So Why Don't Functional Grip Safeties Matter Again?

[Nik Habicht]

Anyone seriously in favor of dumbing down safety rules to keep people from "having to take an early car ride" home -- those might not be people I want to compete with....

They're certainly people I won't run a match with.....

DQs suck. Getting someone hurt -- that's worse. Put the safety on, set the gun down, move on -- it's not hard....

[Lee King]

Here's the problem that I have, at the Pro-Am, a lot of team FNH had the new FNS striker pistols. They HAVE a safety but they are also striker fired. After discussing with the RM, they were OK with letting them dump the gun in a bucket with the safety off.

So now we're talking about keeping up with whether this gun has XX safety or this other gun has YY safety. As an RO, I really don't want to have to go down an inventory of ALL of the mechanics of each individual firearm when clearing guns. At some point you could end up with a book of guns and which one CAN be dumped safety off and which ones cannot and a set of procedures to test each one.

The most important thing, is we are playing a game with a tool when treated with enough respect is perfectly safe. But we seem to be pushing the envelope in what is defined as "safe". Remember the whole 4 laws of gun safety? At a recent match the rules said it was ok to sweep anyone and everyone while unslinging a gun because it was "unloaded and safe". What happened to "all guns are loaded", "never point a gun at anything you aren't willing to destroy", "know your target and what's beyond"?

I came face to face with the reality of what happens when safety is skipped or compromised. Accident's aren't called "purposes". They are instant and irrevocable. Flipping a safety on when abandoning a gun in a GAME seems a trivial price to pay to play.

Edited November 6, 2012 by Lee King

[EkuJustice]

The vast majority of the shooters would still hit the thumb safety on when dumping the pistol. My guess is the question would be more for the thumb safety getting knocked off while putting it in the box. If the 1911/2011 "primary safety" needs to be engaged then Glock's "primary safety" ie trigger safety should have to be engaged also. To date, I have never seen that checked in 3gun

[Flexmoney]

The vast majority of the shooters would still hit the thumb safety on when dumping the pistol. My guess is the question would be more for the thumb safety getting knocked off while putting it in the box. If the 1911/2011 "primary safety" needs to be engaged then Glock's "primary safety" ie trigger safety should have to be engaged also. To date, I have never seen that checked in 3gun

So, it's a learning/execution issue with the RO's then, right?

[toothguy]

The vast majority of the shooters would still hit the thumb safety on when dumping the pistol. My guess is the question would be more for the thumb safety getting knocked off while putting it in the box. If the 1911/2011 "primary safety" needs to be engaged then Glock's "primary safety" ie trigger safety should have to be engaged also. To date, I have never seen that checked in 3gun

So, it's a learning/execution issue with the RO's then, right?

Every safety device the gun was designed with needs to be employed.

Edited November 6, 2012 by toothguy

[Alaskapopo]

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.

I agree as well.

I would also live with them making all pistols clear and empty before putting them down. But it needs to be the same for all guns.

Pat

Edited November 6, 2012 by Alaskapopo

[steviesterno]

I think this whole thing goes with gear selection. Sure, you want the better trigger of a 1911/2011, then spend the second to clear it or risk bumping the safety off on dumping it. You want to just throw the gun in a bucket to save time, get an M&P/Glock, etc.

I've personally never lost a match by the time it takes to clear a 2011, what, 3 times in a match on the clock? That time is easily offset by hitting far targets in one shot since I'm comfortable with the gun. I've also never won a match, so take that for what it's worth.

IF the gun has a safety/safties, you must use them all, end of story. Going down range of it? Totally empty and pointed into a berm, I don't really want to get shot in the ass for running a timer on a weekend off.

[MarkCO]

If it has a safety it should be REQUIRED to be used, period!

Cameron, while I know you have a lot of firearms knowledge, I would be surprised, based on your question, if you have any firearm design experience or warnings design experience. I will restrain myself from a long discussion, however, if you want to know how the analysis of an accident involving an AD/ND on these issues would be conducted, feel free to give me a call and I will walk you through it. Pretty confident that you will want to delete your post after that discussion.

The shooting sports are NOT inherantly dangerous (even though some misguided MDs put such language on the release forms, which in essence buys them MORE liability) until people, misguided by competitive issues, dumb down the safety rules. When YOU change the sport from nuetral to inherantly dangerous, YOU are liable for the results.

[co-exprs]

If it has a safety it should be REQUIRED to be used, period!

Cameron, while I know you have a lot of firearms knowledge, I would be surprised, based on your question, if you have any firearm design experience or warnings design experience. I will restrain myself from a long discussion, however, if you want to know how the analysis of an accident involving an AD/ND on these issues would be conducted, feel free to give me a call and I will walk you through it. Pretty confident that you will want to delete your post after that discussion.

The shooting sports are NOT inherantly dangerous (even though some misguided MDs put such language on the release forms, which in essence buys them MORE liability) until people, misguided by competitive issues, dumb down the safety rules. When YOU change the sport from nuetral to inherantly dangerous, YOU are liable for the results.

+1

It is difficult enough RO'ing with all of the safety considerations which must be observed. The safeties are part of the handgun's design and it isn't my job to question them. All designed safeties should be employed. The penalty at a match is up to the MD, but there should be some penalty for the mistake, whether it be a hefty procedural or a trip home. I like to run 1911 based platforms and my extremely competitive nature wants to win matches. There has never been a match I lost and was able to blame the very slightly longer abandonment procedure for my 1911. What makes or breaks my match is hits and misses. I hit better with my 1911 than my glock, so I choose to compete with my 1911. To be honest, I would be alright with 1911 and 2011 guns not being allowed to pin the grip safety... and I'll probably get strung up for saying so.

[Alaskapopo]

I think this whole thing goes with gear selection. Sure, you want the better trigger of a 1911/2011, then spend the second to clear it or risk bumping the safety off on dumping it. You want to just throw the gun in a bucket to save time, get an M&P/Glock, etc.

I've personally never lost a match by the time it takes to clear a 2011, what, 3 times in a match on the clock? That time is easily offset by hitting far targets in one shot since I'm comfortable with the gun. I've also never won a match, so take that for what it's worth.

IF the gun has a safety/safties, you must use them all, end of story. Going down range of it? Totally empty and pointed into a berm, I don't really want to get shot in the ass for running a timer on a weekend off.

I only empty my 1911's when the stage calls for it. I just flip the safety up and place it in the bucket. I don't throw it. It takes more than a second generally to clear an open gun while standing still at least it does for me. And matches have been won by a second here and there.

Pat

[steviesterno]

I think this whole thing goes with gear selection. Sure, you want the better trigger of a 1911/2011, then spend the second to clear it or risk bumping the safety off on dumping it. You want to just throw the gun in a bucket to save time, get an M&P/Glock, etc.

I've personally never lost a match by the time it takes to clear a 2011, what, 3 times in a match on the clock? That time is easily offset by hitting far targets in one shot since I'm comfortable with the gun. I've also never won a match, so take that for what it's worth.

IF the gun has a safety/safties, you must use them all, end of story. Going down range of it? Totally empty and pointed into a berm, I don't really want to get shot in the ass for running a timer on a weekend off.

I only empty my 1911's when the stage calls for it. I just flip the safety up and place it in the bucket. I don't throw it. It takes more than a second generally to clear an open gun while standing still at least it does for me. And matches have been won by a second here and there.

Pat

Pat I hear you, but to me personally, I can clear my limited gun in under a second. Plus we're usually moving on the way to a dump bucket to do it, so it's not a waste. I would rather spend the time to make sure I haven't wasted the day, time off work, drive, etc. I feel confidant with a shot, drop, rack rack rack then a single safety. But I've also never lost a match by a second. Plus if my fat-ass was faster I could make that time up moving, not manipulating a gun.

[Alaskapopo]

Anyone seriously in favor of dumbing down safety rules to keep people from "having to take an early car ride" home -- those might not be people I want to compete with....

They're certainly people I won't run a match with.....

DQs suck. Getting someone hurt -- that's worse. Put the safety on, set the gun down, move on -- it's not hard....

Someone who relies on mechanical safeties instead of good gun handling is not someone I want to be around. Seriously you can not claim in one breath that its perfectly fine to dump a Glock in the barrel but some how not ok to dump a 1911 in a barrel. Both will fire if the trigger is pulled.

Pat

[Alaskapopo]

I think this whole thing goes with gear selection. Sure, you want the better trigger of a 1911/2011, then spend the second to clear it or risk bumping the safety off on dumping it. You want to just throw the gun in a bucket to save time, get an M&P/Glock, etc.

I've personally never lost a match by the time it takes to clear a 2011, what, 3 times in a match on the clock? That time is easily offset by hitting far targets in one shot since I'm comfortable with the gun. I've also never won a match, so take that for what it's worth.

IF the gun has a safety/safties, you must use them all, end of story. Going down range of it? Totally empty and pointed into a berm, I don't really want to get shot in the ass for running a timer on a weekend off.

I only empty my 1911's when the stage calls for it. I just flip the safety up and place it in the bucket. I don't throw it. It takes more than a second generally to clear an open gun while standing still at least it does for me. And matches have been won by a second here and there.

Pat

Pat I hear you, but to me personally, I can clear my limited gun in under a second. Plus we're usually moving on the way to a dump bucket to do it, so it's not a waste. I would rather spend the time to make sure I haven't wasted the day, time off work, drive, etc. I feel confidant with a shot, drop, rack rack rack then a single safety. But I've also never lost a match by a second. Plus if my fat-ass was faster I could make that time up moving, not manipulating a gun.

I have seen stages that did not give you the time to walk to a bucket to dump the gun. The last shots fired are often right in front of a bucket or table where the pistol is to be grounded. Honestly I think with pistols the most fair and safest rule would be to require the guns to be empty then this would be a moot argument. But to allow one behavior for one weapon system and not for another is silly in my opinion.

Pat

[MarkCO]

Pat, next time you are at the gusmiths, ask him or her to show you the difference in function between a single action pistol (all of which have an external manually applied safety) and a striker fired pistol (most of which do NOT have an external manually applied safety). It really has nothing to do with the finger on the trigger for either platform. Then you will know. I think someone explained it above too.

[Alaskapopo]

Pat, next time you are at the gusmiths, ask him or her to show you the difference in function between a single action pistol (all of which have an external manually applied safety) and a striker fired pistol (most of which do NOT have an external manually applied safety). It really has nothing to do with the finger on the trigger for either platform. Then you will know. I think someone explained it above too.

I understand I hold armorers certificates for the 1911, Glocks and the AR15 family of weapons. I am no gunsmith but I understand who these designs work. I understand that Glocks have their striker springs at approximately half tension while 1911's are at full cock. However the technical details really don't matter when the practical matter is both guns are safe if the trigger is not pulled and both will fire if it is. Again I think the best answer is to make everyone clear their weapon before discarding them. No disrespect meant in my disagreement.

Pat

Edited November 11, 2012 by Alaskapopo

[busyhawk]

OK, just my .02...I have never seen or heard of any firearm at any 3 gun or pistol match after it has been abandoned where it shot by itself!

Now for liability reasons, I want the shooter to apply all the safeties or empty it...yes, I am old and that is just how I like it.

No, it is not my responsibility to ensure the firearms the shooters are using are in operative condition/s. As stated in other postings above, if you don't want to apply a browning type safety then either empty the pistol, get a safe action pistol or don't go to a match...shooters choice right?

Now on the flip side of this is just this...I expect the RM or whomever is the one responsible for the stages to inspect the abandon barrel/bucket/table so when firearms are abandoned that no one is walking in front of a loaded gun. With the proper abandon barrel/bucket/table I really don't care if the firearms is on safe or not to tell the truth...again, read the first paragraph above. If the abandon barrel/bucket/table is good (no one is put in danger) and if the safety is required but not applied then give a shooter a 30 second penalty and get on with it...silly to DQ for a perceived safety issue.

I am very comfortable with walking in front of a loaded firearm...I have problems when humans are around and we all know things happen! Case in point: While ROing the Fallen Brotheren match this year...the shooter abandoned her 2011 style of pistol in/on a platform, when we as ROs walked by it we checked to insure it was in a safe condition before we walked in front of the muzzle. Well, we checked and proceeded down range and upon returning up-range I discovered someone handled the still loaded pistol and placed the shooters discarded magazine under the pistol and now the thumb safety was no longer engaged!!!! Needless to say I had a come to GOD discussion with the whole squad and then tried to relax:(

Oh, and I carry a 3 million dollar insurance policy just in case of Murphy is around.

I really don't think asking the shooters to apply all safety's is asking to much...I don't see any top shooters weighing in here trying to save time either.

Respectfully,

Busyhawk

[StealthyBlagga]

I remain very much in the "apply the safety" camp, and in the "match DQ" camp. Our sport has an exemplary safety record because we don't cut corners - as a Match Director, I don't want to be the guy who discovers how much we can trim the safety rules before we fall off the cliff.

The differences between single-action and double-action fire control systems are obvious. If you want to run a single-action, take the time to unload the gun completely, or apply the safety properly and place the pistol gently in its receptacle. If you are worried about the safety getting wiped off, consider replacing the ambi safety with a left-side safety and abandon the pistol on its right side so the safety cannot get wiped off. Lots of solutions without compromising safety.

[Dave Shooter]

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.

As an aside this year's Blue Ridge didn't quite go by this scenario. If single action pistol was found manual safety off and believed to have round in the chamber we had the shooter clear it and then perform grip safety function check. If hammer fell it was stage DQ. If hammer wouldn't fall it was a procedural.

At least that's how I remember we were instructed and running it.

[Loves2Shoot]

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.

#1 is pure fantasy. In a stock Glock, it has plenty of energy to set of a round WITHOUT pulling the trigger if the safety plunger is removed.

[a.roberts]

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.

#1 is pure fantasy. In a stock Glock, it has plenty of energy to set of a round WITHOUT pulling the trigger if the safety plunger is removed.

Well then, that isn't a stock Glock, is it?

Also, see #2.

Also, see #3.

[dcloudy777]

Okay, for all the "if the gun has a safety device it should be used" folks, should lightening the trigger pull on striker-fired or DA guns be allowed? Trigger pull effort was engineered by the factory to be part of the gun's inherent safety...

[EkuJustice]

Seen the FP safety removed on glocks to get a lighter trigger pull and its allowed outside of Production. I have also seen glocks where the trigger safety dosent work all the time either from removing pretravel without adjusting the safetly or simply for poor choice in springs ie heavy trigger spring, light striker spring.

[Loves2Shoot]

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.

#1 is pure fantasy. In a stock Glock, it has plenty of energy to set of a round WITHOUT pulling the trigger if the safety plunger is removed.

Well then, that isn't a stock Glock, is it?

Also, see #2.

Also, see #3.

No, but that is not what I was refering to. There is incorrect information repeated often that the Glock is "half cocked" unless you pull the trigger and full load the striker spring. This is simply false. Anyone who has had a Glock slip the trigger bar sear knows it isn't that hard to make them go more than one round with one trigger pull. I fixed one such case last summer on a bone stock Glock.

Edited November 17, 2012 by Loves2Shoot

[Nik Habicht]

Seen the FP safety removed on glocks to get a lighter trigger pull and its allowed outside of Production.

Not at any match I RO/RM. See 5.1.6:

Handguns must be serviceable and safe. Range Officers may demand examination of a competitor’s handgun or related equipment, at any time, to check they are functioning safely. If any such item is declared unserviceable or unsafe by a Range Officer, it must be withdrawn from the match until the item is repaired to the satisfaction of the Range Master.

[Alaskapopo]

Seen the FP safety removed on glocks to get a lighter trigger pull and its allowed outside of Production.

Not at any match I RO/RM. See 5.1.6:

Handguns must be serviceable and safe. Range Officers may demand examination of a competitor’s handgun or related equipment, at any time, to check they are functioning safely. If any such item is declared unserviceable or unsafe by a Range Officer, it must be withdrawn from the match until the item is repaired to the satisfaction of the Range Master.

Servicable and safe is subjective. So do you also not allow 1911's with pinned grip safeties. Its no worse than a Glock with a FP safety removed. Hell most 1911's we compete with don't have a FP safety.

Pat

Edited November 17, 2012 by Alaskapopo