So I bought my first ever gun today from my gun store in town, but it kinda was a sucky experience. I bought a Ruger LC9 because of its sleek look, nice feel for my hands and the safety features. However I had to listen to a big talk by the clerk about how the single best safety is my mind and responsible use of a fire arm. I don't get it, these safeties with the loaded chamber sign and all were probably one of the better selling points for me as a person whose never even touched a gun before. I even was tempted by a Kel-tec PF9 which the clerk was suggesting, which I nearly bought because of its super good price, but the Luger was just so appealing and I think worth the extra 50 bucks.
Anyway, are safety features like the manual switch really such shit? I figure you could just ignore and not use them if its not something you can really dig. Even if I do, its just a thumb flick that doesn't take much thought after I've practiced drawing some.
>>28363264
I'd recommend you take a basic firearm safety course, anon.
>>28363264
Because a manual safety on a DA/SA or striker fired carry gun is just something else you have to do in order to fire the gun. If you are a safety sally and just pop paper for kicks and never plan to carry a handgun you are the person these overly safe handguns are marketed for.
>>28363292
I second this.. Strongly
Mistakes come from ignorance.
Mechanical safeties can fail, as can any mechanical device.
Realistically, it's probably unlikely that a safety would fail, but in the firearm community most will tell you the same thing, the best way to ensure that your firearm is safe is to understand how to use it safely, and practice things like trigger discipline, muzzle safety, and chamber checking when handling firearms.
>>28363264
>I figure you could just ignore and not use them if its not something you can really dig.
If you have a weapon with a safety, you must practice disengaging it. Even if you decide to ignore it, there is a chance it could be on nudged onto safe when you think its not and if you don't have the muscle memory to swipe it off then you could be stuck thinking "why isn't it shooting" at a time when you should instead be dispensing bullets.
New Fun you missed the point what Old Man River was trying to tell yo was not to rely on mechanical safties and always follow your weapons saftey rules. Thinking before you act is an essential part of gun ownership. If I had a nickel for every ND that ended in some dickwad going pale and stuttering "B-but I though the safety was on" or "I-I didn't think it was loaded" I'd have enough money to buy that solid gold fursuit we all dream about. He was just telling you to be careful.
>>28363264
Some people feel like they're just another thing that can go wrong, snag, reduce reaction time, accidentally be switched on, etc. Some of that is true. It's also true that they could have helped prevent many cases of Glock leg. Whether you want a safety or not is entirely a personal choice. There are people in the firearms community that have opinions about everything where if you don't agree with them they consider you dead wrong. You just have to ignore them.
>>28363264
my finger and discipline are all the safety features you need to be concerned about
>>28363330
>cont.
Firearms can kill people quickly and virtually effortlessly. It could be you, your spouse, your best friend, your own mother. Relying on a mechanical device to ensure that doesn't happen is a bad idea, it's possible that said device can fail, regardless of how mechanically simplistic it is.
I also raise the argument that using a handgun with a safety as a CC could fail because in the heat of the moment the use may forget to disengage the safety before it's too late.
>>28363264
Like a table saw, a motorcycle, a lathe, or a lawnmower, a gun is a machine that presents an opportunity to harm yourself or someone else if you mess up.
Due to the decline in humanity's ability to not be stupid, loss of individual responsibility, and lawyers abilities to pass blame and collect dollars, we now have weapons with "READ MANUAL BEFORE USING, AVAILBE FROM MANUFACTURER" permanently etched in block letters on what was a well crafted section of polished stainless.
We have thumb safeties, palm safeties, loaded chamber indicators, trigger safeties, magazine disconnects, integrated locks, and all other sorts of things.
There's nothing *wrong* with any of them. They serve the purpose they were intended for. It's all about preference.
However, I believe one would be a fool to come to rely on these systems.
Having a manual safety does not make it OK to try pulling the trigger on a loaded firearm anytime you want. Looking at the loaded chamber indicator is not a substitute for properly clearing the gun or press checking it. A magazine disconnect does not mean it is safe because the mag has been removed.
OP here
So just as a clarification, I do have a gun course scheduled with a coworker later next week. She recommended I buy one like this as my first so I can learn to use all the features to be eventually instinctual with em.
Also regarding the notion of opting to not have safeties or ignoring them, isn't this basically not following g one of the gun safety rules because you think you know better or are good enough? What I told the clerk was that I was under the impression that safety comes first with firearms, particularly for someone like myself.
>>28363264
>I've never touched a firearm
>I know better than someone that works with them for a living
Granted, gun counter clerks are usually full of shit. But he's right in this instance. Safeties don't mean shit if the user isn't competent and aware of their weapon.
In my experience with teaching new people, manual safeties can even be detrimental in inexperienced hands, giving one a false sense of security and safety leading to lax muzzle/trigger discipline. If I hand someone new a gun and inform them it doesn't have a safety, they usually seem more inclined to handle it with proper caution for some reason.
>>28363521
I can see that, not relying on them entirely. Still, I like that they're there. I've been watching youtube videos about this gun and so many keep bringing up the safeties as a negative point about it. One YT chann Fancy nut talks about firearms having a philosophy of use or them filling some kind of niche, and I kinda think the LC9 is intended for new shooters or those living in more restrictive areas. Still don't understand how people can think of it as a negative.
>bought a Ruger LC9
god I hate poorfags
>>28363665
The way I see it, I'm supposed to follow safety rules anyway and the features are just an extra measure to prevent accidents. Just like any of the big 5 are.
>>28363571
>isn't this basically not following g one of the gun safety rules because you think you know better or are good enough?
Nope. Safeties don't make guns safe. And they never will.
Safe users make guns safe.
Lurk around some more and you'll hear stories of people being wounded/killed by "safe" and "unloaded" guns being mishandled by untrained users.
The only common thread in all of them is the person that negligently pulls the trigger. Not manual safeties or lack thereof.
>>28363717
I picked it over the Kel-tec and one of the HiPoints that I was really tempted by. If that makes a difference to ya.
>>28363741
So what, you're gonna tell me they haven't ever prevented an accident and kept someone from having to live with a mistake? It would take a true fool to not be more serious after that. Safeties, I think, do make a difference.
>>28363719
>the features are just an extra measure to prevent accidents
They're not. They don't prevent anything because they're just part of the tool and equally prone to misuse. It's only as good as the user holding it.
You understand what I'm trying to get across here?
>>28363717
My first gun was an Ed Brown 1911. Poorfags, goddamn....
>>28363849
What I think you're saying is that they're only good if I make a habit of training while using them. Though so are literally any safe practices. Do explain more if I'm totally misunderstanding.
> Ruger/Luger used
> YouTube Fancy Nut
> Big Five Rules of firearms
Are we being trolled softly?
>>28363933
Well, I did say I've never even handled a gun before this morning. Here are my apologies for incorrect usuage of terms.
>>28363839
I'll tell you that they've gotten more people killed than they've saved
>Getting mugged by a junky with a knife
>Adrenaline pumping, lost fine muscle control
>Try to defend oneself, forget safety
>die
There's a reason why law enforcement don't have them and why pretty much every person who knows what they are talking about hates them
>>28363916
That is what I'm saying.
I'm also saying that they're absolutely superfluous at that point.
Even detrimental if you decide to carry a firearm with one. But that's a point for further down the road.
>>28363933
Yes
>>28363933
I hope not. I've responded a good few times now and don't so much care for the thought I've been had so well.
>>28363264
The only safety functions I like on my pistols are a 1911 style if it is meant to be carried cocked & locked, otherwise I much prefer a trigger release or nothing at all.
Safety's are there when you need them, one course of fire arms handling won't teach you everything. I carry with one in the chamber hammer back safety on, only because the safety is easy to flick
A manual safety only gives the illusion of safety to a negligent person.
Buying a quality holster and learning proper gun safety makes a manual safety on the gun a redundant feature that is actually a liability
>>28364008
Browning FTW only safety on any weapon is the one using it.
>>28363264
Its an extra step between pulling a gun and firing
While it can prevent accidents, all of those accidents could have been previously prevented by not handling a gun carelessly.
Its nice to have if you're worried, but at the same time if a safety ever has to do its job, something has gone very wrong.
>>28364008
I know a police department that would disagree...
you should never rely on a safety. that mentality breeds carelessness and laziness.
firearms are just like any other martial art. it needs discipline to be effective.
>>28364108
most PD's carry glocks around hur
>>28364123
Well that just isn't true.
>>28363264
there's no problem with them. some stupid faggots are retarded and think they're impervious to error, and think safeties are only for idiots.
yet those same people think that they'd accidentally engage a safety when they draw their gun.
carry a gun condition 1, practice drawing and disengaging your safety until it becomes a natural movement that you do every time you draw.
The shop owner was right, your best and most important safety is the one between your ears, but that doesn't mean manual safeties are a bad thing.
>>28364123
I think a lot of LEOs are switching over to M&Ps. but glocks are still pretty widely carried, yeah.
>>28364108
Sucks to be them. The majority I know carry striker fired pistols which rub me the wrong way.
>>28363264
This is bait.
All this talk about manual safetys yet every rifle has one.
>>28366602
Nuggets don't really have one, though technically yes.
And then there's the argument that rifles are inherently different than pistols, bolt actions vs semiautomatic, needing two hands, defensive use, etc.
>>28366693
actually nuggets do have a safety, though it is a complicated concept
>>28366706
Hence why I said they don't really have one, though technically they do.
>>28363360
my former DI almost got shot in the foot by his next recruits. the recruit in question was a woman, so I'm actually not that surprised, still... there is a reason why DIs are terrified of pistol training over here.
I don't think clueless nogunz should start with anything else than a rifle. there is a reason why kids start with .22 rifles and not revolvers.
>>28363264
>I don't get it, these safeties with the loaded chamber sign and all were probably one of the better selling points for me as a person whose never even touched a gun before.
>Has no experience in a subject
>Has opinion on same subject
LOL
It's good you went with a pistol that has many safety features, and like others I'm not sure you interpreted the employee correctly. Don't rely on the safeties. Like a driver in an almost self driving car if you don't discipline yourself you will compensate for the built in safeties by being unsafe yourself. Primary safety is yourself practicing the four rules, secondary is what the manufacturer has on the firearm. Now maybe the guy was some sort of tard "my index is the only safety I need" but I'm hoping that isn't the case
>>28363264
>using safeties
literally on every gun because the manufacturers lawyers told them to put it on
So....Everyone in this thread should be okay with DA Revolvers.
