Scary Magazine Disconnect

[bigcalidave]

I won't have any disconnects, what if in wrestling for control of your gun the mag release IS hit? Or what if you release it by accident trying to draw when the SHTF for real? What if you can't use that last round you have to save your life? Or the life of a family member? Or if you can't use the gun anymore and someone in your family picks it up to save your life and drops the mag. Wouldn't you want them to get that shot off? Point and shoot is easy. I've seen people I thought were moderately intelligent drop a mag trying to fire a gun...

[epic4444]

magazine disconnections out dated and i dont know why any company still uses it

[Quiet]

Some LE agencies like having magazine disconnects on their service sidearms.
This is due to training and liability reasons.

There was an incident awhile back, where a (i believe) Fresno PD officer had to resort to using his back-up due to his primary sidearm being disabled due to the magazine disconnect. Officer was attacked (hit several times in the head/torso with baseball bat) and knocked to the ground, while on the ground, he drew his sidearm (S&W Model 4506) and tried to shoot the suspect. However, the magazine poped out while he was struggling on the ground and the sidearm failed to fire. Officer then drew his BUG (S&W Model 36) and shot the suspect, after being hit several more times.

I don't like it and see it as another part that can fail when you need it not to.

[greasemonkey]

A loaded handgun is found on a schoolyard. An inexperienced teacher "unloads" the weapon by removing the magazine. While handling the weapon the trigger is accidentally pulled. A third party is hit and killed.

This happened. A magazine disconnect safety most certainly would have prevented this tragedy.

Two problems: 1. there was a person handling a firearm that didn't know what they were doing; 2. the teacher didn't treat it as loaded and a) pointed the firearm at people b) while messing with it. That's gross negligence, not design flaw.

[dansgold]

By definition, someone who is "inexperienced" does not know safe weapons handling procedures. So, what is you point ... that people who don't know how to handle weapons should die or be injured?

[locosway]

By definition, someone who is "inexperienced" does not know safe weapons handling procedures. So, what is you point ... that people who don't know how to handle weapons should die or be injured?

Someone wouldn't try to drive a car on the freeway without ever have been training in it's operation. Why are firearms supposed to be different?

Maybe the answer is mandatory firearms training in grade school?

[Vin496]

By definition, someone who is "inexperienced" does not know safe weapons handling procedures. So, what is you point ... that people who don't know how to handle weapons should die or be injured?

A little dramatic there.

What do you teach children to do when they see a gun? Why do we tell them this?

Just because your an adult the rules should be no different, if you have no experience with a firearm. You should not be handling a weapon. So because you saw how they worked on a T.V. show or in a game, doesn't mean you are any more experienced to handle a weapon than a 5 year old.

The teacher should not have handled the weapon if they were inexperienced themselves.

[dansgold]

There is no disagreement about what the teacher should have done ... that much is obvious to anyone who knows firearms.

A quick read of my comments places them in their proper context. I meant only to take issue with the idea that a mag disconnect "never does anyone any good".

This story is factual, but still anecdotal ... as are all the stories of an officer unable to operate a weapon in a life/death situation because the magazine gets disconnected in a struggle. Do you know of a single verifiable case where someone has gotten killed because a mag disconnect worked correctly?

I don't think they should be mandatory, but clearly they can be useful.

[greasemonkey]

By definition, someone who is "inexperienced" does not know safe weapons handling procedures. So, what is you point ... that people who don't know how to handle weapons should die or be injured?

Yeah, that's clearly my point Here, jump again, maybe you'll get the right answer next time:

[BigDogatPlay]

I used to carry S&W's for work and it was a toss up for me whether the Mag disconnect was good or bad. But I never knew how to fire mine without the Mag, so can you shed some light on that for me?

You have PM.

[nagorb]

[QUOTEI'm not at all familiar with this. Something specific to the Ruger design?[/QUOTE]
I haven't heard anything that extreme but it does say in the manual to not dry fire without a mag in.


I cant say which side I agree with as I can see positives and negatives to both, but my Ruger P345 has one and as of yet it hasn't had a problem.

[halifax]

I had my first look at a Ruger SR9 today and tested the magazine disconnect feature. To my complete surprise, it dropped the hammer with an empty magwell.

I got a primed case and loaded it, and pulled the trigger. No BOOM. The magazine disconnect doesn't lock the mechanism or disconnect the trigger instead it disconnects the firing pin from the hammer.

It works but it is scary. The first time anyway.

From what I read if the gun is dry fired with out the magazine in, or completely in, it will damage the firing pin. From what I understand it can happen extremely fast. One instance I read about it damaged the firing pin to nonoperational with in 10 dry fires.

I'm not at all familiar with this. Something specific to the Ruger design?

I haven't heard anything that extreme but it does say in the manual to not dry fire without a mag in.

I suppose that was part of the reason for my original post. Why would Ruger design their magazine disconnect to allow the hammer to drop? Most magazine disconnect designs "lock-up" the firing mechanism, do they not? Now it has been pointed out that the firearm can actually be damaged by this type of design that Ruger uses.

magazine disconnections out dated and i dont know why any company still uses it

So they can sell handguns in the CA market and, more importantly, because of asinine civil cases like this one:

Representing Victims Legal Action Project Asks Court to Strike down Gun Industry Immunity Bill as Unconstitutional

Representing Victims Legal Action Project Asks Court to Strike down Gun Industry Immunity Bill as Unconstitutional

The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, along with the Center for Constitutional Litigation, filed a petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Supreme Court on August 24, 2009, asking the Court to strike down a federal gun industry immunity law - the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) - as unconstitutional.

The case, Adames v. Beretta, arises out of the accidental shooting death of 13 year old Josh Adames, who was killed by another boy as a result of a defective Beretta handgun.

On May 5, 2001, thirteen-year old Billy Swan found his father’s Beretta 92FS handgun and removed the magazine that contained its ammunition, believing that this action had unloaded the gun. The gun, however, did not contain one of several commonplace safety features that warned users when a round remained in the chamber or prevented the gun from firing when “unloaded” in this fashion. Believing the gun was unloaded, Billy pulled the trigger, and the bullet hidden in the chamber killed his friend Josh.

Josh’s parents sued Beretta in the Circuit Court of Illinois, alleging that the firearm was unreasonably dangerous as Beretta failed to include effective warnings that indicated to foreseeable users when a round remained in the chamber or that alerted users that the gun could fire when its magazine was removed, and failed to include a magazine disconnect safety, a $10 device invented a century earlier to prevent precisely these sorts of accidents from occurring.

After the Court of Appeals of Illinois held that Beretta could be liable for the shooting because of the gun’s inadequate warnings, the Supreme Court of Illinois held that the PLCAA barred the case.

The Adames’ Petition asks the Supreme Court to hold that the PLCAA is unconstitional under the Tenth Amendment, as it dictates to states what branch of their government they must use to impose liability on gun companies, allowing gun suits to be brought if sanctioned by state legislatures, but not by state courts. The Petition also contends that the Illinois Court misread the PLCAA, and that the Act actually allows products liability actions such as the Adames.

On August 23, 2005, the Circuit Court granted Beretta’s Motion for Summary Judgment. Petitioners appealed to the Illinois Court of Appeals, who affirmed dismissal of the design defect claim, but held that the Adames could proceed with their failure to warn claim. Both parties appealed to the Supreme Court of Illinois. The Supreme Court held that the PLCAA was constitutional, and barred the Adames from presenting their case

BTW: Billy's father is a police officer. He certainly should have known better than to leave a loaded gun around with kids in the house.