Semi-Auto Triggers: market trends, choices, and consequences

[LangdonTactical]

OK, so here is a statement that many will not like. This whole thing is the gun communities own fault!

The race has been on to see which manufacturer could build a gun with the shortest and lightest trigger on a striker fired gun for years. Between the aftermarket kits for striker fired guns to the updates to current guns from major manufacturers and new guns hitting the market, it is pretty clear that the customers want as close to a 1911 trigger as they can get, but with no manual safety. The whole culture has gone to the bullshit bravado of "keep your booger hook off the bang switch dude" mentality. We have developed an acceptance for basically single action guns with no safeties. I have been around long enough to remember when a certain striker fired gun hit the market and most of the top guys in the community thought it was ridiculous to have a trigger that short and light with no safety. But here we are, about 30 years later and all anyone wants is a short light trigger on a striker fired a gun. Not to mention all the people that complain about the trigger tab.

When the 320 hit the market, everyone was raving about how great the trigger was and the fact that it did not have a trigger tab. Here we have a fully cocked gun, with no external safety of any kind, and we thought it was great. Sales went through the roof and almost nobody said, hey wait a minute, physics are at play here, what kind of weird magic are they using to keep that thing from firing when it hits the ground. Every other manufacturer that builds a striker fired gun has some kind of trigger tab that keeps the gun from firing when it gets dropped. And what was our answer? "Shut up man, keep your booger hook off the bang switch dude".

At what point will we accept the fact that we are all not Tier One Operators and these things are threat management tools, not just toys we use at the range. If you're so damn good that you never make mistakes and you can use a 1911 with no safeties, then learn how to shoot a gun that sets an example for the rest of us mear mortals.

I for one make mistakes, get scared, and do stupid stuff some times. I will just be over here in the corner with my TDA guns trying to learn how to shoot them better.

[Dagga Boy]

Bingo Ernest! Everyone wants "easy to shoot". SIG/Grayguns/Internet are on the "just has to pass a couple tests and we are good". The new mantra is "booger picker off bang switch and I don't drop my guns". Got it. Well now you got so easy to shoot it will do this:

[hufnagel]

DB "people management trigger" post he made many moons ago is something I continue to take to heart, and preach to people whenever possible.

eta: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?9457-Why-I-like-the-LEM-as-a-quot-street-trigger-quot
because people are lazy for searching. :D
(ok, he called it a "street trigger". sue me.)

[lwt16]

OK, so here is a statement that many will not like. This whole thing is the gun communities own fault!

The race has been on to see which manufacturer could build a gun with the shortest and lightest trigger on a striker fired gun for years. Between the aftermarket kits for striker fired guns to the updates to current guns from major manufacturers and new guns hitting the market, it is pretty clear that the customers want as close to a 1911 trigger as they can get, but with no manual safety. The whole culture has gone to the bullshit bravado of "keep your booger hook off the bang switch dude" mentality. We have developed an acceptance for basically single action guns with no safeties. I have been around long enough to remember when a certain striker fired gun hit the market and most of the top guys in the community thought it was ridiculous to have a trigger that short and light with no safety. But here we are, about 30 years later and all anyone wants is a short light trigger on a striker fired a gun. Not to mention all the people that complain about the trigger tab.

When the 320 hit the market, everyone was raving about how great the trigger was and the fact that it did not have a trigger tab. Here we have a fully cocked gun, with no external safety of any kind, and we thought it was great. Sales went through the roof and almost nobody said, hey wait a minute, physics are at play here, what kind of weird magic are they using to keep that thing from firing when it hits the ground. Every other manufacturer that builds a striker fired gun has some kind of trigger tab that keeps the gun from firing when it gets dropped. And what was our answer? "Shut up man, keep your booger hook off the bang switch dude".

At what point will we accept the fact that we are all not Tier One Operators and these things are threat management tools, not just toys we use at the range. If you're so damn good that you never make mistakes and you can use a 1911 with no safeties, then learn how to shoot a gun that sets an example for the rest of us mear mortals.

I for one make mistakes, get scared, and do stupid stuff some times. I will just be over here in the corner with my TDA guns trying to learn how to shoot them better.

Word!

[gruntjim]

OK, so here is a statement that many will not like. This whole thing is the gun communities own fault!

The race has been on to see which manufacturer could build a gun with the shortest and lightest trigger on a striker fired gun for years. Between the aftermarket kits for striker fired guns to the updates to current guns from major manufacturers and new guns hitting the market, it is pretty clear that the customers want as close to a 1911 trigger as they can get, but with no manual safety. The whole culture has gone to the bullshit bravado of "keep your booger hook off the bang switch dude" mentality. We have developed an acceptance for basically single action guns with no safeties. I have been around long enough to remember when a certain striker fired gun hit the market and most of the top guys in the community thought it was ridiculous to have a trigger that short and light with no safety. But here we are, about 30 years later and all anyone wants is a short light trigger on a striker fired a gun. Not to mention all the people that complain about the trigger tab.

When the 320 hit the market, everyone was raving about how great the trigger was and the fact that it did not have a trigger tab. Here we have a fully cocked gun, with no external safety of any kind, and we thought it was great. Sales went through the roof and almost nobody said, hey wait a minute, physics are at play here, what kind of weird magic are they using to keep that thing from firing when it hits the ground. Every other manufacturer that builds a striker fired gun has some kind of trigger tab that keeps the gun from firing when it gets dropped. And what was our answer? "Shut up man, keep your booger hook off the bang switch dude".

At what point will we accept the fact that we are all not Tier One Operators and these things are threat management tools, not just toys we use at the range. If you're so damn good that you never make mistakes and you can use a 1911 with no safeties, then learn how to shoot a gun that sets an example for the rest of us mear mortals.

I for one make mistakes, get scared, and do stupid stuff some times. I will just be over here in the corner with my TDA guns trying to learn how to shoot them better.

This is the exact chain of reasoning I was following when switching to a CZ P-07 for AIWB carry. Adrenaline dump is a mother, and I know I can get clumsy under stress. Does't hurt that the CZ came out of the box needing few if any modifications.

[psalms144.1]

OK, so here is a statement that many will not like. This whole thing is the gun communities own fault!

SNIP

I for one make mistakes, get scared, and do stupid stuff some times. I will just be over here in the corner with my TDA guns trying to learn how to shoot them better.I made a similar comment in the "non P320 drop safe" thread, regarding drop failures of a GLOCK with an aftermarket trigger. The constant search to get smoother/lighter/shorter triggers has brought us to this point.

I still feel comfortable and confident in my (completely stock) GLOCK triggers as a duty/SD/HD trigger. But there's a reason I've been dabbling with the P07 for a while now.

[spinmove_]

OK, so here is a statement that many will not like. This whole thing is the gun communities own fault!

The race has been on to see which manufacturer could build a gun with the shortest and lightest trigger on a striker fired gun for years. Between the aftermarket kits for striker fired guns to the updates to current guns from major manufacturers and new guns hitting the market, it is pretty clear that the customers want as close to a 1911 trigger as they can get, but with no manual safety. The whole culture has gone to the bullshit bravado of "keep your booger hook off the bang switch dude" mentality. We have developed an acceptance for basically single action guns with no safeties. I have been around long enough to remember when a certain striker fired gun hit the market and most of the top guys in the community thought it was ridiculous to have a trigger that short and light with no safety. But here we are, about 30 years later and all anyone wants is a short light trigger on a striker fired a gun. Not to mention all the people that complain about the trigger tab.

When the 320 hit the market, everyone was raving about how great the trigger was and the fact that it did not have a trigger tab. Here we have a fully cocked gun, with no external safety of any kind, and we thought it was great. Sales went through the roof and almost nobody said, hey wait a minute, physics are at play here, what kind of weird magic are they using to keep that thing from firing when it hits the ground. Every other manufacturer that builds a striker fired gun has some kind of trigger tab that keeps the gun from firing when it gets dropped. And what was our answer? "Shut up man, keep your booger hook off the bang switch dude".

At what point will we accept the fact that we are all not Tier One Operators and these things are threat management tools, not just toys we use at the range. If you're so damn good that you never make mistakes and you can use a 1911 with no safeties, then learn how to shoot a gun that sets an example for the rest of us mear mortals.

I for one make mistakes, get scared, and do stupid stuff some times. I will just be over here in the corner with my TDA guns trying to learn how to shoot them better.

So much this. Well said. I'm so sick and tired of people wanting everything dumbed down to the point where they don't have to use any brain power whatsoever or don't have to exert the time and energy necessary to even gain a remedial level of proficiency with anything, let alone firearms. If you can't handle learning the proper manual of arms for a specific gun or any guns, then don't use guns. Safety is a thing and putting people's lives at risk because you expect an end user to perform every single task perfectly every single time is a misguided fallacy that will show you how wrong you are at every single turn. Flippy switches, levers, dinguses, and weird hinges on guns doesn't make them unnecessarily complex, it's makes your dumb Neanderthal stressed out self less likely to inadvertently and unintentionally perforate either yourself or someone else.

Want a 1911 trigger? Use a 1911. Don't like safeties? Use a TDA. Don't like two different trigger presses on the same gun? Use a striker gun or a revolver. Whatever you use, just use something that's safe and of good quality? You think whatever safety mechanism that's in place is holding you back for whatever reason? Maybe you should look at the possibility that you are holding you back. I know I've caught myself holding myself back before. It happens. I'm human. I make mistakes. It's what I'm good at. Maybe you should think of yourself as human too instead of the perfect machine that never fails that you think you are.


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

[spinmove_]

Bingo Ernest! Everyone wants "easy to shoot". SIG/Grayguns/Internet are on the "just has to pass a couple tests and we are good". The new mantra is "booger picker off bang switch and I don't drop my guns". Got it. Well now you got so easy to shoot it will do this:

Can't agree more. The more I think about this subject the more I'm grateful that there's such a thing as the SCD (thanks, Tom). The more I think about the SCD, the more I think about just switching back to a TDA. That Px4c just keeps looking better and better by the day.


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

[farscott]

OK, so here is a statement that many will not like. This whole thing is the gun communities own fault!

The race has been on to see which manufacturer could build a gun with the shortest and lightest trigger on a striker fired gun for years. Between the aftermarket kits for striker fired guns to the updates to current guns from major manufacturers and new guns hitting the market, it is pretty clear that the customers want as close to a 1911 trigger as they can get, but with no manual safety. The whole culture has gone to the bullshit bravado of "keep your booger hook off the bang switch dude" mentality. We have developed an acceptance for basically single action guns with no safeties. I have been around long enough to remember when a certain striker fired gun hit the market and most of the top guys in the community thought it was ridiculous to have a trigger that short and light with no safety. But here we are, about 30 years later and all anyone wants is a short light trigger on a striker fired a gun. Not to mention all the people that complain about the trigger tab.

When the 320 hit the market, everyone was raving about how great the trigger was and the fact that it did not have a trigger tab. Here we have a fully cocked gun, with no external safety of any kind, and we thought it was great. Sales went through the roof and almost nobody said, hey wait a minute, physics are at play here, what kind of weird magic are they using to keep that thing from firing when it hits the ground. Every other manufacturer that builds a striker fired gun has some kind of trigger tab that keeps the gun from firing when it gets dropped. And what was our answer? "Shut up man, keep your booger hook off the bang switch dude".

At what point will we accept the fact that we are all not Tier One Operators and these things are threat management tools, not just toys we use at the range. If you're so damn good that you never make mistakes and you can use a 1911 with no safeties, then learn how to shoot a gun that sets an example for the rest of us mear mortals.

I for one make mistakes, get scared, and do stupid stuff some times. I will just be over here in the corner with my TDA guns trying to learn how to shoot them better.

While I agree with much of the above, I think it is important to state that not everyone in the community advocated for the 1911 trigger in a striker-fired pistol. Dagga Boy is a great example who made many cogent arguments, backed up by experience, of why (for example) LEM was an ideal action for threat management. That discussion drove many, including me, to try -- and then embrace -- LEM. While those guns were brought to market for reasons other than drop safety, those actions are very safe in terms of drops.

I think it is also important to state that there were other advocates of DA/SA, including TLG and EL. TLG specifically wrote about his concern that trigger travel distance, not trigger weight, played a role in "avoidable" NDs. Beretta and S&W both offered DAO guns as did SIG with the P250 and HK still does. So there must be at least a perceived market for people who want a trigger whose travel distance can help with safety. The existence of the Gadget and its success in our community shows, at least, some awareness of the liabilities of a short-travel trigger on a pistol.

It is also fair to say that, as the quoted section states, that many people want(ed) a 1911 trigger on a striker-fired pistol. But it is also important to remember that most people today have no understanding of the trade-offs involved in pistol design -- or even basic physics. They want a gun that is easy to use and safe just like their phone -- the iGun. It is up to manufacturers to give customers what they want while still providing products that are safe. Manufacturers are supposed to be the experts, not the customers.

[rsa-otc]

OK, so here is a statement that many will not like. This whole thing is the gun communities own fault!

The race has been on to see which manufacturer could build a gun with the shortest and lightest trigger on a striker fired gun for years. Between the aftermarket kits for striker fired guns to the updates to current guns from major manufacturers and new guns hitting the market, it is pretty clear that the customers want as close to a 1911 trigger as they can get, but with no manual safety. The whole culture has gone to the bullshit bravado of "keep your booger hook off the bang switch dude" mentality. We have developed an acceptance for basically single action guns with no safeties. I have been around long enough to remember when a certain striker fired gun hit the market and most of the top guys in the community thought it was ridiculous to have a trigger that short and light with no safety. But here we are, about 30 years later and all anyone wants is a short light trigger on a striker fired a gun. Not to mention all the people that complain about the trigger tab.

When the 320 hit the market, everyone was raving about how great the trigger was and the fact that it did not have a trigger tab. Here we have a fully cocked gun, with no external safety of any kind, and we thought it was great. Sales went through the roof and almost nobody said, hey wait a minute, physics are at play here, what kind of weird magic are they using to keep that thing from firing when it hits the ground. Every other manufacturer that builds a striker fired gun has some kind of trigger tab that keeps the gun from firing when it gets dropped. And what was our answer? "Shut up man, keep your booger hook off the bang switch dude".

At what point will we accept the fact that we are all not Tier One Operators and these things are threat management tools, not just toys we use at the range. If you're so damn good that you never make mistakes and you can use a 1911 with no safeties, then learn how to shoot a gun that sets an example for the rest of us mear mortals.

I for one make mistakes, get scared, and do stupid stuff some times. I will just be over here in the corner with my TDA guns trying to learn how to shoot them better.

Having done the firearms training thing for 40 years, first with revolvers (my first love), then TDA guns and now striker fired, I concur and couldn't have said it any better. Once my personal situation changes a PX4 is in my future.

[rsa-otc]

While I agree with much of the above, I think it is important to state that not everyone in the community advocated for the 1911 trigger in a striker-fired pistol. Dagga Boy is a great example who made many cogent arguments, backed up by experience, of why (for example) LEM was an ideal action for threat management. That discussion drove many, including me, to try -- and then embrace -- LEM. While those guns were brought to market for reasons other than drop safety, those actions are very safe in terms of drops.

I think it is also important to state that there were other advocates of DA/SA, including TLG and EL. TLG specifically wrote about his concern that trigger travel distance, not trigger weight, played a role in "avoidable" NDs. Beretta and S&W both offered DAO guns as did SIG with the P250 and HK still does. So there must be at least a perceived market for people who want a trigger whose travel distance can help with safety. The existence of the Gadget and its success in our community shows, at least, some awareness of the liabilities of a short-travel trigger on a pistol.

It is also fair to say that, as the quoted section states, that many people want(ed) a 1911 trigger on a striker-fired pistol. But it is also important to remember that most people today have no understanding of the trade-offs involved in pistol design -- or even basic physics. They want a gun that is easy to use and safe just like their phone -- the iGun. It is up to manufacturers to give customers what they want while still providing products that are safe. Manufacturers are supposed to be the experts, not the customers.

The problem is that these voices while well spoken with reason on their side are in the minority. Hopefully with the coming of TDA guns now dominating USPSA and similar type of competition we will see the pendulum swing back the other direction. But unfortunately I think it's going to be awhile since the almighty budget dollar rules and typically a TDA, LEM, DOA gun costs a couple of hundreds more to purchase and the additional training costs typically associated with TDA, LEM guns.

[JHC]

Prescient GJM

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?24752-Striker-design-considerations-and-safety

The PPQ was the first one that when I dry fired it, I was like "whoa". That 5" model; if it had a thumb safety? mmmmmMMM.

But, with some new fully tensioned striker designs, I'm not clear that a thumb safety does the trick in an impact. IDK.

[Pit]

Agree with Mr. Landgon's overall idea of what the community seems to be asking for and it's direction at this time. However, firearms manufactures must remain above board and offer weapons proven to be safe. The firearms customer part of the community has the belief that the major manufactures are responsible companies. They do there best to make a weapon that meets expectations including being safe. I know this belief can be taken for granted and misplaced to some degree. However it's not that a machine can break, they all can. It's are they willing to acknowledge a problem and stand behind their product.

JW

[fixer]

OK, so here is a statement that many will not like. This whole thing is the gun communities own fault!

I for one make mistakes, get scared, and do stupid stuff some times. I will just be over here in the corner with my TDA guns trying to learn how to shoot them better.

Thanks Ernest.

Similar thoughts have been percolating in my mind.

Like...How sure are we that all the new "wonder strikers" produced for the XM trials are really and truly vetted? How sure are we that we won't be seeing some serious safety flaws with time and use?

There is a huge rush to market with these things and like any other industry that does it (autos and consumer electronics) there WILL be problems.

[spinmove_]

Agree with Mr. Landgon's overall idea of what the community seems to be asking for and it's direction at this time. However, firearms manufactures must remain above board and offer weapons proven to be safe. The firearms customer part of the community has the belief that the major manufactures are responsible companies. They do there best to make a weapon that meets expectations including being safe. I know this belief can be taken for granted and misplaced to some degree. However it's not that a machine can break, they all can. It's are they willing to acknowledge a problem and stand behind their product.

JW

Firearms manufacturers are in the business of making money and giving the customers what they want. Combine all that with some shady business practices and you get a P320.


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

[John Hearne]

The race has been on to see which manufacturer could build a gun with the shortest and lightest trigger on a striker fired gun for years. ... We have developed an acceptance for basically single action guns with no safeties. ... When the 320 hit the market, everyone was raving about how great the trigger was and the fact that it did not have a trigger tab. Here we have a fully cocked gun, with no external safety of any kind, and we thought it was great.

You sound a lot like my favorite author:

Finally, I'm speculating but I think that a lot of the problem originated from Sig's attempt to give the consumer what they wanted. If you look at the criticisms of other striker fired pistols, everyone bitches about the triggers. Sig went out of their way to design a trigger that was very shootable. Their firing control system was different from everyone else because they wanted a good trigger. Sig offered a tab safety trigger since the gun's introduction but nobody ordered one. Had Sig been willing to compromise on trigger quality or pushed a tab trigger whether the consumer wanted one or not, they probably wouldn't be here today.

The other consideration is the desire of a lot of departments to find a hardware solution to training issues. If all you're worried about is getting folks to a minimally passing score as quickly as possible, it is easier and cheaper to do it with a lighter trigger pull. I think the desire to make the shooting part as easy as possible and have a trigger that those with low hand strength can still shoot well has driven a lot of what we're seeing.

[LangdonTactical]

While I agree with much of the above, I think it is important to state that not everyone in the community advocated for the 1911 trigger in a striker-fired pistol. Dagga Boy is a great example who made many cogent arguments, backed up by experience, of why (for example) LEM was an ideal action for threat management. That discussion drove many, including me, to try -- and then embrace -- LEM. While those guns were brought to market for reasons other than drop safety, those actions are very safe in terms of drops.

I think it is also important to state that there were other advocates of DA/SA, including TLG and EL. TLG specifically wrote about his concern that trigger travel distance, not trigger weight, played a role in "avoidable" NDs. Beretta and S&W both offered DAO guns as did SIG with the P250 and HK still does. So there must be at least a perceived market for people who want a trigger whose travel distance can help with safety. The existence of the Gadget and its success in our community shows, at least, some awareness of the liabilities of a short-travel trigger on a pistol.

It is also fair to say that, as the quoted section states, that many people want(ed) a 1911 trigger on a striker-fired pistol. But it is also important to remember that most people today have no understanding of the trade-offs involved in pistol design -- or even basic physics. They want a gun that is easy to use and safe just like their phone -- the iGun. It is up to manufacturers to give customers what they want while still providing products that are safe. Manufacturers are supposed to be the experts, not the customers.

Well, let's be clear, I am talking about the "pejorative we". I would hope that everyone knows where I stand on this issue, and trust me, I have tried many times to get on the striker fired band wagon. I even switched over to a Glock 19 for about two months or so back in late 2013. I figured at the time, it's a striker fired world and I just live in it, but that did not last long, I just could not bring myself to stick with it.

You can try to put the blame on the manufacturers, but that is not really fair either. Sig was one of the last hold outs in building a striker gun, followed quickly by HK, and then CZ and Beretta. The market wants a cheap gun that is easy to shoot. The gun companies are in the business of making money. The Polymer Frame, Striker Fired gun, with a chassis trigger system, is by far the cheapest way to manufacture a gun.

Yes, there are some hold outs here. Dagga Boy is one of the few left along with myself. Mike Pannon is another one. But even TGL had switched over to a Glock in the end.

The pressure from the gun culture and the gun manufacturers is almost unbearable. The pressure to shoot a Glock or at least a striker fired gun is just massive, saying otherwise is just silly because we all know it is true. The marketing from the manufacturers is going to be all striker fired from here on out because that is what they really want you to buy. Because that is what they make the most money on, least COGs equals highest profit margins.

And at the end of it, we still don't want to admit that a striker fired gun might be a bad idea. I mean how many AD/NDs have to happen before we say "hey maybe there is an issue here"? How many sets of keys need to pull a trigger on a gun that is holstered? I know of at least three cases and one is still under investigation.

Stupid is as stupid does and people will make mistakes with anything. But we can also make smart decisions that help keep those mistakes to a minimum.

Bottom line, I am just blowing smoke in the end, because this culture is like the church of the gun. Once people decide what the best gun/action is, how dare you say other wise.

[GardoneVT]

Watching some clubs start to discuss this now. My thoughts:

Sig produced a gun that drops when fired we're calling a defect/hazard. Competitors show up with all manner of tricked out guns that are susceptible to the same events (and some, more) and we call them customized, giving them their own divisions. We're talking out of both sides of our mouth.
Wrong.

If a competitor turns their own gun into an unsafe pistol,that's an unfortunate event: but it's not STI or anyone else's fault except the owners. There's also no practical test to ensure safety devices aren't defeated ,short of making every competitor X ray their gun before shooting a stage.

Sig built a defective and unsafe pistol,and evidence suggests this was not a surprise for the company. That's a major problem; how many ordinary people bought mass market P320s and have them loaded on nightstands and in drawers? Far as they know the guns as safe as anything else, until it's not. Then someone gets shot,potentially dies, or ends up disabled for life because a manager in Exeter NH decided a recall wasn't worth the revenue hit.


A competitor at USPSA knows the risk and assumes it when modifying a competition only pistol. Sig made the decisions for every buyer and user of a P320 and kept it a secret.




Yes, there are some hold outs here. Dagga Boy is one of the few left along with myself. Mike Pannon is another one. But even TGL had switched over to a Glock in the end.

The pressure from the gun culture and the gun manufacturers is almost unbearable. The pressure to shoot a Glock or at least a striker fired gun is just massive, saying otherwise is just silly because we all know it is true. The marketing from the manufacturers is going to be all striker fired from here on out because that is what they really want you to buy. Because that is what they make the most money on, least COGs equals highest profit margins.

And at the end of it, we still don't want to admit that a striker fired gun might be a bad idea. I mean how many AD/NDs have to happen before we say "hey maybe there is an issue here"? How many sets of keys need to pull a trigger on a gun that is holstered? I know of at least three cases and one is still under investigation.

Stupid is as stupid does and people will make mistakes with anything. But we can also make smart decisions that help keep those mistakes to a minimum.

Bottom line, I am just blowing smoke in the end, because this culture is like the church of the gun. Once people decide what the best gun/action is, how dare you say other wise.

To be fair there is a demand side to this dynamic as well.

The core problem is that gun proficiency is similar to physical fitness; it takes time,costs effort and work,and isn't very glamorous. Much like fitness the results are great ; but years of crappy range sessions and snatched shots and sore fingers from DA dry fire aren't. Telling people they need to train to be good shots with any platform is like the doctor saying "diet and exercise" to the overweight American.

Enter the striker fired gun. The guy who wants to look cool at the range now has a viable option. No more low left DA shots,no strenuous work. A striker fired pistol can be easily operated for someone not willing to spend quality time training to be a good shot.

There's also another group of people who don't like pistol training ; public service agencies. Range time costs money,takes troops and officers off the duty roster and risks line of duty injury during training,always a thrilling topic when insurance renewal time comes around.

Here's a solution; instead of spending large sums on proficiency, just give your troops a Glock and 50 annual rounds in qual ammo. Problem solved.


I've been an RSO for just over two years now. While I've seen plenty of Sigs and Berettas come through the range doors, not one was run from the hammer down position.

Every single DA/SA pistol was fired from SA. A fellow "RSO" even carried a 92 with the hammer back deliberately. That's saying something about the state of people's willingness to train,or lack thereof.

[Pit]

You can try to put the blame on the manufacturers, but that is not really fair either. Sig was one of the last hold outs in building a striker gun, followed quickly by HK, and then CZ and Beretta. The market wants a cheap gun that is easy to shoot. The gun companies are in the business of making money. The Polymer Frame, Striker Fired gun, with a chassis trigger system, is by far the cheapest way to manufacture a gun.



I want to make certain I was clear with my earlier message. I'm looking at the issue of a weapon carried by a LEO firing if it is dropped not the current trend of wanting a pistol with a light, short pull designed to fire with minimal shooter input. I understand a company is going to make a pistol the consumer market seems to want to get in on making a profit. It's the way the company does it due diligence in producing the weapon as well as their after sale support.

Additionally I want to thank you for all you provide on the site, including the "test" on your Beretta. WOW.

What do I know, I still carry a 1911 style pistol. Been told more than once I'm "old and antiquated". As long as I continue to come out on top of any deadly force encounters I'm ok with that.

JW

[JHC]

And at the end of it, we still don't want to admit that a striker fired gun might be a bad idea. .

True. I definitely won't admit that. Not at that broad level of brush anyway. The guns on video this week drop firing from a high likely angle of impact are of one specific design. Maybe it's amazing that since the turn of the century, there hasn't been anything comparable to this AFAIK (easy to replicate all day long).

I'm kinda sketchy on fully tensioned ones that are on the extreme short end of the trigger movement though. But as much for the fragility of the internals holding as for gunhandling. Tamara got me worried about that a few years ago.

[GJM]

An interesting discussion would be are there significant enough differences in various brand striker pistols, to make some more or less acceptable for carry, or are all strikers "bad" for EDC.

The issue of this thread, however, is that Sig designed the 320 and marketed it as drop safe, and it isn't. The complaint with the 320 is not that someone got their finger on the too light bugger switch, but rather the 320 makes loud noises with no finger on the trigger.

[JustOneGun]

OK, so here is a statement that many will not like. This whole thing is the gun communities own fault!

The race has been on to see which manufacturer could build a gun with the shortest and lightest trigger on a striker fired gun for years. Between the aftermarket kits for striker fired guns to the updates to current guns from major manufacturers and new guns hitting the market, it is pretty clear that the customers want as close to a 1911 trigger as they can get, but with no manual safety. The whole culture has gone to the bullshit bravado of "keep your booger hook off the bang switch dude" mentality. We have developed an acceptance for basically single action guns with no safeties. I have been around long enough to remember when a certain striker fired gun hit the market and most of the top guys in the community thought it was ridiculous to have a trigger that short and light with no safety. But here we are, about 30 years later and all anyone wants is a short light trigger on a striker fired a gun. Not to mention all the people that complain about the trigger tab.

When the 320 hit the market, everyone was raving about how great the trigger was and the fact that it did not have a trigger tab. Here we have a fully cocked gun, with no external safety of any kind, and we thought it was great. Sales went through the roof and almost nobody said, hey wait a minute, physics are at play here, what kind of weird magic are they using to keep that thing from firing when it hits the ground. Every other manufacturer that builds a striker fired gun has some kind of trigger tab that keeps the gun from firing when it gets dropped. And what was our answer? "Shut up man, keep your booger hook off the bang switch dude".

At what point will we accept the fact that we are all not Tier One Operators and these things are threat management tools, not just toys we use at the range. If you're so damn good that you never make mistakes and you can use a 1911 with no safeties, then learn how to shoot a gun that sets an example for the rest of us mear mortals.

I for one make mistakes, get scared, and do stupid stuff some times. I will just be over here in the corner with my TDA guns trying to learn how to shoot them better.



I hear what you're saying and agree somewhat. The problem with the balance needed by the industry or just, "us" is that we don't really want a balance. We pick what we think that balance is and then argue for that system(marketing). Sometimes what we think will help doesn't help at all. Sometimes it just gives us a false sense of security. Sometimes it makes it worse.

No one ever seems to want to talk about the, "Why". When we take this down to the geek level what we end up with is people making pistols harder to shoot and feeling that they are more safe. Often they are not. This is the flip side of making the pistol easier to shoot as you allude to. It's as though we forget the mistakes of yesteryear with very similar systems. Is there a sweet spot for trigger? Absolutely. There is a range of products that fit that. But that must be looked at with the amount of training available, how we train, etc.

So can we make a trigger that is too light? Absolutely. Can we make a trigger that is too hard? Absolutely. The industry is flawed by two main problems, "Marketing" and, "The law of unintended consequences". We forget that last one to our own detriment.

[JustOneGun]

Bingo Ernest! Everyone wants "easy to shoot". SIG/Grayguns/Internet are on the "just has to pass a couple tests and we are good". The new mantra is "booger picker off bang switch and I don't drop my guns". Got it. Well now you got so easy to shoot it will do this:



Not only has this thread gone off the rails but what you said and Ernest said are actually many different unrelated things.

Sig screwing up it's engineering and making an unsafe gun has nothing to do with it being a striker fired weapon. We've had screwed up engineering on all weapon systems.

A Striker fired weapon can be made with too light of a trigger. But so is every DA/SA pistol I've shot. Anecdotal, I've seen it and scientific experiments over the years have proved that when "Ascared", transference of force between limbs, etc there is enough pressure put on the DA to make it go bang.

If a trigger on a pistol that is too light shouldn't be made and we are all human and do stupid things, we must by that logic get rid of the DA/SA. That holstered DA/SA in SA that we forgot to decock because we're human is an error waiting to happen. It is far more dangerous because it's lighter and shorter than any production pistol I've fired.

This is an example of Marketing. Marketing does not equal truth...

[BehindBlueI's]

At what point will we accept the fact that we are all not Tier One Operators....

Hell, even if we were we are still human and still not infallible. Especially when we're already sleep deprived then get an adrenaline dump, etc. Anyone can drop a gun, brush a trigger, have an obstructed holster, etc.

The VP9 trigger was the first one that actually scared me. I've never live fired one, just a couple dry fires at the LGS was enough for me.

[farscott]

Well, let's be clear, I am talking about the "pejorative we". I would hope that everyone knows where I stand on this issue, and trust me, I have tried many times to get on the striker fired band wagon. I even switched over to a Glock 19 for about two months or so back in late 2013. I figured at the time, it's a striker fired world and I just live in it, but that did not last long, I just could not bring myself to stick with it.

You can try to put the blame on the manufacturers, but that is not really fair either. Sig was one of the last hold outs in building a striker gun, followed quickly by HK, and then CZ and Beretta. The market wants a cheap gun that is easy to shoot. The gun companies are in the business of making money. The Polymer Frame, Striker Fired gun, with a chassis trigger system, is by far the cheapest way to manufacture a gun.

Yes, there are some hold outs here. Dagga Boy is one of the few left along with myself. Mike Pannon is another one. But even TGL had switched over to a Glock in the end.

The pressure from the gun culture and the gun manufacturers is almost unbearable. The pressure to shoot a Glock or at least a striker fired gun is just massive, saying otherwise is just silly because we all know it is true. The marketing from the manufacturers is going to be all striker fired from here on out because that is what they really want you to buy. Because that is what they make the most money on, least COGs equals highest profit margins.

And at the end of it, we still don't want to admit that a striker fired gun might be a bad idea. I mean how many AD/NDs have to happen before we say "hey maybe there is an issue here"? How many sets of keys need to pull a trigger on a gun that is holstered? I know of at least three cases and one is still under investigation.

Stupid is as stupid does and people will make mistakes with anything. But we can also make smart decisions that help keep those mistakes to a minimum.

Bottom line, I am just blowing smoke in the end, because this culture is like the church of the gun. Once people decide what the best gun/action is, how dare you say other wise.

I do not see the pressure to shoot a striker-fired pistol, but I do see the competition to sell striker-fired pistols. And it, as you noted, is not so much striker-fired as it is "inexpensive" and "smaller". People would purchase a cheap hammer-fired gun since the vast majority of guns are bought, not shot. After all, S&W still sells a ton of J-frame "hammer-less" (concealed hammer) revolvers.

I do think it is fair to place some of the blame on the manufacturers as some, including SIG, sell striker-fired guns as safe. SIG even took a shot at Glock with "drop safe" without the trigger tab. If the customers cannot determine what is best to purchase, the manufacturers have to lead the charge. Part of that is advertising and part of that is offering options. I still do not understand how the VP9 is $200 less than the P30.

[Dagga Boy]

Not only has this thread gone off the rails but what you said and Ernest said are actually many different unrelated things.

Sig screwing up it's engineering and making an unsafe gun has nothing to do with it being a striker fired weapon. We've had screwed up engineering on all weapon systems.

A Striker fired weapon can be made with too light of a trigger. But so is every DA/SA pistol I've shot. Anecdotal, I've seen it and scientific experiments over the years have proved that when "Ascared", transference of force between limbs, etc there is enough pressure put on the DA to make it go bang.

If a trigger on a pistol that is too light shouldn't be made and we are all human and do stupid things, we must by that logic get rid of the DA/SA. That holstered DA/SA in SA that we forgot to decock because we're human is an error waiting to happen. It is far more dangerous because it's lighter and shorter than any production pistol I've fired.

This is an example of Marketing. Marketing does not equal truth...

Go back, read what I have wrote on trigger systems, particularly regarding striker pistols which I have carried extensively, and then take my statement in context to that. Just google "Why I like the LEM". The part about handing out guns with extremely "easy to shoot" triggers like candy would be the context.

[Thy.Will.Be.Done]

Hell, even if we were we are still human and still not infallible. Especially when we're already sleep deprived then get an adrenaline dump, etc. Anyone can drop a gun, brush a trigger, have an obstructed holster, etc.

The VP9 trigger was the first one that actually scared me. I've never live fired one, just a couple dry fires at the LGS was enough for me.

Yeah, I had a VP9 for a short spell a while ago... I agree 100% on the trigger. Great gaming gun, not even remotely close to something I'd feel comfortable carrying on me. It feels like a strong wind could set a round off, despite the pull weight being about 5-6 lbs.

[JustOneGun]

I do not see the pressure to shoot a striker-fired pistol, but I do see the competition to sell striker-fired pistols. And it, as you noted, is not so much striker-fired as it is "inexpensive" and "smaller". People would purchase a cheap hammer-fired gun since the vast majority of guns are bought, not shot. After all, S&W still sells a ton of J-frame "hammer-less" (concealed hammer) revolvers.

I do think it is fair to place some of the blame on the manufacturers as some, including SIG, sell striker-fired guns as safe. SIG even took a shot at Glock with "drop safe" without the trigger tab. If the customers cannot determine what is best to purchase, the manufacturers have to lead the charge. Part of that is advertising and part of that is offering options. I still do not understand how the VP9 is $200 less than the P30.


I think you are correct. But isn't that true of all handgun systems? As a new officer I carried a HK USP 40 that would drop the magazine at the slightest bump. They replaced the parts but not the pistol. From day one to the last day it would drop the mags. At least once a day on patrol the magazine would be in the seat or loose in the pistol but not seated. What makes this problem unique to striker fired? Right now, media. Strikers are all the rage. If we were to switch the entire world back to DA/SA or revolvers we would soon be having the same conversation about them.

[JustOneGun]

Go back, read what I have wrote on trigger systems, particularly regarding striker pistols which I have carried extensively, and then take my statement in context to that. Just google "Why I like the LEM". The part about handing out guns with extremely "easy to shoot" triggers like candy would be the context.



If you go back and read what you wrote you will remember it was I that was right there in the conversation disagreeing with you. Context or not what you guys are saying makes no logical sense. One thing does not equal the other.

[JonInWA]

Ernest's and Dagga Boy's points, are, as usual, cogent and spot on, in my opinion. While I'm PERSONALLY comfortable with my Glocks to feel safe in carry useage, for a duty/threat management handgun my preferences have moved over to HK's LEM (in my case, a P30L V1) and DAO (in my case, with my Beretta 92D with liberal doses of Wilson Combat hardware to improve and lighten the triggerpull).

I see distinct advantages for threat management use in an action that requires some distance with the triggerpull prior to ignition, as well as in an action that does not require any decocking or safeing, other than removing my finger from the trigger and holstering.

Dagga Boy's article on the LEM does a very succinct job in the pros and cons inherent to the various action types.

And, as we've discussed here in a previous thread, I too have some residual concerns over the perceptual lightness/soft trigger break of the HK VPs, although otherwise the VPs have some highly commendable features.

Bottom line: As Ernest points out, we have to weigh "shootabality" and "threat management" characteristics in a gun/platform dependent upon likely use, shooter skill proficiency, and venue. The default choice should likely be the safest.

Best, Jon

[Mjolnir]

"Shootability v. Threat Management" is a succinct and accurate description as I can possibly imagine.

THANK YOU!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dagga Boy]

If you go back and read what you wrote you will remember it was I that was right there in the conversation disagreeing with you. Context or not what you guys are saying makes no logical sense. One thing does not equal the other.

We'll just continue to disagree on most everything. My point and I believe Ernest's on the same track, is where marketing and sales is pushing the engineering. The current push is a "better" trigger than the Glock in the SF guns, and then that pushes deep into the aftermarket. At some point, we start getting into unintended consequences, and consequences to choices. Not exclusive at all to SIG, but every time choices are made, the consequences need to be accepted. Unfortunately, most folks only want to enjoy the good consequences and pretend the bad consequences are not happening.

[Mjolnir]

I'm kinda sketchy on fully tensioned ones that are on the extreme short end of trigger travel...

And H&K was planning (maybe still planning?) on a "Maritime" variant of the VP9.

I'm an HK devotee so I thought, "what could that possibly be?"

Well, they stated that they had *reduced* the trigger weight, *reduced* the trigger pretravel and reduced the trigger reset.

(Added: I could not ascertain whether this variant would have an external safety; it would seem likely but it becomes a bit irrelevant when.... a Glock 19 and the current VP9 works just fine... 🤷🏽*♂️ )...

At the time I thought: [emoji102]

Today I think they may be reassessing that idea.

Personally, the trigger weight is on the light side but I'll take an even more crisp trigger break. Increase the trigger pull by 1/4 to 1/2 lb with that. Pre-travel is fine. I'll take the reset from the CZ P10, thank you.

"Everyone" craves a 1911 trigger... Not without an external safety I don't...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BehindBlueI's]

A Striker fired weapon can be made with too light of a trigger. But so is every DA/SA pistol I've shot. Anecdotal, I've seen it and scientific experiments over the years have proved that when "Ascared", transference of force between limbs, etc there is enough pressure put on the DA to make it go bang.

If a trigger on a pistol that is too light shouldn't be made and we are all human and do stupid things, we must by that logic get rid of the DA/SA. That holstered DA/SA in SA that we forgot to decock because we're human is an error waiting to happen. It is far more dangerous because it's lighter and shorter than any production pistol I've fired.


Safety is a continuum. Yes, the DA trigger CAN be AD'd...but not as often as the SA or SFA trigger.

And yup, a gun that isn't decocked is a safety issue. Again, a continuum. If I train to decock and to hold the hammer when I reholster, I have to mess up two things before I create the same situation as holstering a striker fired.

[Mjolnir]

OK, so here is a statement that many will not like. This whole thing is the gun communities own fault!

The race has been on to see which manufacturer could build a gun with the shortest and lightest trigger on a striker fired gun for years. Between the aftermarket kits for striker fired guns to the updates to current guns from major manufacturers and new guns hitting the market, it is pretty clear that the customers want as close to a 1911 trigger as they can get, but with no manual safety. The whole culture has gone to the bullshit bravado of "keep your booger hook off the bang switch dude" mentality. We have developed an acceptance for basically single action guns with no safeties. I have been around long enough to remember when a certain striker fired gun hit the market and most of the top guys in the community thought it was ridiculous to have a trigger that short and light with no safety. But here we are, about 30 years later and all anyone wants is a short light trigger on a striker fired a gun. Not to mention all the people that complain about the trigger tab.

When the 320 hit the market, everyone was raving about how great the trigger was and the fact that it did not have a trigger tab. Here we have a fully cocked gun, with no external safety of any kind, and we thought it was great. Sales went through the roof and almost nobody said, hey wait a minute, physics are at play here, what kind of weird magic are they using to keep that thing from firing when it hits the ground. Every other manufacturer that builds a striker fired gun has some kind of trigger tab that keeps the gun from firing when it gets dropped. And what was our answer? "Shut up man, keep your booger hook off the bang switch dude".

At what point will we accept the fact that we are all not Tier One Operators and these things are threat management tools, not just toys we use at the range. If you're so damn good that you never make mistakes and you can use a 1911 with no safeties, then learn how to shoot a gun that sets an example for the rest of us mear mortals.

I for one make mistakes, get scared, and do stupid stuff some times. I will just be over here in the corner with my TDA guns trying to learn how to shoot them better.

Just reading this, Ernest, and I just commented tangentially to your point about "everybody wanting 1911 triggers" on polymer, striker-fired pistols with no external safeties.

I agree wholeheartedly with your assessment. I'd be happier with a heavier, shorter reset trigger on my VP9s. I also don't mind "weighted pre-travel" (i.e., not fully tensioned striker).

The older I get the more advantages I see with LEM and TDA.

Odd but true.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[spinmove_]

Safety is a continuum. Yes, the DA trigger CAN be AD'd...but not as often as the SA or SFA trigger.

And yup, a gun that isn't decocked is a safety issue. Again, a continuum. If I train to decock and to hold the hammer when I reholster, I have to mess up two things before I create the same situation as holstering a striker fired.

I agree with this. It could be argued that the right person could ND a Nagant revolver. The same could be said for the safest and most conscientious person out there and a P320 with a race gun trigger job. I think the gun needs to have some safeguards built in because accidents do happen, but we can't completely take all blame away from the end user either.

Be smart AND have hardware that gives you some leeway.


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

[TiroFijo]

Safety is a continuum. Yes, the DA trigger CAN be AD'd...but not as often as the SA or SFA trigger.

And yup, a gun that isn't decocked is a safety issue. Again, a continuum. If I train to decock and to hold the hammer when I reholster, I have to mess up two things before I create the same situation as holstering a striker fired.

Round and round we go... relearning things that should have been ingrained by now. There are no magical solutions, no eating the cake and keeping it.

[JustOneGun]

Safety is a continuum. Yes, the DA trigger CAN be AD'd...but not as often as the SA or SFA trigger.

And yup, a gun that isn't decocked is a safety issue. Again, a continuum. If I train to decock and to hold the hammer when I reholster, I have to mess up two things before I create the same situation as holstering a striker fired.


That sounds right. But as it turns out, it's not. I had the luck of having 1911 (mainly sheriff), Glock and DA/SA(mainly Sig) with a few DAK, LDA stuff thrown in running around the range at the same time. This is what people don't get, once you are used to your new pistol you calibrate yourself to it. As ToddG and others have said, you can get on that DA/SA sooner (more aggressively) to make it go bang at the same time as a 1911 or Glock. Once calibrated the screw ups tend to happen at the same rate.

Now that's different from what Ernest Langdon said at first. Can we have a quest to lighten the pistol so much that it doesn't matter who is running it (me the average Joe or someone great like Langdon) the pistol will go bang when we don't want it to. Sure. But many people take that fact and make the logic leap that we shouldn't use the striker and just stick with DA/SA or LEM. That is what I think is 100% wrong. That makes no sense and is not logical at all.

My old saying is: That and a token will get you on the subway. Just don't forget your token.
My new saying: If you want to use a DA/SA/LEM for said reason that's fine. Just don't forget that the same reasons people screw up with a striker is the same reason they screw up with any pistol. Don't forget to train around/against that.

[BehindBlueI's]

That sounds right. But as it turns out, it's not. I had the luck of having 1911 (mainly sheriff), Glock and DA/SA(mainly Sig) with a few DAK, LDA stuff thrown in running around the range at the same time. This is what people don't get, once you are used to your new pistol you calibrate yourself to it. As ToddG and others have said, you can get on that DA/SA sooner (more aggressively) to make it go bang at the same time as a 1911 or Glock. Once calibrated the screw ups tend to happen at the same rate.


"Calibrated fingers" or the notion "the range" is what's under discussion aside, that doesn't address sympathetic grip, startle response, obstructed holsters, etc.

[JonInWA]

In identifying or refining uses/venues for my striker-fired weapons (in my case, Glocks and an HK VP), I'm more and more thinking that their best use is in a wilderness/hunting/hunting back-up environment, or in a venue where I'm unlikely to have to deal with threat management-i.e., shooting sports applications, or pure and simple "scoot and shoot" situations (which may be a fallacious assumption in and of itself).

I think I've got some thinking to do on my primary platform selections and usage, painful as it may be-and much as I like (and am reasonably proficient) with my Glocks. It's looking more and more as a HK P30L LEM and Beretta 92D DAO kinda concentration. Another contender is my tack-driver TDA of a Ruger P89 (with a manual safety-so on that one after firing I'd need to manually safe/decock).

Above the P320 intrinsic issues, this has been a thought-provoking and beneficial threat. Typical pistol-forum stuff (and quality contributions).

Best, Jon

[DAB]

i was busy in my shop making some walls for our local IDPA matches, so i have not kept up with all the posts today. but it sounds like many folks are reconsidering their choice of pistol type. some folks thinking about taking another look at DA/SA pistols such as the Beretta 92 or Px4. they are fine pistols, i carry a Px4 everyday. still being made and supported.

[Mr_White]

There are a range of reasonable choices, including striker fired. As discussed in many threads, they all have benefits as well as potential pitfalls to manage. Common to all of them must be that the gun is mechanically safe, and doesn't fire unless the trigger was pulled. To me, that what this whole 320 episode is really about.

FWIW, even as a person who shoots a Glock with its modest trigger pull, I am not a fan of aftermarket parts that might change the basic mechanical safety of the gun, or of much lighter/shorter trigger pulls without a manual safety.

[JonInWA]

There are a range of reasonable choices, including striker fired. As discussed in many threads, they all have benefits as well as potential pitfalls to manage. Common to all of them must be that the gun is mechanically safe, and doesn't fire unless the trigger was pulled. To me, that what this whole 320 episode is really about.

FWIW, even as a person who shoots a Glock with its modest trigger pull, I am not a fan of aftermarket parts that might change the basic mechanical safety of the gun, or of much lighter/shorter trigger pulls without a manual safety.

Agreed. All of my personal Glocks are run with either the standard connector/coil trigger spring, minus connector/NY1 spring, dot connector/NY1 or dot connector coil trigger spring. In other words, no triggerpulls beneath 5.5 lbs (possibly the dot/coil spring is 5 lbs), and in most cases, 6 to 6.5 lbs.

Adequate in my opinion for use/threat management, but for use where there's any likelihood of a threat management component, I'm leaning more and more towards LEM/DAO, or TDA.

Best, Jon

[Xrslug]

My new saying: If you want to use a DA/SA/LEM for said reason that's fine. Just don't forget that the same reasons people screw up with a striker is the same reason they screw up with any pistol. Don't forget to train around/against that.

Interesting discussion. I don't think I'm reading DB's and Langdon's comments the way you are. Assuming it's true that people screw up (safety wise) for the same reasons regardless of what platform they're shooting, I see the benefit of a 1911 or a DA/SA being that they provide additional mechanical hurdles (for lack of a better word) to the screw up resulting in an ND. E.g. Holstering a pistol and getting a jacket drawstring stuck in the trigger guard such that it presses on the trigger. If I'm holstering my 1911 with the thumb safety on, the grip safety disengaged and my thumb on the hammer, I would need to forget to do all of those things before I'm in the same position as someone holstering a striker fired pistol with minimal trigger uptake and a 4.5 lb tigger pull. With a DA/SA I would need to forget to decock. Etc.

[breakingtime91]

I tried to follow by reading the posts but at a certain point I lost what we were discussing. It feels like we went from discussing a flaw in one design to applying that same flaw to all striker guns? is that correct?

[JonInWA]

Yeah, kinda...pretty much. We're a moving target kinda group today...

Best, Jon

[Xrslug]

I tried to follow by reading the posts but at a certain point I lost what we were discussing. It feels like we went from discussing a flaw in one design to applying that same flaw to all striker guns? is that correct?

I'd say it's more a discussion of whether this Sig debacle is at least to some degree a consequence of the shooting community's demand for a particular style of striker-fired trigger and manufacturers catering to that demand. Or at least that's what I'm getting from it.

[JustOneGun]

Interesting discussion. I don't think I'm reading DB's and Langdon's comments the way you are. Assuming it's true that people screw up (safety wise) for the same reasons regardless of what platform they're shooting, I see the benefit of a 1911 or a DA/SA being that they provide additional mechanical hurdles (for lack of a better word) to the screw up resulting in an ND. E.g. Holstering a pistol and getting a jacket drawstring stuck in the trigger guard such that it presses on the trigger. If I'm holstering my 1911 with the thumb safety on, the grip safety disengaged and my thumb on the hammer, I would need to forget to do all of those things before I'm in the same position as someone holstering a striker fired pistol with minimal trigger uptake and a 4.5 lb tigger pull. With a DA/SA I would need to forget to decock. Etc.


This is where the disagreement is. You think that you need to forget to decock to have the DA go off when holstering. I've experiment with my holstering and more importantly others who didn't know what I was doing. They holstered the pistol hard enough to make the Sig and HK both DA go click. We also know this because plenty of people have actually had AD this way in real life. And that is where the false confidence of using a DA over a striker comes from.

This is why the question: Is the P320 trigger too light is legit but the answer has nothing to do with saying we shouldn't use the striker. Two different questions with two different answers.

I think for the purposes of this discussion on the 320 is if the trigger can go off with a small amount of pressure then how much can they lighten the parts to reduce the momentum when dropped. Will it be enough? And of course that only makes is less likely to go off when dropped. It will not make it drop safe. That needs to be mechanical in nature. I'm not sure the seeming resistance by the company to a trigger tab unless the problem is actually down the line and the tab will be useless to stop it. At that point I personally would insist, not on the fix but on my money back.

[P30]

I still do not understand how the VP9 is $200 less than the P30.
In Germany, the difference is much smaller:

SFP9 : 650 - 700 €
P30: 700 - 750 €

Prices are for the (small) civilian market and include VAT. But I suppose none of these guns is cheaper than in USA.

[DAB]

i read something in the Rifleman some time ago, about how makers were focusing most of their efforts on designing pistols that were easy and cheap to make and assemble. read: profitable.

so add 30 years of striker fired saturation to the mix and you have the present day. for makers, guns have to be profitable. for shooters, guns have to be affordable and accurate. accurate translates to good ergonomics and good trigger.

my Gold Cup is very accurate, but makers can't make a living selling $1500-$2000 guns. there is not a big enough market.

i'll admit, my P320 has a very nice trigger, that's one reason i bought it, before the MHS award was announced.

so give Glock some credit for creating a new market segment that everyone else is now playing in. pull trigger, get bang. easy, nothing else to remember.

but consumers are also guilty of messing with pistols. how many people do you know that will tell you that they have swapped this or that part in their pistol. and why? better trigger pulls. or they add some texturing to the grip. better ergonomics.

unless you are doing bullseye matches, all pistols will be of sufficient accuracy for combat shooting or IDPA type shooting. put sight on target, pull trigger, hit target scoring zone.

i'll visit Sig on monday and see what the deal is, and then likely pack them up and ship them off and hope for the best.

[fixer]

This is where the disagreement is. You think that you need to forget to decock to have the DA go off when holstering. I've experiment with my holstering and more importantly others who didn't know what I was doing. They holstered the pistol hard enough to make the Sig and HK both DA go click. We also know this because plenty of people have actually had AD this way in real life. And that is where the false confidence of using a DA over a striker comes from.

.

Not arguing just trying to add additional perspective here...

TDA isn't perfect and neither is LEM. I don't think anyone is saying it is impossible for those trigger types to have an AD.

What their designs do is add layers of protection to mitigate and minimize them.

Despite the several anecdotes we all have in our back pocket, there is no available meaningful comparison accounting for experience, stress, etc showing that one trigger type is better for preventing unintentional discharges.

Instead we are left looking at the merits of each design and inferring their suitability using our own experiences and anecdotes.

Humans at their peak capability will make a mistake in the realm of 1/1000 attempts. I don't like those odds when dealing with a bullet going into my leg.

I can forget to decock that 1000th time. I can forget to re-holster with thumb on hammer that 1000th time. I can forget to have my finger in register for the 1000th time. I can forget to look as I holster for the 1000th time. I can drop my pistol on my 1000th drill.

Yet all these things would have to line up on the same day at the time.

Reholstering with thumb on hammer, and decocking are two additional layers of protection over strikers. They aren't perfect they are just additional layers.

[GJM]

In identifying or refining uses/venues for my striker-fired weapons (in my case, Glocks and an HK VP), I'm more and more thinking that their best use is in a wilderness/hunting/hunting back-up environment......

Best, Jon

There can be a lot of threat management in a wilderness scenario, because predatory animals move so fast, you may need to have your gun in your hand before you have made a decision to shoot, if you ever want a chance to shoot. Combine that with cold/wet/snow, multiple layers, cold fingers, unusual holsters like chest rigs, high stress, and you have a challenging environment.



I tried to follow by reading the posts but at a certain point I lost what we were discussing. It feels like we went from discussing a flaw in one design to applying that same flaw to all striker guns? is that correct?

This has completely drifted. I feel like we are ready for a thread entitled "hammer, is it optional or mandatory for EDC."

[GardoneVT]

There's multiple subjects at work here.

One; the market has moved to striker fired designs due to both market pressure and manufacturer preference.No one person or company is changing this anytime soon,for better or worse.
Two: the propensity for a person to have a negligent discharge is not based on trigger system. The German police study (among other))dispels the idea that Trigger System X is superior to Y in this regard. DA/SA or LEM or striker doesn't come into it.

Three: With many complex systems which involve the possibility of serious injury or death, safety protocols are incorporated to reduce the risk of a Bad Thing happening. This is accepted in most disciplines and areas of human activity.
Take aircraft. Every commercial airliner flying has backup hydraulic systems. No hydraulic systems means no control of a 500 knot aircraft. McDonnel Douglas went to the trouble of making tertiary backup hydraulic systems in their DC10.

It didn't stop a triple hydraulic failure and an air crash from happening,nonetheless. Yet you don't see airline companies deciding that redundant systems are thus useless and should be scrapped on that singular basis.

Which brings us back to guns. A pistol like a Glock with a two ounce trigger has no redundant safeties to prevent injury. A DA/SA USP with an external safety has many systems of safety to prevent injury. One is not necessarily more safe then the other in the hands of an unsafe clod, but if a mistake does happen the USP is far less likely to send its owner to the hospital then the two ounce trigger Glock.

Risk reduction is not the same as risk elimination.

[Clusterfrack]

Gardone--wouldn't a better comparison be a Glock with a stock trigger around 5.5 lbs? Or a p320 with a stock trigger around 7 lbs? Vs. a p30 DA 11lbs and SA 2lbs. Trigger travel for a Glock is around 0.49", and HK p30 is DA: 0.55" / SA: 0.25".

[OlongJohnson]

This has completely drifted. I feel like we are ready for a thread entitled "hammer, is it optional or mandatory for EDC."

The last few pages of this thread really belong in this other thread: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?24752-Striker-design-considerations-and-safety

I don't disagree with Ernest as far as light trigger vs. risk of mistakes and overall safety. However, I think it's a separate discussion from a question of mechanical drop safety. I don't think anyone's come closer than Tom to answering the question of whether the P320 can actually be made drop safe, but based on his posts, he's not 100 percent there yet.

To the more general question of, could a fully-cocked, striker-fired pistol with a reasonably short and light trigger pull be made mechanically, rigorously drop safe to the point where something would have to be broken for it to discharge, I think the answer is that it probably can. That is not the same discussion as whether carrying or competing with a fully-cocked, striker-fired pistol with a reasonably short and light trigger pull and no separate mechanical trigger-press-preventing safety is really a good idea. I feel like mixing up the discussion of those two (or three) questions just leads to confusion.

Generalizing from the current Sig P320 situation to suggest that any fully-cocked striker-fired pistol is inherently risky distracts from a specific focus on understanding what combination of events is really happening inside the P320 leading to discharges when dropped in this particular way, which is necessary to understand whether any proposed "fix" is really a fix, and whether more could or should be done.


Split out semi-auto trigger discussion to a new thread: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?27185-Semi-Auto-Triggers-market-trends-choices-and-consequences

Dang, you did this while I was editing my post, and it appears to have still worked. Sure was confusing for a second saving my changes and being in a new thread...

Mods here are ninjas, but they still suck.

[Mr_White]

I'd agree if someone said the race to the shortest lightest striker fired trigger, without manual safety, isn't a good direction to go.

I would disagree if someone said that striker fired triggers are simply bad.

Mechanical/drop safety is a MUST no matter which action/trigger type we might choose.

It could be that a mechanically safe/drop safe gun is no longer possible with a certain level of short light striker fired action/trigger. I really don't know, but maybe that's possible. The striker fired triggers I'd personally use (in terms of weight and length for defensive use) I think are nowhere near that point though.

I'm going to keep running my Glock, with a modestly light, but mechanically/drop safe action and trigger.

[blues]

Well, I know that I don't represent the "norm" for this community but I'd like to go on record by saying that I've never bitched about my Glock triggers...neither the NY variety nor the plain vanilla. For me my Glocks are primarily defensive weapons for EDC or HD.

Since 1988 or 1989 I have had occasion to have them out and pointed at other humans hundreds of times during arrests, warrants, SRT call outs and what have you without an AD / ND. Even when there was cause to have applied some tension to the trigger in anticipation of having to make the shot.

Have I fired guns with smoother, perhaps more compliant triggers? Sure. Would I prefer any of those other handguns if the sheriff called me today to help him on a manhunt? No.

Not everyone wishes for the lightest trigger feasible...and I clearly don't see such as (necessarily) a good thing if available.

Speaking only for myself...so nobody needs to feel that I am passing judgment in expressing my thoughts. I respect everyone's right to choose what works for them.

[GardoneVT]

Where the discussion crosses the P320 is in the matter of risk reduction.

Manufacturers of guns aren't incentivized to make low risk triggers. They're trying to out-lighten the competition because (begin market trend aspect) gunmakers know Joe Public like light triggers. If HK makes a 5lb trigger and Walther makes a 4.5lb trigger, Joe is gonna think the Walther is a better gun. Because lighter trigger is easier to shoot,and easier to shoot is always better then harder to shoot no?

But it's a false dichotomy in consumer eyes. Weight doesn't determine shooting skill-training does. A novice might accidentally hit the target because the gun goes off before their piss poor trigger control drags the pistol low and left, but that doesn't make them a better shooter even though the target looks good.

[Clusterfrack]

A stock p320 has a 7 pound trigger, and 0.4" of travel.

[Camovan]

A stock p320 has a 7 pound trigger, and 0.4" of travel.

A 7# trigger pull that is 20 grams actual weight of trigger vs a 5# trigger pull that is 8 grams actual weight of trigger. Which is safer for randomly dropping? I don't think the pull weight has as much to do with the current issues so much as the relation between those two. What is an ideal or maximum ratio allowable between the two? I dunno but I bet there are some engineers about to get the problem to solve if they want to keep "drop safe" and "you wont ever need a tabbed trigger" in the same marketing campaign again.

[Clusterfrack]

Note: I'm not making any points about drop safety. I was providing data for the DA/SA vs. striker discussion.

[TheNewbie]

Yes I know this has been discussed before but...

Does adding an NY1 or NY2 trigger actually do anything to help prevent NDs? Besides NYPD do any major agencies issue these?

[blues]

Yes I know this has been discussed before but...

Does adding an NY1 or NY2 trigger actually do anything to help prevent NDs? Besides NYPD do any major agencies issue these?

They were mandatory for our issued and personally carried (off-duty) weapons for U.S. Customs SAC/Miami from sometime in the mid 90's until I retired. I don't have a clue if it changed the day after I left or not. I still have one in my G26 but I believe Glock replaced my old trigger on my G19 when they upgraded my frame from Gen 2 to Gen 3 under warranty recently.

[BehindBlueI's]

Yes I know this has been discussed before but...

Does adding an NY1 or NY2 trigger actually do anything to help prevent NDs? Besides NYPD do any major agencies issue these?

We used to, but stopped once we went to Gen 3.

The unintended discharges I'm aware of have been from pulling the trigger to break down the Glock without properly clearing it or obstructed holster/foreign item in holster. Obviously trigger weight is irrelevant in the first kind, they meant to pull the trigger. In the second kind, pretty unlikely the force was within the Goldilocks zone to trip one trigger weight but not another. Still very little tactile feedback.

[Jared]

I agree with a lot of the points being made about the quest for a 1911 trigger on a plastic gun with no manual safety helping to lead us here.

However, I do not think that that is all that went wrong at SIG. Ron Cohen, and the corporate culture he more likely than not has fostered at SIG undoubtedly played a significant role. And I'm saying that because we have one of these king cost cutters at any cost in my professional life, so I know how they operate and the effects they have on the rest of the culture. Our guy isn't even in charge of the entire company, just one division in one factory and it's maddening enough. So I can only imagine what going on internally at Sig.

The buyers demand lighter triggers, and the manufacturers work to give them what they want, that's undisputable. But it's awfully interesting to me that when it hit the fan, someone like Cohen was at the helm.

[Clusterfrack]

And, the p320 does not have a light, or short trigger. 7 pounds, 0.4" travel.

[Trooper224]

Ernest gets the internet win for the day.
http://www.kappit.com/img/pics/201412_1028_bbdcc_sm.jpg

As for myself, when I retire in less than two years I'll most likely never shoot a striker fired gun again much less own one.

[GJM]

If people just listed in their signature line, what they carried, it could probably save us all a lot of time reading all these paragraphs.

Kidding aside, the discussion of topics like this is core to what we do well at Pistol-Forum. Plus, it gives us something to occupy ourselves with while we wait to see what engineering marvel Sig introduces on Monday.

[Trooper224]

If people just listed in their signature line, what they carried, it could probably save us all a lot of time reading all these paragraphs.

True, but as often as you seem to change, would there be enough room for your list? :)

Funny thing is, I remember standing on the range just a few weeks ago, during our new sidearm selection, and being very impressed with the shooting qualities of the P320. I also remember saying, "I like it, but I think the Glock is the wiser choice since we don't know if there are any problems that will surface with the 320, given its new design." Hmmm...........

In spite of all this, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if the glass palace picks the 320. Their egos won't accept and they can't abide being told they're wrong.

[LangdonTactical]

Not only has this thread gone off the rails but what you said and Ernest said are actually many different unrelated things.

Sig screwing up it's engineering and making an unsafe gun has nothing to do with it being a striker fired weapon. We've had screwed up engineering on all weapon systems.

A Striker fired weapon can be made with too light of a trigger. But so is every DA/SA pistol I've shot. Anecdotal, I've seen it and scientific experiments over the years have proved that when "Ascared", transference of force between limbs, etc there is enough pressure put on the DA to make it go bang.

If a trigger on a pistol that is too light shouldn't be made and we are all human and do stupid things, we must by that logic get rid of the DA/SA. That holstered DA/SA in SA that we forgot to decock because we're human is an error waiting to happen. It is far more dangerous because it's lighter and shorter than any production pistol I've fired.

This is an example of Marketing. Marketing does not equal truth...

Well, I am not sure I can fully agree with you there. First of all, yes, the manufacturer does share a lot of the blame and they need to own that. Maybe they will, that is to be seen.

Second, the distance of the trigger pull is what keeps you out of trouble, not the weight. The scientific studies are discussing what I believe is called "sympathetic bilateral pull", meaning when one hand grips the other hand grips also, and if your finger is on the trigger you are likely to have an AD/ND. In this case, you can make a short trigger weight 25 lbs and people will still have issues if they are running around with their finger on the trigger. And people run around with their finger on the trigger all the time when they should not. Agencies that carry DA/SA guns and switch to striker fired guns normally have an increase in accidental discharges as well as unintended shootings. I am not talking about "mistake of fact" shootings, meaning I meant to shoot, and shot on purpose, but find out later it was not a gun in his hand and should not have shot (for example). Even in that case, I personally know several police officers that have pulled their Beretta to half cock before realizing they did not need to shoot. They are all happy they were carrying a DA gun.

I went to FBI instructor School in I believe 1995, before they switched to the Glock. And they were preaching those scientific test back then as well. But at the time it was weight and distance of the trigger pull. At that time they were defending using the 228 as their main gun. Later they used the same test to avoid going to a New York trigger, because of the Scientific test stating that an adult male could pull a 25 lb trigger with a "bilateral sympathetic pull". So the 11 or 12 pound NY trigger would not help prevent accidents. I was shown those studies back then, more than 20 years ago, but somehow the distance of the trigger pull part has been lost and no one that I talk to seems to be able to find the full study anymore. I really wish I could find the full study now, and not just the references to what it says. If you have the full study, I would love to see it again.

As to holstering a DA/SA gun when it is cocked, that is really not much different than holstering many of the Striker fired guns on the market. So I am not understanding your point here from a safety stand point. Also, if we can train people to put ARs back on safe, why is it so hard to teach them to de-cock the gun before they holster. I really don't think that it is that hard, and it really should not be an issue.

The point is, we seem to think we can train people well enough to keep their finger straight under stress, but we cannot train people to de-cock before they holster or when they stop shooting.

I hear what you are saying, but if DA/SA guns are unsafe, we are in big trouble.

[rob_s]

Go down to your local bass pro or uspsa match. Ask people there what they are looking for in a handgun.

100% guarantee there will be no mention of anything discussed in this, or the original, thread.

[GJM]

True, but as often as you seem to change, would there be enough room for your list? :)

I resemble that remark. As my sig line says, I like them all. That is why I can play nice with all sides on this issue!

We all have subjective feelings on this issue, partly based on common sense and partly our experience. A year or so back, I did a deep dive into the ND statistics at Front Sight. Why Front Sight, because they publish their ND info on-line, they have a pretty big volume of shooters, and they probably represent "average" to slightly "above average" real American shooters. I don't have numbers for the denominator, but my guess was strikers represented far and away the biggest percentage of guns going through there. I expected the ND numbers would be dominated by striker pistols.

I was big time surprised with what I found. The ND accidents seemed to be evenly divided between striker, DA/SA and 1911 pistols (no recollection of LEM or DAK accidents). The accidents seemed to be about 1/3 drawing, 1/3 holstering, and 1/3 general stupidity. What does this mean, I don't know, beyond shooting can be hazardous, especially when the participants are human, and the answers may be more complex than just trigger type.

[GJM]

Well, I am not sure I can fully agree with you there. First of all, yes, the manufacturer does share a lot of the blame and they need to own that. Maybe they will, that is to be seen.

Second, the distance of the trigger pull is what keeps you out of trouble, not the weight. The scientific studies are discussing what I believe is called "sympathetic bilateral pull", meaning when one hand grips the other hand grips also, and if your finger is on the trigger you are likely to have an AD/ND. In this case, you can make a short trigger weight 25 lbs and people will still have issues if they are running around with their finger on the trigger. And people run around with their finger on the trigger all the time when they should not. Agencies that carry DA/SA guns and switch to striker fired guns normally have an increase in accidental discharges as well as unintended shootings. I am not talking about "mistake of fact" shootings, meaning I meant to shoot, and shot on purpose, but find out later it was not a gun in his hand and should not have shot (for example). Even in that case, I personally know several police officers that have pulled their Beretta to half cock before realizing they did not need to shoot. They are all happy they were carrying a DA gun.

I went to FBI instructor School in I believe 1995, before they switched to the Glock. And they were preaching those scientific test back then as well. But at the time it was weight and distance of the trigger pull. At that time they were defending using the 228 as their main gun. Later they used the same test to avoid going to a New York trigger, because of the Scientific test stating that an adult male could pull a 25 lb trigger with a "bilateral sympathetic pull". So the 11 or 12 pound NY trigger would not help prevent accidents. I was shown those studies back then, more than 20 years ago, but somehow the distance of the trigger pull part has been lost and no one that I talk to seems to be able to find the full study anymore. I really wish I could find the full study now, and not just the references to what it says. If you have the full study, I would love to see it again.

As to holstering a DA/SA gun when it is cocked, that is really not much different than holstering many of the Striker fired guns on the market. So I am not understanding your point here from a safety stand point. Also, if we can train people to put ARs back on safe, why is it so hard to teach them to de-cock the gun before they holster. I really don't think that it is that hard, and it really should not be an issue.

The point is, we seem to think we can train people well enough to keep their finger straight under stress, but we cannot train people to de-cock before they holster or when they stop shooting.

I hear what you are saying, but if DA/SA guns are unsafe, we are in big trouble.

Ernest, as I recall, we did a deep dive on the length of trigger safety advantage, as attributed to the FBI, several years ago. I don't remember all that got involved, Tom Givens I think and others, and the length of trigger thing could not be correlated with actual scientific testing by the FBI or other organizations. Not saying that it is or is not important, but just that it got repeated enough times until we accepted it as fact here on PF. Somebody else help me with the thread and details?

[TheNewbie]

Go down to your local bass pro or uspsa match. Ask people there what they are looking for in a handgun.

100% guarantee there will be no mention of anything discussed in this, or the original, thread.

True. Most people give blank stares if you discuss information like this. Not because they are inferior or stupid, but because so little of the gun world is exposed to deep thought and humility as it relates to firearms. I might well be amongst them if not for luck and proper exposure.

[BCL]

I don't remember which specific thread, but I remember saving these pics.

18957
18958
18959
18960

[LangdonTactical]

We used to, but stopped once we went to Gen 3.

The unintended discharges I'm aware of have been from pulling the trigger to break down the Glock without properly clearing it or obstructed holster/foreign item in holster. Obviously trigger weight is irrelevant in the first kind, they meant to pull the trigger. In the second kind, pretty unlikely the force was within the Goldilocks zone to trip one trigger weight but not another. Still very little tactile feedback.

How about this one. NYPD threw him under the bus because he had his finger on the trigger, now he has been convicted of manslaughter.

http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/NYPD-Officer-Peter-Liang-Manslaughter-Trial-Stairwell-Shooting-368511201.html

[blues]

How about this one. NYPD threw him under the bus because he had his finger on the trigger, now he has been convicted of manslaughter.

http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/NYPD-Officer-Peter-Liang-Manslaughter-Trial-Stairwell-Shooting-368511201.html

If a young officer is going to be intimidated by his surroundings and make an error based upon a combination of fear and insufficient training, the Pink Houses are a model laboratory for creating that cocktail.

[breakingtime91]

Oh so this was where it was going...So are we now saying that all striker triggers are unsafe? Or that they aren't as safe as DA/SA?

[breakingtime91]

If a young officer is going to be intimidated by his surroundings and make an error based upon a combination of fear and insufficient training, the Pink Houses are a model laboratory for creating that cocktail.

Ya.. I have seen scared people ND weapons with safeties on them before (thinking they were on and trigger checking) Blaming the glock for the response that officer had is kind of reaching IMO. If it's not and we think that a DA pull would of saved him isn't that just an assumption?

[rob_s]

Oh so this was where it was going...So are we now saying that all striker triggers are unsafe? Or that they aren't as safe as DA/SA?

Duh

[LangdonTactical]

If a young officer is going to be intimidated by his surroundings and make an error based upon a combination of fear and insufficient training, the Pink Houses are a model laboratory for creating that cocktail.

In my heart of hearts, I believe that if that young man had been carrying a Beretta 92, he would not be in jail and someone else would be alive. Agree with me or not, but most young cops are not trained as well as they should be and they are often scared and make mistakes.

[blues]

Ya.. I have seen scared people ND weapons with safeties on them before (thinking they were on and trigger checking) Blaming the glock for the response that officer had is kind of reaching IMO. If it's not and we think that a DA pull would of saved him isn't that just an assumption?

Having spent some time in some of the garden spots of Brooklyn and knowing those projects, I can tell you that it's not a place for the faint of heart.
(As many places across our great nation aren't.) I don't know where "all" the blame should lie. It's easy to blame the gun but I'd be willing to bet that there are a lot of officers in the NYPD and other departments who aren't suited temperamentally for the work.

This will only exacerbate any additional weak link in the chain, be it hardware, software, protocol, what have you...(imho)

It's tragic on both sides of the equation.

[blues]

In my heart of hearts, I believe that if that young man had been carrying a Beretta 92, he would not be in jail and someone else would be alive. Agree with me or not, but most young cops are not trained as well as they should be and they are often scared and make mistakes.

You may very well be right, Ernest. I wouldn't try to second guess you. Unfortunately, we'll never know and the shattered parts can't be put back together.

[BehindBlueI's]

How about this one. NYPD threw him under the bus because he had his finger on the trigger, now he has been convicted of manslaughter.

http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/NYPD-Officer-Peter-Liang-Manslaughter-Trial-Stairwell-Shooting-368511201.html

To clarify, I meant on my department since we transitioned away from NY triggers, which was maybe 8 years ago or so.

[ranger]

Innovation improves the breed. I think we should ask for improvements and the manufacturers should seek to provide improvements. I do not buy the apparent theme that striker is unsafe and TDA is safe. I saw way too many 9mm holes in clearing barrels with TDA pistols to accept their superiority.

[breakingtime91]

Having spent some time in some of the garden spots of Brooklyn and knowing those projects, I can tell you that it's not a place for the faint of heart.
(As many places across our great nation aren't.) I don't know where "all" the blame should lie. It's easy to blame the gun but I'd be willing to bet that there are a lot of officers in the NYPD and other departments who aren't suited temperamentally for the work.

This will only exacerbate any additional weak link in the chain, be it hardware, software, protocol, what have you...(imho)

It's tragic on both sides of the equation.

Oh I don't doubt it. It is another reason that I keep a really high trigger finger index (like in the ejection port on a glock) on a rifle and pistol. We all get scared and like Ernest said, do stupid stuff. For that reason I do as much as I can to mitigate that by having steps in place in my training. (as I am sure you do to)

[BehindBlueI's]

Oh so this was where it was going...So are we now saying that all striker triggers are unsafe? Or that they aren't as safe as DA/SA?

In my accounting of UDs "in the wild" causing injury or death, about 1/3 occur when the trigger is pulled to break down the gun, usually because the clearing steps were reversed or the magazine was removed but the chamber wasn't cleared. That objectively makes a gun that requires a trigger pull to break down to be less safe. How much "less safe" and if it's worth the trade offs is a different question. If you are 100% conscientious in clearing properly, using a safe backstop when you pull the trigger, etc. then that is less of a concern to you as an individual...but still does not change the fact it's objectively less safe "for the masses."

Its a matter of degrees, not a binary safe/unsafe.

[BehindBlueI's]

I saw way too many 9mm holes in clearing barrels with TDA pistols to accept their superiority.

But at a clearing barrel you meant to pull the trigger. Would striker vs TDA vs 1911 have mattered in the slightest in that situation?

Only the revolver, which can be opened and shown clear, without the need to disassemble, would be an advantage in that scenario.

[AJD21]

Well first we must all accept that ND and AD will happen with any and all handguns and that handguns by nature are dangerous tools then we can actually have a discussion beyond these obvious points. Just because a Glock 19 has a malfunction doesn't mean it isn't more reliable design than a Hi Point. The same common sense can be applied to other aspects of handguns.

There is no such thing as a perfectly safe handgun. No such thing as 100% reliable. No such thing as a manufacture that doesn't put out a crap handgun every once in a while. No such thing as "most accurate" service pistol.

But there is such as thing as inherently more safe handguns, either by design or in the way they can be handled. Just like some handguns are generally more reliable, more accurate, or more consistent in quality than others.

Putting your thumb on the hammer when holstering eliminates the biggest objective that is brought against TDA's, forgetting to decock. It also all greatly reduces the risk of a ND when holstering because of tactile feedback on your thumb. Your thumb also has incredible leverage over that hammer with minimal effort making it nearly impossible to fire in that situation. Press your thumb against the hammer with reasonable effort and pull your trigger as hard as you physically can and let me know how far that hammer gets. TDA also have the longest and heaviest initial trigger pulls of any pistol and give a visual cue(hammer moving) when you are pulling the trigger. They also don't require a trigger pull to take apart as mentioned.

If the shooting community by and large accept almost without fail that TDA require more deliberation and effort to make go bang on target then you also have to accept they require more deliberation and effort to go bang when not on target. I'm not just talking about being startled in the dark. I'm talking all gun handled that takes place from the range to carry. You can't say they are more difficult(ie, longer harder pull) to shoot on range and then pretend they aren't when your putting them into your holster or handling them.

So what options offers the most layers of safety? What option has the heaviest "whoops" button that can be pushed before a loud noise occurs? Statistics about how it doesn't matter what trigger type you have when it comes to ND are useful but statistically speaking you are more likely to shoot yourself than being shot so then what do you do with the faith in statistics?

All things considered its hard to debate the safety advantage of a TDA over other designs. Not that others are UN-safe but that TDA's are not MORE safe.

[Duelist]

In my heart of hearts, I believe that if that young man had been carrying a Beretta 92, he would not be in jail and someone else would be alive. Agree with me or not, but most young cops are not trained as well as they should be and they are often scared and make mistakes.

He got 5 years probation at sentencing.

[breakingtime91]

In my accounting of UDs "in the wild" causing injury or death, about 1/3 occur when the trigger is pulled to break down the gun, usually because the clearing steps were reversed or the magazine was removed but the chamber wasn't cleared. That objectively makes a gun that requires a trigger pull to break down to be less safe. How much "less safe" and if it's worth the trade offs is a different question. If you are 100% conscientious in clearing properly, using a safe backstop when you pull the trigger, etc. then that is less of a concern to you as an individual...but still does not change the fact it's objectively less safe "for the masses."

Its a matter of degrees, not a binary safe/unsafe.

Same can be said for people not properly trained to run a. DA/SA. How many people thumb cock the hammer, fail to decock, or ease the hammer forward instead of decocking. These are all training issues. With that said I understand your point.

[OlongJohnson]

I kinda think the discussion about P320 vs other potentially not-drop-safe pistols being allowed on a range/in a competition/etc., or shooting at ranges where they are in use, belongs over here rather than in the P320 specific thread.

From the range operator, match director, and trainer's perspective, I get that a factory pistol advertised as drop-safe that isn't (and perhaps more importantly, is all over the news for being such) likely has a different financial liability risk than a modified pistol that may or may not be drop-safe, or an unmodified pistol that was never made drop-safe (such as a Series 70 1911). Anyone in that situation should probably consult council and their insurance agent, not read stuff on the internet.

For someone just going to shoot, whose risk is limited to getting shot if someone drops a pistol, as well as for those with some formally structured safety responsibility for others (groups in previous paragraph), considering the ethical question rather than the litigation risk, why would it make a difference to you whether the non-drop-safe pistol down the row is advertised to be drop safe but is not really, originally was drop-safe but has been modified and is no longer, or was never considered to be drop-safe? The actual physical risk to all present is the same in all cases, and I can't imagine that a shooter is going to be any more likely or willing to accidentally drop a pistol in any one category versus another.

I guess the question is, if you aren't willing to be on the line when someone is shooting a P320, why wouldn't you be just as concerned by someone shooting a Series 70 1911 or Glock with unknown trigger mods?

[BehindBlueI's]

Same can be said for people not properly trained to run a. DA/SA. How many people thumb cock the hammer, fail to decock, or ease the hammer forward instead of decocking. These are all training issues. With that said I understand your point.

Sure. I'm just telling you what I saw from keeping track of UDs. It's not the same as the stats that come from the range or from training. It shows what the general population actually does.

I also understand that we get the numerator without any denominator. If striker fired guns are handled twice as many man-hours as revolvers, you'd expect twice as many injuries if they were equally safe. However some causes are unique to the weapon system. Nobody shoots themselves pulling the trigger of a revolver to break it down to clean because you don't have to do that.

One of our officers just had a UD because a piece of equipment on someone else's belt got inside his duty holster and pulled the trigger of his Glock. https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?27125-Glock-discharges-in-Safariland-duty-holster. With a hammer fired gun and a holster with a hood that blocked the hammer, that would have been impossible without breaking the holster. It's a one time event in nearly 9 years of issuing that gun and that holster, so it's hardly a likely event...but it's *a* risk and thus less safe than some other combinations of equipment on the continuum of safe/unsafe.

[OlongJohnson]

In my accounting of UDs "in the wild" causing injury or death, about 1/3 occur when the trigger is pulled to break down the gun, usually because the clearing steps were reversed or the magazine was removed but the chamber wasn't cleared. That objectively makes a gun that requires a trigger pull to break down to be less safe. How much "less safe" and if it's worth the trade offs is a different question. If you are 100% conscientious in clearing properly, using a safe backstop when you pull the trigger, etc. then that is less of a concern to you as an individual...but still does not change the fact it's objectively less safe "for the masses."

Its a matter of degrees, not a binary safe/unsafe.

So to backtrack a day or two, Tom has suggested that it may be possible to make the P320 rigorously, mechanically drop-safe, but that it would possibly require pulling the trigger to remove the slide. Your experience suggests that purely on an odds basis, that might not be worth it. But to me personally, knowing that I'm in control of clearing and pulling the trigger versus not in control if it drops, I'd go for the drop-safe with trigger pull to take down.

There's an interesting "betrayal" factor that psychologists point to when studying how people assess risk. People will generally object more strongly to something that is actually statistically a much lower risk if they perceive it as being associated with a piece of technology not performing as expected. They may willingly prefer the higher-risk situation simply to avoid the "betrayal" element.

Not intending to be argumentative, more just emphasizing that many questions are of competing yet incompatible or oppositional goods, rather than of good versus bad.

[Navyguns]

Who controls the cultural hegemony in the firearms community?

How many firearms instructors carry and shoot completely stock guns? Because they don't want to set a bad example as subject matter experts about turning safe firearms into unsafe firearms.

[BehindBlueI's]

So to backtrack a day or two, Tom has suggested that it may be possible to make the P320 rigorously, mechanically drop-safe, but that it would possibly require pulling the trigger to remove the slide. Your experience suggests that purely on an odds basis, that might not be worth it. But to me personally, knowing that I'm in control of clearing and pulling the trigger versus not in control if it drops, I'd go for the drop-safe with trigger pull to take down.

There's an interesting "betrayal" factor that psychologists point to when studying how people assess risk. People will generally object more strongly to something that is actually statistically a much lower risk if they perceive it as being associated with a piece of technology not performing as expected. They may willingly prefer the higher-risk situation simply to avoid the "betrayal" element.

Not intending to be argumentative, more just emphasizing that many questions are of competing yet incompatible or oppositional goods, rather than of good versus bad.

Dropped guns have been a very low cause of UDs resulting in injury or death, but have occurred. Even "drop safe" guns sometimes get caught on something that pulls the trigger as they fall. One incident involved a gun that was being placed on a dresser falling and hitting the corner of an open drawer, which pulled the trigger. Definitely in the unusual category where a lot of factors came together just wrong.

For the well trained and careful, the risk of pulling the trigger is not a huge deal. Even if you mess up you'll probably keep it pointed in a safe direction and only injure your pride and your backstop. Among "the masses", it would be a poor trade off.

[OlongJohnson]

Stealing DB's response to a similar thread in Long Guns:


I am going to try to be calm with this, as we have lost all sense of logical at this point with Sig defense syndrome.

How do guns get dropped? What happens when they do? Here is the issue in this discussion...nobody ever claimed these guns were drop safe. Nobody advertised this. So, how do most un modified long guns need to be dropped to discharge. Generally in straight vertical orientation and likely directly on the muzzle. It is really hard to get them to do this. Where is the muzzle if by some freakish chance you can get the gun into that orientation? The problem is many drop tests are set up for drops to test for the types of discharges these types of guns face, and not the reality of what actually happens.

Now, how do Handguns fall? How do they generally land when dropped? How will mass orient that gun falling? Based on most damage I have seen on a ton of dropped Handguns, it is often the rear slide area. Where is the muzzle oriented on impact? Is that dangerous? Is that dangerous if dropped in a typical training or professional environment?

To me the big gigantic fat hairy issue is that the SIG P320 seems to have an easily replicable issue when dropped in a common manner and a discharge of live ammunition into a direction that is extremely hazardous. Meanwhile, everyone is pointing to testing of dropping guns that tend to not be how they discharge because systems have been built to a test and not reality, and they discharge in a way in which the muzzle is usually in a direction not likely to strike anyone.

During my LE career at my agency we dealt with two dropped gun discharges that were both with SIG's. Because of SIG's factory armorers training where we were told the guns could not discharge when dropped, the officers were blamed for improper use of the decocking lever without any real proof other than "it is the only explanation" based on the training provided by SIG on their weapons systems. In this case I actually do think improper decocking was the issue. Now, in the same time period I saw exactly zero discharges of dropped long guns to include Remington 870's, 700's, AR's and M16's, Colt SMG's, and the entire HK line of roller locked guns in multiple varieties and calibers, and Benelli's. Never even heard of a case in a very large metropolitan area.

So, why the issue....basic common sense. The issue is not that the P320 will discharge in some obscure bizarre, weird, unlikely scenario, but that it will discharge in a very likely real life manner and in a way that is extremely dangerous.

[BJJ]

I am nowhere near as knowledgeable as some, but it seems to me that if the concern is that the trigger on a gun can be pulled inadvertently, the answer is a manual safety, not a DA/SA.

Some of the DA/SA proponents run with a 5 or 6 pound DA trigger and a 2 pound SA trigger. I do not find this to be convincing evidence of being "safer" other than being able to thumb the hammer.

Just as a reference point for where I am coming from, I am tied to Glocks because it's what I'm issued. If it was up to me, I would probably run a CZ P09 on duty.

[holmes168]

Oh so this was where it was going...So are we now saying that all striker triggers are unsafe? Or that they aren't as safe as DA/SA?

Guess I'm in the same boat as you. Are we now at a point where all striker fired pistols are deemed unsafe? Or would a glock be fine to carry whereas a VP9 isn't?
Just trying to better understand!

[BehindBlueI's]

I am nowhere near as knowledgeable as some, but it seems to me that if the concern is that the trigger on a gun can be pulled inadvertently, the answer is a manual safety, not a DA/SA.

Some of the DA/SA proponents run with a 5 or 6 pound DA trigger and a 2 pound SA trigger. I do not find this to be convincing evidence of being "safer" other than being able to thumb the hammer.

Just as a reference point for where I am coming from, I am tied to Glocks because it's what I'm issued. If it was up to me, I would probably run a CZ P09 on duty.

For "real world use", which DA/SA proponent is running a 5/2 trigger?

Manual safety is certainly one answer. For that matter, empty chamber carry is as well. Both come with trade offs, just like everything else.

[OlongJohnson]

So, someone with more knowledge please school me. Obviously, discharging muzzle up is double-ungood.

Is a Series 70 essentially unlikely to do that if dropped? Does the firing pin spring reasonably eliminate the chance of a bounce back if it lands muzzle-up? I've read of an AR-pattern rifle making the loud noise when hitting the deck muzzle up (rare but possible), but that's a free floating pin.

I imagine the modified-Glock scenario is a case by case basis, depending on the details of the mods and failure.

[Xrslug]

This is where the disagreement is. You think that you need to forget to decock to have the DA go off when holstering. I've experiment with my holstering and more importantly others who didn't know what I was doing. They holstered the pistol hard enough to make the Sig and HK both DA go click. We also know this because plenty of people have actually had AD this way in real life. And that is where the false confidence of using a DA over a striker comes from.

I don't think that you have to forget to decock an DA/SA to enable a negligent discharge while holstering, I have no doubt an ND can happen in DA mode if you holster it hard enough without your thumb on the hammer -- my point is that in order to be on par with a striker fired gun you would need to forget to decock it (and not have your thumb on the hammer). If you decock it, you have a longer and heavier trigger pull (as compared to striker fired guns), as well as a hammer that will tell you the trigger is moving unintentionally. So there are more mechanical "hurdles" to overcome before the same screwup (in my hypothetical, a jacket drawstring pulling on the trigger) will result in an ND. Unless I'm misinterpreting your position, your premise seems to be that it is equally easy to have an ND with any trigger system and I don't agree with that. I do agree with you that ideally you should be switched on to the same degree regardless of what you're shooting and not have a false sense of security regardless of SA, SA/DA, striker, etc. But we're not robots and some systems are more forgiving of screwups than others.

[Xrslug]

So, someone with more knowledge please school me. Obviously, discharging muzzle up is double-ungood.

Is a Series 70 essentially unlikely to do that if dropped? Does the firing pin spring reasonably eliminate the chance of a bounce back if it lands muzzle-up? I've read of an AR-pattern rifle making the loud noise when hitting the deck muzzle up (rare but possible), but that's a free floating pin.

I imagine the modified-Glock scenario is a case by case basis, depending on the details of the mods and failure.

FWIW 1911's without firing pin blocks pass California's drop tests using titanium firing pins. I haven't looked at the CA test in detail but it involves dropping the guns from a fixture onto concrete from a height of ~40 inches such that they impact at different angles (muzzle down, muzzle up, etc.). Just looking at the design of a 1911, with a spring holding the FP back against the firing pin stop, if a muzzle down impact doesn't cause ignition, it seems very unlikely that a drop on the rear of the slide would allow the FP to push forward and hit the primer. Caveat, my physics is high school level.

[BJJ]

For "real world use", which DA/SA proponent is running a 5/2 trigger?

http://www.defensereview.com/cz-p-07-duty-combattactical-pistol-the-best-pistol-nobody-knows-about/

"• Double action- 6.75 lbs.
• Single action- 3. 28 "

I was slightly off about the weights. I still don't understand how, other than the hammer to thumb check, that's any safer than a Glock or how an ND that would have happened with Glock would be avoided by that set up.

[GardoneVT]

Who controls the cultural hegemony in the firearms community?

How many firearms instructors carry and shoot completely stock guns? Because they don't want to set a bad example as subject matter experts about turning safe firearms into unsafe firearms.

A gun "modified" on a kitchen table with a Dremel isn't in the same parsec of quality or safety as a pistol properly modified by a professional.

I can speak to this point, seeing as I just sent an M9A1 victimized by someones Dremel to Wilson Combat. Guess which type of modifications youll see at a local match versus what will be done to a professional shooter's gun? Lets put the notion of "Sig P320 stock pistol factory defect = comp shooters deliberately modifying gamer guns" to rest here and now.

I think the striker vs DA/SA discussion is a moot point, because in The Real World regular people don't carry DA/SA pistols anymore. Only 5% of Americans are estimated to carry any pistol on their person consistently, and among those folks some are carrying C3 in a jacket holster with a draw so slow it could be timed by tree rings.

The issue isn't the trigger system, but consumer preference for lighter triggers because they're not trained to shoot heavier ones well. Not that long ago DA/SA pistols were the standard pistol in LE holsters, and the 1990's and 1980's arent known for being the Dark Ages of Handgun Accuracy on account of that trigger system. Before that was the Age of the Double Action Revolver. Hell, go back far enough and the semi automatic handgun was considered a poor substitute for a high caliber revolver, which every man knew was the only proper pistol to carry.

So the notion that DA/SA is an accuracy handicap is bullshit. But get out among the gun proletariats, and its like anything with a 3.5lb + trigger is considered an unshootable hunk of junk.Which is what happens when someone with 0 skill shoots a stock pistol of any normal trigger weight, because when you don't have proper technique your target looks like crap.

Do these folks think "shucks I suck, best take a class and get some training? " Hell no. They run to Apex.com and order the lightest drop in trigger the company makes. Suddenly they hit the target better , and then the psychological connection is made. If 3.5lbs is good, wouldn't .05lbs be much better?

Sure the trigger might go off if you sneeze on it, and the gun might also go full-auto from all the metal removed from the trigger parts, but "keep your finger off the trigger" cures all ND ills. Its easier and more macho to just make the trigger lighter then to learn how to shoot properly.

Thus we come to all the cyclic discussion here. Proper training allows one to run any trigger system safely and reasonably well. Its when novice shooters buy guns and monkey with the triggers with no practical skill and paper over the risk with stock phrases that we run into issues. And then Sig makes a defective pistol that may fire when dropped, making the risk calculation even worse.

[Doc_Glock]

Since we are all jumping in:

I feel mechanical drop safety is an absolute requirement in a pistol design. The pistol should not go off unless the trigger is pressed and the trigger should not be able to be pressed by inertia. This is possible with many different designs.

TDA or lightish striker fire? Dunno. I am not convinced either is particularly safer from a people management perspective.

Humans are amazingly good at knowing when a gun will "go off" with any sort of training. Heavy, long trigger or light and short, they all "train" their users.

Surely I am a Glock guy learning TDA right now. What this means is I am getting on the trigger much earlier and more aggressively from the draw than I do with a Glock, if I want to release that shot when the sights settle. I can see how this type of trigger work would be detrimental to an individual trained only on TDA who suddenly converts to Glocks and doesn't put in the work to retrain that digit.

Either way, it is rare that I will fire a gun that I have more than passing familiarity with before I want to. It has happened with extremely light triggers, but that self corrects within a magazine's worth of shooting.

Blaming our desire for simple, kind of light, consistent trigger feel as the cause of Sig's abysmal failure of engineering is confusing two completely separate issues IMO. Posted with all due respect.

[spinmove_]

I don't think that you have to forget to decock an DA/SA to enable a negligent discharge while holstering, I have no doubt an ND can happen in DA mode if you holster it hard enough without your thumb on the hammer -- my point is that in order to be on par with a striker fired gun you would need to forget to decock it (and not have your thumb on the hammer). If you decock it, you have a longer and heavier trigger pull (as compared to striker fired guns), as well as a hammer that will tell you the trigger is moving unintentionally. So there are more mechanical "hurdles" to overcome before the same screwup (in my hypothetical, a jacket drawstring pulling on the trigger) will result in an ND. Unless I'm misinterpreting your position, your premise seems to be that it is equally easy to have an ND with any trigger system and I don't agree with that. I do agree with you that ideally you should be switched on to the same degree regardless of what you're shooting and not have a false sense of security regardless of SA, SA/DA, striker, etc. But we're not robots and some systems are more forgiving of screwups than others.

This is how I see the issue essentially. The TDA pistol isn't necessarily MORE or LESS safe than a SFA or manual safety pistol, it just gives you more opportunities to correct your potential mistake before you actually make it.

If you're running a TDA pistol properly, you're decocking the pistol after you're done firing, checking your holster before reholstering, thumbing the hammer as you're reholstering, and being cognizant of anything that's "off" during that process. With a SFA, you generally don't get to thumb the hammer or decock, so there's two layers you're giving up. Manual safety pistol may or may not allow you to thumb the hammer, but you should be putting it on safe when you'd decock the TDA.

Now if you're a complete dunderhead as far as firearm safety goes or you make A LOT of errors all in sequence, then none of all that above really makes any difference. Everything comes with a trade off and there's no free lunch. I don't care what your poison is, just know how to manage that poison without affecting others or yourself.


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

[BehindBlueI's]

I still don't understand how, other than the hammer to thumb check, that's any safer than a Glock or how an ND that would have happened with Glock would be avoided by that set up.

Me either. I have shot a magazine through one and did not care for it.

I'm thinking more along the lines of the P22X, Beretta 92, etc. CZ really isn't on my radar.

[PNWTO]

Innovation improves the breed. I think we should ask for improvements and the manufacturers should seek to provide improvements. I do not buy the apparent theme that striker is unsafe and TDA is safe. I saw way too many 9mm holes in clearing barrels with TDA pistols to accept their superiority.

Having watched a few clearing barrels get killed I would say the fault is in general education of the manual of arms. IME, on a base where Condition 3 pistols were allowed, the following happened:

1. Servicemember, usually an officer (sorry not sorry #truth), would draw their C3 M9.

2. Servicemember would do a hasty visual chamber check while racking the slide.

3. Servicemember would then drop the magazine.

4. Servicemember would then present the muzzle into the barrel and drop the hammer.

5. Bang.

[Wondering Beard]

OK, so here is a statement that many will not like. This whole thing is the gun communities own fault! [...] We have developed [...] But here we are [...] and we thought it was great [...] And what was our answer? "Shut up man, keep your booger hook off the bang switch dude" [...] At what point will we accept the fact [...]

What do you mean we, kemosabe? ;-)

Ok, I selectively edited your post to razz you some but putting the humor aside, I'm not sure who this "we" is and what sort of people are part of it. As Rob_s points out, the majority of people who buy guns are not only unconcerned by what is being discussed here, they are for the most part totally ignorant of the salient points of this discussion; that does make them very vulnerable to be sold a bunch of idiocy but that does not make them the type of pressure group that would push gun companies to produce pistols with "1911 triggers and no safeties".

As I see it, gun companies, like any other company, wants market share and need to beat the guy with the most market share; in this case, that means Glock. So SIG, S&W, HK, Beretta etc... went all in to find a Glock beater, and more specifically to make a trigger that is better than Glock's (it's hard to be truly innovative with a plastic, striker fired pistol). That may not be the right approach to producing a better safer gun but that's the approach they took; moreover, that approach didn't need to push SIG to make an unsafe pistol (Glock didn't bow to the pressure you're talking about and it is far from an innocent pure good guy company), that's all on SIG. So I would disagree that "we", the "gun community" (not a homogeneous group) pushed for this to happen.

With that said, I am reading, with great interest, the discussion on what trigger system works best, or more likely better, on the continuum of safety and its intersection with shootability. I find DB's comments particularly germane and important and thus would like to add my own small experience to this. When I tried to become good with TDA guns (I never really got there but that's on me not the guns), I found out that not only did I need to get on the trigger earlier than on my Glocks and 1911s (sort of what Ernest shows in his videos) but also needed to start applying pressure on the trigger definitely earlier. Frankly, that made me uncomfortable and when I would shoot Glocks or 1911s after shooting a TDA pistol (back then a P220 with the spur hammer), I would end up firing my shots way earlier than I wanted to. With my Glocks and 1911s, my index finger might find itself a bit early inside the trigger guard sometimes but no pressure on the trigger would be applied until I had made the decision to shoot; something that worked nicely in a few blind scenarios at the NTI or Tom Givens' Tac Conference. I am by no means an expert shooter and I have nowhere near the experience of Ernest or DB or many others here, so it's quite possible that I may have been doing things wrong, but I jut don't like getting on the trigger with pressure early, unless I dedicated myself to only that trigger system and nothing else.

[Rex G]

The Probationary Police Officer (PPO) assigned to me, this week, for a week of field performance evaluation, is carrying a P226. In a world where most of our cadets have been choosing a G23, G22, M&P40, or P320, this young man chose the P226. :) (His other option was the P229.)

The rookie, described above, graduated from Class 230. Class 231 was mandated to start with the P320, as the only duty pistol. It will be interesting to see how the department handles the P320 situation, going forward. (I do not know if Class 232 has yet ordered/received their pistols.)

FWIW, in my 33+ years of big-city LEO-ing, the only UD/ND actually occurring in my presence was a few feet behind my back, when a probationary police officer, (PPO,) who had recently finished training/evaluation, fired her G22 into a porch step, during a reported burglary-in-progress. (The female homeowner reported having heard movement inside.) Thank God for safe muzzle direction! I had just ascended the three or four steps onto the porch, found an unlocked door, pushed it open, and announced, "Houston Police; make your presence known, and show me your hands!" The next sound seemed suspiciously .40-ish, behind me, and the PPO sheepishly but calmly stated that she had discharged her weapon. She seemed OK to keep going, so I advised the other officer, via radio, that we were OK, and we cleared the house. (With a complainant in potential danger, calling time-out was not really a desirable option, at that moment in time. We found that the sound heard by the reportee was a roll of wrapping paper that had fallen, and then rolled across the floor. My only active part in the subsequent investigation of the weapon discharge was to photograph the scene, as I am my division's go-to night-shift camera unit. (It is not so much being a great photographer, as being willing to carry a DSLR, with serious flash equipment and close-range lenses.)

Would this Glock-carrying PPO have fired a traditional DA/SA pistol, such as my present PPO's P226, or a DAK SIG, into the porch step? I am not the one to say, but I do feel a bit safer when clearing buildings, and such, when the other officers, particularly the younger ones, are carrying DA/SA or DAK pistols. (The very few younger officers carrying 1911 pistols seem to handle them very carefully, probably because only a few heavy hitters bother to schedule and attend the mandated transition/certification training.)

[JustOneGun]

I resemble that remark. As my sig line says, I like them all. That is why I can play nice with all sides on this issue!

We all have subjective feelings on this issue, partly based on common sense and partly our experience. A year or so back, I did a deep dive into the ND statistics at Front Sight. Why Front Sight, because they publish their ND info on-line, they have a pretty big volume of shooters, and they probably represent "average" to slightly "above average" real American shooters. I don't have numbers for the denominator, but my guess was strikers represented far and away the biggest percentage of guns going through there. I expected the ND numbers would be dominated by striker pistols.

I was big time surprised with what I found. The ND accidents seemed to be evenly divided between striker, DA/SA and 1911 pistols (no recollection of LEM or DAK accidents). The accidents seemed to be about 1/3 drawing, 1/3 holstering, and 1/3 general stupidity. What does this mean, I don't know, beyond shooting can be hazardous, especially when the participants are human, and the answers may be more complex than just trigger type.


This was close to what I found. When we take the time to find the various ways that people screw up with the gun a pattern forms that doesn't have anything to do with a certain pistol system. More importantly, the fix has nothing to do with that either. Pick whatever platform you want, the training, procedures, etc that one must ingrain to stay safe with that platform are the same procedures and training needed to keep you safe with a striker. We fool ourselves into thinking something is safer.

That poses two problems: Some people who think they are safer, equate that to being safe. They functionally stop there. Some of those people are very good shooters, not weekend warriors. It is luck, fate, that keeps them safe. They are an accident waiting to happen.

The second problem is that some of those people are newer shooters and they are destined to be on the lower end of the ability curve. Now I have taken someone who is going to be a bit slow, lagging in ability over time and given them a system that is a bit or a lot tougher to learn depending on the system. Depending on how much they practice and train they may never overcome. They will flounder. Give that person an easier system and given the same time training and practice they will excel.

When I hear instructors say, "Well you'll be able to learn this system just fine. Just practice a bit more." If I have the training and practice desire similar to or even half of Ernest Langdon then that is true. But I don't. People for a variety of reasons end up with a set time that they train, practice and thrive. Some of those reasons are legitimate to their life. They have a wide range of genetic ability combined with that. The truth is, many of them will not learn the system just fine. They will suck as shooters and we will just classify them as typical gun owners. When in fact if we put some thought into it, they would be excelling with just a bit of help instead of hurt.

[Doc_Glock]

When I tried to become good with TDA guns (I never really got there but that's on me not the guns), I found out that not only did I need to get on the trigger earlier than on my Glocks and 1911s (sort of what Ernest shows in his videos) but also needed to start applying pressure on the trigger definitely earlier. Frankly, that made me uncomfortable and when I would shoot Glocks or 1911s after shooting a TDA pistol (back then a P220 with the spur hammer), I would end up firing my shots way earlier than I wanted to. With my Glocks and 1911s, my index finger might find itself a bit early inside the trigger guard sometimes but no pressure on the trigger would be applied until I had made the decision to shoot; something that worked nicely in a few blind scenarios at the NTI or Tom Givens' Tac Conference. I am by no means an expert shooter and I have nowhere near the experience of Ernest or DB or many others here, so it's quite possible that I may have been doing things wrong, but I jut don't like getting on the trigger with pressure early, unless I dedicated myself to only that trigger system and nothing else.

Thanks for putting in to words what I am experiencing in my training right now.

[Eurastus]

What about a striker-fired action with a consistently long DA-style trigger pull?

I'm thinking of the Kahr in particular. I know these single-stack pistols aren't frequently discussed here on PF, but I believe it is a unique striker design that perhaps we should add to this discussion.

As I understand the Kahr's functionality, the striker is partially tensioned and the firing pin safety is engaged (preventing firing pin movement) while the trigger is at rest.

Pulling the Kahr trigger rotates a dual-lobed cam which finishes 'cocking' the striker while simultaneously moving the firing pin safety up and out of the way of the firing pin. After considerable trigger movement, the safety is eventually fully retracted and the striker is fully tensioned. At the very end of the trigger stroke, the striker releases and the pistol fires.

The Kahr trigger pull is consistently long, relatively smooth, and is certainly not lightweight (it feels similar to a DA revolver to me).

Trigger reset is likewise very long and positive. There is no doubt that the trigger swings back and forth through a relatively long arc as subsequent rounds are fired....again, like the DA revolver.

It has no external safety of any kind.

Thoughts?

[M2CattleCo]

Well if you're gonna screw up, make damn sure you decock/safe, and thumb the hammer first.

1911, Glock, and HK LEM are the only good triggers imo. Looking back at DA/SA and it just looks more and more ridiculous. Just like all these new fully cocked strikers that aren't turning out to be so hot.

[GJM]

I am kind of conflicted on this. On one hand, for a few years, I have been saying that guns that are easier to hit your targets with, are also easier to shoot yourself or someone else by accident with. I still believe that, but I am not sure by what percentage -- some tiny increment or a large one?

What I am not conflicted by, is how much more important software is than hardware. I will take the skilled shooter every day, regardless of trigger, over some sub-trained person that you gave a certain trigger to as a bandaid for lack of skill. I also firmly believe that people are highly influenced by what they are currently carrying.

Many people have opined that a PPQ trigger is unsafe for EDC, and a Glock with a Gadget is OK. And some of those people say a VP9 trigger, though, is fine because of its feel. Objectively, the PPQ has more take-up than the Glock, and the Glock more take-up than the VP9, which flies in the face of the belief that more travel equals more safety. As to the Gadget, definitely a safety feature if used properly when holstering, but 2/3 of the Front Sight accidents were other than holstering.

As I have bounced around to different platforms over the years, often influenced by perceptions of safety, for two decades my wife has daily carried a Glock in either a Rosen Upper Limit OWB or some type IWB behind the hip, and never done anything that has given me a bit of concern for her safety. I really do believe there is no "right" answer, and it is really many shades of gray.

[BehindBlueI's]

As Rob_s points out, the majority of people who buy guns are not only unconcerned by what is being discussed here, they are for the most part totally ignorant of the salient points of this discussion; that does make them very vulnerable to be sold a bunch of idiocy but that does not make them the type of pressure group that would push gun companies to produce pistols with "1911 triggers and no safeties".

I disagree. They may not give it a ton of thought, but the notion they don't dry fire it, feel the light "easy" trigger, and then incorporate that into their decision making seems unlikely. Obviously it's not the sole decision point, price, marketing, size, etc. but the "easy" trigger is certainly a selling point.

You can't tell me the YouTube "personalities" and LGS commandos harping that a DA is so hard to shoot don't affect sales, or that the "better trigger than Glock" isn't used to sell VP9s, P320s, etc.

[BehindBlueI's]

That poses two problems: Some people who think they are safer, equate that to being safe. They functionally stop there.

That sounds a lot like Cohen, making a gun drop safe promotes poor gun handling.

[BehindBlueI's]

Well if you're gonna screw up, make damn sure you decock/safe, and thumb the hammer first.

Which misses the point. If I decock every time and thumb the hammer every time, I have to screw up both and then screw something else up before I have an issue.

With Glock, if I have a holster obstruction, I get a bang once I hit the 5.5-ish lbs of force.
With a P226, I have to forget to thumb the hammer AND have an obstruction before I can get a bang.

I'm also not sure how the 1911 can be ok while the DA/SA isn't in this context. Is the grip safety not defeated when you're holstering? You're snarky about having to remember to safe before screwing up, but the 1911 is one of the "good" triggers?

[GJM]

Which misses the point. If I decock every time and thumb the hammer every time, I have to screw up both and then screw something else up before I have an issue.

With Glock, if I have a holster obstruction, I get a bang once I hit the 5.5-ish lbs of force.
With a P226, I have to forget to thumb the hammer AND have an obstruction before I can get a bang.

I'm also not sure how the 1911 can be ok while the DA/SA isn't in this context. Is the grip safety not defeated when you're holstering? You're snarky about having to remember to safe before screwing up, but the 1911 is one of the "good" triggers?


One interesting thing that popped out of the Front Sight ND reports, was where the decock issue led to an ND. As I recall, the issue was not holstering, but when the student drew the pistol next, put six of the ten pounds on the DA trigger they were accustomed to doing, and got a bang going through four or five pounds with the trigger in SA.

[Wondering Beard]

I disagree. They may not give it a ton of thought, but the notion they don't dry fire it, feel the light "easy" trigger, and then incorporate that into their decision making seems unlikely. Obviously it's not the sole decision point, price, marketing, size, etc. but the "easy" trigger is certainly a selling point.

A selling point? sure, I'll agree with that. Is it the major selling point that pushes gun companies to produce "plastic 1911s with no safeties"? I'm a lot less sure of that. Actually, if someone knows a way to find that out accurately, I would really be interested.

I wouldn't be in the least surprised that when dry firing at the store the "easier" trigger of a Glock, for example, has an effect, but how decisive is it over other aspects? And is it enough of one to so influence SIG as to make that company produce an unsafe gun? I doubt it is that powerful but I'm willing to be proven wrong.


You can't tell me the YouTube "personalities" and LGS commandos harping that a DA is so hard to shoot don't affect sales, or that the "better trigger than Glock" isn't used to sell VP9s, P320s, etc.

Companies sure do that and YT "personalities" can certainly put out a whole lot of derp that is believed by the ignorant, but the question still is "how much of an effect?", who are the biggest buyers of P320s, or PPQs and why? There's a bunch of marketing research to delve into here, but considering the general ignorance (not meant as a pejorative, we all have to start somewhere) of the buying public, if the marketing and advertising of a gun company had emphasized the safety of, for example, a TDA pistol rather than its "light and easy" trigger, would the new gun buyer go with safety or with "easy to shoot"? What about the folks who have a bit more experience but not to the level shown here at P-F? Would the new gun buyer who preferred safety not serve as a good market base for future purchases and models that a gun company might exploit? I don't know for sure, I just suspect that companies like SIG went in one particular direction more on their on volition, especially to beat Glock.

I think we experienced the equivalent, for striker fired trigger systems, of a bubble that the P320 burst, and that companies drove down that cliff (to mix metaphors) with their foot on the gas believing that customers wouldn't mind.

P.S. is there a You Tube's Andy Levy out there?

[Wondering Beard]

Is the grip safety not defeated when you're holstering?

I'm answering only the part that I quoted: not necessarily; in my case, since I bring my thumb over the hammer, I release the grip safety. I don't know how many other people do that.

[M2CattleCo]

Which misses the point. If I decock every time and thumb the hammer every time, I have to screw up both and then screw something else up before I have an issue.

With Glock, if I have a holster obstruction, I get a bang once I hit the 5.5-ish lbs of force.
With a P226, I have to forget to thumb the hammer AND have an obstruction before I can get a bang.

I'm also not sure how the 1911 can be ok while the DA/SA isn't in this context. Is the grip safety not defeated when you're holstering? You're snarky about having to remember to safe before screwing up, but the 1911 is one of the "good" triggers?

The 1911 is a good trigger because it's a good trigger for actually putting rounds when and where you want 'em. The manual of arms is incredibly intuitive and ergonomic, unlike the mixed up controls on a P Series Sig.

By your logic, you shouldn't need the extra layers of safety from a 12lb DA and a hammer to thumb. Just clear your holster every time.

When mistakes happen, it's a chain of events that lead up to the big loud noise, not one simple oversight. I think the more steps involved in a task, the opportunities for a mistake, especially under stress.

[breakingtime91]

S&W SD9 (and SD40) (https://www.smith-wesson.com/firearms#/?series=141), while not known as a "shooter's gun", is excellent. While the striker is partially tensioned, it is essentially a DAO striker in that there is a long pull on every shot and it has a full length reset. Holds 17 (16+1) rounds, is the size of a G19, comes from a major manufacturer, takes M&P sights, has aftermarket support from companies such as Apex (https://store.apextactical.com/WebDirect/Products/Category?categoryId=22), and is routinely available, brand new, for less than $300 (http://www.gunbroker.com/Semi-Auto-Pistols/BI.aspx?Keywords=SD9&MaxPrice=300&NoReserve=1&Condition=2&Sort=4). The firing mechanism uses a pivoting sear, but instead having ~0.03" engagement with a fully tensioned striker and pivoting down (like a P320), it has 0.06" of engagement of a ~1/3 tensioned striker and pivots rearward. Unlike the P320, it also has a tabbed trigger safety that prevents motion of the trigger (and trigger bar) due to inertial events (drops, knocks, mallets, etc.) which not only prevents the firing bin block from being disengaged, but also blocks movement of the sear.

Again, not a "shooter's gun" but a very affordable and capable HD gun, that is drop safe AF. However, it doesn't look cool on FB/YT/IG. :)

Tom, do you know anything about the shields striker system? I have one with a thumb safety I use for NPE.

[JustOneGun]

That sounds a lot like Cohen, making a gun drop safe promotes poor gun handling.



If you honestly think that then I've done a poor job of communicating. Cohen is talking about selling a product that is defective. I don't advocate you buy a DA/SA where the hammer can slip off the notch and fire.

I'm talking about the range of perceived safety from a fully functional pistol (no matter the system) and the processes that we will HAVE to use to still keep us from making it go bang when we don't want it to. This perceived help that people think they are getting from a particular system is actually not a help at all. What I'm saying is that having a long trigger doesn't help you like you think it does. You're just making it harder to hit the target given the same skill level. For some people, and everyone when new to shooting, it is a very real problem.

Logically that does not mean that having a striker somehow makes you more safe. It does mean that the very ways that people screw up when discrimination shooting, holstering, drawing, etc overcome the physical constructs of the long trigger and heavy trigger of the different systems. What it does mean is that no matter the system, to be safe one needs a set of procedures to stop them from being unsafe. The only way your statement makes sense is if the pistol system eliminates the problem and no one is even getting close to suggesting that. When you look at the how and why they occur one find no difference. That's why when experience shows that there isn't a difference in the occurrence of problems between platforms no one should be surprised.

[BehindBlueI's]

By your logic, you shouldn't need the extra layers of safety from a 12lb DA and a hammer to thumb. Just clear your holster every time.


In the real world you don't always have time to clear your holster. I've had my gun out and the situation changes to one that requires hands on. I'm sure every cop has, and while it's more commonly a LEO issue it's not one non-LEO never face.

This is where the conversation veers. A lot of the UD information being reported here is from the range. The range isn't everywhere.

[M2CattleCo]

I understand that and that is a situation where a hammer is a definite advantage as long as you use it correctly.

Correct usage doesn't lead to NDs. If you spend any time analyzing accidents, the almost universal commonality is that complacency and plain 'ol bone-headedness can defeat any safety equipment. From what I've seen, the more complex the safety procedure, the more opportunity for the chain to be broken.

[JustOneGun]

In the real world you don't always have time to clear your holster. I've had my gun out and the situation changes to one that requires hands on. I'm sure every cop has, and while it's more commonly a LEO issue it's not one non-LEO never face.

This is where the conversation veers. A lot of the UD information being reported here is from the range. The range isn't everywhere.


I fully agree with this. But in my experience the things that tend to go wrong, go wrong more often when under extreme stress. So if it happens on the, "Range, shoothouse, FoF" we have to look strongly if it can happen in real life.

[Pit]

I truly enjoy this site for its thoughtful contributors. Some very fine people sharing experiences. Good stuff

I remember back in the days when departments were transitioning to semi-auto pistols. The ISP had been carrying their S&W 39’s for years. They helped many departments throughout the state with information and drills.

The Model 39 fit most officers’ hands fairly well. But I remember an idea being passed around by some of the instructors as if the first DA shot may miss but the ability to hit with the following shots was greatly improved due to the shorter, easier SA follow up shots. They said their hits on target had increased with the adoption of the Model 39.

As the “need” for more rounds became “necessary” the fit of the double stack, TDAs became an issue for officers with smaller hands. Many tried the S&W 59 and the like as S&W was the company many accepted due to their great revolvers. I believe the TDAs lost a lot of popularity around this time. The FBI was a leader in the one trigger pull movement.

When my department of +200 allowed semi-autos in the early 90’s we allowed Beretta, S&W, SIG, Colt (1911) and the newfangled Glock. The rate of AD/NDs we have experience comparing revolver to autos hasn’t changed during field ops. However, we experienced the issue of the officers’ not following proper procedures to clear their Glocks prior to field stripping. This is totally on the individual. Many argue Glock messed up with this design. I’ll leave that for other to debate.

Mindset and training will help keep AD/NDs to a minimum but they will occur. I do not believe one system is superior to another. A lot goes during a lethal force encounter. Can a longer pull give an officer more time to stop? I believe some here have had this experience. I believe them. It is amazing everything you observe when seeing the elephant.

In my own experiences has been the decision to act is f-ing quick while it seems to take a long time. I’ve had to fire on the job with both my S&W 19 as well as a Wilson Combat 1911. Didn’t notice a trigger pull difference. Just front sight and press, happens damn fast in slow motion.

Pick a reliable system, participate in realistic training, have a good mindset and belief in a high purpose. FWIW.

JW

[BehindBlueI's]

I fully agree with this. But in my experience the things that tend to go wrong, go wrong more often when under extreme stress. So if it happens on the, "Range, shoothouse, FoF" we have to look strongly if it can happen in real life.

Sure. "Range/training" is a subset of "all UD". My issue is some seem to think that subset is the whole pie. The fact a certain training center saw an even distribution on the range doesn't mean there's an even distribution outside that subset. Admin handling is still the area where most "in the wild" UDs happen, as an example. Most folks tend to not draw their gun as many times in 6 months as some of us draw during dry fire in a day or a range outing.

Additionally, things you can do on the range (ie clear your holster every time) become less feasible "in the wild".

[GardoneVT]

The 1911 is a good trigger because it's a good trigger for actually putting rounds when and where you want 'em. The manual of arms is incredibly intuitive and ergonomic, unlike the mixed up controls on a P Series Sig.


The 1911 is not intuitive at all for the "99%" of shooters. I've watched a trained Highway Patrolman struggle to clear my 1911 during a traffic stop.

I see most of the discussion is focused on actually shooting the gun. Very little so far is said about the administrative tasks which represent the majority of times people handle weapons. Folks rarely do unsafe stuff with guns when they're on the line; it's the stuff in between that gets people in trouble.

Clearing a gun sounds simple on a PF webpage. To Joe Public it's like doing taxes; what happens first, racking the slide or taking out the mag? Do you send the slide forward next? Do you pull the trigger to show clear or do you put a gun on safe? That's what happens at a range clearing barrel when folks are paying close attention .

At home when it's time to clean the pistol there's additional distractions. Having a risk mitigation trigger system in place can serve as a final warning before Disaster Happens.

[JustOneGun]

Sure. "Range/training" is a subset of "all UD". My issue is some seem to think that subset is the whole pie. The fact a certain training center saw an even distribution on the range doesn't mean there's an even distribution outside that subset. Admin handling is still the area where most "in the wild" UDs happen, as an example. Most folks tend to not draw their gun as many times in 6 months as some of us draw during dry fire in a day or a range outing.

Additionally, things you can do on the range (ie clear your holster every time) become less feasible "in the wild".


I agree with this. Where I think we disagree is what we would do with this. If we were to find a bunch of scientists unrelated to firearms and ask them which is easier, disprove or prove. The answer is obviously disprove. This is where you are IMO. I used to think just like you. Precautionary principle suggests this in the absence of evidence/experience.

Experience has shown I was wrong. I looked around and others experience showed similar. Huh, who would have thunk it. Turns out if I have 70% striker and 20% DA/SA and 10% 1911 that's the ratio of screw ups I get over time. They were put through the same training, same everything and made the same mistakes with the same outcomes. I should be seeing a consistently larger to smaller proportion with the shorter/lighter, lighter and long/heavy pistols. We're not seeing that. Again, we were wrong. Something else is going on.

When looking at why this is I and others have found some likely reasons. Some but not all of the reason is what I've argued above.

[Clobbersaurus]

S&W SD9 (and SD40) (https://www.smith-wesson.com/firearms#/?series=141), while not known as a "shooter's gun", is excellent. While the striker is partially tensioned, it is essentially a DAO striker in that there is a long pull on every shot and it has a full length reset. Holds 15 rounds, is the size of a G19, comes from a major manufacturer, takes M&P sights, has aftermarket support from companies such as Apex (https://store.apextactical.com/WebDirect/Products/Category?categoryId=22), and is routinely available, brand new, for less than $300 (http://www.gunbroker.com/Semi-Auto-Pistols/BI.aspx?Keywords=SD9&MaxPrice=300&NoReserve=1&Condition=2&Sort=4). The firing mechanism uses a pivoting sear, but instead having ~0.03" engagement with a fully tensioned striker and pivoting down (like a P320), it has 0.06" of engagement of a ~1/3 tensioned striker and pivots rearward. Unlike the P320, it also has a tabbed trigger safety that prevents motion of the trigger (and trigger bar) due to inertial events (drops, knocks, mallets, etc.) which not only prevents the firing bin block from being disengaged, but also blocks movement of the sear.

Again, not a "shooter's gun" but a very affordable and capable HD gun, that is drop safe AF. However, it doesn't look cool on FB/YT/IG. :)

ETA: The stock trigger pull weight on the SD9 is very similar to that of a stock P320, 7-7.5 pounds. The weighted portion of the trigger pull is just 4-5 times longer than that of the P320.

This post is going to cost me (a little) money. Interesting info Tom.

(Edit)..... SCD? :D

[BehindBlueI's]

I agree with this. Where I think we disagree is what we would do with this. If we were to find a bunch of scientists unrelated to firearms and ask them which is easier, disprove or prove. The answer is obviously disprove. This is where you are IMO. I used to think just like you. Precautionary principle suggests this in the absence of evidence/experience.

Experience has shown I was wrong. I looked around and others experience showed similar. Huh, who would have thunk it. Turns out if I have 70% striker and 20% DA/SA and 10% 1911 that's the ratio of screw ups I get over time. They were put through the same training, same everything and made the same mistakes with the same outcomes. I should be seeing a consistently larger to smaller proportion with the shorter/lighter, lighter and long/heavy pistols. We're not seeing that. Again, we were wrong. Something else is going on.

When looking at why this is I and others have found some likely reasons. Some but not all of the reason is what I've argued above.

How many did you track? Do you have a spreadsheet or some other data with the breakdown of weapon type and cause of UD?

[holmes168]

The information I've gotten on PF has made me more concerned about the safe operation of a pistol than ever. I've not been one to goof off on the range but want to be as safe as possible while carrying. I believe training and concentration are two of the most important aspects to handling a pistol. Based off what I've read- the Glock seems to be the best compromise between shootability and safety currently on the market. I say this with less cash in my account after spending money on HK. Since I've been more active reading this forum- I've decided to sell the HKs to convert to Glock. I've bought two new gen 4 G-17s and now am deciding between the 19 and 26 as my next purchase. I'll be trying on all my summer shirts this weekend to check concealability of the 19 since I've got one.
I started to carry Glocks a couple years ago and they've always been dependable and even when trying HK- I always had lingering doubts that I'd made the right decision. I'll be ordering the SCD to go along with the Glocks.

[JustOneGun]

How many did you track? Do you have a spreadsheet or some other data with the breakdown of weapon type and cause of UD?



Tracked five years, average of 35 recruits per class, average 3 classes per year (hi was 53? and low was 15?.) High number of classes was 5 in a year and low was 2). Sadly I'm an old retiree. No more access. While I can be a PITA, even in retirement I'm not willing to buck the department and give you info even if I had it. I value my healthcare and LEOSA both of which would/could be effected still.

I do know that there are some older numbers from some of the private ranges and someone on this thread said they believe Tom Givens has some numbers about that. Other than looking at your own department and talking to some the folks in Internal Affairs if they'll give up the info I'm not sure you're going to get info for hard and fast numbers. Some of the people I spoke to when I started suspecting this was IA detective from other departments who where becoming instructors at a train the trainer class. Some of them didn't track it and their department didn't want to due to, "only a downside" in their perception. Other's did. What the older detectives told me was that their department got either better or worse and then over time went right back to the roughly the same numbers of UD's, bad shoots etc.

That last concept was important to me because I've seen it over and over again. Not just for real life problems, but for range/FoF/Shoothouse problems and qual problems. Give a person a different gun and they will get worse if they are given a harder to use pistol (DA/SA/LDA) and a bit better if given an easier (For me I'd hand them a Glock). Some of the average and all the below average shooters ended up right in the same place given enough time. But some people that were average or above got better and stayed better when given a Glock. Some of them got significantly better.

One of the great things about police instruction is I get to track each one for weeks (if they are other agencies) and years if they are ours. I got to see how many holstered with a cocked DA/SA. How many holstered without engaging the 1911 safety. Obviously that is a pure number. I didn't track it. They were retrained and if they didn't fix it, they were thrown off the range, not to be an officer. Not much tracking of the individual there.

[crossrifles]

Mediocrity has blurred vision in some. Some actually believe your equipment can make up for a lack of skill or those old guns (TDA) can't do what striker guns can. My agency is currently replacing TDA pistols for striker guns, so I hear and witness a lot of expensive noise.

Being an LTT alumni, I've been fortunate to discuss training issues with Mr. Langdon and actually make some success in refocusing efforts in things that matter. As a weapons trainer for my agency, it's been shocking to see the lack of proper techniques applied to TDA guns, which I believe is a contributor to the camp that see's the long DA pull a hinderance. They just don't understand how to shoot the TDA and apply proper techniques, so they curse the DA first shot. A lot of the blame here is toward the instructor staff not teaching the proper techniques or just not knowing.

Statements like "oh this striker gun is so much easier to shoot." for them it's somewhat true. They lined up the sights perfectly and snatched the trigger hard and still had terrible shot placement, but it felt easier to them. Your striker gun didn't improve your score for qualification, but your margin for error in the realm of an ND did increase dramatically.

I do place a premium on Instructors who can shoot TDA pistol well and teach classes with them.

my opinion,
Ray Piedra

[BehindBlueI's]

Tracked five years, average of 35 recruits per class, average 3 classes per year (hi was 53? and low was 15?.) High number of classes was 5 in a year and low was 2). Sadly I'm an old retiree. No more access. While I can be a PITA, even in retirement I'm not willing to buck the department and give you info even if I had it. I value my healthcare and LEOSA both of which would/could be effected still.

I do know that there are some older numbers from some of the private ranges and someone on this thread said they believe Tom Givens has some numbers about that. Other than looking at your own department and talking to some the folks in Internal Affairs if they'll give up the info I'm not sure you're going to get info for hard and fast numbers. Some of the people I spoke to when I started suspecting this was IA detective from other departments who where becoming instructors at a train the trainer class. Some of them didn't track it and their department didn't want to due to, "only a downside" in their perception. Other's did. What the older detectives told me was that their department got either better or worse and then over time went right back to the roughly the same numbers of UD's, bad shoots etc.

That last concept was important to me because I've seen it over and over again. Not just for real life problems, but for range/FoF/Shoothouse problems and qual problems. Give a person a different gun and they will get worse if they are given a harder to use pistol (DA/SA/LDA) and a bit better if given an easier (For me I'd hand them a Glock). Some of the average and all the below average shooters ended up right in the same place given enough time. But some people that were average or above got better and stayed better when given a Glock. Some of them got significantly better.

One of the great things about police instruction is I get to track each one for weeks (if they are other agencies) and years if they are ours. I got to see how many holstered with a cocked DA/SA. How many holstered without engaging the 1911 safety. Obviously that is a pure number. I didn't track it. They were retrained and if they didn't fix it, they were thrown off the range, not to be an officer. Not much tracking of the individual there.

Ok, how many UDs in that 5 years?

[Inspector71]

In 2008-2009, I did a eleven month TDY to FLETC as a FI. With the issued H&K P2000 V2, LEM, we were averaging 3-5 student failure rate on qual day. This was when the big hiring push was in full swing and we were getting 48-person classes arriving every week. The students that failed got remedial instruction and another attempt at qualification about a week later. Of these, another 3-4 would pass, but we had to wash out the other 1-2 that could not. I particularly remember one CBP class that had an unusual 7 students fail on first attempt at qual day. One of the permanent FLETC staff instructors that day turned on his heels, rolled his eyes and said to me " We never had failure rates like this when we issued the Glock 17". Food for thought.

[DAB]

it would be interesting to study how many that failed never had shot a gun before. or how many that easily passed had grown up shooting as kids.

shooting well takes time to develop as a skill, somewhat like riding a bike. once you know the basics, it's pretty easy to get on target after a few warm up shots. but if you are new to guns, and someone hands you one and attempts to teach you in a few hours what others have spent years learning, they are at a severe disadvantage.

[JustOneGun]

Ok, how many UDs in that 5 years?



Sorry I don't have the data. Just the trends...If you want some hard numbers it would be better to agree to disagree. I don't think any numbers would make you happy. Not only can I not give them, I also admitted that if I had the raw numbers I wouldn't give them to you. It's not only bad for me but raw numbers can be easily manipulated by misusing stats in the same way you and I disagree on how to interpret how changing a physical construct of a trigger can make something better or worse.

To be fair to departments that not only will not keep the stats but they usually keep just enough to see the trend and move on. Why? Because our disagreement that we have here isn't an interwebs disagreement. That's just something silly that people say on the internet. Our disagreement is the same argument that has to be won by officers and trainers during every lawsuit around the country. Ultimately the numbers then becomes an interpretation. There are plenty of people who interpret them incorrectly. If you're an activist or lawyer there are plenty of classes at university that will teach how to lie using them. They make them show something that logically they can't show. Ultimately what we've been talking about is the same thing. Break it down to the geek level, think about it, make your choice and move on. As I think Tom Givens said (or close to it), "You make your choices and take your chances". I add, "Choose wisely." For instructors I add, "Make sure you're correct because you're not screwing yourself up. You're screwing the very people that need you the most, the below average."

[GardoneVT]

Hard numbers on human error are difficult to acquire ; for obvious reasons people are not incentivized to report their own mistakes honestly. Further ,clean data is impossible to obtain- who among us is willing to have their carry pistol wired for data as it's used over a period of years? Data which might be used as evidence in a defensive incident?

Few would participate,and who'd blame them?

[Mjolnir]

Could it accurately be said that a traditional double action is MORE FORGIVING and a short travel, striker fired action be LESS FORGIVING of human error?

I came off of 1911s, fell in love with the P226 Navy, tried the P30 LEM, heavily invested in the VP9 and about one month ago purchased the CZ P10C and ordered a Cajun Gun Works P-07 that same week. I'm also purchasing a second P2000 LEM from a forum member (because two is better than one).

My background: Mech Engr.

I understand the layers of safety and I also understand the potential danger all firearms present and human response to stress.

In my opinion, I always felt (and still feel) safest with the 1911 platform: it's drop safe (SA TRP) and there are two safeties to disengage to fire. Okay, one is what I term "an administrative safety" (the grip safety) because once you place the gun into your hand that safety is disengaged.

I had a P7M8 and I felt that was a safe pistol to carry (12 lbs to cock it and 2 to hold the safety disengaged).

The LEM H&K pistols would be the about equal in my estimation to the P7 and sometimes I felt a little more secure as I could and would apply pressure to the hammer when reloading.

True story with the P2000. The very same day I purchased it I used it. I did not have to fire the pistol but I had to draw it while seated in a vehicle. Guess what? Finger was ON the trigger and the slack was taken up before I could get the pistol turned towards the bad guy. I still think about trigger actions to this day (mainly, how would that have worked out with my current carry rotation?)

Glocks with stock triggers are "okay" add a SCD/Gadget and I'm fine.

H&K VP9. Great shooter. It's what I term "a cheater pistol" as it flatters me on a good day. The trigger? It FEELS "feathery light" though it isn't. In the situations we imagine - the goblin somehow makes his presence known a few seconds prior to you going to steel it seems almost perfect (the Glock 19 seems to "leap out of the holster" compared to the VP9 though). I carry it AIWB and I dry fire the shit out of my second one ton make damned well sure I cognitively comprehend what I *feel* with that trigger.

I'm testing the CZ P10C and it has a rolling break that I don't like for shooting small targets at distance but I find it slightly more forgiving than say a stock Glock or VP9 trigger.

One thing I found myself doing prior to a Gadget was placing my finger BEHIND the trigger as I was holstering these polymer, no external safety, no hammer pistols. Not sure if that's a good idea; it's certainly not something I would try to teach or transfer to someone.

I would like to think "I will never be in a hurry to holster" but that's probably not true. The VP9 could be a disaster in that environment. The 1911, the best for me as I have (rightfully or wrongfully) complete confidence in that system. In fact, TLG stopped me in his Aim Fast Hit Fast, Shooting on the Move Class because I was rapidly re-holstering - but I was using a striker-fired pistol. [emoji102][emoji102]

So the journey for me is to master the DA/LEM. It's not as fast (for me) and the first shot can sometimes still fall low and left. But I'm working on it.

If an accident were to take place we know a human can fly thru ALL safeties and have a "bang!" moment. Thus I use the terms "more forgiving", "less forgiving" and "unforgiving" when describing pistol actions.

What do y'all think?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BehindBlueI's]

Sorry I don't have the data. Just the trends...If you want some hard numbers it would be better to agree to disagree. I don't think any numbers would make you happy. Not only can I not give them, I also admitted that if I had the raw numbers I wouldn't give them to you. It's not only bad for me but raw numbers can be easily manipulated by misusing stats in the same way you and I disagree on how to interpret how changing a physical construct of a trigger can make something better or worse.

To be fair to departments that not only will not keep the stats but they usually keep just enough to see the trend and move on. Why? Because our disagreement that we have here isn't an interwebs disagreement. That's just something silly that people say on the internet. Our disagreement is the same argument that has to be won by officers and trainers during every lawsuit around the country. Ultimately the numbers then becomes an interpretation. There are plenty of people who interpret them incorrectly. If you're an activist or lawyer there are plenty of classes at university that will teach how to lie using them. They make them show something that logically they can't show. Ultimately what we've been talking about is the same thing. Break it down to the geek level, think about it, make your choice and move on. As I think Tom Givens said (or close to it), "You make your choices and take your chances". I add, "Choose wisely." For instructors I add, "Make sure you're correct because you're not screwing yourself up. You're screwing the very people that need you the most, the below average."

Did you ever have the hard numbers? You had no issue pronouncing that the UDs were evenly distributed across platforms based on the numbers of each in use. Now numbers are some how verboten. How many UDs in total were your percentages based on?

What you're telling me is you tracked 525 recruits, if the average is correct, and came up with enough UDs with enough variety in platforms to make such a pronouncement? What was the context of these UDs?

[BehindBlueI's]

Hard numbers on human error are difficult to acquire ; for obvious reasons people are not incentivized to report their own mistakes honestly. Further ,clean data is impossible to obtain- who among us is willing to have their carry pistol wired for data as it's used over a period of years? Data which might be used as evidence in a defensive incident?


That's actually why I only tracked UDs resulting in injury or death. No damage/property damage only are often not reported. Injuries that are very minor may not be reported, but they tend to be. Yes, people will lie, but there is often a witness or some forensic evidence to help with that, as well as the interview itself.

[JustOneGun]

Could it accurately be said that a traditional double action is MORE FORGIVING and a short travel, striker fired action be LESS FORGIVING of human error


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Of course that's what we've debating. On the face of it it seems a longer trigger stroke or a longer and heaver trigger stroke is more forgiving. But my and other's arguments is that it doesn't seem to pan out that way in real life.

So if we start to isolate things like a bad shooting or a UD while holstering we see things like, average people and below having trouble stopping the trigger press after the decision is made to fire or the decision to holster has been made. The distance a pistol passes into the holster from the top edge to the seated position is longer than the max length of all triggers in the DA/SA pistol. The pressure the average person uses to holster the pistol can overcome the average DA/SA trigger. That fact that when we holster without looking we most often holster quickly and with more pressure than average.

I could go on for paragraphs. What you believe in this way and why is the argument.

[GardoneVT]

Of course that's what we've debating. On the face of it it seems a longer trigger stroke or a longer and heaver trigger stroke is more forgiving. But my and other's arguments is that it doesn't seem to pan out that way in real life.

Unfortunately existing sample sizes of Law Enforcement academy trainees isn't a good dataset for application to the wider base of gun owners nationwide. Trainees are vetted before attending the academy, and are instructed using an intentionally limited selection of weapons. Civlian carry classes aren't useful either: students come from a wider background, but the guns they bring to the class might not be ones they'd ever carry. Is an ND with a Glock 17 at a gun class an applicable data point when their EDC is a .380 DAO pocket gun?

To empirically determine the nature of trigger systems vis a vis negligent discharges, we'd need a sample size of people reflective of the American population of gun owners, and basically convince them to agree to have their guns wired for trigger & grip pressure. They'd then need to agree to have data collected about their firearms useage for a period of time, perhaps six months. One group would carry & use control pistols -basically weapons of their choice, the other two groups would use DA/SA guns and striker guns respectively througout the testing period. The assignment of who'd carry what would need to be randomly determined for the sake of data integrity - which wouldn't sit well with a lot of folks. It would be like randomly assigning half of P-F forum users to carry a Glock 17 whether they wanted to or not.

There are few gun owners who'd volunteer for something like that . Which leaves us with scattered data points of limited value to answering that question. Perhaps a group of volunteers for such a test could be recruited , but even then the data wouldn't be clean- so we're back to innuendo and opinion.

[JustOneGun]

Unfortunately existing sample sizes of Law Enforcement academy trainees isn't a good dataset for application to the wider base of gun owners nationwide. Trainees are vetted before attending the academy, and are instructed using an intentionally limited selection of weapons. Civlian carry classes aren't useful either: students come from a wider background, but the guns they bring to the class might not be ones they'd ever carry. Is an ND with a Glock 17 at a gun class an applicable data point when their EDC is a .380 DAO pocket gun?

To empirically determine the nature of trigger systems vis a vis negligent discharges, we'd need a sample size of people reflective of the American population of gun owners, and basically convince them to agree to have their guns wired for trigger & grip pressure. They'd then need to agree to have data collected about their firearms useage for a period of time, perhaps six months. One group would carry & use control pistols -basically weapons of their choice, the other two groups would use DA/SA guns and striker guns respectively througout the testing period. The assignment of who'd carry what would need to be randomly determined for the sake of data integrity - which wouldn't sit well with a lot of folks. It would be like randomly assigning half of P-F forum users to carry a Glock 17 whether they wanted to or not.

There are few gun owners who'd volunteer for something like that . Which leaves us with scattered data points of limited value to answering that question. Perhaps a group of volunteers for such a test could be recruited , but even then the data wouldn't be clean- so we're back to innuendo and opinion.


And you are correct. That is one of the legitimate reasons gov and companies don't keep intricate stats. But they do keep basic stats looking for the trends. Those absolutely are essential. So when a department transitions from one handgun system to another and all of a sudden there is a spike in bad shoots we know something is wrong. We need to fix it. It doesn't tell us the gun is evil or bad or the transition equated to a failure to train. But it does tell us we better start looking for what it might be.

Now consider that in general local, city, state gov tend to be risk adverse when it comes to these things of handguns, training, etc we can take anecdotal data from hundreds of cities, counties, states and feds and look for a trend. How many people have prolonged increases in bad shoots as a trend. How many of them had short trends but switched away from striker sooner than they would have replaced the pistol normally. Why is it that striker fired guns continue to gain contracts in the face of such increasing stats and trends that show how unsafe they are?

The answer to each of these are anecdotal. The answer collectively is a trend in and of themselves. HK has and will give a good deal to large departments in order to get their guns in their hands. So will Glock and Sig. In the risk adverse world of LE and gov that trend will go away from Glock if those numbers spiked or trended up and stayed up. The fact is they didn't and don't. Just another piece of the puzzle.

[Mjolnir]

I think we need to narrow the scope or we will go round and round each other.

We have to make some assumptions to narrow the scope.

Skill Level needs to be more "average" AS COMPARED HERE. I cannot and will not attempt to speak to those who have a pistol but low IQ and EQ and no interest or attention span. No "thing" is safe in their hands or around them.

A mistake is a mistake and when executed at full speed or with enough in attention to detail there is an ND.

We cannot cover those.

What I can discuss is a "momentary lapse of reason" with the emphasis on MOMENTARY.

Then, IMHO, longer stroke, heavier trigger weights will be inherently "safer" than short stroke, lighter trigger weights.

I don't think one can argue (effectively) against that.

1911s? I still *FEEL* they are the safest - or CAN BE. They are not for the modern beginner. But then should a Glock, PPQ or VP9? Not so sure though it's done every day. And though there are NDs we aren't unheard of.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[breakingtime91]

I think we need to narrow the scope or we will go round and round each other.

We have to make some assumptions to narrow the scope.

Skill Level needs to be more "average" AS COMPARED HERE. I cannot and will not attempt to speak to those who have a pistol but low IQ and EQ and no interest or attention span. No "thing" is safe in their hands or around them.

A mistake is a mistake and when executed at full speed or with enough in attention to detail there is an ND.

We cannot cover those.

What I can discuss is a "momentary lapse of reason" with the emphasis on MOMENTARY.

Then, IMHO, longer stroke, heavier trigger weights will be inherently "safer" than short stroke, lighter trigger weights.

I don't think one can argue (effectively) against that.

1911s? I still *FEEL* they are the safest - or CAN BE. They are not for the modern beginner. But then should a Glock, PPQ or VP9? Not so sure though it's done every day. And though there are NDs we aren't unheard of.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hard to argue against a series 80 1911. it is a really good option if you feel like you need redundant safeties.

[JustOneGun]

I think we need to narrow the scope or we will go round and round each other.

We have to make some assumptions to narrow the scope.

Skill Level needs to be more "average" AS COMPARED HERE. I cannot and will not attempt to speak to those who have a pistol but low IQ and EQ and no interest or attention span. No "thing" is safe in their hands or around them.

A mistake is a mistake and when executed at full speed or with enough in attention to detail there is an ND.

We cannot cover those.

What I can discuss is a "momentary lapse of reason" with the emphasis on MOMENTARY.

Then, IMHO, longer stroke, heavier trigger weights will be inherently "safer" than short stroke, lighter trigger weights.

I don't think one can argue (effectively) against that.

1911s? I still *FEEL* they are the safest - or CAN BE. They are not for the modern beginner. But then should a Glock, PPQ or VP9? Not so sure though it's done every day. And though there are NDs we aren't unheard of.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



If you mean me, I don't think we are talking around each other. I just don't agree with your assumptions. Which of course is okay.

[GardoneVT]

And you are correct. That is one of the legitimate reasons gov and companies don't keep intricate stats. But they do keep basic stats looking for the trends. Those absolutely are essential. So when a department transitions from one handgun system to another and all of a sudden there is a spike in bad shoots we know something is wrong. We need to fix it. It doesn't tell us the gun is evil or bad or the transition equated to a failure to train. But it does tell us we better start looking for what it might be.


The spike in "bad shoots" may not have anything to do with the gun model changing. Perhaps the number of attacks against persons that year went up across the board, so attacks against officers - and thus UOF incidents- increased proportionally. We can't look at the accident rate of Municpal Agency X, add it up with Muncipal Agency Y and decided both switching to striker fired duty pistols is part of the cause.

[JustOneGun]

The spike in "bad shoots" may not have anything to do with the gun model changing. Perhaps the number of attacks against persons that year went up across the board, so attacks against officers - and thus UOF incidents- increased proportionally. We can't look at the accident rate of Municpal Agency X, add it up with Muncipal Agency Y and decided both switching to striker fired duty pistols is part of the cause.


Absolutely. The change indicates just that a change that is unexpected. When we look at the possible reasons we can get clues as to why. Could be explainable and nothing to get excited about? Sure. In that case we might just track it until we can see something emerge. All I was indicating was that we could spend thousands on personal and stat tracking and we will usually come up with the same thing, a trend.

[Navyguns]

Um yeah, I don't like your post Ernest Langdon. What informs your audacity to blame the gun community for Sigs failure to properly test their design?

I'm quite honestly tired of being lectured by the elitist firearms instructor industry.

[Navyguns]

You know, you can add him, or anyone else for that matter, to your ignore list and their "lectures" will completely stop. :)


You are absolutely correct. Every forum has a celebrity they placate to.

[Redhat]

Having watched a few clearing barrels get killed I would say the fault is in general education of the manual of arms. IME, on a base where Condition 3 pistols were allowed, the following happened:

1. Servicemember, usually an officer (sorry not sorry #truth), would draw their C3 M9.

2. Servicemember would do a hasty visual chamber check while racking the slide.

3. Servicemember would then drop the magazine.

4. Servicemember would then present the muzzle into the barrel and drop the hammer.

5. Bang.

I just have to ask...why would it be necessary to press the trigger at the clearing barrel?

[Duelist]

I doubt I'll be able to do for the SD9 what EL did for the PX4, but I'll try. :)



The SD9 is 100% SCD-able with a Glock-style drop-in SCD. I can't comment on future products and availability, but I will say that I own 4 or 5 SD9s. :)


ETA: HOLY FUCKING SHIT!!

18971

That's a current Glock SCD on a SD9. The fit is not perfect, but it locks into place, works, and demonstrates that with only minimal modification a SD9/40 SCD is possible. :)

That post is going to cost me some money, maybe. I had a .40 a few years ago. Nicely made, did not mind anything about it except the caliber.

[Beat Trash]

I just read through all 17 pages of this topic as well as the related topic that DB started. Really starting to think about a Beretta PX4 compact right about now.

[Jared]

I just read through all 17 pages of this topic as well as the related topic that DB started. Really starting to think about a Beretta PX4 compact right about now.


Buddy of mine ordered one yesterday, there's some deals out there to be had. I'm kinda responsible, cause he shot mine and loved it. It really is a heck of a little pistol.

[Duelist]

I just have to ask...why would it be necessary to press the trigger at the clearing barrel?

SOP. IOW, they have to.

[TheNewbie]

I doubt I'll be able to do for the SD9 what EL did for the PX4, but I'll try. :)



The SD9 is 100% SCD-able with a Glock-style drop-in SCD. I can't comment on future products and availability, but I will say that I own 4 or 5 SD9s. :)


ETA: HOLY FUCKING SHIT!!

18971

That's a current Glock SCD on a SD9. The fit is not perfect, but it locks into place, works, and demonstrates that with only minimal modification a SD9/40 SCD is possible. :)


I feel teased! That's awesome to see.

[Redhat]

SOP. IOW, they have to.

Maybe but there's usually a supposed reason for SOP's.

[holmes168]

I suspect it's the same reason you are required to pull the trigger on a unload and show clear in competition, to prove the gun is in fact unloaded.

Pretty much- just in case after all the other steps, you still had a round in your weapon- pulling the trigger pretty much made sure you didn't anymore.

[Mjolnir]

Hard to argue against a series 80 1911. it is a really good option if you feel like you need redundant safeties.

I prefer the 70 Series (easier to get a crisp trigger break & fewer parts).

I rather like that I rely on myself to activate the manual safety. But when I first started carrying I chose a Gov't Model and took it to every carbine and pistol class for seven years. So it's second nature.

Second Nature.... that would imply familiarity due to extended proper usage of a mechanism or machine.

And therein lies the key to whatever system we choose. We are human and we are adaptable as a species. So *ALL* data will be confounded.

Conduct your own Failure Mode Analysis, come up with a workaround for each one. Really assess your proposed workaround. Establish a numerical value to the strength of your workaround and how likely you are to ALWAYS perform the task and the difficulty of the proposed task.

Then choose your system and train on it.

At the end of the day it's a slingshot; a primitive tool to sling 115 to 147 grains of copper jacketed lead projectiles.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Redhat]

I suspect it's the same reason you are required to pull the trigger on a unload and show clear in competition, to prove the gun is in fact unloaded.

Doesn't sound like it works too well. In the 20 or so years I carried the M9 we never had that particular step in our clearing procedures and it worked well. Even if one tried, at that point the safety was on so no point in it.

[Trukinjp13]

Okay, that was a lot to digest. This thread has a lot going on lmao.

1- It is very hard for me to get behind a striker gun being equally as safe as a tda/dao. If you are properly TRAINED. Which if you are carrying a weapon, no matter the trigger you should be. How is having all the built in features of a tda gun not safer? Between the weight, length of pull, hammer to check and to manage the trigger. Even a striker with a scd still has a shorter travel and less pull weight.

2. Reminds me of why I carry my px4cc. I am comfortable with the platform and can shoot the gun damn well.

3. I recently picked up a p-10c. I really enjoy shooting her. The trigger is definitely "easier" to shoot then my px4cc. But I do not shoot it better. I would really like a scd for it. I may actually carry it if so. Until then it is a range gun.

4. Since the p-10c is built a lot like a Glock is the drop safety of it also the same? I am curious to this.

5. Debates are good. Lets people see both sides to a discussion. Hopefully it will also help people who might be leaning one way or another.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BehindBlueI's]

Turns out if I have 70% striker and 20% DA/SA and 10% 1911 that's the ratio of screw ups I get over time. They were put through the same training, same everything and made the same mistakes with the same outcomes.

I'm still waiting for what data you used to make this determination, a rough idea of how many UDs in total we're talking, and how you kept track of how many people used each system.


Tracked five years, average of 35 recruits per class, average 3 classes per year (hi was 53? and low was 15?.) High number of classes was 5 in a year and low was 2). Sadly I'm an old retiree. No more access. While I can be a PITA, even in retirement I'm not willing to buck the department and give you info even if I had it. I value my healthcare and LEOSA both of which would/could be effected still.

One of the great things about police instruction is I get to track each one for weeks (if they are other agencies) and years if they are ours. I got to see how many holstered with a cocked DA/SA. How many holstered without engaging the 1911 safety. Obviously that is a pure number. I didn't track it. They were retrained and if they didn't fix it, they were thrown off the range, not to be an officer. Not much tracking of the individual there.

How many UDs did the 525-ish have in those weeks or years? We don't know your department, the notion that you'll lose your healthcare for posting a rough number seems odd, but ok.


Sorry I don't have the data. Just the trends...If you want some hard numbers it would be better to agree to disagree. I don't think any numbers would make you happy. Not only can I not give them, I also admitted that if I had the raw numbers I wouldn't give them to you. It's not only bad for me but raw numbers can be easily manipulated by misusing stats in the same way you and I disagree on how to interpret how changing a physical construct of a trigger can make something better or worse

How do you misinterpret the number of UDs with each given system? Disagreeing is one thing. Indicating you have data you don't is another. I'll ask again. Did you ever actually have hard numbers or is this anecdotal based on what you recall.


And you are correct. That is one of the legitimate reasons gov and companies don't keep intricate stats. But they do keep basic stats looking for the trends.

You said you tracked UDs for 5 years, and apparently with enough precision to verify that the ratios were exactly the same as the ratio of platform types. That doesn't jive.

You presented something as fact. If it's your opinion, that's fine. If you wish to present it as fact based on data you collected over 5 years, it doesn't seem like too big an ask to know total number of UDs, the circumstances, etc. Are we talking accidental shots into the berm? Are we talking shot door panels in the parking lot during admin handling, what?

For the record, our department does not hide UDs. Every single in-service at the range we are reminded of specific events that led to UDs during training so as to not repeat them. We've yet to have an injury at the range, thank God, but we have had a cleaning cabinet, a table, and a vehicle get an unwanted hole. All were during admin handling, and at least two were pulling the trigger to break down the gun. You'll also catch a suspension for having one and it's tracked in software that tracks all your (and the departments) attaboys and aw shits.

[PNWTO]

Like Tom said, same reason as comps and whatnot.

[hufnagel]

At home when it's time to clean the pistol there's additional distractions. Having a risk mitigation trigger system in place can serve as a final warning before Disaster Happens.

To be Captain Obvious, perhaps the choice to clean ones pistol while there are distractions about is a poor life choice?

[hufnagel]

I doubt I'll be able to do for the SD9 what EL did for the PX4, but I'll try. :)



The SD9 is 100% SCD-able with a Glock-style drop-in SCD. I can't comment on future products and availability, but I will say that I own 4 or 5 SD9s. :)


ETA: HOLY FUCKING SHIT!!

18971

That's a current Glock SCD on a SD9. The fit is not perfect, but it locks into place, works, and demonstrates that with only minimal modification a SD9/40 SCD is possible. :)

If it'll work on an SD9VE, you might have just sold me on a SCD and an SD9VE. :D

[rob_s]

I suspect it's the same reason you are required to pull the trigger on a unload and show clear in competition, to prove the gun is in fact unloaded.


Pretty much- just in case after all the other steps, you still had a round in your weapon- pulling the trigger pretty much made sure you didn't anymore.

Almost 15 years of shooting competitions matches, I've seen "empty" guns go bang on the unload and show clear more than a few times.

[Hambo]

What goes around comes around. Maybe the firearms community will listen to voices of reason now that there is a big striker fired problem out there.

I also can't resist pointing out that before Glock we had a striker fired pistol with a 3.5 pounds factory trigger and no safety problems: the HK P7.

[JBP55]

Almost 15 years of shooting competitions matches, I've seen "empty" guns go bang on the unload and show clear more than a few times.

I prefer the the LEO Method used here. Drop the magazine and lock the slide back and holster after Firearms Instructor verifies the pistol is empty.

[Trajan]

Is a DA/SA with a 5lb DA and a 2lb SA really safer than a striker with a 6lb trigger?

What if it's a two stage striker trigger (like a Glock)?

In the end, dumb people are attracted to firearms. There's always going to be negligence.

[Trukinjp13]

Is a DA/SA with a 5lb DA and a 2lb SA really safer than a striker with a 6lb trigger?

What if it's a two stage striker trigger (like a Glock)?

In the end, dumb people are attracted to firearms. There's always going to be negligence.

Who makes a 5 lb da and 2 lb sa from the factory? Or maybe asking who builds a non gamer gun with that trigger? I still believe having a longer da pull is better then a shorter striker. Also I have seen a couple comparisons of striker vs da that had similar lengths of pull. The da has a consistent weight of pull through the travel. Hence why some guys like the rolling break. Vs a striker has barely any weight through the travel until the break.

So you may have the same weight in the break itself. But you have a 1/2 inch of 6 lbs vs 1/16 inch of 6 lbs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[crossrifles]

Is a DA/SA with a 5lb DA and a 2lb SA really safer than a striker with a 6lb trigger?

What if it's a two stage striker trigger (like a Glock)?

In the end, dumb people are attracted to firearms. There's always going to be negligence.

It's not the weight of the trigger that keeps people out of trouble, it's the length of trigger pull.

I do agree with your last statement.

[Thy.Will.Be.Done]

I also can't resist pointing out that before Glock we had a striker fired pistol with a 3.5 pounds factory trigger and no safety problems: the HK P7.

Which is pretty much completely decocked until squeezing the very stiff squeeze-cocker mechanism, this would be about the only way I would take striker fired actions at this point.

[Mjolnir]

Which is pretty much completely decocked until squeezing the very stiff squeeze-cocker mechanism, this would be about the only way I would take striker fired actions at this point.

A Glock will not fire if you dropped it like the Sig P320 has been dropped. Neither will the VP9. I'm willing to test my CZ P10C here shortly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rob_s]

I prefer the the LEO Method used here. Drop the magazine and lock the slide back and holster after Firearms Instructor verifies the pistol is empty.

That doesn't really work for competitions. You're going to turn the person loose and send them off to wander the range once you've cleared them, and many of the holsters used in competition won't reliably secure the pistol with the slide locked back.

The competition method of pulling the trigger works exactly as it's supposed to. Including when the gun still goes bang.

My point wasn't to say otherwise, only to point out that very often "cleared" guns, aren't, and the only way to know for sure is to pull the trigger.

In fact, this is why I always had shooters with DA guns pull the trigger and not simply decock, as the latter misses the entire point.

[Thy.Will.Be.Done]

A Glock will not fire if you dropped it like the Sig P320 has been dropped. Neither will the VP9. I'm willing to test my CZ P10C here shortly.

I said that not only for drop safety, but also just generally handling safety. It takes a very distinct action to squeeze cock the action, therefore far less likely to discharge coming in/out of holster or just being handled for whatever reason.

[Mjolnir]

I said that not only for drop safety, but also just generally handling safety. It takes a very distinct action to squeeze cock the action, therefore far less likely to discharge coming in/out of holster or just being handled for whatever reason.

Sympathetic Response will state that if you're terrified or shocked you will MAKE A FIST.

There was at least one case where an officer shot a suspect with the P7 unintentionally.

NONE of these things (that is, pistols - not singling out the P7PSP or P7M8) are foolproof. Not a single one.

For the record, I really like the P7. I have somewhat limited use of my left hand which precludes me from drawing and cocking the pistol 100 percent of the time so I sold them. The cocking mechanism is an interesting option - it's like a 1911 without external safeties and the cocking mechanism is the grip safety.

Neat!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Thy.Will.Be.Done]

Sympathetic Response will state that if you're terrified or shocked you will MAKE A FIST.

There was at least one case where an officer shot a suspect with the P7 unintentionally.

NONE of these things are foolproof. Not a single one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sure, but again it is just one more layer of safety that has to fail... you can find an example of anything like that. Doesn't mean it does not have it's merits...

[Mjolnir]

Sure, but again it is just one more layer of safety that has to fail... you can find an example of anything like that. Doesn't mean it does not have it's merits...

It has merit when reholstering, certainly. Dropping it, no doubt.

When it is deployed it's cocked *DURING* the drawstroke. It's then little different than a Glock or VP9...

Add a Gadget to a Glock 19 and it's similar.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Erick Gelhaus]

Going back to Ernest & DB's original idea ... a pistol designed around threat management concerns rather than pure shootability sans external safety ... is there one for those of us who are very challenged in terms of hand size?

As an example, shooting a double stack Sig P22whatever decently was near impossible until SM&A released a shorter trigger for those guns in the 90s, which Sig followed with their DAK. Who has shorter reach triggers in guns that match the criteria?

[flyrodr]

Going back to Ernest & DB's original idea ... a pistol designed around threat management concerns rather than pure shootability sans external safety ... is there one for those of us who are very challenged in terms of hand size?

As an example, shooting a double stack Sig P22whatever decently was near impossible until SM&A released a shorter trigger for those guns in the 90s, which Sig followed with their DAK. Who has shorter reach triggers in guns that match the criteria?

I've found the P2000 and P2000SK in the Light LEM configuration to work well with my small hands/short fingers. And DB does rate the LEM right up there for "thoughtful" usage. The initial trigger pull is mostly slack, so while the actual reach might be as long as a DA pull, the lower resistance makes it more manageable, thus seeming to be less reach. Yet it does provide those millimeter/milliseconds of extra threat management consideration. Having compared it (and the hammer) to similar SFAs, I (n=1) certainly believe that extra pull distance is "safer", even though the resistance is low.

[OnionsAndDragons]

Going back to Ernest & DB's original idea ... a pistol designed around threat management concerns rather than pure shootability sans external safety ... is there one for those of us who are very challenged in terms of hand size?

As an example, shooting a double stack Sig P22whatever decently was near impossible until SM&A released a shorter trigger for those guns in the 90s, which Sig followed with their DAK. Who has shorter reach triggers in guns that match the criteria?

I prefer trying to solve that issue with grip sizing. It's harder to do with a Sig, but Berettas and CZs have some great thin grip options to help make a stock trigger config easier on the small-handed.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Mjolnir]

Going back to Ernest & DB's original idea ... a pistol designed around threat management concerns rather than pure shootability sans external safety ... is there one for those of us who are very challenged in terms of hand size?

As an example, shooting a double stack Sig P22whatever decently was near impossible until SM&A released a shorter trigger for those guns in the 90s, which Sig followed with their DAK. Who has shorter reach triggers in guns that match the criteria?

HK P2000 LEM preferably with the heavy trigger rebound spring, light firing pin spring and DA MAINSPRING.

It's the Todd L Green Special and works great.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Mjolnir]

I prefer trying to solve that issue with grip sizing. It's harder to do with a Sig, but Berettas and CZs have some great thin grip options to help make a stock trigger config easier on the small-handed.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The E2 grips work well on Sig Classic pistols.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[DNW]

Very interesting discussion.

We miss some tremendous learning opportunities by not having better data on why accidents or unintentional discharges happen. In the firearms community and gun culture generally mythology rules the day. Without hard numbers and good investigations you always go back to mythology and biased assumptions. At the end of the day agencies are as bad as the industry, they are more interested in limiting liability than true risk management.

Personally, I could care less about looking across the "average" public gun owner. In the LE and Mil environment we have varying control of variables such as equipment, policy, training etc. If we understood why UDs are occurring we can address it with those controls. What works to reduce risk in this environment doesn't translate over to the public where so much more is up to the individual.

I think there is validity to the idea of a better trigger for threat management, but is that going to prevent the greatest number of bad outcomes? Who knows without good data. The vast majority of UDs I have been involved with investigating or reviewing were the result of intentionally pulling the trigger on a gun someone thought was unloaded. No trigger will prevent that. The "sympathetic squeeze" or flinch reaction trigger pull can defeat any double action trigger out there. Is the rate of those errors higher with striker-fired guns, or are we saying the probability is higher? If we think the probability is higher but we don't have accident rate data to support that than maybe the assumption is wrong.

(My assumptions and beliefs are limited, and based on working for an agency that carries TDA Sigs, and carrying and training with the same for the last 20 years.)

I would love to see an independent organization like Force Science, but dedicated to the advancement of firearms knowledge and training for real world use, based on data and scientific method. Places like PF come close with the sharing of good info from some true SMEs, but it is still hard to separate signal from noise. The vast majority of end-users and rubber meets the road results are out there distributed in agencies and organizations that don't share info and seek to only reduce their financial liability.

[BehindBlueI's]

I prefer the the LEO Method used here. Drop the magazine and lock the slide back and holster after Firearms Instructor verifies the pistol is empty.

On our range we do dry fire into the berm/sand barrel as well. It is simply an extra step that ensures the gun is empty.

Our Glock procedure is:
1) Remove magazine
2) Run the slide multiple times (this is redundant on purpose as if you skipped #1 you'll see cartridges eject)
3) Lock slide to rear
4) Visually and physically (as in put your finger in the mag well and in the breach) verify the firearm is empty
5) Release slide
6) Dry fire into appropriate back stop (generally the berm, but we have sand barrels as well)
7) Run and lock slide
8) RSO verifies empty
9) Either holster locked back or release slide, depending on instructions of RSO

Then we'll pull the trigger en masse at the end of the day for cleaning.

[deputyG23]

Ernest gets the internet win for the day.
http://www.kappit.com/img/pics/201412_1028_bbdcc_sm.jpg

As for myself, when I retire in less than two years I'll most likely never shoot a striker fired gun again much less own one.

This will be my direction most likely as well when I pull the pin maybe soon. Revolvers and probably the P250 I just picked up for a song.

[Trukinjp13]

On our range we do dry fire into the berm/sand barrel as well. It is simply an extra step that ensures the gun is empty.

Our Glock procedure is:
1) Remove magazine
2) Run the slide multiple times (this is redundant on purpose as if you skipped #1 you'll see cartridges eject)
3) Lock slide to rear
4) Visually and physically (as in put your finger in the mag well and in the breach) verify the firearm is empty
5) Release slide
6) Dry fire into appropriate back stop (generally the berm, but we have sand barrels as well)
7) Run and lock slide
8) RSO verifies empty
9) Either holster locked back or release slide, depending on instructions of RSO

Then we'll pull the trigger en masse at the end of the day for cleaning.

This is a pretty fool proof way of doing business.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BehindBlueI's]

This is a pretty fool proof way of doing business.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I suspect it's why we have a very low rate of incidents at the range. We added the en masse end of day trigger pull because of two accidents in over a decade. Our range staff is dedicated and excellent. Range1 doesn't post here any more that I see, but he's one of our retirees and could provide more info on how they arrived at the standards they did, but they work and they work well.

[TexasSiegfried]

As a still relative newbie, it would be interesting to hear what Mssrs Givens and Elifritz might have to say regarding the industry, trigger choices, etc. A perspective from the other side, if you will.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[Redhat]

I suspect it's why we have a very low rate of incidents at the range. We added the en masse end of day trigger pull because of two accidents in over a decade. Our range staff is dedicated and excellent. Range1 doesn't post here any more that I see, but he's one of our retirees and could provide more info on how they arrived at the standards they did, but they work and they work well.

Man that's a lot of steps

[TexasSiegfried]

They have both taught me a lot through their writings, though not yet in person, and I think just think it would be interesting g to hear their perspective, if they were interested in sharing it.

I don't knowwhy, but for some reason I had the idea that Greg Elifritz did post here....must have been beer or lack of sleep!!

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[BehindBlueI's]

Man that's a lot of steps

It is. There's a lot of redundancy built in. However it takes very little time, and it's so ingrained in me I do it before dry firing, etc. even on my own time.

We're all human, we can all screw up. That's the whole point of redundancy and, really, the safety continuum. If I have to screw up a whole bunch of times in a row vs just once, the first is safer. Sort of why we have multiple rules for safe gun handling. I can screw up trigger discipline, I can screw up muzzle awareness, to hurt someone I have to screw up both, etc.

[GJM]

As a still relative newbie, it would be interesting to hear what Mssrs Givens and Elifritz might have to say regarding the industry, trigger choices, etc. A perspective from the other side, if you will.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

I don't recall Tom G's words on this subject, but if we look at his actions, last I heard, he was carrying a Glock 35 IWB. No idea if he has a Gadget.


Going back to Ernest & DB's original idea ... a pistol designed around threat management concerns rather than pure shootability sans external safety ... is there one for those of us who are very challenged in terms of hand size?

As an example, shooting a double stack Sig P22whatever decently was near impossible until SM&A released a shorter trigger for those guns in the 90s, which Sig followed with their DAK. Who has shorter reach triggers in guns that match the criteria?

This thread has sort of become a safety/shootability debate, with pistol choices being made on where you come out on prioritizing shootability and safety. There are other considerations, like accuracy, reliability, cost, durability, and user serviceability that often get thrown in the mix.

[Wondering Beard]

Man that's a lot of steps

Doesn't feel that way to me. It's pretty much what I do by myself (up to only and including#6 as I don't carry an RSO around). It's essentially the same regular steps you would do for unloading any semi auto, just more thorough at each step.

[Stephanie B]

OK, so here is a statement that many will not like. This whole thing is the gun communities own fault!

The race has been on to see which manufacturer could build a gun with the shortest and lightest trigger on a striker fired gun for years. Between the aftermarket kits for striker fired guns to the updates to current guns from major manufacturers and new guns hitting the market, it is pretty clear that the customers want as close to a 1911 trigger as they can get, but with no manual safety. The whole culture has gone to the bullshit bravado of "keep your booger hook off the bang switch dude" mentality. We have developed an acceptance for basically single action guns with no safeties.

Yikes. 200+ posts in two days!

Anywho...

Yeah. I bought a Glock 23 in the late `90s. I could not get comfortable with what I perceived to be a gun that had about the trigger weight of a stock 1911 and had no safeties. I couldn't see the difference between the Glock and a Series 80 1911 with the thumb safety off and the grip safety deactivated (or, for that matter, a cocked K-frame).

I got rid of it in fairly short order.

[Olim9]

I don't recall Tom G's words on this subject, but if we look at his actions, last I heard, he was carrying a Glock 35 IWB. No idea if he has a Gadget.

Not to put any words in Tom's mouth but:

He does use a Glock 35, no gadget. I recall from my class in April with Givens, he briefly mentioned DAO, DA/SA and LEM not being worth learning. This was a while back but I remember him saying something along these lines.

[octagon]

I find it interesting that so much has remained basically the same. Sights have been front sight post and a rear notch to put it in. Double or single stack box magazine that fits in the grip. Barrel locks up with slide the vast majority by Browning or modified Browning design. Controls are in the same basic places and work the same basic way. Recoil spring under barrel and so on. So many things have been the same or very similar for decades yet trigger/firing systems seem to keep changing and new designs being introduced. Just thinking of how old most designs are and then how new trigger/firing systems are and how many different types there are. Single action,double/single,striker fired (pre tensioned or semi pre-tensioned) Double action only, Double Action Kelerman, LEM, LDA,squeeze cocker and probably a few I missed. Many of these designs have come out in the last few decades or so at least for semi auto handgun. While some are very old and a couple only came out with smaller market segment there are a lot of different designs to get the index finger to cause the gun to discharge.

Just looking at aftermarket parts and the most common part available seems to be triggers or related parts that affect the trigger like springs. Sights may be more common but still remain the same basic design of front post and a rear sight notch to put it in whether they have 1,2,3 or more dots,dashes or brightwork on them.

The problem seems to be that everyone is chasing trigger designs to solve a problem that cannot be solved by triggers or any hardware. Consider if all trigger types are a good trigger( not gritty,no excess stacking,consistent no excess overtravel etc) then most people shoot shorter and lighter triggers easier for speed and accuracy. This also makes it easier to shoot the gun at or when the person may not want to. Longer,heavier trigger pulls are harder for most people to shoot but offer more time and effort required to shoot so they can offer a larger margin of safety in not shooting when not intended. Trigger and manual safeties may add other layers of safety too. However these trigger designs are diametrically opposed to each other and how they best fit the end user.

Novices can shoot light short trigger easier to get hits but probably should be using a longer heavier trigger design for the safety margin as they train less intensely to start and less frequently. Some suggest DA/SA as a solution. That allows for longer heavier first pull for safety margin and shorter lighter pull for more shots. It makes sense until you consider how these same novices aren't trained and don't reinforce decocking. Some even when initially loading up. Can they hit with that first DA shot or is it a throw away that hits who or what may be nearby. A DAO or DAK makes sense from a safety margin standpoint for these novices but then they can't,won't or don't spend the time and effort to get good hits with these types of guns. These guns don't reward their short time practice which will likely lead to even less practice and less confidence.

The experts and higher skilled shooters can often shoot any trigger design reasonably well and are informed on the benefits and risks of the different designs. These shooters also train properly and reinforce good habits so have less need for the mechanical safety margins offered by the longer heavier trigger designs.

The rest of the people fall somewhere between novice and expert. The balancing of risk vs ease of shooting, ability to shoot decently early in the process after getting a gun and retaining that ability vs time,ammo and training required to achieve decent skill with a gun that is more challenging to shoot. Every design has trade offs,risks and benefits when compared to a different design. Each shooter must choose the best design for themselves and their needs,training and practice levels etc. The great thing is that we have so many choices. The awful thing is that we have so many choices.

[David S.]

Not to put any words in Tom's mouth but:

He does use a Glock 35, no gadget. I recall from my class in April with Givens, he briefly mentioned DAO, DA/SA and LEM not being worth learning. This was a while back but I remember him saying something along these lines.

I believe he said something along those lines in the interview he did on MASF Civilian Carry Radio podcast, Episode 20.

[blues]

I believe he said something along those lines in the interview he did on MASF Civilian Carry Radio podcast, Episode 20.


https://youtu.be/bou-YCNFTSM?t=3098

[breakingtime91]

https://youtu.be/bou-YCNFTSM?t=3098

This should be interesting :D

[JHC]

Not to put any words in Tom's mouth but:

He does use a Glock 35, no gadget. I recall from my class in April with Givens, he briefly mentioned DAO, DA/SA and LEM not being worth learning. This was a while back but I remember him saying something along these lines.

Well considering how may threat management and shootings Glocks have been somehow managed through here and OCONUS, they are probably pretty well vetted as not being some dark art that can't be learned well. :D

[Dagga Boy]

If you go back to my original "why I like the LEM" article, I am not against striker guns and Glocks in particular. Carried lots of Glocks, and just bought a 19 last week. Where the problem lies is handing them out like candy to non dedicated folks. Good training, and an experienced shooter is where the Striker guns are a great fit and very good choice.

[octagon]

Just to add to the ongoing discussion about what experts carry. I listen to MASF and they do a segment of lightning round questions that usually are quick one word answers. DA/SA or striker is one, Shotgun,rifle or handgun for home defense is another and a couple others. Almost all that I have heard say striker or it doesn't matter. That doesn't mean a lot but it is added data points from respected people with documented knowledge and experience not internet/YT/IG unknowns.

[Jared]

This should be interesting :D

That was a good show, I've watched it twice.

[Doc_Glock]

Going back to Ernest & DB's original idea ... a pistol designed around threat management concerns rather than pure shootability sans external safety ... is there one for those of us who are very challenged in terms of hand size?


I will third the P2000 LEM. I had to run mine with the XL grip to get a typical Glock length trigger release. This is with decidedly medium hands. The reach to trigger was uncomfortably short with the smaller inserts.

[blues]

That was a good show, I've watched it twice.

I had posted the link at the point in time of the interview when the matter was discussed. Now it seems to have reverted to the beginning of the podcast.

I believe it was at the 51:30 minute mark. Sorry for any trouble locating the spot.

[Jared]

I had posted the link at the point in time of the interview when the matter was discussed. Now it seems to have reverted to the beginning of the podcast.

I believe it was close to the 55 minute mark. Sorry for any trouble locating the spot.

That's okay, it's a good enough show to be worth watching beginning to end

[JBP55]

On our range we do dry fire into the berm/sand barrel as well. It is simply an extra step that ensures the gun is empty.

Our Glock procedure is:
1) Remove magazine
2) Run the slide multiple times (this is redundant on purpose as if you skipped #1 you'll see cartridges eject)
3) Lock slide to rear
4) Visually and physically (as in put your finger in the mag well and in the breach) verify the firearm is empty
5) Release slide
6) Dry fire into appropriate back stop (generally the berm, but we have sand barrels as well)
7) Run and lock slide
8) RSO verifies empty
9) Either holster locked back or release slide, depending on instructions of RSO

Then we'll pull the trigger en masse at the end of the day for cleaning.

We do not do #6.

[Redhat]

We do not do #6.

- Unholster and place muzzle into clearing barrel
- Safety on
- Magazine out - hand it to clearing barrel NCO
- Lock slide to rear
- Inspect chamber

*All steps are directed and verified by the clearing barrel NCO.

I suspect many incidents can be traced back to being in a hurry. Also, when you expect the chamber to be empty, your eyes/brain can play tricks on you. I have no idea about procedures in the competition community.

[Olim9]

I believe he said something along those lines in the interview he did on MASF Civilian Carry Radio podcast, Episode 20.

Good to know I wasn't talking crazy. Now I finally know why Tom exactly carries a Glock 35 too!:D

[spinmove_]

If you go back to my original "why I like the LEM" article, I am not against striker guns and Glocks in particular. Carried lots of Glocks, and just bought a 19 last week. Where the problem lies is handing them out like candy to non dedicated folks. Good training, and an experienced shooter is where the Striker guns are a great fit and very good choice.

So, just out of sheer morbid curiosity and because this is literally a trigger thread, why does a person who advocates strongly for the LEM system and personally currently carries a Px4cc purchase a Glock 19?


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

[lwt16]

I have a rookie sergeant on my squad at work now that runs monthy weapons inspections.........okay, I'm good with it but I try to always be the first in line at the clearing barrel. We have several freshly minted rookies direct from the academy and it's quite the show to watch them nervously clear their G17s.

We could benefit from a standardized procedure that everyone follows. Our most recent ND was a Captain that cranked off a round into his office ceiling......he never was a "gun guy" and he attempted to cover it up but most of his subordinates joke about it.

Personally, I do the mag drop and hold it in my primary hand pinkie and then rack the slide several times. Visually verify the chamber is empty on a slide lock and then reholster at slide lock. My duty holster allows me to do this and then I retrieve the chambered round from the top of our clearing barrel. I place the loaded mag on top of the barrel along side the top off round and then retrieve the pistol from the holster while still at slide lock and hand it over for inspection.

Once I get it back, I insert mag and overhand the slide closed. Drop the mag and then holster the gun while I top off the magazine but I don't swing the hood back......then when the mag is topped off, I retrieve the pistol and insert the magazine. Tap it once more, tap the rear of the slide, holster it up. 21 years of doing it this way during inspections has been drama free.

Been fooling with firearms since 1976 and never had a ND. Still have a healthy respect due to all the stories I have heard over the years of people getting too complacent and overconfident and cranking off rounds negligently. As an agency, we have had plenty here over the years.

Regards.

[JTQ]

Good to know I wasn't talking crazy. Now I finally know why Tom exactly carries a Glock 35 too!:D
Some comments I've read on this forum, that I don't think he mentioned (at least directly) in the video.

I think he's said he initially left the 1911 as it is a "one or two bad guy gun, in three or four bad guy world."

I also think he's commented his initial move was to the G23 thinking it was a good match to a 1911 Commander, which he liked, but he found it unpleasant to shoot the G23. Then went to the G22, and still didn't like shooting it. Finally the G35 which he liked.

[spinmove_]

Some comments I've read on this forum, that I don't think he mentioned (at least directly) in the video.

I think he's said he initially left the 1911 as it is a "one or two bad guy gun, in three or four bad guy world."

I also think he's commented his initial move was to the G23 thinking it was a good match to a 1911 Commander, which he liked, but he found it unpleasant to shoot the G23. Then went to the G22, and still didn't like shooting it. Finally the G35 which he liked.

Watched the video this morning. He did mention that normally .40S&W isn't all that pleasant to shoot and is hard on guns, but in the G35 it's manageable, no bigger than a 1911, carries more ammo than a 1911, and is lighter than a 1911.


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

[Dagga Boy]

So, just out of sheer morbid curiosity and because this is literally a trigger thread, why does a person who advocates strongly for the LEM system and personally currently carries a Px4cc purchase a Glock 19?


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

I have a crap load of everything. As an instructor I need to be able to teach all these systems, diagnose shooters on all these systems, my recommendations to people based on their needs and not mine, and to have an open mind to the pros and cons of all of these systems and where they best fit for specific uses. I try to stay up on shooting many different guns and running them enough to stay proficient with them. Having shot several hundred thousand rounds through 9mm Glocks over the years, it is a easy gun for me to use.

There is a huge issue right now in the "training world" with instructors only only shoot one kind of gun and are not doing their students any favors.
The G19 I bought is an old Gen 3 and has an incredibly well done grip reduction and beaver tail. I got into the gun cheap and it makes for a great disposable gun that I know intimately, have lots of spare parts for and can work on, and will make a good student loaner if needed. Unlike my PX4CC, it will not be carried AIWB, but is certainly a solid, proven firearm. It also came from an era when he Glocks were super consistent and very reliable. I got it dirt cheap, and it is a long term keeper.

[spinmove_]

I have a crap load of everything. As an instructor I need to be able to teach all these systems, diagnose shooters on all these systems, my recommendations to people based on their needs and not mine, and to have an open mind to the pros and cons of all of these systems and where they best fit for specific uses. I try to stay up on shooting many different guns and running them enough to stay proficient with them. Having shot several hundred thousand rounds through 9mm Glocks over the years, it is a easy gun for me to use.

There is a huge issue right now in the "training world" with instructors only only shoot one kind of gun and are not doing their students any favors.
The G19 I bought is an old Gen 3 and has an incredibly well done grip reduction and beaver tail. I got into the gun cheap and it makes for a great disposable gun that I know intimately, have lots of spare parts for and can work on, and will make a good student loaner if needed. Unlike my PX4CC, it will not be carried AIWB, but is certainly a solid, proven firearm. It also came from an era when he Glocks were super consistent and very reliable. I got it dirt cheap, and it is a long term keeper.

And that's pretty much exactly why I figured that you bought one. Thank you for confirming my suspicions.


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

[breakingtime91]

If you go back to my original "why I like the LEM" article, I am not against striker guns and Glocks in particular. Carried lots of Glocks, and just bought a 19 last week. Where the problem lies is handing them out like candy to non dedicated folks. Good training, and an experienced shooter is where the Striker guns are a great fit and very good choice.

Do you think a DA/SA is a better choice for a begineer? If so, I find it interesting because that goes against what I have heard from other people.

[Dagga Boy]

Do you think a DA/SA is a better choice for a begineer? If so, I find it interesting because that goes against what I have heard from other people.

It is a harder choice that requires some training. Here is the issue in a nutshell. Teaching a new shooter to shoot is easier with a gun that has a trigger that is easier to manage and with a simple manual of arms. Things like Glocks are easy to teach. Here lies the problem...teaching to shoot versus teaching to daily carry a firearm, living an armed lifestyle, managing daily events and use of force confrontations, managing home defense scenarios, managing administrative handling, and the various pitfalls of actually carrying a concealed firearm at all times is a whole different ball game and involves a whole bunch of other issues.

My new girlfriend is doing awesome with a PX4CC even with instructors who are teaching much of the process poorly (we are separated by several states till next month). She loves the DA/SA. She understands all the "why's" and intends to carry daily an extra in a manner that is a good place for DA/SA. Then you have my kid. She can shoot a DA/SA, but will be pretty much limited to going shooting recreationally for a few more years. She will be likely settling on a striker fired pistol (M&P 9 mm and an M&P 22). When she starts carrying later in life, that may change. My kid has the benefit of a dad who has enough stuff and enough exposure to lots of systems to let her try several things and we can truely fit her current needs and place in life. In the words of Pat Rogers, "Mission drives the gear train".

[M2CattleCo]

*I'm not DB*
My beginner pistol was a Beretta M9. I did fine with it. I was lucky and learned from a guy who was issued an M9 and liked it, so I didn't know how horrible and impossible they were until years later when I got into the internet. By that time I was carrying a Glock 23. When I transitioned from the M9 to the 23 I immediately improved in everything but raw split times. Glock is just a simpler tool.

I don't think starting out on a DA/SA is any different than using one as an advanced shooter. It takes more time, work, and dedication.

As with any firearms training, good training is essential as there are a few more steps to running a DA/SA where the potential for bad training scars exists.

[GJM]

I think there might be a different answer on whether the beginner is a beginner on the way to intermediate, or the beginner will never have more than the most basic skills. If they are forever a beginner, maybe a revolver, LEM or DAK?

Something unrelated to beginners, that occurred to me watching an episode of Border Wars last night, is our CBP officers appear to do a lot more wrestling with people and traversing rough terrain than most -- bet the P2000 works well for them.

[LSP552]

Do you think a DA/SA is a better choice for a begineer? If so, I find it interesting because that goes against what I have heard from other people.

Not Darryl, but it's a trade off, like everything in life. It takes more time and effort initially with a TDA vs teaching someone to "shoot" with a striker fired. But there are definitely advantages of a TDA for people management and it's generally more forgiving of mistakes. And mistakes are easy for new shooters to make. It's kind of ironic that the people who might benefit the most from a more forgiving of mistakes platform are the ones who will probably never be exposed to it.

Two big problems are most gun owners are not going to really train enough to be competent with anything, and there are so few instructors now who really know how to teach TDA.

I'm old enough to remember when the Glock started taking hold in law enforcement and there was a LOT of NDs during that transition.

[blues]

I'm old enough to remember when the Glock started taking hold in law enforcement and there was a LOT of NDs during that transition.

Even when just putting the gun back in the old tupperware box with the post which the trigger guard had to fit around. (Happened after a range visit, not surprisingly.)

Was on hand for one that had near tragic consequences. In the end the agent got a settlement from Glock (for his own mistake), Glock ended up changing the box, and the "genius" was later promoted into the upper levels of management within the SAC office.

[M2CattleCo]

I think there might be a different answer on whether the beginner is a beginner on the way to intermediate, or the beginner will never have more than the most basic skills. If they are forever a beginner, maybe a revolver, LEM or DAK?

Something unrelated to beginners, that occurred to me watching an episode of Border Wars last night, is our CBP officers appear to do a lot more wrestling with people and traversing rough terrain than most -- bet the P2000 works well for them.


That's a good point. Usually if people are motivated enough to get training, they'll eventually try enough pistols that they'll find what works for themselves. The ones who aren't, will either just qual with what they're issued, or leave it in the house or 'in the truck'.

I think the V2 LEM is a pretty decent choice for the CBP, but I've yet to meet anyone that thinks the pistol is worth a damn at all. I run into a few down here in South Texas...

[StraitR]

Our most recent ND was a Captain that cranked off a round into his office ceiling......he never was a "gun guy" and he attempted to cover it up but most of his subordinates joke about it.




Do you think a different trigger system would have prevented this?


A real life "desk pop", that's hilarious*, and he should never live it down. I hope someone presented him with a wooden gun. If you don't know what I'm talking about, reference "The other guys desk pop" on YT. I laugh so hard I come to tears every time I watch it. The Other Guys sounds like a good plan for tonight.

*Obviously only funny because nobody got hurt. This should go without saying, but you never know these days.

[M2CattleCo]

There's a hole in the ceiling above my bosses desk that he put there with a DAO J-frame. I watched my grandfather put a 38 in the ground right between his feet with a DAO J-frame about thirty years ago.

So I'm not really in camp that thinks a DA is much of a safeguard...

[JTQ]

A real life "desk pop", that's hilarious*, and he should never live it down. I hope someone presented him with a wooden gun. If you don't know what I'm talking about, reference "The other guys desk pop" on YT. I laugh so hard I come to tears every time I watch it. The Other Guys sounds like a good plan for tonight.
Hey, don't go chasing waterfalls.

[spinmove_]

The more I read about this subject the more it somewhat makes me scratch my head why TDA pistols are viewed as antiquated and irrelevant.

The first DA shot isn't a hindrance and isn't any worse than a DA revolver press. Yet revolvers are recommended for some people.

The decocker seems to be somewhat akin to a Yield sign. Everyone has seen one before, but few seem to know how to actually use it properly. Why is using a decocker so hard for many to use, but a safety on a rifle, shotgun, or 1911 is a no-brainer?

TDA triggers are very shootable, the hammer is instantly identifiable for what condition it is in, and decocking literally takes no more administrative handling and manipulation than a safety. How is it so many think it's rocket science?


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

[breakingtime91]

There's a hole in the ceiling above my bosses desk that he put there with a DAO J-frame. I watched my grandfather put a 38 in the ground right between his feet with a DAO J-frame about thirty years ago.

So I'm not really in camp that thinks a DA is much of a safeguard...

Same. Saw a guy ND his m9 by showing that the safety was on.

[breakingtime91]

The more I read about this subject the more it somewhat makes me scratch my head why TDA pistols are viewed as antiquated and irrelevant.

The first DA shot isn't a hindrance and isn't any worse than a DA revolver press. Yet revolvers are recommended for some people.

The decocker seems to be somewhat akin to a Yield sign. Everyone has seen one before, but few seem to know how to actually use it properly. Why is using a decocker so hard for many to use, but a safety on a rifle, shotgun, or 1911 is a no-brainer?

TDA triggers are very shootable, the hammer is instantly identifiable for what condition it is in, and decocking literally takes no more administrative handling and manipulation than a safety. How is it so many think it's rocket science?


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

Have you met non dedicated gun handlers? Also administrative handling being 100% doesn't mean that post shooting handling is going to be the same. Daggas article references having to walk a fellow officer through decocking post shooting. So ya, we can go back and forth til were blue in the face but If striker guns are easier to hurt yourself, DA/SA are harder to handle and teach. If handled wrong I do not see how a DA/SA is any safer than a mishandled striker gun. With that said I avoid fully tensioned strikers because I believe that set up is inherently less safe that partially tensioned or DA guns.

[spinmove_]

Have you met non dedicated gun handlers? Also administrative handling being 100% doesn't mean that post shooting handling is going to be the same. Daggas article references having to walk a fellow officer through decocking post shooting. So ya, we can go back and forth til were blue in the face but If striker guns are easier to hurt yourself, DA/SA are harder to handle and teach. If handled wrong I do not see how a DA/SA is any safer than a mishandled striker gun. With that said I avoid fully tensioned strikers because I believe that set up is inherently less safe that partially tensioned or DA guns.

I totally agree that a mishandled gun, regardless of manual of arms, can and will be UD'd. That comes down to either poor training or failure to handle the firearm properly by the end user.

I have met and currently live with non-dedicated gun handlers. Honestly if they actually shot more than once every 4 years, I might work with them, but it's not really an issue at this time.

Again, I don't care what trigger system anyone uses. I just think we need to hold people to a higher standard with regards to handling firearms. If we did that, maybe more people would see the value in TDA pistols or having a SCD for the Glock or similar SFA pistol. I currently carry a G19, but thanks to Tom, I probably won't ever carry another Glock without an SCD because why not have that extra layer available?


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

[LSP552]

There's a hole in the ceiling above my bosses desk that he put there with a DAO J-frame. I watched my grandfather put a 38 in the ground right between his feet with a DAO J-frame about thirty years ago.

So I'm not really in camp that thinks a DA is much of a safeguard...

It's not when there is a deliberate decision to pull the trigger on what they think is an empty weapon. It is for NDs when you don't meant to deliberately pull the trigger. It's not idiot proof but the distance of travel, visual clues and heavier pull do tend to provide more feedback that the noise will occur.

I actually saved a dirt bag's life carrying a 4" model 66. Answering a domestic from an inner city mom who's son is armed with a butcher knife and threatens to kill her over her failure to cook an acceptable dinner. Me and another trooper respond and jr is sitting on a couch holding a knife I draw to a low ready and start with the commands. He jumps up and yells "you will have to kill me MF." I snap the gun up, plant the red ramp on his chest and start a controlled, deliberate trigger stroke. He drops the knife, collapses on the couch crying please don't kill me." He saw the cylinder roll, my parter saw the hammer move and the idiot make the best choice of his life.

[JustOneGun]

That's a good point. Usually if people are motivated enough to get training, they'll eventually try enough pistols that they'll find what works for themselves. The ones who aren't, will either just qual with what they're issued, or leave it in the house or 'in the truck'.

I think the V2 LEM is a pretty decent choice for the CBP, but I've yet to meet anyone that thinks the pistol is worth a damn at all. I run into a few down here in South Texas...



This is a good starting point about, "Why does it matter?"

1. If you have the drive, money, work ethic and a bit of genetic ability you could be the next Ernest Langdon. If that's you and you don't care about CCW or getting robbed, then who cares. Pick your platform and start working hard.

2. What if you want to do both, be the next Langdon and carry a gun to protect yourself. If you're on the upper end of the learning curve and not on the low end of the genetic curve you will just lag a bit behind in ability if you chose a harder to learn pistol. As long as you don't get in a shooting between the time you are new and when your ability catches up to where you would have been with an easier platform it's no big deal. Again, who cares. If you do need the pistol during that time will it affect the outcome of your shooting? Hard to tell. The answer is, "It might." I'm convinced that the average police officer wins their gunfights because they suck less than the criminal. How long will you lag behind in skill development? That depends on the amount of time, money and genetics. See #3 below for further.

3. We all start out think/hoping/planning we are the next (insert awesome professional gun person). I'll give you the Charles Barkley answer, "You're not me. You're not going to the NBA. You have the perfect opportunity to get a free or almost free degree. Stay in school. Get good grades. That will help you in life." I'm just playing the odds here, most of you (and I) are not going to be Langdon. Not even close. That means the lower you are on that bell curve the longer you will lag in ability. If you happen to be on the lower end of genetics, ability, money(not as much or no training) then you may languish forever trying to master the DA/SA.

4. Does this mean I'm suggesting everyone should use a Glock or similar? No. I am saying two things. A: Glock are not evil monsters to be avoided. No matter the platform you will have to include safety and procedures to keep from having an accident. There is no more likelihood of having an accident between platforms. B: If you are new and think I'm wrong and want insurance in a platform then please, please, please consider one that has the same trigger pull every time. Or at least one that is close(functionally) the same every time. IMO there is no place in modern day self defense for DA/SA because there are other viable alternatives.

[lwt16]

Do you think a different trigger system would have prevented this?


A real life "desk pop", that's hilarious*, and he should never live it down. I hope someone presented him with a wooden gun. If you don't know what I'm talking about, reference "The other guys desk pop" on YT. I laugh so hard I come to tears every time I watch it. The Other Guys sounds like a good plan for tonight.

*Obviously only funny because nobody got hurt. This should go without saying, but you never know these days.

Yep, real live desk pop..

We've had windshields shot out of patrol cars, side windows shot out, walls.....etc. Most of these were with our Beretta 92 DA/SA pistols. Surprisingly, M&Ps and Glocks have been better/less drama.

Weird.

[BehindBlueI's]

There's a hole in the ceiling above my bosses desk that he put there with a DAO J-frame. I watched my grandfather put a 38 in the ground right between his feet with a DAO J-frame about thirty years ago.

So I'm not really in camp that thinks a DA is much of a safeguard...

I don't think anyone is saying it's foolproof. I also don't think anyone is saying you can't train and be acceptably safe on any system.

NYPD saw a 500% increase in UDs with their pilot program of .38 revolvers to Glocks.


Semi-automatic pistols discharge accidentally at a higher rate than revolvers. The experience of the
New York City Police Department shows that there are nearly 14 accidental discharges per 1, 000 semiautomatic
pistols compared ~o .75 (less than 1 ) accidental discharges per. 38 calibre revolver. At the
present time about 600 police officers are equipped with semi-automatic pistols. If all 31 ,000 officers were
armed with these weapons more than 400 accidental discharges may occur each year with the attendant
injuries and deaths . - https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/145560NCJRS.pdf

Today they've got the numbers back to roughly equal the DA revolver days through improvements in training and technique...however we all know the majority of gun users have zero to near zero training. You could also speculate that a DA system combined with modern training and techniques would have pushed it down even further.

LASD, Miami-Dade, etc. have all reported spikes in UDs when transitioning, although not as pronounced.

[breakingtime91]

I don't think anyone is saying it's foolproof. I also don't think anyone is saying you can't train and be acceptably safe on any system.

NYPD saw a 500% increase in UDs with their pilot program of .38 revolvers to Glocks.

- https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/145560NCJRS.pdf

Today they've got the numbers back to roughly equal the DA revolver days through improvements in training and technique...however we all know the majority of gun users have zero to near zero training. You could also speculate that a DA system combined with modern training and techniques would have pushed it down even further.

LASD, Miami-Dade, etc. have all reported spikes in UDs when transitioning, although not as pronounced.

Wouldn't the answer be DAO not DA/SA?

[Sal Picante]

If you happen to be on the lower end of genetics, ability, money(not as much or no training) then you may languish forever trying to master the DA/SA.

I don't think there is much to master... Just press the trigger straight back?

We're talking about stock-ish triggers here and normal, able-bodies folks, right?

Am I missing something?

[spinmove_]

Wouldn't the answer be DAO not DA/SA?

IMHO from a nobody, no. The answer is more and better training.


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

[breakingtime91]

IMHO from a nobody, no. The answer is more and better training.


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

We were deliberately discussing low trained people who do not want to pursue more training.. Here is the issue I see with this. If someone finds they are good at something, like DA/SA, they acquit that to everyone being good at it/ having the ability, time, and focus to master it. I do that same thing with weight lifting. I look at people and think " why aren't they in the gym working on their health and physique more/at all". My wife often reminds me that most people don't have the time, drive, or want to be in the gym for 7+ hours a week. That is obviously an extreme example but it is a bias I have. I see that same trend in higher level shooters, "I can do xyz, anyone can or should". Sometimes the answer is maybe they shouldn't, maybe it doesn't fit their availability of time, effort, or priority.

[spinmove_]

I don't think there is much to master... Just press the trigger straight back?

We're talking about stock-ish triggers here and normal, able-bodies folks, right?

Am I missing something?

See, that's what I don't understand on why it's so hard for some people. The TDA trigger breaks at the same point regardless of DA press or SA press. The only difference is weight and length of travel. Reset trigger during recoil, press trigger again for additional shots. Grip gun so it doesn't move while pressing the trigger. Decock when gun comes off target.


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

[BehindBlueI's]

Wouldn't the answer be DAO not DA/SA?

DAO revolver is probably the safest option, especially if training is lacking or absent. Easier admin handling, easier to clear and verify clear, no requirement for a trigger pull to break down, hammer and heavier/longer trigger benefits, etc. I suppose a DAO pistol with a magazine disconnect would be equal.

The TDA (or at least mine) don't require the trigger to be pulled to break down. Given the relation of admin handling UDs and first shot UDs vs "after shooting" UDs, the TDA is probably the next option, particularly for those who carry a lot/shoot a little.

[JustOneGun]

Thousands of police officers who have switched disagree with you. By the time I become close to or perhaps half way in ability to be the next, "Les Pepperoni" I/you might be right. Until I do or if I do then...not so much.

[spinmove_]

We were deliberately discussing low trained people who do not want to pursue more training.. Here is the issue I see with this. If someone finds they are good at something, like DA/SA, they acquit that to everyone being good at it/ having the ability, time, and focus to master it. I do that same thing with weight lifting. I look at people and think " why aren't they in the gym working on their health and physique more/at all". My wife often reminds me that most people don't have the time, drive, or want to be in the gym for 7+ hours a week. That is obviously an extreme example but it is a bias I have. I see that same trend in higher level shooters, "I can do xyz, anyone can or should". Sometimes the answer is maybe they shouldn't, maybe it does fit their availability of time, effort, or priority.

I see it a little differently. I don't usually like to make car to gun analogies, but here we go. I see the TDA system as being a manual transmission vs a SFA as being an automatic transmission. Yes, the automatic is easier to learn, has less to screw up, less to break, yada yada. But the manual gives you more direct control over the car. Downshift to help break, parking break is more secure, downshift and upshift more appropriately and precisely instead of waiting for the auto trans to catch up with what you're trying to do. Sure it's harder to learn, but is it THAT much harder? I don't think so.

People have been driving manual transmissions and shooting revolvers and TDAs for years, decades even! But once you engineer something that does someone's job for them the "old" way is now viewed as antiquated and hard.


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

[StraitR]

This is a good starting point about, "Why does it matter?"

1. If you have the drive, money, work ethic and a bit of genetic ability you could be the next Ernest Langdon. If that's you and you don't care about CCW or getting robbed, then who cares. Pick your platform and start working hard.

2. What if you want to do both, be the next Langdon and carry a gun to protect yourself. If you're on the upper end of the learning curve and not on the low end of the genetic curve you will just lag a bit behind in ability if you chose a harder to learn pistol. As long as you don't get in a shooting between the time you are new and when your ability catches up to where you would have been with an easier platform it's no big deal. Again, who cares. If you do need the pistol during that time will it affect the outcome of your shooting? Hard to tell. The answer is, "It might." I'm convinced that the average police officer wins their gunfights because they suck less than the criminal. How long will you lag behind in skill development? That depends on the amount of time, money and genetics. See #3 below for further.

3. We all start out think/hoping/planning we are the next (insert awesome professional gun person). I'll give you the Charles Barkley answer, "You're not me. You're not going to the NBA. You have the perfect opportunity to get a free or almost free degree. Stay in school. Get good grades. That will help you in life." I'm just playing the odds here, most of you (and I) are not going to be Langdon. Not even close. That means the lower you are on that bell curve the longer you will lag in ability. If you happen to be on the lower end of genetics, ability, money(not as much or no training) then you may languish forever trying to master the DA/SA.

4. Does this mean I'm suggesting everyone should use a Glock or similar? No. I am saying two things. A: Glock are not evil monsters to be avoided. No matter the platform you will have to include safety and procedures to keep from having an accident. There is no more likelihood of having an accident between platforms. B: If you are new and think I'm wrong and want insurance in a platform then please, please, please consider one that has the same trigger pull every time. Or at least one that is close(functionally) the same every time. IMO there is no place in modern day self defense for DA/SA because there are other viable alternatives.

Performance vs Safety, and which you prioritize is a matter of perspective but ultimately drives your choice. It really is that simple. The guys/gals who pick DA/SA or LEM will say "it's not any harder to shoot than a striker". Not true. Simultaneously, the striker guys/gals are selling "it's just as safe as a DA/SA or LEM". Not true.

We may only be splitting hairs with a few degrees of separation when it comes to safety and performance of each trigger type, but the differences do exist. Just choose, and own it.

[breakingtime91]

nvm. :)

[Hambo]

We were deliberately discussing low trained people who do not want to pursue more training.

No trigger system will make up for their incompetence. To talk about them is to talk about people who are so scared of their Glock/Walther/whatever that they carry C3 so it doesn't "go off" when they don't want it to.