Negligent Discharge Investigations...follow up thread

[Joe13]

This….

 

[Stomper]

This….

View attachment 1448387

I thought he used that for practice BEFORE he let young boys suck his tongue….

 

[WillametteWill]

Thanks for all the awesome input to my OP all. I know it drifted from NDs to carry modes/safeties but I think there can be a connection in some cases and for some people. I know many of you carry SF guns without my personal preference for safeties and I completely support your choice and have no doubt you are far safer to be around than most shooters. From years of reading your posts, I continually see a deep understanding of safety principles.

I think partially my goal is to de-stigmatize the use of safeties on SF guns that I encounter, some on this forum (clearly NOT in this thread), at the range, and at gun shops. I'm all for dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery and support folks doing as they see fit, but with the thought process, experience, and understanding that has been posted in this and other similar threads.

Thanks for all the input and look forward to seeing more!

 

[Certaindeaf]

My pet peeve on thumb safeties are they are generally so large gravity alone will likely cause disengagement and as if that's not enough, there's another one on the off-side, increasing the width of the pistol one inch.

 

[Member 53328]

If safeties are such an ideal mechanism for SF guns then why do most LE agencies run sidearms that GENERALLY speaking do not have mechanical/external safeties?

 

[Knebel]

Its one more factor to think about when drawing. However, It makes me squeezy havi g one in the chamber with a spring loaded striker behind it and only that little trigger safety... its great for fast draw and shoot but I'd still prefer at minimum a grip safety.

 

[Koda]

If safeties are such an ideal mechanism for SF guns then why do most LE agencies run sidearms that GENERALLY speaking do not have mechanical/external safeties?

Because they go with what's popular not what's the most practical.

 

[Member 53328]

Because they go with what's popular not what's the most practical.

You sure about that?

 

[Capn Jack]

No magazine safeties, one up the pipe, manual safety, on / off. That's up to you.

Never worn, (OWB) where it's pointed at me.

Spare magazine in the off side pocket.

 

[Koda]

You sure about that?

Just my opinion but my guess is they go with what's both affordable and reliable. Glocks fit that bill pretty good, and why they are the most popular with civilians.

I just don't think LE or Military is the deciding factor on "what's best" though. Ie safety and NDs. Cop's have their fair share as civilians.

 

[WillametteWill]

If safeties are such an ideal mechanism for SF guns then why do most LE agencies run sidearms that GENERALLY speaking do not have mechanical/external safeties?

Legit question. I think it is mostly the Glock effect. Glock became the big player (65% of the market in 2017 per Glock) so SF guns without safeties are familiar. Departments do not always choose what is best. There are many considerations with cost being a significant factor (that they will rarely admit to). They have to think about holsters, weapons-mounted lights, holsters for guns with WML, cost of magazines (this just eliminated HK ). With limited training time, is it easier to teach someone to shoot with a basic SF gun? Sure. Shooting with is not the same as deploying. There is no minimum score (or any for that matter) for re-holstering, walking through ice plant in the dark, or other non-shooting areas when they are trying to get recruits to pass in the academy. Most recruits are NOT gun people now (compared to the old days when I was in the academy).

When DC police switched to Glocks in 1988, they averaged 10 NDs per year for 10 years. 19 of these resulted in officers shooting themselves or other officers. (Social media did not exist so this is forgotten news.) NYPD used to require heavy triggers in Glocks (i.e., the NY trigger) yet now they are exploring putting in lighter triggers so officers will shoot better. What could go wrong? Officer's hit ratio when shooting is about 1 in 5, or 80% misses.

Sometimes there is an influencer in the department's firearms unit...which can be good or bad. If they don't think they have the time (or are unfamiliar with) a certain platform than Glock (or other non-safety SF guns) are low hanging fruit. Some academies, from what I understand, included zero, zilch, nada, training with shotguns, yet new officers will often have one to use on their first day in patrol.

Note the military went the other direction and required safeties on their handguns, and for mass use, have for over 100 years. They went from SA, to DA/SA, to SF with safety. Also note we are not hearing about Sig M17 & M18s firing all by themselves, like we are 320s without safeties.

Just my thoughts.

And not Glock bashing either. I have a high level of respect for many Glock carriers here and in other places.

Because they go with what's popular not what's the most practical.

Yes, and cheap.

 

[Member 53328]

Just my opinion but my guess is they go with what's both affordable and reliable. Glocks fit that bill pretty good, and why they are the most popular with civilians.

I just don't think LE or Military is the deciding factor on "what's best" though. Ie safety and NDs. Cop's have their fair share as civilians.

Well standard military have safeties on all their sidearms. Whether it's the 1911, M9 or now the P320. The top tier guys who run Glocks etc. more than likely are running pistols without safeties.

I don't think it's good to follow in step just cause the military or LE runs certain equipment or trains a certain way.

I agree 100% with you on that.

 

[Member 53328]

Legit question. I think it is mostly the Glock effect. Glock became the big player (65% of the market in 2017 per Glock) so SF guns without safeties are familiar. Departments do not always choose what is best. There are many considerations with cost being a significant factor (that they will rarely admit to). They have to think about holsters, weapons-mounted lights, holsters for guns with WML, cost of magazines (this just eliminated HK ). With limited training time, is it easier to teach someone to shoot with a basic SF gun? Sure. Shooting with is not the same as deploying. There is no minimum score (or any for that matter) for re-holstering, walking through ice plant in the dark, or other non-shooting areas when they are trying to get recruits to pass in the academy. Most recruits are NOT gun people now (compared to the old days when I was in the academy).

When DC police switched to Glocks in 1988, they averaged 10 NDs per year for 10 years. 19 of these resulted in officers shooting themselves or other officers. (Social media did not exist so this is forgotten news.) NYPD used to require heavy triggers in Glocks (i.e., the NY trigger) yet now they are exploring putting in lighter triggers so officers will shoot better. What could go wrong? Officer's hit ratio when shooting is about 1 in 5, or 80% misses.

Sometimes there is an influencer in the department's firearms unit...which can be good or bad. If they don't think they have the time (or are unfamiliar with) a certain platform than Glock (or other non-safety SF guns) are low hanging fruit. Some academies, from what I understand, included zero, zilch, nada, training with shotguns, yet new officers will often have one to use on their first day in patrol.

Note the military went the other direction and required safeties on their handguns, and for mass use, have for over 100 years. They went from SA, to DA/SA, to SF with safety. Also note we are not hearing about Sig M17 & M18s firing all by themselves, like we are 320s without safeties.

Just my thoughts.

And not Glock bashing either. I have a high level of respect for many Glock carriers here and in other places.

Yes, and cheap.

I guess my question was more in regards to if NDs are such an issue. And if people are going to blame the tool rather than the operator…. Then wouldn't it make sense to "fix" the tool by mandating officers to carry a platform that has an external safety? I mean think of the communities safety………. (Heavy sarcasm).

Personally I am a firm believer that it's a training/human issue and not a tool issue. No matter how many safeguards you put in place, require, enforce, etc. people will still find a way to f-ck it up.

Train under stress. Consequences are needed in training. Pain retains.

 

[WillametteWill]

guess my question was more in regards to if NDs are such an issue. And if people are going to blame the tool rather than the operator…. Then wouldn't it make sense to "fix" the tool by mandating officers to carry a platform that has an external safety? I mean think of the communities safety………. (Heavy sarcasm).

Personally I am a firm believer that it's a training/human issue and not a tool issue. No matter how many safeguards you put in place, require, enforce, etc. people will still find a way to f-ck it up.

Train under stress. Consequences are needed in training. Pain retains.

I think we are very much on the same page. First and foremost, safety training must be robust and never-ending. Finger discipline, and muzzle control (the first two that seem to go out the window) must be absolutes and stressed non-stop. This will fix most of the problems.

As you note, top tier folks are using Glocks and other "high performance" guns. But as a friend of mine used to say when we would go to a crash involving a teen driver in daddy's Porsche, BMW or other exotic..."What we have here is a high performance vehicle being driven by a low performance driver."

Agree with training under stress as well, but this is very difficult for most to do. Again, going back to the popular YouTube gun trainers, some say do push ups and run up and down the range to get your heart rate up. This is NOT stress. Competitions can induce some stress but some/many of us will get to the point where it is not really. Force on force with sims, good scenarios and role players comes close but it is spendy and not easily available for many.

I'm definitely not blaming the tool, I think of it more as accepting some of the limitations that may be present (for some shooters, not all) and considering there may be options that could improve safety in some common situations without sacrificing accuracy, power, or speed. DVC. I'm also not trying to convert (nor do they need it) SF / No Safety folks to the dark side. I have worked with countless newer shooters who were talked out of a gun with a manual safety at a gun shop, by a friend or relative even though they really wanted a gun with one but were persuaded by someone who was extremely ill-informed. Now they are carrying a SF gun with no round in the chamber because they are not comfortable (or not carrying at all). They admit with the extra layer of protection provided by a safety they would carry with a round chambered. A manual safety should NEVER be a crutch, but realistically, for some, it provides additional comfort.

Your input is most excellent!

 

[Member 53328]

I think we are very much on the same page. First and foremost, safety training must be robust and never-ending. Finger discipline, and muzzle control (the first two that seem to go out the window) must be absolutes and stressed non-stop. This will fix most of the problems.

As you note, top tier folks are using Glocks and other "high performance" guns. But as a friend of mine used to say when we would go to a crash involving a teen driver in daddy's Porsche, BMW or other exotic..."What we have here is a high performance vehicle being driven by a low performance driver."

Agree with training under stress as well, but this is very difficult for most to do. Again, going back to the popular YouTube gun trainers, some say do push ups and run up and down the range to get your heart rate up. This is NOT stress. Competitions can induce some stress but some/many of us will get to the point where it is not really. Force on force with sims, good scenarios and role players comes close but it is spendy and not easily available for many.

I'm definitely not blaming the tool, I think of it more as accepting some of the limitations that may be present (for some shooters, not all) and considering there may be options that could improve safety in some common situations without sacrificing accuracy, power, or speed. DVC. I'm also not trying to convert (nor do they need it) SF / No Safety folks to the dark side. I have worked with countless newer shooters who were talked out of a gun with a manual safety at a gun shop, by a friend or relative even though they really wanted a gun with one but were persuaded by someone who was extremely ill-informed. Now they are carrying a SF gun with no round in the chamber because they are not comfortable (or not carrying at all). They admit with the extra layer of protection provided by a safety they would carry with a round chambered. A manual safety should NEVER be a crutch, but realistically, for some, it provides additional comfort.

Your input is most excellent!

Well said.

The majority have never been in a hands on altercation. Never had to clear a building. Never had to conduct a felony stop or be injected into a domestic call. Hell, most have never been punched in the face.

The majority have never had to fight through discomfort, pain, and in the process make split decisions and reassess the situation continuously. So many elements and factors can change in a split second.

Life experience plays a huge role in all of this, as does training. I feel very fortunate for my time and training in the military. Cause the cost of higher end classes on the civilian side is insane. It's no wonder people have a limited amount of training.

And I for one do not look for gun handling skills or legal advice on YouTube. So many new shooters have this "media" mentality where I watched a few videos so I'm an expert now. "When my adrenaline kicks in, I will know exactly what to do……."

False. You don't rise to the occasion, you fall to the level of your training.

Personally, I will do everything in my power to make sure my Glock never leaves its holster.

Edit - I'd much rather someone carry with one in the chamber and an external safety than a SF with an empty chamber.

 

[DirectDrive]

If safeties are such an ideal mechanism for SF guns then why do most LE agencies run sidearms that GENERALLY speaking do not have mechanical/external safeties?

Arrogance ?
Ignorance ?
I've read where LEO's in leadership/training positions say that their people are on average, far more complacent with weapons than we, civilian firearms enthusiasts are.

They can't go back now, cat's out of the bag, but I betcha IF Sig could go back, they would have issued a LE version of P320 like the M17/M18 military version with the Manual Safety.
If I was king, I would have directed them to do just that at the front end of the program.
If a dept decision-maker wanted to buck that, then the civilian version would be offered.

 

[FourTeeFive]

It would be interesting to see statistics on these "Accidental" discharges as a percentage of gun make/model sold in the USA. As an example, the sheer numbers of Sig P365 variants, and the fact that many might not be owned by the most experienced gun owners, make me think that any trend has more to do with the people than the product.

Some of us are old enough to remember the Audi "unintended acceleration" hysteria from years ago. It all of course turned out to be clueless drivers, but the press did a great job of convincing the public there was something wrong with the cars.

 

[Deavis]

Note the relationship of the words casual and casualty.

 

[Geardo]

I agree. DA/SA for carry guns strikes the sweet spot for me. Striker fired is fine in a level 3 duty holster.

I still am very curious about the Sig issues due to the drop safe issues and the design of the striker. I'm about 60/40 on if they are actually safe to carry and shoot.

 

[Member 53328]

I agree. DA/SA for carry guns strikes the sweet spot for me. Striker fired is fine in a level 3 duty holster.

I still am very curious about the Sig issues due to the drop safe issues and the design of the striker. I'm about 60/40 on if they are actually safe to carry and shoot.

Out of curiosity what difference does the holster make in regards to SF vs DA/SA unless you are concerned with it falling out during an altercation?