Interesting article on the M&P

[Limnophile]

So involuntary muscle contractions don't equate to training issues? I think we're right back to "keep your finger off the trigger until you're ready to make the gun go BANG" again.

Except that the work of Heim et al. shows that even highly trained experts' fingers unintentionally stray onto the trigger at an un-nervingly high rate; eg, 60% of German police special forces officers (SWAT team members?) touched their triggers when they shouldn't have. In comparison, 92% of police recruits touched their triggers; thus, training helps, and while essential it is far from perfect.

An involuntary muscle contraction of the trigger finger outside the trigger guard is called "an involuntary muscle contraction". Inside the trigger guard it is called "an accidental discharge" created by the operator.

It's an act of negligence, but pretending that all that is needed to prevent it is training, when studies have shown this to be false, is an act of negligence by the designer and manufacturer of the weapon and by the purchaser and user of the weapon.

I'd also suggest that if police departments are concerned about something they can't train out of their staff (including things their muscle do involuntarily), maybe the answer is to go back to pistols with long, double action trigger pulls. Trust me, if my Beretta PX4 Compact that I carry with a round chambered and hammer down ever fires, it's because someone intentionally applied approx. 6-9 pounds of force on the trigger for approx. 3/4" worth of trigger travel. Certainly nothing unintentional about that.

A long and heavy DA trigger is a proven way to decrease NDs, as evidenced by reports of increased rates following departmental switches to safetiless designs (I'm regarding the long and heavy DA or DAO trigger as an external safety). The shooting improvements mentioned in the OP's article is at least partly due to the improved modular grip of the M&P. If it is true that the department's Berettas were DAO, the lighter and shorter trigger pull would help a lot, too. The department could have bought a DA/SA pistol with modular grips or bought M&Ps with thumb safeties.

 

[Limnophile]

To me this is a training issue. I get where ... technology can make us complacent and it does sound like the Berettas made the officers complacent in their habits. However I don't think this is a result of technology as a larger issue, but simply a training issue. Somewhere along the line it was probably standard practice for these officers to stage their triggers and they kept the behavior when changing platforms.

It's my understanding that many LEOs were trained to stage their DA triggers as a way to compensate for the degraded precision attributable to a long and especially heavy trigger pull. I was stunned on learning this, as the practice is inherently unsafe according to how I was taught gun safety, but the practice explains stories stories about LEO NDs associated with cocking DA revolvers and when switching from DA to striker-fired platforms. A DA/SA platform is safer to carry and only degrades the first shot. A DAO platform is perhaps safer, as SA useage is never an option; but, the safety comes at the cost of degrading every shot.

If your finger is on the trigger (which is the only way the firearm can discharge without a serious mechanical failure) then you should, I hope, know.

Glocks have been known to fire without a finger near the trigger -- eg, a windbreaker drawstring finds itself inside the trigger guard upon reholstering, a worn holster pinches the trigger, an item in a purse presses the trigger.

Unfortunately, Heim's study showed that most whose fingers strayed onto the trigger were unaware of the fact.

 

[WVMountaineer]

Some of you guys need a hobby. God Bless

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Out of date #1 safety rule NEVER CARRY A LOADED GUN!
Too much faith has been attached to modern safeties.
The fault of N/D - A/D is bad weapons safety schooling a lack of common sense!
If there nothing blocking the fireing pin from the primer the gun can go off.....if there is no round in the chamber the weapon is perfectly safe.

1) I am unaware of a single law enforcement agency, local, state or federal, anywhere in the United States that teaches its officers to carry without a round in the chamber. Apoarently, every single agency feels that it is more hazardous to officers to not chamber a round.

2) Considering that the problem reported in the above articles is the trigger of the gun being pulled (either by the user or by an object in the truggerguard), I'm failing to see how the problem is "too much faith attached to modern safeties"

3) Safeties (and not just modern ones) are actually highly reliable in most quality handguns. The Hi-Power I carry (gun designed in 1935, firing pin safety added in 1982) has a firing pin safety which does in fact stop the firing pin from hitting the primer unless the trigger has been pulled.

 

[BigMikey76]

Some of you guys need a hobby. God Bless

But this is my hobby

 

[Limnophile]

1) I am unaware of a single law enforcement agency, local, state or federal, anywhere in the United States that teaches its officers to carry without a round in the chamber. Apoarently, every single agency feels that it is more hazardous to officers to not chamber a round.

The NRA's gun safety rule #3, "Always keep the gun unloaded until ready to use," has always seemed flawed to me. A self-defense gun is arguably in use almost always and is undoubtedly more effective when loaded. Many forms of hunting with shotgun or rifle involve carrying the weapon loaded to be prepared for a relatively rare shooting opportunity. Given that many legitimate forms of firearms use involve loaded carry, the NRA should revise this rule.

2) Considering that the problem reported in the above articles is the trigger of the gun being pulled (either by the user or by an object in the truggerguard), I'm failing to see how the problem is "too much faith attached to modern safeties"

The problem is just the opposite -- ignoring the proven ability of affirmative external safeties to reduce (not eliminate) the ND rate. I took two NRA-sponsored hunter safety courses when I was a kid. This was so long ago one involved meeting at the high school gym on a Saturday with shotgun in hand. The NRA ignored the role of any safety device in teaching safe gun handling, because they wanted no one to rely on a safety device to ensure safe gun handling. Fair enough. There is no shortage of stories about someone pointing his gun at a friend and exclaiming shock when pulling the trigger places a hole in the guy, "I thought the safety was on!" The shooter just violated all four of Col. Cooper's gun safety rules, and no external affirmative safety can compensate for gross negligence or abject stupidity. But, when used as a frosting atop a cake composed of Cooper's four rules, an external affirmative safety can enhance safety by preventing some NDs that would otherwise occur due to all too human training lapses.

 

[BigMikey76]

The NRA's gun safety rule #3, "Always keep the gun unloaded until ready to use," has always seemed flawed to me. A self-defense gun is arguably in use almost always and is undoubtedly more effective when loaded. Many forms of hunting with shotgun or rifle involve carrying the weapon loaded to be prepared for a relatively rare shooting opportunity. Given that many legitimate forms of firearms use involve loaded carry, the NRA should revise this rule.

I've always thought of "ready to use" as having more than one meaning. If I am going to carry a pistol, then carrying it is "using" it, therefore it should be loaded and ready to fire if needed. Hunting is "using" a rifle, so it should be loaded and ready to fire. Home defense, bedside gun, etc., all the same story. A gun sitting in a safe is not being "used," so it should be unloaded. A gun that only gets shot at the range isn't being "used" until you are actually at the range, so keeping it unloaded at home or even on the way to the range makes sense. That's how I've always interpreted that particular rule.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

A long and heavy DA trigger is a proven way to decrease NDs, as evidenced by reports of increased rates following departmental switches to safetiless designs (I'm regarding the long and heavy DA or DAO trigger as an external safety).

That is one argument. The other side would be that long, heavy DA triggers lead to unsafe practices like "staging" the trigger in an attempt to gain acceptable accuracy with the long, heavy trigger and that carrying these habits over to shorter, safe-action triggers is the primary cause of such NDs. It would be interesting to see if shooters who had only used safe action triggers had a similar or less rate of NDs compared to transitioning officers.

 

[Limnophile]

I've always thought of "ready to use" as having more than one meaning. If I am going to carry a pistol, then carrying it is "using" it, therefore it should be loaded and ready to fire if needed. Hunting is "using" a rifle, so it should be loaded and ready to fire. Home defense, bedside gun, etc., all the same story. A gun sitting in a safe is not being "used," so it should be unloaded. A gun that only gets shot at the range isn't being "used" until you are actually at the range, so keeping it unloaded at home or even on the way to the range makes sense. That's how I've always interpreted that particular rule.

That's a reasonable interpretation, but makes the rule in question of dubious value except on the range. Face it, a loaded gun sitting in a safe does not pose much of a threat to anyone. Besides, a rule that says to keep your gun unloaded seems to somewhat negate Cooper's #1, that the gun is always loaded. Assuming it is not can lead to big trouble.

 

[Limnophile]

That is one argument. The other side would be that long, heavy DA triggers lead to unsafe practices like "staging" the trigger in an attempt to gain acceptable accuracy with the long, heavy trigger and that carrying these habits over to shorter, safe-action triggers is the primary cause of such NDs.

Good point. Even in the absence of staging, with a DA/SA or DAO one could get sloppy and get accustomed to just resting one's finger on the trigger being pretty confident that the gun won't inadvertently discharge. In fact, one could get just as complacent with a SA gun equipped with an external affirmative safety. But, staging and just resting one's finger on the trigger before ready to shoot are unsafe practices regardless of the platform.

It seems that many LEOs were taught to stage their triggers until Enoka's work was published in 2003.

It would be interesting to see if shooters who had only used safe action triggers had a similar or less rate of NDs compared to transitioning officers.

Most LEOs who did not transition from a DA platform to a striker-fired platform would be handling the latter during their greenhorn phase of gun training and experience. The work of Heim et al. shows that greenhorns' fingers stray onto triggers at a much higher frequency than those of the veterans.

 

[BigMikey76]

Besides, a rule that says to keep your gun unloaded seems to somewhat negate Cooper's #1, that the gun is always loaded. Assuming it is not can lead to big trouble.

I don't think it negates it at all. Let's say I unload a gun and store it in my safe for a year. When I take it out again after that year, I am going to assume it is loaded. The first thing I should do at that point is a safety check, which will confirm whether it is truly unloaded, or if I made a mistake when I put it up for storage. I'm not going to assume that it is unloaded; I'm going to VERIFY it.

That is the idea behind Cooper's #1, IMO - never assume, always verify. Once you have verified, it is safe to do things you would not do with a loaded gun. Now I'm not saying it is OK to point it at people or run around the neighborhood waving it around, etc., so don't go there, but there are things we do regularly with VERIFIED unloaded guns that we would never do if we were assuming they were loaded. Dry fire practice, for example, or taking a gun down and cleaning it could not happen if we were assuming the gun is loaded, so it is OK to assume it is unloaded once it has been VERIFIED.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

but there are things we do regularly with VERIFIED unloaded guns that we would never do if we were assuming they were loaded. Dry fire practice, for example, or taking a gun down and cleaning it could not happen if we were assuming the gun is loaded, so it is OK to assume it is unloaded once it has been VERIFIED.

I disagree with this mindset. Even if I have verified the gun is unloaded and I'm doing dryfire practice, I still observe Rules 2-4

2: I don't point the gun at anything I'm not willing to destroy. Usually I use an old crt monitor or TV for this since it also fulfills requirement #4.

3: I keep my finger out of the trigger until I am ready to drop the hammer

4: I verify that my backstop can contain the bullet in the event the gun does fire

Maybe I misinterpreted what you meant; but one of my major issues is people who think rules 2-4 go out the window once you've verified a gun is "unloaded." It isn't OK to point an unloaded gun at someone and pull the trigger - and more than a few negligent shootings have happened that way. One of the great simplicities behind the Four Rules is you have to violate two of them for anyone to get hurt.

Saying that you can violate the other 3 if you just observe Rule 1 misses the point in my view.

 

[BigMikey76]

Quote:
but there are things we do regularly with VERIFIED unloaded guns that we would never do if we were assuming they were loaded. Dry fire practice, for example, or taking a gun down and cleaning it could not happen if we were assuming the gun is loaded, so it is OK to assume it is unloaded once it has been VERIFIED.
I disagree with this mindset. Even if I have verified the gun is unloaded and I'm doing dryfire practice, I still observe Rules 2-4

2: I don't point the gun at anything I'm not willing to destroy. Usually I use an old crt monitor or TV for this since it also fulfills requirement #4.

3: I keep my finger out of the trigger until I am ready to drop the hammer

4: I verify that my backstop can contain the bullet in the event the gun does fire

Maybe I misinterpreted what you meant; but one of my major issues is people who think rules 2-4 go out the window once you've verified a gun is "unloaded." It isn't OK to point an unloaded gun at someone and pull the trigger - and more than a few negligent shootings have happened that way. One of the great simplicities behind the Four Rules is you have to violate two of them for anyone to get hurt.

Saying that you can violate the other 3 if you just observe Rule 1 misses the point in my view.

I really hate getting into the back and forth quote wars, but here we go.

Here is the whole paragraph from my previous post, rather than just the portion you cherry picked. Pay special attention to first half of the third sentence, as that is where I specifically mention NOT doing the things you seem to think I am saying are OK. I have bolded that part for your convenience:

That is the idea behind Cooper's #1, IMO - never assume, always verify. Once you have verified, it is safe to do things you would not do with a loaded gun. Now I'm not saying it is OK to point it at people or run around the neighborhood waving it around, etc., so don't go there, but there are things we do regularly with VERIFIED unloaded guns that we would never do if we were assuming they were loaded. Dry fire practice, for example, or taking a gun down and cleaning it could not happen if we were assuming the gun is loaded, so it is OK to assume it is unloaded once it has been VERIFIED.

There is nothing in that paragraph that says to ignore rules 2-4, just that a VERIFIED unloaded gun is safe for things like dry firing and disassembly, neither of which, of course, should be attempted with a loaded gun or a gun that has not been verified as unloaded.

OK - over-sensitive quote response completed.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Thanks for clarifying that BigMikey76 - I missed that bolded part when reading your original reply and you managed to hit on a point of common contention with some of my relatives regarding their interpretation of the Four Rules (which I implied to you in this discussion). My apologies for misconstruing that; but hopefully that discussion will help anyone else who is unclear about how the Four Rules work.

 

[Limnophile]

I don't think it negates it at all.

Negate wasn't the exact concept I had in mind, which is why I qualified the word. I was thinking more in line with inadvertently encouraging the troubling mindset that some (hopefully few) adopt as Bart mentioned.

That is the idea behind Cooper's #1, IMO - never assume, always verify.

I think Cooper's four rules are more effective than the NRA's three. Cooper omits keeping a gun unloaded, and the NRA omits the assumption of the gun being loaded and the need to be sure of your target.

Once you have verified, it is safe to do things you would not do with a loaded gun. Now I'm not saying it is OK to point it at people or run around the neighborhood waving it around, etc., so don't go there, but there are things we do regularly with VERIFIED unloaded guns that we would never do if we were assuming they were loaded. Dry fire practice, for example, or taking a gun down and cleaning it could not happen if we were assuming the gun is loaded, so it is OK to assume it is unloaded once it has been VERIFIED.

My dad drilled gun safety rules into my head when he gave me a .22 LR at age 8. His main rules were Cooper's four plus two more -- always keep the safety engaged and release it only as the last step before firing, and when handling a firearm not in use keep the action open (esecially when handing a firearm to someone else).

Even when dry firing, although I check first to be sure the gun is unloaded, I assume and treat it as if it was loaded in choosing a safe backstop and a target I'd not be horrendously distraught about putting a bullet into. While I check a gun's loaded status before field stripping it, I believe all my firearms can be safely field stripped even if they were loaded (not that I'd recommend doing this) -- a hallmark of good, safe firearm design.

 

[Ballenxj]

Seems like some may be walking around with a finger inside the guard. This is unfortunate because the article seems to blame the weapon and not the unsafe user. It's not any more unsafe than many other designs. The Berettas that they are retiring, didn't the LA sheriff's department carry DAO 92s? Seems I saw a report on the academy trainees receiving their weapons and they were 92D.
Shouldn't make any difference with proper weapons handling though.

A very unfortunate set of circumstances which I attribute directly to lack of familiarization with the weapon.
As a rule I will inspect and handle a weapon extensively before loading it. This will include a safety check each and every time.