Curious, what's the BEST handgun safety design?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ruger man that I am, I believe I'd opt for the hammer block safety found on some Uberti Single Action revolvers.

This safety allows the hammer to be alowered from cocked position to the safety notch position with the hammer over a live round and is a positive safety that requires no other action to engage or disengage.

Bob Wright
 
what are the best safety designs on a handgun, and while we're at it, the worst designs?
Click to expand...

As so many others have suggested the Greatest safety feature on anything thing is an informed, properly trained, and careful user.
 
SFsc616171 said:
The best is: ...
For those born after the end of The Cold War, it would seem to be some kind of polymer something semi-automatic that resembles John Dillinger's jail gun.
...
Click to expand...

Nice turn of phrase. With your permission, I would like to file some version of that line in my permanent pithy phrase portfolio.

Bill
 
For the most intrinsically safe but ready to go into action handgun safety system I'd vote for a revolver with the hammer down on an empty chamber. Even in a fire it won't send a bullet down the barrel, although there will be lots of fragments as the rounds ready in the cylinder "cook off".

But the only safety that really will work when handling a gun is between your ears.
 
"For those born after the end of The Cold War, it would seem to be some kind of polymer something semi-automatic that resembles John Dillinger's jail gun."
1C6529391-31913gunreplica.blocks_desktop_medium.jpg
19120$ American :D :D :D :D I learned something new, today :)

Gotta save this one for some "ugly gun" or "Colt's are the best EVAR!" threads :D. Why the heck did he carve text into it? That's like the wooden iPad with the painted buttons! Oh, how I wish we'd had security footage in those days, that performance for the prison guards had to have been one for the ages :p

TCB
 
Please note that Dillinger's jail gun has far more resemblance to a 1911 than a Glock. No wood used on a Glock.:neener:
 
There is no best design in general.

Each type suits each person differently.

For my use, no thumb lever type manual firing inhibitor is best.
 
testpilot said:
For my use, no thumb lever type manual firing inhibitor is best.
Click to expand...

Do you prefer a thumb lever type automatic firing inhibitor as opposed to the thumb lever type manual firing inhibitors?

Or maybe just the basic finger operated manual firing inhibitor, or possibly a finger operated dual manual firing inhibitor, or even a palm operated manual firing inhibitor?

I'm not sure what the current ATF rules are on the use of automatic firing inhibitors in civilian firearms.
 
Last edited:
Consider the requirement that a mechanical safety should fail in the FIRE position.
There was an early pistol in the Walther MP-AP-HP series leading up to the P38 that had the most positive safety linkages in the business. The German General Staff rejected it because if anything went wrong, it failed in the NO-Fire "safe" position leaving the user disarmed. They went with the HP which was theoretically less safe, then with the P38 which is significantly less secure against inadvertent discharge but which would always be shootable even if the safety system quit.

Even so, I think Walther should have sued the movie producers when James Bond's PPK discharged when dropped in one adventure. But then if it hadn't, he would not have come to the notice of the villains and not had to winkle his way out of a dramatic tight spot.

Greener recommended the double action revolver which would "make no demands on the shooter's attention." But autopistols were not well developed in 1910 when his last edition came out.
 
In the future we will have guns with automatic trigger guard sheaths. There will be no physical access to the trigger until the grip safety is depressed + trigger finger is detected as extending along the side of the frame over the trigger guard. When the trigger finger is removed from this position, the sheath will automatically close unless the trigger is immediately placed in the trigger guard or back on the side of the frame. In this way, the gun is inoperable until it has been demonstrated that the user has control of the firearm and of his trigger finger.

Or course, by then, firearms will have been superceded by phase beam plasma lasers. So it will all be done in the firmware.
 
Last edited:
The best safety is a custom made hidden switch activation. When done correctly, without the need for batteries could be a magnet in a glove, a magnetic ring on the finger, or a manual switch. While rfid and biometric activation run on a power source, with care and maintenance, you will not have to worry about running out of power in the heat of the moment.
 
45_auto said:
Do you prefer a thumb lever type automatic firing inhibitor as opposed to the thumb lever type manual firing inhibitors?

Or maybe just the basic finger operated manual firing inhibitor, or possibly a finger operated dual manual firing inhibitor, or even a palm operated manual firing inhibitor?

I'm not sure what the current ATF rules are on the use of automatic firing inhibitors in civilian firearms.
Click to expand...

Trying to go on a little fishing trip are we? Sure looks like you might with that bait. In fact, you are chumming. Not very sporting of you. Fortunately I think the fish you are trying to hook probably recognizes the bait and will not bite.

My concern about your uncertainty prompts the helpful posting of a link:

http://www.atf.gov/content/contact-us

:evil:
 
"The best safety is a custom made hidden switch activation. When done correctly, without the need for batteries could be a magnet in a glove, a magnetic ring on the finger, or a manual switch. While rfid and biometric activation run on a power source, with care and maintenance, you will not have to worry about running out of power in the heat of the moment."

From True Grit:
"Mattie Ross: If I had killed Chaney, I would not be in this fix; but my gun misfired.
Lucky Ned Pepper: [Chuckling] They will do it. It will embarrass you every time. Most girls like to play pretties, but you like guns do you?
Mattie Ross: I do not care a thing about guns, if I did, I would have one that worked."

Back to the OP topic; I would submit the Remington R51 grip safety plus cocked/locked SA trigger is the best blend of 'intuitive' and 'intentional' safety schemes. I found it easy to fail to activate the safety while messing with an empty gun off the range. When loaded and expecting recoil, I found I could not make myself not engage the safety. When you truly intend to fire the gun, you anticipate the recoil and grip more securely than you might when function testing the empty gun, expecting no recoil. The gun can tell when you're serious :p, whereas a Glock cannot.

TCB
 
Anyone ever mess with the index-finger operated safety above the trigger on the FNH five-seven? As far as manual safeties, it actually seems pretty smart, since it prohibits simultaneous trigger/safety use and forces your finger to be where it should be right up to the point you go loud. On a CCW you want as few barriers and as quick a response time as possible so I think a manual safety is more of a detriment, but on an issue gun (which the five-seven ostensibly is) which is more often held at ready --often pointed at people-- this safety seems like it would be less accident prone, if only because it forces the user's finger off the trigger prior to use.

I admit that it's really different from anything else out there, and that thumb safety fans would probably find it quite odd at first.

TCB
 
nom de forum said:
Trying to go on a little fishing trip are we? Sure looks like you might with that bait.
Click to expand...

Fishing for chumps. Appears that I caught at least one! ;)

Was really hoping for some clarification between manual vs automatic thumb lever type firing inhibitors as opposed to manual vs automatic finger type firing inhibitors. I contacted the ATF at your link and they had no idea what I meant by a "firing inhibitor". Perhaps you could take another bite of the bait and supply another link? :evil:
 
45_auto said:
Fishing for chumps. Appears that I caught at least one! ;)

Was really hoping for some clarification between manual vs automatic thumb lever type firing inhibitors as opposed to manual vs automatic finger type firing inhibitors. I contacted the ATF at your link and they had no idea what I meant by a "firing inhibitor". Perhaps you could take another bite of the bait and supply another link? :evil:
Click to expand...


I’m surprised you naively checked with the ATF as my suggestion was obvious sarcasm. I should have anticipated your literal thinking since I am familiar with your slowness to comprehend the abstract meaning of Testpilot’s terminology after numerous prior explanations in other threads. I guess you are just an example of how some people are not as good at understanding abstract thinking as the average person. No link I can provide will help you more than the THR search function to fully comprehend Testpilot’s terminology. BTW, you misspelled “chum” in your post, but that does not mean I misunderstood your intended sentiment. Anything else I can help you with today Chum? I hope nothing that needs to unnecessarily occupy more space in this thread. PM me if I can be of further assistance. Be careful when you go fishing as you can paddle into dangerous waters where big fish can capsize your little dingy. ;)
 
I think I am going to end up getting an M&P just because of it's safety design. It's a striker pistol with an available 1911-style safety.

I am used to operating external safeties, so the process is automatic for me. So automatic, in fact, that shooting buddies give me crap for operating a phantom safety on my Glock when I shoot it.

Strikers are safe by design, but the trigger still can't distinguish between a finger and a shirt tail, belt, or anything else Murphy puts in the trigger guard. I personally would just like to have another layer of safety in a carry gun.
 
I was going to use the between your ears one, but a number of you beat me to it. So suffice it to say that, that said, the Glock has the worst devised by man. Putting a safety on a trigger is like putting brake on an accelerator. I love Glocks, don't get me wrong; they just have lousy safeties.

I was recently playing around with my S&W 659, and I cocked it and began to experiment with the trigger play. I noticed that it took quite a bit to set off the action so it would go off had it been loaded. Would I carry this gun cocked? No way, but it wasn't any more or less apt to fire than a Glock, which I also would not want to carry cocked.

The best in my view is the cock-and-lock type. I have a Taurus 92 stainless and it's one of the best guns I own. I've seen few out of the box 1911s that have been reliable enough for me to trust. I like the safeties on the S&W steel autos, and though some folks don't like magazine safeties, the mags are easily dropped if someone begins to overpower you. Massad Ayoob says this type of safety has saved a number of cops he's trained.

On an auto, another safety I despise is a double action only trigger. Yes, it's safe, but I wouldn't own such a gun. I prefer revolvers at that point because they tend to be more powerful, more accurate and more reliable.
 
Jim Watson said:
Consider the requirement that a mechanical safety should fail in the FIRE position.
There was an early pistol in the Walther MP-AP-HP series leading up to the P38 that had the most positive safety linkages in the business. The German General Staff rejected it because if anything went wrong, it failed in the NO-Fire "safe" position leaving the user disarmed. They went with the HP which was theoretically less safe, then with the P38 which is significantly less secure against inadvertent discharge but which would always be shootable....
Click to expand...
One would think that a member of the "Master Race" wouldn't need a safety. All they'd have to do is cock it, put it in their back pocket and if it went off, it would blow their brains out! :evil:
 
confederate said:
I was recently playing around with my S&W 659, and I cocked it and began to experiment with the trigger play. I noticed that it took quite a bit to set off the action so it would go off had it been loaded. Would I carry this gun cocked? No way, but it wasn't any more or less apt to fire than a Glock,
Click to expand...

Congratulations, your 659 must have the NASTIEST single-action trigger known to man if it requires the same amount of force and travel to go off as a Glock! I hate to imagine what the double-action must be like.

No wonder they quit making them!
 
"The German General Staff rejected it because if anything went wrong, it failed in the NO-Fire "safe" position leaving the user disarmed. They went with the HP which was theoretically less safe, then with the P38 which is significantly less secure against inadvertent discharge but which would always be shootable..."
You must understand that the autopistols of the preceding era--especially locked breech ones-- were awful contraptions with inefficient designs and myriad failures. Having grown up on Borchardts, Broomhandles, and Roth-Steyrs, I can see how the generals of that era would want the new guns to fail "on" rather than "off" since they fully expected them to fail.

TCB
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
  • Locked
Now, what do you mean "condition 3"?...
Replies
6
Views
694
Jim Watson
J
R
  • Locked
Single action, hammer down
2 3
Replies
51
Views
8K
ugaarguy
ugaarguy
P
  • Locked
Glock external safety?
2
Replies
26
Views
2K
John Parker
J
N
  • Locked
What mechanical safety designs used on pistols would not qualify for a best list?
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
herrwalther
H
G
  • Locked
Very Specific Criteria
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
hariph creek
H
Back
Top