The manual safety - yet again.

[GEM]

Karl Rehn found that over 90% of concealed carry types never had any training beyond a state mandated course. Who knows what happens to constitutional carry types. The percent of training by carry gun types would be interesting.

The training issue unleashes the RKBA folks. Should some level of training be mandated? OMG! The NYS CCIA law mandated a 16 hour course, whose curriculum isn't actually that bad for an intro CCW course. However, it was designed as part of a package as an obstacle to getting a permit.

I've pleaded with gun friends to train, never could get them to do it. What's to learn - just pull out the gun and blaze away, it's 3,3,3 anyway.

 

[Jeff White]

Karl Rehn found that over 90% of concealed carry types never had any training beyond a state mandated course. Who knows what happens to constitutional carry types. The percent of training by carry gun types would be interesting.

The training issue unleashes the RKBA folks. Should some level of training be mandated? OMG! The NYS CCIA law mandated a 16 hour course, whose curriculum isn't actually that bad for an intro CCW course. However, it was designed as part of a package as an obstacle to getting a permit.

I've pleaded with gun friends to train, never could get them to do it. What's to learn - just pull out the gun and blaze away, it's 3,3,3 anyway.

That's the issue. You can't mandate that someone train to exercise a constitutional right. Even if you do mandate training, there will be a certain percentage of people who will "pencil whip" their training. This goes on in LE and the military more than we'd care to admit. Fortunately the great majority of people who carry a gun for self defense will never get into a situation where they actually need it. Statistics show that fate often smiles on the untrained. I'm not saying that people shouldn't train, I don't see expecting fate to smile down on you when you get into the fight for your life as a viable plan.

Then we have such a messed up legal system that attorneys who specialize in self defense cases tell you that your training can be used against you in court.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

The trick is just to avoid the real world...

What a coincidence!

We've an ever increasing number of people doing just this thing these days!

 

[lemaymiami]

Skimmed most of the comments on this thread since I long ago decided that a handgun is what you have when you couldn't get to a shotgun (or rifle...)...

I was never a gunfighter (and I don't ever want to be a "gunfighter") - armed force is risky business at best and actually responding properly when you're scared to death? Not exactly a sure thing - and that's why we train, and train... One individual is ice cold - no matter how dangerous a situation - the next gets all pumped up and shaking just from the sound of gunfire - and so it goes...

As for me, responding to any hot call, all those years ago - when there was just the possibility of weapons involved - I had shotgun in hand at the ready, high port position. The shotgun was carried in my vehicle cocked and locked on an empty chamber. In hand, hit the slide release, load a round and move out - with the safety still engaged. My preference was always a Remington 870 and my trigger finger was on that safety all the way until the need to fire - then I cleared the safety and was ready to respond. If I responded that way one thousand times - many times lined up on a potential target - that safety was still on - and only once or twice was it cleared off... None of the folks I had at close quarters ever knew that the safety was still engaged- until it wasn't...

Unlike an armed citizen in self defense mode, cops are required to go into situations that are rarely clear cut and obvious (the armed individual they're facing might be the "good guy" and not the offender at all). Any situation that you can resolve without deadly force is a win - every time... The consequences that any police officer (or armed citizen) faces if they make a bad shooting decision are nothing short of disastrous - so you had to be very certain to only fire when correct and never, repeat never have a negligent or wrongful discharge - so you're operating in a bit different scenario each day, and that's what makes a career..

As far as handguns are concerned - once again practice, practice and if you're in law enforcement or military service... train, train... One other minor point - I long ago decided that carrying more than one sidearm was not for me. It took me a few years to realize that always carrying the same firearm provided some muscle memory and fluid quickness of response that you might not have with an "off duty" weapon or something completely different than your usual sidearm... Something to consider....

 

[shafter]

Nothing wrong with manual safeties. They don't require anymore of a fine motor skill than trigger control, magazine releases, slide stops, or lining up sights. Training is key, you must train alot as with any platform and its not a good idea to switch back and forth.

 

[jmorris]

I like to keep in mind that Jerry Miculek, one of the best shooters of our time, once made the comment that every time he goes to the range he's looking to see if there's something he can change to improve his performance. He could say, with complete justification: "Look at how many matches I've won and records I hold--I've got this down." but instead he focuses on continually assessing his performance objectively and seeing if there are ways to get even better. I figure that if he's still looking to improve, maybe I still have some opportunities to do better as well.

And he doesn’t have problems shooting firearms with manual safety’s, despite being best known for shooting ones that don’t have them. Perhaps practice helps…

 

[Jim Watson]

You simply disengage the safety as part of the draw stroke.

If you train on that every time you draw, you won't forget the safety.

Ah, there's the rub.
I have "The Stroke" down pat, draw gun, clear safety, aim, fire, all in one smooth motion; got it.
But I have on occasion neglected to disengage the safety on a square range where holsters are frowned upon. Seems I would fire one or several shots, reflexively set the safety and either lay the gun on the bench or just lower its muzzle to the bench. Bring it back up and Oops! no fire.
I consider that in a defensive situation The Stroke might not come into play. Am I retrieving a pistol from drawer or table? Do I wish to present or brandish a gun without immediately firing? I know things like that can short circuit the trained reflex of The Stroke, for me, at least. So my home defense pistols are DA/SA and my CCW hideout guns are DAO.

But my IDPA and USPSA guns are good old 1911/2011 cocked and locked, because they are always in a holster in the same place on my belt and I know that when the buzzer sounds I am to draw and start shooting immediately. The Stroke is the most efficient approach.

 

[GEM]

That is a good point. The automatic motor response has been practiced into a level where you don't have to consciously engage each movement. The perceptual/cognitive systems sees the situation and launches the pre-programmed motor sequence. However, does that sequence depend on starting from a known, perceived starting point - the draw stroke. If you have to access the gun from a different starting point, say your underwear drawer or a box under stress, the automaticity might fail. As Jim says, I've seen this happen with starts from a box on the match, stage table or a draw from NOT the standing square to your target BEEP!

This also occurs with folks not finding the dot on an RDS with something not standard to start. There is an argument that if the safety off on the drawer is part of a draw, off, bang programmed sequence, it might lead to more NDs as stopping the Bang might be hard, esp. under stress. Is there a differential ND rate for non safety vs safety guns - interesting question about the draw and NOT shooting?

 

[Jim Watson]

I thought about that but didn't want to drag out the post.
An off-body start at a match is something you can concentrate on and alter your moves to suit. I have a standard approach that works reliably even though not as fast as some. A box start is problematical, getting the lid open and out of the way without slinging the whole thing out of reach takes care.
An empty gun start is harder, I have seen - and done - failures to get the magazine seated. I think the sometimes seen recommendation of a house gun staged with the magazine out is asking for trouble.

 

[jmorris]

That is a good point. The automatic motor response has been practiced into a level where you don't have to consciously engage each movement. The perceptual/cognitive systems sees the situation and launches the pre-programmed motor sequence. However, does that sequence depend on starting from a known, perceived starting point - the draw stroke. If you have to access the gun from a different starting point, say your underwear drawer or a box under stress, the automaticity might fail.

It’s probably more of an issue for people that hold their pistols like this.

For people that hold them like this, it feels weird if there isn’t a safety to be held down.

 

[JohnKSa]

And he doesn’t have problems shooting firearms with manual safety’s, despite being best known for shooting ones that don’t have them. Perhaps practice helps…

No question that training helps, especially when combined with frequent objective assessment of performance. Committing to that requires the understanding that skills are perishable.

I also think a big part of Miculek's success goes beyond that--it is his willingness to learn from his own and others' mistakes and actually change his training and shooting as a result. That's what turns experience into wisdom instead of just a long string of events that are either lucky or unlucky depending on chance.

Here's an excellent example of seeing an issue and working to correct it instead of dismissing it or calling it bad luck.

I have "The Stroke" down pat, draw gun, clear safety, aim, fire, all in one smooth motion; got it.
But I have on occasion neglected to disengage the safety on a square range where holsters are frowned upon. Seems I would fire one or several shots, reflexively set the safety and either lay the gun on the bench or just lower its muzzle to the bench. Bring it back up and Oops! no fire.

I consider that in a defensive situation The Stroke might not come into play. Am I retrieving a pistol from drawer or table? Do I wish to present or brandish a gun without immediately firing? I know things like that can short circuit the trained reflex of The Stroke, for me, at least. So my home defense pistols are DA/SA and my CCW hideout guns are DAO.

• Training reveals an issue. If you don't train and shoot, you can't find problems. You can still learn from the experiences of others, but they are not you and their experiences may not be as applicable to you as your own.
• Shooter acknowledges the issue. When something goes wrong, stop and make a note of it and the surrounding circumstances instead of making excuses or writing it off as chance. Problems encountered in training are an opportunity to learn, but one must have the proper mindset to take advantage of the opportunity.
• Shooter analyzes the issue. Think about why the issue occurred. The information you noted from the previous step comes into play.
• Shooter takes steps, if appropriate, to deal with the issue. Not every issue will require change, but when change is called for, be willing to change.

 

[Jim Watson]

willing to learn from his own and others' mistakes and actually change

To quote a character, fictional, but created by a thoughtful author:
It is easy to learn from your mistakes. It is hard to learn from success.

 

[Jeff White]

Training reveals an issue. If you don't train and shoot, you can't find problems. You can still learn from the experiences of others, but they are not you and their experiences may not be as applicable to you as your own.

I would wager that the majority of shooters don’t train. They shoot and tell themselves they are training.

Training is a continuous process. Train, evaluate, retrain, evaluate. This is the big advantage of regular training under a good instructor. The instructor will identify things you can improve on much better than the shooter can. I think I took Pat Rogers Carbine Operators Course six or seven times during the years I was teaching patrol rifle for my own and other agencies. I learned something every time and taking the basic level class every year made me a better instructor.

Another thing I see is that when shooters train on their own they tend to practice the things they are good at, because everyone feels good after they shoot a drill or exercise and clean the board. It’s a lot harder to motivate yourself to do a drill you know you’re not good at.

 

[Gun-Reck]

My comments were sort of a general observation, not aimed at anyone in particular, not even meant to be applicable specifically to only this thread and intended to contain at least a glimmer of humor. I thought the fact that many of the examples listed haven't come up in this thread would make all that clear.

My point, is that things seem to go wrong in the real world at a rate that is tremendously higher than what one would expect from reading self-assessments in the many threads like this one. There's a saying in Colombia--"Never say never and never say always." Amusingly self-referential, but also insightful. We like to dismiss things that make us uncomfortable with "Never" and "Always: Examples:

• I'll never put my finger on the trigger unless I mean to.
• I'll never forget to take off or engage a safety.
• I'll never forget which gun I'm using even though I use a lot of guns that operate differently.
• Lack of continual training won't be an issue because I'll always remember my training no matter if it was sparse or long ago, or for another type of firearm/carry mode.
• I'll never need to clear a jam in a gunfight because my gun never jams.
• I will never need to reload because gunfights are over so quickly.
• I will never need to shoot past 10 yards in a self-defense situation.
• I will always have the time/dexterity/sufficient number of operating limbs to chamber a round in a gunfight so I can carry chamber empty. So on and so forth.

A more constructive approach is to look at the problems people have in the real world and apply the lessons to ourselves. Examples:

• Look at how this guy got killed in a self-defense situation. How can I do better?
• This guy had this problem in a gunfight. If I had that problem, what would I do? Can I train for that? How often will I have to train to insure that I will perform when needed?
• Why did this gunfight go wrong for the defender? Is there a way I can make it less likely that would happen to me?

It could very well be that the answer does come back: "I'm trained well enough and maintain it frequently enough.", or: "That problem is so unlikely that I don't need to alter my training to deal with it.", but it could also be that seeing other people's failures could prompt changes.

As Benjamin Franklin said: When you are finished changing; you're finished.

I like to keep in mind that Jerry Miculek, one of the best shooters of our time, once made the comment that every time he goes to the range he's looking to see if there's something he can change to improve his performance. He could say, with complete justification: "Look at how many matches I've won and records I hold--I've got this down." but instead he focuses on continually assessing his performance objectively and seeing if there are ways to get even better. I figure that if he's still looking to improve, maybe I still have some opportunities to do better as well.

Edit/delete.

 

[JohnKSa]

That works as long as:

1. All safeties for any pistols that a shooter wants to be trained on are in the same position and operated the same way.
AND
2. There are no pistols that a shooter wants to be trained on with controls other than safeties that are placed where safeties are placed in other pistols that the shooter wants to be trained on.

The shooter should train with both hands, of course.

If the training is for self-defense, it probably makes sense to think about how to deal with situations where the shooter can't get a proper grip on the gun either due to injury or other pressing circumstances.

 

[Gun-Reck]

That works as long as:

1. All safeties for any pistols that a shooter wants to be trained on are in the same position and operated the same way.
AND
2. There are no pistols that a shooter wants to be trained on with controls other than safeties that are placed where safeties are placed in other pistols that the shooter wants to be trained on.

The shooter should train with both hands, of course.

If the training is for self-defense, it probably makes sense to think about how to deal with situations where the shooter can't get a proper grip on the gun either due to injury or other pressing circumstances.

A point solution for an individual problem - not a systems plan.

For systemic problems - Glock.

Simple

 

[JohnKSa]

One could argue that it's always an individual problem which is why training/evaluation is so important for everyone. It would be nice if it were possible to just tell everyone to do 'X' and walk away assured that everyone is going to have everything they need.

So far, I haven't seen a single solution that works for everyone.

 

[Elkins45]

One of the more laughable examples of cognitive dissonance among the gun bros is their attitudes regarding what behaviors can or cannot be trained away. When Glocks started becoming popular people were firing negligent shots all the time because they were accustomed to resting their finger on the trigger of a DA revolver without consequence. When departments looking to reduce their liability for wild shots began issuing NY triggers or DAO guns, all we heard from the peanut gallery was "That's a training issue bro! Keep your booger hook off the bang switch. You just need to learn proper gun handling"

Yet according to the same people remembering to disengage a manual safety is somehow an insurmountable level of skill attainment. Learning to always place your trigger finger alongside the slide is a simple thing to master, but sweeping off a safety is like differential calculus? No, bro, both are a training issue. Same thing with learning the second shot transition with a DA/SA gun.

 

[JohnKSa]

No, bro, both are a training issue.

Absolutely correct.

However, it's worthwhile to keep in mind that the fact that two things are both training issues in no way implies that they will be equally easy to master. Some types of behavior are quite easy to learn and the skill can be maintained with relatively little effort. Some things can take a lot more initial training and recurring work to achieve and maintain consistent mastery.

 

[MarshallDodge]

I have to wonder about the level of training the shooter in the example had. You have to shoot 30 rounds with virtually no time limit to qualify for an Illinois CCW. The state mandated 16 hour training doesn’t cover any tactical training.

As for privately paid professional training, if one doesn’t conduct regular sustainment training the skills learned quickly deteriorate. To maintain proficiency one must train, evaluate, retrain. It’s a cycle. Few people, even professionals have the resources for this.

The late Pat Rogers and I discussed this one night after class and his take was that one could take a 3-5 day class from a tier one instructor and the skill level after that intense training would start dropping off after a week without sustainment training.

I’ve seen similar things to the shooter in the article grabbing the top of his pistol in both military and LE training. It always manifested itself with shooters who only handled their weapons when their agency required them too. With police officers it most often showed up on long gun training. The shotgun or rifle the officer only handled to take it from the armory to their squad and back for the rest of the year suddenly was something they had never seen before when the stress was on.

In the Army it usually was with soldiers in combat service support MOSs who only qualified once a year and when they went to the field their weapons were something that got in the way of their “real job” and they did things like wrap them in plastic bags so they wouldn’t have to spend too much time cleaning them to turn them in at the end of the exercise.

If you’re going to carry a firearm for self defense and you aren’t willing to spend the time to not only become proficient but stay proficient then you’re setting yourself up for failure if you ever have to use your weapon.

This is all the article needed to say. Get good training and practice often with the gun you are going to carry.

If you carry multiple different guns, you are setting yourself up for failure.

 

[Gun-Reck]

This is all the article needed to say. Get good training and practice often with the gun you are going to carry.

If you carry multiple different guns, you are setting yourself up for failure.

Edit/Delete

 

[Old Dog]

If you carry multiple different guns, you are setting yourself up for failure.

I can't completely agree with that. Perhaps if one alternates between something like a Beretta 92 or 3rd Gen S&W and a 1911 or CZ-75 with differing safety mechanics, yeah.

I do carry multiple different guns, but they all either full or Commander-size 1911s (including the one micro, a SIG P-938) or SIG P-series pistols, which do not have manual safeties. And occasionally pack a revolver. Thing is, though, my first twenty years of hard-core pistol-packing and shooting was all on 1911s, so I trained -- still do -- extensively on the platform.

 

[D.B. Cooper]

Still having this debate? It's like Disco; it will never die.

I blame my long gone Beretta 92FS for making me move to my preference in self defense pistols having no safety levers. It was a gun fit problem for me, but it sent me down a path I may have a hard time reversing.

I do have other guns with safety levers, but they are range guns at this point in my life.

HA! I'm pretty much exactly the opposite. I love my M9 and I compare every other gun to it. The only guns I won with no safeties are revolvers. Gunsite insisted I use my Beretta with the safety off at all times. I complied, but the next week at the range, I was back to using the safety.

 

[drobs]

One of the more laughable examples of cognitive dissonance among the gun bros is their attitudes regarding what behaviors can or cannot be trained away. When Glocks started becoming popular people were firing negligent shots all the time because they were accustomed to resting their finger on the trigger of a DA revolver without consequence. When departments looking to reduce their liability for wild shots began issuing NY triggers or DAO guns, all we heard from the peanut gallery was "That's a training issue bro! Keep your booger hook off the bang switch. You just need to learn proper gun handling"

Yet according to the same people remembering to disengage a manual safety is somehow an insurmountable level of skill attainment. Learning to always place your trigger finger alongside the slide is a simple thing to master, but sweeping off a safety is like differential calculus? No, bro, both are a training issue. Same thing with learning the second shot transition with a DA/SA gun.

Re the differential calculus of sweeping off a safety - the same crowd has difficulty operating a pump shotgun, lowering the hammer on a lever action, or a revolver. So much so, I have stopped recommending revolvers for 1st guns.

About 10 years ago I attended Missouri's Hunter Safety hands on practical class. I watched multiple people, of all ages, fail to safely lower the hammer on a lever action rifle. This included members of the military that were taking the class with me. It was a lack of familiarization / training problem. Once shown how to lower the hammer, after failing to do so, all the class was able to safely lower the hammer.

 

[chicharrones]

I really hate gun forums at times. Threads like these irk me.

How dumb have we become over the generations. Somehow a firearm that served our populous for over 70 years is now too difficult to master.


Suffice it to say, the 1911 and thumb safeties should be reserved for only those of the highest training caliber.

It is too strong and too complicated for the general shooter.

Sorry, you just don't qualify to carry a hammered gun...

Not every hammer fired gun is a 1911.

Tell us what you think about guns with safety levers on the slide that "go the wrong way". Or hammer fired SA/DA decocker only guns. Or hammer fired DAO guns with no safety levers or decockers.