I will start off with I have only owned one pistol with a magazine disconnect., a Browning High Power I dumped for other reasons. However, that happenstance is not due to any philosophical resistance to the idea of a mag disconnect (MD) equipped pistol.
Now I see all the furor over the new Ruger P345 because it has an internal locking device and a mag disconnect. Lawyered in parts? Sure, but that is the sales environment these days, especially in the wake of the failure of the immunity legislation.
Locking devices on pistols are becoming the norm and in fact anticipate restrictions on the sales of pistols not so equipped in states where integral locking devices are not (yet) required.
SO here is the question: Isn't the presence of the MD in the new Ruger also anticipating the legal environment surrounding pistols?
Also, I know we are all perfect shooters here, but I read about negligent discharges all of the time. The vast majority of these would have been prevented by an MD. Don't presume to lecture me on the four rules, I know what they are. Still we read about so-called "experienced shooters" forgetting them, even if only for a tragic second or two.
For the casual shooter, or one that might have teenage boys who have gun idiots for friends, isn't the threat of an ND more foreseeable than any "tactical failure" of a mag disconnect not allowing a pistol fire during a reload?
It seems to me the presence of the mag disconnect in the new Ruger auto is a tempest in a teapot, especially if the MD doesn't adversely affect the trigger pull. If I felt inclined to buy a Ruger auto, and the MD is transparent to the trigger and works only as intended, why would I seriously worry about it? I have never heard of a single complaint that a MD on a BHP or an S&W auto failed to allow the weapon to fire when demanded while the mag was in, and additionally have yet to hear even anecdotally of anyone having been killed by firing interruptus from the presence of a MD. Like many other things about autopistols, the presence of an MD would be a quirky note in the manual of arms of that pistol. Knowing it is there allows one to deal with the potential "drawback" of its presence tactically.
Conversely, I have heard of several accounts where dropping the mag out of an MD equipped pistol has saved an officer from his own gun after losing a struggle for it.
Is a well designed MD really such a bad idea?
Now I see all the furor over the new Ruger P345 because it has an internal locking device and a mag disconnect. Lawyered in parts? Sure, but that is the sales environment these days, especially in the wake of the failure of the immunity legislation.
Locking devices on pistols are becoming the norm and in fact anticipate restrictions on the sales of pistols not so equipped in states where integral locking devices are not (yet) required.
SO here is the question: Isn't the presence of the MD in the new Ruger also anticipating the legal environment surrounding pistols?
Also, I know we are all perfect shooters here, but I read about negligent discharges all of the time. The vast majority of these would have been prevented by an MD. Don't presume to lecture me on the four rules, I know what they are. Still we read about so-called "experienced shooters" forgetting them, even if only for a tragic second or two.
For the casual shooter, or one that might have teenage boys who have gun idiots for friends, isn't the threat of an ND more foreseeable than any "tactical failure" of a mag disconnect not allowing a pistol fire during a reload?
It seems to me the presence of the mag disconnect in the new Ruger auto is a tempest in a teapot, especially if the MD doesn't adversely affect the trigger pull. If I felt inclined to buy a Ruger auto, and the MD is transparent to the trigger and works only as intended, why would I seriously worry about it? I have never heard of a single complaint that a MD on a BHP or an S&W auto failed to allow the weapon to fire when demanded while the mag was in, and additionally have yet to hear even anecdotally of anyone having been killed by firing interruptus from the presence of a MD. Like many other things about autopistols, the presence of an MD would be a quirky note in the manual of arms of that pistol. Knowing it is there allows one to deal with the potential "drawback" of its presence tactically.
Conversely, I have heard of several accounts where dropping the mag out of an MD equipped pistol has saved an officer from his own gun after losing a struggle for it.
Is a well designed MD really such a bad idea?