My TSA approved improvised weapon choice.......

[Wing Woo Gar]

How do you guys get these guns through security in the airport? 😳

Unloaded and In a locked container, declared and checked.

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

What part of "I" in my description of mods was unclear?

It's mechanically impossible for a Glock trigger to feel like a single action trigger. But with a little tweaking, they are certainly more than adequate.

No, it's not.

So your definition of "good" means "I didn't break it"?

No, it's not. It's ONE factor out of many that should be considered.

Why not? There are plenty of polymer 1911 handguns available.

Except that your 8 round limit is a false limit. It doesn't exist.

Your argument revolves around two key points. Weight and magazine capacity. Both of which are false dichotomies. You shoot yourself in the foot by pretending polymer 1911 designs are not an option. And then you shoot more than 8 holes in your capacity argument by ignoring the availability of double stack 1911 designs.


That is nothing new. With modern defensive ammo, the single most important factor in shot effectiveness is placement. Where handgun rounds are concerned, cavitation is a myth. This was an even bigger issue in the past.

The problem for us Californians is that we cannot purchase just any model of gun. The second problem is double stack ten round mags isnt much different than 8 round single stack mags. 10 is the limit.

 

[Dirty Dog]

The problem for us Californians is that we cannot purchase just any model of gun. The second problem is double stack ten round mags isnt much different than 8 round single stack mags. 10 is the limit.

Sure. But that's a local limitation, not a limitation of the firearm. Especially when the person is touting other calibers based on their higher magazine capacity.

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

Sure. But that's a local limitation, not a limitation of the firearm. Especially when the person is touting other calibers based on their higher magazine capacity.

Fair point.

 

[Steve]

Unloaded and In a locked container, declared and checked.

Awesome. Do you think the container would work well as an improvised weapon?

 

[Alan0354]

What part of "I" in my description of mods was unclear?

It's mechanically impossible for a Glock trigger to feel like a single action trigger. But with a little tweaking, they are certainly more than adequate.

No, it's not.

So your definition of "good" means "I didn't break it"?

No, it's not. It's ONE factor out of many that should be considered.

Why not? There are plenty of polymer 1911 handguns available.

Except that your 8 round limit is a false limit. It doesn't exist.

Your argument revolves around two key points. Weight and magazine capacity. Both of which are false dichotomies. You shoot yourself in the foot by pretending polymer 1911 designs are not an option. And then you shoot more than 8 holes in your capacity argument by ignoring the availability of double stack 1911 designs.


That is nothing new. With modern defensive ammo, the single most important factor in shot effectiveness is placement. Where handgun rounds are concerned, cavitation is a myth. This was an even bigger issue in the past.

You are just argue for the sake of arguement. You mean they have 1911 original design with polymer and high capacity? That is with small side ejection port, two piece feedramp, original single action cocked and locked? If you talk about anything that is not like that, that's NOT original 1911. I have to look at them more specifically.

You really don't know gun smithing. Pushing the hammer when it is cocked to make sure it doesn't drop is THE MOST IMPORTANT TEST on the safety of the single action trigger. You really need to LEARN!!!

YES, 2lbs trigger is TOO LIGHT to me. I am careful, I THINK of the consequence. That's why the old Government model was like at least 4 to 6lbs minimum because it's not for target and competition. I went competition with My Gold Cup that is about 3lbs, no issue. I won the 2nd price one time.

WRONG, my arguement of weight and capacity is actually of SECOND importance. It's the RELIABILITY. I talked about the two piece feedramp that BY DESIGN is inferior to all the newer one piece feedramp that do NOT have kink in the middle of the ramp, that the head of the bullet don't have to jump across the break when sliding on the feedramp into the chamber. For FMJ, it's ok, not for wide mouth JHP. It jammed on me during competition!!! No matter how I smooth out the ramp, it just didn't work. I should have use FMJ for that!!!

Also, the small side ejection port is small, one has to really shape the extractor to pull the shell out at an angle to avoid hitting the side of the ejection port. This is SIMPLE stuff. These are all common sense stuffs.

Another thing is most modern guns are much safer with a round in the chamber without the need to put the safety on. So when needed, just pull the trigger and the gun will fire. 1911 has to be cocked and locked to be safe. Then when needed, you have to do one more step to push the safety down before pulling the trigger. This is slower.

Most of the modern guns have one piece continuous feedramp so there is no chance for bullet to get hung in the middle when feeding. The ejection port literally the whole top of the slide so it's not critical the angle of the shell ejection. those are improvement over the old 1911 design. My S&W 659 and Walther PPKS both are old designs, they both have features of dropping the hammer when putting the safety on. Then you can take the safety off after loading the chamber, the next time, you only have to pull the trigger and it will fire. It's like first shot in double action.

 

[Alan0354]

How do you guys get these guns through security in the airport? 😳

Far as I know, you have to check in inside the luggage, you cannot carry onto the main cabinet. You have to declare when you check in. I did it one time going to Florida, they went through my luggage and cut open my pillow!!!

 

[Buka]

How do you guys get these guns through security in the airport? 😳

For decades, either in a holster or in my pocket. Not sure now, though. May have to catch one on the other side.

I’m going to miss flying armed.

 

[Steve]

For decades, either in a holster or in my pocket. Not sure now, though. May have to catch one on the other side.

I’m going to miss flying armed.

Ah the good old days.

 

[Alan0354]

Should have a firearm section here, looks like a lot of people are into guns here.

I guess this thread has long run out of steam already, whatever topic is of interest goes.

I was so into it in the 80s, me and my wife went to the range Sat and Sun every week for years shooting up a storm. Average blowing like 500 rounds each time. I stopped in the early 90s. But I still have all the guns, must be like 20 of them, but who's counting. Biggest one is 357mag, never have a 44mag. I have tiny Freedom Arms 22mag pistols, the shortest one has 1" barrel, weight about 4oz. I mainly into handguns, only one 22LR riffle and one shotgun.

Two reasons I quit, first, it got boring after so many years. Second and more importantly, I asked myself whether I can live with taking someone's life, be it a thug in self defense. I don't think I can get over it no matter how justify it is. Now, just have my loaded S&W 659 under my bed.

I bought a Glock 26 last year after all the crimes around the country and attacks on older Asians. I yet to shoot the gun. That was right before I picked up cane fight. Cane fight was the only reason I join this place. I bought all the upgrade parts for the Glock, but never get to it yet. Everything is still brand new in the box.

Towards the end of my shooting period, I was more into gun smithing, it's more interesting to me than punching holes on the target. You don't need a lot of tools to do that, I have most of the tools already other than the huge vise for squeezing the slide during the accurization process. I used the big one on the milling machine in the company's shop when I was working. It is easy enough if one has mechanical attitude, nothing compare to auto mechanics. Just need patience to polish slowly.

 

[Dirty Dog]

Awesome. Do you think the container would work well as an improvised weapon?

Most would, yes. You're required to use a rigid case, so it could likely be used as a blunt force weapon. The ones I travel with most often are a small case that fits my G19 with ammo and extra mags. The holsters go in my regular baggage. Or the one dubbed "the assassin kit" by one of our kids.

This one holds my Glock 41 with the extended barrel, the light/laser, the custom holster that fits that combo, two extra magazines, the mag pouch, a couple boxes of ammo, the suppressor, and a copy of my ATF permit. It's the size of a thick briefcase, so it's a bit unwieldy for an improvised weapon, but not useless. It certainly has the mass for it, though.

You are just argue for the sake of arguement.

No, I point out where you're wrong.

You mean they have 1911 original design with polymer and high capacity? That is with small side ejection port, two piece feedramp, original single action cocked and locked? If you talk about anything that is not like that, that's NOT original 1911. I have to look at them more specifically.

So you want to limit the discussion to 100+ year old guns. Wake up. It's not 1922 anymore. It's 2022. Technology and engineering have improved. And the out-of-date 1911 designs have been updated. Both weight and capacity arguments are moot, thanks to the ready availability of double stack and polymer 1911 handguns. Not to mention extended magazines. It's not the least bit difficult to find 15 round magazines that will fit a vintage WWII 1911 just fine.

You really don't know gun smithing. Pushing the hammer when it is cocked to make sure it doesn't drop is THE MOST IMPORTANT TEST on the safety of the single action trigger.

Sure, it's an important test. But it is not, despite what you wrote, the test. It is merely one of several.

You really need to LEARN!!!

I do, constantly. I highly recommend it.

YES, 2lbs trigger is TOO LIGHT to me.

OK, fine. But that isn't what you wrote. If that is what you meant, then that is what you should have written.

That's why the old Government model was like at least 4 to 6lbs minimum because it's not for target and competition.

Well, no, it was 4-6lbs because it was mass produced for distribution to huge numbers of people with minimal training.

I went competition with My Gold Cup that is about 3lbs, no issue. I won the 2nd price one time.

So you were the best loser. Congratulations.

WRONG, my arguement of weight and capacity is actually of SECOND importance. It's the RELIABILITY.

Reliability is no more an issue than weight or capacity.

I talked about the two piece feedramp that BY DESIGN is inferior to all the newer one piece feedramp that do NOT have kink in the middle of the ramp, that the head of the bullet don't have to jump across the break when sliding on the feedramp into the chamber. For FMJ, it's ok, not for wide mouth JHP. It jammed on me during competition!!! No matter how I smooth out the ramp, it just didn't work. I should have use FMJ for that!!!

Sure, the 1911 was originally designed for FMJ rounds. But, as I said before, this is not 1922. It is 2022. And these issues have all been resolved. You should modernize.

Also, the small side ejection port is small,

Are you with the Department of Redundancy Department?

one has to really shape the extractor to pull the shell out at an angle to avoid hitting the side of the ejection port. This is SIMPLE stuff. These are all common sense stuffs.

And all "stuffs [sic]" that have been addressed.

Another thing is most modern guns are much safer with a round in the chamber without the need to put the safety on. So when needed, just pull the trigger and the gun will fire.

Very true, especially for striker fired handguns. Personally, the 1911 is the only handgun with a thumb safety that I will carry.

1911 has to be cocked and locked to be safe.

No it doesn't. It is perfectly safe to carry a 1911 with the hammer down. With or without a round in the chamber. Doing so, of course, requires you to either hand cock it or rack the slide, and those certainly take time. Cocked and locked is the best choice if you're carrying for personal defense.

Some people find that the hammer being cocked digs into their love handles (ditto the beaver tail). The easy solution to that is a spring change. The gun is loaded as usual, the thumb safety is engaged, and the hammer is pushed down with your thumb. The gun remains cocked and locked, and disengaging the thumb safety will cause the hammer to pop back into the normal cocked position. A little file work to shorten the beaver tail, and the 1911 is much more comfortable to carry. I've done this with my SigSauer 1911 Target and am considering doing it to others.

Then when needed, you have to do one more step to push the safety down before pulling the trigger. This is slower.

No, it's not. When I grasp a 1911 in the holster, my thumb is naturally resting on the safety. When I squeeze, that will disengage the safety. That happens during the draw, as soon as the gun clears the holster. The gun is ready to fire well before it is on target. If that is not true for you, then I suggest that the problem is you, not the gun.

Most of the modern guns have one piece continuous feedramp so there is no chance for bullet to get hung in the middle when feeding. The ejection port literally the whole top of the slide so it's not critical the angle of the shell ejection. those are improvement over the old 1911 design.

Yes, because most of the world understands that it is now 2022.

My S&W 659 and Walther PPKS both are old designs, they both have features of dropping the hammer when putting the safety on.

I know what a decocker is and how it works. I suspect most of the people reading this do.

Then you can take the safety off after loading the chamber, the next time, you only have to pull the trigger and it will fire.

Except for those rare but unfortunate times that holstering the gun reactivated the safety/decocker, and it won't fire.
There may well be exceptions, but every decocker I have ever seen is pushed down to decock and lock the weapon. The opposite of the 1911 thumb safety. This is what makes it possible for holstering the gun to inadvertently engage the safety. This also means you cannot as easily disengage the safety during the draw. This is why the 1911 is the sole exception to my personal "no thumb safeties" rule.

It's like first shot in double action.

No it's not. It IS the first shot in double action. Only double action firearms have decockers. The only striker fired pistol I can think of is the old Taurus 24/7 OSS. And it was junk. The H&K P7 had the striker disengaged (effectively the same as decocked) but had a weird squeeze safety on the front of the grip that cocked the striker when you drew. Just like gripping the 1911 disengages the thumb safety. Also gone now. One of the reasons striker fired handguns have grown in popularity so quickly is that it eliminates that DA first round. Because DA sucks.

 

[Steve]

Most would, yes. You're required to use a rigid case, so it could likely be used as a blunt force weapon. The ones I travel with most often are a small case that fits my G19 with ammo and extra mags. The holsters go in my regular baggage. Or the one dubbed "the assassin kit" by one of our kids.
View attachment 28862 View attachment 28863 View attachment 28864
This one holds my Glock 41 with the extended barrel, the light/laser, the custom holster that fits that combo, two extra magazines, the mag pouch, a couple boxes of ammo, the suppressor, and a copy of my ATF permit. It's the size of a thick briefcase, so it's a bit unwieldy for an improvised weapon, but not useless. It certainly has the mass for it, though.

Your post is pretty cuckoo, But at least it’s on topic now. Well, the first 10% of it at least.

Seems like this is particularly impractical as an improvised weapon compared to just about everything else that was already mentioned. Why do you think this is better than a pen or a cane? Heck, how would this be a better improvised weapon to get through TSA than, say, an actual brief case?

 

[Alan0354]

Most would, yes. You're required to use a rigid case, so it could likely be used as a blunt force weapon. The ones I travel with most often are a small case that fits my G19 with ammo and extra mags. The holsters go in my regular baggage. Or the one dubbed "the assassin kit" by one of our kids.
View attachment 28862 View attachment 28863 View attachment 28864
This one holds my Glock 41 with the extended barrel, the light/laser, the custom holster that fits that combo, two extra magazines, the mag pouch, a couple boxes of ammo, the suppressor, and a copy of my ATF permit. It's the size of a thick briefcase, so it's a bit unwieldy for an improvised weapon, but not useless. It certainly has the mass for it, though.


No, I point out where you're wrong.
You are BLIND
So you want to limit the discussion to 100+ year old guns. Wake up. It's not 1922 anymore. It's 2022. Technology and engineering have improved. And the out-of-date 1911 designs have been updated. Both weight and capacity arguments are moot, thanks to the ready availability of double stack and polymer 1911 handguns. Not to mention extended magazines. It's not the least bit difficult to find 15 round magazines that will fit a vintage WWII 1911 just fine.
Yes, people talk about 1911, it's 1911 original form. When you start modifying and improving it, it's not 1911. don't you even know engineering? Everything is modified from some original design. If you logic hold, you might as well call Glock a 1911 as there are more similarity than difference.
Sure, it's an important test. But it is not, despite what you wrote, the test. It is merely one of several.
Did I said it's the only one. I can assure you that's the most important one. Do you need me to draw diagram to explain to you why?
I do, constantly. I highly recommend it.

OK, fine. But that isn't what you wrote. If that is what you meant, then that is what you should have written.

Well, no, it was 4-6lbs because it was mass produced for distribution to huge numbers of people with minimal training.
WRONG, they make it heavier for safety, yes, it's cheaper too.
So you were the best loser. Congratulations.
How about you? At least I got the 2nd. How good are you?
Reliability is no more an issue than weight or capacity.
It is more important if your life depends on it.
Sure, the 1911 was originally designed for FMJ rounds. But, as I said before, this is not 1922. It is 2022. And these issues have all been resolved. You should modernize.
You really don't get it, look at all the new 1911, they are very much like the original design even though they have polymer and even double row clip. Read my response above.
Are you with the Department of Redundancy Department?

And all "stuffs [sic]" that have been addressed.

Very true, especially for striker fired handguns. Personally, the 1911 is the only handgun with a thumb safety that I will carry.

No it doesn't. It is perfectly safe to carry a 1911 with the hammer down. With or without a round in the chamber. Doing so, of course, requires you to either hand cock it or rack the slide, and those certainly take time. Cocked and locked is the best choice if you're carrying for personal defense.
Of cause, then you have to cock before shooting. People consider it's too slow. also, the 1911 does not have dropping hammer feature to safely lower the hammer like the newer guns.
Some people find that the hammer being cocked digs into their love handles (ditto the beaver tail). The easy solution to that is a spring change. The gun is loaded as usual, the thumb safety is engaged, and the hammer is pushed down with your thumb. The gun remains cocked and locked, and disengaging the thumb safety will cause the hammer to pop back into the normal cocked position. A little file work to shorten the beaver tail, and the 1911 is much more comfortable to carry. I've done this with my SigSauer 1911 Target and am considering doing it to others.

No, it's not. When I grasp a 1911 in the holster, my thumb is naturally resting on the safety. When I squeeze, that will disengage the safety. That happens during the draw, as soon as the gun clears the holster. The gun is ready to fire well before it is on target. If that is not true for you, then I suggest that the problem is you, not the gun.

Yes, because most of the world understands that it is now 2022.
Except you still don't understand 1911 means. the way you talk, all semi auto are 1911, Glock S&W and others.
I know what a decocker is and how it works. I suspect most of the people reading this do.
If you don't understand what is 1911, do you really understand that 1911 don't have that?
Except for those rare but unfortunate times that holstering the gun reactivated the safety/decocker, and it won't fire.
There may well be exceptions, but every decocker I have ever seen is pushed down to decock and lock the weapon. The opposite of the 1911 thumb safety. This is what makes it possible for holstering the gun to inadvertently engage the safety. This also means you cannot as easily disengage the safety during the draw. This is why the 1911 is the sole exception to my personal "no thumb safeties" rule.

No it's not. It IS the first shot in double action. Only double action firearms have decockers. The only striker fired pistol I can think of is the old Taurus 24/7 OSS. And it was junk. The H&K P7 had the striker disengaged (effectively the same as decocked) but had a weird squeeze safety on the front of the grip that cocked the striker when you drew. Just like gripping the 1911 disengages the thumb safety. Also gone now. One of the reasons striker fired handguns have grown in popularity so quickly is that it eliminates that DA first round. Because DA sucks.

That what I was talking about those with decocker that the first shot is double action. You are not very good in reading. You have problem understand English? that's what I was talking!!

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

Awesome. Do you think the container would work well as an improvised weapon?

Lol! I suppose it would, I buy sturdy containers. That’s a very nice turn Steve! Bravo!

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

Ah the good old days.

🤣

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

Most would, yes. You're required to use a rigid case, so it could likely be used as a blunt force weapon. The ones I travel with most often are a small case that fits my G19 with ammo and extra mags. The holsters go in my regular baggage. Or the one dubbed "the assassin kit" by one of our kids.
View attachment 28862 View attachment 28863 View attachment 28864
This one holds my Glock 41 with the extended barrel, the light/laser, the custom holster that fits that combo, two extra magazines, the mag pouch, a couple boxes of ammo, the suppressor, and a copy of my ATF permit. It's the size of a thick briefcase, so it's a bit unwieldy for an improvised weapon, but not useless. It certainly has the mass for it, though.


No, I point out where you're wrong.

So you want to limit the discussion to 100+ year old guns. Wake up. It's not 1922 anymore. It's 2022. Technology and engineering have improved. And the out-of-date 1911 designs have been updated. Both weight and capacity arguments are moot, thanks to the ready availability of double stack and polymer 1911 handguns. Not to mention extended magazines. It's not the least bit difficult to find 15 round magazines that will fit a vintage WWII 1911 just fine.

Sure, it's an important test. But it is not, despite what you wrote, the test. It is merely one of several.

I do, constantly. I highly recommend it.

OK, fine. But that isn't what you wrote. If that is what you meant, then that is what you should have written.

Well, no, it was 4-6lbs because it was mass produced for distribution to huge numbers of people with minimal training.

So you were the best loser. Congratulations.

Reliability is no more an issue than weight or capacity.

Sure, the 1911 was originally designed for FMJ rounds. But, as I said before, this is not 1922. It is 2022. And these issues have all been resolved. You should modernize.

Are you with the Department of Redundancy Department?

And all "stuffs [sic]" that have been addressed.

Very true, especially for striker fired handguns. Personally, the 1911 is the only handgun with a thumb safety that I will carry.

No it doesn't. It is perfectly safe to carry a 1911 with the hammer down. With or without a round in the chamber. Doing so, of course, requires you to either hand cock it or rack the slide, and those certainly take time. Cocked and locked is the best choice if you're carrying for personal defense.

Some people find that the hammer being cocked digs into their love handles (ditto the beaver tail). The easy solution to that is a spring change. The gun is loaded as usual, the thumb safety is engaged, and the hammer is pushed down with your thumb. The gun remains cocked and locked, and disengaging the thumb safety will cause the hammer to pop back into the normal cocked position. A little file work to shorten the beaver tail, and the 1911 is much more comfortable to carry. I've done this with my SigSauer 1911 Target and am considering doing it to others.

No, it's not. When I grasp a 1911 in the holster, my thumb is naturally resting on the safety. When I squeeze, that will disengage the safety. That happens during the draw, as soon as the gun clears the holster. The gun is ready to fire well before it is on target. If that is not true for you, then I suggest that the problem is you, not the gun.

Yes, because most of the world understands that it is now 2022.

I know what a decocker is and how it works. I suspect most of the people reading this do.

Except for those rare but unfortunate times that holstering the gun reactivated the safety/decocker, and it won't fire.
There may well be exceptions, but every decocker I have ever seen is pushed down to decock and lock the weapon. The opposite of the 1911 thumb safety. This is what makes it possible for holstering the gun to inadvertently engage the safety. This also means you cannot as easily disengage the safety during the draw. This is why the 1911 is the sole exception to my personal "no thumb safeties" rule.

No it's not. It IS the first shot in double action. Only double action firearms have decockers. The only striker fired pistol I can think of is the old Taurus 24/7 OSS. And it was junk. The H&K P7 had the striker disengaged (effectively the same as decocked) but had a weird squeeze safety on the front of the grip that cocked the striker when you drew. Just like gripping the 1911 disengages the thumb safety. Also gone now. One of the reasons striker fired handguns have grown in popularity so quickly is that it eliminates that DA first round. Because DA sucks.

Lol! “The assassin kit”

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

Your post is pretty cuckoo, But at least it’s on topic now. Well, the first 10% of it at least.

Seems like this is particularly impractical as an improvised weapon compared to just about everything else that was already mentioned. Why do you think this is better than a pen or a cane? Heck, how would this be a better improvised weapon to get through TSA than, say, an actual brief case?

It’s better because it is made to take damage and an actual briefcase is made for looking snazzy. But come on, what’s cooler than an assassin kit? Either way, it’s not going in cabin of the plane with you unless you are @Buka. Apparently, none of your carryons are going on with you in the cabin anymore either.

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

Most would, yes. You're required to use a rigid case, so it could likely be used as a blunt force weapon. The ones I travel with most often are a small case that fits my G19 with ammo and extra mags. The holsters go in my regular baggage. Or the one dubbed "the assassin kit" by one of our kids.
View attachment 28862 View attachment 28863 View attachment 28864
This one holds my Glock 41 with the extended barrel, the light/laser, the custom holster that fits that combo, two extra magazines, the mag pouch, a couple boxes of ammo, the suppressor, and a copy of my ATF permit. It's the size of a thick briefcase, so it's a bit unwieldy for an improvised weapon, but not useless. It certainly has the mass for it, though.


No, I point out where you're wrong.

So you want to limit the discussion to 100+ year old guns. Wake up. It's not 1922 anymore. It's 2022. Technology and engineering have improved. And the out-of-date 1911 designs have been updated. Both weight and capacity arguments are moot, thanks to the ready availability of double stack and polymer 1911 handguns. Not to mention extended magazines. It's not the least bit difficult to find 15 round magazines that will fit a vintage WWII 1911 just fine.

Sure, it's an important test. But it is not, despite what you wrote, the test. It is merely one of several.

I do, constantly. I highly recommend it.

OK, fine. But that isn't what you wrote. If that is what you meant, then that is what you should have written.

Well, no, it was 4-6lbs because it was mass produced for distribution to huge numbers of people with minimal training.

So you were the best loser. Congratulations.

Reliability is no more an issue than weight or capacity.

Sure, the 1911 was originally designed for FMJ rounds. But, as I said before, this is not 1922. It is 2022. And these issues have all been resolved. You should modernize.

Are you with the Department of Redundancy Department?

And all "stuffs [sic]" that have been addressed.

Very true, especially for striker fired handguns. Personally, the 1911 is the only handgun with a thumb safety that I will carry.

No it doesn't. It is perfectly safe to carry a 1911 with the hammer down. With or without a round in the chamber. Doing so, of course, requires you to either hand cock it or rack the slide, and those certainly take time. Cocked and locked is the best choice if you're carrying for personal defense.

Some people find that the hammer being cocked digs into their love handles (ditto the beaver tail). The easy solution to that is a spring change. The gun is loaded as usual, the thumb safety is engaged, and the hammer is pushed down with your thumb. The gun remains cocked and locked, and disengaging the thumb safety will cause the hammer to pop back into the normal cocked position. A little file work to shorten the beaver tail, and the 1911 is much more comfortable to carry. I've done this with my SigSauer 1911 Target and am considering doing it to others.

No, it's not. When I grasp a 1911 in the holster, my thumb is naturally resting on the safety. When I squeeze, that will disengage the safety. That happens during the draw, as soon as the gun clears the holster. The gun is ready to fire well before it is on target. If that is not true for you, then I suggest that the problem is you, not the gun.

Yes, because most of the world understands that it is now 2022.

I know what a decocker is and how it works. I suspect most of the people reading this do.

Except for those rare but unfortunate times that holstering the gun reactivated the safety/decocker, and it won't fire.
There may well be exceptions, but every decocker I have ever seen is pushed down to decock and lock the weapon. The opposite of the 1911 thumb safety. This is what makes it possible for holstering the gun to inadvertently engage the safety. This also means you cannot as easily disengage the safety during the draw. This is why the 1911 is the sole exception to my personal "no thumb safeties" rule.

No it's not. It IS the first shot in double action. Only double action firearms have decockers. The only striker fired pistol I can think of is the old Taurus 24/7 OSS. And it was junk. The H&K P7 had the striker disengaged (effectively the same as decocked) but had a weird squeeze safety on the front of the grip that cocked the striker when you drew. Just like gripping the 1911 disengages the thumb safety. Also gone now. One of the reasons striker fired handguns have grown in popularity so quickly is that it eliminates that DA first round. Because DA sucks.

That’s some fancy hardware there partner.

 

[Steve]

Lol! I suppose it would, I buy sturdy containers. That’s a very nice turn Steve! Bravo!

Looks like a pelican case to me. Those things are good for more than holding guns.

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

Looks like a pelican case to me. Those things are good for more than holding guns.

Im a fan. I have a couple.