Question on thumb and other safeties

Pierre330

Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2014
Messages
164
Reaction score
68
Location
Ohio
First, I just want to get an idea how many of you have carry guns without an external safety?

When I was buying my second firearm recently (9c) I was asked if I wanted a thumb safety. With no hesitation I said no. My fs 9 has no safety and I want consistency. I've only been shooting for about three months but have come to believe that best safety is YOU. Of course "accidents" happen, but that holds true in everything.

So am I nuts for this belief? Am I crazy for not wanting a thumb safety?

FYI.. This came to mind after reading a thread about appendix carry. I'm getting ready to get ccw and that's a position I'm considering for carry....
 
Register to hide this ad
The vast majority of forum members have no use for a manual safety. I'm not one of them though.
 
I was taught to always use your safety. So when I got my 9c I really wanted one with the thumb safety. Since then I have had the thumb safety pushed off while wearing it IWB. The husband also got a 9c for CC but he got the non safety one. The deal on his was too good to pass up. I do like having the extra security, but the best safety is between your ears. Never, never, never have your trigger finger in the trigger guard unless you are prepared to discharge your firearm.
 
Here we go again!! There are plenty of expressed opinions on manual safeties. Read any recent Shield thread.
 
I figured it was probably a debate that's been around - but I'm not above rekindling...

Much like in many endeavors - there's always a series of timeless debates. In a classical guitar forum I go to they have their own debates that keep coming back.. human nature I suppose:)
 
I don't own a single carry gun that has an external safety. Main and BUG (if carried) have one in the chamber. Completely comfortable doing so.

My only pistols with external safeties are 22LR range toys (M&P22 and GSG 1911-22).
 
Last edited:
When I bought my Shield back in Jan., it was my first CCW, and I was glad to have the thumb safety for my piece of mind. 7ish months later, the TS is not such a big deal, and my next gun probably wont have one.
 
I don't think that there is a "vast majority" that don't like thumb safeties; its probably pretty evenly divided...

When I bought my 40c a couple of years ago if I had known it was available with a safety I would have got one with a safety. I like having a safety & I use the one on my 40 Shield all the time. Its a personal preference.
 
I like the safety on my FS40 & FS45 because that is where my thumb rests and what I got used to from shooting my 1911 which I owned before I bought either M&P.

I actually removed the thumb safety from the 45 and went to the range with it for its second outing and the slide would not lock back on an empty mag. I was confused and frustrated because the first outing was flawless. It was only on my last 10 or so rounds that I realized my thumb was riding the slide stop. So for me the safety is a plus.
 
I think the thumb safety on an M&P is a moot point. Some like it and some don't. Personally I'm indifferent to it. The reason for that is how it works.

On the M&P line, the thumb safety only blocks trigger movement. So, while the gun is in the holster, or on the table, the thumb safety adds no value at all. If the gun were dropped, the thumb safety is not part of why it won't fire.

In fact, the only time the thumb safety adds value, is when reholstering (or as a thumb rest for those of us used to that). In the event something should get inside the trigger guard, the thumb safety would prevent the trigger from moving. So there is some value, it's just not the same as a 1911.
 
As a newbie, both my .40's had them for "my safety" and so that when I carried either, I would not have to think about safety, no safety.

As many have stated, the divide is about equal. Both mine are gone now.
Keep your booger stick off the trigger and no issue!
 
My suggestion to the OP is that if you're going to carry a striker fired gun AIWB a safety is a good idea.

I understand both sides of the never ending dispute but IMHO most AIWB 'accidents' occur during re-holstering and most don't have anything to do with your trigger finger being on the trigger. Most of the time it happens because something gets caught between the trigger and trigger guard (i.e. portion of your shirt, jacket, jacket toggle, or even a rock if you go prone…I've seen it happen with a hammer fired gun).

With a hammer fired gun we always teach our students to keep their thumb on the back of the hammer when re-holstering because IF there is an object obstructing the trigger/trigger guard your thumb will feel the rearward movement of the hammer telling the shooter to stop.

Obviously on a striker fired gun you get no notice until you get the worst surprise of your life. Again, just my opinion but, even if your holster rubs the safety off to fire after your gun is in your holster, it's already in there so no harm no foul. That's what all of the other internal safeties are for.

I would agree that if you come from a 1911/Browning Hi power background it is a much easier transition…BUT by the same token if you're 3 months into your shooting experience it's a perfect time to learn since you haven't developed any habits (good or bad) to re-train.

The worst thing that can happen if you learn to shoot with a thumb safety and you decide to get another gun that doesn't have one down the road, is your thumb will naturally sweep a safety that isn't there…no big deal. It won't slow your speed. I had to make that exact transition when our team transitioned from the Hi-power to a Glock after almost 10 yrs of carrying a Hi power. Now I'm issued a Sig 229 and it required the most amount of change (which wasn't much) because the slide release/lock is where a thumb safety would be and it wouldn't allow the slide to lock back after the last shot. I changed my grip to move my thumb over a few mm and problem solved.

The last 'con' of a thumb safety that is brought up often is your thumb could inadvertently put the gun back on safe as you shoot. My view on that is they're probably shooting by tucking their thumbs vs. a two thumbs forward grip. If you tuck your thumbs it naturally places your thumb underneath the safety and upon recoil that same thumb has the tendency to push the safety up. When you grip the gun with both thumbs forward your right thumb (if you're a right handed shooter) should rest on top of the safety so when the gun recoils there's no way to put it back on safe (assuming your gun is in proper working order otherwise we can 'what if' this to death). Here's good vid that you might have already seen that talks about a bunch of stuff but shows thumb placement better than I can explain it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysa50-plo48

One final thought/example… It's easy to quarter back this example to death…I get that, but stick with me…a LEO buddy of mine who has a deep SF background and 15 yrs as a LEO, purchased a new holster for his off-duty Glock earlier this year. He'd been carrying AIWB for years with his Sig (probably in the military before that). As he was getting accustomed to his new holster, he was moving it around getting it adjusted correctly, and since it was new it was tight. Well he also had his cover garment on, and something got caught in his trigger and in the course of all the tugging and moving it went off. The round went through part of his ab, his scrotum, through his thigh, and came out of his knee. He lived. He's still recovering but there's no guarantee he'll make it back to full duty. His knee is pretty screwed up.

There are obviously a ton of things this guy could have done to avoid this…#1 being the damn gun shouldn't have been loaded in the first place. And maybe a thumb safety wouldn't have helped at all, BUT maybe it could have.

I give this example not to pick apart but as food for thought of the risks of AIWB carry and how even an experienced operator can make a huge mistake. In my job we're taught early on that the job is dangerous and many ways to manage those risks. IMHO, a safety on a striker fired gun carried AIWB is one way to manage a potential risk. It doesn't eliminate them...accidents still happen and whether it's operator error or mechanical the outcome is still the same. I'm not sure if this is true or not, mostly because it hasn't happen to me in 22 yrs carrying a gun for a living…knock on wood…but the saying goes that at some point in your firearms experience you're going to have an AD/ND/UD or whatever the most 'correct' term is for the same thing. If/when it happens; I don't want it to be like my co-worker.

Regardless of which way you go always manage your risks and train hard. Sorry this was long winded.
 
Personal preference. Most people that want a safety tend have learned with them before the full on proliferation of striker fire or from someone who carried before that... and/or served in a capacity where a firearm was carried for duty.

Realistically, we know now for civilian carrying it's another thing to get in the way when the adrenaline spikes and things are moving crazy fast.

For duty... I get safeties and DAO etc - liability is a huge thing for LE departments and the gun is more likely to be used - even if not actually fired.
 
Last edited:
Jiman, so accidental discharges tend to be more common carrying AIWB?
 
To claim negligent discharges are more likely when carrying AIWB is a little disingenuous. To claim that an negligent discharge while reholstering is more likely life threatening is accurate.

I like to refer to the mechanical safety on a Shield as "Schrödinger's Safety".
 
LOL!!! That's funny.

Pierre330: POM is absolutely correct. I'll caveat that by saying that I have absolutely no stats to back up my agreement. I'm not sure anyone does.

IME, I've seen and attended to more ND/UDs from those carrying at the traditional 3-4 o'clock position, but that's of course because uniform guys don't generally appendix carry so my odds of seeing that are less.

Generally the injuries from non-AIWB NDs are tame compared to injuries from appendix carry. The worst I saw was a guy that shot himself in the thigh because he was practicing for a match and cracked a shot off just as he came out of the holster. Most of the time, we would call them pin stripes, was when the shot would go down their pant leg and into the ground or maybe their foot/ankle. There would also be a superficial red streak down their whole leg, thus the 'pin stripe'.

So the incidence of AIWB is probably not higher but the risks of serious bodily harm are, by the very nature of where your muzzle is pointed.

I wouldn't get wrapped around numbers or % though. AIWB is a relatively new fad if you will. More people than ever before are carrying this way or at least trying it. I've never seen such a selection of holsters...many very specific to appendix carry. Back in the day only BGs carried appendix and normally only because they didn't even use holsters.

My guess is if it continues we'll see a rise in 'accidents'. And then the 'pros' will say that the advantages don't out weight the risks and people will go back to more traditional carry methods.

I'm guessing of course but that's how lots of ideas/methodologies in shooting and tactics happen all the time.

To claim negligent discharges are more likely when carrying AIWB is a little disingenuous. To claim that an negligent discharge while reholstering is more likely life threatening is accurate.

I like to refer to the mechanical safety on a Shield as "Schrödinger's Safety".
 
Back
Top