Magazine disconnect disconnection?

[Boats]

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?

 

[middy]

Some people object to the fact that a MD makes it impossible to fire the chambered round in the event that you need it while in the middle of a tactical reload. I find that rather far-fetched, but, on the other hand, I think the MD is a useless crutch for people who shouldn't be handling an autoloader to begin with.

The ILS is similiarly useless. You can get an electronic pistol safe at WalMart for $70.00, no need to fumble with keys that you may not have on you...

All of these gimmicks create a false sense of security. Anyone allowed to handle a firearm should be aware of Cooper's safety rules, making the mechanisms moot. Of course, there are a lot of idiots out there, but these gimmicks just aren't going to save them.

 

[1911Tuner]

Time to Opine

I think that the single biggest advantage...and possibly the reason...for the
device is to make the pistols more attractive to police agencies. Why?

When a cop who is shot while doin' the job, he's likely to be shot with his own gun. During a struggle in which an officer is about to lose his gun to the felon, he is able to level the field by "Popping the Clip"...It doesn't
mean that he's won the fight, or that his life isn't at risk any longer...
He's just neutralized most of the lethal potential of his weapon and
returned the fight to a hand-to-hand issue.

Luck!

Tuner

 

[Walt Sherrill]

Magazine disconnects aren't innately bad -- but I hate the ones, like on the Browning HP -- that affect the trigger pull/feel.

As noted, in some of the S&Ws, used by cops, there's a practical reason for a mag disconnect. Drop the mag and it won't go boom. Struggling with a bad guy for the gun? Drop the mag!

I'd prefer not to have them, since I like cocked and locked carry, and shoot IDPA. In that context (No decocker, cocked and locked carry) there's no easy way to quickly unload, show clear, and then drop the hammer.

 

[ScottS]

Two statistics I'd be interested in seeing:

1) number of police officers killed with their own guns (recent, as I think weapons retention training is much improved over, say, the 70's)

2) number of times the "officer hits the mag release and deactivates the gun" has actually worked, if ever. FWIW, this seems to have an "urban legend" feel to it, much like the M1 Ping and "steal the slide from your Beretta."

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.

The "vast majority?" Source for this, please? It this an "anal extraction?"

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?

If you have "teenage boys who have gun idiots for friends" and you let them get access to loaded weapons, please explain how a mag disconnect is going to prevent disaster. Magazine in, BOOM. This might have been a more persuasive argument for the internal locking device.

Do I expect to have to fire during a reload? Nope. For my money, I don't want any buttons on the gun that suddenly "deactivate" it. What I have seen is failure to fully insert the magazine (no boom), the mag release bumped while in the holster (no boom), or a mag dropped during reload or other manipulations (no boom).

I can either side with with JMB, Sig, Glock, H&K, Springfield (XD-series), et al, or I can side with S&W and Ruger.

Hmmmm....which way to go....

Scott

 

[Boats]

First off, you have avoided the question. California, for one, mandates that all pistols sold there from 2006 onward must have the two features in question. Therefore the question really is, have the antis succeeded in dictating the design of autopistols? Or is Ruger really to blame for going PC, or are they just preserving their ability to sell in one of the most populous states in America?

I also said, that the vast majority of NDs that I had read about would have been prevented by a MD. Not that the vast majority of all NDs would be prevented. Most of the ones I read about are ones where the handler mistakenly thinks he has cleared the chamber for cleaning or other routine handling but has accidentally done it backwards for some reason and then pulls the trigger thinking the action cleared with the magazine removed. It is not all that uncommon a scenario. One of the more famous ones in recent memory was a guy on Glocktalk killing his television in such a fashion, complete with pictures. His definitely wasn't unique and certainly would have been prevented by a MD.

By the same token, many of the so-called "accidental shootings" by teenagers and irresponsible adults take place with autoloaders everyone involved though were "unloaded" because the magazine was out. Two of the more famous ones include the case that has led to the now nearly 20 year legal battle between the parents of Kenzo Dix and Beretta USA, and there was just a high profile incident at Gunsite where one student center punched another with an "unloaded" weapon in their hotel room. Mag out and one round chambered is by far the most common ND scenario to make the newspapers when such incidents occur, among novices and "pros". Where have you been?

I don't even have teenage boys, but again, many gun owners are not as responsible as the ones who tend to post here, as evidenced by the news accounts of NDs that make it here to this website and others like it so we can all preach to one another about how we'd never be so stupid as to commit an ND ourselves or "allow" teenager acess to our weapons without supervision. Such accounts hardly need unassailable citation by me as they are common knowledge just a search away for the curious both here and on The Firing Line.

 

[ScottS]

Well, one of us is avoiding the question. You asked

Is a well designed MD really such a bad idea?

And I think a answered it, for me at least. We all only get to speak for ourselves.

You seem to feel that everyone is capping off ND's because of the "rack-the-slide, drop-the-mag, pull the trigger" and I don't see that. Perhaps we're reading different papers. The most common ND I see by far is someone with a striker-fired pistol, usually a Glock, failing to unload the weapon while cleaning, then when they pull the trigger to remove the slide, BOOM. Exactly how would a mag disconnect help in this situation, since you have to pull the trigger and release the striker to move the slide forward. Sticking a mag back in to pull the trigger just means the gun is balanced better when you shoot yourself in the leg.

BTW, do you have inside knowledge of the Gunsite shooting that wasn't published in the press? None of the reports I read said anything about removing the mag and failing to clear the chamber.

Let's see, I asked:

If you have "teenage boys who have gun idiots for friends" and you let them get access to loaded weapons, please explain how a mag disconnect is going to prevent disaster.

and you saidIf you let irresponsible people get access to loaded weapons (the premise of your argument), a mag disconnect is not going to prevent a disaster. As I said, this would be a far more persuasive arugment for an internal lock, or a trigger lock.

Now, let's try the "answer the question" thing, again. In your first post you asked

Is a well designed MD really such a bad idea?

Yes, because I reject the arguments you put forth in favor of it. As I am not an LEO, and don't worry about someone snatching my weapon, any arguments (as yet only asserted and not proven) along those lines don't affect my decision.

Then, in your last post, you asked a new question

Therefore the question really is, have the antis succeeded in dictating the design of autopistols? Or is Ruger really to blame for going PC, or are they just preserving their ability to sell in one of the most populous states in America?

Ruger has been "bending over" at the PC bar since Bill Ruger couldn't "understand why anyone would need more than 15 rounds in a pistol," to trying to sell PC9/4's to LEO's only, to restricting the sale of factory Mini-14 20 rounders. Glock (G37), Sig(GSR), H&K(many variations of the USP) have all introduced new guns in the last year. None of them felt obligated to bow down to the Kali PC law. Just because California has turned into an anti-haven doesn't mean the rest of the country will, too. Out here in the free states, we don't have lists of guns we can't own, and we can still buy cars without "California Emissions Packages.

I'll take mine without, thanks.

Scott

Great quote in your sig line, by the way.

 

[Sunray]

I think you'll find that most ND's you read about are cop related. They're not the best representatives of shooters in general. Most never had any contact with firearms of any kind prior to becoming cops. Nor do they shoot as a hobby. Even the so-called elite units are notorious for their unsafe firearm handling habits. Not all of 'em, of course, but most of 'em.
As to "...the legal environment surrounding...". It's not just pistols and not just Ruger. All the manufacturers are terrified of being sued. (Not that they're unjustified. If you win in court, you've spent piles of money on legal fees and time. Even if you counter sue for costs, you're a still out time and money.) This is precisely why nearly all firearms come out of the factory with really bad and heavy triggers. It's also why places like Springfield Armoury Inc tells you not to use hand loads. They don't wantto be held liable for somebody's bad reloads.
The only reason the BHP has a mag safety is because it was originally made in Europe. FN refused to build then without it.
No mechanical safety is 100% reliable. The only true safety on any firearm is in the head of the shooter.

 

[lazhuward]

Gun makers get sued all the time because they don't include mag disconnects in their pistols.

Personally, I think it's your responsibility to know how your gun functions. I don't believe that manufacturers should be blamed for negligent discharges.

I also don't like the idea of safety devices that are designed to prevent other people from using your gun. It's your responsibility to secure your weapon, whether it's on your person or in your home.

 

[Standing Wolf]

Is a well designed MD really such a bad idea?

If all you've got is one loose round, you'd better be able to fire it—and it's none of government's big nosy business, anyway.

 

[fastbolt]

1) number of police officers killed with their own guns (recent, as I think weapons retention training is much improved over, say, the 70's)

I can help with that a little ...

Here's a link where you can read through the 2001 Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted report.

http://www.lelib.com/files/2001leoka.pdf

While it makes for interesting reading in its entirety, scroll down to the actual page 14 in the report, at the bottom, Table 5, and you'll see that from 1992-2001 there were 594 officers killed with firearms, 46 of which were by their own firearms. That works out to just under 8% ...

By the way, for the folks that may not have read these reports before, when you see the term "Personal Weapons" used, it means the fists, hands & feet of the assailant/suspect. Don't confuse this with the officers that died by firearms, and the firearms were their own weapons.

There's a lot of interesting info in these reports, if you have the time to browse through them. For example, of the 594 officers killed by firearms, 296 occurred within 0-5 FEET, and another 131 occurred within 6-10 FEET (Table 7). Take a look at Table 6 and see which handgun & rifle calibers have been predominantly used to kill officers.

On the subject of magazine disconnect/safeties ... don't be surprised to see more of them appearing in handguns the manufacturers desire to be able to sell in California ... and as the old saying goes, as goes California, there goes the rest of the nation, to some extent, at least ...

Later ...

 

[ScottS]

fastbolt,

Thanks for the great link. You're right, that's makes interesting reading.

So, in 10 years, 46 officers were killed with their own weapon. IF we assume all 46 officers were killed with their own handgun (some could have been the patrol shottie), and IF we assume all 46 were autos and not revo's, and IF we assume all 46 could have hit the mag release before losing control of the gun (big assumption), then we must conclude that a mag safety might save 4.6 officers killed each year. Not exactly a bulletproof vest, or even seatbelts, is it?

And, by the way, it's "As GM goes, so goes the nation." I can't think of too much CA has exported east (Prop 13/187, Emission Standards, AWB, 10 day waiting period, list of approved guns, etc.)

Scott
NO MAG SAFETY FOR YOU! YOU COME BACK, ONE YEAR!

 

[1911Tuner]

Not Exactly Seatbelts

assume all 46 could have hit the mag release before losing control of the gun (big assumption), then we must conclude that a mag safety might save 4.6 officers killed each year. Not exactly a bulletproof vest, or even seatbelts, is it?

Well, it's not really about statistics. It's about eliminating possibilities and
providing the cop with every chance, no matter how statistically insignifigant to neutralize his weapon in a struggle for control of it.

Statistically speaking, the odds are heavily against an officer being shot
on his tour, and that would tend to make it seem that a kevlar vest is
unnecessary and a PITA to wear...but cops wear'em because of that one
nightmarish moment that probably won't come, but just might.

4.6 officers per year may not mean anything in the bigger picture, but it
means something to those 4.6 officers and the families that they might leave behind. In that light, if it saves one every five years...it's served its purpose.

Cheerios! (Honey-Nut, please)

Tuner

 

[ScottS]

4.6 officers per year may not mean anything in the bigger picture, but it means something to those 4.6 officers and the families that they might leave behind. In that light, if it saves one every five years...it's served its purpose.

If this is true, can you explain to me why the overwhelming choice of automatic in LE use is a Glock, with no mag safety? If this were really an officer-safety issue, how come the officers don't seem to care for it?

LEO groups have more than enough pull to influence something like this if they really thought it saved lives. I have to conclude, from their obvious silence, they don't.

So, it comes down to Ruger bending over yet again.

Scott

 

[1911Tuner]

Why oh Why?

T'was asked:

If this is true, can you explain to me why the overwhelming choice of automatic in LE use is a Glock, with no mag safety?
_______________-

When I was a cherry young Jarhead, a wise old Master Gunnery Sargeant
told me: "Never forget that your equipment was supplied by the lowest
bidder."

If this were really an officer-safety issue, how come the officers don't seem to care for it?

Well...I can take a shot at that one. Might be a couple or three reasons.

One: They've either never been in a life/death struggle with anybody
who dang nigh GOT their gun. My brother-in-law is a police Lieutenant,
and he reports that in the last three years, 2 officers in his platoon have
lost their guns to snatchers who pointed the gun at them and couldn't
make it go bang because the lads popped the mag at the last second.

Two: They haven't really thought about it in depth. It's like the little
issue we had on another thread over topping off a magazine or not.
It's not that the gun is highly likely to fail to feed the top round...it's
a matter of eliminating the small chance that it might. If there's a small
chance that a mag disconnect MIGHT be the deciding factor, why not
take advantage of it?

As for the statistics...quote a few instances in which an officer was
saved by the chambered round while executing a reload.

Three: There's a prevailing attitude...and not just among rookies...that
"It can't/won't happen to me." We see it all the time with people who
don't wear seatbelts and cops who "forget" to put on their body armor.
Most of'em get away with it. Once in a blue moon...somebody doesn't.

As for the "overwhelming majority" preferring this or that...it depends
on which department you ask. Our Sheriff's deputies flatly refused to
carry'em, and exercised their option of carrying their own sidearms.
The Winston-Salem PD finally got rid of the 10mm Smiths and got the
Sigs that they lobbied so hard for. A few stated that they'd quit before they'd carry a Glock.

Be of good cheer and mind your six!

Tuner

 

[ScottS]

Hmmm....now I am to believe that major law enforcement agencies in the country have never cottoned onto the major revelation that we geniuses of the internet have stumbled onto, namely mag safeties. Hmm...Nope, I'm not going for it.

If mag disconnects were the major LEO lifesaver some here would have us believe, you can bet your bottom dollar major LE Agencies would be dictating that from the manufacturers, just as they "told" Glock to offer the NY Trigger (and the NJ Trigger). Sorry, the "low bid" argument is just wrong. Neither Glock nor Sig will ever be accused of being the low bidder for anything.

When I say "overwhelmingly majority," I talking about LE Agencies in the US. I think if you add up the Glock and Sig and Beretta-equipped agencies in the US (i.e. the NON-mag disconnect boys), you'll find they far outnumber the mag-disconnect ones. Even in your own example, the LEO's chose Sig, a non-mag disconnect pistol.

As for the statistics...quote a few instances in which an officer was saved by the chambered round while executing a reload.

Nope. I never asserted this, so I'm not interested in proving it.

My brother-in-law is a police Lieutenant, and he reports that in the last three years, 2 officers in his platoon have lost their guns to snatchers who pointed the gun at them and couldn't make it go bang because the lads popped the mag at the last second.

I assume it's a S&W auto. Now there's your low-bidder.

Bottom line is, you'll never convince me a mag safety is a big LEO lifesaver when the majority of LE Agencies don't give a hoot about them.

And, besides, this thread started with, "Is a mag safety necessarily a bad thing," and I said, "Yes. I have no want/need for one." Why should I have to put up with one if I'm NOT an LEO.

Scott

 

[1911Tuner]

Major?

If mag disconnects were the major LEO lifesaver some here would have us believe, you can bet your bottom...

??? Major? Nobody said it was a major life-saver...and nobody asked
anybody to prove anything here. I figured that as long as we were calling
on statistics, that we might as well get'em all called in.

Finally...No. You shouldn't have to put up with a mag disconnect if you don't want to. It's your choice. I'm not LEO either. My carry pistols are
1911s or clones. No disconnect there, but I wouldn't let the feature stop me from carrying one.

Can't figger why ya seem to be takin' this as a personal affront. It was
an opinion-oriented thread, and the purpose was to get some insight on the pros and cons...necessity or question in search of an answer...
I just offered my points/counterpoints.

Be of good cheer...Hear?

Tuner

 

[WonderNine]

If only my Ruger Single Six had a magazine disconnect, it could have prevented the ND. Oh that's right, maybe I shouldn't have been handling a gun while I was drunk.

I hate mag disconnects and remove them immediately. I especially hate ones that affect the trigger pull. They are unecessary and it just ads another part to break as well.

I saw something on Dateline or some news show like that years back where some idiot pulled the magazine out of the gun and (thinking it was unloaded) decided to be a smartass and put the gun to his head and pull the trigger. His family was pushing for magazine disconnect safeties. It only takes one idiot....

 

[Marshall]

Here's a different take......

It's very possible this about $$$$$. Liability insurance for gun manufactures is staggering! It's very possible insurance companies are the culprits as to why these features we all bit*h about are included on our guns. I would strongly imagine this is about $$ much more than it is about following the PC. I predict we will see other manufacturers, ones we would never expect to add these features, go this route also.

 

[1911Tuner]

Back to the Basics

Anyway...back to Boats' original question. Sorry Boats...This one got
off topic pretty fast. They seem to do that sometimes when the issue turns to back-door gun control...which is what mandated safety devices really are. Make'em useless for fast-response/defense, and it opens the door to the assertion that we really don't need'em anyway.

Yes. I think it's a case of "Coming events cast their shadows before them".
I believe that the day will come that if you/I/we don't own a "Smart Gun"
that we won't be owning ANY guns...and that any possession of a
stupid gun...(i.e. one that can be made to fire by anyone who happens
to pick it up) that you/I/we will be in violation of some federal law that
will net us a heavy fine/confiscation/possible prison term.

I also believe that this isn't as far down the road as we want to believe.
The law against possession of a stupid gun will follow shortly thereafter...
possibly within one Presidential term of the enactment of the law requiring all new guns to be...smart.

Out with the old! In with the new! (And PVC pipe/caps/RTV sealant will require a background check)

Cheers all...and goodnight.

Tuner

 

[geekWithA.45]

In my opinion, the notion that a person could drop the mag and sterilize his weapon during a retention contest is a bit of a fantasy.

If you have full control of your sidearm, dropping a mag is easy. If you're wrestling for it, what's easier to get control of? A canned ham sized object, or a pencil eraser sized object? Which one do you think will occur to you under stress? Which one requires fine motor coordination?

It's one of those "sounds great on paper" ideas that might work out once in a while, but washes out in the real world.

 

[ScottS]

Can't figger why ya seem to be takin' this as a personal affront. It was an opinion-oriented thread, and the purpose was to get some insight on the pros and cons...necessity or question in search of an answer...
I just offered my points/counterpoints.

Me, taking it personally? Not me. Pisser about the 'Net is you can't tell tone. Now I suppose I'm going to have to put those friggin' at the end of every sentence.

Bottom line, I have no dog in this fight. I'm not an LEO, and I live in a free state that is never going to tell me what weapons I can buy (pick from this list). I get to chose my own weapon like a free man, just as long as I can sneak it by my wife. See, there's that thing again.

Certainly I despise Ruger's corporate spinelessness, and by profession and by personality I have a problem with people asserting "facts," but I never have a problem listening to someone's opinion. Sometimes, though, I think the KA folks want to believe their Draconian gun laws will spread East, because misery does indeed love company.

Scott
Happy, Happy, Happy

 

[1911Tuner]

Happy, Happy, Happy...

Excellent! Now we can all be friends again! (He said in his imitation of
Val Kilmer's portrayal of "Doc Holiday" in Tombstone. )

And now...back on topic. I think some us missed the real question that Boats posed. haste is probably the culprit. It was buried in the middle of his post, and many of us...myself included skim over the text
and try to get a general idea of the topic. Sometimes we miss it.

Sorry Boats!

Cheers!

Tuner

 

[sturmruger]

BIZ

Nothing gets me more upset then when people assume all of these gun manufacturers are producing guns for kicks. NEWS FLASH!!! 100% of all gun manufacturers are trying to make MONEY. That means when they add a mag disconnect to their new gun it is a business decision!! They aren't doing it to piss you off they are doing it so they can make more money! Take CA for instance I have heard that CA alone is something like 15% of the US population. By not having the mag disconnect and the internal safety they would be shutting themselves out of 15% of the US market. Since I am a Ruger Stock holder I would be a little pissed about that.


I am planning on purchasing one of the new Ruger pistols when they are available. I can say for sure that if it is possible to remove the MD I will do so as soon as possible. They didn't add the MD to piss people off they did it so they wouldn't shut themselves out of a specific market. If you want to debate a MD you will not be able to get me to disagree I don't like them either. Do I think it was stupid for Ruger to add it to their new pistol? No I think it was a wise business decision and I hope they keep making wise decisions.