So Why Don't Functional Grip Safeties Matter Again?

[DyNo!]

I can't see how a functional 1911/2011 grip safety is any less safe than a Glock. Can someone help me understand?

If someone ditched a 1911/2011 with the thumb safety off and claimed to have a functional grip safety, you'd test it by unloading and showing clear, gripping the weapon below the grip safety and pulling the trigger. If the hammer falls - DQ. If not, holster - range is clear. This doesn't even require the shooter's input since it's repeatable and won't slow down matches where RO's clear guns behind shooters.

As far as I know, Blue Ridge allows it and 3 Gun Nation was REALLY close to allowing it until during the day of the first match, a shooter was not certian if their functional grip safety would stop the hammer in all situations. Not sure where the conflict was.

Edited November 5, 2012 by DyNo!

[outerlimits]

If we are talking gun abandonment, I agree with you 100%.

[AustinT]

I'm with you. As far as the rules are concerned, there should be no difference between an XD and a 1911/2011 with a functional grip safety.

[Lee King]

Would you allow them to holster the gun hot, with the safety off because the grip safety "works"? To me that would be the litmus test.

[twodownzero]

Would you allow them to holster the gun hot, with the safety off because the grip safety "works"? To me that would be the litmus test.

The grip safety is going to be disactivated while you're holstering, so this doesn't seem like a good analogy.

A grip safety on the 1911 does not block sear movement or really do anything to prevent the sear from slipping off the hammer hooks. It merely keeps the trigger from moving.

The grip safety is not a safety and I would not allow it to "count" for gun abandonment. The thumb safety is the only safe way to make a loaded single action pistol safe.

[assaulter]

I'm good with that, although my grip safety is pinned. With that said, I've never seen or heard of a gun discharging without the trigger being depressed, and a grip safety prevents that from happening should the trigger bump something on a table, bucket, etc.

[EkuJustice]

Would you allow them to holster the gun hot, with the safety off because the grip safety "works"? To me that would be the litmus test.

The grip safety is going to be disactivated while you're holstering, so this doesn't seem like a good analogy.

A grip safety on the 1911 does not block sear movement or really do anything to prevent the sear from slipping off the hammer hooks. It merely keeps the trigger from moving.

The grip safety is not a safety and I would not allow it to "count" for gun abandonment. The thumb safety is the only safe way to make a loaded single action pistol safe.

So how is a glock trigger safety any different? It simply prevents the trigger from moving and does not block the striker from moving. On a glock as they say the trigger safety is the primary safety is ever checked in a match to ensure it functions every time? It is not hard to bipass that either intentionally or unintentionally by removing too much pretravel without adjusting the safety and even certain spring combinations prevent it from working all the time.

[DyNo!]

Would you allow them to holster the gun hot, with the safety off because the grip safety "works"? To me that would be the litmus test.

The grip safety is going to be disactivated while you're holstering, so this doesn't seem like a good analogy.

Correct. If you are gripping the pistol - you are deactiving the safety.

That's similar to allowing someone to reholster a Glock with their finger deactiving the safety on the trigger (but not pulling it).

Not considering that - just abandonment.

[Flexmoney]

So how is a glock trigger safety any different? It simply prevents the trigger from moving and does not block the striker from moving.

I believe you are mistaken information there. All 3 of the safeties in the system are functional when the trigger is forward.

Plus the firing system isn't fully energized.

It is nothing like a 1911, whatsoever.

[Flexmoney]

I can't see how a functional 1911/2011 grip safety is any less safe than a Glock. Can someone help me understand?

You know that great trigger that 1911's have? They have them because they are already cocked (energized to fire), and most have a small ledge that holds the hammer back.

People mistakenly believe that the only safety in a Glock is that little tab on the trigger. While it is the interface with the shooter, it merely functions to keep the trigger (bar) in the forward position. This position means that:

1. The striker isn't fully energized.

2. The safety plunger has not been re-positioned to allow the striker to travel forward and contact the primer.

3. The "sear" surface is locked, as the safety tab wing on the trigger bar has not traveled past the ledge that allows it to drop...which allows the sear to release.

[EkuJustice]

That is assuming the FP safety is even in the gun which unlike production in USPSA is not required in 3 gun. The trigger safety prevents the trigger fom moving on a glock the same as the grip safety on a 1911. On the glocks, they also do not check to make sure the trigger safety which is considered the primary safety actually is engaged when a glock is abandoned. All it takes is adjusting the pretravel withoout modifying the trigge safety and it dosent go out far enough to engage or even running the heavy trigger spring with a light striker spring can cause it to not go forward all the time.

[Lee King]

Would you allow them to holster the gun hot, with the safety off because the grip safety "works"? To me that would be the litmus test.

The grip safety is going to be disactivated while you're holstering, so this doesn't seem like a good analogy.

It's deactivated all the way into the bucket until you let go too.

[Ulwembu]

As far as I know, Blue Ridge allows it

As a first shooter this year at BRM3G I specifically asked about sfeties when abondoning the 1911 I was shooting and I was told it always had to be on thumb safety if it was still loaded.

[assaulter]

It's a procedural if the safety was off, but grip safety was functional with a loaded gun. Stage DQ if not.

[Joe4d]

Would you allow them to holster the gun hot, with the safety off because the grip safety "works"? To me that would be the litmus test.

The grip safety is going to be disactivated while you're holstering, so this doesn't seem like a good analogy.

A grip safety on the 1911 does not block sear movement or really do anything to prevent the sear from slipping off the hammer hooks. It merely keeps the trigger from moving.

The grip safety is not a safety and I would not allow it to "count" for gun abandonment. The thumb safety is the only safe way to make a loaded single action pistol safe.

I dont have a dog in the fight, but in many cases this is wrong, quite a few 1911's the grip safety blocks the firing pin. Alla series 80.

[dcloudy777]

The condition of any of the fire control parts of a gun should be irrelevant. A gun is safe based on nothing pulling the trigger and more importantly, the direction the muzzle is pointed. Just MHO.

DanO

[Lead-Head]

The condition of any of the fire control parts of a gun should be irrelevant. A gun is safe based on nothing pulling the trigger and more importantly, the direction the muzzle is pointed. Just MHO.

DanO

I'm with Dan here. Safeties are mechanical things, all of which have the potential to fail at some point or another. If we want to engage them upon abandonment, or reholstering, fine. This should serve as a redundant safety measure supplementing muzzel control. Dump barrels, bucket, boxes, all need to maintian safe direction of the firearm. Safeties are nice too, in my opinion.

Edited November 5, 2012 by Lead-Head

[DyNo!]

I'd definitely be in favor of majors adopting the Blue Ridge (procedural) grip safety rule. It's better than a long car/plane ride home from a major.

The main reason I asked though was so I can institute the rule at a club level match if there's not something inherently dangerous about it that I don't know.

[Lead-Head]

The condition of any of the fire control parts of a gun should be irrelevant. A gun is safe based on nothing pulling the trigger and more importantly, the direction the muzzle is pointed. Just MHO.

DanO

I'm with Dan here. Safeties are mechanical things, all of which have the potential to fail at some point or another. If we want to engage them upon abandonment, or reholstering, fine. This should serve as a redundant safety measure supplementing muzzel control. Dump barrels, bucket, boxes, all need to maintian safe direction of the firearm. Safeties are nice too, in my opinion.

It just occured to me that dump barrels, buckets, and boxes are mechanical as well and also prone to fail, or not be used properly. Crap. I need to make sure i pay my health insurance premium this month.

[Action Pistolero]

Would you allow them to holster the gun hot, with the safety off because the grip safety "works"? To me that would be the litmus test.

The grip safety is going to be disactivated while you're holstering, so this doesn't seem like a good analogy.

A grip safety on the 1911 does not block sear movement or really do anything to prevent the sear from slipping off the hammer hooks. It merely keeps the trigger from moving.

The grip safety is not a safety and I would not allow it to "count" for gun abandonment. The thumb safety is the only safe way to make a loaded single action pistol safe.

I dont have a dog in the fight, but in many cases this is wrong, quite a few 1911's the grip safety blocks the firing pin. Alla series 80.

The Series 80 safety works by the trigger. As the trigger is pulled, there are 2 levers that work together to push up the plunger mounted in the slide. The schwartz safety uses the grip safety to push up the plunger.

The only safety worth a darn on the 1911 is the thumb safety. The grip safety is not to be trusted.

Rather than require a functional grip safety, have them abandon the pistol either at slide lock or hammer down on an empty chamber with the mag out?

[twodownzero]

Would you allow them to holster the gun hot, with the safety off because the grip safety "works"? To me that would be the litmus test.

The grip safety is going to be disactivated while you're holstering, so this doesn't seem like a good analogy.

A grip safety on the 1911 does not block sear movement or really do anything to prevent the sear from slipping off the hammer hooks. It merely keeps the trigger from moving.

The grip safety is not a safety and I would not allow it to "count" for gun abandonment. The thumb safety is the only safe way to make a loaded single action pistol safe.

I dont have a dog in the fight, but in many cases this is wrong, quite a few 1911's the grip safety blocks the firing pin. Alla series 80.

As was already pointed out to you, the Series 80 system has nothing to do with the grip safety. If it works correctly, however, it might prevent the gun from firing if the sear slipped off the hammer hooks.

The only safety that blocks sear movement in a 1911 is a properly fit thumb safety.

[slowsure]

I'd definitely be in favor of majors adopting the Blue Ridge (procedural) grip safety rule. It's better than a long car/plane ride home from a major.

The main reason I asked though was so I can institute the rule at a club level match if there's not something inherently dangerous about it that I don't know.

DyNo,

Since you put this question in that context let me put my ambulance chaser lawyer hat on....So mister new shooter, you shot your foot off while dumping your brand new ST_ pistol into a dump bucket? Do you see the person who instituted this new rule at the match in the room?

I know this is a inherently dangerous sport we play, but in this case I believe MORE is better. My vote would be safety on or completely empty. IMHO.

[HRider]

It has always been funny to me how people will freak out at the sight of a cocked hammer on a 1911 (be it cocked and locked, original 1911 design, swartz safety, series 80 or whatever), never mind that there are at least two safety devices at work when a cocked and unlocked 1911 is laying on a table (halfcock notch and grip safety). Most of these same people are perfectly alright tossing a loaded shotgun into a barrel with a cocked hammer (you just can't see it) and a cross bolt safety that doesn't do anything but keep the trigger from moving, there is not even a halfcock notch to catch the hammer if it slips off of the sear as the gun bounces into the dump barrel. How many ADs have there been abandoning shotguns at matches?

Cam, buy a 1910 and you won't have to worry about a thumb safety.

Hurley

[Flexmoney]

That is assuming the FP safety is even in the gun which unlike production in USPSA is not required in 3 gun. The trigger safety prevents the trigger fom moving on a glock the same as the grip safety on a 1911. On the glocks, they also do not check to make sure the trigger safety which is considered the primary safety actually is engaged when a glock is abandoned. All it takes is adjusting the pretravel withoout modifying the trigge safety and it dosent go out far enough to engage or even running the heavy trigger spring with a light striker spring can cause it to not go forward all the time.

So...people screwing up the safties on a Glock serves as proper justification for ...well...anything somebody wants to do?

[Nik Habicht]

I'd definitely be in favor of majors adopting the Blue Ridge (procedural) grip safety rule. It's better than a long car/plane ride home from a major.

The main reason I asked though was so I can institute the rule at a club level match if there's not something inherently dangerous about it that I don't know.

How much liability insurance do you personally, the match, and the club carry? Consult your insurance provider prior to making the change....