Preventing ND's: DA vs safety

[TicTacticalTimmy]

Ignoring all mechanical aspects and focusing only on real world gun handling, which design is safer: decocked TDA or cocked/locked TDA?

-assume the user is reasonably well trained, not the "average" armed citizen
-assume the user trains to either decock or flip up the safety whenever coming off target
-assume all guns are 100% drop safe

For the purposes of this thread, ND=negligent discharge= pulling the trigger and firing the gun without conscious decision to do so.

There was an interesting and detailed thread in the semi-auto forum about the mechanical safety of Glock vs fully cocked striker vs hammer fired pistols. The conclusion reached by many was that all modern designs are sufficiently safe mechanically to prevent an AD, but that there is a big difference in real world likelihood of an ND when comparing different platforms. I want this thread to take that discussion further: to determine the difference in likelihood of an ND between decocked TDA and cocked/locked TDA or SAO.

[GardoneVT]

Excuse the pessimism,but you're asking to quantify the risk of an ND of a striker fired piece vs a TDA setup. To objectively do this we'd need to establish a training baseline first- at what stage do we consider someone trained enough that they're not likely to ND regardless of the trigger system?

Just answering that question is a project itself. Assuming we can quantify that standard among a viable population of national shooters objectively -not easy- we'd then have to test how likely an accident is with a striker fired gun vs hammer fired. User reported stats would be unreliable for obvious reasons, so deliberately testing ND risk would need to be done in a lab with sim guns of each configuration and a carefully selected sample size of shooters.

Outside of that , all we are left with is personal opinions and isolated anecdotes.

[GuanoLoco]

Not sure I have much to contribute, but for clarification isn't this a 3-way question?

Decocked TDA vs. Cocked/locked TDA without grip safety vs. Cocked/locked SAO WITH grip safety?

[Mr_White]

Where I think you are going to see a big difference in real world NDs is between enthusiasts and non-enthusiasts, rather than between different platforms all wielded by enthusiasts - there may be differences there, but I think they'll be small in comparison.

[spinmove_]

Not sure I have much to contribute, but for clarification isn't this a 3-way question?

Decocked TDA vs. Cocked/locked TDA without grip safety vs. Cocked/locked SAO WITH grip safety?

What about cocked and locked SAO WITHOUT grip safety?


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

[TicTacticalTimmy]

Not sure I have much to contribute, but for clarification isn't this a 3-way question?

Decocked TDA vs. Cocked/locked TDA without grip safety vs. Cocked/locked SAO WITH grip safety?

For the purpose of the discussion assume none of the guns have a grip safety.

I'm thinking about, for example, a CZ-75B vs CZ-75BD

[JHC]

Wasn't it Front Sight that has a sizable analysis of NDs including pistol type? GJM has referenced it beaucoup times. Pistol design types were pretty evenly represented in those stats IIRC.

[GuanoLoco]

Question is not worth laboring over. Time to man up and learn to shoot a DA trigger pull. (insert favorite set of winky smiley sarcastic humorous emoticons here).

Unless maybe if you are a competition shooter who doesn't want the reported trigger degradation associated with a decocker. In that case you need a CZ Shadow with a short reset trigger and without a firing pin block.

[TicTacticalTimmy]

Excuse the pessimism,but you're asking to quantify the risk of an ND of a striker fired piece vs a TDA setup. To objectively do this we'd need to establish a training baseline first- at what stage do we consider someone trained enough that they're not likely to ND regardless of the trigger system?

Just answering that question is a project itself. Assuming we can quantify that standard among a viable population of national shooters objectively -not easy- we'd then have to test how likely an accident is with a striker fired gun vs hammer fired. User reported stats would be unreliable for obvious reasons, so deliberately testing ND risk would need to be done in a lab with sim guns of each configuration and a carefully selected sample size of shooters.

Outside of that , all we are left with is personal opinions and isolated anecdotes.

To clarify the OP, I want to discuss the difference between two types of hammer-fired pistols, strikers are not part of the discussion

I agree that we will not be able to arrive at a perfectly quantifiable answer, but I don't agree that this should preclude any discussion.

The same criticism could be said for any discussion of stopping power of various cartridges or loads: there is no way to have an honest scientific comparison between the stopping power of, say, 9mm vs .40, due to the high number of confounding variables present at any shooting. However, through analysis of gel tests and real world shootings we can at least arrive at some rough idea of the differences in stopping power and use that knowledge to decide what we will actually carry.

Likewise, although there are many confounding variables that make it hard to really compare instances of ND's, I think we can arrive at some broad conclusions by looking at different scenarios where ND's have happened and seeing if one system or the other would have prevented a ND.

In my thinking, a safety is a little safer than DA. I reach this conclusion since a DA could still ND due to a sympathetic grip response, while a safety could not.
Both mechanisms seem sufficient to me to prevent a reholstering-ND.
I'm not sure which is better at preventing a bad draw ND (finger in trigger guard while bringing gun up).
The safety seems better for a situation where you drop the gun and reflexively try to catch it in the air, though I would think a DA would be sufficient in that situation.
As for training your gun on a target, I can see how a DA would be better than a safety for preventing an ND since the safety would be off in that situation. However, I don't imagine many civilian CCW situations where this is a factor.

[spinmove_]

To clarify the OP, I want to discuss the difference between two types of hammer-fired pistols, strikers are not part of the discussion

I agree that we will not be able to arrive at a perfectly quantifiable answer, but I don't agree that this should preclude any discussion.

The same criticism could be said for any discussion of stopping power of various cartridges or loads: there is no way to have an honest scientific comparison between the stopping power of, say, 9mm vs .40, due to the high number of confounding variables present at any shooting. However, through analysis of gel tests and real world shootings we can at least arrive at some rough idea of the differences in stopping power and use that knowledge to decide what we will actually carry.

Likewise, although there are many confounding variables that make it hard to really compare instances of ND's, I think we can arrive at some broad conclusions by looking at different scenarios where ND's have happened and seeing if one system or the other would have prevented a ND.

In my thinking, a safety is a little safer than DA. I reach this conclusion since a DA could still ND due to a sympathetic grip response, while a safety could not.
Both mechanisms seem sufficient to me to prevent a reholstering-ND.
I'm not sure which is better at preventing a bad draw ND (finger in trigger guard while bringing gun up).
The safety seems better for a situation where you drop the gun and reflexively try to catch it in the air, though I would think a DA would be sufficient in that situation.
As for training your gun on a target, I can see how a DA would be better than a safety for preventing an ND since the safety would be off in that situation. However, I don't imagine many civilian CCW situations where this is a factor.

First of all, "stopping power" doesn't exist. It's a silly made up term that isn't quantifiable nor does it accurately describe anything. This is why caliber doesn't matter nearly as much as most people think and why shot placement is paramount.

Secondly, in the OP you reference a thread from which this thread spawned. In that same thread multiple people have surmised and experienced occasions where a DA pull would have or actually did prevent a shooting where one did not need to happen vs a SFA pistol. In those instances I think you could easily say the same if those SFA pistols were CnL'd pistols.

Thirdly, all trigger systems are compromises of some form or another. They all make some aspect of gun handling "better" and also simultaneously "worse" in other aspects. I think what this boils down to is people will generally make mistakes regardless of what they're doing. This is where the person needs to be actively diligent and cognizant of what they're doing to minimize the mistakes. Nobody is perfect. Just like no trigger, safety mechanism, or gun is perfect.


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy