TexasCHLforum.com

This is simple. If a gun's safties don't meet with your logic then another gun choice is in order.

Embalmo wrote:I keep hearing safety off is foolish when holstering a 1911, so the the grip safety is useless; or at best a redundancy? I seriously don't expect to be a 1911 owner anytime soon-The only one I've seen so far that I could conceal is a Colt with a short barrel that cost $899 @ Academy.

Sooo-If the grip safety is so unreliable and useless, I think I would prefer having one without a grip safety. Given the choice between a Bersa UC 9 with a grip safety and a Bersa UC9 without a grip safety I'd choose the latter; that is, of course, unless the grip safety afforded me the luxury of leaving the gun cocked in my holster.

I guess my question is: What good is a grip safety? Maybe it keeps the gun from discharging when dropped. I've just Googled everywhere and I can't find a good answer.

Embalmo

The purpose of the grip safety is to help prevent a negligent discharge if the trigger is pressed when the gun is not being held in a proper firing grip. It does this by blocking the rear portion of the trigger bow from moving rearward enough to release the hammer sear.

When the gun is held in a proper firing grip, there is enough pressure on the grip safety to clear the trigger bow and allow the gun to fire. It is a simple and effective backstop to proper exercise of the 4 rules of gun safety, which it is not intended to replace.

Embalmo wrote:I keep hearing safety off is foolish when holstering a 1911, so the the grip safety is useless; or at best a redundancy? I seriously don't expect to be a 1911 owner anytime soon-The only one I've seen so far that I could conceal is a Colt with a short barrel that cost $899 @ Academy.

Sooo-If the grip safety is so unreliable and useless, I think I would prefer having one without a grip safety. Given the choice between a Bersa UC 9 with a grip safety and a Bersa UC9 without a grip safety I'd choose the latter; that is, of course, unless the grip safety afforded me the luxury of leaving the gun cocked in my holster.

I guess my question is: What good is a grip safety? Maybe it keeps the gun from discharging when dropped. I've just Googled everywhere and I can't find a good answer.

Embalmo

If the grip safety is not depressed, the trigger can't be pulled all the way, but any mechanical safety can fail.

It's easy to depress the grip safety while holstering, either by accident or out of habit, which is why the thumb safety should be on when holstering.

The safeties on a 1911 are not that big of a deal, use them or don't carry one. It will become very natural after a little practice.

CompVest wrote:This is simple. If a gun's safties don't meet with your logic then another gun choice is in order.

I'm not asking anyone's opinion of whether or not I should buy one, or if you think the safety is good or bad. I'm interested in the "Why". Why does the 1911 have 2 safeties when most other guns only have 1 or none. Should non-1911's have a grip safety? Would a 1911 be fine without a grip safety. Would the grip safety suffice if the thumb safety didn't exist. Was it perhaps put there to protect soldiers if their thumb safety didn't get engaged or was broken in combat.

I have looked all over the internet searching, "purpose of grip safety," and "why grip safety." And those searches lead to opinion threads, generally about why people hate them or love them, or how to circumvent them.

Embalmo

JMB musta thought the same thing after designing the 1911 and put it into practice in the design of the Browning Hi-Power.

Point is buy and use correctly whichever you like.

Embalmo wrote:I keep hearing safety off is foolish when holstering a 1911, so the the grip safety is useless; or at best a redundancy? I seriously don't expect to be a 1911 owner anytime soon-The only one I've seen so far that I could conceal is a Colt with a short barrel that cost $899 @ Academy.

The problem is that the grip safety is depressed by your hand to disengage it while holding the pistol in a shooting grip. That happens to also be how you are holding it when you holster it. So your hand, which is partially wrapped around the grips, disengages the grip safety when you are pushing the gun into the holster. So if the thumb safety is off, and you are depressing the grip safety, and something snags the short, light, 1911 trigger, you get to take a ride to the hospital... ...if you survive.

IF you are insistent on carrying it cocked and unlocked, then the only thing to do is to either A) holster the gun with hammer down on a loaded chamber and then cock it after holstering (BTW, there is no reliably safe way to lower the hammer on a live round, so this method is NOT recommended); OR B) holster it cocked and locked and then unsafe it after holstering.

But since the thumb safety is right there in the ergonomically perfect position with an easy to find and feel lever with such a positive "snick" as it goes on or off, why not just take advantage of it and use it? The gun is perfect as JMB designed it. Everything we've done to them since 1911 is just gilding on the lily.

BTW, here is another perspective... My very first ever firearm was my dad's service .45 from dubya dubya too — manufactured by Ithaca in 1943. That's the gun I first learned to shoot pistols with. For years, thumb-safeties were the only thing I knew. So for a guy like me, guns without external safeties seem as unnatural to me as guns with external safeties might seem to a lifelong Glock owner, for instance. So, when I bought my USP Compact (a DA/SA pistol), it came with right handed controls. I'm left handed. Now, I carried it at first decocked, safety off, with the OEM 14 lb. hammer spring... ...which meant that I didn't carry it that often because that first trigger pull was a woolly bugger. Our member killerfly128 showed me where I could find an ambidextrous safety lever for it; and another member, it might have been Carrots, alerted me to the fact that an aftermarket 10 lb hammer spring is available to tame that stiff SA trigger (which also correspondingly lightens the SA trigger pull). Now I can carry the USP cocked and locked, just like my 1911s, and so there is no problem with muscle memory.

BTW, I just realized that I didn't really answer your question.

IIRC, the grip safety was added at the Army's request during a series of competitions between Colt, Savage, DWM, Knoble, at other early autoloader manufacturers. I think all the pistols were required to have one.





The Colt/Browning design eventually won, and became the M1911.

Then, as now, semiautos made some people nervous.

The grip safety is simple, effective, and hasn't caused me any problems.

So your hand, which is partially wrapped around the grips, disengages the grip safety when you are pushing the gun into the holster. So if the thumb safety is off, and you are depressing the grip safety, and something snags the short, light, 1911 trigger, you get to take a ride to the hospital... ...if you survive.

Thanks-This is the answer I've been looking for. Without a thumb safety the phrase "1911 leg" would've been coined long before "Glock Leg". Since my only experience is carrying DA with a round chambered, and no safety, the grip safety would make me feel a lot more comfortable carrying locked and loaded if I won the lottery and could afford that short barreled Colt at Academy.

M. Ball Moe

Embalmo wrote: I'm not asking anyone's opinion of whether or not I should buy one, or if you think the safety is good or bad. I'm interested in the "Why". Why does the 1911 have 2 safeties when most other guns only have 1 or none.

MOJO answered this one for you...

MoJo wrote:If the 1911s we carry today were like John M. Browning first designed them there would be no thumb safety. When the gun was presented to the Army the know it alls in the ordnance board insisted there had to be a thumb safety.

For the whole story click here and select HISTORY from the menu on the left of the webpage...
http://www.sightm1911.com/

Should non-1911's have a grip safety?

Not necessarily although some do, Springfield XD; some revolvers even have them.

Would a 1911 be fine without a grip safety.

Probably so. There are plenty of semis with no grip safety. JMBs other masterpiece, the Browning HP does not have a grip safety and plenty of people carry (or have carried) those as combat weapons too. With that said, I like the redundant grip safety of the 1911 and would not disable it on a carry gun.

Would the grip safety suffice if the thumb safety didn't exist.

As a combat weapon or a concealed carry weapon, I would say, "no" because the thumb safety on a 1911 actually locks the slide in place when engaged. I would imagine it could be difficult to re-holster one without the thumb safety engaged or missing altogether. And, when you look at how the two safeties actually work, I would again have to say, "no". Here's why...the thumb safety actually blocks the sear from moving and releasing the hammer. The grip safety on the other hand, only keeps the trigger from moving to the rear and depressing the sear. Because of this, I think the thumb safety is entirely more reliable and the grip safety is only a secondary safety at best.

Embalmo wrote:So your hand, which is partially wrapped around the grips, disengages the grip safety when you are pushing the gun into the holster. So if the thumb safety is off, and you are depressing the grip safety, and something snags the short, light, 1911 trigger, you get to take a ride to the hospital... ...if you survive.

Thanks-This is the answer I've been looking for. Without a thumb safety the phrase "1911 leg" would've been coined long before "Glock Leg". Since my only experience is carrying DA with a round chambered, and no safety, the grip safety would make me feel a lot more comfortable carrying locked and loaded if I won the lottery and could afford that short barreled Colt at Academy.

M. Ball Moe

The thumb safety is more likely to be helpful during reholstering. The act of pushing the gun into the holster while holding the gun properly will keep the grip safety depressed and therefore not engaged.

The most important antidote to Glockleg (or kimberleg or sigleg, etc.) is to unfailingly observe Rule 3 by keeping the finger out of the trigger guard while reholstering (and any other time the gun is not on target and you've made the decision to fire).

The second most important antidote is to make sure that no loose straps, strings, keyrings, flaps of clothing, or other doodads can enter the holster with the gun and depress the trigger to cause an ND.

Embalmo wrote:

WildBill wrote:

Embalmo wrote:G?

I've never owned a 1911 because cost and size have been too restrictive to even bother with worrying about the trigger. Still, I love a SA/DA trigger that I can draw and shoot with nothing to touch but the trigger; or I can click the hammer back if I have that extra 1/2 second to take aim.

Embalmo

You can get a Rock Island in 4" for under $500 easily and a 5" for under $400. Both conceal well, are very reliable and more than accurate enough for CCW.

MoJo wrote:If the 1911s we carry today were like John M. Browning first designed them there would be no thumb safety. When the gun was presented to the Army the know it alls in the ordnance board insisted there had to be a thumb safety. Since the thumb safety is part of the gun now I wouldn't try to circumvent it. Liability issues and all.

I thought it was the grip safety the Army insisted on having?