Question about Thumb Safety

I shoot single action pistols almost exclusively, so disengaging a manual safety is a subconscious act on the draw, but I have seen people draw and wonder why the gun won't fire, because they are not accustomed to disengaging a safety.

Unless you are committed to developing the required "muscle memory" via practice, you might want to go with a safety-less gun.

The manual safety is a safety in two ways; it makes your operation of the gun "safer", but if you are ever in a situation where someone else has your gun - not even necessarily an assailant, just a person who's not authorized to handle your gun - you might have some time to take appropriate action while the safety is figured-out by someone unfamiliar with your gun or its features.
 
Cirdan said:
If you buy one with a thumb safety, make sure you practice turning it off every time, so it becomes automatic.

Don't have the reference, but I once read a study that supports using a manual safety. In a survey of police incidents where a suspect took the gun away from a LEO, the suspect never shot the LEO when the gun had a safety, and it was on. They just couldn't figure it out in the heat of the moment. Kind of makes sense.
Click to expand...

Excellent point and one often forgotten. While a police officer is more susceptible to this occurring, it can happen to any of us. If you're in a physical altercation which may not warrant lethal force in your mind at the time, the attacker can possibly grab your gun and use it against you. Think of the Travon Martin situation (or a hypothetical similar) where he is bashing your head in the concrete, and the pistol isn't used until the last moment.

PS - This issue was also in Massad's book on Beretta. It's a good read.
 
Really it just boils down to what you are most comfortable and proficient with.

Just food for thought, if a manual safety is a liability on a defensive hand gun, why is a manual safety not considered a liability on a defensive long gun? Would not having a manual safety on your pistol promote greater consistency?

Not being argumentative one way or the other, just a random thought that popped into my head...
 
You need to take your entire environment such as children, relatives etc. into consideration when deciding external safety or not. Unless your infallible someone else will probably gain access to your gun eventually. At that point do you feel safe with what's between their ears.
Click to expand...



I get the logic here but I do want to point something out. Safes, gun cabinets, quick access safes, there are a number of options out there for locking your firearms up to prevent access by children. Many of these are very affordable, and really any of them is far more likely to stop a child than just a safety on the pistol. While I can buy the argument that when flooded with adrenaline someone that physically takes your weapon will be unable to figure out how to use the safety, does that apply to a child? Now maybe it does buy you the extra minutes you need to notice something is wrong, that's possible. But as an anecdote when I was a child my mother left me alone on the porch of our house with my toys. When she came back some time later she found I had disassembled the gear assembly of her exercise box using my fingers. In another anecdote I remember a man I knew who claimed to have worked at S&W right around the time the key locks were introduced on revolvers. He said S&W did a small test where they had a number of kids around an unloaded S&W revolver with no firing pin. The theory was that the kids didn't have the hand strength to press the trigger through the DA mode. What did the kids do? They used both hands and with two index fingers were able to press the trigger to hammer drop. They did this without any urging from adults. My point is kids are a lot more resourceful than people credit. Please don't rely on heavy trigger pulls or manual safeties to stop a child.
 
Last edited:
You need to take your entire environment such as children, relatives etc. into consideration when deciding external safety or not. Unless your infallible someone else will probably gain access to your gun eventually
Click to expand...

I dislike this line of reasoning and am working towards finding the flaw in it. There are certain things in life that "oops" cannot happen and one is a firearm. I worry that having a manual safety may allow some people to be less on guard against a negligent discharge.

The rules of gun safety argue that we should treat every gun as if it were loaded. Maybe the caveat AND READY TO SHOOT should be added.
 
You like a proper standard transmission or an automatic? Either way you have to learn to use 'em correctly. A pistol with or without a manual safety is the same thing. Buy the pistol that fits your hand the best and learn how to use it.
"...can be an issue in a SD situation..." You learn how to deal with that too.
 
As people mentioned , proper training in different situation with the gun you carry. Also putting the firearm back in the holster after a stressful situation is an important step in training. Nothing wrong with safety's , just learn how to use them .
 
If I had encountered this thread earlier, I would have asked the OP what risk he thought the thumb safety mitigated? Intentional trigger pull by someone else? Not all that effective. Unintentional trigger pull by OP? Training issue -- particularly if the OP has trained himself to reflexively thumb the safety off on draw. Drop or other firearm malfunction?

The third category is what thumb safeties were originally intended to deal with, at a time when single action pistols were capable of discharging as a result of a jar off, a sear failure, or being dropped so that the trigger pressed itself (via momentum). In point of fact, the design of the M&P auto (which, in fact, is a single action pistol) largely covers these risks via the firing pin block and the hinged (and light weight) trigger.

Now, I'm not against thumb safeties (or manual safeties in general) when they serve a purpose. I always use the thumb safety when holstering a Gov't Model or P35, and a routinely use the manual safety on an M1 or M14. But unless I'm missing something, I don't see the risk reduction accomplished by using the thumb safety on an M&P auto.
 
Intentional trigger pull by someone else? Not all that effective.
Click to expand...

Would you elaborate, a little?

If the safety is engaged and someone pulls the trigger, the gun won't fire; seems like a pretty desirable situation if someone else is doing the pulling?

You're assuming that the someone has the awareness to know or discover that the gun won't fire because it has a safety, then identify and properly manipulate the safety, then shoot the gun, and all the while I'm just standing there watching and waiting?
 
I think people put far too much faith in a safety stopping someone from shooting them with their own pistol. Has it happened? Sure. People also win the lottery. That's no guarantee if I run to the store right now and buy a ticket that it will be a winning one. Safeties, while something, aren't specifically designed to be hard to locate or hard to manipulate. That would make the pistol rather pointless. Will it maybe buy you a second? Maybe. You're also assuming that in a struggle for a weapon, where as you correctly pointed out you won't just stand there, that the safety itself hasn't been manipulated to the off position from two people struggling to control the pistol. Or how about you yourself had manipulated the safety off because you were bringing the pistol up in an effort to fire? The goal is to prevent a gun grab situation in the first place. There are a lot of techniques designed around this, and any of them I'd have more faith in than hoping my attacker is a slow learner. Even once the grab happens there are still techniques that can be applied.
 
Unless your infallible someone else will probably gain access to your gun eventually. (Not sure how to quote a text on this forum.)

Really? I have carried a handgun in conditions, in foreign countries that most people cannot pronounce the name. And every time I left whatever type of abode I called home at that time, or when back in the states my house or office; I never ONCE thought about someone gaining control of my firearm.

And no one ever did. I have been shot and never lost control of a firearm; I had my left arm broken with a steel pipe and was still able to pull and control my firearm and defend myself.

Can it happen, sure it can, but if you know what you are doing, what the immediate threat is, it makes it next to impossible. But if it worries a person that they will lose control of their firearm, or if a person is worried about an unintentional discharge due to not having an operating safety, then maybe, it is time to think about carrying something, other than a firearm. Just my .03 cents.
 
I'm quite familiar with 1911's and like that type of safety. I also am quite fond of Glocks and don't have any issue with that type of gun with no safety as long as it is carried in a proper holster. But there are situations, such as night stand duty, where I feel better with a safety on a pistol.

Glocks, M&P's, and most all striker fired guns leave the factory with a 5-6 lb trigger. Almost exactly the same as a common factory 1911. No one would recommend a 1911 be used without the safety engaged. I sure wouldn't want to reach in the nightstand for a gun in the dark with a trigger that light with no safety engaged. And since the safety on the M&P functions just like a 1911 I can live with it. I don't like the safeties used on most DA/SA pistols that also serve as decockers such as the Beretta or traditional Smith pistols.

There is no law that you have to use it. But it is there and the ones with safety don't cost any more than the others. If I were sold on the M&P the version with the safety is the only one I'd buy. If no safety just get a Glock.
 
I would say whatever safety paradigm you get, be sure to get a holster which
securely covers the entire trigger and trigger guard. I prefer a safety, but it's a
personal decision. I also have very good SA, and don't live in Beirut.
 
I've never seen a parked car roll away, but I always set the parking brake.
Click to expand...
But I have had the emergency brake cable freeze up, and lock the rear wheels not allowing me to use the vehicle!
That's why I don't want a safety on my carry guns.
 
Last edited:
Personally, I prefer a Glock for EDC, so no safety. I've been carrying them since 1994 ish, and compete with them all time and train with them. Thus, I feel I have a good sense of finger/trigger issues. I also carry DA revolvers with no safety.

They have a heavier trigger pull but research shows that if your finger is on the trigger and you have a startle, trip, etc. you will activate a DA trigger. So that's a mixed bag and it's the same for a TDA semi.

I shoot a 1911 quite bit. So I understand its safety quite well. I don't carry it because of size. I wouldn't have a qualm about carrying it if it were my only choice. My caveat about that safety is that sometimes even trained folks don't flip it under stress. Seen it a few times.

The answer is practice with the system you chose.
 
I have been seeing more and more the point of "buy one gun, practice with it, and carry it" and the concerns with a carry "rotation" With that said pick one set of controls (be it with a safety in one direction or the other or without) and commit to it as your carry weapon(s).

Which you pick is not, IMO, vital.
 
I've never seen a parked car roll away, but I always set the parking brake.

But I have had the emergency brake cable freeze up, and lock the rear wheels not allowing me to use the vehicle!
That's whay I don't want a safety on my carry guns.
Click to expand...

That's pretty weak.
I've seen a broken trigger, so, I should want a carry gun without a trigger?
I had a magazine with a weak spring, so, I should shoot my carry gun single-shot?
I draw the line at putting no ammo in my carry gun because one time I had a round with no powder.
 
That's pretty weak.
I've seen a broken trigger, so, I should want a carry gun without a trigger?
I had a magazine with a weak spring, so, I should shoot my carry gun single-shot?
I draw the line at putting no ammo in my carry gun because one time I had a round with no powder.
Click to expand...
Not weak at all. There are a lot more things that can go wrong than the very unlikely case of a broken safety. Stress, called "buck fever" in the deer woods. Where you are so stressed, and full of adrenaline that you don't even flip the safety off. Believe me it happens to some of the most experienced hunters. There stress is only putting meat on the table, or a trophy on the wall.
Again, missing the safety lever and in the stress of a confrontation not even noticing it. Or just plane slipping off of it because of sweaty hands.
If a person feels they need a safety, by all means get a gun with one. Myself, I feel safer without the extra step in the process of deploying a firearm in a self defense emergency.
 
In spending quite a few years shooting Colt 45 1911 pistols in IPSC competitions, the on-off thumb safety became automatic.

Till a State IPSC match, in Norfolk Virginia. Several years ago. One of the courses of fire had you carrying a pretend Pizza in your right hand like a waiter would carry a tray.

Opening a door caused a target array, two targets, to come off the floor, swing up at you, and down to the ground, in front of you. Definitely doable.

I watched it done! But when you miss disengaging the thumb safety? Big fail.
I carried a lightweight Colt Commander as an EDC. We had just picked up Glock 17s, direct from Austria then. That became my match/carry gun right then. Now a Glock 19 4th Gen.

I had fired thousands of rounds from the holster with 1911s up to that time, with no problems, but a nod is as good as a wink to a blind donkey.
So to speak. A good Kydex holster is a must with a Glock, that hides the trigger.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top