Shield Safety Removal

M

messer454

Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2011
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
None of my self defense guns I have carried for 16 years have had a safety. I am not convinced that I would remember to take the Shield's safety off under stress. I also am not willing to trust my life to the belief that it will just stay in the off position while being carried.

I know you can remove full size M&P safeties. I have even heard that S&W has a spacer that they will send you to block the hole (however I am not sure of that last part.) So can the Shield's safety be removed the same way? Is there a piece that can be put in to block the hole that is left? I did a search but could not come up with anything for sure.

Like the Shield so far but inability to remove the safety is likely a deal breaker for me.
 
Register to hide this ad
Outstanding video. I could not find anything like that. Thank You!
 
that is a great video. however, i would not want to perform that operation on a carry piece........which is what a shield is.

the safety is not easy to manipulate. i just leave it in the "fire" position always.
 
I agree with insomniac. I wouldn't remove the safety from a carry weapon. Depending on what the laws are where you live and how "gun friendly" it is there it might come up if you have to use it. I would just leave the safety in the off/fire position. Just my opinion.
 
If using a throw-down pocket holster for the Shield, and you want to make sure you don't have an ND during holster insertion, you can set the safety, holster the pistol, then unset the safety.
 
Last edited:
The safety on the Shield requires a very deliberate motion to activate. It can be left on while chambering a round and racking the slide. I find it serves a very useful purpose if you choose to use it. Total removal of the factory safety may also raise other issues in a SD situation. If it really is a worry you may do well to look at other firearms that have no manual safety.
 
I agree with insomniac, mewisemajic and gnystrom.
The safety on the Shield is very stiff and and low profile. It takes a deliberate sweep to engage and (for me) is more difficult to engage, than to disengage. I've had no problem Pocket Carrying and simply keeping it in the off position.

The Factory trigger is not a hair trigger by any means and unless one does a trigger job to lighten it enough to make it so, needing to use the safety is a non-issue as long as one keeps their finger out of the trigger guard. (IMO)

If you definitely feel you can't live with the safety being on the pistol though, that video seems to be the best way to go about it. :)
 
Last edited:
hdatontodo said:
If using a throw-down pocket holster for the Shield, and you want to make sure you don't have an ND during holster insertion, you can set the safety, holster the pistol, then unset the safety.
Click to expand...

Agreed - That is my SOP...
 
No safety at all makes sense on a duty weapon carried in a rigid holster. Pocket carry and IWB with a small frame polymer lends itself to having a safety. My shotgun has a safety but i dont have to use it. You also dont have to wear your seatbelt, or drive a car with airbags. Its up to you. I really like all the features of the shield. Safety included. Leave it off.
 
I am on board with leaving it on the gun. If a child or anyone else ever got a hold of it and there was an " accidental " discharge, I think the courts would run you through the mill, and the anti-carry nuts would have a heyday. As has been said, you have to deliberately disengage it.
 
The safety doesn't bother me as I'm a 1911 user and accustomed to using a thumb safety. Unless something changes on my shield, due to wear, etc, I wouldn't worry about it moving inadvertently. It's pretty tight and takes a deliberate action to engage or disengage. Actually.. I like it.. Cheers.. Ron
 
I recently got a shield. As a long time revolver and double action auto kind of person, I don't use the safety on the shield. I have so far had no issue with it accidentally engaging and having played with it some, don't think this is likely so I intend to leave it on the gun and not use it.

Frankly, in any carry situation in which I felt that the safety was "needed" to prevent a problem, such as pocket carry or inside the waist sans holster, etc., I would not choose the shield. Striker fired pistols require a holster that protects the trigger, IMO. I would not consider a thumb safety adequate protection in such a situation.

Just one reason I still like revolvers and 3rd gen S&W autos. If the need were to arise I feel I can safely carry such guns in a waistband, pocket, etc. (I am not advocating that anyone switch to holsterless carry, by the way).

I do like the shield quite a bit, though.
 
I have carried a G33, and before it a G26, for roughly 10 years in a pocket holster by Kramer. The holster solves the trigger concern; a safety is not needed. I would not carry anything in a pocket unless in a proper holster for that sidearm. In addition, as a left hander, I would not care for the safety on the Shield, although I have been told by a left handed S&W rep that he just ignores it with no trouble.
Removal and litigation: to me, a non-issue. If you live in some state like Illinois or New Jersey, maybe that's an issue. Since we don't have kids and cannot have visitors in the house due our dog, much less of an issue for me. There is a big difference between a deliberate SD shooting in which the safety's presence is a non-issue and an ND. Assuming that the hole does not present a problem, I would not be concerned about removing the safety.
Rumor was that a non-safety issue is in the works, but my local LE rep was not supportive of that rumor. It is not worth the effort to them given the market and the existing backlog.
 
Modification of a safety is an action that could and probably would be an issue in court after a critical incident. A weapon not equipped with a safety would not. The safety removal could be interpenetrated that a shooting was accidental not unavoidable, and make you appear irresponsible or even blood thirsty. You will have stepped from under the manufacture protection in the sense that he would have to defend his design. Your modification would leave you holding the bag.
 
I would be in the " leave the safety on the gun but leave it on fire " camp. Maybe after lots of use flipping the safety off ( if you do use the safety ) and on over the years the safety may wear some and move easier than than it does new but I doubt very very much the safety could ever accidently move from the fire to safe position. I never have any carry handgun on safety.
 
Right, removing the safety sounds likes case of job security for lawyers.

625-10scc said:
Modification of a safety is an
action that could and probably would be an issue in court after a critical incident. A weapon not equipped with a safety would not. The safety removal could be interpenetrated that a shooting was accidental not unavoidable, and make you appear irresponsible or even blood thirsty. You will have stepped from under the manufacture protection in the sense that he would have to defend his design. Your modification would leave you holding the bag.
Click to expand...
 
gnystrom said:
Total removal of the factory safety may also raise other issues in a SD situation. If it really is a worry you may do well to look at other firearms that have no manual safety.
Click to expand...

That's what I did... I went with a competitor's sub-compact that doesn't have an external safety.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

lrrifleman
Question about Performance Center Shield Pluses with thumb safeties
Replies
9
Views
1K
song dog
S
J
Shield performance PLUS compact striker safety
Replies
1
Views
362
dajogejr
dajogejr
S
Bodyguard 2.0 Safety Failure
2
Replies
22
Views
1K
Scbuckeye
S
R
safety mod for shield plus and bodyguard 2.0
Replies
1
Views
708
CommunismDelendaEst
C
J
MP22C Question for the Gunsmiths. I Want to remove Magazine Safety.
Replies
0
Views
224
JohnMcD348
J

Latest posts

Back
Top