Is Decocking a TDA Pistol Strictly Necessary?

[john c]

I have evolved to the point of “do what you want, but don’t cry if there are consequences you don’t want.” Choices have consequences and if you think carrying a cocked DA/SA pistol is a good idea, based on your square range training and can manage that without any issues when facing a real threat, likely for the first time in your life....cool. Hope things go well for you. If not....be a grown up and accept the consequences. I have been in thousands of high threat situations and multiple shootings including one with a DA/SA gun and I will not carry this way and train decocking to a sub conscious level, but I have been labeled a dinosaur with old fashion ideas that are often discounted based on what works on the range for shooting performance, because it is ALL about shooting being easy for most folks.

DB, I'm not advocating this, merely asking the question in reference to the P320 and similar pistols that are making inroads in the duty pistol market. Decocking or carrying on-safe aren't options for these users.

This conundrum popped into my head comparing the Walther P99 with the PPQ. In another thread a poster mentioned they'll never carry the P99 because they can't decock it one handed. If, in a situation where two handed decocking isn't possible, why not revert to PPQ mode and simply holster the gun (is the second hand were injured or otherwise tied up and couldn't be used to decock).

A big reason why my agency went to Gen4 G17s was that it was very difficult to train recruits to properly operate the P226. The whole "stop, decock, and holster" took too much training time.

[john c]

If I see someone with a holstered, non-decocked, non-safetied gun (eg: the 1911), I'm going to get far away. That is an accident waiting to happen, and I don't really much care that his finger is his safety.

I agree. But how does the P320 compare to a GI spec 1911? The trigger pulls are similar, though the P320 pull is a bit longer.

[john c]

Wait a minute... I just realized that there are 2 different trigger pulls on a Beretta 92!?



Seriously, I think I understand what the OG is driving at, but, doctrine/process count for a lot here... I'm with @Dagga Boy : I'll be in the decocking control group.

Les, you're a serious shooter with a lot of credibility. What's the best/correct doctrine for using and carrying a P320? I'm using this as an example of a fully cocked pistol gaining wide issuance. The PPQ is not a true duty pistol.

[john c]

To be fair to OP, he wasnt actually asking "should I (or anyone else) carry a TDA in Condition 0?"

That was just a thought exercise to answer the real question of "should I (or anyone else) carry a precocked striker fired pistol in condition 0?"

So, leaving Glocks and other partially cocked strikers out of the discussion for simplicity's sake:

Why would a P320 X5 be safer to carry than a P226, both carried in condition 0?

I feel like saying "design parameters" is dodging the question, since those parameters may be dictated by Marketing and Sales just as much, if not more so, than Engineering and real world usage.

Yes, exactly. Thanks for putting my late night thoughts into a more coherent form.

[spinmove_]

DB, I'm not advocating this, merely asking the question in reference to the P320 and similar pistols that are making inroads in the duty pistol market. Decocking or carrying on-safe aren't options for these users.

This conundrum popped into my head comparing the Walther P99 with the PPQ. In another thread a poster mentioned they'll never carry the P99 because they can't decock it one handed. If, in a situation where two handed decocking isn't possible, why not revert to PPQ mode and simply holster the gun (is the second hand were injured or otherwise tied up and couldn't be used to decock).

A big reason why my agency went to Gen4 G17s was that it was very difficult to train recruits to properly operate the P226. The whole "stop, decock, and holster" took too much training time.

How?! How is “decock before holster” taking that long to train? How is it different than “safe rifle after dismounting”?

[JRV]

I agree. But how does the P320 compare to a GI spec 1911? The trigger pulls are similar, though the P320 pull is a bit longer.

A "good" P320 (allowing for variation/tolerance) is going to be about the same weight as a crappy 1911, and in my experience, has a smidge of weightless pretravel and kind of a "rolling" 1.5-2mm break where the trigger mechanism is releasing the striker. Not super "wally." No meaningful overtravel. Think of a stock Glock 34 with a (-) connector and all the pretravel taken out.

I've only shot five or six of them, so someone else may have a different impression.

The "X" variants are shorter and crisper.

[spinmove_]

Les, you're a serious shooter with a lot of credibility. What's the best/correct doctrine for using and carrying a P320? I'm using this as an example of a fully cocked pistol gaining wide issuance. The PPQ is not a true duty pistol.

Wait...why is the PPQ not a true duty pistol?

[BehindBlueI's]

I don't disagree with this. But if your agency issued you a P320 or PPQ, what would your thoughts be? What actions would you take?

Shrug and carry on, I suppose. We're currently issued the Glock 17M, so I'd treat it the same way.

[john c]

How?! How is “decock before holster” taking that long to train? How is it different than “safe rifle after dismounting”?

That's just what I was told by the range staff. We didn't train recruit officers with rifles at the time, so that wasn't an issue. Regardless, the G17 is working well for us.

[john c]

Wait...why is the PPQ not a true duty pistol?

I merely mentioned that because it hasn't gained widespread issuance. I don't know of any large agencies that have adopted it, though I'm open to being corrected. I just use the example of the P320 because it has seen widespread acceptance. I have a PPQ M1 and had a P320. I vastly prefer the PPQ, but it just hasn't taken off like the P320.