Safeties.

[TOTS]

Someone earlier mentioned advances in holster design and the use of kydex as significant. I believe it was directed to facilitate the safe lack of manual safety for carry. I’m bringing it up for the discussion of designing the holster to defeat the safety upon the stowing of the pistol. Such that the safety is already defeated once the pistol is drawn. This makes the rest of the safety rules more imperative but no more than a SFA pistol that doesn’t come with a safety anyway. Admittedly, this may not be desired for trigger weights or pull lengths that are too light or too short. (1911)

E.g. I just paired a M&P 2.0 thumb safety with a JM holster that allows me to safe the pistol, lower the weapon, holster it and then the guard of the holster forces the safety to disengage as it seats (trapping it). By this time, however, the trigger is completely guarded by the holster. When the gun is out, an added layer of safety is present for admin handling, provided by the thumb safety.

Secondly, pertinent to the internet experts and Lovells recommendations, I feel that the dichotomy lies in that we have people carrying guns who shouldn’t. Those who Lovell is concerned don’t train enough to reliably defeat the safety under stress probably don’t demonstrate the skill required to safely handle guns with light, short pull triggers and no safety (most polymer sfa pistols bought from gunstores today). Or, summarized by “Those who need safeties probably won’t be able to defeat them when needed. Those who may not need a safety probably have the proficiency to obviate the need for the safety.“ The only mitigation is the fact that the general gun owner (not talking about disciplined shooters) never handles the gun enough to realize how unsafe they are with it.

Thoughts on either ideas?

[farscott]

As someone who carried and competed with a 1911-pattern pistol for more than a decade, I admit to misgivings and doubts about the thumb safety on SAO pistols. For me, the light bulb moment was an injured right shoulder. The injury did not allow me to draw from the holster or shoot with my strong hand as I was in a sling. I found manipulation of the safety with my weak hand to need conscious thought, especially as the pistol only had a single-sided safety. More than once, I failed to engage the safety before attempting to holster the pistol. It was very difficult to holster without muzzling myself due to the shoulder sling, so forgetting the safety was a really big deal. I also had issues with the left-hand draw and the grip safety. Training issue, yes. An issue that was exasperated by my inability to normally twist and rotate my upper body. After that experience, I began to prefer ambi safeties and increased WHO training.

For me, missing the grip safety can be an issue, especially with gloved hands. I like the modern designs, such as the EDC X9, that do not include the grip safety. The SVI I use to hunt deer has the grip safety pinned for usage with gloves.

Another benefit of the shorter slide SAO pistols like the EDC X9 is the draw is considerably easier with the weak hand from the strong side. As a huge five-inch 1911 fan, that realization hurt.

[BehindBlueI's]

Secondly, pertinent to the internet experts and Lovells recommendations, I feel that the dichotomy lies in that we have people carrying guns who shouldn’t. Those who Lovell is concerned don’t train enough to reliably defeat the safety under stress probably don’t demonstrate the skill required to safely handle guns with light, short pull triggers and no safety (most polymer sfa pistols bought from gunstores today).

There's a bucket of those people, sure. We'll call that bucket #1.

Then there's a bucket #2 of people who are safe with their guns and are fine to hunt, target shoot, etc. and do just fine with a safety under low and no stress situations but will have some varying likelihood of success under different and difficult situations.

Then there's a bucket #3 of people who are dedicated enough and in sync with with their gear and who will routinely practice all those odd situations until they can't get it wrong. True experts, if you will. They'll be fine.

I think a lot of folks in bucket #2 think they are in bucket #3 or have just never realistically considered the need to be. Some of that bucket will never even consider that their performance may be different under extreme stress, if injured, if grappled, etc. Others will consider it but figure they have it mastered. It'll probably never be an issue, but if it is it'll be a big one. I think it's fairly easy to train to a 80% or even a 90% success rate standard, but that last stretch to 100% requires real dedication and time.

[Elwin]

I think a lot of folks in bucket #2 think they are in bucket #3 or have just never realistically considered the need to be. Some of that bucket will never even consider that their performance may be different under extreme stress, if injured, if grappled, etc. Others will consider it but figure they have it mastered. It'll probably never be an issue, but if it is it'll be a big one. I think it's fairly easy to train to a 80% or even a 90% success rate standard, but that last stretch to 100% requires real dedication and time.

I think this is accurate and helpful, though I wonder if it isn’t a universal problem no matter the chosen pistol, and that it’s a matter of picking your risk/disadvantage. For example, people with sub-6lb striker triggers and no safety still have to get from 90% to 100% success at absolute, unfailing trigger discipline in all situations. Granted we should all be working on that, but for this group there is no “safety net.”

Same would go for DA/SA. Those guys have to get from 90% to 100% hitting the decocker every time they come off target, no matter how much stress or other factors are at play. And DAO requires some serious dedication to get to 100% accountability on long and/or precise shots. And so on.

Obviously I have a bias since I like a good safety. Big picture I agree with you, and I’m probably that Group 2 guy who carries a 1911 and overestimates his proficiency with it. Though I can at least claim awareness of the requirements and putting in (some of?) the work. And recently deciding that as much as I want to, I can’t run a single side safety well enough WHO and need an ambi.

[paherne]

I could get the holster to operate. I could lower the hood with my index finger, and have. My thumb was laid back against my forearm, meaning my grip was also compromised. The break was at the base of my thumb, so imagine not just your thumb is gone from the equation but that big meaty chunk of your palm under it also useless now as you can't roll it toward the rest of your palm either. I maybe could have used gear to flip the safety off or I maybe could have tried it and dropped it instead. That'd have been a bother. Using the other hand was not an option as it was occupied. We can what if it all day. Could I have escaped the entangled fight, made space, etc. Maybe. Could I have fumbled it trying to get it operational and ended up fighting over it? Maybe. But I know that with my Sig or Glock it's not an issue I need to worry about.

So, you basically got made a being without an opposable thumb and most of our human-based tools are made for opposable thumbs. I think I would just leave the gun in the holster, like you did, and hang on for the ride. Especially if I knew cover officers were close, as opposed to introducing a pistol into a fight where all of my techniques for retaining said pistol rely on my thumb working at least partially. These kinds of conversations are valuable, but I doubt they offer more than anecdotal data. We all know cops who've been shot in the hand during gunfights where their dominant hand becomes a club, similar to what you experienced. Do the advantages of a safety outweigh the possibility that your dominant hand will be injured and you will be unable to use the firearms in extremis?

I think, given the scenario you faced, and the problems you overcame, the answer for those carrying a duty pistol with a safety, would be a J-frame on the off side, accessible if you could make space. And, that's a big "if." It was my solution, although I carried a pistol with a safety for only a very limited portion of my career.

[paherne]

I'm not quite sure what started it, but I've noticed a number of recent trainer comments on social media regarding proper use of the Staccato grip safety. They all seem to be addressing a rise in new users pinning the Staccato grip safety with a rubber band or other device.

Neither of my Staccato grip safeties were properly fitted from the factory. The 2019 I carried on-duty required a duty tune from John Jardine before I was willing to carry it. Every 1911-style pistol I've ever thought of using for serious purposes gets the same treatment.

[TOTS]

There's a bucket of those people, sure. We'll call that bucket #1.

Then there's a bucket #2 of people who are safe with their guns and are fine to hunt, target shoot, etc. and do just fine with a safety under low and no stress situations but will have some varying likelihood of success under different and difficult situations.

Then there's a bucket #3 of people who are dedicated enough and in sync with with their gear and who will routinely practice all those odd situations until they can't get it wrong. True experts, if you will. They'll be fine.

I think a lot of folks in bucket #2 think they are in bucket #3 or have just never realistically considered the need to be. Some of that bucket will never even consider that their performance may be different under extreme stress, if injured, if grappled, etc. Others will consider it but figure they have it mastered. It'll probably never be an issue, but if it is it'll be a big one. I think it's fairly easy to train to a 80% or even a 90% success rate standard, but that last stretch to 100% requires real dedication and time.

I think this is accurate and helpful, though I wonder if it isn’t a universal problem no matter the chosen pistol, and that it’s a matter of picking your risk/disadvantage. For example, people with sub-6lb striker triggers and no safety still have to get from 90% to 100% success at absolute, unfailing trigger discipline in all situations. Granted we should all be working on that, but for this group there is no “safety net.”

Same would go for DA/SA. Those guys have to get from 90% to 100% hitting the decocker every time they come off target, no matter how much stress or other factors are at play. And DAO requires some serious dedication to get to 100% accountability on long and/or precise shots. And so on.

Obviously I have a bias since I like a good safety. Big picture I agree with you, and I’m probably that Group 2 guy who carries a 1911 and overestimates his proficiency with it. Though I can at least claim awareness of the requirements and putting in (some of?) the work. And recently deciding that as much as I want to, I can’t run a single side safety well enough WHO and need an ambi.

I’ll agree with all points. But also add anecdotally that I’ve been in the vicinity of NDs waaayyy more often than I’ve been around someone or myself needing to use a weapon in a defensive situation. (Perhaps luckily or for whatever the reasons, but it’s what it is.) So my foremost consideration is safety in admin handling and the less disciplined you are with respect to gun handling, the less you should handle a gun. If you are determined to handle one, it should have as many layers of engineered safety as possible until your human factor safety can be dependable.

I also preach the truth of “it’s the consequences, not the odds” that should drive decision making, or however Aaron Cowan phrases that so I definitely see value in both sides. To clarify, I’m mostly speaking with a “new-gun-Nate” or the bearded Timmy that posts a 6-lb edc dump on instagram but only has 200 flawless rnds through his TiN barreled G-19x that he’s had $500 worth of ceracote but won’t buy a $80 holster for- in mind and not really a LE/ mil/ firearms instructor in mind. Which I also feel is the focus demographic for the videos I was referring to.

[BehindBlueI's]

So, you basically got made a being without an opposable thumb and most of our human-based tools are made for opposable thumbs. I think I would just leave the gun in the holster, like you did, and hang on for the ride. Especially if I knew cover officers were close, as opposed to introducing a pistol into a fight where all of my techniques for retaining said pistol rely on my thumb working at least partially. These kinds of conversations are valuable, but I doubt they offer more than anecdotal data. We all know cops who've been shot in the hand during gunfights where their dominant hand becomes a club, similar to what you experienced. Do the advantages of a safety outweigh the possibility that your dominant hand will be injured and you will be unable to use the firearms in extremis?

I think, given the scenario you faced, and the problems you overcame, the answer for those carrying a duty pistol with a safety, would be a J-frame on the off side, accessible if you could make space. And, that's a big "if." It was my solution, although I carried a pistol with a safety for only a very limited portion of my career.

Sure. We're all the sum of our experiences, etc. If people want a safety, go for it. I just don't, and won't. My primary concern is that large number of bucket #2 folks who don't realize they are not bucket #3 folks. If you (meaning any given you) are bucket #3 those concerns are irrelevant to you. I'm pretty sure I'm bucket #2 and don't care for whatever advantage there is to a manual safety to put in the work to get to bucket #3.

[BehindBlueI's]

I’ll agree with all points. But also add anecdotally that I’ve been in the vicinity of NDs waaayyy more often than I’ve been around someone or myself needing to use a weapon in a defensive situation. (Perhaps luckily or for whatever the reasons, but it’s what it is.) So my foremost consideration is safety in admin handling and the less disciplined you are with respect to gun handling, the less you should handle a gun. If you are determined to handle one, it should have as many layers of engineered safety as possible until your human factor safety can be dependable.

I also preach the truth of “it’s the consequences, not the odds” that should drive decision making, or however Aaron Cowan phrases that so I definitely see value in both sides. To clarify, I’m mostly speaking with a “new-gun-Nate” or the bearded Timmy that posts a 6-lb edc dump on instagram but only has 200 flawless rnds through his TiN barreled G-19x that he’s had $500 worth of ceracote but won’t buy a $80 holster for- in mind and not really a LE/ mil/ firearms instructor in mind. Which I also feel is the focus demographic for the videos I was referring to.

How many NDs would be prevented by a manual safety? How many were intentional trigger pulls? When I tracked those causing injury or death, about 1/3 were caused by intentional trigger pulls after reversing or neglecting clearing steps, for example.

Nothing is fool proof. Someone will always build a better fool. I'm just not sure that relying on a safety is going to prevent a significant number of NDs that matter. Meaning someone is hurt or killed vs just embarrassed at the range sort of NDs.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Good point. If you need the safety because one can't keep the finger off the trigger, you don't see the real problem. It is true as I have commented before that gun design has an affordance that draws the finger to the trigger. So you make the trigger nonfunctional without extra steps or you practice to avoid that seductive movement.

Now will the extra steps hurt you in the time of need vs. the accidental finger to the trigger when inappropriate? To be a touch silly, why remove the safety on the draw? Wouldn't it be safer to remove when it is time to actually pull trigger in response to a threat?

I was almost shot by a guy with a 1911 with a thumb and grip safety. Was talking to a guy yesterday who was there at the Genesee Conservation League when missing a holstering on a non drop safe gun, killed a guy.

If I have to draw a gun for my life, I don't need a step or mechanism that can interfere. Yes, one can practice in matches (as I do with a 1911) but I'm in the camp that under stress, injured, other hand, different position - even that ingrained motor memory can go awry.

It's the Israeli carry argument, got to have a safety line of thought. Not for me. I carry a J frame at times, what's the difference except trigger pull. I could have gotten a retro J with a grip safety. We know that a slip,startle, yip, sympathetic grasp can defeat even a DA revolver pull.