Removing Mag Disconnect
- Thread starter nworker
- Start date
Verndog
Blackhawk
1) you can dry fire your pistol without a magazine and without risking damage. 2) In the event your magazine becomes dislodged you still can fire the one in the chamber which possibly could save your life. 3) There aren't many benefits of having it other then it disables the weapon with no mag if it got into the wrong hands.
Iron Mike Golf
Blackhawk
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2010
- Messages
- 945
It can also result in a lighter or smoother trigger pull, depending on the design of the disconnect.
BrokenArrow
Bearcat
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2007
- Messages
- 8
Verndog said:
1) is nice; the way Ruger did it is just sloppy engineering.
2) is handy; possible but not very probable. I don't know of any documented saves that way.
3) is handier and has saved numerous cops over the years. I know of several documented cases of mag safeties (and maual safeties) saving lives in IL, NV, and NM.
BrokenArrow said:
1. Agreed
2. You can argue the same thing for having a CCW in the first place. What are the chances you'll ever need it? Slim, right?....as in, not very probable. I don't personally know anyone who has had to use their weapon for defense. That fact does not prevent me from carrying anyway....with the mag "safety" removed.
3. While that may be true, what those facts tell us is that all of those people "saved" by a "safety device" alreay broke the cardinal rule of gun-handling.....pulling the trigger on a loaded gun with it aimed at something they did not intend to shoot! How many safeties can you pile on a gun to prevent folks like that from killing/injuring themselves or others? 3? 5? 20? No matter how much mechanical crap they hang off a gun to try to make it safe, there will forever and always be ONE TRUE SAFETY. And that would be the gray matter between the gun-handlers ears.
frontstuffers
Single-Sixer
nworker, besides what has been mentioned already...I believe that I read somewhere on here that it is a requirement in certain pistol competitions. I am sure that some of the folks who shoot competition can help with that one.
BrokenArrow
Bearcat
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2007
- Messages
- 8
vacextar said:
Not what I meant. The documented cases I referred to were cases where cops were struggling w suspects and/or had been disarmed one way or another and the suspects inability to shoot them w their own gun due to a mag/manual safety saved their life.
For example, deputy is jumped during a domestic. During the struggle suspect gets a grip on his pistol. Deputy realizes he is gonna loose it, drops the mag before he does. Perp points it at deputy, pulls trigger, racks the slide, pulls trigger some more, nothing. Drops pistol, goes to get his rifle. Deputy picks up pistol, puts mag back in, chambers round, shoots perp when he returns w rifle.
In another officer is struggling w perp in parking lot. Girlfriend jumps in from behind, gets officer's pistol. While cop is struggling w boyfriend, girlfriend is trying to shoot cop, but can't figure out safety. Officer gets pistol back, eventually cuffs and stuffs both of 'em.
Over a 30+ year period one agency had numerous saves by mag/manual safeties, not even one where it cost an officer his life. Not even one suspected case. In fact, the number of "safety saves" far exceeded the number of officer deaths by any means.
Didn't matter, they dumped 'em for Glocks anyway.
Over a five year period w the feds in the DOJ, about one third of their total shootings (102 of 267) were NDs, most w Glocks, most ( 88 ) while "cleaning" or training but several (14) during ops. Waaaaaay more than previously w S&Ws, SIGs or revolvers.
Doesn't matter, they still prefer their Glocks.
Rules are nice, but some good engineering helps cuzz stuff happens. If following the rules was all it took, we would all be carrying pistolas w half pound triggers, no trigger guard or other safeties at all.
Verndog
Blackhawk
BrokenArrow said:
And to be fair, the scenario the average citizen likely would come across, as opposed to a LEO that the perpetrator already knows carries a weapon are entirely different. Point being the chances any those scenarios would play out that way in a SD situation are VERY remote IMO. The chances of the mag being ajar in a panic situation much better. Happened to me once, went to unholster my gun before bed and mag was kicked loose, not even sure how or when.
BrokenArrow
Bearcat
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2007
- Messages
- 8
That's fair.
I still like having the mag/manual safety. It's nice to have choices.
I still like having the mag/manual safety. It's nice to have choices.
I like the magazine disconnect when I am clearing the gun for cleaning, etc. Drop the magazine and then rack the slide to unchamber the round, knowing that if my hands slip (or whatever) will not cause an AD. Some slides especially are hard to rack, just feels safer.
gunman42782
Hunter
I am of the opinion that a mag disconnet has no place on any pistol of mine, period. But, I am old fashioned that way I suppose. I don't like loaded chamber indicators either. If you are too stupid to know if your chamber is loaded, then you don't need a gun in the first place. Not trying to PO anybody here, but my God, how much intelligence does it really take to know if you put a cartridge in the chamber???? All these things are nothing but lawyers designing guns, instead of gun designers.
jstanfield103
Blackhawk
I agree with gunman, but it is like anything else. It's a personal choice. That's what makes the world so interesting. Personally I removed the mag disconnect and the LCI. I like the way the gun looks with the LCI removed and a nice stainless replacement.
Knecht
Single-Sixer
I removed the disconnect on my LC9 for the very reasons Verndog said, though I don't mind having the loaded chamber indicator on it. Could have a smaller one, yes (I'll probably grind it down a little, if the gun comes back and fires reliably - by now it's sent to service to solve the lightstrike issue - if not, I'm selling it). I like the fact I can see if it's chambered even in dark, just by a touch. When I go to sleep, I keep my gun close, but without round in the chamber - so that if I just have a bad dream or my GF unwittingly punches me in sleep, I don't freak out and shoot her. And sometimes when I'm falling asleep, I just want to make sure if I really unchambered the gun - one touch and I know.
nworker There are 2 sides to this discussion. There are the proponents of removing a magazine safety that tout the benefits of doing so.
Then there are those that say that if a person had removed a magazine disconnect safety it could be used to make them seem to be a careless & negligent person in court if they were involved in a questionable shooting. Imagine a prosecutor speaking to a jury composed of non-gun people- So Mr. Blank you decided to remove a safety device from your pistol. Why did you do this? Oh, so you thought it was unnecessary, Why would Sturm, Ruger & CO. put this on their pistol if it were unnecessary? Oh, I get it, You believe yourself to be smarter than the people that are paid to design firearms for a living.
I would suggest you read some of Massad Ayoob's writings before removing anything.
I know several here disagree with me. That is fine. I do not think it wise to remove a safety device from a firearm. I do not own a pistol that has a magazine disconnect but I am of the opinion that if I am not okay with a magazine disconnect I should buy a gun that doesn't have one.
Then there are those that say that if a person had removed a magazine disconnect safety it could be used to make them seem to be a careless & negligent person in court if they were involved in a questionable shooting. Imagine a prosecutor speaking to a jury composed of non-gun people- So Mr. Blank you decided to remove a safety device from your pistol. Why did you do this? Oh, so you thought it was unnecessary, Why would Sturm, Ruger & CO. put this on their pistol if it were unnecessary? Oh, I get it, You believe yourself to be smarter than the people that are paid to design firearms for a living.
I would suggest you read some of Massad Ayoob's writings before removing anything.
I know several here disagree with me. That is fine. I do not think it wise to remove a safety device from a firearm. I do not own a pistol that has a magazine disconnect but I am of the opinion that if I am not okay with a magazine disconnect I should buy a gun that doesn't have one.
BrokenArrow
Bearcat
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2007
- Messages
- 8
That thingy on top is an LCI? I thought it was a bottle/can opener...
Tmyoungjr
Bearcat
Personally, I removed my mag disconnect. For no reason other than dryfire practice!
My firearm has enough safeties for my liking w/o the mag safety AND I don't carry this one or keep it in the nightstand so I am not concerned on that front.
I use this gun for range use and some competition use (IPSC/USPSA)
My firearm has enough safeties for my liking w/o the mag safety AND I don't carry this one or keep it in the nightstand so I am not concerned on that front.
I use this gun for range use and some competition use (IPSC/USPSA)
