Manual safeties on pistols, what's your take?

[Chefdog]

The release and subsequent buzz about the M&P Shield led to a discussion this morning with my father about the merits/demerits of manual safeties on pistols. I grew up shooting his TDA Sigs along with Smith and Colt revolvers and I never considered buying a pistol with a manual safety because I'd never been exposed to them.

Fast forward to today and my 19 month old son seems to be able to climb up, open, reach, and get into absolutely everything in the house! Obviously, our responsibility as parents is to make sure that our guns are secure at all times, which is why we have safes to store our weapons in. But there's always a possibility that, despite your best efforts and education to the contrary, your pistol might get into the wrong hands. These are the type of circumstances I was discussing with Pops this morning and prompted me to consider whether a pistol with a manual safety might be a better option for me, at this time.


I don't want this to turn into a for/against safety war. I'd like to get people to relate their choices, decisions and experiences concerning the use of safeties (in general) and how they affect all aspects of pistol ownership from training, to fighting, to administrative handling, to safety at home. Anything that anyone can add about transitioning from no safety to safety, or vice versa would be interesting to hear as well.

As always, I look forward to hearing what you guys have to say.

[Jay Cunningham]

Wow man, it really depends in the design. I have no problem with an ambi safety on a 1911.

But I don't like some of these little safety levers that I'm seeing, especially that are only on one side of the gun.

But that's just me.

[DonovanM]

I would trust a 10lb SIG trigger to be more child-resistant than a manual safetied gun any day of the week. Typically safeties don't require a whole lot of pressure to deactivate, at least not compared with a TDA trigger.

Whereas by the time a kid might have the hand strength to operate a 10lb DA trigger, I would hope they would also have the faculties of communication and responsibility necessary to realize that guns aren't toys.

[jslaker]

I like having a safety for administrative handling. It gives a little bit extra piece of mind as the gun goes into the holster. Once it's there, it gets flipped off, though.

The exception to this are slide mounted safeties like the Beretta 92. Too much potential for them to get in the way and get accidentally engaged for my taste.

As long as it's on the frame and out of the way, though, I see it as a nice bonus if not anything critical.

[TCinVA]

I'll go ahead and say it:

"keep your finger off the trigger!" is what I see frequently on forums in discussions of safety. Generally I find that the people who are the loudest about "booger hook!" have the least experience actually handling guns in the real world...meaning not on a range, but in relatively high stress situations. This is not to say that putting one's finger on the trigger without the decision to shoot is a good idea, but I see very little appreciation for the fact that looking over the sights at a hostile individual in the dark with your mind racing and your life on the line presents unique circumstances one isn't likely to encounter when their experience with firearms is limited to a few hundred rounds on a sunny Sunday afternoon.

I can cite some cases where a manual safety prevented a tragedy, but I have a hard time identifying cases where a manual safety got someone killed in a gunfight.

I quite like the idea of a manual safety assuming that it's a well designed safety. The 1911's safety is the best in that regard...it's exceptionally easy to use and very effective if you train properly in it's use. That being said, none of my carry guns actually have manual safeties. They do all tend to have long trigger pulls, though. I don't think every handgun absolutely needs a manual safety to be safe for use and carry, but neither do I think I'm so special that I'm incapable of screwing up...and while it's not something we should ever depend on 100%, mechanical devices that can compensate for human failures are considered a good thing on every other piece of equipment we interact with on a daily basis, but people get all offended when that same thinking is applied to firearms for some reason.

Were I to buy a Shield, I would likely only use the safety while reholstering and would probably disengage it before seating it fully in the holster primarily because I don't like my chances of disengaging the safety on demand from looking at the pictures.

[SecondsCount]

Good points so far.

I won't argue for or against but if you do have a gun with a manual safety, spend some serious time training and practicing on how to disengage it quickly.

[orionz06]

Were I to buy a Shield, I would likely only use the safety while reholstering and would probably disengage it before seating it fully in the holster primarily because I don't like my chances of disengaging the safety on demand from looking at the pictures.

Glad to see I am not the only one who would not really use it.

[DonovanM]

Glad to see I am not the only one who would not really use it.

Count me in too for never using it. I have a hard enough time with the slide release on my Glock!

[JHC]

Having dedicated most of the '80's to the 1911, I like them and I would not mind a small (I never had a problem with the OEM low profile 1911 safety of my Colts) on a Glock. I only had an ambi on one gun; a TRP. I didn't like it. I thought it too large and ambi. Carried IWB in a Summer Special I knocked it off safe from the left side of the gun (elbow? chair?) on more than one occassion.

The safety would need to be naturally reached with the thumb and wiped down to OFF.

[Chefdog]

I would trust a 10lb SIG trigger to be more child-resistant than a manual safetied gun any day of the week. Typically safeties don't require a whole lot of pressure to deactivate, at least not compared with a TDA trigger.


Good point.


I like having a safety for administrative handling. It gives a little bit extra piece of mind as the gun goes into the holster. Once it's there, it gets flipped off, though.

This is in line with what i was thinking, especially for a gun like the Shield that will likely be on and off more often than a larger gun riding in the waistband for hours at a time.



"keep your finger off the trigger!" is what I see frequently on forums in discussions of safety.
Agreed, although i'm more concerned about the perceived "extra" safety as it relates to someone getting unauthorized access to the weapon. Whether or not that is better served by a manual safety or a 10# DA pull is up for debate

I can cite some cases where a manual safety prevented a tragedy, but I have a hard time identifying cases where a manual safety got someone killed in a gunfight.
Also a good point


Thanks for the replies so far.

[theblacknight]

but I have a hard time identifying cases where a manual safety got someone killed in a gunfight.

Wouldnt that be because they are dead and cant pass the info?

Anyways

Plastic guns,no.
SAO,yes.
D/S, no.

[David Armstrong]

I'll go ahead and say it:

"keep your finger off the trigger!" is what I see frequently on forums in discussions of safety. Generally I find that the people who are the loudest about "booger hook!" have the least experience actually handling guns in the real world...meaning not on a range, but in relatively high stress situations. This is not to say that putting one's finger on the trigger without the decision to shoot is a good idea, but I see very little appreciation for the fact that looking over the sights at a hostile individual in the dark with your mind racing and your life on the line presents unique circumstances one isn't likely to encounter when their experience with firearms is limited to a few hundred rounds on a sunny Sunday afternoon.

Excellent point, one I wish more would recognize. For the OP, I've had assorted firearms over the years with pretty much all permutations of safety and haven't found the safety to be a problem, although sometimes the size of the safety could be an issue. I carried a S&W Mdl 39 and a Walther P-38, among others, and after a bit of practice getting the thumb movement dialed in. And like TC I'm aware of some instances where the safety helped but none where it hurt.

[EMC]

As someone who also has a small active toddler in the house, I rely on the gunvault micro-vault when it isn't on my person.
Failing that, if a gun is on night stand duty I opt to go condition 3. The little hands can't rack the slide. (With caution about rotating rounds to prevent re-chambering setback or primer issues)

[DocGKR]

I strongly prefer having a well designed, ergonomic, ambi manual safety on a pistol that is used for uniformed LE use; I have twice seen officers' lives potentially saved when another person gained control of an officer's pistol, but the engaged manual safety prevented the weapon from firing--I don't like to think about the outcome if the pistols involved had been a Glock, Sig, XD, revolver, etc... For me, one of the major advantages of the M&P over Glock for duty pistol use is the outstanding M&P ambi-safety. In addition, I find a manual safety on a pistol being carried AIWB somewhat comforting...although that is clearly not a deal breaker for me, as I am currently carrying a G19 AIWB. For BUG use, I have generally used handguns without safeties. For typical CCW, the manual safety is not as important to me, as the gun is hidden.

[TGS]

If it's a safety that is intuitive to use, such as a 1911, HK45 or as Doc mentions an M&P (no personal experience on the M&P, just going with what he's steppin' in), I think they're dandy if you train with them.

I think the teeny weeny safeties on the sides of guns, like the LC9 and California edition Kahrs, are disasters. I don't see how they serve either side of the fence particularly well.

As to children, my opinion as a single dude without kids is that safeties are not child lock out devices, and shouldn't be treated as such. They were designed for a purpose, and keepin' curious kids safe isn't it. The weapon should be secured using a method to prevent access such as a locked container, or be kept on body.

[rsa-otc]

Unfortunately we can not rely on any kind of safety, condition 3, long stiff trigger pulls or anything other than complete unavailability when it comes to child safety.

With a semi-auto children have been known to take the nose of the gun and press it against a piece of furniture and use their weight to rack the slide leaving them holding a loaded gun cocked and off safe.

With long trigger pulls like Revolvers and DA semi's they will turn the gun around and use both thumbs to pull the trigger. Guess where the guns are pointed during this behavior.

Weapons with hammers children will mimic what they see on the great educator (as I call the TV) and cock them.

Only making sure the gun isn't available to children is the full proof child lock.

[UNK]

Unfortunately we can not rely on any kind of safety, condition 3, long stiff trigger pulls or anything other than complete unavailability when it comes to child safety.

With a semi-auto children have been known to take the nose of the gun and press it against a piece of furniture and use their weight to rack the slide leaving them holding a loaded gun cocked and off safe.

With long trigger pulls like Revolvers and DA semi's they will turn the gun around and use both thumbs to pull the trigger. Guess where the guns are pointed during this behavior.

Weapons with hammers children will mimic what they see on the great educator (as I call the TV) and cock them.

Only making sure the gun isn't available to children is the full proof child lock.

I think this hits the nail on the head more so than any other reply. It would be an absolute tragedy to have a child injured, killed or maim another person. If it;s not on your person then it needs to be locked away, or locked. A kid given enough time can find anything. Surely you can remember finding Christmas presents before they were wrapped?
Another option is to gun proof your kids as described by Massad Ayoob in his book with the same title. Here is the link

http://www.amazon.com/Gun-Proof-Children-Massad-Ayoobs-Handgun/product-reviews/0936279052/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

[texag]

Were I to buy a Shield, I would likely only use the safety while reholstering and would probably disengage it before seating it fully in the holster primarily because I don't like my chances of disengaging the safety on demand from looking at the pictures.

As someone who's actually shot one, I KNOW I wouldn't be able to reliably deactivate that safety at speed.

[rsa-otc]

Another option is to gun proof your kids as described by Massad Ayoob in his book with the same title. Here is the link

http://www.amazon.com/Gun-Proof-Children-Massad-Ayoobs-Handgun/product-reviews/0936279052/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

Absolutely agree with this, an excerpt from my training manual:

"D. Children and Firearms:
1. Children and firearms can be a dangerous combination. Once a child reaches an appropriate age (this depends on maturity, not physical age) some degree of education is important, this way the firearm does not become the "forbidden fruit".
2. Even if your own children are well educated and behave, you cannot depend on your children's friends to be the same. Also, consider that children fall victim to peer pressure easily.
3. It is a fatal mistake to think that you can hide something from your child. After all, did your parents ever succeed in hiding anything from you?
4. Do not assume your child hasn't the strength to operate your weapons. With a revolver they will first cock the gun (TV is a great educator) or use both thumbs to pull the trigger while pointing the gun at themselves. With a semi-auto pistol, they will press the front end of the gun against an object and use their weight to cycle the action.
5. Young children may not be able to tell the difference between a toy gun and a real one. This is especially true with toy guns looking more real everyday and real guns beginning to incorporate plastic and light weight alloys in their construction. Follow the Child Safe Rule: Children should be taught from the beginning to treat their toy guns just as adults are expected to treat real ones."

Anyone who has been around me for any length of time knows I can brag about my own kids a well as any proud parent. In my classes I use my own kids as an example of how differant children mature emotionally/mentally at differant stages in their lives.

Both my kinds went to college on academic scholarships. Ken is an Eagle Scout, Boys State Grad, and NJ State Police Youth week. Bri is a 3rd degree black belt and was one hip injury from the Navel Acadamy. They are both GOOD Kinds:

When Bri was little (pre teen) she was not a follower if you told her to jump out of the tree she would tell you where to go, Ken on the other hand was very susceptible to peer presure at that age, if he was told to jump out of the tree he would have asked which branch. Fast forward to their teen years, it was like they switched bodies, we were never worried about Ken but Bri worried us (Bri proudly takes credit for every gray hair on my head as well as the lack there of). By their late teens both had found their internal compass and we were not worried about either.

Both's first memories of firearms was being on the range around 6 or 7 years old, I expected them to treat their toy guns like I treated my real ones. As they grew up my guns were locked up with trigger locks or in my gun locker, the only keys were on my wife's of my person. They are competent gun handlers and Ken bought his first handgun last year, Bri has plans for hers after she graduates College next month.

[Chefdog]

Unfortunately we can not rely on any kind of safety, condition 3, long stiff trigger pulls or anything other than complete unavailability when it comes to child safety.

With a semi-auto children have been known to take the nose of the gun and press it against a piece of furniture and use their weight to rack the slide leaving them holding a loaded gun cocked and off safe.

With long trigger pulls like Revolvers and DA semi's they will turn the gun around and use both thumbs to pull the trigger. Guess where the guns are pointed during this behavior.

Weapons with hammers children will mimic what they see on the great educator (as I call the TV) and cock them.

Only making sure the gun isn't available to children is the full proof child lock.

I agree 100% with the statements above. I use one of the Micro Gunvaults to secure my handguns when at home and find it absolutely necessary to be secure and accessible at the same time.
My intent (which i don't think I adequaty conveyed) wasn't to imply that a safety or 10# pull was the answer to firearm safety. I was trying to start a discussion on whether or not manual safeties do in fact give an additional layer of safety for administrative handling and at what cost/benefit to training and or defensive use vs a typical striker fired pistol.

[rsa-otc]

I agree 100% with the statements above. I use one of the Micro Gunvaults to secure my handguns when at home and find it absolutely necessary to be secure and accessible at the same time.
My intent (which i don't think I adequaty conveyed) wasn't to imply that a safety or 10# pull was the answer to firearm safety. I was trying to start a discussion on whether or not manual safeties do in fact give an additional layer of safety for administrative handling and at what cost/benefit to training and or defensive use vs a typical striker fired pistol.

In this case as the saying goes mission drives gear train. I responded as I did because child safety was addressed early in this thread.

At this time and through out my career have I never had guns with safeties, and in the case of 2nd & 3rd Gen S&W autos I used that lever as a decocker exclusively. There are times I would find an additioanl layer of safety comforting, an example of this would be if I ever started carrying AIWB. It would most definately be situational. Trigger finger disipline will only get you so far.

[Chefdog]

In this case as the saying goes mission drives gear train. I responded as I did because child safety was addressed early in this thread.


I went back and read my OP and it seems that somehow I managed to derail my own thread before it even got started. Might be an internet forum first, thread drift within the first post. I probably deserve an award of some kind.

[ford.304]

What is the thinking with the tiny safeties? Are you just supposed to use them when holstering/performing other administrative functions?

Disabling the safety on a 1911 as part of the draw was something I could pick up in about 5 minutes of dry fire practice. I don't see how you could do that at all with some of these designs... which, if you can't do that, when would you actually use the safety?

[FotoTomas]

I like the idea of a manual safety as an officer survival tool. I also like the magazine disconnect feature for the same reason. I do NOT like the safety style on the slide such as the Beretta, Walther and Smith and Wesson classic pistols. I found the safety harder to use and train with plus on several occasions during matches the safety was used to decock and stayed down by my error causing a delay in the first shot.

Currently my duty pistols and one of my off duty pistols have a magazine disconnect safety. I like that feature for many reasons and it is a requirement for my duty guns. None of my personal carry or duty weapons have a manual safety however. The old M1911A1 I have for sentimental reasons from my Army days is the only pistol in the home armory with a safety and it is not routinely carried for personal defense.

On the other hand all of my rifles have a manual safety and I do not feel comfortable without it on a long arm. Mostly for administrative handling.

[jmjames]

When I bought my P30, I bought a P30S for many of these same reasons. My kid is 4 1/2, and I saw a safety as hopefully one more thing standing between him somehow getting a hold of the pistol and a tragedy. Before I got the P30S, all of my pistols were hidden up in a closet with trigger locks on them, unloaded. Not too useful for self defense, but very kid proof.

Now, the gun has three possible places: in a nightstand safe with electronic lock (he's never once bothered going in the drawer, since he's learned that all the candy is hidden in my wife's drawers, and I just have books in mine), on my person in a holster, or, late at night (long after he's asleep), in my desk drawer while I work.

I like having the option of carrying hammer down and safety off, or cocked 'n locked. The safety is very similar to a 1911, and is easy to flip on/off; unlike an HK45, getting over excited taking it off won't decock the gun, either. That said, I always carry decocked and safety off, except for when I went hunting this weekend (carried C'n'L since if I needed to shoot it, it would be an aimed shot at a longer range where DA would make it harder). As others have mentioned, the safety is nice for administrative handling.

I have not felt, since I bought the gun, that the manual safety added one bit of actual safety around my child.

All of the safety with this firearm and my child has come from two things: keeping it out of his hands 100%, and teaching him about firearm safety. He and I have had multiple versions of the Four Rules talk, and I recently bought him a super low-powered Airsoft gun that he gets to use under supervision, which helps him practice those rules. I do not, and I WILL NOT purchase him any toy guns that come close to resembling actual firearms, not even a lot of the Nerf stuff. Why? Because I never... ever... want him to feel like pointing a gun at a person is part of a game.

So... to summarize... the manual safety on my P30S has *not* made it more safe for my child. I do feel that if I have failed to keep it out of his hands, and I have failed to teach him properly, that the manual safety will buy me an additional 5 - 60 seconds to get it out of his hands... ABSOLUTE MAX. I find it to be a useful feature for administrative handling, and it gives me an additional carry option that I currently choose to not exercise, though one day I may.

J.Ja

[lamarbrog]

If a kid can pull a trigger, he can disengage a safety. Customers have long tried to justify buying an XD (not sure why they feel a need to justify it to me) by saying that the grip safety will keep any kids from shooting it. Interestingly, I have also had customers tell me that a "kid's small fingers couldn't possibly pull a Glock trigger because it has that safety on it". It's a great way to pick morons out of the crowd, because both concepts are truly moronic.

About the only thing even remotely similar to this that I could see as a reasonable idea would be keeping a magazine out of the pistol and hoping the kid could not manage to lock a magazine in and rack the slide back. At least some amount of strength and technique is needed to accomplish that task. The best option really is a quick-access lock box, though.



I have pistols with and without manual safeties. I prefer not to have one.

If you are competent, you do not need a manual safety to protect you from yourself since on a properly designed pistol that is all it accomplishes. If you are incompetent, you would have a higher likelihood of encountering issues with disengaging a manual safety due to lack of practice (and probably should seek a revolver, since you lack the skills necessary to effectively use an automatic anyway).

[LHS]

If a kid can pull a trigger, he can disengage a safety. Customers have long tried to justify buying an XD (not sure why they feel a need to justify it to me) by saying that the grip safety will keep any kids from shooting it. Interestingly, I have also had customers tell me that a "kid's small fingers couldn't possibly pull a Glock trigger because it has that safety on it". It's a great way to pick morons out of the crowd, because both concepts are truly moronic.


I know a guy who bought a P7M8 because he thought his kids couldn't squeeze hard enough to cock it. Fortunately, he never had to put that to the test.

For me, I grew up shooting 1911s before transitioning to the Beretta 92. I went with the G-model Beretta, which is decock-only, and I really don't like the standard FS-model safety. It's awkward to disengage quickly, and too easy to accidentally engage. The 1911's safety, on the other hand, is ergonomic genius. Disengaging it is part of assuming a proper firing grip, just like depressing the grip safety.

My preference, safety-wise, depends on the gun. Single-action guns, imho, should have a safety and an exposed hammer. I could never bring myself to AIWB a Glock or even an XD (not that I'd own the latter anyway). TDA or DAO guns used for CCW don't need the safety, imho, because the long trigger pull gives some measure of security during reholstering, etc. Duty guns are another matter, and one I'll leave to the folks who actually carry guns on duty.

[ToddG]

A manual safety can be a life-saver if someone else ends up with your pistol after a retention fight. It's happened enough times that no one can rationally argue the fact. But if the safety isn't ergonomic enough that you can run the gun with your thumb atop it 100% of the time, or if you fail to build that habit, it is possible to leave the safety engaged when trying to shoot. I've seen famous competitive shooters fail to disengage a 1911-style safety under the mild stress of a pistol match. Furthermore, most people who don't ride the safety as part of their normal grip may do a lot of draw practice that involves subconsciously disengaging the safety but when they retrieve the gun from some other position (like picking it up from the nightstand) they don't swipe the safety... specifically because they made it part of their draw habit.

A safety that can be engaged while still allowing the slide to move has another benefit. It adds a certain amount of safety when handling the gun administratively. Loading, unloading, etc. can all be done with the safety on. While obviously this is no substitute to following the Cardinal Rules, it does add another layer of protection against accidental discharges.

Like Foto, I'm also a fan of properly designed and implemented mag safeties. The only gun I've used extensively with a mag safety has been the M&P. It had no effect on the trigger pull or the reliability of the gun, but with a simple act (dropping the mag) I could disable the gun. This became my habit whenever I had to handle the gun off the range. Again, it's no substitute for the Cardinal Rules but simply gives yet another redundant layer of protection. And like the manual safety, there are plenty of real world stories demonstrating the practicality of dropping the magazine from the gun during a retention struggle.

Having said all that, for a gun that will be carried concealed the retention issue is a lesser concern for most and the redundant safety measures, while a plus, are not a necessity. Since leaving the M&P to test other guns (P30, HK45, G17) I've had neither a manual safety nor a mag disconnect and don't feel substantially endangered by their absence.

[Chefdog]

What is the thinking with the tiny safeties? Are you just supposed to use them when holstering/performing other administrative functions?

Disabling the safety on a 1911 as part of the draw was something I could pick up in about 5 minutes of dry fire practice. I don't see how you could do that at all with some of these designs... which, if you can't do that, when would you actually use the safety?

This brings up a question to me. If you're going to have a pistol with a manual safety, should you use it all the time, and not just sometimes? Seems like asking for trouble if you have that one brain-fart and forget to engage/disengage because you haven't established a rock solid SOP. If that holds true, should all your pistols use the same manual of arms? I'm guessing this is likely more important for someone like me who spends much less time on the range than the majority of you guys.

[Chuck Haggard]

I carried a 3rg gen S&W 9mm, either 5906 or 5903, for almost 20 years at work. With enough reps that safety is easy to get off safe with a quickness, IF your hands aren't too small for the gun.

When I used to worry about such things I got my first shot time down to .86 for a consistent first round hit from the holster, using a Safariland Top Gun thumb break style duty holster, shooting "point shoulder" one handed at seven yards.

I know guys who could do the same with a Beretta 92 from on safe. It sucks, but it can be done.

I am a huge fan of on-safe carry for uniformed officers for the obvious weapon retention advantage.


Anyway, I have seen two shootings where kids ended up dead because they got ahold of a condition 3 pistol and figured out a way to get a round chambered, another where the three year old killed himself by pulling a DA revolver trigger with both thumbs due to his fingers being too weak to pull the trigger.

With tricycle motors running around the house you need to have the gun/s locked up or on your person. Period.

[Lomshek]

As someone who also has a small active toddler in the house, I rely on the gunvault micro-vault when it isn't on my person.
Failing that, if a gun is on night stand duty I opt to go condition 3. The little hands can't rack the slide. (With caution about rotating rounds to prevent re-chambering setback or primer issues)

I strongly disagree with the idea that a toddler can't chamber a round. You're thinking like an adult not a kid.

A kid will place the rear edge of the butt into the carpet with the muzzle facing their chest and then use both hands to hold the slide while using their body weight to drive the slide back toward the ground. I read about it in an Ayoob article years ago and when my kid was two (too young to remember) I had him test it with a 100000000% unloaded gun. That was enough to make sure I will never leave a gun where a child can access it period.

On the subject of a manual safety being more "kid proof" than a Glock (for instance) or a heavy DA trigger the same rule applies. Children are curious and ingenious. There is no safety device that will prevent a child from firing a gun. If it is off your person and loaded it should be locked away.

[Moshe Dayan]

Why would you need to "test" such a thing to assure you that storing your firearms out of reach of children was a good idea? That is ridiculous.

[1986s4]

When my children were very young my wife and I began to teach them to stay out of our room except by permission. And now, as teenagers , they still ask. Even so, my go to, bump in the night [and it happened twice], weapon at that time was my S&W M 1917 .45 revolver. Kept unloaded w/ full moon clips nearby and hidden. Very easy and fast to load. I never showed it to them either, I didn't want them to even know it existed. Now it is my daughters favorite pistol, she likes to think she is Indiana Jones when she shoots it. I give her kudos for noticing what kind of gun Indiana Jones shoots...

[Lomshek]

Why would you need to "test" such a thing to assure you that storing your firearms out of reach of children was a good idea? That is ridiculous.

Because for years I had heard (and believed) the same "kids can't rack the slide" argument for condition 3 storage. After reading Ayoob's article I wanted to see myself how a kid could do it so if I tell people they are wrong I can back it up. I figured I would catch some flak for admitting to something like that but decided it was more important to shoot down that train of thought.

Regardless my guns were not accessible to my kids (now "experienced" shooters themselves at 11 & 13).

[Comedian]

I strongly prefer having a well designed, ergonomic, ambi manual safety on a pistol that is used for uniformed LE use; I have twice seen officers' lives potentially saved when another person gained control of an officer's pistol, but the engaged manual safety prevented the weapon from firing--I don't like to think about the outcome if the pistols involved had been a Glock, Sig, XD, revolver, etc... For me, one of the major advantages of the M&P over Glock for duty pistol use is the outstanding M&P ambi-safety. In addition, I find a manual safety on a pistol being carried AIWB somewhat comforting...although that is clearly not a deal breaker for me, as I am currently carrying a G19 AIWB. For BUG use, I have generally used handguns without safeties. For typical CCW, the manual safety is not as important to me, as the gun is hidden.

In the 2 cases of the officer's losing their pistols, I'm guessing the pistols were not in retention holsters? Could you expound on the circumstances a bit?

[PHPistols]

The original question is "What's your take on manual safeties?" On pistols as self-defense weapon, I am against it. It is one more part of the gun that can malfunction.

I am for them if it is used for fun, practice, or hunting.

[JAD]

I like a manual safety on guns with short trigger pulls. I don't see the need at all with a DA. I think they provide a slight margin when holstering and when moving (I think the safety should be on or the gun decocked during movement). They must be designed so that they can be comfortably ridden, and a high grip has to be used; if it's a DA, the decocker has to be where I can get to it with one hand (SIGs are the only ones I have positive experience with).

With all that said, you'd think I'd be uncomfortable with Glocks; I'm not. A Glock (stock) has a trigger that's long enough to offer that margin (and it has, for me, once --- in 1996, when I was trying to holster a G22 with my finger on the trigger). It's not long enough for me to trust it in a nightstand application without a holster, or in a floppy holster like my PTTwo; but then, I wouldn't trust a cocked and locked single action either.

[DocGKR]

Both officers were carrying S&W 3rd gen pistols in the issued Safariland 070 SSIII retention holsters with the safety in the on position...

One officer was investigating a strange noise at a residence in a very wealthy part of town that frequently has racoons in the garbage cans--instead he was knocked unconscious by a hidden burglar who smacked the officer in the head with a 2x4. When cover officers arrived, they found the bad guy with the first officer's pistol in hand, trying to pull the trigger and cursing because it wouldn't fire...unfortunately the bad guy dropped the pistol when he saw the approaching cover officers and was sadly not shot for his perfidy.

The other incident requires more explanation than I have time to write at the moment, but had a similar outcome where the officer's pistol would not fire for the unauthorized person who ended-up with it, as they fortunately didn't know how to deactivate the safety.

[Comedian]

Thanks Doc.

[Chefdog]

Some very strong evidence for the use of manual safeties for uniformed LEO's. For the rest of us I guess it really comes back to preference, like everything else. Although I think for the average person (like me) who'll put substantially fewer rounds through his weapon this year than most of you, a simpler manual of arms is probably better.

[EMC]

I strongly disagree with the idea that a toddler can't chamber a round. You're thinking like an adult not a kid.

A kid will place the rear edge of the butt into the carpet with the muzzle facing their chest and then use both hands to hold the slide while using their body weight to drive the slide back toward the ground. I read about it in an Ayoob article years ago and when my kid was two (too young to remember) I had him test it with a 100000000% unloaded gun. That was enough to make sure I will never leave a gun where a child can access it period.

On the subject of a manual safety being more "kid proof" than a Glock (for instance) or a heavy DA trigger the same rule applies. Children are curious and ingenious. There is no safety device that will prevent a child from firing a gun. If it is off your person and loaded it should be locked away.

I agree, and I worded it poorly and made a dangerous statement in doing so for which I apologize for propagating that notion. I consider it part of the layered approach with the micro-vault as primary safety mechanism. If for some reason that latch doesn't secure on the micro, the condition 3 is another layer and if I had a safety that would be yet another.

[bcauz3y]

Good points so far.

I won't argue for or against but if you do have a gun with a manual safety, spend some serious time training and practicing on how to disengage it quickly.

This is really the camp that I am in.

Most safeties are simply a training issue.

My only exception to this is the grip-safety/lemon squeeze/whatever. Considering that humans have some hard-wired tendency to shoot at the gun, you are reasonably likely to be shot there.

JMO, I have no real data to back this up

I carry a glock, have been for 10+ years in all manners of IWB, OWB, duty, AIWB (my latest favorite). The only time I've been kindof wishing I had a manual safety is when I reholster in my AWIB.
df
On the other hand, my heart nearly stops every time, and I'm ULTRA careful. So maybe its a good thing. Who knows.

[EMC]

This is really the camp that I am in.

Most safeties are simply a training issue.

My only exception to this is the grip-safety/lemon squeeze/whatever. Considering that humans have some hard-wired tendency to shoot at the gun, you are reasonably likely to be shot there.

JMO, I have no real data to back this up

I carry a glock, have been for 10+ years in all manners of IWB, OWB, duty, AIWB (my latest favorite). The only time I've been kindof wishing I had a manual safety is when I reholster in my AWIB.
df
On the other hand, my heart nearly stops every time, and I'm ULTRA careful. So maybe its a good thing. Who knows.

This is why we need the gadget. I will start carrying AIWB only when that device is done and on the market.

[JeffJ]

My take is that you should keep things consistent. If your carry gun has a safety, then any range, game, guns etc. should have a very similar safety. I'm also not a big fan of not using any safety devices, mainly because it's too easy to forget to disable the safety, clear leather, gun not go boom. I'm just a big fan of consistency, I personally don't have as much time as I'd like to devote to training one platform, I don't want to worry about 2.

[lamarbrog]

My take is that you should keep things consistent. If your carry gun has a safety, then any range, game, guns etc. should have a very similar safety. I'm also not a big fan of not using any safety devices, mainly because it's too easy to forget to disable the safety, clear leather, gun not go boom. I'm just a big fan of consistency, I personally don't have as much time as I'd like to devote to training one platform, I don't want to worry about 2.

When I carried a Beretta 92FS I always trained to take the safety off. I'd start from low ready, then practice extending, taking the safety off, and squeezing through the double action pull to fire. I'd assess, apply safe/decock, and go go back to low ready. Repeat. During a large portion of my training I would disengage the safety before every shot. (Considering I rarely load beyond 5 for training, I still get plenty of safety removal practice even without the special effort.)

Then, I'd carry it with the safety off, decocked. If it somehow got switched on, it would already be muscle memory to take it off.


Now I carry a Glock 19 and don't worry about such things.

[Jcs3151]

I never liked them on my duty guns but my view has changed to manual safeties when it comes to the batch of small single stack pistols. When I bought the Ruger LC9, I did not like the manual safety, loaded chamber indicator or the magazine safety but after having it a while I find the redundant safeties a asset at times when I come home yet may not be ready to lock the gun up away from my small children. I know I can put it someplace they can't reach, put on the manual safety and remove the magazine. I then know the weapon wil not fire. Yes, I know unloading the gun will do the same but it is one less step. This is the only time I use these features. Never while carrying.