To "safety" or not?

[Arete]

I think that it's because if the weapon system has a safety on it, you should use it. Some don't, so you don't.

Especially if it's ergonomic.

Been quite a few MP5 users who had NDs due to running safety off, because apparently American thumbs are shorter than German thumbs and they didn't make the safety long enough to be ergonomic. Including one here locally that occurred during service of a high risk search warrant. Big pucker factor for everyone when that happened, especially for the guys who were not in the room when the LEO who had the ND, they were left wondering if it was the start of a gunfight, who shot who, etc.

May I ask, what AR and what Glock are you using that have 4 lb triggers?

Just now measured trigger travel and pull weight for a Gen 4 Glock 17 and a Colt 6933.
1/2" travel and ~7.5 lb for the Glock.
1/8" travel and ~6.75 lb for the 6933

I maintain over 100 Glocks and over 50 AR15's, all used for duty, and the trigger travel and weight above are the norm.

 

[user12358]

I think that it's because if the weapon system has a safety on it, you should use it. Some don't, so you don't.

The whole question is why is it considered fine for a striker fired hand gun to not have a safety. We can all agree that modern service weapons, for the most part, don't go off without you pulling the trigger. However, would anyone be fine with an AR not having safety if we put a trigger identical to a Glock trigger in it?

I agree that we should always strive towards making our weapons as safe as possible without compromising employment times, even when people consider it unergonomic such as guys that run MP5s and AKs safety off because it isn't as convenient as an AR.

I don't have a trigger pull guage on me right now but all the SSF and SSA pattern triggers I have used have come right in at around 4 and a half pounds in Semi and the Glocks with, I believe, NP3 minus connectors didn't feel much heavier. I am not nearly as familiar with Glocks as I am other platforms but I was under the impression that was pretty much standard, but I may be completely off base.

As far as travel distances, are you including the fairly long take up before you start to encounter resistance in your 1/2" for the Glock and would you do the same for a P22X in SA considering both of those period are where the firing pin block is being actuated out of the way, it just being much smoother in a P22X? I dug up a stock Glock 23, Gen 3 I believe, and measured the front of the trigger shoe to the frame. Under no load while cocked I got 5/8" and 3/8" when it had been fired giving a 1/4" travel distance.

 

[Ryan St.Jean]

Totally agree with you that you can still pull straight through a long and nasty 13lb DA revolver pull and ND. In the end they are all deadly weapons and every safety feature we add is just trying to make it so they are only dangerous in the precise moment that we consciously chose them to be so.

I guess it all comes down to where you fall on the sliding scale of what you are comfortable with. I personally prefer a P22X style system where I am just as quick to break the first double action shot as I am if I leave it cocked but I have to make a much more deliberate action to set the gun off in DA and I can also place downward pressure on the hammer when holstering (of course, the gadget gives you this same functionality with a Glock). Looking back at it, it seems like the big Glock marketing push of the "safe action" just pushed the Overton window enough that it became acceptable.

Not to derail this thread too much and getting backon the original topic, I actuate the safety every time I raise the rifle up and then flip it off every time I come off the sight and have found no time disadvantage or hindrance to operation in doing so.

One could have an ND with a double action revolver. However I think that DA nds are rarely accidentally/ negligently touching the trigger. That heavy pull gives a lot of wiggle room.

Glock etc all striker fired handguns don’t have that same heavy assed trigger pull safety margin. They also don’t have a physically accessible safety.

Personally I am comfortable moving with a Glock in my hand. I keep my trigger finger indexed and point it in a safe direction.

YMMV

 

[Ryan St.Jean]

May I ask, what AR and what Glock are you using that have 4 lb triggers?

Just now measured trigger travel and pull weight for a Gen 4 Glock 17 and a Colt 6933.
1/2" travel and ~7.5 lb for the Glock.
1/8" travel and ~6.75 lb for the 6933

I maintain over 100 Glocks and over 50 AR15's, all used for duty, and the trigger travel and weight above are the norm.

This is a valid point. Also brings up the danger of installing super light gamer triggers on defensive/ duty guns. That is a really bad idea.

 

[user12358]

This is a valid point. Also brings up the danger of installing super light gamer triggers on defensive/ duty guns. That is a really bad idea.

Do you consider a Geissele SSF a super light gamer trigger or are you just speaking in generalities?

 

[Arete]

Firearms users and especially trainers should also have a working knowledge of studies by Heim and Enoka, relating to trigger finger manipulation and especially what happens under stress. People have had and will continue to have NDs, even with long, heavy triggers.

Application of rule 3 is important, but rule 2 matters a lot, as well.

http://www.forcescience.org/fsnews/3.html

https://www.policeone.com/archive/a...rms-Discharge-Does-the-finger-obey-the-brain/

https://fortress.wa.gov/cjtc/www/im...ifle_Instructor_2014/Section 15 Resources.pdf

 

[BooneGA]

This is a valid point. Also brings up the danger of installing super light gamer triggers on defensive/ duty guns. That is a really bad idea.

Provide examples of which triggers you are talking about and an explanation on why its a bad idea in your opinion. Posts like this aren't useful without expounding.

Thanks,
Rick

 

[user12358]

People have had and will continue to have NDs, even with long, heavy triggers.

This is true but in your first source they state that "In about 6 per cent of cases, enough trigger pressure was registered to have fired the pistol had it been uncocked (that is, mechanically set for an initial double-action trigger pull). In about 20 per cent of cases, the pressure was sufficient to have fired the gun had it been cocked (as with secondary rounds). The gun used had a 12-pound double-action trigger pull and a 5-pound pull, single-action." (Force Science News).

This seems to concretely support that a longer and heavier pull offers a much greater margin of error that gives a noticeable drop in negative outcomes.

 

[Ryan St.Jean]

Provide examples of which triggers you are talking about and an explanation on why its a bad idea in your opinion. Posts like this aren't useful without expounding.

Thanks,
Rick

Trigger examples
Timney drop in AR trigger (specifically in the 3 or 4 pound configuration)

Voguel competition trigger system
http://www.rockyourglock.com/custom/GT-07V.htm when used at a lower setting.

The specific reason for my concern is that the risk of an increased chance of neglogent discharge does not merit the gain in performance in a non gaming setting.

 

[Arete]

@12358 - I concur that a longer heavier trigger can "offer" an added measure of safety, however, experience and also the testing referenced, show that it is far, far from a sure thing. If one has a ND event from overflow, startle, or loss of balance, they are often going to put a lot more than 12-14 lbs of pressure on that trigger, in a split second and the longer travel and pressure isn't going to stop that ND. There are anecdotes about long DA pulls giving guys time to change their mind about shooting, but that's not what we are talking about here. Been plenty of NDs with Beretta M9/92F, as well as Sig DA/SA pistols. Back when cops carried DA revolvers, same thing.

Some of the science behind this . . .

Regarding Sympathetic Contractions
For an average man (20-45 years, 170 lbs, 5ft 10 in), peak handgrip strength is about 125 lbs (Bemben, Massey, Bemben, Misner, & Boileau, 1996). The index finger contributes between 30 to 60% of the force to peak grip strength, depending on the position of the thumb and the width of the grip (Li, Latash, Newell, & Zatsiorsky, 1998; Radhakrishnan & Nagaravindra, 1993; Talsania & Kozin, 1998). Based on an average index finger contribution of 45%, the index finger in opposition with the thumb is capable of exerting 56 lbs of force during a maximal handgrip contraction. Because several studies indicate that a sympathetic contraction in hand muscles can reach 25% of maximum in laboratory settings (Shinohara et al 2003; Zijdewind & Kernell, 2001), a maximal sympathetic contraction would involve an index finger force of about 14 lbs, which is sufficient to overcome most trigger pulls on handguns. This value, however, probably underestimates the actual maximum force that can be achieved by the index finger during field operations due to the modulatory effects of stress on muscle contractions

Regarding Loss of Balance
When balance is disturbed, rapid involuntary contractions are evoked that attempt to return the body to a position of equilibrium. Two features of the strategies used by the nervous system to maintain balance can evoke involuntary contractions in hand muscles.

Regarding Startle Reaction
The reaction in the hands, which occurs less than 200 ms after the stimulus (loud sound), is for the person to make a fist.

In summary,
scientific and clinical observations indicate that there are powerful influences between the limbs of the human body and that these effects are large enough to evoke an involuntary muscle contraction and cause the unintentional discharge of a firearm.

Note that in the Enoka study, the force required to pull a the trigger in the position requiring the most force to overcome it (They state it was cocked) was 56.9 newtons, which converts to 12.8 lbs, and there were 9 "discharges" out of 144 events, whereas with the 22 newton (5 lb) trigger, there were 29 "discharges".

So, a lower rate of NDs (3:1) with the heavier triggers, however, still, far from perfect.



Something else - - - given the extremely high market saturation of striker fired handguns in US LE use, the rate of NDs is quite low. Now, we don't want ND's to occur at all, granted, but increasing the trigger pull does in fact make the guns harder to shoot. I know of a major (400+ LEO) agency that used to issue 96D's. Their officers had great trouble firing the guns accurately. Some of their officers were using 2 fingers to depress the triggers, the problem was so much for them. They went to a mix of 1911s and Glocks, and Voila! Everyone performed better. Furthermore, they had no issues with NDs.

So, where is the balancing act? It depends. NYPD requires a 13 lb trigger on their Glocks. They still have NDs every year, and those guns are much harder to shoot well than the standard Glock trigger.

If a 7 lb striker fired gun is so unsafe, why are there not hundreds of thousands of ND's every year by the estimated 1 million full time US LEOs, the majority of who carry striker fired guns, which lack manual safeties, and who are carrying them at least 2080 hrs each year? That's at least 2,080,000,000 man hours, not counting overtime and off duty, and how many NDs are occurring? Now, granted, a lot of NDs are not reported, but it is very standard LE policy that all NDs, on and off duty, shall be reported, upon pain of discipline, so we know that a lot of them are being reported. Further, NYPD breaks their NDs down by how they occurred.

In 2011 for example (a year chosen at random by me, a year in which they has 36,600 sworn officers) NYPD had a staggering total of 13 "unintentional" discharges: "out of Officers unintentionally discharging their firearms did so in two distinct circumstances—either purely unintentionally (13 incidents), or unintentionally during adversarial conflict (two incidents). Purely unintentional discharges usually occur while the officer is loading, unloading, or otherwise handling the firearm. Unintentional discharges during adversarial conflict occur while the officer is actively engaged in the arrest or apprehension of a subject." http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downlo...ypd_annual_firearms_discharge_report_2011.pdf

In another example, when LASO switched from the 92F to the M&P, they has more NDs. But LAPD didn't. Why? Training. LASO used to teach "on target, on trigger". That's a bad habit, no matter the trigger type.

"In 2012, there were 12 accidental discharges, none involving the M&P. In 2013, there were 18, eight of which were M&Ps. Of the 30 incidents in 2014, 22 involved M&Ps.

Assistant Sheriff Todd Rogers attributed the increase to deputies still adjusting to the lack of a safety on the new gun.
"The vast majority were people trained on the Beretta," Rogers said. "There is a correlation, no doubt about it."

http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-sheriff-guns-20150614-story.html

As a comparison . .. In 2009, LAPD (10,009 sworn) had 12 NDs. 1 with a 870, 1 with a 92F, 2 with revolvers, and 8 with Glocks.
http://assets.lapdonline.org/assets/pdf/2009YearEndReportFinal.pdf

So, it's not just a hardware issue, it's also a software issue, which is why LAPD and LASO had different results after each of them transitioned from the 92F to striker fired pistols.

 

[user12358]

I appreciate the indepth analysis with sources provided. We are definitely in agreement that even the heaviest trigger pulls can only reduce, not eliminate, the hazard of negligent discharge. I also agree that there isn't an epidemic of NDs and that they can be blamed squarely on striker fired handguns and we need to get them off the streets. I ran a Glock for quite a few rounds when starting out with a dot because it was the only platform with an acceptable holster and it never went off when I didn't intend for it to.

I believe that the only true solution is a software fix through proper training. While the heavier DA pull does offer a quantifiable window of safety, there is a lot more practice needed to effectively run a DA/SA gun than a reasonably weighted striker fired pistols (IE no 13lb NYPD trigger). I personally enjoy being able to thumb on the hammer when holstering but the main reason I run DA/SA P22X guns is not overwhelmingly because of safety concerns, I just like that the DA pull lets me have the trigger staged better on my presentation so I can brake it as soon as I get the dot on target and I can have a ridiculously crisp SA pull and very very short reset with the Gray Guns action kit while maintaining what I consider acceptable safety. I was mainly advocating the position of why there is a difference in safety standards between MSF guns and ARs because I thought it was a very good question that people shy away from. I certainly don't have a good answer and wanted to see if anyone else did.

In the end everything comes back to people not having enough training, from having fingers resting on the trigger of handguns, to not running safeties on rifles, to not decocking DA/SA guns, to running stupid heavy triggers, to adding grip safeties. There is no magic bullet hardware solution, despite people always wanting the easy way out. Gear is fine but training is final.

Once again, thanks for the sources and discussion. I haven't seen the full Enoka study before, only references to it, and will try to read through all of it soon.

 

[Arete]

Well said

 

[Ryan St.Jean]

Do you consider a Geissele SSF a super light gamer trigger or are you just speaking in generalities?

There are so many people making aftermarket triggers that some generalization is necessary to facilitate conversation.

I specifically mentioned a 3 or 4 pound Timney AR trigger in another post. That is the range I was speaking about.

Exactly where 3-4lb ‘unsafe and a bad idea’ bleeds into a grey area of ‘if you know what you are doing’ on the way to the standard 6-8lb AR/ Glock trigger is a valid question. In my opinion the 4.5-5.5lb Giselle and comparable triggers fall into that grey area. For the right person they could be safe and offer increased performance. Clearly SOCOM, who has some smart experienced people, thought they were worth using. At the same time you don’t see big army buying them.

 

[user12358]

At the same time you don’t see big army buying them.

Do you consider that a factor of cost or do you think big Army looked at them and decided they were unsafe?

 

[Ryan St.Jean]

Do you consider that a factor of cost or do you think big Army looked at them and decided they were unsafe?

This is an almost wild guess. I am an active duty officer but not involved in our weapons procurement process.

1- They didn’t even think about it. For a huge organization focused on revitalizing our skills at combined arms maneuver against a near peer threat in a modern world with CEMA, unmanned drones available on the internet, etc this isn’t even on the radar.

2- I can’t envision the people who required a safety on their striker fired handgun and wearing PT belts running on closed roads in clothes with built in PT belts being cool with with decreasing the trigger pull by 30% for the rifles everyone carries.

For better or worse there is a problem with risk aversion in our organization. We say ‘take prudent risk’ but what we mean is ‘don’t take any unnecessary risk regardless of the payoff.’

3- Money.

That is my personal opinion on the matter.

 

[user12358]

I just wanted to make sure we both agreed that the big Army not doing something was not in anyway a condemnation of a practice, procedure, or product. If someone said that monocular green phos NODs are obviously the superior choice because of the half million AN/PVS-14s that have been purchased by conventional military forces, everyone with even a little experience under the multitude of dual or quad tube options would laugh them out of the room.

 

[ccw1911]

The big factor, if there is one, that makes one trigger "safer" than another from the standpoint of inadvertent contact is more about how far the trigger has to move than weight. Trigger pull weight can be a factor but it has to be pretty heavy to make a difference. This is why the first shot on a DA/SA or all DA shots with a revolver have an extra safety factor. The trigger has to move so far it gives a little extra layer. On any firearm with short trigger movement I use the manual safety if it has one. I'm perfectly comfortable without a manual safety on DA guns, this doesn't change protocol of keeping the finger out of the trigger guard but if I'm doing an emergency draw to fire I will get my finger in there sooner on a DA gun.

I'm sure I'll catch hell for this but Glock really muddled the waters when they promoted their trigger system as revolver like and therefore no manual safety needed. The trigger pull on a Glock is so much shorter than a revolver or DA auto it's not a valid comparison. I know keeping your finger out of the trigger guard takes care of all the safety issues.....but if you've ever fought off a guy trying to take your gun in a dark ditch wondering where the hell your back up is you know textbook ideas don't always prove true.

 

[Ryan St.Jean]

I just wanted to make sure we both agreed that the big Army not doing something was not in anyway a condemnation of a practice, procedure, or product. If someone said that monocular green phos NODs are obviously the superior choice because of the half million AN/PVS-14s that have been purchased by conventional military forces, everyone with even a little experience under the multitude of dual or quad tube options would laugh them out of the room.

Mixed feelings about this. Generally the stuff we use gets a lot of testing and it is pretty good kit.

Stuff we look at but don’t use either sucks, is too expensive or it’s manufacturers don’t bribe the right politicians. Sucks is self explanatory. Too expensive is realty as we have budgets. For similar procurement but fewer budgetary issues look at SOCOM. To the DOD procurement process and how it is driven by what congress wants us to have, which is in turn driven by which companies contribute to their campaigns, where retired officers get cushy jobs, etc, well that’s reality.

 

[user12358]

For similar procurement but fewer budgetary issues look at SOCOM.

Which is exactly why I asked you if the Geissele SSF was not aquired by big Army due to budgetary concerns. I never said that the items acquired by big Army were purchased on a whim or were bad kit, simply that big Army not using something is not a condemnation of that thing.