boyd@mailer.cc.fsu.edu (Mickey Boyd) (06/06/91)
In article <35246@mimsy.umd.edu>, snitor!petert@uunet.UU.NET (Peter Toth) writes: #In article <35140@mimsy.umd.edu>, jalden@eleazar.dartmouth.edu (Joshua M. Alden) writes: ## I would like it to have the following characteristics: ##[...] ## I've been looking around, and I haven't found a firearm which meets ##all these criteria. I thought I'd found it in the Colt Officer's .45, ##but that's got a magazine-drop safety. Anyone know of a firearm which ##fits all or most of my criteria, or am I dreaming? # #Does disabling/removing the magazine-drop safety void the warranty ? #If not, ... Yes it would, and you would probably have to do it yourself (since no gunsmith would want to accept liability). # #Apropos: for the longest time i've been puzzled by magazine safeties. #Can anyone explain what are they good for besides rendering the gun less #than useless while reloading ? I am unsure if the original poster really meant "hammer dropping", but the purpose for a magazine safety (that which blocks the trigger when the magazine is ejected) is to allow for an easy way to make the gun "safe". That is, you can deactivate your weapon by taking out the magazine. Personally, I think it is a bit stupid to make the action of a weapon dependent upon a removable part that get's a lot of abuse. It is a political invention, just as so many other idiotic gun designs . . . . The above is IMHO. Direct flames elsewhere. -- Mickey R. Boyd | "God is a comedian playing to an FSU Computer Science | audience too afraid to laugh." Technical Support Group | email: boyd@fsucs.cs.fsu.edu | - Voltaire
maarrrk@gauss.ucsb.edu (Mark Erickson) (06/08/91)
In article <35315@mimsy.umd.edu> boyd@mailer.cc.fsu.edu (Mickey Boyd) writes:
#
# [stuff deleted]
#
#That is, you can deactivate your weapon by taking out the magazine. Personally,
#I think it is a bit stupid to make the action of a weapon dependent upon
^^^^^^^^^
#a removable part that get's a lot of abuse. It is a political invention, just
#as so many other idiotic gun designs . . . .
#
#The above is IMHO. Direct flames elsewhere.
#--
# Mickey R. Boyd | "God is a comedian playing to an
# FSU Computer Science | audience too afraid to laugh."
# Technical Support Group |
# email: boyd@fsucs.cs.fsu.edu | - Voltaire
Isn't an autoloader without a magazine just an expensive,
inconvenient single-shot pistol? I seems to me that by definition
an autoloader is dependent on the magazine....
I think that if my magazine was "tweaked," my S&W 4506 would
start having feeding problems long before the magazine safety
malfunctioned.
Also, the FBI S&W was specifically spec'ed out WITHOUT a
magazine safety.... Interesting...
--maarrrkhes@ccvr1.cc.ncsu.edu (Henry E. Schaffer) (06/11/91)
Since one can give examples on both sides (where a magazine safety would either prevent or cause harm) this is a classical trade-off in design. I saw a newspaper clipping of a case where a police officer stopped a car with armed criminals in it, and during his approach they shot at him and hit his pistol in such a way as to drop the magazine - and this was given as an example of why a magazine safety is undesirable for police use. (And this general reason, including the capability of operating single shot when it is necessary, is why many police agencies specify that their duty arms not have a magazine safety.) However, because of the complications of semi-autos (with their many operating controls and parts that the user must keep track of) there is a chance of "pilot error", and the magazine safety is one attempt at trying to foolproof the pistol. For people without enough training (and current experience/practice) it still is probably the right thing - and I'll include many police officers in this category. I generally recommend to beginners that they start with a revolver for this kind of reason - there is much less to keep track of, and the dangers are much more visible and obvious to an untrained person. For a properly trained/practiced person, the tradeoff shifts, and the interference with the trigger action, and the interference with operation in damaged magazine, etc. situations becomes more important. (Note that police agencies vary greatly in how much and what types of training they offer or require of their officers. I heard of one which went to semi-autos from revolvers by just issuing them to their officers, and by contrast the NC Highway Patrol had several full days of training including many performance tests of such things as clearing jams and tactical reloading before their officers started carrying semi-autos in place of revolvers.) Therefore I claim that this is not a "religious" issues, but one of assessing the situation and achieving the correct trade-off. --henry schaffer n c state univ
boyd@mailer.cc.fsu.edu (Mickey Boyd) (06/11/91)
In article <35396@mimsy.umd.edu>, maarrrk@gauss.ucsb.edu (Mark Erickson) writes: #In article <35315@mimsy.umd.edu> boyd@mailer.cc.fsu.edu (Mickey Boyd) writes: ##That is, you can deactivate your weapon by taking out the magazine. Personally ##I think it is a bit stupid to make the action of a weapon dependent upon # ^^^^^^^^^ ##a removable part that get's a lot of abuse. # # Isn't an autoloader without a magazine just an expensive, # inconvenient single-shot pistol? I seems to me that by definition # an autoloader is dependent on the magazine.... As an entity, yes an autoloader is dependent upon some sort of ammo carrier. My point was that if you manage to ding up a magazine just right, you can render your weapon totally inoperable (perhaps without you knowing it). Thus, a) A single shot is better than throwing rocks b) Such a safety implies "more to go wrong". Also, let us not forget something else. For most types of mag safeties, it is easier to envision them "sticking" in unlocked mode than the other way around (that is, you pull out the mag and it can still fire). I have SEEN this happen due to dirtiness. Now you have an invisible INTANGIBLE safety. Arrrgh! # I think that if my magazine was "tweaked," my S&W 4506 would # start having feeding problems long before the magazine safety # malfunctioned. It depends upon the way the mag safety is implemented. However, you are right for the majority. # Also, the FBI S&W was specifically spec'ed out WITHOUT a # magazine safety.... Interesting... Yup. -- Mickey R. Boyd | "God is a comedian playing to an FSU Computer Science | audience too afraid to laugh." Technical Support Group | email: boyd@fsucs.cs.fsu.edu | - Voltaire
gary@gatech.edu (Gary Coffman) (06/15/91)
In article <35420@mimsy.umd.edu> hes@ccvr1.cc.ncsu.edu (Henry E. Schaffer) writes:
#
#to drop the magazine - and this was given as an example of why a
#magazine safety is undesirable for police use. (And this general
#reason, including the capability of operating single shot when it
#is necessary, is why many police agencies specify that their duty
#arms not have a magazine safety.)
#
# However, because of the complications of semi-autos (with their
#many operating controls and parts that the user must keep track of)
#there is a chance of "pilot error", and the magazine safety is one
#attempt at trying to foolproof the pistol. For people without
#enough training (and current experience/practice) it still is
#probably the right thing - and I'll include many police officers
#in this category. I generally recommend to beginners that they
#start with a revolver for this kind of reason - there is much less
#to keep track of, and the dangers are much more visible and obvious
#to an untrained person. For a properly trained/practiced person,
Our local police department wanted a pistol that could be treated
like a funny looking revolver with a *big* cylinder, so they
bought the Glock. No safety, no grip safety, no magazine disconnect,
just pull the trigger and it goes bang, just like a revolver. It
has only one control other than the trigger, the magazine release,
just like the cylinder release on a revolver. The slide release can
be ignored, if you shoot empty, change magazines and treat it like
a jam by jacking the slide back and releasing. Think of the magazine
as an easier to use speed loader. They transitioned easily because
it worked just like what they were used to using. Other than getting
used to the new sights and grip angle, the main thing they had to
learn was how to jack the slide to clear a misfire or jam. And with
good ammunition, those are rare. The officers have been delighted
with their new weapons since they are easier to care for, easier
to carry, and give more firepower. Even a couple of detectives
who had been lugging personal Colt .45s changed over.
I switched from a Browning Hi-Power to a Glock as my personal
carry pistol for many of the same reasons.
Garyphil@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Phil Howard KA9WGN) (06/19/91)
Does anyone have a lineup of which autopistols do and do not have magazine safeties? -- /***************************************************************************\ / Phil Howard -- KA9WGN -- phil@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu | Guns don't aim guns at \ \ Lietuva laisva -- Brivu Latviju -- Eesti vabaks | people; CRIMINALS do!! / \***************************************************************************/