Safety or no safety?

[rwsmith]

DAO

DAO begs for no safety lever. However the trigger on my Shield is much better (lighter) than most DAOs. I think a safety would be acceptable in that case.

 

[MacA]

It was "6 of one, half a dozen of another" for me. However I ended up choosing my Shield 45 with a safety only because I'd rather have one and not use it, than to not have one and need it! I have carried both 1911s and Glocks. I am comfortable with both.

 

[Redlegvzv]

I will not own a semi-auto pistol that does not have a safety. It is very important for civilians who carry to ensure that they never have an unintentional discharge. The safety is one more surety step in that direction.

In the Army I carried my 1911 sidearm with safety on, as millions of soldiers have. Never a mishap.

 

[TnShooter83]

I have both. It took a bit of searching to find a holster for the one with safety.
Other than that, I don't really care. If I were doing it again. I'd do No Safety.
But the I have with the safety shoots so good. Im keeping it.

 

[wingriderz]

Only have one that has one in my line up LC9 I pocket carry it alot . Its never been an issuse always off. But I would say prefer a no safety

 

[Horn]

Designed For Militay

There goes over 100 years of 1911s and almost the same for Browning Hi-Powers. Who knew.

Both intended for military. Early on and may be true today, the
military always considered enlisted men were not too intelligent and so wanted safeties (as many as possible) on handguns.
If you've ever been in a shooting situation ( Generally law enforcement) you don't need an explanation why no matter how often you train____when the perp is shooting at you___you just pull the trigger. Been there.
Poli Viejo

 

[Darkstar888]

Personally I have no use for a thumb safety on any gun other than a SA only 1911 that requires it to safely carry. They wouldn't necessarily be a deal breaker for me as I could simply choose to never engage it. But on a Beretta 92FS for example I would likely have it changed to decocked only.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[5Wire]

Both intended for military. Early on and may be true today, the
military always considered enlisted men were not too intelligent and so wanted safeties (as many as possible) on handguns.
If you've ever been in a shooting situation ( Generally law enforcement) you don't need an explanation why no matter how often you train____when the perp is shooting at you___you just pull the trigger. Been there.
Poli Viejo

Almost every major firearm manufacturer today makes some version of the 1911. They have safeties. They are mostly sold for personal defense. Don't like safeties? Don't buy a gun that has one. If you have a safety on your gun, learn to use it. There's no issue here.

 

[kd4gij]

Is there a kit to remove the safety from a shield?

 

[Jäger1]

If you've ever been in a shooting situation ( Generally law enforcement) you don't need an explanation why no matter how often you train____when the perp is shooting at you___you just pull the trigger. Been there.
Poli Viejo

Never had a shotgun or rifle in my police car that DIDN'T have a safety on it. Needed a little more than "just pull the trigger" to make them fire.

Meanwhile, going back well over a century, soldiers have had safety's on their weapons and had to grasp the concept that "you just pull the trigger" simply doesn't work until you move that safety thingy on the weapon.

Soldier, cop, or citizen... yeah, if you don't do enough training to be familiar with the weapon, then you probably are better off with a safety. Preferably something with a long trigger pull, like a revolver.

I prefer handguns with safeties (with the exception of the revolver, of course); my Shield has a safety. However, I would not lose any sleep if I had no choice but a handgun without a safety.

Also been there.

 

[jstanfield103]

Out of my 6 M&P's all have safeties except my 5" Pro Series, because they do not make it with a safety. So I am going to buy another M&P FS with safety and switch the internals of the Pro Series to that frame and then sell the FS with out the safety just to recover the money.

 

[jim46ok]

A lot of banter over a simple concept. If the gun has no safety, you have no safety. If it DOES have a safety, you have the option.....

 

[Mark IV]

Just as the title says, do you prefer a thumb safety or no thumb safety?

My view is that the overwhelming majority of civilian gun toters will never need to even draw, much less fire, their gun in self defense. But, they'll be carrying it around, putting in and out of holsters, car consoles, cases, safes, etc. countless times over the years.
All of this handling makes an accidental/negligent discharge vastly more likely to occur, than it is that a scenario will arise where the gun toter is put at risk by the 0.4 seconds it takes to click off a safety. That's just the real-world fact of the issue.
I personally feel much safer lugging around a pistol that I know isn't going to be unintentionally discharged, and I compensate for the possible delay of disengaging a safety by trying to be hyper-alert to my surroundings and being prepared to remove that safety.
That being said, for police officers that DO have a more realistic likelyhood of being involved in gun fire, I can see having a pistol that is always ready to fire instantly.

 

[T2C]

With a good holster, a thumb safety is not necessary on a defensive pistol. Some people who carry the Shield like the safety, so they have the option of using it or not.

I would never rely on a safety to prevent an unsupervised child from injuring themselves with a firearm.

 

[Tenncvol]

I agree with Mark IV that making the firearm safer during the many mundane occasions it is handled is my justification for a properly designed manual safety lever.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[FLS&W]

I have been preferring to go No Safety lately but I have a mix of Safet/No Safety guns. The 9mm Shield has it but the 45 Shield does not, the 5 Glocks don't, the FNS 9 has it but the FNS 9c doesn't, the CZ PCR and Sig P230SL are decockers w/o safety, and the Bersa 45 UC is a decocker/safety like the Berettas.

I usually have the safety "off" when carrying the models that have a safety but on occasions I have carried them with the safety "on."

 

[Kruzen]

I like the thump safety on my Shield 40 since it's my carry gun. Taking it in and out of my pants and I don't want to be UD statistic


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[wnderr]

I prefer a manual safety, just because I have been shooting them for 50+ years. It's a non issue to me, to flip it off when I want to use it. It's just automatic to me. Especially like a safety in a carry weapon. MHO

 

[CoMF]

Little late to the discussion, but I personally don't see a need for them on a pre-loaded striker fired or DAO pistol. On others, such as SA and DA/SA autos, I feel they may be justified.

What works for me may not work for everyone else. That's why I tend to look at "only one right way" arguments with a jaundiced eye.

Since this is in the M&P forum, I'm going to say that I'm glad S&W caters to both camps. As for me, my personally owned .45 Shield doesn't have one, and I specifically requested one so equipped from my LGS.

Use what you feel comfortable with. There are no "one size fits all" solutions to personal defense.

 

[jstanfield103]

CoMF,
I really like the way you put that.