USPSA range officer killed in accident

[MoRivera]

Would you leave if someone is competing with a Sig P320? Would you ask if they had the recall work done? Would you ask for proof?

I also own a Sig P320....  . When I used it for a defensive handgun class a few years back, the instructor simply said 'don't drop it'.

I wouldn't...but that doesn't necessarily mean I'd fault someone if they did, or that I'd mind showing them if it was simple enough to do.

In the case of the P320, simply removing the slide would show that.  A firing pin on the other hand I dunno...maybe a dowel pressed against the rear?  If anything, this is something that the match directors themselves would ask, like with chrono-ing your ammo.  If another shooter asks the match director to do it and they refuse, then I guess it's their choice whether they want to continue or not.  Kind of a can of worms.

If USPSA decides to just continue as it was and not take 'extra measures' but further stress safety procedure, you might get an uproar from shooters seeing that the guns in question are so widely used.  But then if USPSA does scrutinize or make exceptions, then that opens it up for all kinds of other things.....series 70 1911/2011s, aftermarket triggers on other guns, etc...and then where would it stop?

I guess the easiest 'solution' would be to just not allow the non-firing-pin-block CZ's for competition, but that would suck.  Sounds a bit to me like gun control.

[Earl Keese]

Would you leave if someone is competing with a Sig P320? Would you ask if they had the recall work done? Would you ask for proof?

I also own a Sig P320....  . When I used it for a defensive handgun class a few years back, the instructor simply said 'don't drop it'.

I wouldn't...but that doesn't necessarily mean I'd fault someone if they did, or that I'd mind showing them if it was simple enough to do.

In the case of the P320, simply removing the slide would show that.  A firing pin on the other hand I dunno...maybe a dowel pressed against the rear?  If anything, this is something that the match directors themselves would ask, like with chrono-ing your ammo.  If another shooter asks the match director to do it and they refuse, then I guess it's their choice whether they want to continue or not.  Kind of a can of worms.

If USPSA decides to just continue as it was and not take 'extra measures' but further stress safety procedure, you might get an uproar from shooters seeing that the guns in question are so widely used.  But then if USPSA does scrutinize or make exceptions, then that opens it up for all kinds of other things.....series 70 1911/2011s, aftermarket triggers on other guns, etc...and then where would it stop?

I guess the easiest 'solution' would be to just not allow the non-firing-pin-block CZ's for competition, but that would suck.  Sounds a bit to me like gun control.

You mention all the issues that may arise, and that it seems like gun control. . .but you've started and posted in more threads on this subject than just about anybody else.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[MoRivera]

You mention all the issues that may arise, and that it seems like gun control. . .but you've started and posted in more threads on this subject than just about anybody else.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

Yeah, I'm just concerned since I'm a CZ Shadow shooter and want to keep using it in competition.  Sometimes you want to look at all the angles/perspectives in case it becomes an issue..and even though you may not agree with a certain outlook, you can still understand it which I think will help if it needs addressing.  I sincerely hope it doesn't and believe me I won't push it, but I also don't want to be seen as someone who isn't concerned with the gun's drop safety et al.  Can't please everyone, obviously.  In my case and at least in the local matches I frequent, everybody is on friendly speaking terms so I think there'd be a level of trust and familiarity.  It's just a lot of us were pretty startled when we first heard on Monday, and now later when many will know how and what kind of gun...and I'm shooting one...I'm just concerned, and like many I've invested a lot in these guns and equipment/accessories.

The 'simple routes' like banning certain models outright is the only place I see it being like gun control, and if I had to guess I don't see that happening.

[Earl Keese]

I think it will be addressed, no need for multiple repetitive hand wringing threads on multiple forums. Your concern is obvious, like Ralph Nader obvious. All of the speculation helps nobody.

[MoRivera]

I didn't start this thread, I don't see how discussing the subject is hurting anybody either, but I would venture to guess that it helps even less for an individual to repeatedly express how pedantically disinterested they are in a discussion rather than just ignoring it altogether.  Eagerly looking forward to an explanation on the 'need' for that.

[Grendel]

Let's keep it on topic gents. No need to get into the weeds about who posts what or why.

[CCWLearner]

This is a very unfortunate incident for the parties involved and their families.  It probably will also impact many people who are involved in competitive handgun shooting.  I'm not looking to cramp anybody's style or ban anything, but I hope it does lead to some additional safety measures at competitions.  Although this is the first fatal incident I have heard of or read about, I have read previously about a CZ Shadow or Shadow 2 (don't recall which) having an accidental discharge while holstered due to the hammer being bumped, and maybe some combination of mods like an extended firing pin and reduced power rebound spring.

A couple of days ago, when I first read this thread, I was explaining it to my wife and one of my sons who were in the room at the time.  As I explained to them, I personally don't own a handgun that doesn't have some kind of active drop safety.  That's one of the reasons I prefer my Sig P290RS for pocket carry over several of the other DAO pocket .380's on the market.  The S&W BG380 has one but several of the others don't, relying instead on the passive inertia safety of a lightweight firing pin vs. the rebound spring.  That includes the Seecamp, NAA Guardian, Remington RM380, Beretta Pico, etc.

For concealed carry or home defense, I want a gun I can throw off a tall building or wreck a motorcycle with and not worry about accidental discharge.   At least not if it's holstered and the holster survives the impact.  I don't jump off of buildings or ride motorcycles, but still.  Maybe I'm paranoid and overthinking this?  Maybe.  Anyway, I explained to my family that many modern handguns designed for self-defense or duty have some kind of drop safety, including all the ones I currently own, but the CZ Shadow was a gun meant for competition... and that this incident happened at a competition.

Not too long ago, there was a thread here asking for input on selecting a handgun for range shooting and also home defense, like a nightstand gun with a light mounted on it.  Several people were recommending a Shadow 2 for the job.  I remember one particular post where someone had set up their Shadow 2 for the task "because why not?".  Well, here's your answer, as to "why not".  In a close quarters gunfight in a house, when it's dark, your adrenaline is dumping, maybe you're grappling with an intruder, your family also in there with you... do you really want a gun that will go off if dropped or bumped the wrong way?  No thanks.

[timmy75]

Still can't stop thinking about this accident although i am on another continent. RIP and God help guy who dropped his shadow.

There are still so many what ifs.

some people posting pictures of extended firing pins sticking through breech face when hammer is down.
although I am not gunsmith, idea of firing pin touching and laying down on live primer seems just wrong.

also there are experiments with extended FP and weaker FP spring. people reporting ignition is possible with just light tap when hammer down.

[SI VIS PACEM PARRABELLUM]

Not too long ago, there was a thread here asking for input on selecting a handgun for range shooting and also home defense, like a nightstand gun with a light mounted on it.  Several people were recommending a Shadow 2 for the job.  I remember one particular post where someone had set up their Shadow 2 for the task "because why not?".  Well, here's your answer, as to "why not".  In a close quarters gunfight in a house, when it's dark, your adrenaline is dumping, maybe you're grappling with an intruder, your family also in there with you... do you really want a gun that will go off if dropped or bumped the wrong way?  No thanks.

I own many handguns that are not "drop Safe" and would have no issue using any of them for defensive purposes. I don't buy into "what ifs" like this simply because someone is trying to account for a safety that a gun does not have and substitute that for the one between their ears that they should have. Also if your "grappling" with anyone and one or both of you is armed the chance for an AD is extremely high no matter what gun you have.
Practice safe gun handling techniques always and your chances of failure are very low. The gist of this thread is an unfortunate accident but the cause is more than likely unsafe gun handling in the end.

[CCWLearner]

I own many handguns that are not "drop Safe" and would have no issue using any of them for defensive purposes. I don't buy into "what ifs" like this simply because someone is trying to account for a safety that a gun does not have and substitute that for the one between their ears that they should have.

I share your opinion on this subject regarding some safety mechanisms that have been implemented in handguns, like magazine disconnects or internal locks for example, but when it comes to drop safe mechanisms I disagree.  For the same reason that people used to carry their single-action revolvers with the hammer over an empty chamber, and the same reason "Israeli Carry" was developed, I think drop safeties are a good addition to a handgun's design.  I don't own a 1911, but if I got one, I'd get one with a drop safety, even though I understand many people dislike them because it's another possible point of failure and may affect the trigger pull in a bad way.

Also if your "grappling" with anyone and one or both of you is armed the chance for an AD is extremely high no matter what gun you have. Practice safe gun handling techniques always and your chances of failure are very low.

Yes, I understand that, but the AD you have should be one or the other of you pulling the trigger, not the exposed hammer hitting the floor or somebody's skull or whatever.  You don't get to follow all the rules of gun safety when someone is on top of you, trying to take your gun and use it on you.  This was the same type of argument that was used to justify the introduction of magazine disconnects, but to me that seems like a double-edged sword.  Having a gun that will only fire when someone pulls the trigger, though, that is hard to argue against, at least in my mind.

The gist of this thread is an unfortunate accident but the cause is more than likely unsafe gun handling in the end.

Yes, it sounds like they dropped the gun when trying to holster it.  That's always a bad idea, something that should always be avoided, but it gets much worse when the gun is likely to discharge in a random direction from the impact.

I recall you are an auto mechanic or retired from being one.  I'm sure you know a whole lot more than me about the internal workings of a car and some of the safety mechanisms in there.  You probably have strong opinions about some of them... some are good, some are useless, some do more harm than good.  I am personally really annoyed by some of the new "safety features" in cars like the lane change warnings and automatic braking etc.  What about seat belts, though?  Nobody wore them when I was growing up, but I always wear mine now.  I practice safe driving, I haven't had any kind of collision with anything for over a decade, but I wear my seat belt anyway.  I see a firing pin block, transfer bar, or similar drop safety in the same way.  My dad's 1911 and Ruger Blackhawk weren't drop safe, but I'm glad that my handguns are.

[SI VIS PACEM PARRABELLUM]

At the end of the day we all have to make our own choices and live and sometimes die with them. I won't own a 1911 with a series 80 lockwork but I'm satisfied with my CZ's Sig's and Beretta's  that have pin blocks. I'm simply saying don't rely on any safety mechanism to save you from an unsafe condition, it won't. Hit hard enough a pin block can be damaged and set off a round on some guns. CZ52 for example.
I don't compete but I know several who do and they have all been DQ'ed at least once for unsafe handling practices. Every DQ involved allowing a round to escape accidentally.

[Mercs]

PSA: Tanfoglio makes essentially the exact same gun, but has a firing pin block that does not negatively impact trigger pull. So you can have a great trigger pull, and also a gun that is drop safe



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MoRivera]

Some feel that a simple rule change will address it, a la starting the gun from half-cock would pretty much eliminate the danger of a hammer-down drop-fire, and in that case it becomes the same as any series 70 1911/2011 gun that's widely used in the same competitions.  But then some who don't shoot a CZ may point out that it creates a shorter double-action first trigger pull and is therefore an advantage over other DA pistols that don't have the feature.

Interestingly, the rules already allow for CZ's with a decocker (like the SP01 Tactical) to start from the half-cock because that's where the decocker lowers the hammer to, even though those guns HAVE internal firing pin blocks.  So in that respect the rules already allow for it, but that's because technically the gun decocks to that as it's intended carry condition, whereas the non-decocker models are technically meant to start with hammer all the way forward....so the rules would be making an exception for them.  It seems that's where some don't want to create that sort of precedent, even if it's motivated by safety concerns.

[CCWLearner]

I was looking into the rules for a local IDPA club before this COVID stuff happened, and that's what I understood about how I would use my P-07.  I would chamber a round, decock, then holster the gun to make ready.  Afterward, I would drop the mag, rack the slide and show a clear chamber, then dry fire to a hammer fully down to make safe.

I don't really understand why they have DA/SA guns with safeties start off with the hammer all the way down.  Especially if they are competing against SAO guns that start off cocked and locked?

[MoRivera]

I was looking into the rules for a local IDPA club before this COVID stuff happened, and that's what I understood about how I would use my P-07.  I would chamber a round, decock, then holster the gun to make ready.  Afterward, I would drop the mag, rack the slide and show a clear chamber, then dry fire to a hammer fully down to make safe.

I don't really understand why they have DA/SA guns with safeties start off with the hammer all the way down.  Especially if they are competing against SAO guns that start off cocked and locked?

My understanding is because that's the intended design of the gun, to be carried hammer down and double-action for first shot.  Be it a Sig, Beretta or a CZ.  Both the Beretta and Sig have decockers the lower the hammer to the fully forward position, although Sigs have a mechanism that suspends the hammer a bit back from the firing pin end, and both of them have internal firing pin blocks whereas a CZ Shadow and Shadow 2 do not.....even though the 'B' models both manual safety and decocker ones do.  .  So with a decocker-equipped pistol, wherever the particular pistol lowers the hammer to is considered its default starting/carry condition, but with the manual-safety models, the default is considered fully-forward unless specified otherwise by manufacturer.

Bit of a quagmire, but apparently nowhere in the Shadow's literature does it say its recommended starting condition is with the hammer on half-cock.  So by rule they have to start hammer fully-forward, which gives a lot of R.O.'s the heebie-jeebies upon starting as the hammer needs to be manually lowered on a chambered round.  So if USPSA were to rule that the Shadow has to now start on half-cock even though it shortened the DA pull, and even though it makes sense from a safety-standpoint...technically it is starting the pistol in a way that's not recommended by the manufacturer....EVEN THOUGH mechanically it would be the exact same as how decocker models of the same make are allowed to start.

Of course, one can always start with the Shadow cocked-n-locked like a 1911, but that puts it into Limited division where it's up against more customized guns and higher caliber/power factors where it's at a scoring disadvantage.  In IDPA, it can be shot in ESP division (as opposed to DA in SSP division) starting cocked-n-locked and not have any caliber/scoring disadvantages, but USPSA is the real issue here where the Shadow's appeal and popularity really revolves around the Production division.