All firearms require an extra bit of care and one should never be "casual" with any firearm. Lots O' Folks said the same about a C&L 1911, nothing has changed.
All firearms require an extra bit of care and one should never be "casual" with any firearm. Lots O' Folks said the same about a C&L 1911, nothing has changed.
The term double/single action is not redundant. They are double on the first pull and single after that.
Such is not known. All that is known, is that the Glock series of handgun is issued to both the United States Marine Corps Forces Special Operations Command, and the United States Navy SEALs.
Yes, that's why it's called a DOUBLE-action. The idea of the word "double" is to convey the fact that the gun has two modes of operation.
I believe that specialized units get to select whatever they want. However the common U.S. military sidearm went from the 1911 to the Beretta 92 and is now a SIG, I think.
Someone always gets into a hissy fit over some guns features..... Flavor of the week etc..... The revolver only crowd was one....
I keep a round in the chamber, but I always carry in a holster and there is no access to the trigger until the gun is drawn. I don’t do gun clips or tuck it in my waistband.
That's interesting. Unfortunately, in reality, the military puts far less time into pistol training than law enforcement. This is understandable, actually, as the military focuses on riflery. Only a small section of the military carries pistols with any kind of regularity (some officers, security forces, etc.) and their training in the pistol's use is rudimentary at best. Obviously, Spec Ops and similar units do far more work with pistols and have far better training. The comment about Glock being "specifically designed for law enforcement" seems odd; as Gaston Glock himself stated he got into designing a pistol for the singular purpose of security lucrative military contracts. The philosophy regarding the different pistols is interesting to study. The original autos were almost all single action mechanisms (1911, Luger, etc). The first double action pistol ever adopted by a military was, of course, the Walther P-38, adopted by Germany right before the Second World War. The mindset can be summed up as being that most accidental discharges are single round events, as opposed to combat, so having a heavy, long trigger pull reduces the risk of accidents, but after that long pull the pistol is now in single action mode and precision shooting to resolve a close-quarters fight is now an option. In law enforcement circles, where revolvers were king for decades, they figured it would be easier to adopt a pistol that functioned similarly; i.e. point gun, pull trigger. No safeties to fumble with, and the same trigger pull for every shot. When I was in the Border Patrol we were issued the Beretta 96D, which is built on the same platform as the military Beretta, but in .40 instead of 9mm, and used a slick slide, no safety configuration with a long Double-action pull for every shot, as the pistol automatically "decocked" itself with every shot; essentially identical to shooting a DA revolver. Obviously, the Glock was intended to be a professional's weapon; to be used by well-trained people who would understand the importance of trigger-finger discipline. Unfortunately, any training created by bureaucracy is going to cut corners, and we end up with people carrying pistols they're just not really prepared to use. This is why we have things like the "NY-1" and "NY-2" trigger modules for Glock, that raise the trigger pull weight to 8 and 12 pounds respectively, which unfortunately reduces the shootability of the pistol and increases the likelihood of a poorly trained officer being unable to shoot with any kind of precision.
Welll...... technically you are 100% correct. But the terminology has gone round and round, and now most people will call the traditional double/single action pistols simply "double action" while a pistol that automatically decocks itself between shots for a long, DA pull for every round a "Double Action Only" or "DAO". Sort of like the evolution of "automatic", "semi-automatic" and "fully automatic", I suppose...
That's funny; I had a conversation with Col.Cooper when I trained with him about this. Believe it or not, there are two schools of thought on the definition of "double" versus "single" action. The description you mention above is the one Cooper himself espoused (hence his argument there was no such thing as a "double action only"). However, my grandfather described it differently, and generally his description is the more widely accepted one (much to Cooper's chagrin). Mainly, that the term "single-action" means the trigger performs the "single action" of releasing a cocked hammer, while the term "double-action" means the trigger performs the dual action of drawing the hammer back and releasing it to fire the gun. Thus, the term "Double Action Only" means that the pistol can only be fired with a long, heavy "double action" pull and the option of cocking the hammer and firing single action is removed. I tend to ascribe to my grandfather's description; of course, he taught me this long before I'd ever even heard of Cooper, so it comes naturally to me. And, well, hey; he was my grandfather, after all!
Sorry, maybe we bumped heads in a gun forum....? Doc, as always I admire your knowledge and insight with firearms.
That's bad training. The cop should have not had his finger on the trigger. This is the same reason the rookie cop shot the health care worker trying to protect an autistic man from being shot. The cop didn't intend to shoot him, but had his finger on the trigger.
Hmm, interesting point. It does argue that those DAO autos that decock after each round and require a long, heavy pull for every shot are really single-action autos, or SAO's. I think the language tends to get in the way.
Yeah, that's why finger off the trigger, an active thumb safety, or a long, heavy pull before that first shot might prevent such things. Once you get to the shooting part with actual deliberation instead of a twitch, then the dance has begun and a nice, light trigger comes in handy.
For a new gun owner an affirmative safety is probably a good idea, but it is no substitute for how you should be trained from day 1. How you handle a firearm should be no different, manual safety or no. In fact, relying on the safety can in and of itself lead to problems. There is only one way to carry a firearm, and that is to ingrain each and every action into muscle memory, focus 100% on what you're doing when handling a firearm, and follow every safety step 100% of the time without fail. A negligent discharge causing injury REQUIRES more than one failure in that process. Having a manual safety on a firearm can sometimes cause people to take shortcuts they wouldn't if they didn't have a safety. It becomes a crutch, quite frankly. Unless you have a defective firearm or it has been modified (something you should not do with a carry gun for several reasons), fail to carry the firearm in a working holster, or fail at least two steps in basic firearm safety, you'll never accidentally shoot anyone. That said, for CCW purposes, I do tend to recommend to those new to CCW to select a firearm with either a longer trigger pull, or a heavier one. However, in every situation where I've seen someone have a negligent discharge with a Glock, the person with the firearm did at least two things wrong. The other reason you hear about Glocks "going off", is simply because there's so many of them out there. I wouldn't hesitate to carry a Glock, because how I handle a Glock is no different than how I handle my wifes Bodyguard 380, which has one of the heaviest and longest trigger pulls I've ever seen.
One aspect that must be addressed pertaining to external safety devices, beyond the false sense of security that is provided by their inclusion, is the potential for them to be activated at an inopportune time while under stress.
There is a little "cop-ism" in law enforcement circles, called "Glocking yourself." It stems from the epidemic of officers holstering their guns with their fingers on the trigger; an epic failure of Rule 3. Finger hits holster and stops, gun keeps going, loud noise. I even saw a guy "Glock" himself with a Beretta 96D. He rammed the gun into the holster with his finger on the trigger so aggressively that even that long, heavy DA pull didn't stop him from pumping a round through the bottom of his holster. Fortunately, the bullet struck the ground and no one got worse than a spattering of gravel and bullet fragments; but did he get an earful from the instructors!
Baloney. I've been using a firearm since I was 8 (a .410) and have never had an "accident". Unless there's a defect in the firearm, it's not an "accident", it's negligence.
Yep. The only case I can see being "not their fault" is a foreign object in the holster...piece of gravel...whatever. Honestly though, even that is kind of their fault. I've gotten in the habit of going two straight fingers over the trigger guard, and thumb to back of slide, just to be certain nothing catches the trigger on it's way home. Fast out, slow back is also a mantra to live by. *EDIT: They also make a backplate for the glock that pushes back for any pressure on the trigger, hence my thumb on the back of the slide comment. It's a good piece of gear.
Yep. If you carry with a safety, you have to train with it. When I was teaching my wife to shoot I had her put the safety on and off after every shot to really burn it into her muscle memory. She was pissed at me about it at the time, but she thanked me later after she understood why I did it. If you're ever in an "oh ****" situation, thinking about what you need to do isn't going to be your strong suit.
