-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/Pioneer Valley Arms February Giveaway ***Smith & Wesson SD9VE 9MM***
carry gun with a safety
- Thread starter LORD of WAR
- Start date
been following this thread.. can you provide more detail on this comment.
I'm a huge fan of 1911 with its added safety features, personally if i am allowed to carry my initial thought is SOMEDAY i would most likely carry a smaller 1911 variant.
But this comment makes me wonder how such an event happens, kinda new to guns.
I'm a huge fan of 1911 with its added safety features, personally if i am allowed to carry my initial thought is SOMEDAY i would most likely carry a smaller 1911 variant.
But this comment makes me wonder how such an event happens, kinda new to guns.
I doesn't happen often, but it does happen often enough that one should pause to consider how safeties work and one should always be cafeful when resetting the safety (i.e., muzzle pointed in a direction where, if the gun fires, the worst you'll experience is a bit of embarassment).
Not to write a treatise, but most safeties fall into two design types: trigger (or sear) blockers and hammer (or striker) grabbers are the most prevalent.
In theory, a trigger blocker inserts a bit of metal that blocks the rearward path a trigger would normally follow when being pulled. The problem is tolerance; in order to work, a trigger blocker design has to allow some trigger movement (else you couldn't insert the safety block into the trigger's path), and some of these designs are such that pulling the trigger with the safety on effects some reduction of sear engagement, albeit not enough to fire the weapon. However, if the trigger/sear/hammer surfaces are worn (through use or amateur gunsmithing), the weapon can fire when the safety is released and the block removed.
(Typically, hammer blocker designs that the foregoing applies to are those where the trigger works directly on the hammer, without a separate sear in the mechanical linkage, such as a mil-spec AR trigger. Where the design allows for trigger slack (take up prior to the time where the trigger itself first contacts the sear), the failure mode just discussed does not necessarily apply.)
Hammer grabbers do just that: they actually effect a connection to the hammer or striker and move it back, so that when the safety is on, the weapon doesn't fire. However, the safety is now functioning as a sear on its own, and if as a result of pulling the trigger while the safety is on or otherwise, the regular trigger/sear function is out of play, the weapon fires when the safety is released.
If you want an eye-opener, take hold of a '98 Mauser-pattern bolt rifle. Put the safety on. Pull the trigger (nothing happens). Now, while holding the trigger, release the safety. Pin drops. Pin will always drop. Inherent in the design.
Now, there is an additional and entirely different element of risk injected by weapons that have manual safeties and operators who use them: the psychological effect of tending to make the operator treat the weapon with less care because "the safety is on, so it isn't dangerous."
Bottom line: a manual safety, used properly, reduces (but does not eliminate) the magnitude of one set of failure modes, while introducing new failure modes of its own. The "safest" loaded (i.e., round in the chamber) firearm is a Smith & Wesson double action revolver with the hammer down, followed closely by a SIG SA/DA with the hammer decocked. Neither has a manual safety.
Edit re: carrying a Gov't Model in Condition 1: as a general matter, unless required by range or match rules, I do not engage manual safeties, with two exceptions: AR-style rifles and carbines and Gov't Model design SA pistols (1911, 1911A1, Browning Hi-Power). In both cases, proper deployment technique calls for not releasing the safety except as the weapon is brought on target, and in both cases the controls design facilitates this (as the safety can be reset with one's fire control hand in the firing position). I have carried Gov't Models in Condition 1 (i.e., round in the chamber, hammer cocked, safety on) for years and consider it close enough in compound risk to a S&W hammer down.
Last edited:
Mass-diver
NES Member
To echo what others have said,
1.)Push a revolver - they are they best option for "non-gun" people. Highly reliable, safe, simple to use.
Those DA/SA safety/decockers are hard to deactivate. Unlike a 1911, you have to push them up, which is a tough move.
2.) Take a course with him and let someone else be the voice of reason. As I'm sure you know, it's when you start to do some real life drills that the problem of complicated safeties really reveals itself.
1.)Push a revolver - they are they best option for "non-gun" people. Highly reliable, safe, simple to use.
Those DA/SA safety/decockers are hard to deactivate. Unlike a 1911, you have to push them up, which is a tough move.
2.) Take a course with him and let someone else be the voice of reason. As I'm sure you know, it's when you start to do some real life drills that the problem of complicated safeties really reveals itself.
Well, other than the same one with no round in the chamber. And, how is a Sig SA/DA with hammer decocked different than other brands handled in the same fashion (for example, Ruger P series)? I can't think of any difference.
Also, the decocker on Rugers and Makarovs at least, is a downward motion.
Last edited:
True of the Walther PP design (emulated by the S&W M39 and derivatives), but not of the SIGs. Decocker (which has no hammer or trigger block function) a simple lever you slide down. It drops the hammer as far as the rebound position.
I'm not familiar with the Ruger, and I didn't mean to imply that the SIG was the only design that met the criteria, only that it was an example.
There are issues with any auto that has a hammer down behind a chambered round; these involve how the rebound function is achieved and maintained and how inertia-fire is addressed (if at all). This is why carrying a Gov't Model in Condition 2 was considered a no-no (at least prior to the Series 80).
Screw manual safeties on a carry gun...in general. The ONLY manual safety I'll put up with on a carry gun is on a 1911. Other than my 1911s, I only own two guns with a manual/external safety...and they never get carried. A Ruger 22/45 and a Walther PPK/s.
Well i'm glad my dad certainly isn't that way.
I like the idea of letting him carry something suitable (Glock, HK, M&P, etc) with an empty chamber until he feels comfortable carrying it with a loaded chamber. At least then he's got something with him. Its apparent that he has a comfort issue with carrying with a loaded chamber. Unfortunately no amount of training is going to get him over it. He needs to carry for a while and gain confidence in the pistol (and that it won't jump out and start killing people).
And for the record even I feel uncomfortable with a round in the chamber in certain circumstances. As an example I will never carry anything in a smart carry next to my gonads with a round in the chamber. Just a personal comfort issue for me
![[smile]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/001.gif "Smile [smile]")
If it's just the "round in the chamber" issue, maybe he would consider carrying a revolver and leave the chamber in front of the hammer empty. Something like a SW432PD, which is DAO and can have a hefty trigger pull.
Otherwise, the SW1911PD with then Sc frame and the CT grips would have what he needs.
Or you can try and score something like an STI LS9, but you would have to find that item in some other fashion than as a "new" purchase
Thank RKG, very informative reading.
Sigmond
NES Member
I carried for 20 years and never kept a round in the chamber, until a became a Police Officer. Now on or off duty i carry a Glock with a round in the chamber. I trust that handgun more than any, combined with training. So, training is the key. The idea of carrying in the yard is a good one to get adjusted. In the old days we carried revolvers and had no choice. Good luck.
You know, I have to wonder whether part of the problem is right here. He's an adult. You don't let him carry something. He decides to carry or not. He decides what is suitable for him. Not you. He has to make these decisions, not you. And the choices that he makes may not be ones you agree with.
Sounds to me like a training issue.
And for the record even I feel uncomfortable with a round in the chamber in certain circumstances. As an example I will never carry anything in a smart carry next to my gonads with a round in the chamber. Just a personal comfort issue for me
For the record, I strongly recommend against sometimes carrying chamber full and sometimes carrying chamber empty. If the SHTF, there is a very good chance that you won't remember that today you are carrying chamber empty.
Very sound advice if you're talking about an autoloading pistol. However, if the subject is carrying a S&W DA revolver, it really doesn't matter:
For the record, if you do a detailed failure mode analysis, you will find that there is just about nil delta risk between a six-loaded S&W DA revolver and a five-loaded S&W DA revolver.
In both cases, the next chamber can be fired by simply pulling the DA trigger, so the issue is the round under the hammer at rest.
There is the so-called "hammer block," which as someone noted, was added to the design in the late 40s at the request of the Navy. With the hammer down and trigger forward, this inserts the tip of a steel part between the lip of the hammer and the frame (I'm talking now about pre-lock Smiths, with the pin in the hammer, though the analysis is not materially different for frame-mounted pins); so inserted, this block effects a compression block that prevents the hammer from moving far enough forward for the pin to emerge above the rim of the pin hole.
In real life, though, the incident that prompted the Navy's request (a supposed dropped-pistol jar-off of a cocked revolver) did not happen, and the hammer block does nothing (except to make a rattling noise if you shake a hammer-down Smith). The actual operating safety in a hammer-down Smith is the rebound slide, which also inserts a compression fit block between the hammer and the frame; you can pound on the hammer of a hammer-down Smith all day, and all you'll succeed in doing is breaking the spur off. This is true even if you assemble the revolver leaving the "hammer block" out.
There are some interesting demonstrations we used to use to illustrate this point, rather dramatically, but they'd take more time to describe than the software allows. However, getting back to the OP's original question, I think we can summarize as follows:
A) For a casual carrier, a revolver is better than a self-loading pistol.
B) With a S&W DA revolver, from a failure mode analysis, there is no greater risk of an unintended discharge of an uncocked revolver if the sixth chamber is loaded.
C) However, from a defense perspective, the chamber under the hammer would be the last round fired (not the first), so if someone wants to five-load their revolver, he can do so at no cost to first-round readiness.
Sigmond
NES Member
Good Points
All good points! Practice, practice, practice. That is the way we reduce risk. Carrying occassionally chambered and unchambered as soneone pointed out is a bad idea. It leads to a state of uncertainty in the event of an incident. Better not to chamber if you are not experienced, auto or revolver. Get him to the range weekly and enrolled in a good NRA type training program. Smith & Wessen has a good training program.
All good points! Practice, practice, practice. That is the way we reduce risk. Carrying occassionally chambered and unchambered as soneone pointed out is a bad idea. It leads to a state of uncertainty in the event of an incident. Better not to chamber if you are not experienced, auto or revolver. Get him to the range weekly and enrolled in a good NRA type training program. Smith & Wessen has a good training program.
The click the gun will make on an empty chamber will be a deafening sound and possibly the 2nd to last sound he hears if he every needs to use his gun.
Having spent a number of classes next to individuals who had safety / decockers on their weapons and watching them attempt to holster without decocking, it is a serious hazard unless they are extremely familiar with the weapon system and have built up the automatic response to do so under stress.
Having spent a number of classes next to individuals who had safety / decockers on their weapons and watching them attempt to holster without decocking, it is a serious hazard unless they are extremely familiar with the weapon system and have built up the automatic response to do so under stress.
I just found out that the M&P's are now all being offered with an optional thumb safety.
http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/...angId=-1&parent_category_rn=15711&isFirearm=Y
http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/...angId=-1&parent_category_rn=15711&isFirearm=Y
My point on on the first part was that he thinks he knows what he wants but apparently is only making assumptions based on what he thinks he wants or needs. He's never carried and has no training so he's probably wrong. Ultimately I agree that he's an adult and will carry what he wants.
Also I have a certain firearm that I always carry without a round in the chamber usually due to it's close proximity to my baby maker when it's holstered. I only carry it as a last ditch backup gun and its chamber is always empty. My normal carry gun always has a round in the chamber. I will agree that you shouldn't carry the same gun sometimes with one in chamber and sometimes without.
So wouldn't the first step be to get him some training, rather than encouraging him to carry without training?
Maybe he should take at least a few months to go and take some formal training classes. Unfortunately he'll need a pistol for most of them![[wink]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/002.gif "Wink [wink]")
1) he doesn't need a pistol to take a basic pistol class.
2) he can borrow a gun from BH while taking a concealed carry class at Sig (or something similar).
I'm certified to teach NRA Basic Pistol. I know exactly what is taught in NRA Basic Pistol.
I'm out of this thread. Completely pointless.
well for all that have been following this he decided on the walther ppk/s...however hes also going to get the sig 232 because he really liked how it felt in his hand...i showed him an m&p amd he said too bulky...also showed him a few other used guns we had behind the counter and he said the size and slimness of the ppk plus the safety feature was what he wanted...now to ween him off that damn gun!
the stainless steel one is the only MA compliant one...the blued isnt because its too light i think? or whatever stupid reason...anyways im a polymer gun guy so i think both are too heavy!
