Manual safety on semi auto's or not?

[kmoore]

I think I know what your opinion will be, but how do you feel about magazine disconnects/safeties ? They were popular for a few years, but I think most manufacturers have discontinued them. I've removed them from a couple of my guns as soon as I got them home.

The 1st semi auto service gun I had. Did indeed have a magazine disconnect. I removed it before I ever fired the gun, a S&W 59. Dumb idea they were. So, others can follow. A magazine disconnect makes the gun unable to fire if magazine was removed.
Hell yah, if I have a round in the gun and need to use it while changing the magazine or the mag got released. I want to stay in the firefight at least 1 more round.
Many years ago, I read a police shooting report were the officer had a S&W 9mm with a mag disconnect. He was shot during a gun fight. Figured he was going to pass out or be over taken by the attacker. He released the mag so the attacker could not shoot him with his own gun. But all the attacker needed was to reseat the mag and continue using it. I think they are a flawed idea of gun safety.

 

[RC44Mag]

Most semi autos do not need a manual safety.

If we parse your sentence we need to know your definition of the word need is, it's reminiscent of Clinton's confusing definition of sexual relations.

No, I suppose firearms don't literally need safety's and it's a personal choice for individual shooters to make what works for them. An N.D. while drawing or holstering often has real serious consequences.

 

[RC44Mag]

I think I know what your opinion will be, but how do you feel about magazine disconnects/safeties ? They were popular for a few years, but I think most manufacturers have discontinued them. I've removed them from a couple of my guns as soon as I got them home.

I've had my Beretta 84F for over 30 years now. I see the point of them and I'm sure they save more lives then they take and don't think I'll come across the time I'll need to load one round into chamber by hand because I lost or broke a magazine. I don't mind it at all. Just my thought on the subject.

 

[RC44Mag]

The 1st semi auto service gun I had. Did indeed have a magazine disconnect. I removed it before I ever fired the gun, a S&W 59. Dumb idea they were. So, others can follow. A magazine disconnect makes the gun unable to fire if magazine was removed.
Hell yah, if I have a round in the gun and need to use it while changing the magazine or the mag got released. I want to stay in the firefight at least 1 more round.
Many years ago, I read a police shooting report were the officer had a S&W 9mm with a mag disconnect. He was shot during a gun fight. Figured he was going to pass out or be over taken by the attacker. He released the mag so the attacker could not shoot him with his own gun. But all the attacker needed was to reseat the mag and continue using it. I think they are a flawed idea of gun safety.

So the cop was in a gunfight, gets shot by already armed perp, disarms his own pistol so the perp wouldn't use the weapon he has in hand but would rather use the cops to finish the job? Leaving him at the mercy of a dirtbag who already wounded him. Most interesting decision. If I got that right.

 

[PRichardson87]

What's a safety

 

[RC44Mag]

What's a safety

Shooters trigger finger. What do I win?

 

[Bob Wright]

Most semi autos do not need a manual safety.

The Browning designed pistols like the Colt Government Model do, indeed need need a manual safety if the gun is to be carried for everyday/defense carry. To be instantly available, the pistol should have a round chambered, the hammer cocked, and safety engaged. While there are other safeties built in, never depend on these only. And swiping that safety off is analgous to cocking the hammer of a Singel Action revolver.

Bob Wright

 

[blume357]

I think we need to be clear that there are several different designs for a semi-auto pistol. Just saying does a semi-auto need a safety is way to general a question. From my perspective a 1911 for sure needs one... It is designed to be carried 'cocked and locked'.... I don't think the standard DA/SA semi-auto needs one... these new fangled 'plastic' pistols with the striker fired action I actually feel probably should have one for the average person with minimum training.

 

[JackBull]

The 1911, Browning Hi-Power and CZ 75 are the only manual safeties I would consider. I am OK with the Glock safety design also.

 

[Busterswoodshop]

I prefer no safety on my carry pistol.

 

[Mobuck]

No real 'need' for a safety on a SA/DA pistol. The 'decocker' is sufficient.
I have a couple of Rugers and one S&W that have decocking safeties. Too easy to decock and leave the safety engaged causing to happen later.

 

[GunnyGene]

The 1st semi auto service gun I had. Did indeed have a magazine disconnect. I removed it before I ever fired the gun, a S&W 59. Dumb idea they were. So, others can follow. A magazine disconnect makes the gun unable to fire if magazine was removed.
Hell yah, if I have a round in the gun and need to use it while changing the magazine or the mag got released. I want to stay in the firefight at least 1 more round.
Many years ago, I read a police shooting report were the officer had a S&W 9mm with a mag disconnect. He was shot during a gun fight. Figured he was going to pass out or be over taken by the attacker. He released the mag so the attacker could not shoot him with his own gun. But all the attacker needed was to reseat the mag and continue using it. I think they are a flawed idea of gun safety.

One of the arguments put forward for inclusion of mag disconnects came from a few industry lawyers who were concerned about their company being sued by anti's over "unsafe" firearms if the PLCAA went away. They felt that not having the device would open them up to a barrage of lawsuits (which hasn't happened as far as I know). We hear the same arguments now about 'Smart' vs 'Dumb' guns. It behooves us to not allow the Brady's and Everytown types to determine what is 'safe' and what isn't. That includes such things as 'safe storage' laws. These kind of legal assaults, if not fought successfully, will inevitably lead to the complete loss of our rights, in the name of safety.

Remember C. S. Lewis' warning:

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be "cured" against one's will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals.

 

[kmoore]

So the cop was in a gunfight, gets shot by already armed perp, disarms his own pistol so the perp wouldn't use the weapon he has in hand but would rather use the cops to finish the job? Leaving him at the mercy of a dirtbag who already wounded him. Most interesting decision. If I got that right.

That was his thought process. Not one I would take or suggest. He was very lucky that he was not executed where he lay. The perp left and left the officer's gun. Most of the cops who lose or give their weapon to a crook will be shot to death by their own gun.
Real life isn't like on TV where the perp tells an officer to drop it and after the cop does, the crook leaves. Training teaches means of dealing with those deathly encounters. Bottom line surrendering your weapon to a hardened crook is mostly a death sentence. Fight till you cannot. On another note. Once a LAPD chief named "Gates" was asked about only arming his officers with 38 spl. 158 gr lead bullets. His words were "In case one of my officers gets disarmed he might survive getting shot with his own gun". Because that lacked power over a .357 or many better choices in guns and bullets.
That was the wrong answer. He should have his officers better trained on gun retention and better holsters to retain the gun. Along with better survival training. Remember the real case made into a book and movie. "The Onion Field."

 

[harley08]

For a while I carried a compact Kimber actually had two different ones that were both totally unreliable
and made trips back to the factory, will never have another. That has nothing to do with anything other
than I hate the brand now and have 1911 style experience.
Getting to the point ... much of my work involves crawling around, in, and under tight spaces. Carrying
in an inside the waistband holster several times I found the thumb safety had been somehow moved to the
fire position...even with a grip safety, that's not a good feeling.
I switched to Glocks and an LCP.

I carry Glocks, but I also own Colt 1911a1's

 

[harley08]

One of the arguments put forward for inclusion of mag disconnects came from a few industry lawyers who were concerned about their company being sued by anti's over "unsafe" firearms if the PLCAA went away. They felt that not having the device would open them up to a barrage of lawsuits (which hasn't happened as far as I know). We hear the same arguments now about 'Smart' vs 'Dumb' guns. It behooves us to not allow the Brady's and Everytown types to determine what is 'safe' and what isn't. That includes such things as 'safe storage' laws. These kind of legal assaults, if not fought successfully, will inevitably lead to the complete loss of our rights, in the name of safety.

Remember C. S. Lewis' warning:

"Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"
Patrick Henry at the Virginia Convention, St John's Church, 1775

 

[Skeet 028]

I must say I do like safeties. Mycarry piece for summer is a Sig. 365. It has no safety and I do not trust it with loaded chamber. But it is a truck/car gun. winter I still carry a 1911...Right now a cheap Rock Island Arms with all the bells and whistles. I used to carry my Wilson Combat or an old Military 1911 A1 that was worked on by our Armorer at the time A USMC Gunnery Sergeant. He was an old guy...at least 30...I was 18. He also taught me combat shooting...serious stuff. I took his instruction to heart. I only had to use that 1911 once. I'm still here. What you get used to. I think If I have to draw a 1911...the safety IS OFF when it appears! I do not usually carry in a holster these days...The Sig and other no safety semi autos just make me feel unsafe if they have a round chambered. I carry a S&W 60-4 in an inside waistband holster in the summer.. I also have a Ruger SP101 in 327 I would carry if it had a decent trigger. And for some reason I just recently was given a Glock 43...but can't get my head around that trigger

 

[Dave P.]

No real 'need' for a safety on a SA/DA pistol. The 'decocker' is sufficient.
I have a couple of Rugers and one S&W that have decocking safeties. Too easy to decock and leave the safety engaged causing to happen later.

I have a Ruger with a decocker and it makes me cringe every time I use it, something about that hammer falling toward a live round
just feels wrong. It's the only gun I own with one.

 

[Paul B]

Well my carry piece is a Colt Combat Commander .45 ACP, the more or less 1911's baby brother. It's carried cocked and locked. I'm more than comfortable with the design.

On the other hand, sometime when I feel the need (rarely) I'll switch to an S&W 6906 9MM. S&W copied the Walther P-38 design which in turn was an enlarged version of the Walther PP, PPK and the much later PPK/s which replaced the PPK here in the US thanks to the BATF. BTW, all those Walthers, with the exception of the P-38 hve been used by me as a CCW at one time or another. My complaint on them, S&W and Walther, is they got the safety bass ackwards.

The normal way to take the safety off to fire is swipe down like the 1911. With the S&W and Walther's you push the safety up rather than down. That's why if and when I do carry one or the other the safety is off.

Then there is the SIG-SAUER P-220. A nice handgun, but no safety whatsoever. Just a hammer drop switch. Trigger pull is a bit stiff in DA mode but not bad at all in SA mode. The gun is very accurate in SA mode and will almost keep up with a custom target grade 1911 I own. I'm just not all that comfortable with the total lack of a safety.

I'll have to be honest though, I've packed a 1911 in one model or another since before I was 18 years or, legally or otherwise. All the others have been Johny come lately's so to speak.
Paul B.

 

[Pál_K]

I have a Ruger with a decocker and it makes me cringe every time I use it, something about that hammer falling toward a live round
just feels wrong. It's the only gun I own with one.

Unlike perhaps the CZ-52, good decocker designs ensure the hammer cannot physically strike the firing pin. Some pistols with decockers have a transfer bar which is raised only when the trigger is pulled, so dropping the hammer hits nothing. Other decockers rotate a block which prevents the hammer from falling fully forward and striking the firing pin.

 

[JBP]

I would never CCW a semi-auto that when you engage the safety it drops the hammer and goes from SA to DA for the 1st shot unless the hammer spur was large enough to reset back to SA. I'm too old (78) to think about it so when I do CCW a semi-auto it's a Glock.