Manually lower hammer in Production

[Punkin Chunker]

a de-cocker is a mechanical device that can and eventually will fail, resulting in an ND.

In contrast, manually lowering the hammer will never fail so long as I do my part (and I take personal responsibility for my actions - instead of relying on a mechanical device like the one that failed above - see first post).

Without getting into the finger in the trigger guard, finger out of the trigger guard, half-cock, fully dropped, etc. ad infinitum of it all, this is the bottom line to me:

You bring a pistol to the line. The pistol has a hammer drop. While making ready for Production, you tell me that you have to manually lower the hammer, because the hammer drop doesn't work after you've made a modification to the pistol.

HELLO -- ALARM BELLS.

At that point, you want ME to look at YOU, and believe that you have done nothing else to affect the safe functioning of the pistol, even though you've just told me you messed up a safety feature, can't fix it, and want to shoot the pistol while it's messed up.

At that point, we're done.

[SA Friday]

IMO, the Sig decocker would be legal to use to make ready, but the CZs would not.

8.1.2.2 "Double action" - chamber loaded, hammer fully down or decocked.

Notice the "or". The CZ would be "decocked" - the hammer does not need to be fully down.

There is a thread on the CZ, decock or fully lower, on THR under the competition section. One of the contributors wrote Amadon and asked. Racerba, I wouldn't abritrate this for $100 if I were you.... "hammer fully down" is the controlling part of that sentence you quoted.

10.5.9 Failure to keep the finger outside the trigger guard during loading,...of a gun without a decocking lever,...

Then the two rules contradict each other. The rules specifically states guns with or without decocking levers. If the hammer needs to be fully down, it should state only that and not include the "or decocked" phrase. Unfortunately, Amadon is the ultimate decision maker, even though he is wrong.

BTW - where is that thread?

Yup. The hammer has to be fully down and not in half cock, regardless of the method you use to achieve. The only exception is where the hammer is cocked with an external safety applied.

You can't pull the hammer to the half cocked position, but if that's where the decocker lever puts it, it should be fine. But apparently Amadon has a different interpretation - again.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=340645

It's post 10.

[Turbo23]

a de-cocker is a mechanical device that can and eventually will fail, resulting in an ND.

In contrast, manually lowering the hammer will never fail so long as I do my part (and I take personal responsibility for my actions - instead of relying on a mechanical device like the one that failed above - see first post).

Without getting into the finger in the trigger guard, finger out of the trigger guard, half-cock, fully dropped, etc. ad infinitum of it all, this is the bottom line to me:

You bring a pistol to the line. The pistol has a hammer drop. While making ready for Production, you tell me that you have to manually lower the hammer, because the hammer drop doesn't work after you've made a modification to the pistol.

HELLO -- ALARM BELLS.

At that point, you want ME to look at YOU, and believe that you have done nothing else to affect the safe functioning of the pistol, even though you've just told me you messed up a safety feature, can't fix it, and want to shoot the pistol while it's messed up.

At that point, we're done.

I believe that as far as the original topic here.... This is right on par!

[Skywalker]

It's fundamentally unsafe to use under extreme conditions of weather and stress.

By the same logic ANY of the things we do in practical shooting is unsafe as well.

If you consider the load and make ready procedure "extreme conditions of weather and stress" that shouldn't allow for manually lowering the hammer, then you might want to ban practical shooting as well: can you imagine someone running and gunning on uneven ground, while being high on adrenaline and trying to run faster than the clock?

On the subject topic: I don't know for USPSA, but for IPSC

1. If the gun is equipped with a decocker mechanism, then this has to be used, and it doesn't matter if the final result is hammer fully down or on half cock notch, provided you fully operate the device the gun is equipped with.
   
2. if the gun doesn't feature a decocker, you have to manually lower the hammer to full down position; you can't lower it to half cock notch.
   

You can read it here.

Edited February 29, 2008 by Skywalker

[JThompson]

It's fundamentally unsafe to use under extreme conditions of weather and stress.

By the same logic ANY of the things we do in practical shooting is unsafe as well.

If you consider the load and make ready procedure "extreme conditions of weather and stress" that shouldn't allow for manually lowering the hammer, then you might want to ban practical shooting as well: can you imagine someone running and gunning on uneven ground, while being high on adrenaline and trying to run faster than the clock?

On the subject topic: I don't know for USPSA, but for IPSC

1. If the gun is equipped with a decocker mechanism, then this has to be used, and it doesn't matter if the final result is hammer fully down or on half cock notch, provided you fully operate the device the gun is equipped with.
   
2. if the gun doesn't feature a decocker, you have to manually lower the hammer to full down position; you can't lower it to half cock notch.
   

No. The hammer must be down no matter what... not half cock.

EDIT Sorry bro... didn't see the IPSC comment. The rule is written the same for both, but John ruled fully down. I tend to agree with this ruling, but think it should have been written better in the book.

Edited February 29, 2008 by JThompson

[Skywalker]

The rule is written the same for both, but John ruled fully down. I tend to agree with this ruling, but think it should have been written better in the book.

Don't really want to mess with USPSA rules but I think I need to understand this: in USPSA, if you have a gun whose decocker doesn't completely lower the hammer (e.g. CZ-75BD and the SP-01, I've been told), you can't use the originally designed safety mechanism, and have to manually lower the hammer all the way down?

Edited February 29, 2008 by Skywalker

[JThompson]

The rule is written the same for both, but John ruled fully down. I tend to agree with this ruling, but think it should have been written better in the book.

Don't really want to mess with USPSA rules but I think I need to understand this: in USPSA, if you have a gun whose decocker doesn't completely lower the hammer (e.g. CZ-75BD and the SP-01, I've been told), you can't use the originally designed safety mechanism, and have to manually lower the hammer all the way down?

Yup... that about sums it up.

"Fully decocked is all the way down, half cocked is just that. So it would

have to be lowered manually if the decocker did not bring it all the way down."

John Amidon

VP USPSA

Director NROI

Edited February 29, 2008 by JThompson

[Flexmoney]

Hmmmm...just a quick read says, "...or de-cocked...".

Using the de-cocker seems fine to me then?

I don't see an "official ruling" on the USPSA website that would trump the way the rule book reads.

[JThompson]

Hmmmm...just a quick read says, "...or de-cocked...".

Using the de-cocker seems fine to me then?

I don't see an "official ruling" on the USPSA website that would trump the way the rule book reads.

Per appendix D4

Special conditions:

— Handguns with external hammers must be fully decocked at the start signal.

[Chuck Anderson]

I'm not sure John understood the question fully on the other website the way it was written. By his ruling if a gun doesn't fully decock it cannot be used in Production because 10.5.9 would make it a DQ to lower the hammer. I really don't think that was the intent of his ruling and it doesn't make any sense that it would conflict with IPSC (which it does) for the exact same rule.

[rvb]

I'm not sure John understood the question fully on the other website the way it was written. By his ruling if a gun doesn't fully decock it cannot be used in Production because 10.5.9 would make it a DQ to lower the hammer. I really don't think that was the intent of his ruling and it doesn't make any sense that it would conflict with IPSC (which it does) for the exact same rule.

I agree, plus there's those pesky Sig's where the hammer springs back from "fully down" all by themselves. If it was impossible for them to meet the required starting condition then they shouldn't be on the approved guns list

-rvb

[JakeMartens]

I just installed an extended mag release from Sig

I am wondering if this is legal to begin with on Sig?

When I bought my CZ SP01 I got the model with the decocker just for this reason, I wanted to stay away from the manually lowering the hammer. Also when manually lowering the hammer it has to go all the way down. When you have a gun with a decocker it is 100% legal to use it and where ever it drops the hammer to is fine.

I sent an email to John about this before I bought the gun and he explained that is was legal, but deactivating the decocker would not be since that is considered a safety feature. I am looking to see if I still have that somewhere but it was 2 years ago.

I had Angus do the trigger and there was trouble with getting the same kind of trigger on a non decocking model. Also there was an issue that sometimes when using the decocker it dropped all the way, which could have resulted in a round going off, so I ended up lowering manually, which was the opposite reason for getting that model of gun, and based on the rules was illegal. SO I sent it back to CZ to have the original stuff put back in and then traded it off.

With the popularity of the CZ pistols (and copies) obiviously many people have gotten over this issue. I am of the opinion that whether on accident or purpose many that lower the hammer manually end up at halfcock instead of all the way down and that this is not caught or seen by the RO's. If you just pull the trigger and hold the hammer, then let off the trigger and start to lower the hammer you are going to end up at half cock, the only way to let it go all the way down is to hold the hammer, pull the trigger and lower it pass the half cock and then let off the trigger.

[JThompson]

It does seem a bit of a safety issue to have people dropping a hammer manual... Some hammers have very little area to grasp too. Then there is the finger on the trigger while making ready. I wouldn't like to make anyone who doesn't have a gun that "fully" decocks buy something new or invalidate a whole line of guns, but this does present a fairness issue. If people are allowed to use a gun that decocks only to half cock then everyone should be able to shoot production from half cock. If we did it this way, nobody would have to put a finger on the trigger and people that used guns in the half cock would not have an advantage over those with hammers fully down. Either way, unless the conditions are the same... there is an advantage to the half cockers. Is this an unfair advantage? idk, but I know if I was shooting production, which I intend too this summer, I would not like a rule/gun that gives an advantage no matter the amount.

EDIT: I'm going to run this by Jay and Perry this weekend.

Edited February 29, 2008 by JThompson

[SA Friday]

I'm not sure John understood the question fully on the other website the way it was written. By his ruling if a gun doesn't fully decock it cannot be used in Production because 10.5.9 would make it a DQ to lower the hammer. I really don't think that was the intent of his ruling and it doesn't make any sense that it would conflict with IPSC (which it does) for the exact same rule.

I agree, plus there's those pesky Sig's where the hammer springs back from "fully down" all by themselves. If it was impossible for them to meet the required starting condition then they shouldn't be on the approved guns list

-rvb

regardless if you manually decock the hammer or use the decocking lever, the sig starts its DA trigger pull from the same notch on the hammer. That notch is the 'hammer down' position. The hammer only goes forward of that position when the trigger is pulled and the hammer strikes the firing pin. Then the hammer resets to the notch off of the firing pin. No advantage gained.

Edited February 29, 2008 by SA Friday

[JThompson]

I'm not sure John understood the question fully on the other website the way it was written. By his ruling if a gun doesn't fully decock it cannot be used in Production because 10.5.9 would make it a DQ to lower the hammer. I really don't think that was the intent of his ruling and it doesn't make any sense that it would conflict with IPSC (which it does) for the exact same rule.

I agree, plus there's those pesky Sig's where the hammer springs back from "fully down" all by themselves. If it was impossible for them to meet the required starting condition then they shouldn't be on the approved guns list

-rvb

regardless if you manually decock the hammer or use the decocking lever, the sig starts its DA trigger pull from the same notch on the hammer. That notch is the 'hammer down' position. The hammer only goes forward of that position when the trigger is pulled and the hammer strikes the firing pin. Then the hammer resets to the notch off of the firing pin. No advantage gained.

Understood... thanks F... that still does leave some other guns though.

Best,

JT

[rvb]

I agree, plus there's those pesky Sig's where the hammer springs back from "fully down" all by themselves. If it was impossible for them to meet the required starting condition then they shouldn't be on the approved guns list

-rvb

regardless if you manually decock the hammer or use the decocking lever, the sig starts its DA trigger pull from the same notch on the hammer. That notch is the 'hammer down' position. The hammer only goes forward of that position when the trigger is pulled and the hammer strikes the firing pin. Then the hammer resets to the notch off of the firing pin. No advantage gained.

Hi SA,

I was going for sarcasm / devil's advocate (and I happen to like Sigs). From a CZ guy's perspective, why doesn't the Sig have an advantage if they can start from "half cocked"? I've actually done some trigger mods to the Sigs that allow some rediculously awesome triggers (like 4lb DA) but CAN rest at "full cocked" (All safety features work, decocker works, just no "second strike" ability). So would that become an illegal mod to the guys using my triggers?

I think the rule -could- be very simple like "as positioned by the decocker or fully down if no decocker exists." Perhaps we are all way over complicating it here? [most likely].

-rvb

Edited February 29, 2008 by rvb

[Flexmoney]

Hmmmm...just a quick read says, "...or de-cocked...".

Using the de-cocker seems fine to me then?

I don't see an "official ruling" on the USPSA website that would trump the way the rule book reads.

Per appendix D4

Special conditions:

— Handguns with external hammers must be fully decocked at the start signal.

If a de-coking lever doesn't "fully de-cock"...then what does it do? That is it's single reason for being on the gun, I think ?

[JThompson]

I think the rule -could- be very simple like "as positioned by the decocker or fully down if no decocker exists." Perhaps we are all way over complicating it here? [most likely].

-rvb

If everyone can't start from half cock then the rule isn't fair. I have a PX4 with no work done and I can tell you there is a pretty big dif shooting it from half as opposed to full hammer down. It's much easier to pull that first shot.

Edited March 1, 2008 by JThompson

[Nik Habicht]

I think the rule -could- be very simple like "as positioned by the decocker or fully down if no decocker exists." Perhaps we are all way over complicating it here? [most likely].

-rvb

If everyone can't start from half cock then the rule isn't fair.

Sure it is --- you're just as free to choose a different gun, that is capable of having a sweeter trigger, if that's important to you. Everyone gets so hung up on this --- oh, it's an advantage that after one long hard, DA pull he's shooting a SA; oh, it's an advantage that all shots have the same light, long trigger pull; oh, the long barrel's an advantage; oh, the lighter guns swing too fast -- that should be an illegal advantage.....

We all make out choices based on a whole bunch of features of the gun ---- and I've NEVER been beaten because my competition chose to drive a different gun. I've been beaten because I didn't practice enough to win.....

[Chuck Anderson]

I sent an email to Amidon a few days ago asking for clarification. I'll post the answer when I get it.

[JThompson]

I sent an email to Amidon a few days ago asking for clarification. I'll post the answer when I get it.

Sounds good to me...

[Chuck Anderson]

John just responded that the BOD is the governing body on the rules and he has kicked the decision up to them. He said that he wasn't sure if it would result in an NROI interpretation or not but that he'll give me an update when the decision is made. Looks like it's a waiting game now.

[JThompson]

John just responded that the BOD is the governing body on the rules and he has kicked the decision up to them. He said that he wasn't sure if it would result in an NROI interpretation or not but that he'll give me an update when the decision is made. Looks like it's a waiting game now.

That's very interesting....

[Chuck Anderson]

But not surprising. If the only way a shooter with a gun on the approved list is able to compete is by commiting an action subject to DQ, there is something wrong with the rules. Specifically if you did have to use the trigger to lower the hammer on a gun with a decocker it is a DQ under 10.5.9. And when the rules says, Hammer down or decocked, that to me means that it is pretty obvious that decocked is a valid start position regardless of where the hammer is. The rule requires a DA first shot, which whether the hammer is down or at half cock, it's still DA.

[eerw]

I think the rule -could- be very simple like "as positioned by the decocker or fully down if no decocker exists." Perhaps we are all way over complicating it here? [most likely].

-rvb

If everyone can't start from half cock then the rule isn't fair.

Sure it is --- you're just as free to choose a different gun, that is capable of having a sweeter trigger, if that's important to you. Everyone gets so hung up on this --- oh, it's an advantage that after one long hard, DA pull he's shooting a SA; oh, it's an advantage that all shots have the same light, long trigger pull; oh, the long barrel's an advantage; oh, the lighter guns swing too fast -- that should be an illegal advantage.....

We all make out choices based on a whole bunch of features of the gun ---- and I've NEVER been beaten because my competition chose to drive a different gun. I've been beaten because I didn't practice enough to win.....

Nik..good point..

I can remember being accused one time of shooting so well because in SA my gun was like shooting a 1911...had to laugh at that one..this from a Glock shooter..

starting from half cock vs. fully down..really doesn't matter all that much if you master the technique..besides..its a total of like 6 shots at the avg 120 round match..