What's Wrong with Magazine Disconnects?

With all due respect BSA1, a mag safety would not prevent hardly any "found gun" tragedies since those guns are usually loaded & with a mag, and would be merely an odds game at preventing "moron with gun" tragedies like my own ancestor's. Safe storage is an important issue, but a distinct one from operational safety (my issue with mag disconnects). A better argument could be made for leaving guns in level II holsters as a child-proof safety measure than the inclusion of a mag safety that likely won't even be activated when the gun is in an unsafe loaded condition.

"The U.S. General Accounting Office estimated that 31 percent of accidental deaths caused by firearms might be prevented with the addition of 2 devices: a child-proof safety lock and a loading indicator."
Guess which one of these likely doesn't have any impact on unsafe usage at all...loading indicators are another feature that's primarily present due to the demands of ignorant legislators or militaries, rather than a distinctly useful safety mechanism. I've already seen my SACM's indicator become stuck in the 'loaded' position. Also, who is even checking these vs doing a press check? More than 31% of accidents would be prevented if people gave storage enough of thought to bother engaging any of these safety devices :rolleyes

Instead, some people just assume it won't matter if they leave a loaded pistol out on the nightstand unattended, or get wasted while carrying --not much you can do to safeguard their behavior besides punish them for negligence after an incident.

TCB

Bottom line is the best safety is the one between your ears. Some folks don't have one there and for those people no additional add on's will make a difference, just inconvenience others.

Darwin will indeed sort those folks out in one way or another. The downside is the possibility of innocent injuries/loss of life. Personally I do not think any mount of "forced safety" will prevent the aforementioned because of the lack of what's between their ears is impossible to overcome.


The idea of a MD for tactical purposes may indeed be a reality, but the data and statistics to back that up are so little that it almost makes it irrelevant.

As for myself I go back to the S&W M39, various generations, skipped the first two attempts of the polymer striker fired pistols, and up to the current MP series. All the S&W pistols that I’ve owned previously and own now have the magazine disconnect. I’ve never had an issue thus operational problem with the magazine disconnect.

I've never really cared one way or another about disconnect safeties - thinking it to be arbitrary as to who's advantage it is to disable the gun. But it might make sense to have one if you are the type to carry a backup gun (or knife or some other defensive weapon). If someone without a gun is grappling for your primary gun and you are able to disable it by dropping the magazine you could then concentrate on getting them off of you with or without the gun and get to your backup. You would, however, be giving them a club.

We had an officer involved shooting very recently in which the officer was shot with her own service weapon. In that case a mag disconnect might have prevented it if there was a chance she could have hit the mag release but that's a big if.

Bottom line is the best safety is the one between your ears

Click to expand...

I'd actually expand on this and say the best safety designs are those you can easily control & operate intentionally. To me, that's the purpose of a firearm safety. Seems kind of obvious when you put it that way. Mag disconnects are the only safety I'm aware of that a user cannot intentionally defeat or override...well, except for "smart guns" (I see mag disconnects as a product of the same thought processes as "smart guns" --'if we can stop the user from being able to use the gun in certain situations, bad things won't happen to them! Hooray!')

We had an officer involved shooting very recently in which the officer was shot with her own service weapon. In that case a mag disconnect might have prevented it if there was a chance she could have hit the mag release but that's a big if.

Click to expand...

What if the gun gets kicked waaaay across the room and they have to fight hand to hand? What if the perp carries around an empty mag so he can 'reactivate' a cop's gun after snatching it? Losing the weapon implies a loss of control over said weapon, so how would she have been able to deploy the mag, unless she was jettisoning it (long) before she had actually lost control of the weapon? I know there are stories where the safety accidentally helped, and I understand the logic behind the argument, but it just seems similar to same specific-scenario-based thinking behind multiple backup guns or multiple backup magazines (hint: highly unlikely you or anyone else involved in a random violent encounter will be fighting long enough to make use of them)

TCB

I have a Hi-Power and would not mind the mag disconnect...>

...if it had been engineered in a manner that did not affect the trigger pull. I'd have been happier if it had been better implemented, or not implemented at all.

I believe that for the military, at least, (and the Hi-Power was the standard sidearm in my country until fairly recently), the merit seen in the mag disconnect was in preventing accidental discharges when the magazine was out and the weapon assumed to be unloaded. Not in rendering the pistol inert in a gun-grab situation (which I have never really considered overly practical), but more for situations such as weapons cleaning when proper clearing procedure may not have been followed. Of course, this flies in the face of safe gun handling and is a question for their training, but it would seem that the military thought it worthwhile.

I removed the mag disconnect from my BHP and was pleasantly surprised by the improvement to the trigger pull, but the reason I removed it was because it prevented the empty mag from dropping free during a magazine change. Full mags would drop free due to gravity, but empty mags do not have the necessary mass to overcome the friction. So, I would have to release the mag and pull it free before reaching for a full mag.

I truly hate it that some makers have decided that everyone must want a magazine safety and have begun making certain "wide appeal" handguns that are ONLY available with a magazine safety.

Click to expand...

My understanding is this is commonly due to legislative requirements (also, municipal requirements for service arms)

Okay, that is the stuff from movies

Click to expand...

A-'First thing; forget everything you think you know from the movies'
B-'You know, I've actually heard them say that line, in the movies'



TBC

I have a number of pistols with the magazine safety, at least as oririnally designed. These are all on pistols used to shoot recreationally and for fun.
My experiences with them:

• FEG Hi Power. This is the straight clone of the Browning Hi Power. It came with the magazine disconnect, and the trigger was gritty and spongey. I removed it in a simple procedure as detailed online, and it now has a much crisper trigger.
• S&W 39/59 series. I bought a 915, which is the 3rd Gen Value Series version of the 5904, and the prior owner had removed the magazine safety and "had a trigger job done on it". I also bought a 39-2, with the magazine safety in place. The 915 feels a hair better, but it's very hard to tell the difference in the two. Not enough to make me do anything to the 39-2, safety, trigger or otherwise.
• I have a Star 30MI, has the mag safety, I've read that it does not affect the trigger at all to remove it. I've left it stock, although in the back of my mind, I've read that removing it would allow me to use S&W mags (I have 2 for the 915, so that would double my capacity for the Star). If I do anything to this gun, it would only be to use the extra mags.
• A Star Model B Super, it has a nice crisp trigger as it is, and the risk of dryfire breakage of the firing pin is actually an encouragement to leave the mag safety alone.

I still need to understand who those are that need a magazine disconnect.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

I still need to understand who those are that need a magazine disconnect.

Click to expand...

Have you read the thread? Whether one may personally put much weight to the reasons to have one, some of those reasons have indeed been explained pretty clearly several times here.

If you're suggesting that the people who want one don't really need one, that's taking on probably an unreasonable about of responsibility for making others' value judgments for them.

X-Rap said:

I still need to understand who those are that need a magazine disconnect.

Click to expand...

Nobody NEEDS one, like nobody NEEDS anything.

Perhaps the ability to render the gun completely inoperable, without being able to reverse it, is extremely high on some people's requirement lists. It changes the gun from being a firearm to being a club. Can't just flick the switch back over like a thumb safety.

However, reinsert the magazine, and you get a fully functional firearm again. If there is a round chambered, it's immediately ready to fire.

There are some people who need or want a magazine safety on a gun and there are some valid reasons why some people might need or want a magazine safety.

For people who don't fall into that category, a magazine safety is more parts added to a device that doesn't need more parts. It's additional complexity in a design that doesn't need additional complexity. It's additional cost in a product that doesn't need additional cost. It adds some new failure modes to the gun that weren't there before and don't need to be there.

I'm glad that there are guns with magazine safeties on the market because it provides something useful for the few people who need the feature. I truly hate it that some makers have decided that everyone must want a magazine safety and have begun making certain "wide appeal" handguns that are ONLY available with a magazine safety.

Click to expand...

Sam, I've read all the thread and my use of the word need came from reading the post above. I'm not aware of any agency in the US that mandates mag safeties and while I've owned them in the past I wouldn't have one again. The OP asked for opinion and I'm giving mine. The above post was from my phone and I apologize for not being clear.
I can only guess why Browning put a mag safety on his HiPower but I bet the 1911 would have fewer followers if it had one.

To me its a completely worthless feature that gets deactivated before the gun ever makes it out to shoot a round out the barrel.

During a tussle all the "operator" has to do is push the mag release? Really? Is that why my Browning Buckmark came with a mag safety? So that when I'm out tacticooling with the pumpkins they dont try to swipe my .22? That "feature" is an abomination that got yanked as soon as the box was opened as it has on every gun Ive ever bought that had it installed from the factory.

If we only had weapons with a mag disconnect we'd not think twice. Those in power engineer these devices to supposedly make them protective devices for the uninitiated. That interpretation is a lack of functioning familiarity with the tool. Those people need to have devices on hand to bring awareness. "Common sense" seems to be a Darwin level occurrence that varies widely.

Half of what I have have a mag disconnect. Just a matter of what you can acclimate with. When I acquired one without, the operational practice was different and I liked that. I can see the features to either. The Hi Power trigger feels horrible with it. Most the others I have with a mag disconnect the trigger feel isn't obvious to me. That said, the nightstand set-up is the one without the mag disconnect.

If your pistol is about to be taken from you and you drop the magazine, I guess you'd better be prepared to get beaten to death with it. That's probably what's going to happen next.