I bought my first semi-auto pistol in the late '70s, a .380 PPK/S. It was equipped with a
"decocker" mechanism, with which I was comfortable. About ten years later, Glock did away with a traditional safety in favor of its split trigger blade. I was never impressed with the design, particularly for IWB carry. It became a worthy alternative for many, however, and Glock has enjoyed decades of success. As new models evolve and are introduced by competitive brands, manufacturers have become reluctant to include manual safeties or decocking levers, whatsoever. Proper handgun training includes instruction on safe handling but accidents do occur, particularly with striker fired and internal hammer pistols. A safety can be disengaged in less than a second. Human physiology has not changed much in 50 years. Aside from 1911 designs, which faithfully offer "cocked and locked" readiness, the vast majority of new semi-autos do not provide a manual safety option. Shouldn't manufacturers realize that a large share of their customers will not purchase a pistol without this feature?

I learned on handguns that did not have a manual safety and I prefer them that way.
The only semi auto pistols I own with a safety are .22 as that is the only way they come.

I'm still wondering why the civilian versions of the P320 come without a manual safety. Why only the military M17/M18 versions?

To me, a fully-cocked striker gun with a single action trigger needs a safety.

Much of the reduction of manual safeties comes from modern training that emphasizes finger off the trigger until actual engagement of the target.
In the days of the DA revolver, the finger off the trigger was not pressed home during training as much as it is today. I recall very little instruction about it when I was first being trained.
Ever look at the old revolver holsters? Fully exposed trigger. That would be insanity with the modern striker autos.

^^^^^Exactly this. While I can generally handle a handgun with a manual safety somewhat competently, it's something that I'm not particularly comfortable with having shot, trained with and carried Glocks for the past 33 years. Hell for the longest time I've had issues with remembering the manual safeties on rifles and shotguns thanks to my Glock experience. It comes down to how we're ultimately conditioned and wired as a result.

I seem to have come to prefer manual safeties on striker-fired pistols, and have in fact held off on buying at least two P320s (Fs in .45ACP and 10mm) in hopes that they will eventually be produced with manual safeties.

Having said that, have there really been all that many cases of unintentianal discharges with striker-fired pistols that would have been prevented by the use of - specifically - manual safeties?

quote:

Having said that, have there really been all that many cases of unintentianal discharges with striker-fired pistols that would have been prevented by the use of - specifically - manual safeties?

With regard to Glocks, which of course holds the lion share of striker guns, I believe there actually have been a substantial number of ADs, especially early on. You also must take into consideration the fact that Gs have a tabbed safe trigger, as well as a half-cocked striker so that the trigger is kinda sorta a double-action system.

Manufacturers don't want to do manual safeties because they have to make, and dealers have to stock two SKUs for every model they make. And since a lot of shooters have drunk the Glock Kool Aid that manual safeties aren't necessary, a majority of buyers don't want them, and dealers don't want to stock them.

But the Manufacturers could have their cake and eat it too, especially for poly-striker guns. Design the trigger mechanism to take a end user installed safety kit, which the manufacturer would sell as accessory. Mold break out panels into the polymer grip frame that are easily removed to accommodate the safety levers. If a shooter wants a manual safety, he buys and installs the kit.

I was pleased when Sig offered the P365 series with and w/o safeties. My EDCs are equipped and disengaging the lever is routine. I've never owned or handled a rifle (aside from some lever actions), shotgun or even an air arm that didn't include a safety lever, button or switch. It's provided without exception. Are handguns inherently safer? Of course not.

I’m a Glock guy but I still buy 1911s and 2011s with the manual safety. And I make sure all my non-striker HKs have a manual safety (no LEM for me)

quote:

A safety can be disengaged in less than a second

And failing or forgetting to disengage your safety can last the rest of your lifetime.

I stopped owning pistols with manual safeties after going through a police academy course in 2003 where we had a 2 second drill from 3m to fire 3 shots. I pulled out my gun and pulled the trigger and NOTHING happened. Took me until the buzzer rang to realize that I needed to flick off my safety and I fired all three shots after the timer.

I think your premise is wrong that "a large share of their customers will not purchase a pistol without this feature."

A large share of their customers DO purchase a pistol without a safety manual. And I like either a decocker or safety manual. My P365XL has a manual safety and my P320 has a manual safety.

I think it has a lot to do with when you first started getting into guns and the prevailing environment at the time. People getting into guns now are in an environment where manual safeties are not the norm.

It's not like accidents and negligent discharges didn't happen in the times of the decocker or manual safety.

If you are going to "run" a manual safety, like counter-steering a motorcycle, you must train and practice with it so its operation becomes automatic, without conscious thought. It can be done. The same is somewhat true of keeping your finger off the trigger unless ready to shoot, as the human hand naturally wants to wrap all its fingers around an object, but less.

I think it’s heavily with the preference of the user, including the ‘manual of arms’ of the particular firearm. To take it to the extreme, does one want a safety on a S/A or D/A, revolver? No.

With a striker fired semi-auto, maybe, depending. Some have lighter pulls, them up to an LEM, ‘NY trigger’ or a heavier pull.

Another component, seldom mentioned, the CC individual is a very ‘low probability’ user. Now I’m not saying pack the gun away buried in a backpack, unloaded, but safe carry is paramount.

Like many things, no reason for absolutes with the choices.

quote:

Originally posted by egregore:
If you are going to "run" a manual safety, like counter-steering a motorcycle, you must train and practice with it so its operation becomes automatic, without conscious thought. It can be done. The same is somewhat true of keeping your finger off the trigger unless ready to shoot, as the human hand naturally wants to wrap all its fingers around an object, but less.

This. It's all about training and reps. Yes, you can train yourself to disengage and re-engage a manual safety, but it's still one more administrative function that has to be performed under stress. And manual safety operation on handguns changes between platforms, so you'd have to train that motion for every type of gun that you own, or restrict yourself to only one type.

Keeping your finger off the trigger until ready to fire is universal. It works for every single gun ever made. I own handguns with safeties, but I won't carry them for defensive purposes, because like Jester814 I've been on the line and presented a gun on the clock that refused to fire, and it was a horrible feeling. I want my defensive tools to work the same way every time, and I know that if I draw my J-Frame, my P320, my P250, my Beretta 92G, or my P245, it's just point and click...no safety to fumble with or disengage. Yeah, the administrative functions are different (reloads, decocking, etc), but those are administrative functions and don't share the same time pressure as the first round off the draw.

Yes, you can train for it, but it takes a lot of bandwidth. I went through a rifle class last week where they hammered the concept of safety on until sights were on target ready to fire, and then off again as soon as it came down. Every movement, and every administrative function (reloads, malfunction drills where the hammer was still cocked, movement, etc) we were disengaging and re-engaging the safety, usually on the clock with very tight time requirements. It was a challenge, and the AR safety is pretty well designed for ease of operation. It was a 5 day class and we worked that in every drill, and I also spent hours at home in the evenings (and rubbed the inside of my middle finger raw on the trigger guard to prove it) working it dry trying to polish up my movements to ensure I could meet the times. Is that something the average gun owner is willing to do, and are they willing to do it across multiple platforms? There are a lot of handgun designs out there that have safeties that aren't quite so easy to manipulate as the one on an AR.

If I were a single-platform guy, and only ever carried one type of handgun, I could be ok with a manual safety. I'd train it into my routine, and that would be that. But the reality is that I'm not...both through personal choice and through department policy. I enjoy guns too much to limit myself that way, and also different guns fill different roles. My full-size P320 with TLR-1 and Romeo 1 Pro is great in a duty holster, but my S&W 640 is better in a pocket. For off-duty IWB it's a compact without the light, like my Beretta 92X, P245, or sometimes a P320. For hiking and chest-carry, it's the P250. Different guns, but none has a manual safety and they all come into action the exact same way.

The one issue I have with striker guns is I was taught to place your thumb on the hammer on a DA handgun when holstering. If something is going to move the trigger, you will feel it. But training on a Sig 226, which has no manual safety, you become more comfortable with guns without manual safeties.

I went and put the manual safety on my 365 and keep my PPQ unchambered because of no manual safety.

I bought the M18 because it has a safety, but the trigger pull does a great disservice to the classic P series it's so terrible.

I really can't see myself carrying on my person anything other than DA/SA or DA.

The only exception is when I rarely/reluctantly carry a micro-9 (MC2sc, the only I own) on those occasions when that format pistol makes the most sense.

This is why I've never carried a 1911 or P210. Although I wonder if that will change if I live to be 60 and the kids are out the house.

I think safeties are always good for rimfire pistols, and it seems most manufacturers generally agree.

quote:

I pulled out my gun and pulled the trigger and NOTHING happened

This is one of the reasons I had to sell my 938. I tried like the dickens to get proficient with it. It was easy to shoot, accurate, and easy to conceal.

That safety tho. It was the BO that smelled enough to warrant leaving her at the bar.

quote:

Keeping your finger off the trigger until ready to fire is universal. It works for every single gun ever made.

Exactly. The only caveat is that I wouldn't carry a single-action-only handgun with a short and sub-4ish pound trigger pull (like a 1911) without a manual safety due to the higher likelihood of the trigger getting snagged unintentionally. But that's the only edge case that I see for handgun safeties for me personally.

And this thread wouldn't be complete without...

quote:

Design the trigger mechanism to take a end user installed safety kit, which the manufacturer would sell as accessory. Mold break out panels into the polymer grip frame that are easily removed to accommodate the safety levers. If a shooter wants a manual safety, he buys and installs the kit.

Which is exactly what S&W did with their M&P 2.0. There are cutouts molded into the polymer frame for the manual safety on all models. The non-safety models come with plugs installed. The safety mechanism is simple to remove or install. And if you buy a safety version and want to remove it, S&W CS will send you the frame plugs for free.

Several years ago I purchased a M&P 2.0 Compact with a safety, since even at the blue line pricing it was another ~$75 cheaper than the non-safety version. (Almost certainly due to lack of demand for the safety version...) A call to CS for the frame plugs, and about 5 minutes at the table to remove the safety and install the plugs, and I have a non-safety model. I then sent the safety lever, detent, and spring to a forum member who wanted to add a safety to his M&P 2.0, and in 5 more minutes he had turned his non-safety model into a safety model.