DB diatribe on triggers

[JustOneGun]

This perfectly illustrates my point about people having strong opinions about things being safe or not based on very fine differences or perceived differences. As an example, Dave thinks “a PPQ while great to game and range use is just too light,” where the P99 AS trigger “seems ideal.”

What I find so interesting, is the PPQ has more take up than a VP9 or Glock, and a similar trigger weight, but it is “too light.” The P99 is “ideal” even though it’s reset and follow up shots are as or more short and light than a PPQ, and there is the potential to get confused about which of the three trigger conditions the P99 is in.

For a supposedly software focused forum, it seems like we are reducing safety to hardware choices, when I suspect software is far and away the most significant factor in overall safety. Holstering with your finger on the trigger is going to lead to a bad outcome regardless if it is a Glock, VP9, PPQ or P10-C. And if you tell me you run an M&P with a safety, would you bet if you would holster with finger on the trigger, you are confident you would have put the safety on, or in the case of a DA/SA, decocked first?

This is essentially always been my argument. Other than doing something to artificially slow down the draw or presentation, the gun will go bang at about the same time whether it's a 1911, Glock, LEM or 14# DAO revolver. Why? Because as a few people point out in these threads, they get on the trigger a bit earlier with the longer trigger systems. So if that is what tends to happen with just a bit of practice there isn't much more time to, "Stop" shooting. We know that people were having the same startle reaction, sympathetic squeeze, etc before we ever created a striker fired pistol.

So the safety procedures, good work habits, etc that will allow you to safely carry an LEM are the same procedures that will allow you to carry a striker. The only way that it's not true is if it's all about hardware.

[JodyH]

There is no hardware solution to a software problem.
If you're a soup sandwich, adding delicious bacon slices to it just makes for a soggy bacon soup sandwich.

There are various trigger systems that work with you, not against you when it comes to stress induced "software glitches".

I've had too many "surprise trigger breaks" with Walther PPQ's to be comfortable carrying them.
The shots still went straight into the target because my software programming is to get on the trigger once the pistol levels out and is just about to settle to a stop at full extension.
My base "software" is good and safe, the surprise BANG! is a glitch that while safe, is not acceptable to me if I'm still trying to evaluate the target up until the BANG!.
For the way I manipulate a trigger (I maintain constant finger contact with the trigger face) I find that the LEM and the VP9 give me more cushion against "glitches" than the PPQ or a M&P.

I think how you perceive a trigger's safety margins is determined by when you get on the trigger and how you run the trigger.
GJM may perceive triggers differently than I do because of his booger flickin' flip and press trigger manipulation method.

[Doc_Glock]

FWIW, recently I did a drill where you get on target, wait for the beep and pull the trigger as fast as possible. Using a Beretta 92, I found that I can pull the trigger in 0.29 sec from hearing the beep in DA and 0.27 in SA. That 0.02s just isn't significant IMO.

I am kind of unsure of the interpretation though:

On one hand you could say the difference is insignificant, therefore DA/SA is not a detriment to getting the first round off.

On the other hand, you could say the longer, heavier DA pull can't really prevent a determined trigger pull, so why bother with two triggers and just learn the margins of a single pull.

I certainly respect the opinions of those who work with guns in hand frequently in non shoot situations, but I remain unconvinced there is any safety improvement with TDA, DAO or LEM systems. TDA introduces some modest but possibly unnecessary complexity into gun handling, and DAO/LEM slows shooting cadence perhaps insignificantly.

There is something really satisfying mentally about a system that allows the ignition portion of the gun to be at complete rest in its normal carry configuration. No amount of mechanical failures will allow this to fire without a trigger pull.

I just want to be safe and reasonably competent with any trigger type on the market.

[octagon]

I don't get what the dive into minutia is supposed to be for. Is it for speed of the first shot,accuracy of the first shot and any/all follow up shots or split times? If it is for any of these for defensive shooting does it really matter if the user is trained and practiced with their particular gun? I say it doesn't matter enough to make a real world difference.

If it is about the safety of not shooting a suspect when you don't want to or "taking a person at gunpoint" then that is so much more a software/training and practice issue. It is also hugely more of a critical issue for LEOs than citizens and since it is more a LEO issue since they are doing it more often and have a duty to take a person into custody that citizens do not then we have to consider the Glock being so ubiquitous.

If badguys are being shot when they shouldn't be that is not a trigger issue but a decision making and technique issue both software not hardware.

Where the trigger finger is and when along with when and why we are pointing guns at another human being are all software issues.

[David S.]

FWIW, recently I did a drill where you get on target, wait for the beep and pull the trigger as fast as possible. Using a Beretta 92, I found that I can pull the trigger in 0.29 sec from hearing the beep in DA and 0.27 in SA. That 0.02s just isn't significant IMO.

I am kind of unsure of the interpretation though:

On one hand you could say the difference is insignificant, therefore DA/SA is not a detriment to getting the first round off.

On the other hand, you could say the longer, heavier DA pull can't really prevent a determined trigger pull, so why bother with two triggers and just learn the margins of a single pull.

I certainly respect the opinions of those who work with guns in hand frequently in non shoot situations, but I remain unconvinced there is any safety improvement with TDA, DAO or LEM systems. TDA introduces some modest but possibly unnecessary complexity into gun handling, and DAO/LEM slows shooting cadence perhaps insignificantly.

There is something really satisfying mentally about a system that allows the ignition portion of the gun to be at complete rest in its normal carry configuration. No amount of mechanical failures will allow this to fire without a trigger pull.

I just want to be safe and reasonably competent with any trigger type on the market.

Enel. With respect, sir, your post seems to indicate that you misunderstand DB's argument.

To use a baseball analog, the primary benefit of a long DA or LEM trigger pull is an improved ability to check the swing. The long trigger pull gives you more room to stop mid-stroke, as the situation evolves. Trigger length is more important that weight.

I think I got that right.

[GJM]

If folks are shooting DA or LEM just as fast as shorter triggers, by faster application of pressure, how does that result in more decision time?

[chl442]

If you're good with .21 or so splits on a Bill Drill the LEM won't hold you back.
If you just have to have .15 splits go elsewhere.

Myself, I'm very content in the .21-.25 range because my conscious brain can actually count and account for rounds at that speed.

100 percent agree with Jody H.
I have zero problems shooting .21 to .25 splits with my HK P2000's that are TLG LEM configuration .
I find myself having to work slightly harder with my P30's which are V1 Light LEM . I've done some of my best shooting at speed and precision work with the TLG LEM configuration. I actually prefer the "wall" in that configuration better than anything else .
Chris

[octagon]

If folks are shooting DA or LEM just as fast as shorter triggers, by faster application of pressure, how does that result in more decision time?

And if the shooter is engaging the trigger sooner in the draw stroke to do so where is the safety margin also?

[David S.]

If folks are shooting DA or LEM just as fast as shorter triggers, by faster application of pressure, how does that result in more decision time?

DB teaches students to operate at "decision making speed": A rather modest .35-.50 splits. If you're operating at that kind of pace, I think his long DA/LEM hardware recommendation start to makes sense. If you're operating beyond "decision making speed," whatever that means to you, then it probably doesn't matter what type of trigger you use.

I'm certainly no gunfighter and I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. I hope I'm representing his views accurately.

[JustOneGun]

DB teaches students to operate at "decision making speed": A rather modest .35-.50 splits. If you're operating at that kind of pace, I think his long DA/LEM hardware recommendation start to makes sense. If you're operating beyond "decision making speed," whatever that means to you, then it probably doesn't matter what type of trigger you use.

I'm certainly no gunfighter and I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. I hope I'm representing his views accurately.

I too cannot speak for someone else. But when you break down what you need to do in a gunfight it might look different. So after doing everything in my control to avoid a gunfight fails and whatever mental trigger I have developed in my brain says, now. I decide that I need to shoot the bad guy. IMO it is good to see the what(gun, knife, bat, etc) that makes me want to shoot them as I start my presentation. At some point during that presentation I am nearing the time that I will place my finger on the trigger and pull it. Relative to that point I believe I need to change my eye focus from the what, to where I want my bullets to go. For sake of argument let's say high center chest. For the fraction of a second that I am no longer looking at the what and am looking at the target, I will not see the what anymore.
For me, once the decision to draw and fire is made, there is no reason to artificially slow down the draw or stop development of my speed. If the, "what" is still in his hand and a threat when I take my eyes off it and transition visually to my target, they are getting shot. If something changes before that, then by all means I need to stop. After that, it's not going to happen unless I artificially slow down. But at that point and for that fraction of a second, why in gods name would I want to go slower on purpose?

I think of it like a weight lifter. Make the easy gains before making it more complex. Make the gains in speed, knowledge of when to fire, knowledge of how to have good safe procedures so that only the bad guy gets shot, etc. As an aside, I don't believe in training to put decision making on the timer. It is a separate act. I don't start moving my hands to draw or come on target until that decision is made. I need to see what I need to see, no matter how long it takes. Low light, circumstances etc, may slow me way down. It happens. But once I know I need to draw, or draw and shoot, then that needs to happen at the fastest speed that I've developed to date during training that insures an accurate hit. If that is .5 or .15 it doesn't matter. That's my speed.