Safety VS safety?

[NHT3]

A recent thread about a Sig 320 turned into somewhat of a debate on the usefulness/need for active safeties. After some thought I think, we as a firearms community made a critical mistake decades ago. I would like other opinions on the matter so feel free to follow me into the weeds or try to lead me out.


The terms, perception is reality and words matter are heard almost daily and in today's world both have relevance. Have you every pondered why we continue use the term “safety” when talking about what is actually a mechanical block on a trigger/firing pin/striker. I learned the difference in a mechanical “safety” and Safety, always treating a firearm like it's loaded therefore not pointing at anything I didn't want to shoot, when my dad started taking me hunting at 10 years old.
We have gained so many new gun owners in last few years that have no prior firearms knowledge and believe the mechanical safety lever is all that is required to be safe. For them perception is reality and the word safety equates to making a firearm completely inert and incapable of damaging anything.
Any ideas on how to make people understand the difference in “Safety” (noun) an active safety lever and “safety” (verb) a mindset to keep you safe? Too many believe that simply flipping a lever renders a firearm completely inert eliminating the need for the 4 basic safety rules.
Maybe a different term like hammer or firing pin block rather than “safety”?
I don't know the answer but I know the terminology we've been using for over a hundred years is contributing to people literally shooting themselves in the foot, or worse. Those of us that know the difference need to figure out a way to spread the word. Any ideas?

 

[OneBadV8]

I remember taking classes with Mindset Labs back in the day and he always stressed the importance of only having one set of fun handling skills.

It’s much easier to always handle firearms the exact same way (always loaded vs relaxing because you think a safety lever can’t fail).

It’s always stuck with me, blue guns, training barrels, nerf, etc. always assume the gun is loaded. Plus I don’t like to carry guns that have manual safeties, it’s an extra step I don’t want in a high stress situation.

Safe gun handling skills trumps a manual safety every time.

Maybe we just change the narrative or terms from “safety” to something like “safe gun handling” or something that means that

 

[KellyinAvon]

Hhhhmmm, a lot to think about here. Understanding how your firearm operates and it's inherent "safety" (a Glock has no manual safety lever, but has 3 safeties; a Colt Peacemaker is called a 6-shooter, but is not safe to carry with a round under the firing pin) is a big part.

Why do have have this gun? Is it for carry/home defense/safe queen/range toy/plinking/in case of bears?

Do I have an "I can NEVER be complacent" mindset?

 

[Sigblitz]

Agree with always loaded and no manual safety for keeping that safe mindset.
Finger off the trigger because no manual safety.
Press check for what? Always loaded.
Good holster to guard the trigger.

 

[OneBadV8]

Good holster to guard the trigger.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

It’s always stuck with me, blue guns, training barrels, nerf, etc. always assume the gun is loaded.

Literally defeats the purpose of owning them, unless specifically being used to teach gun safety at that time.

always treating a firearm like it's loaded therefore not pointing at anything I didn't want to shoot

Is more problematic. I've explained my thoughts on it multiple times so will just give a condensed version. Telling someone to 'treat it like it's loaded' implies there's a way to treat it unloaded. If I tell you treat it like it's a blued gun, that obviously implies there's a way to treat nickel guns I just haven't shown you yet. There aren't two sets of rules for mechanically functional firearms, loaded or not, so creating a subset that requires you to play pretend is meaningless. You've shot with my son when he was pretty young. I never once had him play pretend. I taught him how to handle a gun, period, until it was mechanically disabled such as disassembled.

Have you every pondered why we continue use the term “safety” when talking about what is actually a mechanical block on a trigger/firing pin/striker.

Not really, but I figure some guy who understood marketing coined it. It's an inherently dangerous object and lots of people really feel good about buying safety to leash that danger. I doubt you'll change the nomenclature at this point in history, but I don't think it matters. Reinforcing the idea that 'safe' isn't a binary condition but is a sliding scale. There is some inherent risk with handling firearms and your actions and the conditions in which you do so can instigate or mitigate that risk. Probably more than a 6 year old needs to know, but adults should be quite capable of grasping that. It's one more thing that has to be defeated before your error becomes smoke and noise.

 

[JohnP82]

Excellent topic.

I enjoy nothing more than helping new shooters get involved and help them pick out their first handgun.
Often times one of their "requirements" is that it has a "safety"...which promptly gets my attention as to why that is a requirement. I personally will not carry a handgun with a manual safety, but that's just my personal preference and I don't push it on others. It just sends up a red flag to me as to why they "have" to have one. Makes me worry that they think it can solely be relied on to make up for a possible user error. I always have a lengthy discussion on that matter.

Again, no problem with someone wanting a manual safety on their firearm, as long as they understand that it does not replace safe gun handling overall.

 

[cedartop]

Literally defeats the purpose of owning them, unless specifically being used to teach gun safety at that time.



Is more problematic. I've explained my thoughts on it multiple times so will just give a condensed version. Telling someone to 'treat it like it's loaded' implies there's a way to treat it unloaded. If I tell you treat it like it's a blued gun, that obviously implies there's a way to treat nickel guns I just haven't shown you yet. There aren't two sets of rules for mechanically functional firearms, loaded or not, so creating a subset that requires you to play pretend is meaningless. You've shot with my son when he was pretty young. I never once had him play pretend. I taught him how to handle a gun, period, until it was mechanically disabled such as disassembled.



Not really, but I figure some guy who understood marketing coined it. It's an inherently dangerous object and lots of people really feel good about buying safety to leash that danger. I doubt you'll change the nomenclature at this point in history, but I don't think it matters. Reinforcing the idea that 'safe' isn't a binary condition but is a sliding scale. There is some inherent risk with handling firearms and your actions and the conditions in which you do so can instigate or mitigate that risk. Probably more than a 6 year old needs to know, but adults should be quite capable of grasping that. It's one more thing that has to be defeated before your error becomes smoke and noise.

Agree with you totally on blue guns etc.

For a while now I have been questioning the efficacy of trying to teach the 4 rules. As you mention at least one defies logic, and most people don't remember them after the initial introduction. I really like how Tom Givens boils it down to 2 absolutes. Muzzle discipline and trigger discipline. I think these are pretty easy concepts to grasp and should be able to be remembered even by the most casual gun user . There is nothing wrong with 3 of the 4 rules, but they can still be encapsulated into the 2 bullet points of muzzle discipline and trigger discipline.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I really like how Tom Givens boils it down to 2 absolutes. Mizzle discipline and trigger discipline. I think these are pretty easy concepts to grasp and should be able to be remembered even by the most casual gun user .

Agreed. If you only have to do those two things and can still mess up *one* of them without life altering consequences you're golden.

If you need to play pretend, pretend Sofia Vergara is watching you and she's super turned on by safe gun handling.

 

[cedartop]

Agreed. If you only have to do those two things and can still mess up *one* of them without life altering consequences you're golden.

If you need to play pretend, pretend Sofia Vergara is watching you and she's super turned on by safe gun handling.

How do you know about my obsession with Sofia Vergara?

 

[Sigblitz]

How do you know about my obsession with Sofia Vergara?

She whispered it in his ear?

 

[Creedmoor]

A recent thread about a Sig 320 turned into somewhat of a debate on the usefulness/need for active safeties. After some thought I think, we as a firearms community made a critical mistake decades ago. I would like other opinions on the matter so feel free to follow me into the weeds or try to lead me out.


The terms, perception is reality and words matter are heard almost daily and in today's world both have relevance. Have you every pondered why we continue use the term “safety” when talking about what is actually a mechanical block on a trigger/firing pin/striker. I learned the difference in a mechanical “safety” and Safety, always treating a firearm like it's loaded therefore not pointing at anything I didn't want to shoot, when my dad started taking me hunting at 10 years old.
We have gained so many new gun owners in last few years that have no prior firearms knowledge and believe the mechanical safety lever is all that is required to be safe. For them perception is reality and the word safety equates to making a firearm completely inert and incapable of damaging anything.
Any ideas on how to make people understand the difference in “Safety” (noun) an active safety lever and “safety” (verb) a mindset to keep you safe? Too many believe that simply flipping a lever renders a firearm completely inert eliminating the need for the 4 basic safety rules.
Maybe a different term like hammer or firing pin block rather than “safety”?
I don't know the answer but I know the terminology we've been using for over a hundred years is contributing to people literally shooting themselves in the foot, or worse. Those of us that know the difference need to figure out a way to spread the word. Any ideas?

What evidence do you have that this is a problem with new or old firearm owners?
I don't believe I ever heard, read or witnessed that mindset.

 

[indyblue]

My feeling is that EVERYONE makes mistakes or will make one at some point in life.

A manual safety for me is just a little insurance against that one time things don't go as planned.

How many here carry a cocked 1911 without the safety engaged?

I'd rather have it and not need it than.....

 

[SheepDog4Life]

Whether a no-thumb-safety striker fired firearm, a firearm with a safety/safeties, or a de-cocker DA/SA firearm... the 4 rules still apply.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

What evidence do you have that this is a problem with new or old firearm owners?
I don't believe I ever heard, read or witnessed that mindset.

I have heard 'but the safety was on' in multiple interviews after a UD resulted in injury to self or others. Not quite as often as 'but I cleared it', but still frequent.

 

[Creedmoor]

Whether a no-thumb-safety striker fired firearm, a firearm with a safety/safeties, or a de-cocker DA/SA firearm... the 4 rules still apply.

Exactly.

 

[loudgroove]

With the few people I got started with firearms, and with my kids. I've had to learn to say upfront. ANYTHING you have seen on t.v. forget about it. Those are actors that has probably never held a real gun in their life. They have a director telling them how to look bad a$$ for the movie. I just have found it easier to teach someone safe handling after stressing that. Including the scene where the good guy has the bad guy cornered and the bad guy tells the good guy his safety is on. lol Yeah that doesn't happen in real life either.

 

[bgcatty]

A manual safety would surely have prevented a lot of accidental discharges along the way. Notwithstanding this obvious stance a little common sense and following the basic safety rules at all times would also reduce negligent discharges. My !

 

[BehindBlueI's]

How do you know about my obsession with Sofia Vergara?

I just assume every straight male old enough to own a handgun is...

 

[BehindBlueI's]

What evidence do you have that this is a problem with new or old firearm owners?
I don't believe I ever heard, read or witnessed that mindset.

This just came to mind, my very first person accidentally shot as a new patrolman was an older guy with a cheap-o pocket carry. I'm drawing a blank on the brand name, but they used to be pretty prevalent in the pot-metal-cheap gun community. Dammit, I'll edit it in later. *RAVEN* It was a Raven.

Anyway, he was a passenger in a vehicle and it went off in his pocket. Probably from keys or something else in the same pocket. He said the safety was on but must have slipped off, and those guns sure AF didn't have very good tension to stay in the correct position. They were right next to a fire truck so they flagged it down. When I got there they'd cut his pants open and there was a big bloody spot over his...gibbly bits. I asked if he'd shot himself in the...gibbly bits and the medic said no, the thigh, they'd just laid the bloody cloth over on the gibblies.

He had definitely relied on the safety instead of a more common sense pocket holster/nothing else in the pocket. God only knows how long he'd gotten away with it until it bit him in the metaphorical ass/literal thigh, but when it did he probably learned a little something.