Safeties - How do we (or not) adapt to them?

[KevinB]

Everyone is product of their environment to some extent.

I grew up on the BHP. I've carried BHP's, SIG226's, Glock's, 1911's and now M&P's. I''ve also worked with M9's - and the M9 is something I cannot work without some serious time (time I refuse to give to that platform).

I hate the mag disconnect - I won't carry a pistol with one. 1911/BHP/M&P safeties, I am fine with due to years of muscle memory. My one issue, is due to years of BHP and 1911, I will take the M&P off safe when manipulating the slide (I'm okay with that too BTW).

Shotguns and bolt guns -- I do not use a safety on these, I leave them empty chamber until in position, then will leave empty shell in chamber if I am moving after.

AR's - its so ergonomic into semi from safe that I will only off safe when coming onto target out of ready position. 26 years of muscle memory there.
I started on the FN C1A1 (FAL).

I prefer to simplify my options when using safeties.

[LangdonTactical]

I carried my 3rd gen S&W's and 92F with the safety on and learned to use those abortions, however I far prefer the ergonomic safety on 1911's and M&P's.

This is interesting to me as I grew up on a Beretta 92FS, or shall we say M9. I did not know till years later that the 92F safety was designed to sweep off with a downward motion like a 1911. Todd knows the man that explained that to me at Beretta, RIP, and once I tried it I was mad that I did not know this for the last 12 plus years that I had been using and teaching people how to use the M9. That being said, I am a fan of the G model Berettas, which is why the Elite and Elite II where both G models. I was also pissed off when I started working at Beretta and saw my first G model. I was like WTF, why are you guys hiding this thing!!! This is what everyone wants and no one even knows that it exist! That was 1997. I did my best from then on out to scream from the mountain tops that the G existed, we sold tens of thousands of them and the people all said "yes, this is good". And so the discontinued them all together.

[LangdonTactical]

The manual safety on the HKs and M&Ps is a great example of how I think they should be executed: you can still manipulate the slide so you've got that extra "anti-oops" protection when you're handling the gun administratively. .

Trust me when I tell you that was a big deal when I was working at S&W and we were heading down the path of the safety on the 45. The 9mm and 40 where done and out and we were working hard on the features of the 45 as SOCOM's Modular Handgun program was in full swing, RIP. There was a lot that was don't to that gun that I can take credit for, but the two major things that I had to go to bat on was the mag capacity and the safety. Having the safety lever operate like a 1911 was key I though and I even told them is should be along the lines of an Ed Brown Ambi high ride safety. I also explained how important it was for the safety to not lock the slide when it was on safe.
The good news is that Joe Bergeron was there as well and backed me up on all these points. Had I been alone I am not sure I would have gotten my way. I still have the powerpoints that I presented on what the M&P 45 should be

[David Armstrong]

As a FWIW, one of the reasons behind Fairbairn moving to C3 carry as default were his feelings that for his officers, with very limited training, the safety was harder to use and easier to forget than racking the slide.

[Chuck Haggard]

As a FWIW, one of the reasons behind Fairbairn moving to C3 carry as default were his feelings that for his officers, with very limited training, the safety was harder to use and easier to forget than racking the slide.

Back then it might have been, considering the guns being used, same idea the Israelis came up with due to the hodge-podge of guns they work with. The original 1911s were OK from my personal experience, but the .380s they were using are another matter. They obviously went with "one training mode to rule them all" when they locked into "what TTPs?"

[Dagga Boy]

I would be very interested to read how the Beretta safety is supposed to be used like a 1911 that Ernest Langdon describes above.
While I don't like the Beretta, it is a gun that I have to know how to run as an instructor.

[Chuck Haggard]

I was shown how you can run the safety much like a 1911 as you close your hand on the grip, don't flip upwards at the safety, you close your thumb down onto the lever and it pops "off".

On the 3rd gen S&Ws the "flip" at the safety also doesn't work, which is how most people run them. Works much better to run the thumb forward into a high thumb position, the safety pops right off and there is no issues with missing it.

[ToddG]

I would be very interested to read how the Beretta safety is supposed to be used like a 1911 that Ernest Langdon describes above.
While I don't like the Beretta, it is a gun that I have to know how to run as an instructor.

That's why there's the weird contour at the back of the safety lever. If you simply swipe your thumb DOWN that contour, the safety pops up into firing position. It's obviously still a different location than the a 1911 safety but the movement is ... similar.

[johnemckenzie]

That's why there's the weird contour at the back of the safety lever. If you simply swipe your thumb DOWN that contour, the safety pops up into firing position. It's obviously still a different location than the a 1911 safety but the movement is ... similar.

I just picked up a Beretta 92FS A1 because of the TDA talk here and on the blog. It is a strange beast for me. However, the additionally safety and etc. makes it something I want to work on. I feel like disengaging the safety takes… http://youtu.be/H-Q7b-vHY3Q

This is the first time I've ever heard of this disengagement technique! Could someone post a good quality video demonstrating it?

[Chuck Haggard]

If I had a Beretta I'd do a quick video, don't have one, not even sure around here who might have one.