Poll for those who carry an automatic, either open or concealed

[NavyLCDR]

The chambered choice begs the question. The only semi-auto I would carry with one in the chamber is one that has a hammer and a firing pin block safety.

The majority of accidental discharges with semi-autos seem to occur with striker fired pistols that rely upon trigger pull distance to prevent accidental firing.

There is no difference between a hammer fired pistol with a firing pin block safety and a striker fired pistol. Both of them will discharge when the trigger is pulled fully to the rear - which is the cause of the vast majority of negligent discharges. Striker fired pistols also have internal safeties designed to keep the gun from firing unless the trigger is pulled fully to the rear.

For example, the gun that I carry:
http://www.gunblast.com/Taurus-PT145.htm

The Millennium Pro has several built-in safety features. It is of a double action striker fired design, and has an internal firing pin block that prevents the gun from firing unless the trigger is pulled. This is the primary safety, and all that is necessary. However, in addition to that, the gun has a manual thumb safety that is easily accessible to a right-handed shooter, if he so chooses to engage that safety mechanism.

BTW, for the poll - PT-145 loaded 10+1 safety off in Fobus paddle holster.

 

[r1derbike]

"Poll for those who carry an automatic, either open or concealed"

Look. Your title says automatic, not semi-automatic. It also doesn't say semi-automatic with external safety and hammer, or striker fired, with external safety, or external safety with internal hammer, or other oddball designs.

You get to your poll, and find the cocked-and-locked description, which implies external hammer cocked and external safety, slide locked per 1911 jargon.

Loosen your BVDs a few notches. Get your blood pressure under control, man. You're going to have an aneurysm at your age.

 

[TrapperBob]

its a simple poll.. You look at the two options.. if neither fit your style, you don't vote...I made it simple for a reason... there are just too many people in this forum that like to make things difficult. You posted this as if after 70 years of life and 50 years of weapons carry experience, that I did not know that. I made it simple and you still could not get it right....

Ok, I almost never directly criticize people's posts, but since you seem to be hell bent on taking everything as a personal insult, I'll make an exception, so let me say specifically that my post was not intended to be an attack on you or your poll, but simply to point out, politely and with no insult (unless you choose to be insulted, which I have no control over), that there are other possibilities that perhaps you should consider. If ALL you were interested in was those specific conditions of carry, a simple "other" choice would have solved the whole problem. To be very blunt, your poll was very poorly designed, regardless of what information you were looking for, and despite that fact it was a single question. You are not unique in that aspect, many polls are poorly designed. Although it is a bit impressive that you managed to have a one question poll that is so poorly designed.

As for the fact that you are 70 years old with 50 years of carry experience;
1) How the heck are we supposed to KNOW that from your original post?
2) Why does it matter? it is completely and totally irrelevant to the poll, or my reply.
3) It doesn't change the fact that your poll is very poorly designed.

And judging from your venomous responses from the start, you seem to have anger management issues, so perhaps you should consider not carrying a gun.

 

[Eidolon]

Look. Your title says automatic, not semi-automatic.

Well Hell, then I want an M3 with the bolt pulled backl

 

[ET]

Ok, I almost never directly criticize people's posts, but since you seem to be hell bent on taking everything as a personal insult, I'll make an exception, so let me say specifically that my post was not intended to be an attack on you or your poll, but simply to point out, politely and with no insult (unless you choose to be insulted, which I have no control over), that there are other possibilities that perhaps you should consider. If ALL you were interested in was those specific conditions of carry, a simple "other" choice would have solved the whole problem. To be very blunt, your poll was very poorly designed, regardless of what information you were looking for, and despite that fact it was a single question. You are not unique in that aspect, many polls are poorly designed. Although it is a bit impressive that you managed to have a one question poll that is so poorly designed.

As for the fact that you are 70 years old with 50 years of carry experience;
1) How the heck are we supposed to KNOW that from your original post?
2) Why does it matter? it is completely and totally irrelevant to the poll, or my reply.
3) It doesn't change the fact that your poll is very poorly designed.

And judging from your venomous responses from the start, you seem to have anger management issues, so perhaps you should consider not carrying a gun.

Let me see... two options, do either apply to you? No? then don't vote..
The poll was designed for those who have the choice of carrying cocked and locked, or un-chambered.. I carry my 1911 cocked and locked , and wanted to know if others also carry this way or un-chambered.
I could not make it any simpler.. but then I find that there are way too many simple minded people in this forum that cant even understand that..
Poorly constructed indeed..... the fact is you don't have the ability to understand something so basically simple, that the only way your can respond is by trying to trash a very simple mined poll. I tried to dumb is down but obviously there is a much higher level of dummy in this forum. I don't care about unrelated weapons users or revolver users... so why even mention it...
the thread has 45 posts.... the poll has 43 responses. So obviously some people get it.....

 

[Firefighterchen]

The boys club is growing so fast.

Sent from my D6616 using USA Carry mobile app

 

[Bikenut]

Let me see... two options, do either apply to you? No? then don't vote..
The poll was designed for those who have the choice of carrying cocked and locked, or un-chambered.. I carry my 1911 cocked and locked , and wanted to know if others also carry this way or un-chambered.
I could not make it any simpler.. but then I find that there are way too many simple minded people in this forum that cant even understand that..
Poorly constructed indeed..... the fact is you don't have the ability to understand something so basically simple, that the only way your can respond is by trying to trash a very simple mined poll. I tried to dumb is down but obviously there is a much higher level of dummy in this forum. I don't care about unrelated weapons users or revolver users... so why even mention it...
the thread has 45 posts.... the poll has 43 responses. So obviously some people get it.....

Had you structured your poll to ask something along the lines of:

If you carry a 1911 style pistol do you carry unchambered or cocked and locked?

Then you would have gotten responses from those who carry a 1911 style pistol...

As for dumbing down the poll..... yeah, you did make it a dumb poll when you didn't take the time to be specific as to what you were asking.

 

[r1derbike]

The poll was designed for those who have the choice of carrying cocked and locked, or un-chambered.. I carry my 1911 cocked and locked

Had you included the above in your poll title or body as written, there would have been ample information on where you were going with it, instead of confusion, and replies echoing that confusion, and of course the admonitions to use search for other threads already covering this. Some users here provided you with multiple links of like subject matter, which took a bit of time on their part, but what they intended was to help you in future polls. Search is your friend.

What you wrote above would have made the poll simple for everybody. There is no dumbing-down a poll, only providing enough information that pollsters may make an educated decision given the choices.

Congratulations on making the above statement. I hope your future polls are not so ill conceived.

 

[JimTh]

Well just to correct the OP's title...I don't carry an automatic in any condition. Usually I carry a semi automatic. Its condition is sometimes dirty but functional, some are more used than others or BNIB. Does that count?

 

[BluesStringer]

 

[Jones0430]

Not trying to be a jerk... I honestly am curious...

Do you have cites and/or links to studies that support your statement that a majority of accidental discharges with semi autos occur with striker fired pistols that rely on trigger pull distance?

While I don't believe in the concept of "accidental discharges" because any unwanted discharge can be traced back to some human negligence from design to materials to inattention to foolishness to just plain screwing up....

I really am curious to see the actual numbers comparing striker fired NDs to any other type of pistol... even including revolvers if those stats are available.

I have looked and looked. There are no statistics available. Most statistics concern rifles and hunting accidents. However there is a lot of anecdotal evidence available. Most of it from news reports on law enforcement negligent discharges. Many, if not most law enforcement agencies are armed with Glocks or something similar. There are those who are not.

I do know that at least one federal agency (FBI) had reservations about the Glock for this reason. I also am aware that a federal training center has banned Blackhawk SERPA holster because of the probability of a negligent discharge upon drawing the weapon with a striker fired pistol. I believe Tex Grebner was using a Blackhawk holster in his infamous self-inflicted wounding, as well as carrying a Glock.

While a striker fired pistol doesn't necessarily garauntee an ND, they seem to be more inclined than say a Beretta 92FS.

For background, an ND that we are discussing involves the placing of the finger on the trigger, inadvertently, and pulling the trigger, inadvertently. Since there is no mechanical safety blocking the hammer/striker, the trigger gets pulled and the pistol discharges.

From Wikipedia, the discription of a negligent discharge:

A second common cause of accidental discharges is when the gun-handler places his finger on the trigger before he has decided to shoot. With the finger so positioned, many activities may cause the finger to compress the trigger unintentionally. For example, if one attempts to holster the firearm with finger on trigger, the holster edge will drive the finger onto the trigger, and discharge is likely. If one stumbles or struggles (with an adversary) with finger on trigger, the grasping motion of both hands will likely cause the trigger finger to compress the trigger.

With a mechanical safety blocking travel of the firiing pin, or contact by the hammer on the firing pin, the unintentional trigger pull will usually result in no discharge. Not so with a stiker fired, trigger safety pistol like the Glock.

 

[NavyLCDR]

While a striker fired pistol doesn't necessarily garauntee an ND, they seem to be more inclined than say a Beretta 92FS.

For background, an ND that we are discussing involves the placing of the finger on the trigger, inadvertently, and pulling the trigger, inadvertently. Since there is no mechanical safety blocking the hammer/striker, the trigger gets pulled and the pistol discharges.

With a mechanical safety blocking travel of the firiing pin, or contact by the hammer on the firing pin, the unintentional trigger pull will usually result in no discharge. Not so with a stiker fired, trigger safety pistol like the Glock.

Tell you what - take a 92FS and pull the trigger and try to release it before the hammer falls against the firing pin to discharge the gun....tell us what percentage of the time the trigger reset and firing pin block engagement will beat the hammer fall.

If you need to have a manual safety to keep you from pulling the trigger to the rear when you don't intend to, then buy a gun with a manual safety. People just love to blame all kinds of mechanical/design reasons to blame the discharge on that results from them pulling the trigger.

 

[bofh]

I believe Tex Grebner was using a Blackhawk holster in his infamous self-inflicted wounding, as well as carrying a Glock.

Wrong. Tex Grebner was using a Kimber Pro Carry II 1911 .45 ACP. Now, how did that happen? He disengaged the manual safety and then pulled the trigger. He explains the details in this video:

 

[Bikenut]

I have looked and looked. There are no statistics available. Most statistics concern rifles and hunting accidents. However there is a lot of anecdotal evidence available. Most of it from news reports on law enforcement negligent discharges. Many, if not most law enforcement agencies are armed with Glocks or something similar. There are those who are not.

I do know that at least one federal agency (FBI) had reservations about the Glock for this reason. I also am aware that a federal training center has banned Blackhawk SERPA holster because of the probability of a negligent discharge upon drawing the weapon with a striker fired pistol. I believe Tex Grebner was using a Blackhawk holster in his infamous self-inflicted wounding, as well as carrying a Glock.

While a striker fired pistol doesn't necessarily garauntee an ND, they seem to be more inclined than say a Beretta 92FS.

For background, an ND that we are discussing involves the placing of the finger on the trigger, inadvertently, and pulling the trigger, inadvertently. Since there is no mechanical safety blocking the hammer/striker, the trigger gets pulled and the pistol discharges.

From Wikipedia, the discription of a negligent discharge:

A second common cause of accidental discharges is when the gun-handler places his finger on the trigger before he has decided to shoot. With the finger so positioned, many activities may cause the finger to compress the trigger unintentionally. For example, if one attempts to holster the firearm with finger on trigger, the holster edge will drive the finger onto the trigger, and discharge is likely. If one stumbles or struggles (with an adversary) with finger on trigger, the grasping motion of both hands will likely cause the trigger finger to compress the trigger.

With a mechanical safety blocking travel of the firiing pin, or contact by the hammer on the firing pin, the unintentional trigger pull will usually result in no discharge. Not so with a stiker fired, trigger safety pistol like the Glock.

Thank you for looking for stats. Many folks make statements and when politely asked for cites and/or links to back up their statements all that is heard is the deafening sound of crickets. It might not mean much but you have gained much respect in my eyes.

I'm (speaking only for myself) still not convinced that a striker fired pistol is inherently more dangerous, or perhaps I should say more prone to being handled in an unsafe manner that could cause an ND, than any other design simply because there are a plethora of revolvers out there that don't have an external safety and some striker fired pistols have a long and somewhat heavy trigger pull just like a revolver does.

And the WIKI quote in your post doesn't address any specific design of pistol but only mentions having a finger on the trigger causing the trigger to be pulled unintentionally... which also could happen with a revolver, a striker fired pistol with a long trigger pull, and any pistol with a mechanical safety that was neglected to be put on "safe" or has been intentionally taken off "safe" (which presumably would be the case during a struggle).

By the way.. that WIKI quote mentioned that the finger on the trigger is the ....second.... common cause of an accidental discharge (really an ND) so I'm curious.. what was considered the first cause?

While I understand that a striker fired pistol with the only external safety being the one in the trigger might cause concern for folks who are not confident in their ability to keep their booger hook off the bang switch the problem really isn't the lack of a traditional external safety.. the problem is folks negligently putting their fingers on the trigger before it is necessary to shoot causing an ND... and all firearms share that danger.

Actually, I personally think (just me again) that learning to rely on a traditional external safety could cause a false sense of security leading to an ND thinking the safety is "on" when it isn't. Again, the problem would be a finger on the trigger... traditional safety or not.

And I suspect there aren't any stats out there concerning how many NDs occurred with pistols that had a traditional external safety making a factual comparison a bit difficult.

To all... I apologize for the length of my post.

 

[the dark]

Carry an automatic? Really?

 

[NavyLCDR]

Carry an automatic? Really?

Link Removed

Automatic Pistol
A term used often to describe what is actually a semi-automatic pistol. It is, technically, a misnomer but a near-century of use has legitimized it, and its use confuses only the novice.

 

[JimTh]

Link Removed

The problem is that the gun grabbers are using that term, "automatic" and having the public think we are running around with machine guns. So what we need to do is get people that purport to be non-novices to use the correct terms or Piers Morgan may rise from the grave again.

 

[NavyLCDR]

The problem is that the gun grabbers are using that term, "automatic" and having the public think we are running around with machine guns. So what we need to do is get people that purport to be non-novices to use the correct terms or Piers Morgan may rise from the grave again.

Well, mark the date on the calendar...I might have actually agreed with one of your posts.

 

[Jones0430]

@ Bikenut,

The first reason listed from Wikipedia follows

Accidental discharge is the event of a firearm discharging (firing) at a time not intended by the user. Perhaps most commonly, accidental discharges (sometimes called ADs by military and police personnel and referred to as negligent discharges by several armies) occur when the trigger of the firearm is deliberately pulled for a purpose other than shooting—dry-fire practice, demonstration, or function testing—but ammunition is negligently left in the chamber.[1] Unintentionally leaving a firearm loaded is more likely to occur when the individual handling the gun is poorly trained, and perhaps also with removable-magazine-fed firearms (as the magazine may be removed, giving an unloaded appearance even when a round remains chambered—

I did run across a news article that mentioned that prior to switching from revolvers to Glocks, the NYPD had significantly fewer NDs. Training was listed as a prime cause. A gun blogger mentioned that police are not particularly well trained in arms, and their lack of training combined with complacency because they continually wear their firearms makes for a combination where NDs are more likely.

 

[JimTh]

Well, mark the date on the calendar...I might have actually agreed with one of your posts.

Hey...one for me. It just means you are becoming wiser grasshopper.