Info on FBI study regarding trigger weight versus length of pull....

[jthhapkido]

I do remember that Todd said that the startle response initiates a very strong muscle contraction (25 lbs?)
which was much more than even heavy triggers. This was why heavy triggers did not help.

....noting that one conclusion from the original study may be valid but the other not. (I.e., heavy trigger doesn't help, but longer triggers don't either, and perhaps they found this with more research. Or may Glock gave them a deal and they said "Hey, training can fix this!")

Or, as is my personal feeling:

Heavy triggers don't help much particularly for people with low training levels, but longer travel length CAN help but only in limited circumstances, related to:

1) the skill level of the person shooting (higher skill, more likely to be able to stop mid-pull),
2) length itself meaning that VERY LONG triggers seem to be able to help, but most that are shorter than "very long" don't make much difference, with #1 above being the determining factor in the length necessary.

....in addition, stopping negligent discharges given startle responses, tripping, etc while trigger-checking is a different thing than negligent discharges when "going to pull the trigger and decide not to do so" or "finger on the trigger and sights on targets but not going to shoot at this very moment."

(I realize that training should either mitigate or remove the errors types above, but again, #1 above is important...)

I have NO data to support my opinions there, those literally are just my opinion, but it is one of the reasons I want to see the FBI study. I'm REALLY curious how they came to their conclusions regarding "length of trigger pull" and what set of circumstances they thought it would help.


Anyone happen to know what the negligent discharge rates were for the FBI before and after they switched to Glocks? That might be...instructive.

[LSP552]

I have to confess, I was pretty confident that I would find this study inside of a half hour. As it turns out, it's actually pretty difficult to find. I'm not saying it can't be found, but it's certainly going to be challenging, and here's why...

Best I can tell, the study we're looking for appears to be testing done by the FBI Academy Firearms Training Unit in 1988. It was done on a wide variety of semi-automatic firearms which ultimately condemned Glock by name due to it's short and light trigger pull. For those of us that were alive in 1988, we can tell you whippershappers that believe it or not, there was no internet . I guess Al Gore hadn't got around to inventing it yet, but we survived thanks to Die Hard, Metallica, and Kelly Bundy.

So, two things are going to pose a challenge if this is the study being referenced. 1) As Todd pointed out, the FBI eventually transitioned to Glocks so materials condemning them for being unsafe were probably buried or redacted. And 2) Predating the internet, it's unlikely that a digital copy exists. If we happen to find it, it will most likely be a scan of a hard copy. Finding someone still taking up space on their server for a scanned FBI study from 1988 may prove difficult.

And thanks to BT91 recommending a pretty good beer, I'm not exactly on my game right now. Alas, the search continues.

I remember reading this at the time, but I've looked back through some of my old instructor stuff and can't find a copy. LSP972 is a pack rat so I'm hoping he may have a copy stashed and/or remembers more details on the when and where.

[Chuck Whitlock]

Can anyone hit up Mas Ayoob? I recall him writing about FBI's reasons for preferring DA/SA, which he had gotten from the head of their firearms unit (John Hall?) at the time.

[Lon]

Can anyone hit up Mas Ayoob? I recall him writing about FBI's reasons for preferring DA/SA, which he had gotten from the head of their firearms unit (John Hall?) at the time.

Isn't Mas a member here? Thought I saw him post here a couple times.

[John Hearne]

I do remember that Todd said that the startle response initiates a very strong muscle contraction (25 lbs?)
which was much more than even heavy triggers. This was why heavy triggers did not help.

I've seen as high as 50 lbs. Remember, there is no single monolithic startle response. The degree of stimulus (22 LR v. 5.56) controls the degree of startle as done the sensory input. You can get startle response from a loud noise, postural instability, flashing lights, etc.

[HCM]

Isn't Mas a member here? Thought I saw him post here a couple times.

He is, as is SSA (Ret) Buford Boone.

[LSP972]

Best I can tell, the study we're looking for appears to be testing done by the FBI Academy Firearms Training Unit in 1988. It was done on a wide variety of semi-automatic firearms which ultimately condemned Glock by name due to it's short and light trigger pull... For those of us that were alive in 1988, there was no internet...

So, two things are going to pose a challenge if this is the study being referenced. 1) As Todd pointed out, the FBI eventually transitioned to Glocks so materials condemning them for being unsafe were probably buried or redacted. And 2) Predating the internet, it's unlikely that a digital copy exists. If we happen to find it, it will most likely be a scan of a hard copy. Finding someone still taking up space on their server for a scanned FBI study from 1988 may prove difficult.

Excellent probe, and the second paragraph is 100% on the points. I remember it quite well; back then (1988), just about all well-experienced LE staff instructors that I knew across the country were not familiar with the Glock at all, pretty much had a total amount of suspicion about the "plastic extra". Like you said, no internet/digital/etc. information back then... we saw hard copy information on note books/books or personal or professional letters. We had ONE hard copy information from FB-1, received personally in the unit, and none of us got to take it anywhere, at any time. Basically, the information was telling us that the Glock was a bad thing, had plenty of bad issues, stay away, etc., etc.

I got to read that booklet completely, because I was at the Sig Armorer class for a week and read it carefully until I was done. Ken, were you there as well? I simply don't remember some of that stuff anymore; cannot remember who all was at that Sig Armorer course. I think we had at least one more of those Sig detailed P226 classes; I know you were at one. Anyway, the hard print Glock info from Quantico went back to the LSP staff course leader at the end of each day; after I read it, I never recalled seeing that again. Dunno where it went, never asked, because we were totally not interested and didn't care at all who said what about it, once we had read the FB-1 gospel.

I ended up in Quantico in 1993 for the second version discussion of the 1986 disaster; lots of things had changed, the Bureau was working overtime at it and trying to do as well as they could... and still hated the Glocks as problems. We (LSP) ended up allowing G17s and G19s to be adopted by personal LSP commissioned owners in 1994. Not my idea, I didn't want them, somebody above me made the decision, that's all I'll talk about it. Period.

I wasn't keeping up with FB-1 stuff by that time (after learning some stuff about the ... interesting... HRT unit from Quantico; when they showed up at a small sheriff's prison a week after we- LSP SWAT- had been handling it,; again, will not further that discussion), so when we heard they suddenly had adopted Glocks in 1996, on a HUGE basis... hmmm. Some folks were interested; I was pretty much NOT interested and paid no attention to them.

Most folks don't even want to hear any of this, so I won't bother anyone. But if Ken got to to read any of that FB-1 document after (or at the same time) I did, I never knew any more about it.

.

You're on the correct situation, StraitR. Finding that document, 28 years later... lotsa luck, my man.

[BehindBlueI's]

Can anyone hit up Mas Ayoob? I recall him writing about FBI's reasons for preferring DA/SA, which he had gotten from the head of their firearms unit (John Hall?) at the time.

Isn't Mas a member here? Thought I saw him post here a couple times.

He is, but I don't know how active. I can shoot him an email and ask if he has time to swing by and respond.

[GJM]

I remember this story from last year or so:

http://www.latimes.com/local/califor...614-story.html

Gist of the article is the ND rate skyrocketed after switching from the Beretta to M&P. Lots of questions about the FBI study, if it surfaces.

[Drang]

Can anyone hit up Mas Ayoob? I recall him writing about FBI's reasons for preferring DA/SA, which he had gotten from the head of their firearms unit (John Hall?) at the time.

What is the specific question for him? Why did the FBI prefer DA/SA?

I'll see him (and Pax) tomorrow.