The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: The Semi-automatic Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old October 7, 2022, 04:54 AM   #26
Nathan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 1, 2001
Posts: 5,877
To me, a safety feature is a function of the gun that blocks an unintended firing test case.

I would love to see guns tested with 5-25 unintended firing test cases and then rated as pass fail. I think that would be the key to really highlighting the reason some current guns are a relatively new(last 50 years….my goodness I’m old) are fundamentally less safe. Not bad, just less safe.

Things like pull trigger with safety off & on at 5lb, 8lb, 10lb, 15lb, 30lb…with grasping and without grasping the gun.

Drop free and fixtured at 1ft, 3ft, 6ft, 30ft. With and without manual safety applied.

Fire with and without magazine.

Can loaded chamber be assessed without gun function?

Can cocked status be confirmed visually.
Nathan is offline  
Old October 7, 2022, 06:24 AM   #27
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,459
On second thought, I withdraw my objections. This approach is an excellent idea.

When I think about the word 'consider', to me it means: 'do with'.

In my opinion, the word 'safety' means: 'raffia basket'.

I realize that some people may object to that, but I maintain that 'dictionary definitions' just don't cut it for this kind of discussion. It's clear that everyone can use their own personal definitions and the result is productive. You actually CAN change reality by simply changing what you call something. I find it is very useful to come up with personal definitions and to use them in place of the standard ones when communicating.

Anyway, back to the OP's question. "What do I do with raffia baskets?" I put stuff in them--stuff that's suitable for either transport or storage in raffia baskets, of course.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old October 7, 2022, 07:07 AM   #28
Shadow9mm
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 21, 2012
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 3,312
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnKSa View Post
On second thought, I withdraw my objections. This approach is an excellent idea.

When I think about the word 'consider', to me it means: 'do with'.

In my opinion, the word 'safety' means: 'raffia basket'.

I realize that some people may object to that, but I maintain that 'dictionary definitions' just don't cut it for this kind of discussion. It's clear that everyone can use their own personal definitions and the result is productive. You actually CAN change reality by simply changing what you call something. I find it is very useful to come up with personal definitions and to use them in place of the standard ones when communicating.

Anyway, back to the OP's question. "What do I do with raffia baskets?" I put stuff in them--stuff that's suitable for either transport or storage in raffia baskets, of course.
The fun thing about English, or rather the way it is used, is generally is is very context dependent.

So i would say yes, they are all safeties. Even a locked container or a trigger lock would be an external safety, meaning one not integral to the firearm.

However when speaking of firearms they are generally phrased in the terms of safeties, meaning manual safeties. Passive safeties, like grip or trigger safeties. And passive safety features like firing pin blocks. So it is important to be clear you are correct.
__________________
I don't believe in "range fodder" that is why I reload.
Shadow9mm is offline  
Old October 7, 2022, 01:09 PM   #29
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,459
All language/communication is context dependent to one extent or another. That's not the issue here.

Everyone clearly understands the context of the discussion and is on the same page in that respect. The terms are all terms that have accepted meanings. And yet people (at the invitation of the OP, it must be noted) are still making up their own definitions instead of using the accepted ones--as if the terms are open to redefinition--as if making up personal definitions is constructive instead of destructive or as if knowing various personal definitions is enlightening instead of confusing.

This type of thing is a contagious disease. People believe, and are encouraged to believe that they can actually change reality by simply redefining terms or by renaming things. I'm not going to give examples from outside the gun community, but I think it shouldn't be hard for people to come up with some on their own.

Ironically, the gun community has typically been a stickler for not getting caught up in it. Instead, they have fought against the idea of renaming 'semi-auto magazine fed rifles" to 'assault rifles', to name one example, pointing out that both terms already have definitions and those definitions should be used correctly.

Anyway, that's all getting away from the OP's question.

I'm curious to know what other people on this thread do with raffia baskets?
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old October 7, 2022, 03:32 PM   #30
Nathan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 1, 2001
Posts: 5,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by Limnophile
A passivesafety does nothing to prevent inadvertent operation.
Yes, that is the problem with a trigger safety.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TunnelRat
Perhaps this is a matter of perspective, but the above statement is untrue both in terms of the definition of inadvertent and the practical use of firearms. Passive safeties such as trigger tab safeties or firing pin blocks absolutely can prevent forms of inadvertent operation. Absent a Hollywood movie scenario, think Jamie Lee Curtis in “True Lies”, a firearm discharging when dropped is generally not intended. I accept that those passive safeties cannot stop a trigger being pressed to the rear by say a snagging garment or a poorly placed finger on behalf of the user, but they do prevent inadvertent operation in a form.
We agree, but disagree. Operation of the trigger is the normal. Inadvertent would be the operation of the trigger while not intending to, right. That is the act of reholstering and snagging…aka inadvertent operation.

With all due respect safety level is just about laying out all the test cases and checking the pass boxes. Then add them up and see who wins. I can tell you all that certain near safetyless designs will have fewer checks.
Nathan is offline  
Old October 7, 2022, 03:45 PM   #31
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,459
Quote:
Yes, that is the problem with a trigger safety.
As already noted, passive safeties (including trigger safeties) can and do prevent some types of inadvertent operation. At least if we are using normal definitions for 'inadvertent operation' and not narrowing the focus artificially to only take into account a subset of the ways that a gun can be inadvertently operated.
Quote:
Inadvertent would be the operation of the trigger while not intending to, right.
Such as having the trigger operate from being dropped. Trigger safeties are very good at preventing inadvertent operation from inertia events (dropping/jarring).

They are less effective at preventing snagging, but, depending on the design, they can prevent some snags. If the snagging object impinges on the trigger in an area where the trigger safety can not be operated (the side of the trigger or at the top of the trigger bow in the typical "flipper" type trigger safety) then the trigger will not be operated by the snagging object.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old October 7, 2022, 10:01 PM   #32
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 26,504
Quote:
And yet people (at the invitation of the OP, it must be noted) are still making up their own definitions instead of using the accepted ones--as if the terms are open to redefinition--as if making up personal definitions is constructive instead of destructive or as if knowing various personal definitions is enlightening instead of confusing.
Could you explain how asking people what they consider a safety or "the safety" is, in any way inviting them to create their own definitions?

What brought about my asking the question was someone referring to a "magazine disconnect safety".

I recognize what a magazine disconnect is, and what it does, and how it prevents the gun from firing, but I don't in any way consider it a "safety" or even a safety feature. SO, I was asking what other people considered to be a safety.

The result has been...interesting, with some people essentially thinking along the same lines I do, and others considering anything that either prevents the gun from firing or allows safe carry to be a "safety" in their view.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old October 7, 2022, 11:12 PM   #33
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,459
Quote:
Could you explain how asking people what they consider a safety or "the safety" is, in any way inviting them to create their own definitions?
If the term didn't have any accepted meaning then asking people what they thought it meant might make sense. Since it already has an accepted meaning, asking people what they think it means is asking them to make up their own definitions.
Quote:
I recognize what a magazine disconnect is, and what it does, and how it prevents the gun from firing, but I don't in any way consider it a "safety" or even a safety feature.
Ok. I understand what you are saying, but that opinion is misaligned with the common usage of the terms 'safety' and 'safety feature'.

A magazine safety is, by any reasonable definition, a safety. To make it easy, that's precisely why it's called a magazine safety. And, also by any reasonable definition, a safety is also a safety feature--safety feature being a more general term than the word 'safety' as it applies to firearms.

Firearm safeties are a specific category of the much more general category of 'safety features'. Safeties deal specifically with preventing inadvertent discharge of the firearm while safety features are any design features designed to prevent undesirable dangerous occurrences, reduce the chances of injury or the severity of injury from dangerous occurrences, or to reduce the likelihood of dangerous occurrences.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old October 9, 2022, 09:10 AM   #34
zeke
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 17, 1999
Location: NW Wi
Posts: 1,566
Am another who thinks a safety is a manually operated safety, that can be turned off/on.

Course ya got to consider that i believe in 2 types of pistols, semi-autos and revolvers.
zeke is offline  
Old October 9, 2022, 01:59 PM   #35
Willie Lowman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 5, 2009
Location: Uh-Hi-O
Posts: 2,992
of all the handguns I own, 2 of them have a switch that prevents the gun from firing when the trigger is pulled. My Glock, Sig, and revolvers have no such feature.

So for me my safety is located between my thumb and middle finger.
__________________
"9mm has a very long history of being a pointy little bullet moving quickly" --Sevens
Willie Lowman is offline  
Old October 9, 2022, 05:19 PM   #36
Tamara
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: March 11, 2000
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 16,002
"What do you consider a safety??"

Why do you ask?
__________________
MOLON LABE!
2% Unobtainium, 98% Hypetanium.
The Arms Room: An Online Museum.
Tamara is offline  
Old October 9, 2022, 09:37 PM   #37
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 26,504
Quote:
Why do you ask?
I asked because I was interested in hearing what other people thought, seeing if, how, and where their opinions differ from mine.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old October 10, 2022, 11:02 AM   #38
Pahoo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 16, 2006
Location: IOWA
Posts: 8,654
Agree but missing the relavence ??

Quote:
I make a distinction between a safety and a safety feature.
I asked because I was interested in hearing what other people thought, seeing if, how, and where their opinions differ from mine.
Can't say my opinion is of much help as I really don't see the benefit of me splitting hairs. So I have no reason to question your thoughts/opinions. As previously stated; I teach Hunter Safety and Firearm's Safety. I "try" to practice what I teach and that is four basics firearm safety rules and "Read your manual", and be informed of all it's features. I do mention that "Use all safeties present" but don't trust them. Instead, trust the four fundamental rules......

Unless I'm missing something, I would not see any benefit on having a conversation about the distinctions. ..
Example; I have a firearm that lists three (3) safeties. Per your thinking, I guess that at least one, is a "safety feature" and not sure on the other two.

Be Safe !!!
__________________
'Fundamental truths' are easy to recognize because they are verified daily through simple observation and thus, require no testing.
Pahoo is offline  
Old October 10, 2022, 11:22 AM   #39
Aguila Blanca
Staff
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 17,733
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pahoo
Can't say my opinion is of much help as I really don't see the benefit of me splitting hairs. ...

Unless I'm missing something, I would not see any benefit on having a conversation about the distinctions. ..
Example; I have a firearm that lists three (3) safeties. Per your thinking, I guess that at least one, is a "safety feature" and not sure on the other two.
That last sentence is, IMHO, the key.

For most of us, most of the time, this is nothing but an exercise in splitting hairs, arguing about a distinction with no [real] difference. Where it could make a difference, as I mentioned in an earlier post in this thread, is if/when you have used a firearm and have been charged criminally or sued civilly because someone didn't think it was a "good shoot" (justified use of a firearm in defense of self). In court, if you have removed or disable any "safety feature" that was on the firearm when it left the factory, you should expect the other side to use that fact to paint you as a dangerous nut who disregards safety to make it easier for you to kill people.
__________________
NRA Life Member / Certified Instructor
NRA Chief RSO / CMP RSO
1911 Certified Armorer
Jeepaholic
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old October 10, 2022, 12:22 PM   #40
HiBC
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 13, 2006
Posts: 7,983
I owned a pistol with a magazine safety..Once. I think it was a MAB PA-15.
If you removed the magazine, the trigger and slide were locked.
That means if there is a round in the chamber,you cannot remove the magazine and then clear the chamber.
It IS possible to manually pull the slide back and lock it open with the slide stop, then remove the magazine. That is rather cumbersome an not a very intuitive move. Or you can cycle the slide for every round in the mag till the gun is empty. The magazine safety encourages the practice of removing the magazine and leaving a round in the chamber, assuming the gun is "safe".
Others may disagree,but I believe magazine safeties are inherently dangerous.
No,I do not remove them. I just will not buy or own any pistol with a magazine safety.
--------------------------------------------------------
Quote:
I asked because I was interested in hearing what other people thought, seeing if, how, and where their opinions differ from mine.
And if they differ from yours,?

---------------------------------------------------------------

Something I have seen too often is the phrase "Its on safe" as justification for compromise.

So I maintain that the Human Being responsible for the gun is the most important safety.

But certainly that Human Being can,and should,take advantage of the "extra layer",the redundancy ,of manual safeties and safety features.

My hands are a bit odd. The heel of my hand is quite beefy. The center of my palm is hollow. Its not a reliable hand to compress a grip safety on a 1911.
No,I don't defeat the grip safety. Though some very serious pistoleros do.

I use only flat mainspring housings and grip safeties with a speed bump.

On top of that I tune the grip safety to minimum travel necessary. I make sure it works for me.

IMO,its a good idea to consider the holster as a safety feature,

Too many versions of "minimalist carry" don't consider the holster's role.

Belt clips, un holstered pocket or purse carry, etc leave an unprotected trigger subject to a pencil or cartridge brass or clothing or seat belt snag.
If I pocket carry,I use a kydex pocket holster. In an otherwise empty pocket.

Firearm safety is never reliant on one feature.

It does not matter one bit whether Alec Baldwin's trigger was pulled or his half cock notch failed or his thumb slipped,

The safety between his ears was not engaged.

"Treat all guns as if they are loaded" was broken.

"Don't point your gun at anything you do not want to kill"

Those are the "Safeties"

YES!! I use my safety! But if its that safety that keeps someone alive, my entire 359 degree universe of gun safety has FAILED. And I got lucky.

Last edited by HiBC; October 10, 2022 at 01:06 PM.
HiBC is offline  
Old October 11, 2022, 11:50 AM   #41
jackstrawIII
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 20, 2016
Location: Upstate NY.
Posts: 860
A safety is something that prevents the gun from firing when the shooter turns it on, and allows the gun to fire when the shooter turns it off.
__________________
In God we trust.
jackstrawIII is offline  
Old October 11, 2022, 12:58 PM   #42
CDW4ME
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 18, 2009
Posts: 1,314
Safety: a thumb operated device unnecessary on a Glock.
__________________
It's okay if you disagree with me; I can't force you to be right.
CDW4ME is offline  
Old October 12, 2022, 03:38 AM   #43
Nathan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 1, 2001
Posts: 5,877
Quote:
Safety: a thumb operated device unavailable on a Glock.

There…fixed it for you!
Nathan is offline  
Old October 12, 2022, 05:01 AM   #44
Ed4032
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 13, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 287
The best safety is The Four Rules to prevent a bad negligent discharge. You must break at least two of the rules for a bad day. Still not good but much better than the alternative. My opinion. At some point all of us will have a negligent discharge, it’s just when. Follow the four rules all the time. None of us are perfect every time.
__________________
Gun control is like stopping drunk driving by making it harder for sober people to drive.
Ed4032 is offline  
Old October 24, 2022, 06:44 AM   #45
Gas Bag
Member
 
Join Date: January 3, 2019
Posts: 69
It seems to me that the safeties on a 1911 is what I think of. Such as a flip up and down lever, for the thumb. And a grip safety in addition to that, and those are two pretty good devices.
Gas Bag is offline  
Old October 24, 2022, 10:03 AM   #46
SIGSHR
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 13, 2005
Posts: 4,669
I distinguish between an "officially" designated safety and safety "features". My Browning HP has a hand safety that must be manually engaged to be punt on safe or off, then a floating firing pin and a magazine safety that require no action by the shooter. Plus a half cock, usually considered a safety feature. Not intended to take the place of the manual safety. My Star Model B allows the safety to engage with the hammer at half-cock.
SIGSHR is offline  
Old October 26, 2022, 11:23 PM   #47
Ignition Override
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 18, 2008
Location: About 20 nm from the Big Muddy
Posts: 2,828
Only our ability to Concentrate on safety steps, and not be rushed.

My carry guns have always been DA/SA.
Ignition Override is offline  
Old October 27, 2022, 08:23 AM   #48
gwpercle
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 30, 2012
Location: Baton Rouge, Louisiana
Posts: 1,587
Honestly ... The best safety is what is located between your ears .
A firearm is only as safe as the person holding it and using you head when handling a gun will keep every one a lot safer than any mechanical gizmo .
Gary
gwpercle is offline  
Old October 27, 2022, 06:42 PM   #49
FITASC
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 6, 2014
Posts: 6,257
I consider a safety to be common sense coupled with a finger off the trigger - doesn't matter if a rifle, shotgun or handgun
__________________
"I believe that people have a right to decide their own destinies; people own themselves. I also believe that, in a democracy, government exists because (and only so long as) individual citizens give it a 'temporary license to exist'—in exchange for a promise that it will behave itself. In a democracy, you own the government—it doesn't own you."- Frank Zappa
FITASC is offline  
Old October 28, 2022, 03:16 PM   #50
GarandTd
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 15, 2016
Location: Rural PA
Posts: 1,639
My thoughts:

A safety is a selectable mechanical switch that prohibits the end user from firing the firearm. It is consistent, definitive, and repeatable.

While the brain is an important component under the umbrella of safety, it is not, IMO, a valid safety. The brain is a mysterious organ that is not always predictable even when its not "broken".

A safety is a safety feature, but a safety feature is not necessarily a safety.
__________________
22lr, 20 gauge, 8mm Mauser, 35 Remington, 30-06, 5.56x45/223, 9mm, 380acp
GarandTd is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:31 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.16542 seconds with 8 queries