I've Been Saying This For YEARS

No, it cannot. There is a stark difference in readying a cap and ball pistol and sweeping off a safety.

You're just saying that the firearm is optimized enough for you, and it doesn't need to be optimized further.

As someone who works in IT, the better the UX, the better the product. You can always optimize. Less actions to perform the same task is almost always better UX.
 
If you have a good holster, and have the discipline to keep the muzzle in a safe direction and your finger off the trigger there is no need for a manual safety.
 
Ol' Mas likes to analyze things at some length. I don't think he was actually advocating for manual safeties, as much as saying they sometimes have some merit.
Those posters here who say to train with what you carry are spot on. Personally, my carry stuff only has a bangswitch, but SIG, on the 365 platform, had a simply great idea with the ability to add a safety if you wish.
Moon
 
I'm not commenting on the need or no need for a safety, but most striker guns are the equivalent of a cocked DA/SA gun, not a decocked DA/SA gun.

A decocked DA/SA gun has no energy stored, if all the passive safeties suddenly evaporated, nothing would happen since the hammer isn't going anywhere since it is already down. If all the passive safeties on a partially or fully cocked striker fired gun suddenly disappeared, the gun could fire, because there is stored energy.

I see your point on potential energy differences, however the below is an opportunity for a hammer gun to have an issue that a striker fired gun would not.

And if a decocked DA/SA's half cock safety fails and something catches the hammer pulling it, releases and if falls on a charged case? What then?
 
I've edited out some posts.

If yours is missing it is because it violated the rule we have against insulting other members...Attack the Argument Not the Member...even when that member isn't involved in the thread
 
Mas is more qualified than most on pistol matters. His opinions and commentary are always a learning tool for me. Yes, he does have an employer like most, but I don't perceive any degradation of non-safety handguns in this video. He simply is stating what he sees as advantages of the manual safety. Mechanically, both systems can be very safe in the hands of trained operators. Emphasis on systems, not particular handguns.
 
You're just saying that the firearm is optimized enough for you, and it doesn't need to be optimized further.

As someone who works in IT, the better the UX, the better the product. You can always optimize. Less actions to perform the same task is almost always better UX.
Agreed, but you are not going to get accidentally shot by a computer. Well, maybe with AI it could happen when it takes over the new safe pistol with the face recognition a finger print ID. It’s all choice. That’s good.
 
Agreed, but you are not going to get accidentally shot by a computer. Well, maybe with AI it could happen when it takes over the new safe pistol with the face recognition a finger print ID. It’s all choice. That’s good.

Well, the computer analogy would be that you need good cybersecurity.
 
The vast majority of Americans carrying concealed today, tens of millions, likely have little to no experience with firearms. Although many in the firearm industry are trying to improve both the number of skilled carriers and their skill level, I really don’t imagine the average carrier is going to acquire better firearm skills, especially with constitutional carry.

In view of that, think of the daily handling of all of those firearms; an external manual safety can prevent many accidental discharges that will occur within that big population. That alone is worth the manual safety.

If you believe you have the presence of mind and skill level to avoid accidents without having a safety, or, are able to properly handle the firearm in a defensive situation, then you should carry a firearm with the features you want.

I carry firearms with manual safeties wherever possible for the above reasons, my skill level could be better.

However, my main reason for carry with a safety is young grandchildren. Although they have been instructed many times not to touch any of my guns, there may be a one in a million chance or circumstance that they may somehow access and pickup a gun. Almost every child knows how to pull a trigger, water pistols and Nerf guns have seen to that.

Massad Ayoob shared a study which echoes what I tell customers with young children and grandchildren. Kids can pull a trigger, but they don’t know about the safety. It just eases my mind if that one in a million circumstance happens, a trigger gets pulled and nothing happens.
 
To no one in particular, just observing a trend, a dangerous one.

I grew up with the 1911 and revolvers. I never had a problem with the safety, or any safety for that matter. Don't have a problem with no safety at all. I've owned glocks, sigs, etc, etc.

Currently have pistols with safeties and without. Neither pose a problem with me.

What does irk me, is when someone tells me that the safety is going to get me killed. Thereby implying that I'm too stupid to learn to work a safety.

Then there's the other side screaming that I'm stupid for not having one and I'm going to rip the fabric of time/space.

Both of these statements come from younger men that have only been alive about half as long as I've been shooting.

I've been an avid shooter for many years now. Had far more training than most I know, I did it for the fun factor. Most of my adult life was spent in the military and a short stint with a police department.

But for some reason a few grey hairs and whiskers means that I'm a stupid old man that needs to be educated on modern firearms handling.

Safety or no safety, both have their place, both require training and practice. Neither will "get you killed". But arrogant misinformed decisions just might.

Learn, make good choices that suit your individual lifestyle. Understand that other people have different situations and priorities than you do.Trying to shove your opinion down someone elses throat with rude, insulting comments only points out your own self important inability to think objectively.

I'm fine with pistols with and without safeties. Whatever you choose, practice with it until it's second nature.
 
...someone tells me that the safety is going to get me killed.
Yes, that is an unjustified claim. It COULD, but the idea that it's a sure thing is incorrect.
Safety or no safety, both have their place, both require training and practice.
Correct.
Neither will "get you killed".
It's not hard to come up with realistic scenarios where either one COULD get the user killed if not used properly. A person using a manual safety could draw and fail to disengage the safety and be killed before they could correct the mistake. A person using a gun without a manual safety could snag the trigger during a reholster, put a bullet through an artery in the leg and die before help arrives.
Whatever you choose, practice with it until it's second nature.
Yes. AND one should make sure to understand all the limitations imposed by the choice.

Some examples: A gun without a manual safety must be carried in a hard holster that completely protects the trigger. The holster must be inspected periodically to insure that it is not degrading/deforming. A gun without a manual safety is going to be immediately operable if an opponent grabs it. A gun with a manual safety needs to be carried in a holster that protects the safety and insures that it can't be operated while the gun is holstered. The user needs to practice engaging the safety properly so that it's engaged when it needs to be, in addition to disengaging it when appropriate. An injury to the shooting hand could require using the weak hand to disengage the safety, and it might be difficult to disengage the safety if the gun must be used by the weak hand and the safety isn't ambidextrous. etc.
 
Some examples: A gun without a manual safety must be carried in a hard holster that completely protects the trigger. The holster must be inspected periodically to insure that it is not degrading/deforming. A gun without a manual safety is going to be immediately operable if an opponent grabs it. A gun with a manual safety needs to be carried in a holster that protects the safety and insures that it can't be operated while the gun is holstered. The user needs to practice engaging the safety properly so that it's engaged when it needs to be, in addition to disengaging it when appropriate. An injury to the shooting hand could require using the weak hand to disengage the safety, and it might be difficult to disengage the safety if the gun must be used by the weak hand and the safety isn't ambidextrous. etc.

Well put. Whether your choose a firearm with a safety or not is contingent on the manner of carry, use, your training, etc. This is not a yes/no answer; what is right for me may not be right for you. Fortunately, the manufactures give us plenty of choices.

Now, let's find something we can all agree on. 9mm or .45ACP?
 
Massad Ayoob shared a study which echoes what I tell customers with young children and grandchildren. Kids can pull a trigger, but they don’t know about the safety. It just eases my mind if that one in a million circumstance happens, a trigger gets pulled and nothing happens.

Instantly picking it up? Yeah, maybe the safety will stop them for a moment.

But my experience with kids is they like to push all the buttons a flip all the levers, I wouldn’t expect a safety to delay them for long.

Best bet in that horrible situation, IMO, is a long and heavy trigger.

(assuming we allow that a child gets a hold of a loaded gun without supervision, obviously avoiding this circumstance is the best policy)
 
Instantly picking it up? Yeah, maybe the safety will stop them for a moment.

But my experience with kids is they like to push all the buttons a flip all the levers, I wouldn’t expect a safety to delay them for long.

Yep. Kids are downright intelligent. It's like they are human or something.
 
Instantly picking it up? Yeah, maybe the safety will stop them for a moment.

But my experience with kids is they like to push all the buttons a flip all the levers, I wouldn’t expect a safety to delay them for long.

Best bet in that horrible situation, IMO, is a long and heavy trigger.

(assuming we allow that a child gets a hold of a loaded gun without supervision, obviously avoiding this circumstance is the best policy)
My guess is a kid would cock a hammer before they figured out a safety lever. Even today, in this striker fired world, there is enough hammer cocking on TV for kids to head down that path before figuring out a manual safety. It's not going to be a big difference as far as total time is concerned, but flicking off a safety is probably not their first step.



In the big picture of this question, I'm pretty competent with a gun with a manual safety, and I can live OK with a gun without a manual safety, but the number of folks that show up in these threads that would never choose a gun with a manual safety because they are confident they couldn't work it in a timely manner makes me think it is a bigger safety feature than I thought they were. If the majority of folks can't work a manual safety, and this is on a gun forum, perhaps a manual safety is more value to me than I have thought in the past. Kind of like the "millennial automobile anti-theft device" - the manual transmission.
 
In the big picture of this question, I'm pretty competent with a gun with a manual safety, and I can live OK with a gun without a manual safety, but the number of folks that show up in these threads that would never choose a gun with a manual safety because they are confident they couldn't work it in a timely manner makes me think it is a bigger safety feature than I thought they were. If the majority of folks can't work a manual safety, and this is on a gun forum, perhaps a manual safety is more value to me than I have thought in the past. Kind of like the "millennial automobile anti-theft device" - the manual transmission.

It's a good point.

I got away from carry pistols with safety levers some 15 years ago, partly due to the fact that I carry revolvers on occasion. Due to all that practice with lever-less guns, I'd have to practice for a good length of time to retrain my brain to sweep a safety off on the draw without thinking about it.

My recently acquired 1911 has shown me my limitations in this regard.
 
Due to all that practice with lever-less guns, I'd have to practice for a good length of time to retrain my brain to sweep a safety off on the draw without thinking about it.

Thankfully that’s a skill that can be relatively easily trained up with dry fire. Cheaper and doesn’t require range time, just some snap caps.

Luckily enough for me that even though I haven’t carried a 1911 in some time, I have shot them enough that swiping that safety comes back immediately once I take one to the range, so I can go either way as long as the safety is close enough to a 1911.

Learning not to pull the first shot of a DA/SA gun took more work for me, but was worth learning since it’s made shooting all my other guns better.
 
Since it's still morning I didn't make popcorn to read through this but did manage to drink a large cup of coffee. I have no opinion on the subject except to say each should do what works best for them. In my case my very first semi-auto pistol shooting was with one that had a safety as they all did at that time. My thumb learned to flip that little lever down first thing and it is still an automatic action for me.
 
Instantly picking it up? Yeah, maybe the safety will stop them for a moment.

But my experience with kids is they like to push all the buttons a flip all the levers, I wouldn’t expect a safety to delay them for long.

Best bet in that horrible situation, IMO, is a long and heavy trigger.

(assuming we allow that a child gets a hold of a loaded gun without supervision, obviously avoiding this circumstance is the best policy)
Unfortunately, I’ve read of instances where there was a heavy trigger, the child turned the gun around so they could put both thumbs on the trigger, inadvertently pointing the gun at themselves.
 
I've seen this as a black and white issue.

It depends on the gun and it depends on the shooter.
 
I have both. I don't switch out guns often, it's usually a revolver like my SP101 is my most carried gun 90%. Then in summer I'll switch out to my LCP .380 when wearing shorts and a Hawaiian shirt, no safety there either. In a dressier mode it will be my PPK/s 380 in a shoulder holster. I'm a fan of the decocker.
 
Here’s my whole train of logic on what to carry.

1. You need to be good with what you carry. That means manual of arms, accuracy, speed to deploy, reload, etc.
2. To be good you have to practice.
3. To practice you need to enjoy enough to train.
4. People who live with you also need to be somewhat prepared to use your weapon, so they should be able to which means another person or five need to repeat steps 1 through 3.

And that conversation stops there, but leads into this one.

If my 11 and 12 year olds are training at all, there needs to be an immediate and positive stop and safe. Hammered pistols and revolvers can have hammers lowered gently if there’s no manual safety. That takes the required energy out of the system which ignites a primer. How do you make a striker fired pistol safe? You unload it which means more time in the hands which is not immediate. If there is necessary hands on instruction for grip, stance, etc, and multiple hands on the gun it needs to be verified that it’s not going to go off accidentally.

So with this second conversation in mind, you suddenly start eliminating a large chunk of the possibilities.

Revolvers are OK but barely. Thumbing down a hammer is not ideal, but it works. So let’s give revolvers a C grade here. It’s passing, but not spectacularly. DAO revolvers are a different animal entirely and they get an A. Single action revolvers are so much fun to use but they still get a C except for those unmentionable ones with the little flip safety that everybody gripes about.

Slide-guns are tricky, and it really goes by type. Strikers like glocks are always partially cocked. That don’t work for me. Still energy to slam a firing pin into a primer. No dice. To get truly safe you drop mag and clear chamber. Too much time. DAO strikers are generally ok in the same way that revolvers are. Hammer fired guns are similar.

But ALL of those different types of gun get a huge chunk of extra credit from a manual safety. I can shout and the kids take finger off trigger, click safety on and range is good. It’s now safe to do that hands on correction, or let the dog run through the yard, get the 2yr old back inside away from noise, or whatever may be going on.
Instantly safe… well safe within a couple seconds.

So now, back to the original thought. What can my kids train with, which means what can I carry that they may end up with in a really awful situation? It’s going to be either a DA revolver, or a semiauto with a safety. Revolvers have slow reloads and carry less rounds loaded. Probably gonna be my EC9s. And yes, it should have a safety for all those reasons Mas Ayoob says, and the other reasons that other people think up, but the one that matters for me is that my kids can train with it and be competent with it because there is a chance that they will need it.
 
Back
Top