Magazine disconnect safety - why?
I've been wanting to get a S&W 1076 for quite some time, I recently discovered that the FBI version had no magazine disconnect whereas the public version has one. This seems totally backwards to me. The logic FOR it seems to be:
If an assailant gets ahold of your gun you can pop out the magazine to render it unoperable. (my question is why let the person get so close?)
Against it is:
When changing magazines you always have one in the chamber (provided it didn't run the mag empty and hold back the slide) and could fire it at an attacker should they "charge" you while reloading.
Did I miss anything? I just don't really see the reasoning to have one, except MAYBE for a cop on the beat. However, I think I'd opt for the ability to fire that one in the chamber if that cop were me. What do you guys think?
If an assailant gets ahold of your gun you can pop out the magazine to render it unoperable. (my question is why let the person get so close?)
Against it is:
When changing magazines you always have one in the chamber (provided it didn't run the mag empty and hold back the slide) and could fire it at an attacker should they "charge" you while reloading.
Did I miss anything? I just don't really see the reasoning to have one, except MAYBE for a cop on the beat. However, I think I'd opt for the ability to fire that one in the chamber if that cop were me. What do you guys think?
0
-
let me take a stab at this....lets see, a govt agency....politicaly correct mindset.....safety first....agents work in pairs anyway.....AD mishaps during loading........guns were leftover stock bid on and bought by lowest bidder..........policy policy policy. did i hit anything valid yet?
former air operations officer SEAL Delivery Vehicle Team 2. former navy skeet team, navy rifle/pistol team member. co-owner skeetmaster tubes inc.. owner/operator professional shooting instruction.0 -
I sold an AMT to an LEO. That was one of the first questions he asked...
Maybe a gun without a mag is seen as "empty", so if someone "dry-fired" with a round in the chamber there would be no discharge.
Tactical reloading outweighes this safety consideration, IMHO.
(Oh no! I've been on line too much... first time I've used an abbreviation) [V]
0 -
Apparently intended to prevent unintentional discharges by ignoramouses and idiots, mag disconnects are so-called safety features that can get you killed in a pinch. The only "reasoning" going on here is flawed. Too stupid to realize that a round in the chamber can still be fired is too stupid to handle a firearm.
redcedars0 -
Amen Redcedars! Mag safeties like the ones in S&W and the Browning Hi Power are silly bones thrown to the politically correct fruitcakes. The assumption is that FBI agents are of a superior grade of marksman. The extensive training they get eliminates the need for such a safety whereas us "civilians" are just looking for a way to blow our own heads off. The truth that we all know as responsible gun owners that have learned to handle our weapons in both sporting and tactical scenarios is that the only gun safety that matters in the one in your head! Plus after S&W got in bed with Clinton I wouldn't own one.
Whats next? A ban on automatic transmissions?0 -
This is not the same S&W. They ran the Redcoats out & the company is under new ownership. 0 -
Some guys remove the magazine disconnects from their pistols--it is not difficult to do. However, if you remove any factory safety feature, and get involved in an "incident" where you use that gun, the civil courts will nail your hide to the wall.
You will never find a ligitimate gunsmith who will remove a safety feature for you...because of the potential liability.
For whatever that is worth,
Rafter-S0 -
Rafter-S, I can see where there might be liability if someone was injured by an accidental discharge after the magazine safety was removed. What is the rational for being held civily liable over an incident? I am assuming an incident in which you used the gun for self defense. Please give a citation of cases where this happened. 0 -
We really need to go to the General Discussion for this but here goes:
A lawyer for the poor dead victim's family can choose about 50 different ways to go after you in civil court. Just one of his "paintings" of you would be as a wreckless, irresponsible know-it-all...as proved by your removal of safety devices on lethal equipment. He would also say you likely didn't intend to shoot the poor victim--just intended to hold him at gunpoint until police arrived, but because the gun had safeties disconnected (by you), the gun accidentally discharged. So you accidentally killed (no longer self defence) his client's breadwinning member of the family.
This happens frequently in self defence shootings. You may not have criminal charges filed, but the civil suits can line up.
Read some of Mosab Auub's dissertations on the subject. He is an "expert witness" who frequently testifies in shooting cases.
Respectfully,
Rafter-S
added as an edit: Forgot to mention the gunsmith who you talked into removing a safety. Now the "other side" has a potential "deep pocket" to go after. Especially if he works through a big sporting goods store--the lawsuits will naturally expand to include them.0 -
Rafter-S has a good point. Removing or disabling so-called safety features just gives the plaintiff's lawyer another issue.
Suppose your altered firearm is handled in your absence and by a neighbor. The neighbor removes the magazine and thinking the firearm is now unloaded, unintentionally fires the gun and is injured. Now one of the plaintiff's arguments will be that the injury would not have occurred but for the modification that disabled or removed the safety feature.
I find all the "dead man" switches on my lawn mowers to be a real pain in the a$$, and I disable at least two on my lawn tractor. I have figured out another work-around for the "dead-man" for my push mowers. But when I use casual labor to help with yard work, I put them back in operation, for the very reasons Rafter-S describes.
But lawn mowers are not firearms. I personally don't own any guns with mag disconnectors, and I would probably not be interested in a gun with one (except as a collector's item). However, if I did, I don't think I would remove or disable the feature. And having a gunsmith do the work simply adds another set of "pockets" for plaintiff's lawyer to go after, and the gunsmith's insurance company probably has the deepest pockets around. Unless you are wealthy, or have homeowner's insurance that covered, a plaintiff's lawyer might not find the case worth his time, but a gunsmith with liability insurance changes all that. No matter what the result, the gunsmith might be uninsurable thereafter.
redcedars0 -
Thanks guys, so I guess I'm not the only one who has mixed feelings on this issue...
I wouldn't ever disable manual or firing pin type safeties, but to me the magazine disconnect safty has the opposite of the desired effect.
I've been looking at S&W 1076's and the civilian version has the safety but the gun is also available in limited supply in the FBI model (once issued to the FBI cadets) that doesn't have the magazine disconect safety, and the slide has a big warning across it to that fact.
I think even though it'll cost me more I'll save longer and get the FBI version to avoid any legal problems later rather than modifying the gun (which I'm not real keen on anyway).
Ya'all are the greatest, thanks! [:)]0 -
The magazine disconnect is at the heart of the latest and last gun ban by Gov Gray Davis to declare any non-disconnect gun "unsafe" in Kallifornia. Needless to say most guns don't have this feature so....[:(!]
Three Precious Metals: Gold, silver and lead0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
11 comments