Pistol "Safe" Conditions

[mechanical]

I'll apologize if this is on the long-winded side.

I want to give some background for my question, some info on my experiences, and why I'm bringing this up.

First, some quick background on myself:

I've been shooting USPSA and 3 Gun/MultiGun matches locally for about a year now. I've been doing this for fun and am not really serious about "competing".

I've been reading this forum for a while, but don't post much. I mainly read to find tips/techniques/etc to improve my shooting. (In short, I'm a nobody)

I searched a bit and didn't see any discussion on this topic, but feel free to point me towards it if I missed it.

My question here was prompted by some happenings at a recent local 3 gun match.

In short, a stage allowed you to reholster your pistol during the course of fire to pick up a rifle/shotgun.

I'm totally comfortable with that and it isn't a problem for me.

(I'm fine with slinging a loaded rifle too, FWIW)

Our resident rules-nazi started hassling the RO with questions about holstering a loaded pistol, what rules allowed it, how it had to be done, the condtion, etc etc etc. He also hassled the RO about leaving rifles/shotguns in the dump barrels elsewhere during the match. During the stage that allowed reholstering, one of the shooters holstered a pistol in a manner that got a warning from the RO.

Here's my question:

What is the rationale behind the various "safe conditions" to holster or box pistols?

(I suppose this applies to USPSA, Outlaw and whatever other multigun rules exist. probably some more than others, it's kind of a general thing I think)

All pistols can be boxed or holstered (when allowed) totally empty, slide locked open. (makes sense to me).

I know the Glocks/M&P's are ok to just drop in the box or holster, loaded chamber.

1911's and SAO pistols must be on safe.

DA pistols must be decocked (and on safe if there is one?).

I don't understand this: How is the Glock any different from a 1911 with the safety off?

Don't start with the "safe-action" thing. According to Glock's Brochure, the "safe-action" system is a combination of their triger safety, firing pin safety and an auxiliary drop safety.

<I linked to the official Glock Brochure here, but don't have enough posts to do that>

The way I see it, both the Glock and 1911 (off safe) are pretty much the same.

Both will fire if the trigger is pulled.

Neither will fire any other way (my understanding is that the 1911 is relatively safe from inertial discharge, but if you disagree, imagine a series 80 with the additional firing pin safety).

The 1911 has a trigger safety too (usually called a grip safety), and it's probably "safer" from accidental discharge than the Glock's because it doesn't automagically turn off if anything touches the trigger. It might be harder to force or overpower too, but I haven't looked into that.

When abandoning the pistol, if you catch the trigger on either the Glock or a 1911 (off safe), they will fire. (This happens to be the only reason I can think of for either pistol to fire during boxing/holstering, barring some freak mechanical defect.)

Lets throw in the DA/SA Sig pistols for the sake of expanding this scenario (226, 228, whatever).

How is the loaded and cocked Sig functionally any different from our Glocks?

Both have firing pin safeties that are disengaged when the trigger is pulled. Both are drop safe. Both will fire if the trigger is pulled.

Is there any condition in which the loaded and cocked Sig will fire that the Glock won't?

Or put the other way, how is a Glock safer than the Sig under this situation?

I see the Glock and Sig as being functionally identical at this point (fire if trigger pulled, won't fire if it isn't). The two pistols have similar trigger pulls too (heck, some Glock triggers are lighter than the SA trigger on a stock Sig).

I guess I'm hung up on the pistols all being functionally the same as a Glock when cocked (Sig) or off safe (1911). All of them will fire if the trigger gets yanked, none will fire if it isn't. Since they're all the same at this point, why is one acceptable to drop in a box while the other gets you a DQ?

Rephrased: why should a 1911 shooter get a DQ if his safety gets bumped off during/after abandoning when it only reverts the pistol to the Glock's "safe" condition?

[HRider]

I am not a match director nor did I make the rules. My opinion is that the rules makers believe that a Safe action pistol (Glock, M&P, XD etc.) is much like a double action revolver, yes it will fire if the trigger is pulled, but the trigger must be pulled far enough to "cock" (for lack of a better term) the striker and then release it for the Safe action pistol to fire. A single action 1911/2011 (with non functioning grip safety)or cocked double action pistol(which is practically now a single action) only need to have the trigger bumped to fire. My personal opinion is that a cocked and UNLOCKED 1911/2011 with a FUNCTIONAL grip safety is as safe as a Safe action pistol. I suppose the dump rules for these pistols (empty or safety lock engaged)are made to keep everyone safe even if people are using 1911/2011s with non functioning grip safeties as many do. I hope this helps.

On the subject of reholstering, I would rather dump pistols in a box/bucket than have people reholster hot pistols during a course of fire, again, just my opinion.

Hurley

[Ronnie j]

Well first off a Glock, xd , or mp and an cocked sa/da pistol or 1911 are not functionally the same. A slight bump to any trigger surface of cocked 1911 , sig or cz could cause a discharge , a pistol with a trigger safety requires force to be applied in a fairly specific manner to the face of th trigger.

Uspsa rules state you cannot require a reholser , but do state specific safe holster conditions . Sa requires safety on, da/sa requires deck or safety on. Safe action requires a workin trigger safety .

I don't know what rule set your shooting under, but I've heard your argument before .

Have shot a sig , do shoot a 1911 and glock , and I will say I wouldn't drop a 1911 or sig in a box and trust it. If you can pitch your cocked 1911 or sig into a drop box and feel safe you need better triggers.

[Don Springer]

A lot of people will disable the "grip safety" and because of that it's easier to assume it doesn't work than to go test it every time a 1911 is dumped "off safe".

[mlmiller1]

Not to be argumentative or anything but the single action pistol, "cocked" has the hammer under spring tension, held back by the sear as well as (if functional) the grip safety. With most grip safeties disabled, if anything happens to the sear that is holding against the spring tension on the hammer, the hammer will fall, firing the weapon. However, the glock firing pin is not under the same tension. To make the glock fire, the firing pin still must be drawn fully back before it can go forward, firing the weapon. Imagine if you will a bow & arrow. The bow is under tension but the arrow(firing pin in the glock) must still be drawn rearward before it can move forward with enough force to fire. This is accomplished by the pull stroke on the glock as you pull the trigger, which by the way you must also disengage the trigger safety before it can be pulled. The glock is not "cocked" until you pull the trigger rearward. Thus the difference in safety of a single action versus a glock. I suspect most "striker fired" weapons are somewhat similar I don't know enough about the other brands you specifically mentioned to address them but I do understand the glock firing mechanism as well as a reasonable understanding of a how a single action fires.

Does that make any sense?

MLM

[mechanical]

Lets ignore the (optional) reholstering for now. I understand a lot of you aren't comfortable with it, but it's not the focus of my question. Rules on this match were some kind of outlaw ruleset (unpublished, to my knowledge). I suppose the relevance in my mind was that the "safe holster condition" in USPSA (and 3 Gun, etc) struck me as similar to the abandoning/boxing conditions.

I don't want to tie this into the 1911 grip safety too much, I know they are commonly disabled.

(I usually shoot a Sig (SAO and DA/SA), but also have a Glock. I don't do much with the 1911 at this time)

Ronnie J, if you can give a bump to any trigger surface get a discharges, it's broke.

It should only fire with a rearward motion. This could be applied to the trigger face, or through friction on the side of the trigger.

I'd say that if you can't toss your cocked/unlocked 1911's or Sig's into a box and feel safe, you need better triggers.

The firing pin safety (Sigs and other pistols so equipped) will prevent firing unless the trigger is pulled.

On 1911's, I think the firing pin springs and half-cock notch should prevent firing (lets not talk about the 1911 too much, I started using them as an example because they're common). (Is there any info available on dropped firearms discharging? Has anyone run a test or experiment on this?)

I suppose the Glock trigger safety reduces the chances of a side/friction force causing moving the trigger rearwards and firing, but aside from a horribly floppy holster, I can't think of any situation where this would really occur. It seems to me that whenever a discharge comes up in this situation, it's because something worked into the trigger guard and pulled the trigger, totally negating the trigger safety.

What about the M&P? Correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I've seen of them, the bottom of the trigger hinges backwards to deactivate the firing pin safety. There doesn't appear to be anything preventing a side/friction load from firing one of these.

I don't have an M&P to look at, but it seems to me that the trigger pull weight and travel are comparable between M&P's, Glocks and the Sig. I'll get my Glock and Sig out to compare, but I want to say the pull weight and travel (slack/takeup is part of the travel, right?) is comparable.

In any case, the race Glock/M&P with a 2lb short travel trigger of whatever variation doesn't strike me as being too far off from a Sig (SA) or 1911.

Is a "trigger safety" considered adequate just because it's external to the frame?

I'm having trouble seeing how an external "safety" that is disabled by pulling the trigger really makes the firearm any "safer" than one without. It doesn't seem any different from the internal firing pin safety that's disabled by the rearward travel of the trigger, except that you can see it without disassembling the pistol.

[mechanical]

MLM, I was typing when you posted and missed your reply.

I understand what you're trying to say, and perhaps it makes sense when we look at the classic 1911, but it doesn't strike me as a relevant comparison with any of the other pistols of interest.

The Sigs and whatever else all have a firing pin safety. You can do whatever you want to the sear and hammer, but it will not fire even if it strikes the firing pin.

You can take a hammer and punch and whack the firing pin itself, but it won't fire unless the trigger is pulled enough to disable the firing pin safety. In an external, manual of arms "functional" sense, is that any different from the Glock or M&P?

[twodownzero]

Just to clarify something in this thread: a 1911 grip safety doesn't block the sear motion. The thumb safety does.

A 1911 with the thumb safety off and the grip safety functioning is still not "safe."

[AFH]

Mechanical,

You will find many people who insist that going downrange of a rifle or shotgun in a dump barrel or pointing toward the side of the berm is unsafe. Many of these are the same folks who think you should be DQ'd for unbagging your rifle, shotgun , or pistol at your car; that having a box of shotgun shells sitting on a railroad tie beside a safe area is grounds for being DQ'd; the list goes on.

Different rule sets in 3gun allow different dispositions of abandoned weapons. A few matches, including the BRM3G, treat a 1911 with a functional grip safety the same as a Glock or M&P. ...However, in order to check the pistol, if a 1911 is found abandoned with the thumb safety off, it is left laying until the stage is cleared. Then the CRO will unload the pistol and attempt to drop the hammer with the grip safety not engaged (not depressed). If the hammer falls, the shooter receives a stage DQ, if not he is good to go, but may receive a procedural penalty for not putting on the thumb safety. This is done to discourage folks from slowing the match down by having to check their 1911 on every stage.

I agree with you on reholstering by the way.

twodownzero,

If the weapon will not fire, even with the trigger being pulled, why is a 1911 with the thumb safety off and the grip safety functioning still not "safe?" One could argue that is even more safe than a Glock since there would have to be a force applied to the grip safety as well as the trigger.

Andy

[slowsure]

One other safety device a 1911/2011 style pistol can have and comes into play in this discussion is the "Series 80" firing pin block or "Schwartz device".

I'm shooting a Para widebody this season. It has a thumb safety, functional grip safety and a firing pin block, all three would have to fail before the firing pin could go forward.

Having said that I normally unload the pistol before dumping, because its ME down range of it.

[StealthyBlagga]

Regardless of the mechanical issues involved, the "safe condition" at most matches derives directly from IPSC/USPSA rules and guidelines for mainly historical reasons. The gist of the rules has always been that ALL safety devices that are installed must be engaged in order for the pistol to be deemed "safe". A Smith & Wesson M&P pistol that came from the factory without a thumb safety is "safe" the moment the shooter releases it, whereas another M&P pistol that came from the factory WITH a thumb safety is not "safe" until the thumb safety is engaged. If this seems illogical and unfair to you, I suggest you start lobbying USPSA for a rule change.

[AFH]

Since the HUGE majority of 3 gun matches are not run under USPSA rules, they are not of primary importance to 3 gun events generally. Most 3 gun events run under a version of the so-called IMGA rules. However, if "Mechanical" is primarily shooting USPSA events, then they are extremely important, and contacting the USPSA rule committee would be appropriate -- as would not unbagging your pistol at your car.

Andy

[Stlhead]

If a gun is abandoned, in the specified location, pointing in the appropriate direction, and nobody touches it, how could it possibly discharge even if the safety was not engaged? Guns don't go off by themselves. I don't see a problem going forward of abandoned guns, even if they are hot and off safe, as long as no one touches them. The reason that I am a strong proponent of abandoning only completely empty guns without regard to the safety position is one of stage management. An empty gun can be removed from the dump barrel in preparation for the next shooter, while the current shooting is still on the clock, as long as the dump location is such that it can be done without sweeping anyone. Guns can be cleared without ever removing them from the dump barrel, O.B.I. can be installed and it can be ported off to a rack lickety split, the guns can be staged for the next shooter prior to current shooter even finishing if need be. As long as the stage description is clear as to how guns are to be abandoned, the penalties for not following the description are clear, and the procedures for handling the guns before and after the start signal are safe and consistent, there is no advantage to be gained by not having the guns empty prior to abandonment.

[atomicferret]

snip

I agree completely. And along those same lines; if you are going to REQUIRE a gun to be completely unloaded by the shooter before he can move on, then ALLOW it to be cleared.

I shoot a local match that forces the shooter to completely unload each gun, but then treats it like a live grenade until the shooter is finished. It easily adds an hour or more to the duration of the match that day.

Edited April 17, 2012 by atomicferret

[mechanical]

Stlhead,

Abandoning empty so that the RO's can rack the firearms makes a lot of sense. I'd say that in this case, it's not so much a "safety" rule as an administrative one to keep everything moving along and I don't really see anything wrong with it, as long as it's understood to be an admin thing with clearly defined penalties.

Andy, I didn't realize that there were matches that were ok with the 1911 grip safety in lieu of the thumb safety. It seems biased against 1911's if nothing else gets the trigger/grip/etc safety checked for function when the thumb safety isn't engaged, but I suppose that a higher rate of disabled 1911 grip safeties than Glock trigger safeties could have led to that.

(Do these rules allow cocked Sig's? Like I've been saying, they're no different than the M&P or Glock except you can't see the lever that disengages the firing pin safety)

I suppose that the matches I've been to may have been heavily influenced by USPSA, and/or my fellow shooters may have fed me erroneous USPSA inspired rules and advice. I was under the impression that the pistol "safe" conditions were pretty much universal from comments my squadmates have made.

StealthyBlagga,

It is illogical, but I can see how that train of thought (all safeties must be engaged) got started.

StealthyBlagga/Andy:

I'm not here to bitch about your USPSA rules. I just wanted to figure out what, if any, reasoning was behind them and have no intention to lobby the USPSA rule committee for a change. I don't care for some of the things I've seen (probably not a reflection on the organization as a whole, just local) and don't have the skill to compete in any meaningful manner, so I'm happy just doing this for fun at the local level without investing myself into the concerns of the organization as whole.

I've heard enough comments from friends and other shooters about "always unload to avoid a potential DQ" or "shooting a Glock/M&P so they don't have to worry about anything when abandoning" that I wanted to ask about this. It struck me as being an overly harsh penalty to DQ a shooter who is just as safe as the Glock guy (or potentially more safe), solely because his safety bumped off after he dropped it in the box.

Edited April 17, 2012 by mechanical

[dcloudy777]

A pistol being "safe" can be somewhat reliably achieved mechanically, but can be practically guaranteed by positioning it in a safe direction or by unloading it. Put dump barrels/boxes/whatever in positions that force guns to be pointed in a safe direction... AND/OR require all guns to be unloaded before being abandoned. The position of any mechanical safety should be irrelevant.

DanO

[DyNo!]

And just to confuse everyone:

For many years I shot a Beretta 92G Elite II in USPSA and a few times in 3-gun.

The pistol had no safety, just a decocker. There was no condition that the pistol would not fire if the trigger were pressed and it was loaded/in battery.

I sold my two Elites but I have a Sig P226 now that I might shoot in 3-gun one day.

It cannot be put on safe either.

How would you all handle these two guns?

Edited April 17, 2012 by DyNo!

[StealthyBlagga]

And just to confuse everyone:

For many years I shot a Beretta 92G Elite II in USPSA and a few times in 3-gun.

The pistol had no safety, just a decocker. There was no condition that the pistol would not fire if the trigger were pressed and it was loaded/in battery.

I sold my two Elites but I have a Sig P226 now that I might shoot in 3-gun one day.

It cannot be put on safe either.

How would you all handle these two guns?

Decocked = safe

[shred]

If a gun is abandoned, in the specified location, pointing in the appropriate direction, and nobody touches it, how could it possibly discharge even if the safety was not engaged?

Cook Off.

Mostly a FA issue, but it does happen.

[Nik Habicht]

And just to confuse everyone:

For many years I shot a Beretta 92G Elite II in USPSA and a few times in 3-gun.

The pistol had no safety, just a decocker. There was no condition that the pistol would not fire if the trigger were pressed and it was loaded/in battery.

I sold my two Elites but I have a Sig P226 now that I might shoot in 3-gun one day.

It cannot be put on safe either.

How would you all handle these two guns?

Make 'em as "safe" as they can be, decock, finger off the bag switch, holster, move on.....

Seriously -- it's all about making guns as safe as they can be, within the limits of their design....

[RAZZ]

Regardless of the mechanical issues involved, the "safe condition" at most matches derives directly from IPSC/USPSA rules and guidelines for mainly historical reasons. The gist of the rules has always been that ALL safety devices that are installed must be engaged in order for the pistol to be deemed "safe". A Smith & Wesson M&P pistol that came from the factory without a thumb safety is "safe" the moment the shooter releases it, whereas another M&P pistol that came from the factory WITH a thumb safety is not "safe" until the thumb safety is engaged. If this seems illogical and unfair to you, I suggest you start lobbying USPSA for a rule change.

Is that really the way it works? That seems silly. What about a traditional DA/SA gun that has a decocker, and also a thumb safety? Can you just de-cock it, or do you need to de-cock and apply the safety?

[RiggerJJ]

This one gets my goat;

put a pistol (or long gun) MUZZLE DOWN in a bucket or barrel ON THE GROUND. leave the safety off and walk away. Is it unsafe in that condition? What is going to happen? Walk all around it, downrange, uprange, etc. Does anything happen when its not touched? What is so unsafe about it? What is so unsafe about putting it in that condition? What is so unsafe about walking downrange of it to tape/reset the stage, or do your last walkthru?

Once it is no longer being touched (remove the human element) its safe. As soon as someone touches it thou...

(A "cook off" will happen safety on OR off, and if one does happen the muzzle is pointed DOWN)

Match DQs are for MAJOR SAFETY VIOLATIONS (ie; "you (or your firearm or ammo) are too unsafe to continue this match. go home and practice or fix it"). Putting a firearm in a barrel or bucket pointed muzzle down not on safe is FAR from a major safety violation when compared to sweeping body parts or someone else, breaking the 180, AD when reloading, and all the other violations reserved for match DQs.

As long as the firearm was abandon CORRECTLY MUZZLE DOWN, leaving the safety off should NOT be a match DQ...

jj

(nomex suit is now on)

Edited April 18, 2012 by RiggerJJ

[StealthyBlagga]

Regardless of the mechanical issues involved, the "safe condition" at most matches derives directly from IPSC/USPSA rules and guidelines for mainly historical reasons. The gist of the rules has always been that ALL safety devices that are installed must be engaged in order for the pistol to be deemed "safe". A Smith & Wesson M&P pistol that came from the factory without a thumb safety is "safe" the moment the shooter releases it, whereas another M&P pistol that came from the factory WITH a thumb safety is not "safe" until the thumb safety is engaged. If this seems illogical and unfair to you, I suggest you start lobbying USPSA for a rule change.

Is that really the way it works? That seems silly. What about a traditional DA/SA gun that has a decocker, and also a thumb safety? Can you just de-cock it, or do you need to de-cock and apply the safety?

USPSA allows traditional DA/SA pistols to be holstered when decocked only - there is no requirement for the safety to be on when the pistol is decocked, even if the gun is fitted with one. M&P is different because it is fully cocked - closer in mechanical function to a single-action. Only M&Ps that do not come with a safety at all can be holstered without applying the safety. I think the same would actually be true of a 1911 if it was built without a thumb safety (feel free to check with Amidon), though this might fall afoul of rule 5.1.6. - SORRY, MY MISTAKE. USPSA rules don't require a striker fired pistol to have the safety engaged. However, I believe this would still be required under many versions of IMA rules... something we need to look at clarifying.

Don't shoot the messenger here - I don't write the rules, I just enforce them. YES - YOU CAN SHOOT ME

Edited April 20, 2012 by StealthyBlagga

[StealthyBlagga]

This one gets my goat;

put a pistol (or long gun) MUZZLE DOWN in a bucket or barrel ON THE GROUND. leave the safety off and walk away. Is it unsafe in that condition? What is going to happen? Walk all around it, downrange, uprange, etc. Does anything happen when its not touched? What is so unsafe about it? What is so unsafe about putting it in that condition? What is so unsafe about walking downrange of it to tape/reset the stage, or do your last walkthru?

Once it is no longer being touched (remove the human element) its safe. As soon as someone touches it thou...

(A "cook off" will happen safety on OR off, and if one does happen the muzzle is pointed DOWN)

Match DQs are for MAJOR SAFETY VIOLATIONS (ie; "you (or your firearm or ammo) are too unsafe to continue this match. go home and practice or fix it"). Putting a firearm in a barrel or bucket pointed muzzle down not on safe is FAR from a major safety violation when compared to sweeping body parts or someone else, breaking the 180, AD when reloading, and all the other violations reserved for match DQs.

As long as the firearm was abandon CORRECTLY MUZZLE DOWN, leaving the safety off should NOT be a match DQ...

jj

(nomex suit is now on)

I don't necessarily have a problem with this, provided the gun does not discharge. However, even a gun muzzle-down in a barrel could throw debris (rocks etc) in unsafe directions if it discharged. More disconcerting, a lot of the faster guys push the endge of the envelope by literally THROWING their gun into the barrel, and I am not sure this is wise with a rifle that has a <2lb single-action trigger without the safety applied. Watch the video of Nils getting DQd on Stage 2 at SMM3G... we are ALL lucky that he applied the safety catch before abandoning that rifle.

Edited April 18, 2012 by StealthyBlagga

[RiggerJJ]

This one gets my goat;

put a pistol (or long gun) MUZZLE DOWN in a bucket or barrel ON THE GROUND. leave the safety off and walk away. Is it unsafe in that condition? What is going to happen? Walk all around it, downrange, uprange, etc. Does anything happen when its not touched? What is so unsafe about it? What is so unsafe about putting it in that condition? What is so unsafe about walking downrange of it to tape/reset the stage, or do your last walkthru?

Once it is no longer being touched (remove the human element) its safe. As soon as someone touches it thou...

(A "cook off" will happen safety on OR off, and if one does happen the muzzle is pointed DOWN)

Match DQs are for MAJOR SAFETY VIOLATIONS (ie; "you (or your firearm or ammo) are too unsafe to continue this match. go home and practice or fix it"). Putting a firearm in a barrel or bucket pointed muzzle down not on safe is FAR from a major safety violation when compared to sweeping body parts or someone else, breaking the 180, AD when reloading, and all the other violations reserved for match DQs.

As long as the firearm was abandon CORRECTLY MUZZLE DOWN, leaving the safety off should NOT be a match DQ...

jj

(nomex suit is now on)

I don't necessarily have a problem with this, provided the gun does not discharge. However, even a gun muzzle-down in a barrel could throw debris (rocks etc) in unsafe directions if it discharged. More disconcerting, a lot of the faster guys push the endge of the envelope by literally THROWING their gun into the barrel, and I am not sure this is wise with a rifle that has a <2lb single-action trigger without the safety applied. Watch the video of Nils getting DQd on Stage 2 at SMM3G... we are ALL lucky that he applied the safety catch before abandoning that rifle.

I am not advocating abandoning in any condition. The safety should be on or gun empty for an extra layer... but I am advocating not DQing people for doing it safe but forgeting. They should get a procedural (ours is 30 seconds).

The incident mentioned above was unsafe gun handling, had nothing to do with what condition it was in. He basically dropped it, a clear DQ. Yes, it was a good thing the safety was on...

jj