Striker fired semiautomatic pistols' safeties?

[Naphtali]

Among striker fired semiautomatic pistols, which have strikers that automatically have a physical barrier — that is, a hunk of steel — that prevents striker from touching primer of its chambered cartridge unless the trigger is pulled? I do not mean sear blocks or trigger blocks?

This feature is one of two reasons why I have never considered buying one of these popular pistols and have remained faithful to double/single action revolvers.

 

[dusty3030]

Glock, Smith and Wesson, Springfield, Beretta, Sig, pretty much all of them I have ever seen have a plunger type in the slide that blocks the striker unless the trigger is pulled.

 

[Gene L]

My Sig 365 has an external safety. I don't know how it works or what it blocks and generally find it superfluous.

 

[dusty3030]

Thinking about after I posted a moment ago the "classic" striker fired pistols (Colt Vest Pocket, Browning Baby) do not have a firing pin blocking safety but instead are single action with a sear blocking type.
All of the inexpensive pocket pistols that have followed (Raven, Bryco, Cobra, Jennings etc.) are the same way, no striker blocking safety. The Hi Point falls into this category as well, no firing pin block either.

 

[1sailor]

Plastic striker fire pistols do have some advantages on their side but safety doesn't appear to be one. There's a reason it's called "Glock leg". I'm wondering how the military is going to do with their new Sigs. It's similar to carrying a revolver with the hammer cocked and saying that the transfer bar makes it safe to carry that way. On the other hand they are lighter, thinner, and easier to clean. They also do not offer second strike capability. If it goes "click" you have to rack the slide as opposed to just pulling the trigger again. According to CZ-USA a second strike works over 80% of the time. I see a LOT of guys on youtube etc recommending them for carry but they usually fail to mention that it takes a while to build all that muscle memory for clearing a jamb etc. One of the big selling points on the new wonder pistols is that they carry so many rounds compared to revolvers. While having more rounds can't hurt I believe that far too many guys who carry picture themselves being involved in a protracted fire fight and arming themselves in that fashion.

 

[mikerjf]

Browning 1910 would be another oldie that DOESN’T have a striker block.

 

[WR Moore]

Somewhere around here I've got a 3 part article from the Washington Post on DCs experience with Glocks. In the 14 years (at the time) they'd had Glocks, they'd averaged 1 ND per month. Don't recall when the article was written, but I expect the trend continued. I would postulate that Glock leads the universe in NDs.

That said, and while deplorable, the emphasis needs to be on the NEGLIGENT. If some one's trigger digit (or foreign object) wasn't where it wasn't supposed to be, the ND would not have happened. If the trigger is operated, the striker block/plunger will not prevent firing.

As Ron White has often noted: "You can't fix stupid."

As for the concerns noted in post 5, M&P40s were our issue sidearm from 2006 on. We shot them a lot and they stood up very well. I retired in 2015 and the only issue with my personal sidearm was a take down lever that broke off, apparently during qualification as I noticed it in while cleaning afterward. Quick parts change and it soldiered on. The only things done to the pistols were the factory suggested parts changes at the correct intervals.

 

[CB3]

A striker (not hammer) in a modern striker-fired pistol is blocked from touching the primer by a substantial hunk of metal (variously called a striker safety; striker block; firing pin safety, etc.) that will not allow the striker to pass by it unless the trigger is pulled moving that safety out of the way.

A trigger connector bar of some type generally must:

1. Finish cocking the striker
2. Then release the striker from the sear mechanism AND
3. Simultaneously push the striker safety block completely out of the way

so that

The striker can hit the primer.

Partially pulling the trigger will not deactivate all three safeties.

The trigger itself on many designs requires a certain pull generally with a finger to defeat a built in mechanical safety, adding a fourth safety.

Some striker fired guns have external manual safeties, adding a fifth safety for those who feel they need it.

Keep the loaded gun in a modern, safe holster that fits and retains that particular gun and which protects the trigger from being pulled while in the holster and you have a sixth safety, if you are competent enough to holster carefully and safely.

Modern striker fired guns do not magically, mechanically or spontaneously fire themselves. Believe it or not, the manufacturers design them that way, at least in part to avoid lawsuits. They are safe when used by competent shooters.

Are there negligent discharges with such a gun? There sure are. More than other mechanical actions? Probably, but that’s not the fault of the design of the gun as much as it is the failure of the person to use it correctly. Striker fired guns do not spontaneously fire themselves, even if one (or maybe even two) safety device fails.

Long, heavy double action trigger pulls have long been a basic, simple type of safety on handguns of all designs. They also usually make the gun harder to shoot accurately. They are slower to reset. They can be harder to shoot fast and accurately in a defensive situation. Remembering to swipe off a mechanical safety has long been the bane of many defensive shooters. Ask any instructor.

The DA/SA semi-auto, hammer fired, was a step in between a revolver and a full striker fired gun. It has numerous redundant safeties built in also, in addition to some of the worst OEM DA first pulls ever invented.

The simple DA pull of a defensive revolver is historic, old and reliable. It has worked just fine for 164 years.

The commercially successful modern striker fired pistol was designed about 35 years ago to overcome these challenges, safely. For those who choose not to use them, fine. Just don’t make the decision based on a lack of understanding of their mechanical safety. It’s a software problem, not a hardware problem. Modern shooters may want to adapt to modern equipment. There are advantages.

RE: The video above. Dude’s t-shirt got caught in the trigger because he didn’t clear the path. When the gun didn’t seat properly in the holster he didn’t stop and check it, he just covered it with his polo shirt. That’s two major holstering mistakes. He already had the trigger partially pulled. He bent over and pushed the grip down, finishing pulling the trigger. The gun worked as it was designed. Software, not hardware.

 

[Kanewpadle]

The Sig M17's also have an external safety which certainly helps make them safer. There is a reason the military wanted it that way.

You can get a DA/SA semi-auto pistol with just as much ammo capacity as any striker out there. In fact, the FN's and CZ's in DA/SA have some of the highest capacity magazines available save for the 33 round Glock's.

You got prove of that decision? If the military wanted a Glock with an external safety all they had to do was ask.

 

[kbm6893]

Glock submitted a gun with a safety for the military trials. It still didn’t get the bid. And I wouldn’t be shocked at all if the new Sig’s are gonna be carried empty chamber. Safety or not.

 

[Kanewpadle]

Sure, and lets see how safe that striker system sans no external safety 20 or 30 years later after long term use and abuse. All mechanical devices age, wear out and break down and I'd rather not have a gun with a striker fully cocked and being held back by a tiny piece of metal if and when that occurs.

DA/SA's have came a long way since the old Walther PP's and Polish Radom P64 pistols. The trigger on my CZ-75 P-01 is superior to ANY striker pistol I've ever owned. In fact, if you go around the various gun blogs and forums it won't take you long to find people complaining about the "spongy, crappy" triggers that most strikers possess.

And it STILL works. I challenge you to find any recent accidental shooting injuries or deaths that have occurred where a modern DAO revolver was involved. You'll be searching for a long time.

Here ya go. See pages 40-43.
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/146193NCJRS.pdf

 

[Kanewpadle]

Huh? The military didn't choose Glock, they choose Sig. This may have had nothing to do with the external safety issue but for other reasons although I have heard that Glock was not willing to alter their basic design for whatever reason.

How do I know the Military wanted it that way? Well, considering that scant few commercially sold Sig P320's have external safeties and ALL M17 variants have them and so did the Beretta M9's before them and so did the 1911's before them then it doesn't take rocket science to figure out that maybe, just maybe, that it is a military requirement.

“May have” or “ I heard” or “maybe”. All conjecture or opinion. No proof.

That’s my point.

 

[okiegtrider]

You got prove of that decision? If the military wanted a Glock with an external safety all they had to do was ask.

If I'm remembering right, Glock did submit one with an external safety to the military.

 

[oldiegoldie]

Despite being lambasted and chastised for my opinions concerning strikers I fully agree which is why I no longer own any. Let me be clear, I don't have as much a problem with strikers that have a back up external safety, it's the ones that don't I take issue with.

What concerns me most with these pistols is how they will hold up down the road, years and decades later after use and abuse. All you have there is a little piece of metal holding back that hammer. Like all mechanical devices, things wear out over time and what's to say that a hard enough bump or jar won't set that thing off some day and Murphy says these things tend to happen at the worst possible moments. With an external safety you at least have a secondary back up in case the primary fails. If you don't like the safety, don't use it, I don't see why it's a big deal. Nobody questions why long guns have safeties so why is it such a problem with semi-autos?

While I don't have any statistics to back me up I've no doubt that a majority of accidental and negligent discharges involving injury and death happen with these type of pistols. You can counter that argument by saying "yeah, but that's because they are the most popular and best selling pistols so of course there will be more accidental shootings with them" but that doesn't change the fact that there are simply more safer designs out there. Replace all those strikers with DA/SA semi-autos or revolvers and I'll bet many of those accidents would not have happened.

I believe the DA/SA to be the safest platform in a semi-auto available and if I were to carry a semi-auto these would be it. I am not alone in my sentiments as I've noticed that some knowledgeable experts in the field are beginning to return to these type of pistols. These usually have a safety/decocker or both and can be carried in multiple ways including hammer down so there is no possibly of that hammer ever slipping over time. Like a DAO revolver, it's heavier trigger pull acts as a safety itself and if you want to be even more safe you can activate the external safety. You can rest your thumb over the hammer on holstering and if you feel that hammer come back at all you know there's a problem and you can stop, not so with a striker sans external safety and people have shot themselves upon holstering these guns as this poor fellow carrying a Glock via appendix carry found out: VIDEO: Holstered Pistol Discharges... Negligent or Accident? - The Truth About Guns

agree whole heartily and no, it's not a popular opinion on most handgun forums. the 9mm pistol that i believe to be the gold standard for safety is the Sig P250 sc [discontinued]. it is DAO and has a trigger pull of 6.5-7#, smooth and not a long pull. 12+1 and weighs 24 oz unloaded. it has the advantage of having a .22 available in the the same configuration, though it's full size. a 15 round mag is available for the P250sc. expect very few to agree with my opinion.

 

[ContinentalOp]

Um, yeah, thanks for that really old info of accidental shootings involving Glocks.

You probably should've read it before posting your response. I'll point out a few things I was able to pick up on a quick skim. Hopefully I didn't miss anything obvious.

First, Glocks did not become standard issue until 1993. During the time of this report, 514 Glocks had been issued to specific personnel as part of a pilot program.

Out of 47 accidental discharges (the report's terminology), 4 involved Glocks. There were a few involving perpetrators' guns. Some involved struggling with perpetrators. Out of those, I counted 26 accidental discharges due to unsafe handling of officers' guns. If we assume all of the Glock accidental discharges were included in these 26, that means 22 involved DA revolvers. [As an aside, NYPD was issuing DAO revolvers, but there may have been some DA/SA revolvers grandfathered in.] I actually tried finding personnel numbers for 1992 so I could work out some percentages for a comparison between revolvers and Glocks, but couldn't find any and gave up as I already ended up spending more time on this than I originally intended to.

 

[Rustyt1953]

This falls into: "buy what you like and let others do the same".

 

[uncleted327]

I had to stop reading to save my sanity. I have NEVER heard of someone having a striker fired gun discharge on it's own without the trigger being pulled because the striker block failed and the striker released on it's own. If you only feel comfortable with an external safety that's your choice. But let's stop trying to sell the ridiculous "yeah but" and "what if" scenarios that you are trying to use to justify your misconceptions to everyone else.

 

[Hank496]

I had to stop reading to save my sanity. I have NEVER heard of someone having a striker fired gun discharge on it's own without the trigger being pulled because the striker block failed and the striker released on it's own. If you only feel comfortable with an external safety that's your choice. But let's stop trying to sell the ridiculous "yeah but" and "what if" scenarios that you are trying to use to justify your misconceptions to everyone else.

Uh, I have to disagree. Sig currently has a “voluntary upgrade” program to modify the early P320 FCU and slides to prevent unintended discharges when dropped. This program covers both thumb safety and non safety versions.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

 

[mikerjf]

I’ve heard of a 1910 Browning discharging while in a coat pocket hanging in the closet... the catch on the striker itself failed.

No firing pin safety, of course, and that would have prevented this one.

 

[dusty3030]

Uh, I have to disagree. Sig currently has a “voluntary upgrade” program to modify the early P320 FCU and slides to prevent unintended discharges when dropped. This program covers both thumb safety and non safety versions.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

In the case of the Sig the trigger is being pulled, by momentum, when dropped muzzle up. The pistol hits the floor and stops but the trigger has enough energy to keep moving and fire the gun. Why Sig didn't use a tabbed type (Glock) or hinged type (S&W) trigger I don't know. That is what the tab on a Glock trigger and hinge on a S&W MP trigger is for, to keep the trigger from coming back if it is dropped on it's butt end.