Safety on Pietta 1851 Navy

[J.S. Colt]

What does "hair trigger adjustment" have to do with anything when the hammer is down and the revolver is in the holster?

I'm not sure... you'll have to ask Mr. Earp about that, as he's the one who said it, not me.

And didn't Earp once suffer an accidental discharge when his Colt fell out of its holster while he was sitting in a barroom?

Yes, he did. Which means that he knew from first-hand experience how important is is to leave the hammer on an empty chamber. Experience is an amazing teacher; I had a chain-fire happen to me once - I've learned how to avoid them.

Stuart Lake also got the "Buntline Special" story rolling--and folks are still trying to sort that one out.

Not sure what this has to do with the question on hand... unless you're implying that the statement from Wyatt Earp was a figment of Lake's imagination? I'll admit some of the stories in the book are possible exagerations, but the section quoted was in Earps own words; an old-time gunfighter sharing some of the lore of the past.

It's a very strange thing when people insist on arguing against something as vital as personal safety. You might as well argue against wearing a seatbelt. The odds of my being in a car accident are fairly low... in fact, I've never been in one. But that doesn't mean I'm not going to get creamed the next time I go out for a loaf of bread, so I wear a seatbelt just in case. Why take chances?

Accidents happen all of the time, whether in a car, or with a loaded gun. Both need to be treated with respect or you're gonna wind up dead. Or someone close to you will.

You can pooh-pooh the warnings if you want to, but ask yourself this: is there a real possibility of the worst happening, or am I certain that it will never happen? If you can say, for sure, that accidental discharge will never happen to you, then keep on doing what you're doing. Otherwise, maybe there's some truth in what people are trying to tell you here.

I use the "4-second prayer" rule. If what I'm doing has the potential for eliciting the "Please, God... let me take back the last four seconds!" prayer, I like to be very careful in the way I approach it; 'cos no one, as far as I know, has ever, ever gotten those four seconds back.

 

[crockett]

Well I would say it's safe to say we aren't going agree on this one. That's okay, this group has had this discussion before, it's one of those things- like deciding if it is safe to blow down the barrel of a muzzle loading rifle. Everyone has to operate at a safety level inwhich they are comfortable. I also shoot a lot of modern weapons as well as black powder. On a lever action it only takes a second to put a round in the chamber so I usually carry the rifle without a round in the chamber rather than depending on a safety or half cock position. I am pretty wary of side by side double barrel shotguns because the "safety" simply keeps the trigger from being pressed, otherwise the hammers are cocked and ready to fire and if there is wear in the sear/hammer engagement then you have a real problem. If I'm bird hunting behind dogs I ask everybody to keep the guns broken- plenty of time to shoot when the dogs go on point.
I don't like carrying a Colt government model "cocked and locked" I am told Colts have been thrown off of building while cocked and locked and when they hit the pavement the gun didn't fire- still- for me- I just don't like that carry mode.
On a Mauser bolt,I'm told the channel for the firing pin is oval so if you rotate the firing pin via the safety and the safety stays in that position, the firing pin can't move forward in the pathway- good set up.
So,I think,I am pretty careful on gun safety. On a percussion revolver, probably the biggest worry is a chain firing. I know Wyatt Earp, etc loaded 5 but I think that pertained only to the 1873 Colt.
Any gun is dangerous; and, I agree beware of the old timer who has become comfortable just because he's never had an accident. If I was with someone who was slamming a gun back in his holster or wandering all over the place without being aware his gun may hit a wall or door jam; well I'd hightail it out of there; but, if someone is watching what they are doing, is careful in handling the gun, including putting it back in the holster, etc then FOR ME I can't see the problem with six chambers being loaded on a PERCUSSION revolver. I know accidents have occurred with a cartidge revovers being loaded with six rounds but has anyone any documentation on such an accident with a percussion revolver?

 

[mykeal]

crockett -

Please go back through my description of the two scenarios (5 loaded with the hammer down on an empty chamber, and 6 loaded with the hammer down on a between-chamber notch/pin) and explain to me precisely where in those descriptions I've gone wrong.

You see, I don't think we disagree at all. I think you know that carrying on empty is safer. I understand your post to say you've decided it isn't safer ENOUGH for you to change your way of carrying. You're putting your eggs in the "it won't happen to me" basket. Putting it another way, you're saying the probability of occurrence is so low that it isn't worth it to change regardless of the severity of the consequences. It hasn't happened, therefore it won't happen. The inverse of post hoc, ergo proctor hoc.

I don't have any documentation for you, one way or the other. I can't prove, with written documentation, that a percussion revolver carried with all chambers loaded and the hammer on a between-chamber notch/pin has been inadvertently fired and hurt someone when that same revolver carried on an empty chamber would not have fired.
I believe it has happened because it CAN happen.

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

I'm not against safe carrying practices. I not only carry my Colts in a safe condition, but I use holsters that protect the revolver and don't allow anything to snag the hammer while the piece is holstered. I'm just pointing out that Stuart Lake sometimes got things wrong. He was perhaps less an Earp biographer and more of an Earp idolizer. He pictured Earp more as Earp wanted to be seen, and not as more unbiased historians have discovered him to be. And Earp, like many of these frontier types, often "yarned" gullible writers just for the fun of it.

 

[crockett]

Mykeal: Yeah, you're right on that. I thought I sort of said that on my original post. When the hammer is down on an empty chamber, well there's a big cut in the cylinder and there is no way I can think of for the cylinder to accidentally move, so yes, having the hammer in the notch is a stronger method of preventing unwanted cylinder rotation than relying on the pins.
There's another issue as well, if you have young people around or you are constantly switching back and forth from cartridge to percussion guns, then as a force of habit it may be wise to have everything with an empty chamber under the hammer. So as I said, we all have to operate at whatever level of safety feels okay. For me, and me alone, I feel safe with six loaded because the main spring is strong and the cylinder pins fit securely in the hammer's crease. The gun is carefully put in a slim jim holster and the holster's leather molded to the shape of the gun;and, the holster also extends up high on the gun and pretty much covers the spur on the hammer. The holster is worn cross draw which means nothing ought to brush against it.
If the main spring was weak, if the pins didn't securely fit into the hammer, if the gun was bouncing around in the holster or the holster didn't come up high enough to shield the hammer spur, then that would be a different matter.

 

[rebel727]

Don't get me wrong, I don't advocate carrying six and if/when I teach somebody I teach them to load five. If I carry in the woods I do carry six but that's just me. I know the consequences but I've done it for so long I don't feel right with five. My holsters are original styles with the cylinder completely covered and the hammer almost completely covered, just enough exposed to slip a thong over it. I don't use cut down or fast draw holsters.

 

[Rikeman]

I made a few comments on the original discussion of this issue and have not changed my mind, ( I am a carry on 6 guy) but I respect any who feel safer is better.

In practice we are all choosing degrees of safety. Your argument is sound and can not be desputed and logic would follow to be even safer you should carry with only 4 loaded because it is measurably safer and it is possible to have a situation where the hammer could be pulled far enought to cause an unwanted fire. safer still, use a water gun!

I say this a bit tongue and cheek, but really the promotion of safety here is superb and commendable. We all need to know our weapons and what they are capable of and any weaknesses they may have. We have chosen a sport that is not as safe as playing cards. I also ride a motor cycle. Wearing a full riding suit with pads is safer than jeans and a leather coat.....degrees of safety.

I have not seen it from you, but others seem to needlesly run down others for taking the time to consider the risks and deciding that the measurable degree of added risk is worth it. That is what makes America great! We are not all issued safety helmets when we are borne just to make sure we dont bump our heads :hmm:

 

I figure we can all agree to carry all chambers empty would be the safest.

If a frog had a glass arse scenarios are fun to auger about but are they probable.

The bottom line is some folks don't have enough to do so they auger over everyone elses business.

Carry five or carry six is a mans own business.

 

My wife broke down and let me open my birthday present early.
I read the manual and was surprised to see it has a safety of sorts. Little pins located on the rear of the cylinder, between the nipples, that when the hammer is rested there keeps the cylinder from rotating, thus preventing the cap from being accidentally struck.
I was rather impressed by this because I read earlier in the manual you should always carry a revolver on an empty cylinder.
The safety pins are a pretty sweet feature IMO.

HD

Those safety pins are sweet indeed and they work just fine.BP revolvers are fine with six and saa's are better with 5. That is just my opinion and works fer me. :hatsoff:

 

[jtmattison]

Those safety pins are sweet indeed and they work just fine.BP revolvers are fine with six and saa's are better with 5. That is just my opinion and works fer me. :hatsoff:

I am confident my revolver cannot accidentally discharge while in my holster. It is impossible for the hammer to even move far enough for the cylinder to rotate much less provide enough force to detonate the cap.
We cannot sit here and say the practice of carrying a fully loaded revolver is unsafe without examining the different holsters folks are using.

I feel mine is perfectly safe and I can live with it. That's all that matters to me.

:hatsoff:

HD

 

[mykeal]

I am confident my revolver cannot accidentally discharge while in my holster.

And I say again: the issue is NOT discharging while in the holster - it is during the transition from hand to holster that snags on belts, clothing, holsters, etc. occur.

Of course it's safe IN the holster. Nobody ever said it wasn't. And if you are very diligent and always focused on what you are doing, the transition into the holster will be safe each and every time. But we're human. We get distracted. We take shortcuts, because, "I've done this a million times over the last 50 years, and I've never had a problem, and I always do it the same way and I know exactly what I'm doing, therefore I never will have a problem."

Bang.

Damn, that hurts.

 

[crockett]

Well I sort of thought we were done with this topic and I don't want to repeat myslef. I acknowledge having a chamber empty has to be safer- there's nothing to cause an accident.
What I was trying to convey, and I guess I didn't do a very good job- is that to my knowledge the percussion guns were always loaded with six rounds. I have done a fair amount of reading on the subject and I can't off hand recall any mention from diaries written at the time of loading only five rounds IN A PERCUSSION. A lot of the percussion guns were actually used with combustible cartridges sold by Colt, Sage, and others and these little boxes contained six rounds, not five.
In any event along came the 1873 Colt Peacemaker, and similar type guns, and folks just automatically started loading six, just like with the percussion guns and then the accidents began. I think we are therefore applying safety practices needed on the Colt 1873 to the percussion guns but as I said the lock up on the percussion hammer over an empty chamber is more secure than the pin and anyone concerned about the issue ought to opt for that alternative.

 

[mykeal]

crockett -

I was just being anal with Hunting Dawg: slicing hairs about being safe while IN the holster, which I've never disputed, vs a point I felt I'd made several times - that problems occur during moving the gun into the holster. Sometimes I can't stop making the same point over and over if I think someone's missed it.

 

I figure we can all agree to carry all chambers empty would be the safest.

If a frog had a glass arse scenarios are fun to auger about but are they probable.

The bottom line is some folks don't have enough to do so they auger over everyone elses business.

Carry five or carry six is a mans own business.

Of course even empty in all six there is a probability of an accident with these mean old revolvers. Ya just might drop one on yer toe and break the toe nail off or something worse.

If dropped while walking it might just bust yer shinbone or knee cap or worse. :hmm:

Well....it might!!!! :rotf:

 

[J.S. Colt]

Cooner54 Said:I figure we can all agree to carry all chambers empty would be the safest.

If a frog had a glass arse scenarios are fun to auger about but are they probable.

The bottom line is some folks don't have enough to do so they auger over everyone elses business.

Carry five or carry six is a mans own business.




Of course even empty in all six there is a probability of an accident with these mean old revolvers. Ya just might drop one on yer toe and break the toe nail off or something worse.

If dropped while walking it might just bust yer shinbone or knee cap or worse.

Well....it might!!!!

Not funny. Frankly, someone who apparantly has as little respect for a firearm and a serious discussion regarding firearms safety shouldn't be allowed to carry and/or fire a gun, in my opinion. I don't mean to be disrespectful, but it seems like some of us just don't get the point.

I know this accidental discharge of a cap-n-ball revolver can happen as I knew someone it happened to. He had all six loaded and capped and had the pistol strapped on when he decided to climb into the back seat of his car to get something. Something happened (we never did figure out what, and I wasn't there at the time), and he shot himself in the leg. The guy was nearly a year recovering from the wound. It can and does happen. The real truth of the matter is that he's damned lucky he didn't kill someone because of his thoughtless stupidity.

As far as this thread goes, well, the fact of the matter is that we'll obviously never come to a consensus on this subject, which means we'll all continue to be endangered by those who think they're better than fate and blithely insist on doing whatever they feel like doing, disregarding any evidence to the contrary. I'm surprised that all of these futurists aren't raking it in at the Lottery; they all seem to have such an amazing grasp of what fate holds ("Oh, garsh, it ain't never gonna hapin to me!"). All I can say is, choose your hunting partners carefully!!

 

[crockett]

Actually I think we can come to a consenus. It's good to know someone actually DID have a mishap with a holstered percussion loaded with six. Like I said I have never heard of any accidents but I keep an open mind. That's one of the advantages of this forum, to share real life experiences. Up until now I was of the mind that only loading five was overkill in the safety department but if accidnets can occur it is just plain stupid to take the chance. If any one else has ever heard of a similar mishap I'm sure others would like to know.

 

I think I do get the point, in my opinion. I must have picked some pretty good hunting pardners over the years because we have never had any accidents and have fun at the same time as well as watch our P's and Q's while handling firearms.

The point some of you are NOT getting, in my opinion, is you can make up as many scenarios as your fantasy can come up with but it doesn't make it probable. If your that scared of these old guns then go bowling, golfing, or help grandma with her quilting and quit scaring the hell out a folks with your neurosis.

 

[mykeal]

The point some of you are NOT getting, in my opinion, is you can make up as many scenarios as your fantasy can come up with but it doesn't make it probable. If your that scared of these old guns then go bowling, golfing, or help grandma with her quilting and quit scaring the hell out a folks with your neurosis.

Conner54: nobody ever said it was PROBABLE. What I said was we can be SAFER.

As long as we're talking about people not getting the point, I'll make it again, just in case you skipped it somehow:

A rational safety analysis begins with classification of the consequences of an event. In this case the event is inadvertent discharge of a firearm, and the consequence is death. Can't be any more serious than that. Do you agree or disagree with that classification?

Next, the analysis determines the probability of occurrence of the event/activity. In this case the event/activity I chose to examine is returning the firearm to the holster. Many people attempt to bypass that event and say that their holster prevents unintended movement of the hammer; a good holster can certainly do that, but until the firearm is actually holstered, those features do not come into play in this event. So, I claim that it is possible to snag the hammer on the edge of the holster, belt or other article of clothing while returning the firearm to the holster after loading it. Do you agree that it is possible?

Now, let's look at probability of that happening. Certainly one can greatly reduce that probability by being diligent, carefully ensuring that the hammer is not snagged by paying attention to the motion and location of the firearm at all times. However, we are all human, and repetitive motions become inevitably become too familiar; that is, the muscle memory is too well practiced to recognize and overcome unexpected deviations from the familiar practice. And because the motion is familiar the mind is focused elsewhere, allowing the muscle memory to control the activity, so the attention we rely on to overcome unexpected deviations is not in play. This happens when the event/activity has been done many, many times, so the probability is very low. Do you agree with that?

So, we have a catastrophic consequence coupled with a very low probability of occurrence. When you have a catastrophic event, what level of probability justifies taking no action to eliminate or further reduce the probability of the occurrence?

My thesis is that if there is an action one can easily take to further reduce the already very low probability of occurrence of an event that has a catastrophic consequence, then one should do so. Do you agree with that?

Carrying on empty is just such an action. Do you agree with that? If not, please go back to my description of the differences between carrying on empty and carrying hammer down on a safety notch/pin and specify where the error is.

And one more point you seem to have missed: "It hasn't happened therefore it won't happen" is a logical fallacy. While it may provide some guidance in determining probability of occurrence (and that is very, very untenable because you don't have the experience of even a tiny fraction of the number of events that have occurred) it has no physical bearing on the action involved. And besides, I've already conceded a very low probability of occurrence and said that the catastrophic nature of the consequences still justifies taking what is a simple and effective measure of prevention.

Get the point?

 

[Rikeman]

It continues to go round and round here. Unless I miss read what Cooner is writing, he and I both understand perfectly what you are saying. We have missed no point. I think we both understand perfectly that there is added risk to carrying all six loaded. That is a calculated risk that we are willing to take. As far as danger to others, unless you totally miss handle your weapon (In that case it does not matter how you load it!) it is not a danger to others as you should always have muzzle control never point at others. If there is a misfire, the injury would be serious, but most likely not deadly. Splitting hairs for sure. As you have already conceded low probability I also concede it will most likely result in serious injury.

Mykeal: I take no issue with your pursuit of your point. You present it in a passionate and intelligent way. You are not offensive to others.

J.S. Colt: I do take issue with you! To suggest that I Blithely misshandle my weapon, or am thoughtless or stupid because I carry all six IS offensive. You paint with too broad a brush and assume way too much about me. :bull:

Before every use of any of my weapons, I perform function tests to assure that the weapon is performing as it should. I am not a gun slinger from the old west and have no need to rapidly return my weapon to the holster after loading. Heck.....in order to be loaded on all 6 means I have just conducted the lengthy process of reloading. I agree with Mykeal that the most dangerous part would be holstering. Muscle memory does come into play and I always holster pressing my thumb directly on the back of the hammer ensuring it doesnt move. I always strap my gun into the holster. To perform any funcion with you weapon without thought while daydreaming is just asking for trouble no matter how you decide to carry!

Please, if you feel the need, I welcome your opinions on why you feel different. Do not make assumptions about me that are not justified :hatsoff: Debate is great....keep it respectful!

 

[Poor Private]

Me I figure the safest way is to leave em all empty. I'll use it as a club instead of what it was intended for. If they only wanted you to use 5 they wouldn't have milled out the 6th chamber. Does that meant I have to leave my crocket pistol empty until I need to fire it? :rotf: Now my Patterson I guess will be a 4 shooter, and my snakeseye will be a 1 shooter, ohh wait they are side by side I guess I better leave it empty too. I won't load my musket either cause it's a 1 shooter.
Or what we can do is load em all up and just not cap em. NOO then I have to get out my bifocals to see em to put on the nipples(cones), and take off my gloves during hunting season.
My oh My am I