Quote of the Day: Waldo

From my Buddy Waldo on guns with extraneous safeties.

I guess what I’m trying to say is if someone wants a gun, but doesn’t trust themselves with it unless it’s got three different safeties to disengage before a DA shot, than maybe they should hire a handler or something to keep them from drowning in their soup, or walking through glass doors, or some shit. My frustration with how we so readily accommodate the incompetent

Any gun that is capable of sending a round down range, is capable of sending a round some place regrettable. I complain about the new crop of Ruger pistols having unnecessary safeties. Still no matter how many stupid safeties are on a gun, if you don’t follow the 4 rules, you will eventually have something regrettable happen. Meanwhile there are so many expert shooters who use Glocks for self defense, work, and competition and have had NO problems because if you follow the 4 rules you’ll NEVER have anything regrettable.

The safety is between your ears, and nowhere else.

Oh also what’s Ironic is Waldo and I both own and carry 1911s that have a thumb safety, grip safety, and a firing pin block. I dunno if he feels the need to justify his love for the 1911….but I point out that the 1911 is a proven platform, so as excessive the safeties are, they work as advertised, so let’s not get silly! 😀

This entry was posted in Guns, Safety. Bookmark the permalink.

0 Responses to Quote of the Day: Waldo

  1. guffaw says:

    I’m copying parts of this, and linking your post to my blog. Thank you. One can’t promote safety enough. – gfa

  2. Bob S. says:

    Weer’d,

    To me the idea of “extraneous” means one you don’t use.

    I use the thumb safety on my Taurus — the system uses the firing pin block safety — but I decide whether or not to keep my weapon on safe.

    I practice for that method of use versus the concept of having a safety and not using it – to me that makes sense.

    I think the idea of not having a thumb safety comes from the “high speed low drag” mindset — and I wonder if there is any evidence that not having a safety has made a difference in the real world.

    • Weerd Beard says:

      My feelings comes from the heavy use of DA Revolvers. Seems that for over 100 years people have carried guns that had just a long heavy trigger pull, and that was more than enough. Of course the first Semi-auto guns were Single-Action guns, it wasn’t until the Walther P38 in the late 30s did a double-action trigger get integrated, and even then it wasn’t until the Sig P220 in 1970 that a DA gun was suddenly given the controls of a DA revolver.

      As for your thumb safety on your Taurus, if you use it, that’s awesome, and I’d point out I wouldn’t consider you unsafe in the least if you didn’t, tho I WOULD if you didn’t decock the weapon first before taking the safety off.

      What I don’t like is guns I neither NEED to use the safety, nor WANT to use the safety. Kahr makes a Mass Compliant PM9 with a thumb safety that is 100% a compliance after-thought. Its difficult to use, and unnecessary in the original design. The guys in the shop point out that you just don’t have to use it…which is true, but what is also true is that safety could manage to get bumped on accidentally and cause the gun to lock up unexpectedly, forcing you to figure out what your gun isn’t working in a situation where every moment counts.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.