Talk:Safety (firearms)

message: * AGREE - I think Grip safety would be better off as part of this article. Arthurrh 21:37, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge: "Grip safety" into this article 

message: Wow, this page needs a lot of work. I was thinking about structure first. It looks like there are two basic lists. One would be the types of safeties, the other (the one currently in the article) would be what kinds of gun use each kinds of safeties. Something like this:
==Safety types==
===Grip===
===cross-bolt===
===yada yada===
==Firearm types==
===Single action revolver===
===lever-action rifle===
===shotgun===
===yada yada===
Or maybe we just need the list of safety types, rather than the current article organiztion, now that I think about it. Thoughts, comments, suggestions? I don't want to jump on it till I have a good idea of where to go. Arthurrh 19:15, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Your first suggestion is best, IMO—that is, what you show in the sample outline. I would have started working toward that kind of outline, but have never had time to start. It will be a lot of work to fill out such an outline, but that's what would be needed to create a proper article on the topic. I think you should definitely go ahead. Even if you don't have time to complete it all, it would be an improvement to make progress toward the goal. At revolver there used to be a really cool animated diagram that showed the action as the pawl turned the cylinder. (Not there anymore, I guess it wasn't GFDL-compatible.) If I had the skills to make one of those animated diagrams, I would make one for each type of safety and put it under each heading. A brainstorm for the future. — Lumbercutter 02:03, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs work 

message: I changed the first sentence of the first paragraph from:
"In firearms, a safety or safety catch is a mechanism used to prevent the accidental firing of a weapon, to ensure safer handling."
to
"In firearms, a safety or safety catch is a mechanism used to help prevent the accidental firing of a weapon, helping to ensure safer handling, as no firearm should ever be considered safe, even when unloaded with the safety on."
The reason I did this is because the first paragraph said in no uncertain terms that once a weapon's safety has been put in the on position it will not fire and the weapon is "safe." This is not true at all. Most people who are trained or have experience with firearms will tell you that a gun is never considered safe (unable to shoot), even when the weapon has no chambered rounds, the magazine is out, the action is open and locked, and the safety is on. Medic8613 06:57, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Introduction Paragraph

message: In the section on shotguns there is a mention of a "tang safety" but no definition of what a tang safety is, and it is not mentioned before or after this instance in the article. Most of my shooting is with handguns and post modern assault rifles, and not shotguns. I assume its a switch on the top of the stock right at the end of the action that is toggled with the thumb, but I am just guessing, and don't know for sure. If anyone knows the definition it should probably be added to the list of various different types of safeties, or explained in the section on shotguns. Medic8613 07:13, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's exactly what a tang safety is. It's simply one form of manual safety, different from a button safety in the trigger guard (another popular shotgun/rifle safety). 71.158.181.131 (talk) 14:30, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Tang Safety

message: I seem to recall that the Colt 45 had a safety at the end of the barrel so that it would not fire if pressed against something.  If this is correct, should this be added in the right place to the is article?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.24.6.135 (talk) 20:12, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That's simply a byproduct of recoil actions. When you press the end of a cocked Browning-action semi-auto against a surface, the slide moves rearward out of "lock-up" which generally prevents the hammer from contacting the pin with enough force to send it into the primer. It also generally moves the firing pin block, if it exists, out of line with the mechanism that disengages it. This can actually be considered an annoyance, but as most gun owners don't need to press a gun's muzzle against a surface it's not a big deal. 71.158.181.131 (talk) 14:36, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Barrel Safety?

message: This page neglects to mention the relief cuts present on certain single action revolvers that make it safe and permissible to carry them with a fully loaded cylinder.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.239.229.213 (talk) 07:03, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You are referring to the "half-cocked" notch that holds the hammer spur away from the primer and can only be released by the sear. Yes, this is a form of safety, and was present on Series 70 and previous M1911s. I will add a paragraph to the Drop Safeties section on these.
Actually I think he was referring to the Safety Notch on revolvers (found between hammer rest and the 1/2 back loading notch), not SA auto-loaders. While its "possible" to carry on a live chamber, relying on the safety notch and the gun being SA really isn't a great idea IMO.  Manufacturer's probably wouldn't support such an idea.  I'm not aware of any revolver, safety-notch SA or otherwise, which is carried on a live round per manufacturer's specs.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.203.165.22 (talk) 06:51, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  What about Safety Notches on single-actions? 

message: Magazine safety (disconnect, interlock) prevents the gun from firing if the magazine is removed. This is one of the debatable "safety" features mandated by some firearms legislation. The drill with a magazine fed firearm should be (a) remove the magazine, (b) clear the firing chamber and (c) visually inspect the firing chamber for an unejected cartridge. Magazine safeties supposedly protect you from the "forgotten" round, but once a magazine loaded or empty is reinserted in the gun, that "forgotten" round becomes an accident waiting to happen. Viewed this way, the magazine safety encourages unsafe gun handling: the safety check with a magazine fed firearm should be (a) remove the magazine, (b) clear the firing chamber and (c) visually inspect the firing chamber for an unejected cartridge. Also, millions of hunters, fishermen, trappers, hikers and campers own guns for protection against predators in the wild: if you drop or lose a magazine from a gun without a magazine safety, at least you have a single shot firearm but with a magazine safety you have an inert blunt object. Also, some models with magazine safeties have the option of disabling the magazine safety, while some models (eg, Raven .25 pistol) have been made with and without a magazine safety during the production history of the gun. The value of a magazine safety is open to debate and arguments can be made for and against. Naaman Brown (talk) 18:24, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I was always told, and have primarily seen, magazine safeties on former police issue pistols, specifically models by Smith & Wesson. I thought this was primarily a feature for weapon retention situations, or at least marketed as such to police, especially since most of the firearms with them are a bit too large to be used for conceal carry. I was not aware of it being a byproduct of legislation. Perhaps a good starting point would be to find what firearm was the first to include the feature? --72.94.5.164 (talk) 02:11, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Magazine safety 

message: First time suggesting an edit on Wikipedia, so bear with me if this is not the correct protocol. In the decocker section of this article, it starts out with the statement "Most traditional double-action semi-automatic (DA/SA) pistols..." This makes it sound like the SA stands for semi-automatic in "DA/SA" instead of "Single Action". The term is linked to another page which does correctly state DA/SA means "Double Action / Single Action", but seems a little confusing here. --McCoolJ (talk) 18:15, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Decocker section 

message: When where safety catches first used, common, made law, for which firearms, etc...?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.111.82.50 (talk) 01:45, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I would also like to know. Paul, in Saudi (talk) 10:13, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: My thought as well. If anything, the Russian article has a nice overview, but without dates and sources.--Adûnâi (talk) 23:21, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  History? 

message: Why is there two sections covering trigger disconnects? Also seems like it ought to mention the significance of guns like the Model 12 lacking a disconnect mechanism, namely that you can empty the magazine simply by holding the trigger down and racking the slide repeatedly. It's not obvious to a layperson. All it says is that "the gun will fire as soon as the breech is closed if the trigger is depressed. AnnaGoFast (talk) 19:28, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trigger disconnect 

message: It says that it's not safe to carry old SA revolvers on half cock because they aren't drop safe, but it says nothing about older DA revolvers. Until after WWII, most revolvers had a firing pin fixed directly to the hammer face, or at least lacked any sort of transfer bar. How is it any safer to carry one of these fully loaded than a single action? A SA on half cock should be at least marginally safer, since the sear would have to disengage in order for the hammer to strike the primer. An old DA simply has to be dropped on its  hammer, and its likely to go off. Neither is safe, but a half cocked SA is safer, so it ought to tell people that both are dangerous, not just SA's. AnnaGoFast (talk) 19:52, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: All of this sounds like original research unless it is properly referenced to reliable sources.  Wikipedia is not intended to be a user forum, it's intended to be an information reference. 97.91.254.54 (talk) 01:22, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Safe carry of old DA revolvers 

message: The 5.7 has a disconnect and a tactile chamber indicator, if that we need more exaples. L3X1 (distænt write) )evidence( 14:31, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  5.7