Why Must the Hammer be Cocked

[Certaindeaf]

It defeats the purpose of a manual safety if you have to take it off to unload the gun. You might as well not have it at that point.

To unload a cocked revolver you have to drop the hammer with your thumb (while pressing the trigger.. ooh!, no safety, double ooh!). A SA auto, you just drop the mag and jack one out.. but you already knew that. What are you talking about?

 

[cauldron]

It's a neat design, that shows input from more than one person. The fact that browning and Colt could make it work, and work well, and everyone was happy is awesome. It almost seems there should be a hammer spur OR a safety lever, but not both.

Designing an entire pistol, then later adding a safety that works so well is genius.

There was a 'hammerless' design also. Longer slide and fuller beavertail and a bobbed hammer, and there you go. (just like the smaller .32 'hammerless' pistols)

Except for the thumb cocking calvery, it would work just fine for everyone else. No hammer bite, and you can't see the hammer at all. Rack, safe, holster.



and to the OP, glad to have you, and thanks for an interesting thread.

 

[jerkface11]

Sorry I forgot you are only allowed to criticize pistols that AREN'T 1911's.

 

[Certaindeaf]

Sorry I forgot you are only allowed to criticize pistols that AREN'T 1911's.

Trust me, your ignorance was not confused with criticism.

 

[jerkface11]

Oh so I imagined that you can't unload a 1911 without taking the safety off?

 

[tipoc]

Originally Posted by jerkface11 View Post
It defeats the purpose of a manual safety if you have to take it off to unload the gun. You might as well not have it at that point.

At that point you are unloading the gun so you don't want it engaged or need it to be.

Decades back some soldier somewhere dropped a mag from a gun and forgot they still had a round in the chamber. He then pulled the trigger and shot somebody or something important which is how a magazine disconnect showed up in the Browning Hi-Power and in many subsequent S&W semis used by cops. Such device "solved the problem" jerkface11 is concerned with by making it impossible to shoot the gun without the mag in it.

Fortunately the 1911 has never had a mag disconnect. It doesn't need one.

Practice the 4 rules and keep your finger off the trigger for the split second before you rack the slide to eject the round in the chamber and you will be fine.

tipoc

 

[jerkface11]

I don't want a mag safety. I want the ability to unchamber a round without taking the safety off. As for practicing the 4 rules what's the point in a manual safety at all?

 

[Certaindeaf]

Oh so I imagined that you can't unload a 1911 without taking the safety off?

You didn't say that, you said that "It defeats the purpose of a manual safety if you have to take it off to unload the gun..".

 

[tipoc]

I don't want a mag safety. I want the ability to unchamber a round without taking the safety off. As for practicing the 4 rules what's the point in a manual safety at all?

You realize that there are other safeties on a 1911 besides the thumb safety?

The 4 rules were devised by Jeff Cooper with the 1911 in mind. They are applicable to all types of firearms though, also his point in making them simple and interdependent.

Also, why do you want the ability to unchamber a round without disengaging the thumb safety?

tipoc

 

[powell&hyde]

The best safety is the one between the ears.

 

[1911Tuner]

I don't want a mag safety. I want the ability to unchamber a round without taking the safety off.

Then you should choose another design. There are several guns that can't be unloaded with the safety on. Some don't have a manual safety of any type, aside from a captive half-cock. (Original Model 92/94 rifles and the Model 97 shotgun are a few examples.)

There are some that require carrying hammer down on an empty chamber and following an exact loading sequence to effect that safely. (The original 1873 SAA and faithful copies. Place on half cock...open gate...load one/skip one...close gate...cock and lower hammer.)

As for practicing the 4 rules what's the point in a manual safety at all?

If you adhere to the four rules, no safety at all is required. The point of the safety is to cover those who can't keep from coon-fingering the trigger.

Because...

Pulling the trigger fires the gun. If you don't want the gun to fire, don't pull the trigger.

It's a simple concept.

 

[1911Tuner]

Full Circle

Back to the OP's question:

It's just the way it's designed. It's been that way for 102 years, and there would be no advantage to redesigning it to allow engaging the manual safety with the hammer down or on half-cock because pulling the trigger in either of those conditions wouldn't fire the gun anyway.

And...since the question has been answered multiple times...and because the atmosphere is starting to become a little charged...

Closed.

 

[JShirley]

So, when I considered entering the modern era with a semi-automatic for home defense, I was thinking along the same lines. That is, a round in the chamber and hammer down. Then I could manually cock the hammer with my thumb and drop the thumb safety. Obviously, the mechanics of a revolver and a semi-automatic are vastly different.

I'm not sure this was actually answered. Your revolver should be fired double-action if you are acting in defense. It is a double-action revolver: it's meant to be fired this way.

The 1911A1 is a single-action automatic pistol. While your revolver can fire with a long trigger pull, your 1911 cannot. It MUST be cocked to fire.

It would indeed be a freak accident to drop a 1911A1 on its hammer and for it to fire. The reason skeletonized hammers are seen on most 1911s is to crush and absorb the impact energy should a 1911 happen to fall while exactly inverted.

Hope this helps. Welcome to THR.

John

 

[1911Tuner]

Your revolver should be fired double-action if you are acting in defense. It is a double-action revolver: it's meant to be fired this way.

There are a couple schools of thought on that issue, John.

Given the time, distance, opportunity...and assuming that the imminent threat criteria have been met...I'll absolutely cock the hammer on a double-action revolver in a life nor death situation. Since the purpose of shooting is hitting...and a fast, accurate hit provides the best chance of stopping the fight in time to get me home alive...anything that I can do to expedite that is exactly what I'll do.

Bear with me.

I'm not a cop, and I have no duty to arrest. Nor do I have a duty to challenge or "warn" a violent individual of my armed status or of my intent to shoot. There are several instances of a private citizen issuing a "Freeze! Drop your weapon" challenge and getting shot for it.

I'm not gonna be that guy.

If the situation has degraded to the point that I feel it necessary to draw the gun, the opportunity for conversation has passed, and shooting is pretty much a foregone conclusion. There are certain exceptions, of course. For instance...inside my home or on my property and I've already got him on screen with a shotgun...but it would be advisable to immediately show hands and move slowly.

As for the intent of the double-action revolver...

I do believe that the idea was to cock the gun for that first all-important shot with the DA mode in reserve if a fast followup shot became necessary. At least, that's the way the old-timers saw it.

Of course, if an attack comes so suddenly that the cretin is on top of me as I claw my way to the gun, I'll use the trigger-cocking mode.

As Cooper noted: (paraphrased)

"At powder burning distances, one does not need to be a virtuoso."