PDA

View Full Version : ye olde gun safety


mothergreen
12-14-2007, 8:02 PM
know how folks myself included always jump on pics people take with their guns and fingers in the trigger? well it seems to be a recent thing that people started caring about that.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/38159000/jpg/_38159546_kalash_ap_300.jpg
http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/f/f1/JohnBrowning.jpeg

try as I might I couldn't find the picture of John Thompson holding the stockless version with his finger on the trigger.

what does all this mean? nothing really.. I just thought it was kind of interesting.

Lon Moer
12-14-2007, 8:13 PM
http://bp2.blogger.com/_Plr3VyISKcg/RkY38JXS-HI/AAAAAAAAADo/J_A03mFmACM/s400/feinsteinAK47.jpg

Pulsar
12-14-2007, 8:54 PM
http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/f/f1/JohnBrowning.jpeg

Curse you for posting that picture, that rifle is on my serious want list and you just reminded me of it. I fell in love with that thing when I did a clean and oil to a customers Browning Semi-Auto .22 (horrible name for a gun aint it?)

But yeah, it is a recent thing. I remember reading an article a year or two ago talking about how military and police are trained. How 15 years ago it was ok for the finger to be inside the trigger guard but not on the trigger, or 30 years ago finger on the trigger was fine if the safety was on, and talking about the new standard being the finger just outside the trigger guard, but at the ready.

mothergreen
12-14-2007, 9:43 PM
sorry lol but hey when your bank acount recovers you'll thank me. interesting, might that have to do with each new generation being less and less exposed to guns?


lon, that scary picture doesnt belong in this thread! shivers!

M. Sage
12-15-2007, 5:02 AM
Or it could have to do with people actively trying to find more ways to avoid accidentally shooting their friends...

Turbinator
12-15-2007, 7:38 AM
Or it could have to do with people actively trying to find more ways to avoid accidentally shooting their friends...

I will vote for this answer. If you go back in time 100 years ago, firearms were available but not nearly in the same #'s they are now. The population was smaller back then, too. Just through natural statistics, the number of people getting negligently shot (as opposed to purposely) would have been smaller. With the proliferation of the population, as well as the introduction of more firearms, it's only natural that the pure number of incidents would rise. I for one am happy that people made a conscious effort to find other ways to reduce negligent incidents, other than just trying to ban guns.

Turby

WolfMansDad
12-15-2007, 11:03 AM
Depends on the gun.

I keep my finger outside the trigger guard on all my guns EXCEPT my single-action vaquero. It's ergonomics are different from modern designs, and it's awkward to handle it with your finger indexed. Most modern firearms are cocked, or half cocked like the glock, pretty much all the time, and you should never trust a safety with your life. With them, it makes sense to keep your finger off the trigger until you are ready to shoot. With something that has to be manually cocked, there's no real need. You can pull the trigger all day long, and it's not going to fire until you thumb the hammer back, even if whatever safety it has fails.

M. Sage
12-15-2007, 11:10 AM
I will vote for this answer. If you go back in time 100 years ago, firearms were available but not nearly in the same #'s they are now. The population was smaller back then, too. Just through natural statistics, the number of people getting negligently shot (as opposed to purposely) would have been smaller. With the proliferation of the population, as well as the introduction of more firearms, it's only natural that the pure number of incidents would rise. I for one am happy that people made a conscious effort to find other ways to reduce negligent incidents, other than just trying to ban guns.

Turby

I don't even know if it's really because of that, in particular. Firearms training has moved forward. A lot of the knowledge and basic "how-to" is different now, and a lot of it is thanks to a studied, scientific approach.

People don't learn to shoot their combat pistols one-handed anymore, for example (check out all the pics of GIs using their 1911s). Now we have a few different two-handed shooting styles, and anybody thinking that the old one-handed style is going to fly would probably be looked at as very old-fashioned at best.

FortCourageArmory
12-15-2007, 11:16 AM
I remember seeing "Blackhawk Down" and it illustrates the point. One of the Delta guys was getting his food in the mess hall when a Ranger captain started to berate him for having his M4 locked, loaded and the safety off. The Delta guy just looked at the captain and held up his trigger finger and said, "here's my safety, sir" and walked off to eat. Pretty much sums up my feelings on the subject.

BillCA
12-15-2007, 1:15 PM
If you go back in time 100 years ago, firearms were available but not nearly in the same #'s they are now. The population was smaller back then, too. Just through natural statistics, the number of people getting negligently shot (as opposed to purposely) would have been smaller. With the proliferation of the population, as well as the introduction of more firearms, it's only natural that the pure number of incidents would rise.
Well.... almost. It's not the sheer numbers of AD/ND's that one should look at, but the number per gun-handlers (per capita even). 100 years ago, more people were familiar with firearms (per capita) than today. I dare say that a visit to SF in 1900-1910 would reveal that most men and a significant number of women knew how to shoot a gun or at least handle one safely. Today, there is a huge portion of the population that has never even held a real gun of any kind.

Photos of turn-of-the-century folks will often show a finger on the trigger for three reasons. First, they knew that their guns were empty for the photograph (or at least in a safe condition). Second, many of the firearms still had an external hammer that had to be cocked. Lastly, because these were free men who used their guns as they were intended - hunting, protection or target shooting - and the finger on the trigger was symbolic of being ready to use it at any time.

I think today's photos that show the finger-on-the-frame isn't necessarily bad. In posed photos it demonstrates a commitment to safety, illustrates discipline and denotes at least some level of training (especially in group photos). This technique is less than about 20 years old so it is a fairly recent invention.

Re: One-handed Shooting
Not to burst the bubble about the superiority of two-handed shooting (yes, it's more accurate), but the SF troops are practicing one-handed shooting and there's a move to teach it (and point-shooting) to regular troops again. The reason is simple. Your offhand may be busy - trying to drag a buddy to safety, holding your empty/jammed primary weapon, using the radio, etc.

mothergreen
12-15-2007, 2:22 PM
nobody would tell JMB to keep his booger hook off the bang switch if he somehow could post here :38:

FinalBoss
12-15-2007, 3:06 PM
Very good points

Rob P.
12-15-2007, 3:33 PM
125 years ago people KNEW that a firearm was loaded because it WAS loaded. ALWAYS. This is not true in today's world where people know that a firearm is UNloaded but we're supposed to treat it like it is loaded.

It has nothing to do with fingers or triggers. We invent rules that say "keep you finger off the trigger" to perpetuate the awareness that it is a gun and not an everyday tool for food and defense.

And the new design of self cocking / always dangerous handguns don't help. There is a reason JMB made the 1911 SA only. SA guns can't go off "accidentally" even if you pull the trigger unless the hammer is cocked. And the hammer isn't cocked unless you're going to shoot something. So, even if lil' Joe Jr did get his hands on the gun and pull the trigger he can't do anything with it unless he cocks the hammer first. And any kid big enough to cock a hammer had already had firearms training enough to know who, what, when, and where to shoot.

So, at the time, trigger fingers on triggers didn't mean anything.

mothergreen
12-15-2007, 4:04 PM
I thought he made it SA cuz DA technology didn't exist yet:D

good points by all. remember make your children gun proof not your guns childproof ;)

Turbinator
12-15-2007, 4:32 PM
First, they knew that their guns were empty for the photograph (or at least in a safe condition).

Hmm, just like all those negligent shootings where the shooter "knew" the gun was safe?

Turby

Rob P.
12-15-2007, 8:24 PM
I thought he made it SA cuz DA technology didn't exist yet:D

good points by all. remember make your children gun proof not your guns childproof ;)

The Model 1889 Colt revolver was DA so the technology and engineering knowledge to make DA pistols was available in 1911. It is just a sear engagement linkage after all. Browning chose to make the 1911 SA because it was safer that way.

The reason it is safer for an autococker to be SA is that at that point in history firearms were KEPT loaded at all times. This means there was a round in the chamber and a full magazine for pistols. A pistol with a DA trigger system can be fired by anyone or anything which pulls the trigger. However, a SA pistol needs to be cocked before it can be fired. Adding a safety selector and a grip safety means that the pistol cannot be fired unless one INTENDS it to be fired and the weapon is held in a way that all the safeties are disengaged. (Yes, we all know that 1911's can be fired if the safety is off, the hammer down, and one strikes the hammer hard enough. So can any of the SA peacemakers of the time. This is just physics not oversight.)

This SA points given above are not true with today's plastic fantastic lineup which are almost all DA and have almost no true safety mechanisms. Glocks and ND's are almost synonymous to the point that some Glock's being holstered can have an ND. You CANNOT do this with a SA automatic - it is impossible if the hammer is "cocked and locked" or down.

mothergreen
12-15-2007, 8:36 PM
ah, didn't know that learn somethin new every day. my glocks are plenty safe:D but it makes sense that that is why the finger out of the trigger guard is the way now.

Pulsar
12-15-2007, 9:13 PM
Not to mention DA is kind of an answer to a question no one ever asked for auto pistols. DA on auto pistols only really started making sense when hammerless guns started coming on the market.

I know I just opened a nasty can of worms here.

N6ATF
12-15-2007, 11:18 PM
One of these days I might just get my USP converted to var. 9 (SA only) since I couldn't find one already in that configuration in about a year of searching (almost all var. 1 SA/DA)... to me, DA is crap anyway.

mothergreen
12-15-2007, 11:47 PM
Not to mention DA is kind of an answer to a question no one ever asked for auto pistols. DA on auto pistols only really started making sense when hammerless guns started coming on the market.

I know I just opened a nasty can of worms here.

my first handgun was a glock. so the first guns I got to know how to shoot well were double action heavy pull. I bought my first 1911 not to long ago. it practically shoots itself. a hammerless gun with the trigger of a 1911 would be nice. but I can shoot em all.

BillCA
12-16-2007, 9:12 AM
Just to set the record straight...

The reason it is safer for an autococker to be SA is that at that point in history firearms were KEPT loaded at all times. This means there was a round in the chamber and a full magazine for pistols. A pistol with a DA trigger system can be fired by anyone or anything which pulls the trigger. However, a SA pistol needs to be cocked before it can be fired. Adding a safety selector and a grip safety means that the pistol cannot be fired unless one INTENDS it to be fired and the weapon is held in a way that all the safeties are disengaged.

Look at a Colt 1905 .45 pistol and the 1903 .38 Auto pocket pistols shows that a safety lever was not considered necessary on all semi-auto pistols.

At the point where JMB was designing what would become the 1911, his original designs were less than perfect. Both the grip safety and the thumb safety were add-ons after his first design proposal (Colt 1905). Why? Because as a military sidearm it was already decided that it would be carried without a round under the hammer and that the slide would be operated in order to use the pistol. After early trials, a thumb safety was added. In military trials it was decided that the pistol needed a safety to prevent discharge if dropped or mishandled so a grip safety was added.

When the new 1911 pistol was first delivered, several senior Army staff officers were concerned that there were too many "gadgets" on the pistol (levers and safeties) and that it would be "complicated" to instruct soldiers to safely operate the pistol.

mothergreen
12-16-2007, 11:05 AM
interesting.. and now they turn away the simple glock for more gadgets on the m9 :rolleyes:

Greg-Dawg
12-16-2007, 11:24 AM
It's called, "Times have changed". I don't think the "Finger Off the Trigger" phrase was popular back than as now.

M. Sage
12-16-2007, 2:02 PM
125 years ago people KNEW that a firearm was loaded because it WAS loaded. ALWAYS. This is not true in today's world where people know that a firearm is UNloaded but we're supposed to treat it like it is loaded.

It has nothing to do with fingers or triggers. We invent rules that say "keep you finger off the trigger" to perpetuate the awareness that it is a gun and not an everyday tool for food and defense.

... I just shot a run-and-gun rifle competition, and whenever I had to move, my finger was off the trigger. The rifle was loaded: I knew it was loaded, it's an autoloader, the mag was still full, and the safety was off. Those were the reasons I had my finger off the trigger.

FWIW, I'm pretty "casual" about my guns, but muzzle control and keeping my finger off the trigger are the two big ones that I worry about around the house.

supersonic
12-16-2007, 2:16 PM
http://bp2.blogger.com/_Plr3VyISKcg/RkY38JXS-HI/AAAAAAAAADo/J_A03mFmACM/s400/feinsteinAK47.jpg

God, does this picture make me want to shout a word that starts with the letter "C" and ends with a "T"!!!!!!!!!

M. Sage
12-16-2007, 2:18 PM
Carrot!

762cavalier
12-16-2007, 2:38 PM
Carrot? I was thinking

CORRUPT:eek:;)

N6ATF
12-16-2007, 11:18 PM
COPOUT!

mothergreen
12-17-2007, 12:35 AM
funny my thought was a 4 letter word.:ban:

M. Sage
12-17-2007, 5:00 AM
funny my thought was a 4 letter word.:ban:

Hmm.. Can't think of one that short.

5968
12-17-2007, 9:03 AM
I remember seeing "Blackhawk Down" and it illustrates the point. One of the Delta guys was getting his food in the mess hall when a Ranger captain started to berate him for having his M4 locked, loaded and the safety off. The Delta guy just looked at the captain and held up his trigger finger and said, "here's my safety, sir" and walked off to eat. Pretty much sums up my feelings on the subject.

You beat me to it!

Rob P.
12-17-2007, 10:39 AM
God, does this picture make me want to shout a word that starts with the letter "C" and ends with a "T"!!!!!!!!!

Cart?

Cast?

Am I close?

supersonic
12-17-2007, 11:52 AM
Hmm.. Can't think of one that short.

HMMMM.....Neither can I. Some peoples' minds are simply in the GUTTER!!!!!!:rolleyes::ban:

supersonic
12-17-2007, 11:56 AM
Cart?

Cast?

Am I close?

Nope! "CANYOUSAYIDIOT?!!!!!!!!!";)

thedonger
12-17-2007, 12:03 PM
nobody would tell JMB to keep his booger hook off the bang switch if he somehow could post here :38:

:rofl2:

Booger hook & bang switch. I like that.

mothergreen
12-17-2007, 1:31 PM
feel free to use it donger heh.

sage :p rhymes with bunt :eek:

Rob P.
12-17-2007, 2:36 PM
feel free to use it donger heh.

sage :p rhymes with bunt :eek:


Cake????

But you said it started with a C and ended with a T so it can't be "bunt cake". Hmmm. I gotta think about this summore.


Celt? Nah, I don't think she's Irish.

Cent? Nope, spends too much of our money.

Chat? Close, but the fact that she talks out her butt a lot isn't insulting when it's true.

Chit?

Waitaholdit - A "chit" is a: 1) child; 2) debt; 3) letter, or; 4) little thing. This could be it! Feinswoggle absolutely IS a big "chit". We know this for a fact so "chit" MUST BE the word you were thinking of. Yes? Do I win? Well? Do I?

(breathlessly waiting for the prize winning notification)

mothergreen
12-17-2007, 2:41 PM
you just won a free hug :grouphug: its a california aproved safe and sane prize