Why are popular striker-fired pistols safe?

Status
Not open for further replies.
labnoti said:
I'm glad everyone can have it almost according to their preference. I say almost because let's face it, there's still some lame blemishes out there in the name of safety that truly nobody wants. But the idea of a handgun that cannot be disabled by a manual safety lever goes back to the beginning of the adoption of automatics by institutions and agencies that previously fielded revolvers that did not include safety manipulation in their manual of arms. Fairbairn and Sykes practiced and promoted the idea of pinning safeties on 1911's (and carrying them in condition 3). I don't think they were such advocates of condition 3 as they were, by experience, opponents of manual safeties. Needless to say, they and their practices were heavily influential in police and military doctrine, later especially in police agency doctrine and many people, departments, and institutions came to follow their thinking -- which I would emphasize was not merely opinion based on conjecture, but borne of experience and hard lessons. I have no argument against the idea that condition 1 carry merely requires training, but I also have no experience with failures of that practice whereas there are many people that do. Whether we think those people's bias against condition 1 is justified or not, they do have liberty to hold an opinion and maintain a practice different than ours, whatever it may be.

So we can see a practice that evolved of:

double-action revolver
single-action auto without safety in condition 3
da/sa with decocker and without safety
various striker actions without a manual safety

alternatively, we can see an evolution of:

single action revolver
single-action auto with safety in condition 1
da/sa with safety in condition 1
various striker actions with a manual safety

The question the OP seems to be asking is about the safety of "various striker actions without a manual safety." I believe the answer is they are made safe in carry either by having a DAO action where the trigger fully cocks the striker (I think these are mostly obsolete among duty guns), or by nothing more than a longer and possibly slightly heavier trigger pull that may complete the energizing of a partially cocked striker as well as clearing passive safeties, and a reliance on the holster to protect the trigger.
Click to expand...
Excellent discussion of the question.
 
It certainly wasn't Glock that taught people to want "point and shoot" without safety-manipulation. You could say that DA revolver makers conditioned people to that desire because they were among the first to offer it, but it would be hard to argue they had as much influence as Fairbairn. He was totally opposed to safeties and he had enormous sway with both the British and the Americans. He massively influenced the SAS and US 1st Special Forces Command (green berets). His dagger or its direct derivatives are the centerpiece of their logos. He subsequently influenced MI6 and OSS, particularly vicariously through Col. Rex Applegate. When the FBI started arming itself, they took advice from other federal agencies, and subsequently followed most of Fairbairn's doctrines such as point-shooting. Subsequently, most law-enforcement agencies in the US have taken and continue to take advice and direction from the FBI whose doctrines have evolved after something like 70 or 80 years, but Fairbairn's influence still remains at least as big as Smith & Wesson or Glocks. In many ways, S&W and Glock were ultimately compelled to produce what Fairbairn's doctrines prescribed.
 
Last edited:
rpenmanparker said:
You are missing the point. None of us is perfect try as we might. The safeties are there to catch our mistakes. If you don’t make mistakes, you don’t need a safety.
Click to expand...
IMO, the safest gun, striker or otherwise, is the P7; if you do not fully squeeze the cocking mechanism, the gun cannot fire. I like guns where all I need to do is "point and shoot"
 
I can't speak for others, but I don't consider a glock design, or any of their copycats, safe.

Any cocked 1911, with the safety off, is also unsafe.
 
They are both safe in the holster. They are both not as safe when out of a holster. They both can be used safely with proper care and training. They have different implementations of safety mechanisms and we get to choose what we like and what we are most comfortable with.
 
Last edited:
My understanding is that the Glock trigger mechanism was meant to offer a compromise between a single action automatic and a double action revolver. It would:

A) not require remembering to release a manual safety

B) offer a shorter, lighter trigger pull for better accuracy and more rapid fire than a DA revolver (when fired DA) or a DAO automatic

C) offer a trigger less likely to accidental or unintentional discharge than a cocked DA revolver or SA automatic.

I am old enough to remember when the Glock was introduced, which was back when a lot of American police still carried revolvers, although quite a few had gone to the Beretta 92 or other DA semi-autos. I thought that like most compromises, it would fail to satisfy anyone completely, and "fall between two stools", as the saying goes. I also thought, from the writing of Masaad Ayoob, that the presence of a manual safety catch was an advantage to the police, and its absence on the Glock would be another black mark.

Instead, the Glock took the police world by storm, and also appealed to many new shooters who never really grasped the difference between DA and SA and DAO and so on. (Ever tried to explain that to someone who has never fired a gun? It's tough. They just don't get that the difference between a DA trigger and an SA trigger is a big deal when you are trying to hit something over 8 feet away.) The lack of a manual safety appealed to them too. Until you have handled a 1911-type gun enough, it seems like releasing the safety might be easy to forget under pressure.

BTW, the fact that the Glock striker fired is incidental. A hammer fired gun could be arranged to work the same way. Up until the Glock, in fact, almost all striker fired pistols were SA only. I am sure there are exceptions, but I can't think of one now. Therefore it keeps taking me by surprise when people assume that "striker fired" implies "Glock style trigger". )Walt Sherrill does a much better job of describing this in post #12.)

PS - I thought of two! The Roth Steyr Model 1907, and it's little brother, the 7.65mm Roth-Sauer,
 
Last edited:
Interesting, I have a friend that is retired Military Armorer. Present range officer, avid shooter etc. For years it always talked and bragged about his Glock 19. Not to recently I saw him for the first time after a long absence. I called out to him and asked him "Where the Hell have you been, haven't seen you in so long"? His reply, "I shot myself". I thought he was joking, but he pulled out a picture of a XRAY that showed a hollow point bullet going from his hip down his leg. Pretty ugly to say the least. He told me, he was heading to the range one day, and opened his car door and his Glock slipped out and caught on something and Bingo, the jackpot.
We discussed a few things and I told him, I was done with light Crisp triggers. He told me, "Well, I never thought I would say this, but I am done with the Glocks. I mentioned I made a decision to go with a double action gun and he agreed.
I personally now carry a Beretta Nano. I love the Double action on this gun. Some folks put it down because it is a double action and they say it has a long pull. Ok, and as one other Nano guy said, it is a similar to a revolver, but better. I agree.
For years I carried a Ruger LC9S. I used the safety, have trained with a safety all my life. However, the trigger for me personally was just too easy to fire with the very short final takeup. And I never have ridden a reset with any gun I have every shot. JMO
 
Last edited:
While I dont have it anymore, I think I am one of the few people, like Jeb, who like trigger of the Nano. It's more of a squeeze bottle pull rather than a break. Hard to explain, but it's certainly an acquired taste and not for folks who like a 3.5# glock.

I dont particularly like striker pistols with a manual safety. They main reason is that they often seem like after thoughts. I had more problems finding the tiny tab of a safety snicked on or off on my FNS pistols than I ever had on a 1911 or M9. So, if it's a Glock or a SIG or an FN or whatever, no manual and a quality holster for me. They are also gun that I dont handle a great deal when loaded. Chambered, in the holster, stay in the holster until I fire them at the range or clear them for long term non-bedside storage.

Striker fired non manual guns are great shooters. Great for quick shooting and self defense. Wonderful capacity, durability, and price. They have their place.

I'm still a single action revolver guy, but non manual safeties on strikers are dangerous. Their just not a dog you can leave your kid alone with when it comes to mishandling them.
 
Another point I should have put above: Revolvers /seem/ safe because I guess old, reliable, etc. But just like they can jam, there were plenty of NDs in service.

Agencies, on transitioning to autopistols—almost regardless of which model or mechanism—saw their NDs plummet. Often, from a dozen a year to zero, year after year.

Partly this was certainly actually having a plan, and training everyone in proper procedures, having good holsters, etc. But it also indicates the guns are in no way intrinsically more dangerous. Training only goes so far (trust me: my day job is human factors), so a dangerous mechanism will bite you. Glocks, et al don't go off "on their own" enough to indicate their mechanism is a bad idea.
 
I think the specific feature the OP had in mind was the little emergency brake on the Glock's trigger. I don't really see what purpose it serves. There's nothing that would get inside the trigger guard that wouldn't trip the mechanism and allow the trigger to move. Same with my M&Ps. It seems to be more of a psychological pacifier than a real safety device.
 
It is not about things getting inside the trigger guard. It is about dropping the gun or some such. Another protection against a discharge not due to pulling the trigger.
 
The only way to make any gun truly "safe" is to render it inoperable. Otherwise, use a quality holster and keep your booger hook off the trigger unless you are going to fire.
 
Interesting thread with various insights.

Dibbs said:
I can't speak for others, but I don't consider a glock design, or any of their copycats, safe.

Any cocked 1911, with the safety off, is also unsafe.
Click to expand...

Maybe I'm totally misinformed but I feel, thumb and grip safety not withstanding, less secure with a single action 1911 at my side than a striker fire without any safety. Any gun can be at the center of an AD but personally I don't depend on a mechanical safety because anything mechanical can malfunction and you must remember to put the thumb safety on every time. Having said this any gun, safety or no safety, could fire if the trigger is pulled so there is always a risk factor.

Monac said:
A) not require remembering to release a manual safety
Click to expand...

You have to remember to release it and you have to remember to activate it.

I would say a hammer style DA is the safest but there is still a risk. I haven't had any ADs with my DA revolvers but I have had one go off when pointed down range (obviously in a safe direction) but still at a time that was sort of unexpected. The main thing is of course keep fingers and everything else away from the trigger until ready to shoot.

This thread in my opinion is more of an argument for continued safety awareness and persistent practice than an equipment preference debate. All it takes is one second being lax and boom.
 
rpenmanparker said:
IMO the Glock concept is BS hype. Glocks are a bad solution in search of a problem. There is no reason for not having a manual thumb safety on it like on so many other striker pistols, e.g. Ruger SR9. For righties the thumb safety is smoothly and easily deactivated during the draw from the holster with no speed penalty whatsoever. For lefties the same is true if a pistol with ambidextrous safety is chosen. Personally I believe a 1911 in Condition 1 is as safe as any other current pistol type, moreso than most.
Click to expand...

If Glock put a manual safety on their pistols, I vwouldn't own one.

There is no need whatsoever for a manual safety on any pistol other than a SA.
 
If Glock put a manual safety on their pistols, I vwouldn't own one.

There is no need whatsoever for a manual safety on any pistol other than a SA.
Click to expand...

cheygriz said:
He gets it!:)

As long as the hammer drop is a hammer drop ONLY and there is no manual safety that can be accidentally engaged.:thumbup:
Click to expand...
He does...

"The Glock ... it's a single action gun."
 
John_R said:
I think the specific feature the OP had in mind was the little emergency brake on the Glock's trigger. I don't really see what purpose it serves. There's nothing that would get inside the trigger guard that wouldn't trip the mechanism and allow the trigger to move. Same with my M&Ps. It seems to be more of a psychological pacifier than a real safety device.
Click to expand...

I have thought the same thing. However after the SIG 320 drop failures, I think the dingus also serves as an inertia drop safety. The 320 had a nice smooth face trigger that doesnt abrade my delicate piggie. However, without something to catch the trigger a fall at just the right angle could cause the trigger to move back far enough to fire since it had a good deal of mass to it.

A little blade lock keeps that from happening.

I still prefer my 320 smooth metal trigger, but I dont find the FNS hinged triggers to be bad either. Not really a fan of the dingus.
 
cheygriz said:
In my opinion, the Glock is much closer to a DAO than a SA. It retains the long, heavy trigger of the DA.
Click to expand...
My guess (since I haven't handled all striker or all DA/SA or DAO guns) is the typical striker fired gun has about half the trigger travel and half the trigger weight of the typical DA auto.

Do striker fired guns have a heavier trigger pull and a longer trigger travel than a 1911, probably (per my limitations listed above), but they are closer to a single action trigger than a double action trigger.
 
I don't try to classify a Glock/M&P/XD etc as single or double action. The SA/DA moniker comes from revolvers and still sort of makes sense in hammer fired semi-autos but in striker fired guns it does not work that well IMHO. A Glock's the striker is partial "cocked" and so its sort of like a double action, but not, since you have no double strike capability. An XD has a long double action like trigger pull but the striker is fully cocked and many after market trigger jobs on XDs remove nearly all the pre-travel and all of the over travel making the trigger pull more like a single action than a double action. I think trying to wedge a striker fire gun into the SA or DA pigeon holes is pointless. A striker fired gun is a striker fired gun and thus has a unique operation and trigger pull separate from both single and double action hammer fired weapons.
 
My biggest safety concern is during holstering. It’s not always easy to see if there might be something in the holster that could interfere with the trigger. A piece of clothing can also get wedged in the trigger guard during holstering. With an exposed hammer revolver, you can put your thumb under the hammer during holstering. With a grip safety, you can release the safety by holstering with your thumb on the back of the slide. Keep your thumb under the thumb safety to make sure it’s engaged during holstering.

In any case, Murphy is always close by.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
Why do SAO handguns need manual safeties, but striker fired ones dont?
2 3 4 5 6 7
Replies
173
Views
18K
Madcap_Magician
M
G
  • Locked
1911 cocked, safety off carry?
2 3
Replies
64
Views
5K
bigfatdave
B
S
  • Locked
Condition 0. 1911 vs. Striker fired.
Replies
17
Views
2K
baryon
B
Warp
  • Locked
Are Glocks really drop safe? Even in the summer?
2 3
Replies
65
Views
5K
9mmepiphany
9mmepiphany
Alllen Bundy
P365 Series - Omitted Striker Spring Alters Manual Trigger Safety Operation
Replies
3
Views
290
Riomouse911
Riomouse911
Back
Top