I have been reading on this forum about the S&W Bodyguard 2.0.
Several comments along the lines of "better get the safety" have caught my attention.

I was an early Glock user and my department offered the New York Trigger. I liked the NY 1 trigger since I was coming from revolvers. Many years later, I don't like a thumb safety and actually try to stay clear of them. These include Glock, S&W M&P, Original .380 Bodyguard, Springfield XDs.

For the Bodyguard 2.0 and no other handgun in this earth, educate me. If you believe the Bodyguard 2.0 needs the safety, why is that? I'd be pleased to hear your experience and opinion. Especially if that opinion is based on experience.

I don’t like thumb safeties on striker fired pistols. As long as the trigger guard is covered by the holster and you use care re-holstering I see no need for a thumb safety. Many times when re-holstering my IWB holsters I remove the holster before reinserting the pistol. As I age and have less flexibility I find I have no issues drawing but it is easier to remove the holster insert pistol then place holstered weapon inside my waste band at 3-4 O Clock.


I tend to have less issues re-holstering larger pistols but being an old retired guy is a lot different than working the streets and taking offenders into custody.

From the reports I have seen, the 2.0 has an unusually light trigger pull; much lighter than most carry guns that may be used for pocket carry.
Too light, in my opinion without an external safety.

OK, based on that, the comments I have read make sense.
I was not aware of a light trigger pull. I can see how that might make a difference.

Thank you for posting.

Thinking about the 2.0 having a lighter trigger pull.
It makes sense but then how many gun websites are all about making the trigger pull of every gun lighter. But maybe not for pocket carry. One company has a lot of trade in making the Bodyguard .380 trigger shorter and lighter. So I really need to just buy a 2.0 and see for myself!

Do any of you know the trigger pull of a Glock 42 compared to the 2.0?

I own the original BG380 (Non-Safety & Non-Laser) and only carried it out of convenience. The trigger on that thing isn't going to be pulled without intention, as you know.

Just picked up the BG 2.0 and the trigger is pretty light compared to other pocket pistols. It's definitely lighter than the G42 I own, but not terribly so. It's almost like the flat face makes it feel lighter if that makes sense. I plan on getting a nice kydex pocket holster to cover the trigger and also the mag release button. I'd never try and re-holster a pocket pistol while the holster is in pocket so I'm not too worried that.

God forbid, if the time ever comes when I need to draw it, a safety is not something I want to even think about dealing with. I understand folks say it's all about the training, but I've seen enough footage online to know that I do not want to be fiddling with a safety in the heat of the moment.

Obviously, it's all about your comfort level, but I won't carry a pistol with a safety.

This is helpful information. Thank you for posting.
I agree about a good pocket holster. I will be checking on the kydex holsters. My Bodyguard .380 has a good selection available Maybe the Bodyguard 2.0 will be popular enough to get a good selection.

I purchased a Bodyguard 2.0 the first day they came out and it's been flawless. The trigger is a very nice four pound pull and the gun is quite accurate for being so small.

I preferred the heavier trigger on the original LCP for pocket carry over the shorter lighter trigger on the newer model. I don’t like thumb safeties, but have wondered about the Bodyguard 2.0 trigger for pocket carry.

Agreed. The trigger on original LCP (second gen) was great. I didn't mind the trigger on the LCP II or Max, but what worried me was that hammer being 90% cocked while in my pocket and without a plunger safety for that firing pin. I just didn't trust that design.

The new BG 2.0 has the firing pin safety and I fully trust it. As long as I don't press that trigger, it won't fire. Just have to keep that trigger protected while in pocket as number one priority.

Another advantage of a thumb safety is that in the event that someone else gets control of the gun, they will not be able to fire it immediately, if at all.
The general public knows nothing of thumb safeties.

I mean no disrespect, but planning on losing your handgun is in the same class as keeping the chamber empty in case a BG gets it away from you.
If I lose my handgun to an attacker, then I've already lost that fight (and probably my life).
I agree w/the previous poster in that I do not want to be fiddling w/a small safety under stress when fine motor control goes out the window.

__________________
His Universe, His rules.

I would suggest getting on a mat with a blue gun and learning how to protect your gun, instead of planning to lose it.

I posted a comment on the Bodyguard 380 safety on 6/29.
This post would also apply to the new 2.0.
Go to Bodyguard safety in search to read it. I believe you will find it enlightening whether you agree or not.
Enjoy your new Bodyguard 2.0!
I am an old guy and don’t know how to copy my post to this one.

I would suggest getting to the range and learning how to draw and shoot instead of planning on grappling with an attacker.


Hopefully the above silliness highlights the silliness of your post.

The firing pin safety is not the issue; it’s about a fold of clothing or a careless finger depressing a light trigger when re-holstering, especially when using an IWB or pocket holster.

I can't imagine anyone in their right mind trying to re-holster in a pocket holster without removing it first, but let's face it, a few gun owners are not all there.

This. Gun is always holstered *outside* the body.

__________________
His Universe, His rules.

I picked up my new Bodyguard 2.0 yesterday. Getting aquatinted, I found the manual safety dang near impossible to operate. I had to push with both thumbs to go from safe to free and back. Now I haven't dissembled, cleaned and lubed everything yet and I am use to my 365 with a long safety lever, but does this thing smooth out with use?
Secondly, about the trigger operation. It seems the trigger pull has some mechanical notches in a pull. Is this a bug or feature for those that like to have a pre travel stop as the trigger approaches the break?
Comments appreciated.

If you’re carrying condition one, probably so for inexperienced folks.

__________________
USN Retired, EDC BG 2.0

I agree, the Bodyguard 2.0 is not a pistol for inexperienced shooters. It’s a little snappy and the slide isn’t easy to rack. But, it’s very thin/light, has a low bore axis, and feels/shoots great. 100% reliable with every bullet weight I’ve run through it, 85 grain to 99 grain.

I find it far easier to shoot than my LCP Max.

Question for those who have disassembled a Bodyguard 2.0

If Wolff or another reputable company made a + power spring, would a simple spring change add a pound or 2 to the trigger?

Instead of a 3.7 (approx) pound trigger, maybe go to a 4.5- 5.5 lb?

I don’t “plan” on losing my gun, but surprise assaults can happen to you before you even know there is a threat within arm’s reach.
If you drop your gun, or if it is knocked out of your hand, or taken off your belt after being a victim of the “Punch Out Game”, you are not dead already if your gun has a thumb safety that the criminal knows nothing about. Could buy you some time to put some distance between you and your attacker.

My EDC's are carried concealed. They remain concealed until I perceive a lethal threat to myself or others. If the BG knows I have a handgun, it's only because it's already in my hand and ready to fire so a safety is just one more potential failure point to putting the gun into action. If the BG doesn't know I have a gun, then a safety serves no useful purpose insofar as the BG is concerned.

__________________
His Universe, His rules.

I got to handle but not shoot a BG2 today.
The trigger pull on THAT EXAMPLE was not so light that I would worry about pocket HOLSTER carry without the miniscule safety.
All three of my party liked it. I could see it replacing my Colt Gov't .380 as an IDPA BUG and my Keltec .32 for pockets too small for my G43.

I had no problem hitting 8" plates at 15 yards with mine, so using it for a BUG gun would work very well.

I started out with the Springfield XD series guns that had the grip safety. I never had trouble with it, but being a new shooter, it made me feel a bit safer about IWB carrying. Through the years of aging, I found the confidence to carry without any safety with the M&P Shield 1.0. I now carry the Glock 26 and the 19X which have no external safety except the trigger dingus. I like these guns. It is safe to say that I will not be purchasing another pistol with a safety. I do like the Bodyguard 2.0. and may be getting one soon.

Joe

I guess I am in the minority. I purchased mine with the thumb safety. My Shield plus also has one .

I have carried various Glocks and other striker fired pistols with out safeties and with the proper holster never felt unsafe.

With inside the waist band and especially pocket carry I like the extra level of safety. In my opinion the BG 2.0 has an excellent safety. It is a little difficult to engage .Which is good. But very easy to swipe off.

I train to swipe it down every draw or every time before firing. It is a personal choice. It is nice they offer it as an option

>>It is a personal choice. It is nice they offer it as an option<<

Exactly, which is why they offer it both ways.

Some states also require a manual safety to be sold there.

Yes, you're right. Living in a "free" state I tend to forget that.

That is about all the dinky levers on the BG2 and Shield look good for.
M&P and EZ safeties are ok, maybe the Equalizer. The CSX looks marginal in catalog cuts.

I just purchased one today and agree that the safety is way stiff. I also had to use two fingers to move it to SAFE, and can barely release the safety with my strong hand thumb. I hope it gets easier with use.

Mine got easier with use. Now easy to swipe down with thumb.

I have 2 of the original Bodyguards with manual safeties. They had the same problem. Almost impossible to push up or down. I disassembled them and took a dremmel and ground down the curved section just a little until it worked smoothly. I plan on buying one of the new Bodyguards with the thumb safety as well and if it is too tight then I hope it can be fixed in the same way as the 1st gen Bodyguards.
As for safeties, my EDC is. P365 with manual safeties. I carry small of my back heavy cant because I wear a sport coat with dress shirt tucked in. Get in and out of truck all day and have to take gun out put in holster mounted in center console then get out of truck and blind holster gun behind my back. I have no desire to shoot myself in the ***! I don’t have enough to spare! So I train with the manual safety. It is muscle memory now.

>>Almost impossible to push up or down.<<

Luckily, mine doesn't seem to have that problem. Yes, it is stiff, but I can easily manipulate it up and down.

The issue I'd like to talk about in connection to this thread, is why I've seen such rancor and disgust from much of the no-manual-safety crowd aimed at safeties and those that have them for the past twelve or so years? Why can't we just leave people be with their decisions?

Every now and them an article, video, podcast, or forum thread goes into how every single form of manual safety on a non-1911 defensive pistol (strange they stop there), from thumb safeties to grip safeties (but not trigger safeties, again, strange) will get you killed that one time you might (but probably won't ever) need to use it, and is often an indicator of naivety, lack of experience, or tactical sophistication.

Here's what I think after experiencing all different kinds of options... I think there's a group think attached to a sunken cost decision bias and maybe functional fixedness bias. When dealing with a polemic like yes or no to manual safeties, each has to make up their mind with their own applied logic and use cases. For some, once you decide, anyone else's personal logic seems to be an afront to your personal logic and reasons. Like I or WE NEED to know we got the best, and there is no other way in which MY or OUR choice isn't the right or preferrable way. This means that the very fact people live different lives or have differing opinions feels like an active attack against someone with little else to form an identity on.

There are arguments for and against... the arguments against are that they're another failure point if you need that thing to go bang, which is a one in a million chance for most (but not all) Americans. On top of that, what are the chances that it'll fail the one time you need it and not the thousands of times you are practicing with it at the range before to let you know there's a problem? What are the chances those failures aren't reported online through video reviews or forums like this? I've heard about grip safety/roll pin mechanical failures with old XDs, though I've never witnessed any myself. I've never heard of a failure of a thumb safety, which is an exceedingly simple control bar that I would argue possibly makes the trigger linkage stronger and less likely to take damage when not in use, though it most likely does alter the trigger weight and feel a bit negatively for most guns.

The next argument against is the training argument... you better be quick and smooth on the draw, which is kinda like, sure... but you should be like that firing the gun period. I CCW qualified with a manual safety 365 in CO as well as a manual safety Shield 45 in TX, both times from the holster, and one including a moving/approaching target at an indoor range, and I had the highest score in one class and like the third or fourth highest in with the small 45.

Does carrying a thumb safety gun make specific practice and muscle memory more important? yes. I can not draw a gun from a holster while target focused WITHOUT sweeping down with my thumb now. It's part of the draw regardless of the pistol. To me that issue is solved, train the same so that you can operate any pistol from a holster without thinking of it.

But I don't see people arguing that you should train for safeties, I see them saying that safeties on the gun are a bad idea, will get you killed. These are the same people that want you to search the inside of your holster like looking for gold a cave in case something is in there to defeat the trigger "safety" and blow your bits to... ah bits. Sure. That's great training advice, but don't say that an additional check on safety while conducting an inherently dangerous act is bad and you should rely on muscle memory and training instead, then say you can't rely on muscle memory and training to navigate an additional safety feature. What's the most likely statistical firearm danger... you ND because you're an idiot or an idiot makes you put him down in a Ol' West-style draw off because you didn't wait to get the drop on them or wait for your background to clear?

I carried Glocks, M11s, and M9s in the Army in reverse order, the last being striker-fired and the others DA/SA with sometimes tricky slide-mounted safeties the Army made you use. Since, I've carried M&P's, and Walthers, a Glock, Shadow Systems, and Sigs since, all stiker-fired, two without safeties, and M&P's and Sigs with thumb safeties.

I don't hate that Glocks and Walthers, and pretty much every striker gun out there doesn't have manual safeties, but for me, I can't figure out why there's a contingent out there determined to brow beat and shame thumb safeties out of industry adoption... especially with small guns that could find all kinds of weird use case scenarios, like being in office drawers ready to go, or a hiking chest rig, or around a calf or ankle, it makes sense to have a way of securing the trigger if the kydex won't fit the use.

I'll continue to carry what I will, sometimes favoring thumb safeties, as a small contingent of gun owners do because they're still being produced. To me, in many cases, the marginal everyday safety benefits far outrank the astronomically narrow and low defensive use risks. I'll work around the minor trigger debuffs, which to me is the strongest argument against it.

Sorry for the essay. I've been seeing affronts against safeties for over a decade and quietly rolling my eyes ever since. Got the demons out now. Carry well and carry on.

This forum is better mannered when it comes to this topic, but the overall sentiment is always there. I put a post up a year or so ago about why a slightly wider thumb safety for the Shield isn’t available since the stock one is so flush, and the first response was “because it isn’t needed” and “safeties will get you killed”. At least nobody went with the cringe worthy “keep your booger hook off the bang switch” and “my safety is between my ears”.

Bottom line, before Glocks came along in the later 80’s(I know they came to the US in the early 80’s, but nobody was carrying them until 1986 or so), the majority of semi auto pistols had safeties. Millions of them had been carried for decades and nobody minded them. There weren’t scores of dead gun owners gunned down as they fumbled for the safety. Then Glock sold the concept of “no safety to fumble with” to a whole new generation, and that generation has since spawned another one who knows nothing else.

As for the training aspect, if a gun owner is so confident that his training means he will NEVER touch the trigger when he didn’t mean to, why can’t he be so confident that he will sweep the safety off? If you can train to keep your finger off the trigger, even is a highly stressful situation, why can’t you train to sweep the safety off just as confidently?

Safeties are fine. Too many wanna be operators out there. I think the benefits outweigh the one very unlikely negative, that you can forget to turn the safety off in a life or death situation. But to each his own. We’ve probably all seen the guy carefully holster his Glock in his appendix holster and then bend over. BANG!! Either the gun or holster was defective, or something got caught in the holster and fired the weapon as he bent down. I wonder what he thought as he lay there in pain, wondering if he just sever d a femoral artery or blew his junk off? Either way, wouldn’t have happened if the gun had a safety.

Well said, on both of your parts!

I have a new Bodyguard with the thumb safety and it is almost useless because it is so hard to manipulate. I wave flipped it on and off hundreds of times hoping that will loosen it up, to no avail.
So I simply carry it with the safety off.

My issue isn't the possibility of a mechanical failure of the safety, but rather a manipulation failure under stress when fine motor control goes out the window. With larger handguns with larger safeties, this is much less of an issue, but trying to manipulate a small safety under stress isn't something I care to attempt (ymmv).

__________________
His Universe, His rules.

>>but trying to manipulate a small safety under stress isn't something I care to attempt<<

The answer to that is...just don't use it! And no, the BG 2.0 safety is not one that's inadvertently going to get engaged, that you can be sure of.

Then why even get one w/a safety to begin with?

__________________
His Universe, His rules.

>>Then why even get one w/a safety to being with?<<

In my case, that's all I could get at the time. But due to the diminutive size of said safety it wasn't a deal breaker. It doesn't get in the way at all, and is easy not to use if that is one's choice.

If you're a belt-and-suspenders kind of guy, get the safety; if not, don't.

You're welcome.

__________________
Pisgah

I once saw a bumper sticker displayed by a private pilot reading" Watch Your Attitude". Years ago I was a resident assistant at a 900 member, many discipline shooting club facility. A group of junior High Power Rifle shooters were in attendance making their M1a's and M1g's safe prior to going down range. I recommended to one that he lock the trigger group on safe as well as the bolt locked open and all ammo and magazines removed. The response I got in return was one from a mouthy smart *** punk about how to never rely on a safety. I don't know how far he progressed with the team, I hope not at all. I hear similar opinions from plastic pistols as well.

__________________
"Don't Give Up the Ship"

I appreciate all who address the BG 2.0 trigger and safety question.
THANK YOU for posting.

I even enjoyed most of the posts that had nothing or little to do with the original question. I often think inside the box and usually benefit from looking outside.

I think the rules here are for new members to go to the new member section, introduce themselves, learn the secret handshake, and don't use phrases like "sunken cost decision bias" "functional fixedness bias" or words like "polemic". You'd be better off with this group starting slow, like beans or no beans with chilie or something about minimum bear calibers. You on the other hand start off with a coherent well written post that makes a great deal of sense. Can't be having that from a new member now can we?????

__________________
Forum consigliere

Not silly.
Is law-enforcement wasting their time doing weapon-rentention training?