Safe or not safe?

Got this reply: As a side note, single action revolvers based on the SAA design imported into this country from Europe are required by the Federal Government to have a second, redundant safety mechanism built into them to prevent a discharge if the gun falls to the ground. I guess this applies, but I wonder if it applies the such single action products, like Uberti, the cattleman?
 
Last edited:
I guess this applies, but I wonder if it applies the such single action Ulsberit products, like the cattleman?
Click to expand...

Yes, it does. I have had two Uberti Cattlemen over the years. The first one had a small hammer block built into the hammer. The second one came with the two position cylinder pin. I no longer have the first one, I still have the second one. I replaced the two position cylinder pin with a standard cylinder pin because the two position cylinder pin is a ridiculous design.

Last year Uberti announced they had a new model. This one has a firing pin that retracts into the hammer so it cannot strike a primer. When the trigger is pulled, an actuating bar pushes the firing pin forward so it will strike a primer. I have seen a couple of videos about this model but I have not handled one myself yet.
 
T. O'Heir said:
No round under the hammer dates from 19th Century single action revolvers that'd go bang if dropped. Modern hand guns don't do that.
Click to expand...



Tell that to my uncle who to this day carries a 22 slug mm's from his heart

Dropped my dad's (his older brother doh) Beretta 948 22 Semi Auto as he leaned over to look under hood of the car. Gun slipped out of shoulder holster and landed on the hammer and bang a few mm's over and Id have never meant him as it happened when he was 15.

They have NO hammer safety.
The gun was mfg in 1957 in Italy. So yeah modern would apply.
b5a2c848fcd62ad03fddba368406b0b3.jpg





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
This thread should be a "sticky"....
Outstanding pictures and definitions of the different ways to make safe carry w/all chambers loaded...
 
Colt double actions went to the Positive safety action with hammer block about 1908. Shows up in the names of the smaller guns, Pocket Positive and Police Positive, but the Army Special and New Service got it, too. Said not to be as strong as the various S&W hammer blocks, it was still a lot better than a plain or even rebounding hammer.

Possibly the safest of the frontier guns when fully loaded was the 1858 Remington C&B with deep hammer nose notches between the nipples. Colt safety pins for the purpose got beat down in short order. Manhattan made some C&B revolvers with 12 bolt notches in the cylinder so it would be retained between chambers.

But in the 1880s, Colt would have you load six and go to the "safety notch." If you busted it out and shot yourself or your horse, just unfortunate.
 
No recalls or civil litigation back then. You were presumed to have a degree of common sense when it came to owning and handling something as inherently hazardous as a gun or a knife has the potential for.
 
One of my favorite "duh" remarks was by a self-styled gun "expert" who wrote that "...there would have been far fewer people killed in the Civil War if guns at that time had had modern safety features." Yup. Having an enemy army shooting at you can be hazardous to the health without "modern safety features" on their guns.

Jim
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top