Why Not Have A Safety On An M+P ?

That was because there was a round chambered and they pulled the trigger. Again .. trigger discipline has to be properly taught and maintained through practice.

The consistent implication through out this thread by the "safety is required" group has been that a safety will prevent such situations. It will not, hence my last sentence. The operators in both cases placed their faith in a mechanical device instead of the biological weapon safety and somebody else paid the price.
 
The consistent implication through out this thread by the "safety is required" group has been that a safety will prevent such situations. It will not, hence my last sentence. The operators in both cases placed their faith in a mechanical device instead of the biological weapon safety and somebody else paid the price.

Not required, just preferred...
 
The consistent implication through out this thread by the "safety is required" group has been that a safety will prevent such situations. It will not, hence my last sentence. The operators in both cases placed their faith in a mechanical device instead of the biological weapon safety and somebody else paid the price.

Exactly!

The safety cannot be depended on. In Silversmok3's instance the safety worked and did what it was supposed to do. In MANY other instances, the safety created a false sense of security and someone made a mistake that killed or hurt someone.

I don't care if you have a safety or not. Either way, you always treat a gun the same way. It doesn't matter if it has a safety. The safety affords you no special privileges at all. You can't do anything different if your gun has a safety. Nothing.

Because if you think you can, that's when you are dangerous.
 
Exactly!

The safety cannot be depended on. In Silversmok3's instance the safety worked and did what it was supposed to do. In MANY other instances, the safety created a false sense of security and someone made a mistake that killed or hurt someone.

I don't care if you have a safety or not. Either way, you always treat a gun the same way. It doesn't matter if it has a safety. The safety affords you no special privileges at all. You can't do anything different if your gun has a safety. Nothing.

Because if you think you can, that's when you are dangerous.
Exactly, and if a proper holster is used that protects the trigger guard, not some cheap piece of junk that can easily break, you will be better served and safer = your brain + proper gear and practice. How many times when I meet with guys to practice and they take their *carry gun* from a box, not their holster that is on their belts/their sides. And they never practice draw and fire. How is that safe?
 
Why Not Have A Safety On An M+P ?

Because it isn't necessary, I don't want one, don't like them and don't want one on any carry gun.
 
Thank God they make them with and without. Personally, a trained LE officer, can carry a pistol in a holster without a safety and is probably better off for it.
 
So Im gonna take my rifles / AR's carry guns etc. and duct tape my safeties hot.Let ya know how it goes.
 
There are Officers whose lives have been saved because their gun had an engaged safety when it was lost to a criminal. Maybe we should ask these Officers what they think about safeties.
 
People should get what they want, and it's nice that the M&P gives you the option. Other companies should follow suit. What irks me about the whole safety debate is the "my safety is between my ears" crowd. It's the absolute height of arrogance to feel supremely confident that you will NEVER have a brain fart and screw up, when professional soldiers, cops, and shooters have had one. The fact is that many of these "my safety is between my ears" crowd are young or otherwise inexperienced shooters who are simply repeating what they have heard others say. Take a visiit to a local shooting range and tell me you don;t see unsafe gun handlers. if you wanna shoot yourself in the leg, have fun. But when your rounds are coming in my direction, I have a problem. And the fact is that the MAJORITY of shooters take a quick class, buy a gun, shoot a box or two, and call it done. If you're going to excercise your right to carry a weapon, you owe it to yourself and the rest of us to diligently train in it's use, and if practicing to take a safety off is too much trouble (especially when it costs you nothing and can be done in your bedroom), then maybe you should just get some pepper spray. I can wash cayenne pepper out of my eyes.
 
People should get what they want, and it's nice that the M&P gives you the option. Other companies should follow suit. What irks me about the whole safety debate is the "my safety is between my ears" crowd. It's the absolute height of arrogance to feel supremely confident that you will NEVER have a brain fart and screw up, when professional soldiers, cops, and shooters have had one. The fact is that many of these "my safety is between my ears" crowd are young or otherwise inexperienced shooters who are simply repeating what they have heard others say. Take a visiit to a local shooting range and tell me you don;t see unsafe gun handlers. if you wanna shoot yourself in the leg, have fun. But when your rounds are coming in my direction, I have a problem. And the fact is that the MAJORITY of shooters take a quick class, buy a gun, shoot a box or two, and call it done. If you're going to excercise your right to carry a weapon, you owe it to yourself and the rest of us to diligently train in it's use, and if practicing to take a safety off is too much trouble (especially when it costs you nothing and can be done in your bedroom), then maybe you should just get some pepper spray. I can wash cayenne pepper out of my eyes.

Not arrogance .. confidence with proper training and practice, and faith with proper equipment. I don't go to *local indoor ranges* I am not responsible for what others do .. just myself, and I do not want someone else mandating safties on my guns because you and others think it should be that way. You do what you want. You feel unsafe at your range, then go somewhere else.
 
Last edited:
I think it is up to an individual to choose to have a safety unless mandated by your Dept. If I were to carry a pistol today on duty, I would want a safety but I think it should be a choice. I carry a revolver now, most of the time concealed; a different situation entirely.
 
Not arrogance .. confidence with proper training and practice, and faith with proper equipment. I don't go to *local indoor ranges* I am not responsible for what others do .. just myself, and I do not want someone else mandating safties on my guns because you and others think it should be that way. You do what you want. You feel unsafe at your range, then go somewhere else.

I'm confident when I drive, but I still wear my seatbelt and I'm glad I have an airbag, and it'd not just for the other drivers. I'd wear my seatbelt if I was the only driver on he road. And every range I have ever been to has unsafe shooters at it.
 
I'm confident when I drive, but I still wear my seatbelt and I'm glad I have an airbag, and it'd not just for the other drivers. I'd wear my seatbelt if I was the only driver on he road. And every range I have ever been to has unsafe shooters at it.

It should be a choice, and not dictated by anyone, nor the government.

BTW .. those airbags have gone off when they should not have and caused bodily injury. That happened to a former manager of mine some years ago. She sustained more injuries than her car sustained damage in a simple fender bender. Maybe you are being a bit too paranoid ?
 
I'm confident when I drive, but I still wear my seatbelt and I'm glad I have an airbag, and it'd not just for the other drivers. I'd wear my seatbelt if I was the only driver on he road. And every range I have ever been to has unsafe shooters at it.

Another apples/oranges argument. You can be the only one on the road and a very safe/competent driver. Being a mechanical device things to break on automobiles which can, through no fault of the operator, cause the vehicle to leave the roadway and crash possibly causing fatal injuries to an unrestrained driver.

On a side note, LEOs and Soldiers are a subset of the general population. Yes, there are members of both occupations that have no business handling deadly weapons (Been an instructor of both groups). They are in the minority BUT are the ones that garner the most attention especially in the press when something goes wrong. You seldom hear reports on the news of soldiers/LEOs doing their job properly.



Ok with this I'm done.

I have noticed two firearm related topics of late which cause the participants on both sides to display extreme closed mindedness and an almost religious fanaticism. The 41/44 mag debate and the debate on the necessity of safeties on modern striker fired semi automatic handguns. In light of this I have decided to just go straight to the creationism versus evolution discussions and let you fanatics on both sides these two issues have at it.
 
Last edited:
..... What irks me about the whole safety debate is the "my safety is between my ears" crowd. It's the absolute height of arrogance to feel supremely confident that you will NEVER have a brain fart and screw up, when professional soldiers, cops, and shooters have had one. .....

You misunderstand what we are saying.

Having a safety DOES NOT guarantee you will not have an accident! And sometimes safeties can cause a person to ignore the most basic gun safety rules. A lot of people have been shot by someone who said "I thought the safety was on". Safety or not, you shouldn't be pointing the gun at someone!

The only way to truly be safe is to follow safe gun handling techniques and that is done by the person holding the gun.
 
IMO a safety can give one a false sence of security. "I don't have to watch were I point my muzzle, it has a safety." "I can practice my fast draw in front of the mirror with a loaded gun, it has a safety." "It's okay to just rest my finger on the trigger, it has a safety." " I can carry my gun in my pocket with my car keys, it has a safety." "I can just toss my gun in my glove box/sock drawer/purse, it has a safety."

Treat every gun as if it were loaded, always. Never rely on mechanical safeties.

It's not that I think safeties are bad, I just do not put my faith in them and do not advocate that others do either.

There are no accidents. There are either mechanical failures or failures in judgement.
 
Professional shooters have "faluires in judgement" and let rounds go when they shouldn't. If it can happen to them it can happen to anybody. A safety is not a license to act like an unsafe idiot, but it is an extra layer of security that can save a life. There are very few cases of a safety causing a death or injury, and many cases of them saving lives. If you train to disengage on the draw, the safety is a non-issue that only comes with benefits. Some people can't be bothered with that, though. Those are the ones who scare me.
 
You misunderstand what we are saying.

Having a safety DOES NOT guarantee you will not have an accident! And sometimes safeties can cause a person to ignore the most basic gun safety rules. A lot of people have been shot by someone who said "I thought the safety was on". Safety or not, you shouldn't be pointing the gun at someone!

The only way to truly be safe is to follow safe gun handling techniques and that is done by the person holding the gun.

Never said it guarentees you won't have an accident. Just saying it greatly lessens the chance. If you pull the trigger because you think it's safe because the safety is on, you're a moron who should not carry a weapon. You can't deny that there ARE accidental discharges, and MANY of them could be prevented with a manual safety. Look at the Glock. You have to pull the trigger to disassemble it! Stupid.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top