Question for the 1911 guys?

[wcd]

Waiting for the 1911 purists…

Will chime in No I would not. If I wanted to go that route an off the shelf so to speak HI Power.

 

[ECS686]

I’ve wondered about the arguments regarding modified carry guns for a while and I’m hoping there’s a resident lawyer that can explain the logic here. I don’t modify mine for reasons pertaining to reliability, but if I did, I don’t understand how it could be used against me. First, if I shoot somebody, it’s because I felt my life was in danger and I fired with the intent to eliminate the threat. Second, guns are designed to be deadly weapons. If I make my gun better at it’s intended purpose or modify it in a way that improves my ability to effectively defend myself, how is that unlawful in an otherwise lawful shooting?

I could imagine an anti-gun prosecutor telling the jury that you purposefully modified your gun to make it easier to kill someone, or painting you as reckless because you made it more likely that you gun could accidentally go off and kill innocent bystanders.

Not a Lawyer however taught and certified Officers in Use of Force and Firearms AND have been in several Federal Inquiries on Use of Forces I have done with less lethal as well as a co worker using lethal force which was SOP so I will just share My experience

In most of the US an Apex Trigger will not make or break your case or be that mail in the coffin for a Prosecutor.

It generally (more on that in a minute) has to be a bad use of force for prosecutors to charge. Where a modified firearm comes into play is if the modified gun went off when you didn’t want it to or etc and someone was hit when they were not supposed to be hit.l AKA you were not justified AT THAT time!

Now part 2 on the Generally. A prosecutor is the most powerful person and they can charge you for whatever. They only need beyond a reasonable doubt to win not to make a charge. We saw that with Rittenhouse in Kenosha.

In those Jurisdictions it really doesn’t matter if using a modified or unmodified firearm in a JUSTIFIED way If a Prosecutor is that anti gun they are going to prosecute you anyway.

So folks need to worry about using sound legal tactics and get relevant training from Vetted Instructors with a LE Training background.l more than getting the latest aftermarket BS companies are dumping out!

My experience is most modifications can and have effected reliability in the firearms. That’s the bigger concern on a firearm used for carry. Most Direarms (Strikers and 1911’s) when they choke I have seen had aftermarket triggers, recoil springs/guide rods YouTube armorer advice or shoddy handloads.

I can tell you what I have not seen. Stick Glocks and S&W M&Ps or Sigs go down very much at FLETC or other Training and competition that are Agency guns or As manufacturerd by the factory. (And no 40 Glock KBs that you always read about back in the 40 days)

Your just fine with a .50-1.0 split time in a defensive use. Save the whiz bang stuff to the competition guns.

 

[OD*]

Mr Brownings first design did not have the grip safety. The US Army requested it.
That said I would never disable it

No, the pistol had a grip safety from the Model 1907 onward, what the Calvary requested became the slide lock/thumb safety. Model 1907

Model 1910

Model 1911

 

[OD*]

Question for the group: if a 1911 manufacturer offered a 1911 without the grip safety, would you buy one? Lugers were available with or without a grip safety. What if 1911s were similar. Would you choose one with or without the grip safety?

I did, they were called the Detonics Combat Master

 

[AlVine]

I've read that it used to be pretty common in the past, especially with law enforcement. A roll of rubber bands held down the safety and improved the grip. The bands made kind of a palm swell, and the rubber was a bit 'tacky.' If you wanted to get fancy a gunsmith could pin the safety in place.

The reason was that under stress one might not get a perfect grip when drawing the pistol. From personal experience, just under the mild stress of friendly competition, I can say this does happen. If someone was pointing a gun at me for real I wouldn't take the time to readjust my grip, which might be perfectly adequate for shooting, just not quite good enough to depress the safety. Sometimes, even with a good grip, the safety is hard to depress, that's why those bumps on the bottom of the safeties were developed.

The grip safety was added by Colt at the Army's request, Browning was happy with the thumb safety. Maybe it was a good addition, maybe it was unnecessary. Colt also added the slide stop lever, which was definitely a good addition IMHO. Sorry St. John, I humbly beg your forgiveness for my blasphemy. I shall sing a score 'Songs of the Training Camps' in penance.

"The blue-steel Colt, The new steel Colt,
She runs to stunts erratic;
For she's a darn Tough arm to learn
This Army automatic.

Yet when you get [to] know this arm
and how to coax and pet her,
She'll do her duty like a charm;
No gun will serve you better.
She'll stick right closely by your side
And as the fight grows hotter
And you are caught in battle's tide -
You'll thank your stars you've got her.

The lusty Colt, The trusty Colt,
The weapon democratic,
Whose vicious might
makes men one height -
The Army automatic.


-- Songs of the Training Camps"

 

[Kernelkrink]

I’ve wondered about the arguments regarding modified carry guns for a while and I’m hoping there’s a resident lawyer that can explain the logic here. I don’t modify mine for reasons pertaining to reliability, but if I did, I don’t understand how it could be used against me. First, if I shoot somebody, it’s because I felt my life was in danger and I fired with the intent to eliminate the threat. Second, guns are designed to be deadly weapons. If I make my gun better at it’s intended purpose or modify it in a way that improves my ability to effectively defend myself, how is that unlawful in an otherwise lawful shooting?

As we have seen recently with the Kyle Rittenhouse and George Zimmerman justified self defense shootings, if a Prosecutor wants to charge you he will, evidence and actual events be damned. Other places like Greenwood you take care of bidness and you are hailed as a hero. In a perfect world all the "system" would look at is the actual shooting and if it was justified or not. In case you haven't noticed, this world today is as far from perfect as can be.

You have the misfortune of shooting someone who deserved it in someplace not Greenwood, instead the local Prosecutor is pulling a full Rittenhouse on you. First off, if he can convince a Jury you didn't intentionally shoot your assailant to stop him, but instead the gun "just went off" now you have a negligent homicide, not a self defense shooting. Back in the DA revolver days many departments converted their sidearms to DA only, no single action possible. Why? Because of accusations the officer cocked his revolver to "show he meant business" and now the "hair trigger" was an accident waiting to happen, which the opposing council now argued was what did happen, not a justified intentional shot. A deactivated grip safety will be argued in court as tantamount to cutting the brake lines on your car, a reckless act that endangers everyone around you. Deactivating any safety device the factory put on there is not a good idea, one of the reasons Springfield Armory chose to leave the mag disconnect out of their Browning HP clone. No one liked them anyway but doing it yourself opened up a can of worms. The lack of one from the factory just made it more desirable than an original for a carry piece.

Other mods can make you look like you were just looking for a chance to kill someone. Have "Smile and wait for flash" engraved around the muzzle of your gun? Punisher skulls on the grips? "Go ahead, make my day" custom engraved on the bbl of your .44 magnum? Bet those will be brought up as proof you were a Vigilante on the prowl for some poor soul who could be used for target practice while claiming self defense. Reloaded carry ammo? What, explosive black rhino cop killer bullets available at any WalMart weren't deadly enough for you? No, you had to go to your garage and make your own extra deadly nuclear tipped bullets!

Another issue is the non-standard loadings. One case I read about in Combat Handguns was a guy whose wife was in bed arguing with him, he at the foot of the bed. She grabs his .38 off the nightstand and shoots herself in the head. Guy calls the cops and reports the suicide, but the coroner sees a distinct lack of powder burns and pressure damage at the entrance wound compared to what he is used to seeing from close range .38 wounds. To his eye, the wound is more likely from a distance, say about from the foot of the bead to the pillow? Guy is charged with murder. Turns out the guy had been target shooting with it and it was loaded with very light "mouse fart" rounds not full power loads which was the cause of the unusual wound. With factory ammo your lawyer can obtain a sample of ammo from that particular lot as an "exemplar" to test and prove that extra light target load produces that kind of wound up close. With a handload, how ya gonna do that? You would literally be manufacturing your own evidence, it would never be admitted.

Now, can your lawyer overcome these arguments and you prevail in the end? Sure, he just might be able to. But every extra bit of time a lawyer spends prepping your case and especially time spent in court is literally costing you thousands of bucks more than if these issues were never brought up in the first place. Premium defense ammo is expensive at typically a buck a shot, but spending $10 over what a mag full of reloads would cost you is a hell of a lot cheaper than even 10 minutes of court time. Leave the witty sayings for engraving on your range toys. And what happens if he can't prevail? Remember, you are being Judged by 12 folks too stupid to get out of jury duty. And unless you are lucky and get a "gun person" on yours (likely to be excluded just for that knowledge) the only knowledge of firearms and self defense they will have is a lifetime of Hollyweird's depiction of gun owners and users.

Not a lawyer, but have had long discussions along these lines with mine, as well as a lifetime of reading about incidents and their legal aftermath in various magazines.

 

[armalitesheepdog]

No, the pistol had a grip safety from the Model 1907 onward, what the Calvary requested became the slide lock/thumb safety. Model 1907
View attachment 212577
Model 1910
View attachment 212578
Model 1911
View attachment 212580

As far as I know a 1905 is not a 1911

During the production run of the Colt Model 1905 Military, the Department Of Defense purchased 200 units for evaluation. There is no indication that the pistols made it to a field trial, but feedback from the US government prompted the development of a grip safety similar to the one found on the Fabrique Nationale Model 1905 6.35mm pocket pistols.

 

[Slow Hand]

John Moses Browning thought it needed one.
Who am I to argue?

No, he didn’t.

 

[STAGE 2]

Not a lawyer, but have had long discussions along these lines with mine, as well as a lifetime of reading about incidents and their legal aftermath in various magazines.

Except the magazines are full of BS. Ayoob and others do this to fill pages between the advertisements.

Only problem is that there are several who have studied this including a former federal judge if memory serves, and in the entire history of American jurisprudence there has never been an individual convicted of an otherwise good shoot because of the ammunition he used or the modifications he made to his firearm.

Now if the gun writers were being honest they would have included this fact in their article. Of course they don’t because it would make the article pointless and pointless doesn’t generate advertising revenue.

 

[OD*]

As far as I know a 1905 is not a 1911

During the production run of the Colt Model 1905 Military, the Department Of Defense purchased 200 units for evaluation. There is no indication that the pistols made it to a field trial, but feedback from the US government prompted the development of a grip safety similar to the one found on the Fabrique Nationale Model 1905 6.35mm pocket pistols.

Yes sir, that's what I understood. We were discussing the Model 1911, which already utilized the grip safety. The Department of War requested a safety after the testing in 1905/06 as you stated, which became the Model 1907 U.S. Military Trials pistol. Browning first used what he called the "automatic grip safety" on his Model 1903, which he based the FN Model 1905 grip safety off of.

 

[Johnny C]

Novac came out with "the answer" backstrap.

 

[Mij]

OK, this post has enough soak on it. I’d like to thank everyone that answered the pure question. I’ve read the responses and have found no compelling reasons that would cause me to change my personal opinion. One of the fellows that was involved in the original discussion about the subject (the big table morning coffee bunch at the local breakfast cafe) is coming out to shoot on Wed. I’ll see how it goes. Should be at least 3 maybe 4 1911’s here. One is the deactivated grip safety. Again thanks to everyone for opinions and the info.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

I've heard of it being done for competition, and saw it once while out and about done with a bunch of rubber bands. He had it sticking out of his back pocket with no holster.

That was the Cavalry if memory serves

Old school Delta Force rig

Calvary wanted the grip safety first, then they wanted the manual safety. When JMB originally submitted the 1905 for testing it had neither. I will say the hammer safety is interesting.

 

[daddyusmaximus]

Heard of it now...

Doesn't mean I'd ever consider it...

 

[churchmouse]

Question for the group: if a 1911 manufacturer offered a 1911 without the grip safety, would you buy one? Lugers were available with or without a grip safety. What if 1911s were similar. Would you choose one with or without the grip safety?

No.
Just wouldn’t

 

[nagantoid]

It’s good to see though, that as a group, we take safety seriously enough that the very idea of disabling a safety, even if possibly an unneeded one, to be wrong.

I think this is just general prudence. The gun is delivered as a package, not as a set of pieces you stick together. The original design included the grip safety and the _overall safety and reliability_ of the gun was characterized with all its pieces in correct working order. The manufacturer thought over the engineering, built prototypes, developed a complete understanding of how the gun functioned under different conditions, and was satisfied that it met requirements. Was it over-engineering to include the grip safety? Maybe. But the "right" path to address that is with a new design that goes through the same set of careful thought processes, prototyping and testing, so that the behavior of the new design is fully understood. Simply disabling part of a machine on an ad hoc basis doesn't give that same level of confidence that you know exactly how it will behave across the whole range of conditions where it is expected to be used.

(edit: A firearm is one of the few devices where "it operated" and "it didn't operate" are both safety issues. It's a very interesting Scylla and Charybdis through which an engineering group must steer).

 

[Kernelkrink]

Except the magazines are full of BS. Ayoob and others do this to fill pages between the advertisements.

Only problem is that there are several who have studied this including a former federal judge if memory serves, and in the entire history of American jurisprudence there has never been an individual convicted of an otherwise good shoot because of the ammunition he used or the modifications he made to his firearm.

Now if the gun writers were being honest they would have included this fact in their article. Of course they don’t because it would make the article pointless and pointless doesn’t generate advertising revenue.

And yet the issues are brought up in court all the time, especially if there is a civil lawsuit. Ayoob for example always gives specific court cases where the issue came up, and while a jury may see through the BS opposing council is trying to sell, every minute spent in the courtroom is costing the defendant $$$, Look at Kyle Rittenhouse, ya think the fact he used an "evil assault rifle" in an otherwise good shoot scenario factored in at all in the prosecution and trial? How many hours/days less of lawyer fees ya suppose Kyle would not have had to pay if all that idiot prosecutor had to wave around and point at the Jury was a S&W model 10? And I seem to recall the prosecutor talking about how hollowpoints were designed to explode inside someone. Seems he thinks ammo is an issue.



Gun writers sell articles, that doesn't make them wrong. Ayoob is a court recognized expert witness that has testified in hundreds of trials over the years, mainly for the defense. You don't pay people like him unless there is an issue with your defense that needs some heavy duty explaining, which if he believes the shooting is justified he gives. Several of the cases he was working on ended early because a nervous defendant decided to take the plea deal even though he thought they could win. Which way did those ones go in the study?

The Alvarez case in Miami was one that stands out as one where gun mods had become an issue, specifically the trigger return spring had a few coils cut off to lower the DA trigger pull, and he had replaced the stock grips with some plastic Safariland ones that fit his hand better. The prosecution argued the spring made the gun fire faster and made it more dangerous, and the grips violated a PD policy that forbid things like ivory or mother of pearl grips. Ayoob testified in that one too, pointing out that a weaker trigger return spring actually slowed down the reset, making it fire slower in rapid fire, and how the grips were more ergonomic, improving his accuracy which is always a good thing, no misses to endanger the public. Racially charged case that resulted in riots and fires both before and after, luckily the Jury saw through the BS and acquitted on the merits. Note how long the trial lasted for an event that took less than a minute.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1984/03/16/miami-jury-acquits-policeman-in-fatal-shooting-of-black/4f3b1682-1397-4fa0-b4bb-ca05dfd16414/

Then there was the Gary McFadden case where the fact he used a legally owned Ruger AC556 machine gun to kill an attacking motorcycle gang member resulted in a prosecution that likely would not have happened if a "normal" gun had been used. Note the cost of the trial.

https://www.georgiapacking.org/threads/the-gary-mcfadden-incident.178047/

BTW, what are the criteria for an "otherwise good shooting"? A guy modifies his gun to have a really light trigger, he shoots an intruder with it. He says he meant to shoot him, self defense. Prosecutor says his "hair trigger" caused the gun to fire "accidentally" ,making it negligent homicide and he came up with the intentional shooting story to cover his butt. Guy is convicted, which way does that go down in the study?

 

[walt o]

The grip safety does not block the sear or hammer .As a safety it almost useless few automatics use it they use a thumb safety that blocks the hammer.Even the grip safety on the S&W revolvers blocked the hammers JMB was a genius ,but some things can be improved on that he made, HI _POWER

 

[Leadeye]

I shoot the 1902/03 38 ACP quite a bit, never have had an issue with no safety. Always just figured it was the way things were back then although Broomhandles have a solid safety.

 

[Alpina9]

As many have said--the grip safety gets "pinned" not infrequently in competition guns. One more thing not to worry about when you draw and shoot. Novaks actually makes a grip safety called "The Answer" that achieves this.