Thumb Safety on M&p

[TDC]

what do you suggest TDC, that IDPA and IPSC right a specific set of rules for every gun being used in competition >>??

cause that is the only other option.....

the "do not remove any safety device" in IDPA covers everything from 1911 grip safety (disconnector) to removing the safety notch on a glock trigger, or in this case the magazine disconnect in an M&P..... or browning hipower for that matter.

whaty is so hard for you to understand that, or are you just arguing for arguments sake... cause I can understand that.

why is dry firing "ignorant"... a lot of people use dry firing as a form of practicing trigger control....

remember this is a sport, and as such it has rules... IDPA for example asks that you dry fire the weapon to show clear, you cannot decock it, you actually HAVE to fire it so that the range officer is certain that there is no ammunition in the chamber.....

again it is a sport.... if that is so hard for you to comprehend then I would say participating in said sport would be to hard for you as well....

think also of the liability factor that the "sport" would set if it advocated the removel of a safety device.... litigation.

I'm not saying that a set of rules is required for every firearm. All I'm saying is that deeming the removal of the disco to be a violation and a safety concern is false. You might as well classify the interchangeable grips as a violation as it could add to the performance of the pistol by offering a more comfortable grip. Most pistols do not have a disco so how removing one makes any sort of difference is what puzzles me. The disco is not a safety device. Safeties prevent the firearm from firing under normal conditions, which includes using a magazine.

I'm arguing this point simply because its an ignorant rule that is not based on any logical facts.

Dry firing to practice trigger control is excellent practice. I'll clarify my point. Most competitors that I have witnessed, do NOT use the "slide forward and dry fire" as an opportunity to practice their sight picture/sight alignment, or trigger control. Most simply close the slide via the slide lock(we won't get into why this is a poor choice) and slap the trigger with zero regard for where the pistol is pointed and how the trigger press was performed.

All firearms are treated as if they are loaded. If this is truly the law(one of the four laws) of the land than what is the issue with loaded firearms in a holster? Why is a hot range such a rare occurrence? Are we to believe that the extremely low rate of ND's at matches is directly connected to unloaded pistols and the unload and show clear process, or is it due to intelligent people who adhere to the fundamental rules of firearms safety/handling?

The condition of the firearm is irrelevant when it is holstered. It is even more irrelevant when the firearm is under the control of an individual who understands and adheres to the fundamental rules of firearms safety/handling.

Personally, the cold range mentality and the "unload and show clear" process is designed for idiots who can't be or shouldn't be trusted with a firearm. Its nothing more than an easy entrance for those who lack the skills to play while maintaining a safe environment.

Sport or not, the rules should be based on logical thought and supported with facts. This rule regarding the disco is neither logical nor supported with fact(s). Liability is something too many concern themselves with. The mere fact that such a "sport" imitates or advocates the use of a firearm for defensive purposes is enough to support banning it from the word go. The risk of injury or death is prevalent and should be obvious with such activities like IDPA/IPSC, motocross, bungy jumping, etc etc. Regardless of the litigation fears, the league does not have to make a stand on the disco issue. Nor do they have to advocate anything. Simply permitting such modifications under the stock classification with the use of common sense and logic would solve the issue without advocating any reckless behavior.

TDC

 

[Westicle]

I have nothing to add besides the fact you obviously don't get it....

put the koolaid down and open your mind.... don't be such a flake.

 

[TDC]

I have nothing to add besides the fact you obviously don't get it....

put the koolaid down and open your mind.... don't be such a flake.

You obviously have no argument or counter points, so I'll stand by my statements until someone with a little more intelligence posts.

TDC

 

[Westicle]

You obviously have no argument or counter points, TDC

its not that, the fact of the matter is that no matter what you think the rules are the rules... the sport is played by those rules and if you do not like them then do not participate.

and discussing with you this topic is like talking to a mirror, its just not worth wasting my time arguing with you over something so trivial. I doubt if you will ever show up at any of the IDPA shoots I organize so why bother arguing.....

 

[Words Twice]

I love making fun of Bob as much as the next guy but maybe its time to lock this thread...

 

[TDC]

its not that, the fact of the matter is that no matter what you think the rules are the rules... the sport is played by those rules and if you do not like them then do not participate.

and discussing with you this topic is like talking to a mirror, its just not worth wasting my time arguing with you over something so trivial. I doubt if you will ever show up at any of the IDPA shoots I organize so why bother arguing.....

I am aware that removing the disco is a violation. I would like clarification as to why. Perhaps I'm supposed to accept these rules/laws without asking questions, much like so many do with our criminal code and firearms act.

TDC

 

[Canuck44]

I am aware that removing the disco is a violation. I would like clarification as to why. Perhaps I'm supposed to accept these rules/laws without asking questions, much like so many do with our criminal code and firearms act.

TDC

1, The mag disconenct is a safety Device.

2. Page 18 of the rule book. "The following modifications are NOT ALLOWED IN ANY DIVISION unless otherwise specifically mentioned.

E. Disconnection or disabling of any safety device on any gun."

Now you know why you can't. The reasoning behind the rule should be self-evident.

Take Care

Bob

 

[Westicle]

but why BOB, WHY !!!

oh the huge manatee....

 

[Juster]

I've said it before and I say it again: magazine disconnecter "safeties" are inherently unsafe.

Not if properly designed, like the Browning Tri-safety, where you can fire the gun with the mag off if the grip safety is left depressed.

 

[TDC]

1, The mag disconenct is a safety Device.

2. Page 18 of the rule book. "The following modifications are NOT ALLOWED IN ANY DIVISION unless otherwise specifically mentioned.

E. Disconnection or disabling of any safety device on any gun."

Now you know why you can't. The reasoning behind the rule should be self-evident.

Take Care

Bob

Bob,
You failed to explain how the disco is a safety device. Under normal use it prevents nothing, so how is it a safety device? Because S&W says so?

TDC

 

[Canuck44]

No because the gun is designed for the LEO/Military market and as was stated a number of posts ago having a mag disconnect makes the gun inoperable when a mag is not inserted. This prevents accidental discharges when the gun does not have a mag in it.

This feature has also has proven useful when in a physical encounter IF the officers gun is dislodged or grabbed by his/her assailant depressing the mag release and dropping the mag again mags the gun inoperable. I am told there have been instances in the US where this ability has saved officers lives.

If neither of those explanations hit a nerve I'll end this by saying , "Yes since S&W calls it a safety device" the rule stands".

I can offer no further explanation and no more will be forthcoming.

As Words Twice posted time to end this thread.

Take Care

Bob

 

[Mike Oxlong]

IIRC, Constable Strongquill's (RCMP) death was due in large part to the 'Mag Safety' on his issue S&W 5946. Const Stongquill was left handed and in the struggle with his killer, he inadvertantly pressed the mag release thereby making his pistol ineffective as a means of self-defence. It cost him his life.

I'd suggest that this feature has the potential to cost as many lives and it saves and should not be incorporated in modern pistol designs.

 

[TDC]

No because the gun is designed for the LEO/Military market and as was stated a number of posts ago having a mag disconnect makes the gun inoperable when a mag is not inserted. This prevents accidental discharges when the gun does not have a mag in it.

This feature has also has proven useful when in a physical encounter IF the officers gun is dislodged or grabbed by his/her assailant depressing the mag release and dropping the mag again mags the gun inoperable. I am told there have been instances in the US where this ability has saved officers lives.

If neither of those explanations hit a nerve I'll end this by saying , "Yes since S&W calls it a safety device" the rule stands".

I can offer no further explanation and no more will be forthcoming.

As Words Twice posted time to end this thread.

Take Care

Bob

Bob,

Here's the carrot I was looking for. The BS about the disco being a "useful tool" during a struggle is straight up horse sh*t. As usual, its a hardware solution to a software problem. As was mentioned, atleast one officer of the law lost the fight thanks to this wonderful device. You know what would be far more effective in saving lives...More training and a gun the works when a round is chambered regardless of a magazine.

On a side note. Someone mentioned the pistol can be had without the disco. This begs the question again. If some can compete without it because their pistol came that way, why can't the folks with older models not remove theirs? Would that not be the same as some folks having factory night sights and some not?

TDC

 

[mackattack]

Bob,
I agree, its not a performance enhancement. It is also not a safety concern to remove the magazine safety(or disco as it has been called) as doing so(or ordering the pistol without the disco) would render the pistol just as capable or "dangerous" as all the other pistols that do not have such devices. Again, if the removal is not a performance enhancement and its not a safety concern, why the concern if its removed?

The safety concern is teaching people to reinsert a magazine into a firearm to dry fire it. Dry firing is an ignorant action in and of itself, its even more ignorant to have to insert a magazine to do it. Magazine insertion is an part of the loading procedure, not the unloading procedure.

Rick,

The M&P series as well as other striker fired pistols, or even DA/SA pistols like SIGs have mechnical safeties aside from the operator. The addition of positive or active safeties requiring your input are not necessary. Compliance with the fundamental rules of firearms handling/safety is all that is required to handle any and all firearms. No safety device required. The inclusion of safety devices whether they be passive or active is simply an insurance policy in the event of a dropped firearm, where the operator losses all control. When the operator has full control, the device is moot. Anyone who has enough sense to use a positive safety is usually intelligent enough to comply with the fundamental rules of firearms safety. A hundred safety devices on a firearm won't make a difference if the idiot running it fails to employ them. Kind of like seat belts and traffic laws.


TDC

I agree. There's really no need for manual safeties. That's why we're seeing less and less of them. Those that feel there is are usually really used to having them and feel more comfortable with having it. It's not necessary, required or "safer" to have them IMHO. The CF shouldn't bother having them on their next pistol should they ever choose to replace the BHP.

 

[mackattack]

what do you care, everyone knows IDPA/IPSC will get you killed anyway...

I agree. There are definite differences between "tactical" shooting and the competitive shooting forsure. Shooting is a great sport for the diversity of styles and equipment. There's always something to learn and try. Now if I could find someone to take me out skeet shooting...

 

[Westicle]

I agree. There are definite differences between "tactical" shooting and the competitive shooting forsure. Shooting is a great sport for the diversity of styles and equipment. There's always something to learn and try. Now if I could find someone to take me out skeet shooting...

we used to shoot skeet here, but the boys dropped it in favour of sporting clays.... if you can give it a try, best bang for your buck.

as to the other post... you will never get it, so why even bother trying, just keep parroting your story line.

 

[mackattack]

I will....manual safeties are useless. Sporting clay sounds good though.

 

[TDC]

As is the norm on this site. You bring up a valid point, back it with logic and/or fact(s) and no one has anything to dispute it with. So I guess the final answer here is:

"Its the rules, and there's no need to challenge the rules or justify them"

Sure sounds like a solid foundation for which IDPA, you know DEFENSIVE PISTOL is based upon.

TDC

 

[Rick]

The M&P series as well as other striker fired pistols, or even DA/SA pistols like SIGs have mechnical safeties aside from the operator. The addition of positive or active safeties requiring your input are not necessary.

So then... the safeties on a C7A1, C6, Model 70, etc are only there because they're not striker fired and don't have mechanical safties aside from the operator? JTF2, CSOR, Delta, and whoever else you care to think of who almost certainly have considerably more firearms handling expertise and experience than you do should not even bother with those safeties in their weapons handling drills because those "positive or active safeties requiring their input are not necessary"???

I will disagree with you on that. The fact of the matter is, and always has been, that most accidental/negligent discharges are due to operator error, not a mechanical malfunction that occurred in the absence of a mechanical device to prevent same.

Compliance with the fundamental rules of firearms handling/safety is all that is required to handle any and all firearms. No safety device required. The inclusion of safety devices whether they be passive or active is simply an insurance policy in the event of a dropped firearm, where the operator losses all control. When the operator has full control, the device is moot.

That's a dramatic pronouncement, but we haven't quite invented a human being yet who is failsafe against screwing up, particularly when on the two way range.

A hundred safety devices on a firearm won't make a difference if the idiot running it fails to employ them. Kind of like seat belts and traffic laws.

That's an interesting analogy. Seat belts save lives when somebody screws up.

The BS about the disco being a "useful tool" during a struggle is straight up horse sh*t. As usual, its a hardware solution to a software problem. As was mentioned, atleast one officer of the law lost the fight thanks to this wonderful device.

Interesting.

Massad Ayoob wrote an article about this very thing some time ago. At the time, pointed out that there have been more than a frew instances where the magazine disconnect had saved the life of an officer who had been disarmed. At the time he was unable to find any instances where an officer had died because of the disconnect. Let me help you out with a brief quote from the article here:

The latter functions as a "kill button," which when pressed by the officer deactivates the weapon by not only dropping the magazine but rendering the cartridge in the chamber unshootable. This has already saved countless police lives. Illinois State Police alone, in just the period 1967-77, logged thirteen troopers saved in gunfights who might well have died if they'd still had revolvers. For three, it was firepower that rescued them. Two survived when, realizing they were losing the struggle for their pistol to their assailants, pressed the "kill button." Eight were saved when someone got their on-safe S&W away from them, tried to shoot them, and couldn't.​

I'm not exactly an acolyte of Ayoob's, but I don't think he's the one here who's full of "horse s**t" as you put it. There's instances right there where both manual safeties and magazine disconnects have saved cops lives.

Now, if your position is that those instances didn't really happen and organizations like the ISP are just making it up, then perhaps I can understand why you believe as you do. Otherwise, I think you're just ignoring the obvious.

As for the death of the member you referenced... you don't suppose being left handed and having a handgun that was only set up for right handed shooters had anything to do with it, do you? Didn't the RCMP make changes to address that right afterward? Were you party to the proceedings that followed that shooting to conclude as you have here that he died as a result of the magazine safety - or is that an "everybody knows" assumption similar to your other comments regarding magazine disconnects?

I happen to prefer and like a safety on a handgun, including the ones I carry with a permit both here in Canada and down in the US. I suppose you could say I'm staking my life on it. I wouldn't loose a whole lot of sleep if I had to carry one without a safety - but then again, I lose absolutely no sleep because my handgun has either magazine disconnects or user operated safeties on them either.

If all the high speed low drag boys start removing the user actuated safeties from their weapons or adopt weapons drills where the safety is never used, perhaps I'll reconsider. In the meantime, my position is that folks who don't have nearly the amount of weapons training and weapons handling time in should probably use those same safeties as well.

However, the beauty of it is that those who don't like magazine disconnects and safeties can simply choose something without those features.

 

[TDC]

Rick,

The firearms you mention rely solely on positive, user operated safeties. You are also correct in that they operate very much like a single action only pistol in that the system is always charged. The use of positive safeties is not the issue of concern. The issue first and foremost is the belief that magazine disconnects/disco is in fact a safety device. The anecdotal instances of officer survival do not directly link the positive outcomes to the disco itself. Other factors were and are involved which influence the situation. To rest full faith that a disco is a life saver would be ignoring the obvious.

The fact that a disabled firearm due to mag ejection is useless for all involved proves it is of as much value to the good guy as it is to the bad guy. If this were a math equation the answer would be =equal. Which means there is no gain or benefit.

Safety devices are designed to prevent inadvertent discharges due to loss of control or foreign objects. Dropping your gun, falling from the holster, catching something on or in the gun(although a quality holster prevents access to the trigger). Safety devices are not designed and should not be designed to prevent the operator from discharging the pistol. Ejecting the magazine is something done while the operator has full control of the pistol, (much like discharging the firearm) which means the disco isn't a safety device. Furthermore, the intended purpose of the disco is a liability by design. An unseated mag due to inattention or everyday contact with ones vehicle, counter tops etc etc could and would render the officers pistol useless right from the word go. With the potential for such dire consequences, how or why anyone would believe that the possibility for this device to save ones life outweighs the very real possibility of this device to cost one their life is foolish. Cases of such events are hardly common place or compelling enough to warrant the use of magazine disconnects as a benefit. They are an answer to a question that has never been asked. The firearms industry and the Mil/LE community haven't demanded the inclusion of such devices on their firearms which leads me to believe there simply isn't enough evidence to support them.

Your comment regarding my seatbelt analogy has missed the point. Again, you are correct, seatbelts save lives when someone screws up. However, they only save the lives of those smart enough to put them on. Same goes for active safety devices. If the operator fails to use them, then they're of no value.

TDC