Do You Need a Manual Safety?

[txradioguy]

Lately there has been lots of talk about safeties on firearms. Some people even claim pistols like the Glock or Kahr Arms have no safety and are therefore not safe to carry with a round in the chamber. (That’s not true.)

For this discussion, let’s ask if you need a safety on a modern auto-loading pistol. Do you? I say no. And I follow that up by asking:  Why do you think you need a manual safety on a modern striker-fired pistol?

The gun is drop-safe. It can’t fire when dropped — unless you try to catch it and inadvertently pull the trigger. Do you think you need a safety because a child might get hold of your gun and fire it? How about you MAKE SURE no child ever gets hold of your gun — ever — under any circumstances? If you can’t guarantee that no child will get hold of your gun, maybe you should reconsider gun ownership.

What reason can you give that a modern pistol should be equipped with a safety? Let the debate begin.

Does a Safety Make a Pistol Safe?

https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/need-manual-safety/

[the_doc]

Does a Safety Make a Pistol Safe?

Hmmm...I would say it makes a pistol an unsafe weapon if you can't remember that the safety is on and/or you can't remember how to disengage the safety quickly.  Therein consists the main advantage of a revolver, I think.

[RoosGirl]

Short answer yes with an if, long answer no with a but.  :)

[RoosGirl]

I started out shooting with a revolver.  I then bought a Glock.  Checking for a safety, much less remembering if the safety is on or off is not in my muscle memory even a speck.

[Mom MD]

I started out shooting with a revolver.  I then bought a Glock.  Checking for a safety, much less remembering if the safety is on or off is not in my muscle memory even a speck.

There is only one reliable safety with any gun.  The one between your ears.

[Mom MD]

Hmmm...I would say it makes a pistol an unsafe weapon if you can't remember that the safety is on and/or you can't remember how to disengage the safety quickly.  Therein consists the main advantage of a revolver, I think.

I have a backstrap safety on my Springfield.  I love it.  I don't have to think about it because any time I fire my weapon it is firmly in my hand.  But it would be sufficient to stop little hands from firing it as they could not fit their palm around the backstrap and reach the trigger.  Having said that I NEVER rely on a safety.  Its a nice back up but the primary safety is consistent OCD handling of your weapon -- all guns are loaded and never point the gun at something you are not willing to destroy.  If the gun is not loaded, see above....

[txradioguy]

Hmmm...I would say it makes a pistol an unsafe weapon if you can't remember that the safety is on and/or you can't remember how to disengage the safety quickly.  Therein consists the main advantage of a revolver, I think.

That's why if you employ the manual safety you train like you fight and incorporate use of the safety every time you practice so flicking it off before you engage a target becomes second nature...and so does flipping it back on when you're done.

[Elderberry]

Of all my pistols, only two are striker fired. A kel tec p32 with no safety and a safety is not needed. And an Astra400. It has a safety and on this weapon I feel a safety is needed. But it is not a modern weapon.

All my hammer fired pistols are DA/SA except for a 1911(not a modern weapon?). They all have safeties, but for me, the safeties are not needed for the DA/SA guns unless they are used just to drop the hammers. I couldn't imagine the 1911 without the safety.

[the_doc]

That's why if you employ the manual safety you train like you fight and incorporate use of the safety every time you practice so flicking it off before you engage a target becomes second nature...and so does flipping it back on when you're done.

Thanks.  I'm sure you're right about that.