Question about Thumb Safety

[JimTheTwo]

Hello,

I am pretty new to the forum though I've been a reader for a little while. I am also pretty new to handguns and VERY new to concealed carry. With so many options out there, my head is spinning and I feel like I change my mind on what to get every day.

After a ton of reading and researching I've decided to purchase a S&W M&P 9 compact 2.0. I am really not sure if I should get the model with the manual thumb safety or without.

I was wondering what the general opinion is on this. I have heard that you should never have a gun for EDC without a manual safety and I have also heard that it can be an issue in a SD situation, where every second can count.

Thanks in advance!

[Risasi]

Now you've gone and opened a can of worms. It comes down to personal preference and how confident you are that you will keep your booger hook from inadvertently pressing the bang switch in a negligent manner.

[Cheapshooter]

Very much a personal choice. If you are not confident in your ability to handle, and carry a gun that has no manual safety you are most likely better off having one.
For myself, fully knowing that the safety is between my ears, I choose to not complicate an emergency situation with an extra step. In an intense situation that step could be forgotten, or physically missed. My carry guns have eother long, deliberate double action triggers, long single action pull, or in the case of my Springfield XD40 Sub Compact, and Remington R51, a 1911 style grip safety.

[FITASC]

Unless it's a 1911 being carried "cocked and locked" I prefer no manual safety, especially on guns like that, Glocks, Kahrs, etc.
I like the "point and shoot" idea.

[JimTheTwo]

Thanks guys, for your input. Yeah, I'm pretty familiar with the concepts of safety being first and foremost in between the ears. And I ABSOLUTELY know the can of worms this sort of topic can turn out to be. My issue is that I can't decide whether I should learn without a safety to better reinforce the safety between the ears or whether I should just go with the safety and decide from there if a safety is something that I need.

Maybe it's better to start with the safety and decide I don't need it later than to have an issue and realize i needed it after the fact. Any thoughts?

[GarandTd]

If you have a safety, you can decide to not use it, though some may argue that you could activate it accidentally. Without a safety, I prefer a longer, firmer trigger pull(double action).

[JimTheTwo]

So with these two guns, would there be a difference in the way the trigger feels? They would still have the same action correct?

[Kvon2]

So with these two guns, would there be a difference in the way the trigger feels? They would still have the same action correct

should be.

Regarding the safety/no safety issue I think you'll find the general consensus is going to be get whatever makes you comfortable and if you're going to use the safety make sure you practice your draw having to turn the safety off a ton.

[Cheapshooter]

If you have a safety, you can decide to not use it

But what's the fun in that? Get one with the safety. Then when you realize you are better without it you have an excuse to buy another gun!

[Northof50]

Firearms are inanimate objects and can be neither safe or unsafe. As with any tool, it is the person holding the tool that will determines how it is used. There is no right or wrong. Remember, the 3rd rule of firearms - your finger is off the trigger until your sights are on the target and you're prepared to shoot. Following the rule negates the question - yes/no external safety. As many have written, it will be based on what you feel most comfortable. My suggestion [and only a suggestion] fire your pistol for a few months and become very comfortable with it before you carry it. Regardless of the model, you will become intimately familiar with its working. If an external safety, train with it until it is not a question. If non external, train with it until it is not a question.

[Kvon2]

But what's the fun in that? Get one with the safety. Then when you realize you are better without it you have an excuse to buy another gun!

This is the smartest thing I've ever heard. Ever.

[TJB101]

Originally Posted by GarandTd

If you have a safety, you can decide to not use it, though some may argue that you could activate it accidentally. Without a safety, I prefer a longer, firmer trigger pull(double action).

Exactly... no safety a SA/DA is preferred... but it’s all personal preference.

[Charlie98]

One of the reasons I don't automatically poo-poo a revolver for concealed carry is the general lack of a safety... you just draw the weapon and pull the trigger, the same would be for non-external safety autos like was mentioned (Glock, Kahr.) Unless you train constantly, I don't recommend carrying something with an external safety to disengage.

[BigJimP]

Its personal preference...and it just depends on what controls you like the best.

( I'm a 1911 guy, so for me ...its cocked & locked - with a thumb safety & grip safety of course ---- and I primarily train with my carry gun....full sized 1911, 5" in 9mm )...

[TheGunGeek]

All my pistols have a manual safety. Disengaging it under stress is simply a practice & training issue. Massad Ayoob goes into this in great detail in one of his books, and officers who have carried it haven't had any performance issues. So my advice is to use the manual safety and practice, practice, practice. When I train this includes starting from on-safe position at each set. Negligent discharges are a greater risk statistically.

[Cirdan]

If you buy one with a thumb safety, make sure you practice turning it off every time, so it becomes automatic.

Don't have the reference, but I once read a study that supports using a manual safety. In a survey of police incidents where a suspect took the gun away from a LEO, the suspect never shot the LEO when the gun had a safety, and it was on. They just couldn't figure it out in the heat of the moment. Kind of makes sense.

[TunnelRat]

I think gun grabs are more of a concern with officers than your typical concealed carrier as you’re interacting with people while openly carrying and often in close proximity, but it’s certainly not out of the realm of possibility (I had an instructor that was an officer in a large metropolitan area where criminals deliberately targeted concealed carriers and made spotting them a priority). I get the argument that a safety can help in that area.

As for safety or not, if you do decide to use a safety you have to train to the point where disengaging it becomes automatic when deciding to use force. In cases I’ve read the majority of negligent discharges occur when people press triggers on chambers they think are empty and actually aren’t. In that situation I don’t think the safety helps or hurts you because you’ve decided to press that trigger and disengaging the safety is something you’ve done as it’s part of the manual of arms. That said if you do want one I think with training it can still be used effectively. Rifles and shotguns have manual safeties and the concern about forgetting to use them doesn’t seem to be brought up. Like anything, training is key.

Lastly with the M&P I believe it is relatively easy to remove the safety of you want. You can also get polymer inserts from S&W to fill the gaps left from where the safety levers were. So you could buy the safety model and if you decide that you want to remove them after time it’s an option.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Spats McGee]

Welcome to TFL, JimTheTwo!

Getting a general opinion on safeties is a little like getting a general opinion on "the best caliber." It comes up often, and the discussion can get pretty heated. That said, and with the caveat that I'm not a police officer/military/operator/gunslinger, I've gone with "no thumb safety." My first carry gun was a 1911 that (obviously) had a thumb safety, but I eventually bought a Glock for carry, and it does not have a thumb safety. With training, swiping the thumb safety off becomes automatic, and I'm comfortable with that notion. What I was most assuredly not comfortable with was having 1 gun in the carry stable that had a thumb safety, while neither of the other two did.

[RETG]

My PX4s were all F models (with safety/decocker) but it only took fifteen minutes per handgun to change to a F model (decocker only). So for me, with my DA/SA handguns, only decocked; no safety.
But I am surprised how many people I have met who carry not only in safe mode, but with no round in the chamber.

[abarhorst]

You need to take your entire environment such as children, relatives etc. into consideration when deciding external safety or not. Unless your infallible someone else will probably gain access to your gun eventually. At that point do you feel safe with what's between their ears.


You may want to look at something like a CZ that allows you to switch it to either s/d or external safety.

[RickB]

I shoot single action pistols almost exclusively, so disengaging a manual safety is a subconscious act on the draw, but I have seen people draw and wonder why the gun won't fire, because they are not accustomed to disengaging a safety.

Unless you are committed to developing the required "muscle memory" via practice, you might want to go with a safety-less gun.

The manual safety is a safety in two ways; it makes your operation of the gun "safer", but if you are ever in a situation where someone else has your gun - not even necessarily an assailant, just a person who's not authorized to handle your gun - you might have some time to take appropriate action while the safety is figured-out by someone unfamiliar with your gun or its features.

[TheGunGeek]

Originally Posted by Cirdan

If you buy one with a thumb safety, make sure you practice turning it off every time, so it becomes automatic.

Don't have the reference, but I once read a study that supports using a manual safety. In a survey of police incidents where a suspect took the gun away from a LEO, the suspect never shot the LEO when the gun had a safety, and it was on. They just couldn't figure it out in the heat of the moment. Kind of makes sense.

Excellent point and one often forgotten. While a police officer is more susceptible to this occurring, it can happen to any of us. If you're in a physical altercation which may not warrant lethal force in your mind at the time, the attacker can possibly grab your gun and use it against you. Think of the Travon Martin situation (or a hypothetical similar) where he is bashing your head in the concrete, and the pistol isn't used until the last moment.

PS - This issue was also in Massad's book on Beretta. It's a good read.

[MandolinMan]

Really it just boils down to what you are most comfortable and proficient with.

Just food for thought, if a manual safety is a liability on a defensive hand gun, why is a manual safety not considered a liability on a defensive long gun? Would not having a manual safety on your pistol promote greater consistency?

Not being argumentative one way or the other, just a random thought that popped into my head...

[TunnelRat]

You need to take your entire environment such as children, relatives etc. into consideration when deciding external safety or not. Unless your infallible someone else will probably gain access to your gun eventually. At that point do you feel safe with what's between their ears.

I get the logic here but I do want to point something out. Safes, gun cabinets, quick access safes, there are a number of options out there for locking your firearms up to prevent access by children. Many of these are very affordable, and really any of them is far more likely to stop a child than just a safety on the pistol. While I can buy the argument that when flooded with adrenaline someone that physically takes your weapon will be unable to figure out how to use the safety, does that apply to a child? Now maybe it does buy you the extra minutes you need to notice something is wrong, that's possible. But as an anecdote when I was a child my mother left me alone on the porch of our house with my toys. When she came back some time later she found I had disassembled the gear assembly of her exercise box using my fingers. In another anecdote I remember a man I knew who claimed to have worked at S&W right around the time the key locks were introduced on revolvers. He said S&W did a small test where they had a number of kids around an unloaded S&W revolver with no firing pin. The theory was that the kids didn't have the hand strength to press the trigger through the DA mode. What did the kids do? They used both hands and with two index fingers were able to press the trigger to hammer drop. They did this without any urging from adults. My point is kids are a lot more resourceful than people credit. Please don't rely on heavy trigger pulls or manual safeties to stop a child.

[Lohman446]

You need to take your entire environment such as children, relatives etc. into consideration when deciding external safety or not. Unless your infallible someone else will probably gain access to your gun eventually

I dislike this line of reasoning and am working towards finding the flaw in it. There are certain things in life that "oops" cannot happen and one is a firearm. I worry that having a manual safety may allow some people to be less on guard against a negligent discharge.

The rules of gun safety argue that we should treat every gun as if it were loaded. Maybe the caveat AND READY TO SHOOT should be added.