manual safety is unnecessary?

Status
Not open for further replies.
My 2¢
Don't fear a Glock because of no manual safety.
Get yourself a quality Kydex holster with adjustable tension screw.
Leave the gun in the holster all the time, the trigger is covered and 100% safe. Works if you're carrying or it's sitting on your night stand.
 
+1 for the folks who have already pointed out that it depends on the intended use - for a highly trained bodyguard or LEO, it may be detrimental in a quick-draw situation.

Handling a pistol on the range or having it the nightstand for HD as a non-professional operator, a manual safety might be a good idea.

I must admit that I'd love to have one on my Glock - with the Glock-typical choice only between half-loaded or ready to go bang, I prefer the former in any situation other than already preparing to aim and fire out on the range.
 
As a bit of a side note, adding up the time the major training academies have been teaching the 1911 is a bit of a red herring. The US military has WAY more time teaching the 1911, if you add it up the same way.

And yet, they teach different things. They can't both be right, can they???

Well, the fact is, they can be, and they are.

Professional civilian training is aimed at what is best for you, in a defense situation. Military training is aimed at what is best for the military, in every situation.
Click to expand...

Just wanted to chime in about this. There's a fundamental difference in military pistol use and in police pistol use. For the military, the pistol is a heavy backup weapon, the primary weapon being the rifle. For the police, the pistol is the primary weapon.

As a consequence, for the military, it makes sense to, hypothetically speaking, trade off 25% of the utility 1% of the time, for 1% more safety 100% of the time. For the police this balances out much different.
 
As usual, a very interesting discussion. I don't really have anything to add, other than to say OldMarksman makes the case for a manual safety very well and I am in complete agreement with him. For the record we differ in that I still EDC an SR9c.

I will say that accidents happen to even the best of us. I also think Glock makes a fine fighting handgun. That I choose not to carry one doesn't denigrate those who do. It also does not mean that I have a manual safety to do for me what I should be doing with proper safety practices, or lack understanding of the complexities of safely and effectively carrying a weapon. I am simply more comfortable and confident with a manual safety.
 
I started carrying a ruger sr40 which has a safety because I was used to the beretta m9 I carried in the military which had a safety. After about a year I bought a glock 27 and have not bought a pistol with a safety since. Keep your booger hook off the bang switch gents, be careful reholstering and always use common sense.
 
It's not hard to train yourself to flip a switch while drawing.
Click to expand...
Until you actually need the gun in a SD emergency, and a cold, frozen thumb misses the safety, a gloved thumb can't push it off, a sweaty thumb slides off the safety without releasing it, or adrenaline, and fear overrides all training. Buck fever X10k when it's life and death rather than venison back straps on the line.
Just my opinion, and if people feel better with that one extra step, and realize se the possibilities, then that's their opinion.:D
 
Cheapshooter I think your points are valid. I contend though that those same conditions dramatically increase the chances of a negligent discharge, and the manual safety is at least as important in that situation as any other. I will take my chances that training will prevail if I ever find myself in harms way.
 
Until you actually need the gun in a SD emergency, and a cold, frozen thumb misses the safety, a gloved thumb can't push it off, a sweaty thumb slides off the safety without releasing it, or adrenaline, and fear overrides all training. Buck fever X10k when it's life and death rather than venison back straps on the line.
Just my opinion, and if people feel better with that one extra step, and realize se the possibilities, then that's their opinion.
Click to expand...

Training, training, training.

Did I say training? Its all about how you train to shoot your guns, whether its a pistol, rifle, or shotgun. Also some of us live in the South and don't have to worry about this cold weather you guys up north have to deal with. :D

For the record, I currently carry a Glock for ccw. But I have carried other handguns with safeties in the past as well. When I owned an M&P and SR9c with manual safeties, I trained taking the safety off during the draw.
 
Same arguments every time! "A safety can get you killed in a defensive situation". Can somebody point to ONE case where that happened? Who here has even been in a shooting? I can find dozens of cases where a safety saved a life.

Fact is 99.99% of us will never fire a shot in defense, yet ALL of us handle a weapon regularly. As for forgetting to take it off if you need it, who here forgets to step on the brake before shifting into gear? Do you even think about it? 5-10 minutes a night picking up a gun on safe and disengaging it and it is total muscle memory. So much so that when I pick up my Beretta 92(no longer a house defense gun), I automatically flip the safety UP as I do when I pick up my Ruger SR9 or LC9-S. The beretta safety works in the opposite direction.

Same old "keep your booger hook off the bang switch" comments, too. If whoever made up that rediculous saying got a nickle for everytime it was repeated by somebody trying to sound like an "operator", they would be millionaires by now.
 
homerboy said:
Same arguments every time! "A safety can get you killed in a defensive situation". Can somebody point to ONE case where that happened?
Click to expand...

Teenager Killed by Polar Bear Because Adult Forgot To Turn Off Mauser 98K Safety

Horatio Chapple, 17, was on an adventure holiday to the remote Svalbard islands in Norway with the British Schools Exploring Society (BSES) on 5 August 2011 when the bear ripped open his tent and dragged him out, causing mortal head injuries.

One of the expedition leaders forgot to turn off the safety. He/she attempted to fire the camp Mauser 98K four or five times, each time squeezing the trigger and cycling the bolt, ejecting unfired rounds onto the ground.

"The expedition’s science leader [identified in the report as L2] emerged from another tent. He grabbed the rifle and fired four or five times. On each occasion a bullet was simply ejected on to the ground leaving the rifle empty. The bear then turned on L2 and mauled him about the head, causing him to drop the gun.

The mountain leader of the expedition [identified in the report as L1] did not know where the spare bullets were and shouted for help in finding them. He diverted the bear from L2 by throwing a stone at it. The bear turned on L1 and mauled him badly.

Other team members were attacked by the bear until L2 found one of the bullets that had been ejected, loaded the rifle and shot the animal dead.”
Click to expand...

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/...lar-bear-adult-forgot-turn-mauser-98k-safety/
 
I still don't blame the safety. Failure to turn off the safety on the "camp 98k" is an operator failure, not a mechanical failure.

Root cause analysis says Operator error is always a training issue.
 
The above article simply reinforces the need for training. No one would suggest that rifles should not have safeties. The scientists in this article were not properly trained in the use of the Mauser, had no knowledge of where the ammunition was, and had only shot 4 rounds with some cursory training. While it does technically answer Homerboy's request, it doesn't really address the issue being discussed.
 
Figured there would be one or 2, now google how many would have been prevented by one. I'm at work now so I don't have the time, but a simple google search of "accidental shooting" will bring up dozens where the lack of a safety (the mother shot by her 3 year old comes to mind) got somebody killed.

And how familiar was the man with the Mauser? The Mauser has a 3 position safety. If the man wasn't familiar with it, it kind of negates the argument. The scientist obviously had the safety in the middle position, which allows for a cycling of the bolt but not being able to fire the weapon. The article is factually wrong when it says he fired the gun 4 times. He didn't realize there was no BANG?

And just where did the term " Glock leg" Come from? Nobody was carrying a gun in a waistband before Glock came along?

Human beings are infallible. Mistakes are made. And the odds are MUCH higher that the lack of a safety will result in a shot not meant to be fired than the presence of a safety.
 
"A safety can get you killed in a defensive situation". Can somebody point to ONE case where that happened?
Click to expand...

How would we know, exactly? The dead person can't tell us that they fumbled the safety or that they pulled the trigger without getting a bang.

I own pistols with no thumb safety, with slide mounted safeties, and with frame mounted safeties. I have never had an accidental discharge, but I have, at the range, pressed a trigger without taking the safety off. I honestly can't imagine that it has never happened in a defensive situation, whether it was documented or not.
 
How would we know, exactly? The dead person can't tell us that they fumbled the safety or that they pulled the trigger without getting a bang.
Click to expand...
Thats the problem with that way of looking at things. Unless there was a critical evaluation as to why, and even then, whos to say, so how would you ever know?

I carried a 1911 for years, and I never had an issue with a properly functioning safety not coming off when I drew the gun, but it is a training issue that you must address and stay on top of, and its even more critical, if youre the type that switches guns a lot.

Looking at it from another aspect, I used to find the safety on my 1911's off quite a bit at the end of the day, so just because its there, really means nothing, if youre not reasonable in your handling skills.
 
I guess a dead guy with a gun next to him with the safety on would be a good sign.

But either way, 99.99% of us will never be in that position. And of those who are, what are the odds that it will happen to that select few?

Citing some dopey scientist who couldn't figure out how to operate a weapon since he clearly had no training doesn't prove much. Maybe if somebody had bothered to explain the three position safety on a Mauser, where if it is pointing straight up you can cycle the bolt but not fire the gun, he would still be alive.
 
And of those who are, what are the odds that it will happen to that select few?
Click to expand...
About the same as the other 99%. I would say that it was directly proportional to the time they put in with the gun in regular practice.

Someone who thinks they are safer because their gun has a manual safety, yet never practices with it, is just as likely to have issues as anyone else who doesnt practice. It really does all come down to regular practice and training, with anything/everything, and not so much, what the gun is or how its set up.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top