Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 2/6/2006 4:39:36 AM EDT
Or even though you think the decocker is safe, you still hold onto the hammer and slowly let it drop when using it?
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 4:42:55 AM EDT
Yes.

Obviously, I still keep the barrel pointed in a safe direction.
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 4:43:21 AM EDT
Nothing I own has a decocker, although if I pick up a 92F like I was thinking about, I wont be able to say that.
But to answer your question, I always point in a safe direction when I'm handling a decocker-equipped weapon and dropping the hammer. You just "never know"..
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 4:45:50 AM EDT
I've always wondered a bit about that too.


Glad 1911's don't need them. Cocked & Locked, baby
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 4:46:29 AM EDT
Yeah I trust her and she makes a good sammich
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 5:01:25 AM EDT
I've had a few guns with de-cockers and ended up selling them. A couple of Rugers and a Beretta. Just never cared for that device.
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 5:04:16 AM EDT
On my 92FS - Yes
On my CZ-52 - No
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 5:04:24 AM EDT
Yes
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 5:06:02 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Zaphod:
Yes.

Obviously, I still keep the barrel pointed in a safe direction.



thats the key.

all devices will fail its just a matter ot time. I keep it pointed down and away from me and anyone else
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 5:06:22 AM EDT
On Sig P220, Yes.
On Makerov, No.
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 5:06:24 AM EDT
on my HK and SIG, yes. Any other, NO
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 5:06:30 AM EDT
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 5:06:45 AM EDT
I always point in a safe direction before I use the decocker, but I have no problems and never worried about using it once I saw how it worked. It can't fail unless there is some kind of serious malfunction.
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 5:06:45 AM EDT

Originally Posted By coondog:
I've had a few guns with de-cockers and ended up selling them. A couple of Rugers and a Beretta. Just never cared for that device.

Decockers that ride high like the ones or Rugers and Berettas aren't very ergonomic as you either have to use your weak hand to flip it down or take your strong hand off the grip to flick it down. Sigs have the decocker on the frame and takes barely a second to decock it. If Sigs didn't have the decocker so well placed I wouldn't own one and would opt for a 1911 or Glock because most DA/SA have the safety/decocker mounted too high which makes it tough to operate during times of high stress.
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 5:07:42 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/6/2006 5:07:52 AM EDT by racer934]
No problem trusting the decock on my Sigs or HKs. Keep it in a safe direction, there is not issue. On both handguns, two things would have to break (firing pin safety and "half cock position") for the hammer to contact the firing pin and discharge a shot.
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 5:13:41 AM EDT
I actually prefer a decocker when working with someone new to shooting. I feel it is a quick, efficient, and safe way to neutralize the weapon for both of us. Especially if the shooter is young or easily rattled (usually women.)

It is too simple to coax or instruct them to point in a safe direction and decock the weapon. Yes, I trust the decocker, but always point it in a safe direction when using it. Habit.
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 5:15:22 AM EDT
Never substitute for the basic rules of gun safety. Always keep the muzzle pointed in a safe direction, even when decocking.
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 5:17:00 AM EDT

Originally Posted By DukeSnookems:
Or even though you think the decocker is safe, you still hold onto the hammer and slowly let it drop when using it?



Nope.

The decocker on the Beretta, Sig, Smith and Wesson, and Walther pistols that I own work like a charm. They are designed so that the hammer cannot possibly cause the weapon to fire.

Link Posted: 2/6/2006 5:20:07 AM EDT
I trust mine. (92F and several Sig's)

On the ones y'all have seen fail, what EXACTLY happened?

What kind of gun, what failed and does failing mean a discharge?
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 5:20:12 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/6/2006 5:23:57 AM EDT by John_Wayne777]

Originally Posted By tc556guy:
Nothing I own has a decocker, although if I pick up a 92F like I was thinking about, I wont be able to say that.
But to answer your question, I always point in a safe direction when I'm handling a decocker-equipped weapon and dropping the hammer. You just "never know"..



Pointing the weapon in a safe direction is always a wise thing to do.

With the Beretta, for instance, there is no danger of the weapon firing.

The Beretta system uses a sort of transfer button to transfer the blow of the hammer to the firing pin. This button is nestled in a cylinder of steel which happens to be connected to the safety levers on each side of the slide. When the safety levers are rotated to the Safe/Decock position, the button is rotated completely out of the way, isolating the hammer blow completey from the firing pin.

In addition, the firing pin safety is locked into place preventing any firing pin movement. The Smith and Wesson system works the exact same way.

There is absolutely no danger of a discharge when using such a system....

I heard the Makarov mentioned as a "no", but I believe the Makarov system works exactly like the Beretta system I described.

The Sigs work a bit differently, but when the decocker is used the hammer is STILL isolated from the firing pin, as it is not allowed to move into the fully forward (i.e. firing) position unless the trigger is completely depressed, plus the firing pin safety is not dis-engaged unless the trigger is fully pressed. HK's decocking system works the same way as the Sig system does.
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 5:21:39 AM EDT
yes, i have HK's
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 5:24:15 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/6/2006 5:32:13 AM EDT by FALARAK]
Some guns have a slab of metal come down and shroud the firing pin while decocking.... making a discharge damned near impossible.

Sigs decock in a special way, where they drop the hammer on the decocker, with much less enegy, then as you release the decocker, the hammer slowy rests to half cock. The Beretta 92 series actually rotates a 2 piece firing pin completely underneath a slab of metal boefre dropping the hammer, making firing impossible.

Sorry... I have heard of WAY more ND's from jokers doing the manual hammer ride method and slipping off the hammer, then using a well designed factory decocker. Every decocker I have owned, I use, without question.

All guns are always kept pointed in a safe direction, of course, it doesnt matter if they have a decocker or not.

Of course - you have to ask yourself.... are you using the decocker in the manner for which it is intended? Are you sitting at home, with one in the pipe, rocking the hammerback and decocking 20 times a day? I cannot say that even this is bad on the gun, but surely cycling live ammo and doing this in the home is asking for trouble. Decocking is for use when you have completed firing, or chosen not to fire with a DA gun in SA mode... and there is still ammunition in the weapon. When used as intended, I trust them implicitly..... at lest, the designs I have owned.
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 5:29:03 AM EDT

Originally Posted By fight4yourrights:
I've always wondered a bit about that too.


Glad 1911's don't need them. Cocked & Locked, baby



DA/SA pistols dont "need" them either. A decocker on a SA pistol would be silly, it would just make your pistol into a brick. They are on *some* DA/SA pistols simply to offer the option for a pistol in SA mode, to be set back to DA mode quickly and safely, in order to be holstered. Since 1911's can be holstered safely with the hammer rearward, this is not needed.

I am a glock fan, not bashing here.... but this is the reason you hear about a seeming disproportionate number of ND's with Glocks..... they lack the external safety, and dont have a decocker like a true DA/SA, which allows for a super heavy DA trigger pull.... they maintain a farily light pull, and therefore trigger discipline is much more important, technically.
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 5:29:52 AM EDT

Originally Posted By John_Wayne777:
[Pointing the weapon in a safe direction is always a wise thing to do.

With the Beretta, for instance, there is no danger of the weapon firing.

The Beretta system uses a sort of transfer button to transfer the blow of the hammer to the firing pin. This button is nestled in a cylinder of steel which happens to be connected to the safety levers on each side of the slide. When the safety levers are rotated to the Safe/Decock position, the button is rotated completely out of the way, isolating the hammer blow completey from the firing pin.

In addition, the firing pin safety is locked into place preventing any firing pin movement. The Smith and Wesson system works the exact same way.

There is absolutely no danger of a discharge when using such a system....

.


I am aware of how the M9 decocker works. There IS a potential for the decocking system to not work properly, and I try to not rely on a mechanical device for my personal safety while on the range. Have yet to have an AD or ND. Hopefully that trend will continue.
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 5:30:18 AM EDT

Originally Posted By The_Beer_Slayer:
i have seen more than one fail at the range on various guns over the years. NEVER trust anythig mechanical.



What kind of guns? Are you 100% sure the decocker was used and mechanically failed?
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 5:33:19 AM EDT

Originally Posted By tc556guy:
I am aware of how the M9 decocker works. There IS a potential for the decocking system to not work properly, and I try to not rely on a mechanical device for my personal safety while on the range. Have yet to have an AD or ND. Hopefully that trend will continue.



Can you explain the potential failure, and cite any instances of it happening? Surely the military would have records of such, with such widespread distribution and use of the M9.
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 5:40:44 AM EDT

Originally Posted By tc556guy:
I am aware of how the M9 decocker works. There IS a potential for the decocking system to not work properly, and I try to not rely on a mechanical device for my personal safety while on the range.



I am not suggesting that you decock the weapon while staring down the barrel here.

I am simply saying that I am at a loss to see how it is even remotely possible for a decocking system such as exists on the Beretta 92 series pistols to POSSIBLY cause a discharge. If the safety/decocking lever moves, it moves the transfer button out of the way of the hammer and out of line with the firing pin. The weapon just won't go off.



Have yet to have an AD or ND. Hopefully that trend will continue.



Decockers are not a replacement for pointing the weapon in a safe direction, but neither do they cause additional danger in their use.
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 5:46:05 AM EDT

Originally Posted By tc556guy:
Nothing I own has a decocker, although if I pick up a 92F like I was thinking about, I wont be able to say that.
But to answer your question, I always point in a safe direction when I'm handling a decocker-equipped weapon and dropping the hammer. You just "never know"..



Yes, you never know...

I had a new Smith/Walther PPK/S (a/k/a: PPK/S/P.O.S.), and little did I know the safety decocker was bad from the factory. I followed the rules, and pointed the gun in a safe direction when racking the slide - bang! The gun slam-fired into my living room floor. Do you know how loud shooting a gun with no ear protection is? Do you know how pissed off the wife and kids were after checking all thier body parts for bloody holes?

I had the gun sent to Smith for a good look see, and they confirmed the safety decocker was broken. They replaced about half the gun to assure me that everything was okay. I then took the gun to the range and tested it, then immediately sold it. I don't need stuff like that.

By the way, the best way to hit a target with a .380 PPK is to throw the entire gun at it.

Always point in a safe direction, you never know.
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 5:48:37 AM EDT
I trust my decocker completely. It consists of my fingers, concentration, and BHP pointed in a safe direction. Works every time, and I can see all the necessary parts.
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 5:52:24 AM EDT

Originally Posted By The_Beer_Slayer:
i have seen more than one fail at the range on various guns over the years. NEVER trust anythig mechanical.




Care to share brand name experience on these incidents.....
(If not in public you can IM me.)

Link Posted: 2/6/2006 5:53:50 AM EDT

Originally Posted By rjroberts:
I trust my decocker completely. It consists of my fingers, concentration, and BHP pointed in a safe direction. Works every time, and I can see all the necessary parts.



I am curious, why would you lower the hammer on a SA only gun, with a live round in it? I can honestly say I have never done this. My hammers are always back... if I want to make the weapon safe, I clear it. The only time I can see having a hammer down situation, is when forced to in IDPA after showing clear, they make you drop the hammer on an empty chamber. When does the situation arise, when would you want to take a loaded/chambered SA only gun, and drop the hammer?
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 6:00:42 AM EDT

Originally Posted By John_Wayne777:
I am not suggesting that you decock the weapon while staring down the barrel here.

I am simply saying that I am at a loss to see how it is even remotely possible for a decocking system such as exists on the Beretta 92 series pistols to POSSIBLY cause a discharge. If the safety/decocking lever moves, it moves the transfer button out of the way of the hammer and out of line with the firing pin. The weapon just won't go off.



I never said it "caused" the discharge.However,as Hedos story shows, they can fail, so best to not rely on them working. If the military trusted the decocker to always work, they wouldn't have made checking it part of the functions check.
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 6:01:20 AM EDT

Originally Posted By FALARAK:

Originally Posted By rjroberts:
I trust my decocker completely. It consists of my fingers, concentration, and BHP pointed in a safe direction. Works every time, and I can see all the necessary parts.



I am curious, why would you lower the hammer on a SA only gun, with a live round in it? I can honestly say I have never done this. My hammers are always back... if I want to make the weapon safe, I clear it. The only time I can see having a hammer down situation, is when forced to in IDPA after showing clear, they make you drop the hammer on an empty chamber. When does the situation arise, when would you want to take a loaded/chambered SA only gun, and drop the hammer?



I generally unload it, and did not make that clear. But, I have lowered on a chambered round, not a problem, but only when necessary as in some types of field combat situation. I carry with hammer down and cock while drawing. HAving done it that way for more than 30 years, it comes quite naturally, and I can do it as fast as someone else releasing a safety. Not something I would recommend relying on if you haven't had the practice, though.

No, the hammer down on a BHP or 1911 A1 or newer design does not press the firing pin against the round. Actually, it prevents the pin from going back far enough to build up spring tension in a situation of sudden deceleration. I started carrying that way in the AIr Force, when flying. Didn't want my 1911 going off in a crash or jump.
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 6:07:00 AM EDT
We recently replaced the carpet with hardwood flooring, and found the .380 round right where we expected to find it. The fibers on the end are where the carpet and lead fused together on impact.

This is what a safety decocker can do when it fails, and this is the "happy ending" version.

Link Posted: 2/6/2006 7:11:38 AM EDT
All of my handguns have a de-cocker/safety. I always point in a safe direction and thumb the hammer down even with the de-cocker. Otherwise, watching that hammer fly down when using the de-cocking device can be rather disturbing.
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 7:16:22 AM EDT
I don't own a decocker.
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 7:17:54 AM EDT
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 7:20:12 AM EDT
John Wayne Bobbit did and look what it got him.

Link Posted: 2/6/2006 7:37:06 AM EDT

Originally Posted By MilkMan:
John Wayne Bobbit did and look what it got him.








When I read the title, I wondered for a second if a decocker was the opposite of a fluffer.
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 8:23:51 AM EDT
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 8:27:03 AM EDT
I have a CZ P-01 that has a satisfying "click" and relatively gentle letdown when using the decocker.

I trust it completely... although I still obey the golden rules of handling. "Trusting" a decocker, I suppose, is like trusting a safety... just obey the rules instead.


- BG
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 8:37:59 AM EDT
Oops, I thought this was a thread about wives and girlfriends...
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 8:50:31 AM EDT

Originally Posted By DukeSnookems:
Or even though you think the decocker is safe, you still hold onto the hammer and slowly let it drop when using it?



With a Glock, you don't have to worry about the hammer striking the firing pin.
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 9:15:18 AM EDT
My S&W decocks when you engage the safety. It physically rotates a cover up to mask the firing pin.

So yes.

But you always point a gun in a safe direction anyway.
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 9:21:12 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Tannim:
My S&W decocks when you engage the safety. It physically rotates a cover up to mask the firing pin.

So yes.

But you always point a gun in a safe direction anyway.



The Beretta is the same way. The only time I pull the hammer back anyways is at the qual range.
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 9:24:45 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Hank_Rearden1:
On Sig P220, Yes.
On Makerov, No.




ok allthough you follow the rules and keep the barrel pointed in a safe direction, why don't you trust your Makarov decoker. If you look at the hammer while you operate the safety/decoker, you will see a hammer block rotate up, which prevents the hammer from coming close to the firing pin. Clearly you are not familiar with the operating system, or something on your pistol is broken.
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 9:25:21 AM EDT
Yes...trust but verify.
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 9:27:10 AM EDT
On my 226 I trust the decocker more than I trust my thumb to lower the hammer slowly and safely.

I've never had a mishap doing it either way.

Link Posted: 2/6/2006 9:29:47 AM EDT
My sig has one, I use it regularly, pointed in a safe direction of course. No problems yet. Doesn't mean something couldn't go wrong, though.
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 9:30:38 AM EDT
I'd rather trust the mechanical device designed to safely decock the weapon than my sweaty thumb holding the hammer as I ease it down. Then again, I own SIGs and they are rather well made weapons.
Matt
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 9:33:52 AM EDT
Yes, I trust the decocker on my SIGs. I always point the pistol in a safe direction whenever it's in my hand, but not particularly because of the decocker.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top