Hmmm Maybe a thumb safety is not so bad....

Would you buy it?
Click to expand...
Maybe. It would depend on what I intended to do with it. I wouldn't buy one to carry in a soft holster, in a holster that didn't cover the trigger, or shoved into my waistband without a holster. But then there are many, many guns that fit that description--some with heavy trigger pulls, some with light trigger pulls.
Would it have the same, less or more AD incidents.
Click to expand...
How many AD incidents that involved the gun would be more dependent on how many guns they sold than on any features of the guns.

If one compared ADs based on the AD rate corrected for the number of guns out there, it's harder to make a clear prediction. It would depend on a number of things. For example: Is this a gun that's going to be a high-end gun that is used mostly by people who are particularly "gunny"? Or is it going to be a budget gun that's going to be put into the hands (and holsters) of a lot of marginally trained people who don't really care much about guns in the first place but have to carry one because it's a requirement of their job?
Could it be manage by individuals effectively?
Click to expand...
Sure, if they paid attention what they were doing and were versed in firearm safety. Just like any firearm.
 
There's a agency in California switching to the M&P from the Beretta 92, IIRC. The number of AD/NDs have gone up, and the agency is attributing that to the different fire control group of the M&P.

I have transitioned from a USP 40, which was carried cocked and safety on, in a Uncle Mike's Pro3 holster to an M&P 40, carried in a Safariland lvl 3 lightbearing holster. Going by my previous example, I should expect an AD/ND any moment now. I mean it's the gun at fault, right? I no longer have an active safety, and I even changed holsters and the technique to "clear leather" as well. So, should I switch back, or do I continue to train and maintain?

I'm sorry, but it's user error in the majority of cases. If your finger is in the trigger guard, or a piece of holster, it's not the gun's fault, regardless of the number of safeties, or lack thereof. If you want a gun with a safety you have to flick off, by all means, get one. You still have to do your part, keep equipment maintained, keep finger off trigger, etc, to prevent AD/NDs..as this fella found out with his 1911....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3kJ6SU3ycs..

Maybe he needed a safety with a combination.
 
I'm sorry, but it's user error in the majority of cases.
Click to expand...
That could be said about tragedies involving chainsaws without guards, lawnmowers without positive cutoff brakes, ejection seat actuators without safeties, and any number of other things. Even cuts to the web of a hand caused by recoiling parts.

That does not mean that such cases are more acceptable--and they will happen.

If your finger is in the trigger guard, or a piece of holster, it's not the gun's fault, regardless of the number of safeties, or lack thereof.
Click to expand...
Or if a jacket sting gets into the holster....

It all gets back to the nexus between risk management and human factors engineering. I the main issue is to prevent discharges caused by human error, design in a positive safety. But if there is concern that releasing that safety might prevent the gun from being forced timely when needed, at least take that into account when designing the safety.

I've gone a step further. My firearm has a grip safety that requires no separate movements or operations to discharge the gun.
 
Folks, it's always user error, always. A manual safety has to be disengaged to fire the pistol. It's an extra step that has to be taken to fire the pistol. I've heard of 'Glock Foot", never heard of Colt foot, wonder why? I carry my LC9 with the safety on even tho it would be hard to fire it by accident due to the 3/4" trigger pull. Any accidental discharge is due to operator error, a safety is there to make it less likely to occur.
 
don't forget my mom's county sheriff who shot his wife in the back on New Year's when he was drunk. or the Dekalb County sheriff that shot the woman that he was doing "tactical training" with. oops.

i have no problem with civilians carrying Glock-type pistols, but there are too many incident where the police put civilian lives at risk with these firearms. i don't believe it's the guns fault or anything, but i do believe an active safety will prevent many ND's in police ranks. the stories are just too plentiful to keep going "business as usual".

sept in seattle "Police say the woman refused to show her hands, so the officer drew his gun. While drawing the gun, police say the officer accidentally shot the 19-year-old woman in the leg. "

sept in NY "Investigators believe the impact of Cuevas running into the officer caused him to fire one round, striking the 20-year-old victim in the left shoulder, police Commissioner Raymond Kelly said at a news conference. Cuevas died later at a hospital."

sept in Lodi "During the Little Buckaroos Reading Round-up event, Officer Robert Rench was helping a boy try on pieces of SWAT team gear, when another young boy approached unnoticed. The boy, who witnesses told police was about 6 years old, reached his finger toward the gun and pulled the trigger, Piombo said."

from above story, this quote is priceless and explains why some people are against the idea of glock's and police........."The Glock handguns that SWAT members carry aren’t equipped with a safety", Piombo said.
“There is nothing we could have done differently,” he said. “It was just an accident. It boggles the mind why a child would do that.”.

well, okay then, nothing can be done i guess, they said so

these are a couple cherry picked stories from the DOZENS similar in the last two months.

if glock's are not part of the problem, then what's the solution? i believe a simple switch safety would stop SOME of these incidents, of course not all. i understand that the safety will likely be off after drawn, so alot of these will still happen.
 
but i do believe an active safety will prevent many ND's in police ranks.
Click to expand...
I think something the "safety" people seem to be forgetting is, when the gun has been drawn, and is in hand, the "manual" safeties are disengaged, or should be, at the time of the draw.

Guns like the Glock, with the trigger safety, only have the safety removed, when the finger is placed on the trigger, and rearward pressure applied.

Anyone holstering without watching what they are doing, is the problem, regardless what the gun is.
 
none of th stories I showed had anything to do with reholstering. a kid walked up and pulled the trigger between the cops holster, how do you argue with that?
 
a kid walked up and pulled the trigger between the cops holster, how do you argue with that?
Click to expand...
I guess Im just not getting that picture, and how its happening. I know of no duty holsters that would allow that to occur.

It doesnt say anything about the gun being in a holster. Sounds more like the gun was out of the holster.
 
I agree with all the fundamentals previously mentioned. Good functional gear, finger OFF the trigger, etc. However, a couple of other things worth mentioning.

I compete whenever possible in IDPA, USPSA, GSSF, and other like matches. One thing that just sends shivers up my spine is watching fellow competitors "speed holster" (my term) their pistol or revolver. Half the time these people have loose clothing that is dangling near the holster that they have failed to clear. For some reason, they think as soon as the muzzle has started into the holster, then the gun is suddenly infallible. If you are one of the "speed holster" folks, STOP...DOING...THAT. Please

The other thing which is a factor here is that many folks can't see their holster as they are inserting the pistol. Location of carry (back), overweight, physical limitations, or whatever. I ALWAYS make sure that I can see the holster and gun at the same time. The pistol goes in slowly as I check, double check, and triple check to make sure there is nothing that will press the trigger as I insert it. If you can't see the gun as you holster it, consider taking the holster off your belt, insert the firearm cautiously, and then put the holster back on.

Fly
 
I wouldn't be surprised if a child's finger could work its way into the holster below.
Click to expand...
Maybe, but I have a feeling, if we could look down into that holster from a different angle, we'd see that there wasnt room. But then again, never say never.

I ALWAYS make sure that I can see the holster and gun at the same time. The pistol goes in slowly as I check...
Click to expand...
I agree, and I do as well. "Holster reluctantly" is a phrase worth remembering and ingraining.

Regular presentation practice in dry fire can be a big help in instilling good habits. It also allows for discovery of possible troubles, with new or different cover garments.
 
People shoot themselves with all kinds of guns, it's more likely with a Glock or other Glockish gun. A safety is a good thing.
 
pete2 said:
People shoot themselves with all kinds of guns, it's more likely with a Glock or other Glockish gun. A safety is a good thing.
Click to expand...

That is quite a broad statement. If people can't follow some fundamental rules of firearms safety and common sense when holstering/unholstering, I don't know that a manually operated safety is going to be a solution. People already have the attitude of "It's ok...it's not loaded" when they break the safety fundamentals. Having a safety may just re-inforce that attitude. On top of that, as mentioned earlier in this thread, how many people have been at a competition, pulled out a 1911 or other pistol with a manual safety, and forgot to flip it off? If they forget to take it off, how many times are they forgetting to switch it on?

Fly
 
The last match I was at, there was a stage with two strings. The 1911 guy forgot the safety on each string.

It isn't uncommon, even with the best. I practice removing the safety on the draw but then have forgotten it (but rarely).

If it was a gun fight - that might be a problem. It's mostly finger on the trigger that causes a ND.
 
I think something the "safety" people seem to be forgetting is, when the gun has been drawn, and is in hand, the "manual" safeties are disengaged, or should be, at the time of the draw.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Plus, we are presuming that the same people who cannot be relied upon to keep their finger of the trigger can be absolutely relied upon to engage the safety.

There may be accidents that would be prevented by a thumb safety, but they are not a panacea, and there is no need for every accident involving a pistol without a thumb safety to generate another of these threads.

Operator error is involved in the overwhelming majority of these instances, whether the pistol had a thumb safety or not. I have been carrying a handgun without a thumb safety nearly every day for over two decades. These accidents don't have to happen if gun owners pay attention. They need to pay attention to their trigger finger, their pistol, their holster, their clothes, and maybe, just maybe, to their thumb safety.
 
The Military, notably the cavalry, thought a thumb safety was a very good idea in 1910. Which is why the 1911 has one. I don't see where it is a bad idea, even today.

Is it foolproof? No. Nothing is. DO people forget to take the safety off? Yes. But people also forget to step on the brake, or other things that they perform countless times in daily life.

To me, the answer to those who say they don't want a safety, because they might forget it is simple. Simply don't use it at all. If you never put it on, you won't forget to take it off!

OK, yes, safety levers can and have been moved from off to on, and from on to off in holsters during carry. You can find examples of nearly everything, if you dig enough. But look at the general run of things.

You COULD have your magazine button pushed while carrying. It has happened. Yet no one is crying for the general use of the heel clip magazine catch to prevent this dangerous occurrence! :rolleyes:

You can call it a safety on the trigger, I call it a "trigger activation switch", and don't consider it alone to be enough.

Carry and use what you think best. I won't preach what is best for you, I only know what is best for me, and for me, a semi auto without a thumb safety isn't the best.
 
How often does a civilian in a self defensive situation need a fast draw? It seems to me that this debate comes down to increased safety vs.increased speed, and a person could come to regret either choice in the wrong situation. If someone thinks the likelihood of an accidental or negligent discharge is more common in real life than the need for the fastest draw possible I can't really criticize that opinion. I know I've gone back and forth in my own mind between everyday safety and someday emergency.
 
How often does a civilian in a self defensive situation need a fast draw?
Click to expand...
When they need it. ;)

If youre carrying a gun, I would hope you are practiced enough with it, and the way you carry it, that you can produce it quickly, smoothly, and reasonably safely. When you need it, you need it now, and it should not require thought as to how youre going to accomplish that. It should just happen.

It seems to me that this debate comes down to increased safety vs.increased speed...
Click to expand...
The draw isnt as much the issue, as is reholstering. Thats were the speed is not necessary, nor is it desired, especially from the standpoint of safety.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top