The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post - DA/SA Hammer-Fired vs. Safe-Action Striker-Fired: I Give Up

RC20 · June 29, 2013, 11:13 AM

Ahh, a subject near and dear to my heart.

Now I won't claim this as gospel. Everyone is different, what works for me is not the end all and be all for everyone. But I do know what works for me and then you have to decide if it matches what feels right for you.

Some parts are true regardless of which side of the action type you fall on.

Strikers are inherently unsafe. glock strikes terror into my heart as the worst of the lot because they do not have a true safety.

My definition of a true safety is just that, you put it on and it won't fire. The rest are what we call "interlocks" in the mechanical world. Those can still be engaged (snagged) and then it goes off.

The only exception is S&W who does offer a true safety on their semi autos. Then its a 1911 and I am ok with that though I would like the safty to be more prominanat.

Strikers without a true safety should always be carried in a holster just for that purpose. Its extremely limiting.

They are also the reason for the latest rage called trigger discipline. Thats because in too many cases they went boom when it was not desired. In the computer world they call it turning a flaw into a feature.

The illogical is at some point you do have to put your finger on the trigger (or it wont fire of course). In that transition you may make a sudden fraction of a second decision to fire and you may be too late (I had a dog encounter a while back that was so close that I am not even sure how I stopped, fortunately for the dog I did, but we are talking micro seconds)

If not for glock we would not have strikers and that gun was intended for military not civilian use (it has to be the best PR in history).

I came from a revolver background (that and 1911s). So the DA/SA was a natural for me and continues to be.

Its also safe to carry concealed without a holster.

I also like the fact I can cock the DA/SA and get that fine trigger control you talk about on the first shot (I am careful and deliberate about it but if I am really concerned about a bump in the night, I do cock the gun)

I don't want this to be taken as bragging, but at one time I did a lot of revolver shooting and it was mostly SA.

I shot a police course almost entire SA at that time. The only time I shifted to DA was at the close stage you simply could not miss and speed was a factor.

The rest I shot SA, made the shoot and reload times fine and not only topped my entire class as well as 18 or so of a staff of 22.

I am not fast of slick, but I have found I can be steady if I aim and shoot at my own pace. The SA option (or the shift to SA) in the DA/SA pistol allows you do do that.

Now they call it shot placement being the single most critical factor in winning a gun fight.

I don't think any of that precludes one from owning a striker for target work if it suits you, but I have no confusion as to what works for me and what I want if and when things go bad.

June 29, 2013, 11:13 AM	#8
RC20 Senior Member Join Date: April 10, 2008 Location: Alaska Posts: 7,014	Ahh, a subject near and dear to my heart. Now I won't claim this as gospel. Everyone is different, what works for me is not the end all and be all for everyone. But I do know what works for me and then you have to decide if it matches what feels right for you. Some parts are true regardless of which side of the action type you fall on. Strikers are inherently unsafe. glock strikes terror into my heart as the worst of the lot because they do not have a true safety. My definition of a true safety is just that, you put it on and it won't fire. The rest are what we call "interlocks" in the mechanical world. Those can still be engaged (snagged) and then it goes off. The only exception is S&W who does offer a true safety on their semi autos. Then its a 1911 and I am ok with that though I would like the safty to be more prominanat. Strikers without a true safety should always be carried in a holster just for that purpose. Its extremely limiting. They are also the reason for the latest rage called trigger discipline. Thats because in too many cases they went boom when it was not desired. In the computer world they call it turning a flaw into a feature. The illogical is at some point you do have to put your finger on the trigger (or it wont fire of course). In that transition you may make a sudden fraction of a second decision to fire and you may be too late (I had a dog encounter a while back that was so close that I am not even sure how I stopped, fortunately for the dog I did, but we are talking micro seconds) If not for glock we would not have strikers and that gun was intended for military not civilian use (it has to be the best PR in history). I came from a revolver background (that and 1911s). So the DA/SA was a natural for me and continues to be. Its also safe to carry concealed without a holster. I also like the fact I can cock the DA/SA and get that fine trigger control you talk about on the first shot (I am careful and deliberate about it but if I am really concerned about a bump in the night, I do cock the gun) I don't want this to be taken as bragging, but at one time I did a lot of revolver shooting and it was mostly SA. I shot a police course almost entire SA at that time. The only time I shifted to DA was at the close stage you simply could not miss and speed was a factor. The rest I shot SA, made the shoot and reload times fine and not only topped my entire class as well as 18 or so of a staff of 22. I am not fast of slick, but I have found I can be steady if I aim and shoot at my own pace. The SA option (or the shift to SA) in the DA/SA pistol allows you do do that. Now they call it shot placement being the single most critical factor in winning a gun fight. I don't think any of that precludes one from owning a striker for target work if it suits you, but I have no confusion as to what works for me and what I want if and when things go bad.