Manual Safety or Not: Too Dangerous To Carry?

[SouthpawUH60FI]

What—the accidental discharge comment?

Get over yourself; it’s funny, and doesn’t violate a single forum rule.

The rules clearly state, "Keep it civil and polite." Are you defending that comment as civil and polite? Is it civil and polite enough to make that comment directly to her in person? So hypothetically, you and your wife or daughter are at the gun shop or the range and someone walks up and says the same thing to her, what happens?

It isn't funny, it's reprehensible.

 

[HansGruber]

I have only carried 1911s for my whole CCW life (about 30 years now).

But, I listened to a podcast by Mike Glover (of Fieldcraft Survival) a few months ago and it has certainly gotten me to at least considering changing my EDC to a single action striker-fired pistol with no safety (other than the blade in the trigger).

I think there is no disputing the fact that any and every manual safety on a pistol is a POTENTIAL impediment to firing the weapon when you want to. I mean, that's what they are for - preventing you from firing the weapon.

If you're in an urgent, high-stress situation, WILL you always be able to get a good enough grip to reliably disengage a grip safety? Will you remember to, and be able to EXPEDITIOUSLY, click off a thumb safety? What if you're having to operate the pistol with only your weak (usually, left) hand?

Mike made a pretty good case for why law enforcement or military might need or be required to carry pistols with more safety features than a private citizen carrying solely for self-defense. So, what they do is not necessarily what is best for the rest of us.

If you are that private citizen, carrying for self-defense, the concept of carrying a pistol that will GUARANTEED (well, as guaranteed as anything in life can be) go off when you pull the trigger is pretty appealing. No chance of it not going off because you didn't click off the thumb safety (whether you forgot, or you missed, or you're shooting lefty and it's only on the "wrong" side). No chance of it not going off because you didn't get a "proper" grip.

It is the same appeal as carrying a revolver, but with a nice, light trigger and many more rounds on tap - all in a less bulky package.

For the moment, I am still carrying only 1911s. But, I have been shooting them for 30 years, I practice with them, and I shoots USPSA, IDPA, and SCSA matches with them. I nevertheless recognize I could forget to sweep the safety, not be able to reach it, or get a bad grip and have made a conscious decision to live with that risk, as I consider it very low (for me). At least for now. But, I may yet change my EDC to something striker-fired....


ps. I DO believe that the risk of a Glock-style trigger getting caught on a shirt, and causing an AD, when holstering into a concealed carry holster is real. The risk is low, but I think it is real enough to merit being VERY careful with that.

How many times, in 30 years, have any of those things happened to you?

As @HayesGreener said, it’s all in the training…

 

[fordag]

It's super simple.

A trigger is  not a safety.

 

[HansGruber]

Disagree.

I would say it is mostly about the training. If it was ALL about the training, then all the smart people would carry revolvers. They don't because training is important, but the equipment matters, too. And if you take 1000 people and give them good training with a 1911, and 1000 different people and give them good training with a Glock, then put them all through a bunch of high-stress self-defense scenarios, I would bet you real money that the 1911 group would have more instances of not firing a round when they intended to versus the Glock group. Because, every now and then, very occasionally, even a well-trained operator with a 1911 will fail to get that thumb safety clicked off or fail to get the right grip. Which was one of Mike Glover's points in his podcast.

And I wonder how many negligent discharges the Glock group would have over the 1911 group…

And the fact is, you are MUCH more likely to make a mistake while holstering/unholstering during administrative actions than you are going to have an issue under stress, due to the fact that a defensive shoot is almost certainly a once in a lifetime event, where administrative drills are going to be a daily action.

 

[stuartv]

How many times, in 30 years, have any of those things happened to you?

As @HayesGreener said, it’s all in the training…

It has happened at least once this year in a match that I attempted to fire my 1911 and had forgotten to click off the thumb safety. In comparison, my Canik Rival (which I also shoot in matches) has never failed to fire when I pulled the trigger (other than from bad, cheap ammo, which has also caused problems in my 1911).

 

[stuartv]

And I wonder how many negligent discharges the Glock group would have over the 1911 group…

And the fact is, you are MUCH more likely to make a mistake while holstering/unholstering during administrative actions than you are going to have an issue under stress, due to the fact that a defensive shoot is almost certainly a once in a lifetime event, where administrative drills are going to be a daily action.

So, why did so many police departments stop allowing their officers to carry 1911s, but tons of them now issue or allow Glocks? What are their stats comparing the 2?

 

[KillerFord1977]

I have Glocks, FN's and Hellcats. No manual safety on any of them.

I dropped a Glock onto concrete from about 3 - 4 feet by accident. No discharge. From what I understand, a striker fired pistol is 'something' like a revolver. It needs the trigger pull to shoot the gun. Dropping it won't fire it.

I'm very happy with all the striker fired pistols I own. I used to worry about no safety and thought they may just go off; but once I looked into them, I don't worry any longer.

Snagged a fully loaded, round in the chamber Sig P320 on the gun bag strap. Gun hit the concrete deck. Scratch on the slide. Nothing more.
Not happy about any of it, firearm scratch or safety of snagging a loaded gun, but end result was no discharge.

 

[KillerFord1977]

So, why did so many police departments stop allowing their officers to carry 1911s, but tons of them now issue or allow Glocks? What are their stats comparing the 2?

My opinion:
Like the Military.
A .45 is exponentially harder to train a person to shoot than the 9mm.
Training, weight of gun and extra ammo are all resons why military and agencies dropped the .45

 

[RatherBfishin]

This article did not mention the Springfield XDe in 9 or 45. It is exactly like the DA/SA S&W "Wonder Nines" that replaced revolvers. XDe now discontinued by Springfield was a replacement for my Walther PPK/S but .45 instead of .380. 12 lb DA first pull and 5 in SA. Or you can cock the hammer and carry cocked and locked with safety on.

 

[MountainWestBob]

"Cocked and Locked" isn't an option with the Hellcat. It's fully double action. I would prefer a DA/SA with an external hammer and will be on the lookout for such. Also, I can't imagine needing 14 rounds... If I'm in a fight that lasts long enough to fire 15 rounds, I'll be long dead before the end; anything more than a short-and-sharp conflict will be fatal to me (that's due to age-related slowdown and lack of sufficient range and instruction time). Safety-wise, the Hellcat is close to perfect as sold.

 

[stuartv]

My opinion:
Like the Military.
A .45 is exponentially harder to train a person to shoot than the 9mm.
Training, weight of gun and extra ammo are all resons why military and agencies dropped the .45

I didn't say anything about 45s. It's easy to get a 1911 in 9mm, yet PDs still don't allow them.

Also, to my earlier point, check the 1911s and 2011s of any of the top competitive shooters. They all have pinned grip safeties. Why? Because match experience (i.e. experience in stressful shooting situations, where the shooter is trying to get off a shot quickly) has shown that it DOES happen that even very experienced 1911 shooters will sometimes have a failure to fire because they didn't have the right grip.

Put equal training on a 1911 and a Glock-style pistol and then collect data in the real world. Like I said, I'd bet money the 1911 shooters log more times where they didn't get a round off because of the gun. Specifically, the gun having more impediments (or you can call them safeties) to firing it when you want to. More hurdles to overcome mean, statistically more times that you fail to overcome a hurdle.

 

[stuartv]

"Cocked and Locked" isn't an option with the Hellcat. It's fully double action. I would prefer a DA/SA with an external hammer and will be on the lookout for such. Also, I can't imagine needing 14 rounds... If I'm in a fight that lasts long enough to fire 15 rounds, I'll be long dead before the end; anything more than a short-and-sharp conflict will be fatal to me (that's due to age-related slowdown and lack of sufficient range and instruction time). Safety-wise, the Hellcat is close to perfect as sold.

Doesn't seem that hard to imagine, to me. Dicken (in the recent Indiana Mall shooting) fired 10 rounds at the bad guy. Imagine if there had been 2 bad guys (as there have been in other situations - e.g. that 2015 mass shooting in San Bernadino, CA).

 

[gjackson]

While I generally agree with articles facts and conclusions, it failed to address one critical item. That being the issue of failing to remember that your manual safety is on when you are attempting to fire your weapon. This issue can be minimized to a great extent through training and carrying ONLY pistols with manual safeties of similar construction. My EDC weapon is always an XD/XDm of various sizes and calibers with trigger and grip safeties. I prefer this option because the pistol is always safe (two safeties on, plus the drop safety) until it is needed and then the natural outcome of retrieving my weapon from the holster makes it fully operational without further action on my part. I also like the fact that it is difficult/awkward/near impossible to fully compress the grip safety and grasp the trigger until the weapon is clear of the holster and gripped properIy. Additionally, I also know how many times, while at the range with my 1911, I have forgotten to disengage the manual safety before attempting to fire. While I admit it only takes a second or two to assess and eliminate the problem, it may be a second or two that I don't have. This experience has taught me one thing: I don't consider it safe or wise to employ varying EDC weapons that do not have the same "user interface", manual and trigger safeties or grip and trigger safeties. No safety, other than a trigger safety or DA/SA with the 10 lb. first round trigger pull, in my opinion, are unsafe for EDC. If you don't believe it, do some research on negligent discharges and see how many have involved pistols with trigger safeties only, or DA/SA pistols with a 10 lb. first round trigger pull.

 

[stuartv]

And I wonder how many negligent discharges the Glock group would have over the 1911 group…

And the fact is, you are MUCH more likely to make a mistake while holstering/unholstering during administrative actions than you are going to have an issue under stress, due to the fact that a defensive shoot is almost certainly a once in a lifetime event, where administrative drills are going to be a daily action.

ps. What happens during "administrative actions" is completely irrelevant to the discussion of which one is going to be more reliable in a self-defense situation. No argument from me that a gun that is more likely to go off when you want it to is also more likely to go off when you don't want it to. It is still MORE LIKELY to go off when you DO want it to (i.e. when you NEED it).

 

[stuartv]

How many times, in 30 years, have any of those things happened to you?

As @HayesGreener said, it’s all in the training…

As I said, if it was ALL in the training, everyone would carry a super simple and reliable revolver. But, it is NOT ALL in the training. It is mostly in the training, but also some in the equipment.

Same training + better equipment = More capability for self-defense.

 

[HayesGreener]

I investigated some negligent discharges over the years. In only one instance, involving a Taurus, was it the fault of the gun. Lack of knowledge, lack of training, or pure dumba-- on the part of the shooter was always a factor.

When we first transitioned from revolvers to semi-autos in the early 80's, and the Glock became a thing, officers were negligently shooting themselves and others with their new Glocks. Enough so that many departments wanted nothing to do with Glock. They came with a really light trigger and officers were in the habit of putting fingers on triggers with revolvers that had 10-12 pound double action trigger pulls. Virtually all revolver training of the day was done with double action shooting, thus a substantial trigger pull. Many departments opted for DA/SA pistols like S&W 3rd generation guns, or those that could afford them, SIG DA/SA guns.

Glock was alarmed at the number of negligent discharges and increased the trigger pull weight on their pistols as a result. In my opinion Glock would never have captured the police market if they had not increased the trigger weight and accompanied it with aggressive training programs. Some agencies went too far with it-NYPD had a 17-pound trigger pull on their Glocks. No wonder they can't hit anything.

The thing Glock had over the other makes was an aggressive marketing program, and they were cheap. Glock's primary marketing target was not the police, but the civilian market, and they believed the way to capture the civilian market was to make it the pistol LE was carrying. So, they sold them really cheap to law enforcement agencies. With every agency in the country wanting to transition to semi autos, it was compelling. They had to market it as a safe gun. The problem wasn't the trigger or a lack of a safety-it was the training. LE and the manufacturers responded with aggressive training emphasizing safe handling rules. Keeping your finger off the trigger was key.

With respect to the 1911, a number of LE agencies and special teams in the military still use them. They can do that if they are willing to take on the training curve. The 1911 is not for everyone. There is no question that the 1911 requires specific training and conditioning to make it reliable and safe. A lot of folks are leery of a pistol that is carried locked and cocked, not realizing that most striker fired guns are mostly cocked where you can't see it. You don't put 1911's on the street without a robust training program. Training is important with every platform, but this is especially true with single action only pistols. I would include the Browning Hi-Power, the SIG P238, and others of that type in my call for specific, additional training. Knowing how to reliably deal with manual safeties and grip safeties requires a serious commitment to training drills. If you are having difficulty getting the safety off reliably, you are not training enough or are not doing it right.

Another reason the 1911 fell out of general use in LE agencies is the recoil from the 45acp cartridge in full house defensive loads. As women and men of smaller stature entered policing more and more in the 80's and 90's, the 1911 is a pretty big and heavy gun for many folks.

 

[Airdale26]

Hello all, here is today's article posted on TheArmoryLife.com. It is titled “Manual Safety or Not: Too Dangerous To Carry?” and can be found at https://www.thearmorylife.com/manual-safety-or-not/.

This specific topic has recently resurfaced and it is very approprite at any time in firearms discussions and points of view. I personally am a believer in pistol safeties. That said, I am a user of pistols with no safety and also attached safeies.
I am a glock fan it is engineering and simple design, But I am NOT a trigger safeties unless you spend some time in serious practice in holster deployment and routine firing. Safeties have a place and value. For the novice user or new to CC, safeties can be a good thing and no so good. Training, Practice and more practice is essential. I am aware of incidents in which an indivdual deployed from a hoslter and placed his finger on the trigger and it discharged into the ground, boucing off the floor and striking another individual further away. Again, a novice user who may not practice all that oftern, especially with the increased cost of ammo. may not yet possess the requiste skill level to instinctly react a situation and forget the to deactive the safety. Some will profess that no safe is the way to go for CC. Unless you are sppending more money to modify or disable safeties, learn to work with the specific firearm via training and practice.

 

[HansGruber]

As I said, if it was ALL in the training, everyone would carry a super simple and reliable revolver. But, it is NOT ALL in the training. It is mostly in the training, but also some in the equipment.

Same training + better equipment = More capability for self-defense.

Clear up that logic-“If it was all in training, everyone would carry a revolver”.

Because it makes zero sense when applied to this discussion.

Connect the dots, please.

 

[SaltyMonkey]

From what I understand, a striker fired pistol is 'something' like a revolver. It needs the trigger pull to shoot the gun. Dropping it won't fire it.

Unless it’s in Al ec Baldwin’s hands. They just magically discharge.
Sorry, Couldn’t resist.

 

[southtex]

For me, my 64 year old arthritic thumbs have a hard time with many of the safeties (I swear they are concave buttons) on the sub compact guns. When I carry my 1911's the safety is always engaged, no trouble with the larger lever. I always practice the safety drop 1911's (on draw) at the range as my thumb rides there. I carry a Shield plus with no safety the majority of the time. I worry about not being able to disengage the safety (sub compact) under pressure more than an accidental discharge. That's just me.