View Single Post
Old 03-27-2020, 4:51 PM
Vinnie Boombatz's Avatar
Vinnie Boombatz Vinnie Boombatz is offline
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 446
iTrader: 3 / 100%

Originally Posted by freedom-lover View Post
Stumbled across another thread on a first time gun owner who purchased a 92FS. Lots of folks recommended conversion of the de-cocker to a 92G, which would eliminate the gun's safety. Out of boredom, I thought this might be a fun project and then when ordering the parts, I came across a skeleton hammer Beretta has for the 92FS. That looks cool, too. Why not do both at the same time.

However, any thoughts on a semi-auto with no safety? Doesn't every single semi have a safety - from 1911s to every S&W, Sig, etc.?
You're referring to my thread. I'm the guy who replaced the safety with the Beretta decocker only kit.

There are quite a few DA/SA guns that don't have a true safety. The Sig P226 comes to mind. The long, heavier DA pull is in essence the safety. I'm completely comfortable with that, especially after going to a firearms safety course and repeatedly putting the gun's safety on accidentally when doing the malfunction drills. I did start getting used to it and remembering to flip the safety off after cleaning the malfunction and going in for a shot, but even after that I'd still end up putting the safety on once in a while. IF that was a moment where my life depended on it, I'd probably be dead.

At home my Beretta is kept in a bolted down, locked Fort Knox pistol box, I don't have kids or anyone around that could get to the firearm nd that's basically there for theft prevention.

I guess the answer is it's a question each person has to address individually and decide what they're comfortable with. Neither is a right or wrong answer. FWIW, everyone I know that's carried a Beretta 92FS either as an LEO or in the military would always carry the pistol with one in the chamber, decocked with the safety off.

Last edited by Vinnie Boombatz; 03-27-2020 at 4:55 PM..
Reply With Quote