I was an armorer who exclusively worked with the M-14 platform. It is the best weapon you could ask for. Easy to disassemble, to clean, to replace parts, to repair any portion. The safety is my favorite aspect. The only reason someone wouldn't like it is because they aren't masculine enough to move the safety forward with a single finger.
I need to purchase an M14 so I can compare it to my favorite little military surplus weapons the SKS, first weapon I ever field-stripped and I was staggered to learn that it was all mechanical leverage spring tension and gas pressure that makes it function. And my AK-47, it's crudely simple, easier to field-strip than the SKS.
When does the copyright expire for the Ruger Mini-14? Wouldn't it be nice if dozens of other gun manufacturers like PSA started building clones and selling them at AR prices and then thousands of aftermarket companies flooded the market with all sorts of upgrade parts? Same for the M1A rifle too. The AR is nice but it really isn't all that.
What is your opinion of the trigger housing as I think the idea of putting a tool into the hole to release the housing can bend the trigger housing metal and snapping it back into place is a little difficult on the mini 30, as well. I am retired police and carried many weapons in my 33 years in LE and 11 years in the Army. Now I have a nice mini 14 as well as a mini 30 and find the mini 30 housing is very difficult to pop into position and will pop out easily if not secured tight.
It really is a shame that this man only has 157,000 subscribers, he has got to be one of the most underrated individuals in the CZcams gun community. He's a total class act.
The only reason your finger would enter the trigger guard anyway is because you are about to fire it. And the only reason you would disengage the safety of a loaded rifle is because you are about to fire it. So having your finger in the trigger guard to disengage the safety makes perfect sense. I don't see a problem with that.
Except almost everyone disengages the safety in advance of being ready to fire. I’d never wait that long to take a safety off to where I’d have to disengage it and fire in the same instance. I like to think of duck hunting as an example. When I see ducks that look they they are working the spread to land, I generally have my gun up from its rest and loosely in my shoulder pointed the direction I anticipate to shoot. Safety comes off at that point too but my finger remains out of the trigger guard. If the ducks make the commitment all I have to do is raise the barrel a few inches and pull the trigger. Can’t do that with a garand style safety. And I challenge you to do it well with some nice winter hunting gloves on.
@@austincrowe5194 except the Garand is a combat rifle and not a waterfowl shotgun. I swear everybody just needs to have an opinion no matter how ridiculous
@@sgtstedanko7186 and only well trained military people should get to have combat rifles? It’s a subpar safety design for numerous reasons. It’s why it isn’t a common safety design. And it’s a legit complaint about the garand style rifle. Then again that’s one man’s opinion. But I’m not a gun writer. Just saying I think the garand is an elegant design. However I think the safety could be a better design. Doesn’t make or break the gun though.
@@austincrowe5194 is such a stupid argument. It's a very safe safety. There's no training required. When you're ready to shoot, you put your finger in the trigger guard, flip the switch forward, then put your finger on the trigger. I don't see what your point is. When the safety is on, it not only blocks the hammer but also blocks the trigger. Doesn't get any safer than that. Far more safe than a thumb switch or button. Like i said before, some just comment for the sake of commenting.
@@sgtstedanko7186 ok. Then work the safety with some winter gloves on. You’ve also ignored the whole part about when the safety is not properly functional… aka when the gun will fire when the safety is on. I’ve seen that happen before because mechanical stuff breaks from time to time. You’ve ignored any potential claims of problems and acted like it’s an infallible design. All I’m saying is that there are much better safety designs out there. In fact any of them that are generally ergonomic with a firing grip for the weapon are better. I’ve also said the weapon is good overall but that the safety design could be improved. It’s not the worst safety but it could be better. If you can’t see my point then you clearly didn’t read what I’ve written. But fortunately you don’t have to take my word for it… you can take the word of all the other countless gun designers that have seen the gun and did not incorporate that safety design into their weapons.
The"Garand"safety has been tried and true for over 80yrs. It's always nice when an expert who knows what he's talking about debunks myths and misconceptions and puts the armchair"experts"in their place. Thanks 👍
I always thought it was brilliant. It helps to be old enough to grow up with the generation that it was designed for. I’d bet my front teeth the safety haters are from a generation that caused a need for instructions on shampoo bottles
Here Here or is it hear hear!! As hear what these people are saying! Couldn’t agree more with you folks 😃 legit! (Is that what the kidz say nowadays legit?)
This form of safety is truly ambidextrous. A cross-bolt safety is awkward for most left handed shooters, while this design works equally well for either hand. I have to wonder if some writers' minds are actually engaged when they start spewing words!
I have no experience with Garand style safety, my experience is shotgun related the Rem870 v Mossberg 500. Im a righty, my youngest daughter a lefty. The safety on Mossberg is easier for her, we have Mossbergs as a result. Nothing against the Remington. This Garand style seems like a great safety to me, right or left. Kinda wished more used it.
Cross-bolt safeties placed behind the shooting hand are among the worst offenders because of their awkward location. Those placed at the front of the trigger guard are easier to operate if you are a northpaw. I'm a southpaw and I installed a cross-bolt safety in an 870 shotgun for my convenience, but I still visually check it because the rearward location remains awkward and pushing across (instead of forward) is not very intuitive. Tang mounted safeties are intuitive as long as pushing them forward disengages the safety. I've seen a few safeties that disengage by pulling them back. This is counterintuitive and awkward. I own one pistol with a frame mounted thumb safety that must be pushed up to fire and down to make it safe. I have no idea what the designer was thinking, but this feature is the clunkiest thing I've encountered on a pistol.
@vettelover2009 YEP, an empty chamber is the only sure thing. But to all those people that just love safeties, would they allow me to point a loaded weapon to their head and squeeze the trigger ?
@vettelover2009 You have fallen victim to the bad rhetoric of hand gun trainers. Rifles almost never have holsters and safety switches are essential. Especially on self loading / automatic rifles.
@vettelover2009 I believe EthosAtheos is saying while carrying a rifle the trigger is open and can snag on branches and other things. While a pistol is in a holster with a sheath over said trigger giving it protection from outside forces that are not controlled by handler of said firearm.
@vettelover2009 Talking about military applications running in the jungle with a hot weapon with no safety is asking for it. That is why they are on rifles.
@vettelover2009 I have no problems with loaded rifles. But gear snagging a trigger is real, I've seen it happen. I've seen people ND when picking up a rifle in a vehicle. I have no idea what your exp. is but mine is that safety's are your friend.
You are spot on sir! Just ordered a mini 14 just like yours. As a retired state trooper after 30 years, (the last twenty as a firearms instructor), my knowledge of firearms is no where near the level that you present. I salute you sir.
I love listening to you. You're one of the most intelligent and calm people educating us. You are to our craft what Bob Ross is to painting. Kudos and cheers to you.
I would say, "sales clerks with below-average writing skills, but great familial or other connection to the publisher and/or the so-called *industry*." As of 2023, most firearms publications are at the Popular Science or Popular Mechanics level of technical honesty versus salesmanship. Which is to say, heavily biased in favor of a particular view, regardless of factual or mechanical accuracy in what's written.
@@Paladin1873 I will take a look, never have before. I think print media are, at least for the next 50 yrs or so, on the sidelines at best. So many people use the internet versus newspapers or magazines. On the internet it's a lot of noise and very little signal. Some would say "this reflects the audience" but almost none of it feels organically created to inform, most of it seems to be selling either a product or a persona, and sometimes both. This is one of the main reasons our host Mr GB is such a treasure. I've never felt anything but the desire to share his accumulated wisdom and experience. If he mentions a manufacturer it's usually in the course of talking about a particular firearm, cartridge, or aspect of either. I see no favoritism other than favoring honesty.
I enjoyed this video! Thank you for making it. I have found silly complaints about other safety methods. The 1911 comes to mind especially in regards to how new shooters cannot handle the complexity of such a manual safety.
...and the grip safety... ...and it's single-action trigger... ...and the half-cock notch on the hammer... It's almost like J.M.B. designed so that it's as "G.I.-proof" as possible and will not fire unless you intend it to fire. .
I will say honestly that when I chose my first handgun I chose polymer striker-fired simply to avoid the decock/safety-off step when learning. Now, however, after a couple years of training heavily, I could manage it with less stress. I don't think it's false to say it's one more step to train and think about, I would say instead that everyone should train with what they have, and learn the process until it becomes automatic. Regardless of whether it's a simpler striker-fired polymer pistol, or a dual-action pistol with a decocker or manual safety.
Untruths and misinformation in professionally written and published articles, less than thought out comments on the internet? Surely these things could never happen! I simply love it when you explain a simple concept so that “anyone” should be able to grasp the obvious! Another great video, education is sometimes a very slow process; thanks for being the patient teacher you are!
Exactly. The only argument I have heard that carries weight was from a new shooter who was nervous about the safety being anywhere near the trigger rather than in a different position entirely. I reminded them we were shooting stiker fired pistols lacking any safety as well, and after explaining the ethos of this safety type they immediately came to prefer it over the side mounted switch safety on the AR we were shooting. It was a good lesson for them about trigger discipline and for me about their safety concerns
I can't agree more, not only is it just as safe or safer than any other safety, it is certainly faster and more effective than any Mauser, 1903, Enfield, or any conventional rifle safety of the time, The time it takes to move a Mauser or 1903 safety in combat and fire is at least double that of the Garand!
The essence of a true improvement in mechanical engineering -- more efficient in use, no less dangerous, and possibly safer via the mechanical changes/improvements.
As the owner of a Mini-14, I agree with you wholeheartedly. I never understood the vitriol directed at the Mini. I love mine. No, the Mini-14 isn't an AR15, but then again neither is a Ruger American, an AK47 or a Henry Big Boy.
Love it when it rains truth, but you sir cast lightning bolts of fact that illuminate internet misinformation. Thanks for everything you do Gunblue490!
I wish I had him as my Pops growin up. Didn't have a single shooting relative till my 30's. Great videos and LOVE his no nonsense approach and the way he shares his wisdom and experience.
The only thing I can think of is that someone who is not paying attention and not familiar with the weapon system could, when trying to put the safety on, push the trigger instead of pushing the safety. The safety is just a couple of inches in front of the trigger, and someone not paying attention could push the trigger and fire the weapon, instead of pushing the safety to the on position. They would have to be completely unfamiliar with the weapon and safety system, but I guess that it is a possibility.
That’s my line of thinking on this. I made a post with my thoughts as well but I would liken it to having a two light switches side by side, one for hat turns off the lights and the other that turns on the oven or something. Make a mistake, be in the dark etc and you are right in the right place and doing the right physical action that would actuate the trigger. A separate and different action should actuate the safety. It doesn’t seem to be a problem in practical use but it’s also not a good idea to design features of safety like this.
Do you actually know what you’re saying? “ pushing” the trigger? You pull a trigger, an opposite action from taking the safety off in this family of firearms. Even better, you engage the safety from outside the trigger guard, no possibility of pulling the trigger while you’re pushing the safety on unless you have another finger in the trigger guard (think about that name for a minute) and at that point you shouldn’t even be allowed to touch a firearm.
@@tnzayatz6579 Never underestimate the stupidity and carelessness of people. The action of engaging the safety is the same action as pulling the trigger. You push back on a piece of metal that hangs from the bottom of the rifle. The trigger is maybe a couple of inches behind the safety and both are manipulated in the same exact way, you pull back on them. It is conceivable that someone not familiar with the rifle and just being careless could think that their finger is on the safety, when in fact it is on the trigger, and get an accidental discharge.
During the course of 20 years handling and unloading a Mini-14, somewhere between 3,650 to 7,000 times, never was there an ADD (accidental discharge). Anyone who might claim that the safety is unsafe is incorrect.
Universal Firearms Safety Rule: “Finger off the trigger until the sights are aligned and the decision to shoot has been made.” (Then pop the safety and send your message down range.)
Thanks for all of the wonderful tips on the Mini-14. In regards to Mini-14 topics I would love to see how you are zeroing (what zero range) the Mini-14 using the iron sights at an indoor range and which height over bore and muzzle velocity specs you are using to calculate POI vs POA at 25 yards for those of us that don't have access to a long distance range.
I've only recently discovered your channel, but it's great to see someone who's obviously experienced (far more than I) and knows just what they're talking about! I love my AR-pattern rifles, but I will NEVER sell my Mini-14! I especially like the point you make about not having to look at the safety to know it's position instantly.
I really enjoy your videos, the perspective from our old timers is both wise and appreciated. Lots to learn from them, even if it’s as simple as a press to reset peoples ‘think with yer head’ button video like this one
I get annoyed when stupid gun writers don't provide correct information to trusting people because they're not the experts that folks think they are. I didn't attend chef's college, so I don't try to teach people French cooking, and too many gun writers never were schooled in firearms and aren't qualified to be teaching about them. All that was ever needed to be a gun writer was a typewriter. Now, it's just a cellphone.
I applaud you for making this video to set those who buy-in to stupid hype about anything “old” straight. Just because something is invented at a later date(AR-15) with a different mechanism(safety) that invention seems to put in some minds that the previous product is somehow bereft of the attributes that made it great in the first place. Thank you, sir for your “short” but very informative video👏
I dont want to assume that, that's the case but I have an itching feeling that you may be right. There's so much "out with the old" mentality lately that these meat heads seem to think that its a righteous principle to get rid of anything that's old now. Functionality is functionality...no matter who used it or how long ago it was used. I think the writer who made that statement couldn't push the safety out of the way with his dainty little index finger so he immediately came up with a case for why it's stupid to have it there. Haha
@@nsob8897 and probably has no confidence in his own dexterity. So then it becomes unsafe for everyone in there own mind. I think this is what happens when we let schools, government, TV and social media raise our kids
@@nsob8897- It is a bias which is pervasive amongst the young, and perhaps for understandable reasons, that newer is always better. Their youth can be blamed, and the lack of life experience, for holding such an outlook. What is mysterious, though, is how so many older folks who ought to know better still subscribe to this tired trope. Maybe we ought to use the word "old" less, and substitute "time-tested" in its place....
Trigger guard safety like this works great, it's just that a lot of the current gun enthusiast community has grown up with the AR platform safety, and subsequently feels more comfortable and safer with those controls. AR style controls do tend to be a little bit faster on the clock in competitive shooting, but outside that environment where strict administrative procedure must be followed (including when safeties must be engaged and disengaged) under time pressure, there's not a huge objective advantage over the older style trigger guard safety.
I agree with your video. I consider my Mini14 safety to be the most intuitive and easiest safety to use and understand on all my rifles. The closest 2nd place intuitive safety on a rifle I own is the common bolt action rifle safeties. It's my opinion...should be yours :) Thanks for the discussion
@@fjb4932 Look at the video at the video 7:11 time, his finger is on the safety just like it would be on the trigger. It would be easy pull the trigger while thinking you are setting the safety. A similar finger movement is used to set the safety as it is to pull the trigger.
This right here. Same actions in close proximity is the kind of thing you try not to design into machinery for safety reasons. Mistakes and fumbles happen, try not to set operators up for failure.
The other giant advantage of the M1/M14 safeties is they double as a PADLOCK hasp. I imagine that a properly drilled hole would allow the Mini's safety to be padlocked too.
It was common practice in armories for a rod to be passed through all the safeties and secured in gang fashion to the gun rack. Yes, the Mini-14 could be drilled, but I suspect such tough steel might require annealing and re-hardening.
People who think that the Garand-style safety is 'dangerous,' they don't shoot Garands, and they know just enough about firearms to get themselves into real trouble.
Well sir I like that design much better than the AR so my friend you can't fix stupid .Wish we could .We wouldn't have the bozos we got in government now .
The safest thing about a mini 30 is that if someone has a negligent discharge and also bad muzzle awareness, the person in the line of fire will not get injured.
Disengaging the M1 safety is a very conscious and deliberate act. The trigger guard protects it from being accidentally disengaged. To disengage the safety and fire at the same time you need two fingers in the trigger guard going in opposite directions. As a result, having the safety lever inside the protective trigger guard but *opposite* the trigger in both direction and actuation is genius. It is extremely hard to accidentally mis-use, it is protected from normal handling. it is simple, and it is tactile so you don't have to look at it, at the same time it resists finger pressure making it harder to disengage. What in the hell is unsafe about any of that, I'd like to know.
I was trained to shoot on grand at age of 9 when I started using other rifles I thought all of them needed the same safety system of the m1 grand and still do. Thank you for what you do for all of us.
Soldiers carried the M1 Garand across Europe in one of the worst winters recorded, and they wore gloves. There's plenty of room in that generous guard.
@@GunBlue490 Excellent point! However I doubt the military would tout any data of some GI getting shot in the bum from the guy behind him fumbling through the trigger guard.
@@chrishill1286 I received military firearms training. GIs are taught to not place their finger on the trigger until they can safely shoot at the enemy. The last person to shoot their buddy in the bum is someone who received military training.
Thank you for bringing wisdom, experience, and Truth to the Firearms community. I hope and pray you do not waiver or fatigue. God Bless you, your family and Benny we need more people like you.
The first military rifle I trained on was the M1. The second rifle was the M-14. I don't ever recall any negligent discharges that were attributed to the manual safety. Writers from the generation that grew up first learning to operate the AR pattern rifles seem to be the ones complaining the most about this earlier system. The only plausible concern I might have with operating the M1 or M-14 is under winter conditions when I am wearing heavy gloves or mittens. It is conceivable one could disengage the safety and accidentally activate the trigger, but this is averted by installing a winter trigger and winter safety. For those who prefer to use an AR in winter, you can unlatch and fold down the flat trigger guard to allow better access by a gloved hand.
When I was 16 years old and someone tried to sell me a m1 garand I looked it over and said thats a dumb place for the safety. 15 years later when I wasn't a dumb smart ass kid, I looked at another m1 closely and thought the man who invented this gun was a genius. Today at 60 years old, my 30 year old son and I took my cmp m1 made in December 1941 to the range and while we were zeroing in he said to me, this is the best shooting rifle I ever put my hands on and whoever designed this rifle is a gun genius. Im thankful he didn't say that saftey was in a dumb place.
Great video, I like the safety position on the mini-14 because I don't have to change the position of my hand as I do when using a tang safety or crossbolt. My mini is a favorite "walk around" rifle.
Thank you Mr GB,, and Happy New Year to you and your family. If you reviewed the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals decision regarding the ATF "bump stock" ruling you would see the emphasis there on true mechanical function versus the untrue & emotionally charged version of mechanical reality. There's a bit of serendipity between that 5th Cir decision and your fine video above. God Bless you.
Easy for someone who hasn’t ever used this type of firearm to make false statements of its safety features, thank you for telling the truth, it is a safe firearm.
Everyone on the internet is a firearm genius without credentials. Today hardly anyone served in the US military, when I was young everyone I knew had a father that served in WW2. I’m a veteran and a hunter, I’ve never thought about complaining about safety placement. It must be exasperating to listen to all the geniuses that populate the internet.
Very very well stated.... Great system, for right or left handed .... I get worked up when a homeowner hires me then tells me how to do the job they are paying me for ..... Your a great person to explain things even as I may know somethings well, I will never know it all, anyone can always learn ....
It's the most convenient, foolproof and safe safety I've ever encountered and I don't think I ever will encounter one better. Whoever says otherwise needs to get out of the gene pool.
I totally agree. I have never understood the idea that the safety on this design isn't safe. I find it to be the best safety our there for all of the reasons you mentioned.
the key concept is INDEXING ... if youre pulling back on an off-safe trigger mistaking it for the safety then its bcs youve failed to use your finger to trace the guard thus assuring whether youre inside or in front
I think the unsafe idea goes back to gloves in cold weather. The army had a cold weather extended safety for the m1 rifle where all manipulation was done external of the trigger guard.
Honestly I understand the criticism about the location of the safety. Having to enter the trigger guard to switch the safety off is not the safest option in my oppinion. Training emphatizes heavily (and has for at least the last twenty years) that the finger enters the trigger guard only when the sights are on the target, no matter what type of firearm you are using. I personally wouldn't want to keep the rifle on safe until I am on target, that costs precious moments when you might not have that time. I also see the risk of an accidental discharge while disengaging the safety. You are right that humans have fine motor skills, but those skills degrade heavily under stress. When you put the first digit of your trigger finger into the trigger guard (safety engaged) there is maybe 1/8th of an inch between your finger and the trigger. Getting bumped by someone or something, getting the rifle or sling caught on something or a slight trip when you disengage the safety on the move and you fire at least one round (maybe more) accidentaly. When you are wearing a glove I would guess that there is no wiggle room at all between your finger and the trigger blade when disengaging the safety, plus that sensation and dexterity are already lower than normal.
An added feature of the safety is that when the safety is depressed into the trigger guard is you can tell the gun is cocked at a glance. If someone hands you the rifle, it lets you know right away if it might have a round chambered.
I'm not sure if the original comment was to say that the safety was mechanically unsound, or ergonomically unsound. It's well known that mechanically speaking, that safety is sound. However, if I may share an experience, I was once shooting my mini 30 in the winter and was wearing gloves. As I raised the rifle up to take a shot, I inserted my trigger finger into the trigger guard to switch the safety off. Along with switching the safety off, the trigger depressed and I ended up firing a round into the burm when I wasn't ready to fire. It was because of the glove material making my trigger finger "fatter". Upon inserting my finger into the trigger guard, it disengaged the safety AND depressed the trigger at the same time. Now this can be looked at under alot of different lights, but the bottom line is, it happened, and for me, that's an ergonomic error on the design of that safety. Everyone will say, just don't shoot it with gloves on, ok fair enough, but regardless, I just wanted to share this with everyone. Something to think about
Good points. Too bad those are banned in my country. BTW thanks for the videos on using mineral spirits and mineral oil for cleaning and lubricating. Walmart only just got some in stock. Best price. Went to the paint section and picked up a quart of mineral spirits for $6. The added bonus of stocking up on the mineral oil is that if I or the wife ever get constipated the mineral oil will help. 🙃
It is a well designed safety. The only detriment that i've personally ever experienced with this type of safety is when trying to operate it in cold weather with a gloved hand. You slide your gloved finger into the trigger guard and its very difficult to manipulate the safety without physically moving the trigger. The touch and feel factor just simply isn't there on a gloved hand. I've always just chose to just remove the glove on my trigger hand and just deal with the cold. A good design - yes, an ideal design - not so much
I mean… really shouldn’t be putting your finger inside the trigger guard until you’re ready to shoot, right? Not only is the Gerand safety the safest out there, it’s the most obvious and intuitive safety ever devised. Now, if you had to put your finger inside the trigger guard in order to engage the safety? Sure, but that would ludicrous.
Whenever I have an anxiety attack, I don't curl up in a blanket, stick a binky in my mouth, or play with a fidget spinner. I can feel assured thst I'm the most safe holding my mini 14 with the safety on and trigger finger in the trigger guard. Thank you for making this video. I feel more at ease.
Any safety system that introduces the finger into the trigger guard is inherently more dangerous than a thumb activated safety found on modern combat rifles. Notice I am not saying that it is unsafe, just LESS safe. A tired soldier could miss the safety and hit the trigger. Stranger things have happened.
Just stumbled across your channel…good channel with good content. I’m now subscribed! Just watched your video comparing the synthetic versus wood stock Mini 14. Excellent video! What do you think about longer, stiffer recoil springs with a buffer on the Mini 14?
The safety placement on the Garand action weapons is THE BEST place to put it. At night, in the cold rain, YOU KNOW if the weapon is safe without any high tech device.
One of the smartest safeties out there. Your finger has no place inside the guard unless you are ready to fire, with any other safety location, you might be fumbling to locate it and then heading back to the trigger...this way, the safety is positively locked until you are 100% ready to fire.
I'm so glad that you put this video out because there are a lot of potato heads out there that are confused about that safety. Keep up the great content
I understand where the complaint is coming from in the "You should keep your finger off the trigger until you're ready to fire" part of gun safety, but the thing is the only reason you'd have the safety off is if you're getting ready to fire, so your finger is going to go on the trigger anyways. If you're not ready to fire, leave the thing on safe, and putting the safety on is outside of the trigger guard. Granted, in general I've found that most people of my generation are used entirely to AR-15 style ergonomics that the Garand style ergonomics of the M1, M14, Mini-14 etc. are weird and a lot of knowledge is lost. That's why I do like watching your videos on the platform as I have an interest in it, but most people my age don't know how to use or maintain these guns anymore.
I have said the same thing for years. I think what is driving a lot of it is the need for most folks to feel very secure and safe with firearms, so people come up with all manner of things to do or not do in the name of safety. When I was growing up there was safe practices, but it boiled down to basic firearms safety and my brain.
It always makes me laught when people on CZcams bring up the M1 / M14 type safety, and how unsafe it is. Then I think about the millions of Garands and M-14's that were manufactured and used in wars and conflicts. If it was a problem, the M-14 would have been designed with a different type of safety.
I love the Garand safety and I'm a lefty, but, playing devil's advocate, the danger of the safety is when wearing thick gloves, it can be difficult to get your finger into the guard without disabling the safety and possibly causing a ND. Just saying, be aware of this during winter months and use extra caution.
![Why Won't the Ruger Mini-14 Just Die? [Part 1]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EzyGl_w-IXg/mqdefault.jpg)
I was an armorer who exclusively worked with the M-14 platform.
It is the best weapon you could ask for. Easy to disassemble, to clean, to replace parts, to repair any portion.
The safety is my favorite aspect. The only reason someone wouldn't like it is because they aren't masculine enough to move the safety forward with a single finger.
I need to purchase an M14 so I can compare it to my favorite little military surplus weapons the SKS, first weapon I ever field-stripped and I was staggered to learn that it was all mechanical leverage spring tension and gas pressure that makes it function. And my AK-47, it's crudely simple, easier to field-strip than the SKS.
@@bjolly8924you won’t find many weapons with more simple working parts than those two you just mentioned.
When does the copyright expire for the Ruger Mini-14? Wouldn't it be nice if dozens of other gun manufacturers like PSA started building clones and selling them at AR prices and then thousands of aftermarket companies flooded the market with all sorts of upgrade parts? Same for the M1A rifle too. The AR is nice but it really isn't all that.
What is your opinion of the trigger housing as I think the idea of putting a tool into the hole to release the housing can bend the trigger housing metal and snapping it back into place is a little difficult on the mini 30, as well. I am retired police and carried many weapons in my 33 years in LE and 11 years in the Army. Now I have a nice mini 14 as well as a mini 30 and find the mini 30 housing is very difficult to pop into position and will pop out easily if not secured tight.
It really is a shame that this man only has 157,000 subscribers, he has got to be one of the most underrated individuals in the CZcams gun community. He's a total class act.
That’s because he speaks from real experience like a wise no nonsense uncle. He is speaking to those who are here to learn.
@@the_watcher_abc
🤔Very insightful of you, I believe you are correct.
He has one more subscriber now.
2 more now
@@scroungyredneck936
Hell yeah!! Letereat!!!!
The only reason your finger would enter the trigger guard anyway is because you are about to fire it. And the only reason you would disengage the safety of a loaded rifle is because you are about to fire it. So having your finger in the trigger guard to disengage the safety makes perfect sense. I don't see a problem with that.
Except almost everyone disengages the safety in advance of being ready to fire. I’d never wait that long to take a safety off to where I’d have to disengage it and fire in the same instance.
I like to think of duck hunting as an example. When I see ducks that look they they are working the spread to land, I generally have my gun up from its rest and loosely in my shoulder pointed the direction I anticipate to shoot. Safety comes off at that point too but my finger remains out of the trigger guard. If the ducks make the commitment all I have to do is raise the barrel a few inches and pull the trigger. Can’t do that with a garand style safety. And I challenge you to do it well with some nice winter hunting gloves on.
@@austincrowe5194 except the Garand is a combat rifle and not a waterfowl shotgun. I swear everybody just needs to have an opinion no matter how ridiculous
@@sgtstedanko7186 and only well trained military people should get to have combat rifles?
It’s a subpar safety design for numerous reasons. It’s why it isn’t a common safety design. And it’s a legit complaint about the garand style rifle.
Then again that’s one man’s opinion. But I’m not a gun writer. Just saying I think the garand is an elegant design. However I think the safety could be a better design. Doesn’t make or break the gun though.
@@austincrowe5194 is such a stupid argument. It's a very safe safety. There's no training required. When you're ready to shoot, you put your finger in the trigger guard, flip the switch forward, then put your finger on the trigger. I don't see what your point is. When the safety is on, it not only blocks the hammer but also blocks the trigger. Doesn't get any safer than that. Far more safe than a thumb switch or button.
Like i said before, some just comment for the sake of commenting.
@@sgtstedanko7186 ok. Then work the safety with some winter gloves on.
You’ve also ignored the whole part about when the safety is not properly functional… aka when the gun will fire when the safety is on. I’ve seen that happen before because mechanical stuff breaks from time to time.
You’ve ignored any potential claims of problems and acted like it’s an infallible design.
All I’m saying is that there are much better safety designs out there. In fact any of them that are generally ergonomic with a firing grip for the weapon are better. I’ve also said the weapon is good overall but that the safety design could be improved. It’s not the worst safety but it could be better.
If you can’t see my point then you clearly didn’t read what I’ve written.
But fortunately you don’t have to take my word for it… you can take the word of all the other countless gun designers that have seen the gun and did not incorporate that safety design into their weapons.
The"Garand"safety has been tried and true for over 80yrs. It's always nice when an expert who knows what he's talking about debunks myths and misconceptions and puts the armchair"experts"in their place. Thanks 👍
I always thought it was brilliant.
It helps to be old enough to grow up with the generation that it was designed for.
I’d bet my front teeth the safety haters are from a generation that caused a need for instructions on shampoo bottles
@@h.r.puffnstuff8705 And warnings on your coffee cups to not spill hot coffee all over yourself, it could hurt.
That position is perfect for the safety.
LOL As Forrest Gump might say....and just like that the armchair "experts" were quiet.
Here Here or is it hear hear!! As hear what these people are saying! Couldn’t agree more with you folks 😃 legit!
(Is that what the kidz say nowadays legit?)
This form of safety is truly ambidextrous. A cross-bolt safety is awkward for most left handed shooters, while this design works equally well for either hand. I have to wonder if some writers' minds are actually engaged when they start spewing words!
I agree. I shoot left handed and absolutely hate cross-bolt safeties as they are awkward to use unless you are right handed.
I have no experience with Garand style safety, my experience is shotgun related the Rem870 v Mossberg 500. Im a righty, my youngest daughter a lefty. The safety on Mossberg is easier for her, we have Mossbergs as a result. Nothing against the Remington. This Garand style seems like a great safety to me, right or left. Kinda wished more used it.
Cross-bolt safeties placed behind the shooting hand are among the worst offenders because of their awkward location. Those placed at the front of the trigger guard are easier to operate if you are a northpaw. I'm a southpaw and I installed a cross-bolt safety in an 870 shotgun for my convenience, but I still visually check it because the rearward location remains awkward and pushing across (instead of forward) is not very intuitive. Tang mounted safeties are intuitive as long as pushing them forward disengages the safety. I've seen a few safeties that disengage by pulling them back. This is counterintuitive and awkward. I own one pistol with a frame mounted thumb safety that must be pushed up to fire and down to make it safe. I have no idea what the designer was thinking, but this feature is the clunkiest thing I've encountered on a pistol.
They need a cross-tongue safety..lol
Southpaw agreeing with you.
As a lefty Ive always liked the mini 14, or M1A safety.
Only thing wrong with the safety is ,it isn't on more rifles.
@vettelover2009 YEP, an empty chamber is the only sure thing. But to all those people that just love safeties, would they allow me to point a loaded weapon to their head and squeeze the trigger ?
@vettelover2009 You have fallen victim to the bad rhetoric of hand gun trainers. Rifles almost never have holsters and safety switches are essential. Especially on self loading / automatic rifles.
@vettelover2009 I believe EthosAtheos is saying while carrying a rifle the trigger is open and can snag on branches and other things. While a pistol is in a holster with a sheath over said trigger giving it protection from outside forces that are not controlled by handler of said firearm.
@vettelover2009 Talking about military applications running in the jungle with a hot weapon with no safety is asking for it. That is why they are on rifles.
@vettelover2009 I have no problems with loaded rifles. But gear snagging a trigger is real, I've seen it happen. I've seen people ND when picking up a rifle in a vehicle. I have no idea what your exp. is but mine is that safety's are your friend.
You are spot on sir! Just ordered a mini 14 just like yours. As a retired state trooper after 30 years, (the last twenty as a firearms instructor), my knowledge of firearms is no where near the level that you present. I salute you sir.
I love listening to you. You're one of the most intelligent and calm people educating us. You are to our craft what Bob Ross is to painting. Kudos and cheers to you.
Thank you and God bless!
It's sad that you really have to explain something as simple as this, and worse that there are people in this world that need to hear it.
My thoughts exactly! Thanks.
Well, like Ron White said "you can't fix stupid" LOL. That safety is precisely where it should be.
Gun writers are salesclerks with good writing skills.😅🤣😂
Not even good most of the time.
I would say, "sales clerks with below-average writing skills, but great familial or other connection to the publisher and/or the so-called *industry*."
As of 2023, most firearms publications are at the Popular Science or Popular Mechanics level of technical honesty versus salesmanship. Which is to say, heavily biased in favor of a particular view, regardless of factual or mechanical accuracy in what's written.
@@seanoneil277 Gun Test is pretty good. They accept no advertising, so there is no incentive (requirement) to shill for the advertisers.
@@Paladin1873 I will take a look, never have before. I think print media are, at least for the next 50 yrs or so, on the sidelines at best. So many people use the internet versus newspapers or magazines. On the internet it's a lot of noise and very little signal. Some would say "this reflects the audience" but almost none of it feels organically created to inform, most of it seems to be selling either a product or a persona, and sometimes both.
This is one of the main reasons our host Mr GB is such a treasure. I've never felt anything but the desire to share his accumulated wisdom and experience. If he mentions a manufacturer it's usually in the course of talking about a particular firearm, cartridge, or aspect of either. I see no favoritism other than favoring honesty.
@@seanoneil277 I agree.
I enjoyed this video! Thank you for making it. I have found silly complaints about other safety methods. The 1911 comes to mind especially in regards to how new shooters cannot handle the complexity of such a manual safety.
...and the grip safety...
...and it's single-action trigger...
...and the half-cock notch on the hammer...
It's almost like J.M.B. designed so that it's as "G.I.-proof" as possible and will not fire unless you intend it to fire.
.
I will say honestly that when I chose my first handgun I chose polymer striker-fired simply to avoid the decock/safety-off step when learning. Now, however, after a couple years of training heavily, I could manage it with less stress. I don't think it's false to say it's one more step to train and think about, I would say instead that everyone should train with what they have, and learn the process until it becomes automatic. Regardless of whether it's a simpler striker-fired polymer pistol, or a dual-action pistol with a decocker or manual safety.
@@seanoneil277
"everyone should train with what they have"
AMEN !!!
@@jupiterjunk It's genius!
@Steve Shooter you consider that genius?
Untruths and misinformation in professionally written and published articles, less than thought out comments on the internet? Surely these things could never happen!
I simply love it when you explain a simple concept so that “anyone” should be able to grasp the obvious!
Another great video, education is sometimes a very slow process; thanks for being the patient teacher you are!
Exactly. The only argument I have heard that carries weight was from a new shooter who was nervous about the safety being anywhere near the trigger rather than in a different position entirely. I reminded them we were shooting stiker fired pistols lacking any safety as well, and after explaining the ethos of this safety type they immediately came to prefer it over the side mounted switch safety on the AR we were shooting. It was a good lesson for them about trigger discipline and for me about their safety concerns
I can't agree more, not only is it just as safe or safer than any other safety, it is certainly faster and more effective than any Mauser, 1903, Enfield, or any conventional rifle safety of the time,
The time it takes to move a Mauser or 1903 safety in combat and fire is at least double that of the Garand!
Not to mention the safety of the Mosin. 😃😄
The essence of a true improvement in mechanical engineering -- more efficient in use, no less dangerous, and possibly safer via the mechanical changes/improvements.
As the owner of a Mini-14, I agree with you wholeheartedly. I never understood the vitriol directed at the Mini. I love mine. No, the Mini-14 isn't an AR15, but then again neither is a Ruger American, an AK47 or a Henry Big Boy.
Love it when it rains truth, but you sir cast lightning bolts of fact that illuminate internet misinformation. Thanks for everything you do Gunblue490!
The comparison with the cars in the traffic jam and the foot on the accelerator is spot on.
I wish I had him as my Pops growin up. Didn't have a single shooting relative till my 30's. Great videos and LOVE his no nonsense approach and the way he shares his wisdom and experience.
The only thing I can think of is that someone who is not paying attention and not familiar with the weapon system could, when trying to put the safety on, push the trigger instead of pushing the safety. The safety is just a couple of inches in front of the trigger, and someone not paying attention could push the trigger and fire the weapon, instead of pushing the safety to the on position. They would have to be completely unfamiliar with the weapon and safety system, but I guess that it is a possibility.
That’s my line of thinking on this. I made a post with my thoughts as well but I would liken it to having a two light switches side by side, one for hat turns off the lights and the other that turns on the oven or something. Make a mistake, be in the dark etc and you are right in the right place and doing the right physical action that would actuate the trigger. A separate and different action should actuate the safety. It doesn’t seem to be a problem in practical use but it’s also not a good idea to design features of safety like this.
Do you actually know what you’re saying? “ pushing” the trigger? You pull a trigger, an opposite action from taking the safety off in this family of firearms. Even better, you engage the safety from outside the trigger guard, no possibility of pulling the trigger while you’re pushing the safety on unless you have another finger in the trigger guard (think about that name for a minute) and at that point you shouldn’t even be allowed to touch a firearm.
@@tnzayatz6579 Never underestimate the stupidity and carelessness of people. The action of engaging the safety is the same action as pulling the trigger. You push back on a piece of metal that hangs from the bottom of the rifle. The trigger is maybe a couple of inches behind the safety and both are manipulated in the same exact way, you pull back on them. It is conceivable that someone not familiar with the rifle and just being careless could think that their finger is on the safety, when in fact it is on the trigger, and get an accidental discharge.
During the course of 20 years handling and unloading a Mini-14, somewhere between 3,650 to 7,000 times, never was there an ADD (accidental discharge). Anyone who might claim that the safety is unsafe is incorrect.
I’ve always really liked the safety location on the mini 14 and the M1A. Easy to use and very intuitive. Thanks for the great video sir.
Universal Firearms Safety Rule:
“Finger off the trigger until the sights are aligned and the decision to shoot has been made.” (Then pop the safety and send your message down range.)
Thanks for all of the wonderful tips on the Mini-14. In regards to Mini-14 topics I would love to see how you are zeroing (what zero range) the Mini-14 using the iron sights at an indoor range and which height over bore and muzzle velocity specs you are using to calculate POI vs POA at 25 yards for those of us that don't have access to a long distance range.
Great idea!!
I have always wondered what those people were thinking about the mini-14 safety. I love this rifle platform.
I've only recently discovered your channel, but it's great to see someone who's obviously experienced (far more than I) and knows just what they're talking about! I love my AR-pattern rifles, but I will NEVER sell my Mini-14! I especially like the point you make about not having to look at the safety to know it's position instantly.
I really enjoy your videos, the perspective from our old timers is both wise and appreciated. Lots to learn from them, even if it’s as simple as a press to reset peoples ‘think with yer head’ button video like this one
The first explanation I can think of is "the dumbing down of society".
It's the modernist "safety first" mentality
GB you're 100% right
I don't think I've ever seen you quite so annoyed
I get annoyed when stupid gun writers don't provide correct information to trusting people because they're not the experts that folks think they are. I didn't attend chef's college, so I don't try to teach people French cooking, and too many gun writers never were schooled in firearms and aren't qualified to be teaching about them. All that was ever needed to be a gun writer was a typewriter. Now, it's just a cellphone.
@@GunBlue490 Right again. CZcams is full of them
Boy that’s a nice looking mini 14!
Gunblue, do you take Benny rabbit hunting? I believe rabbit season is on here in NH.
Just as the trigger guard protests the trigger, the guard protects the safety. Not only from damage but from accidental disengagement.
I applaud you for making this video to set those who buy-in to stupid hype about anything “old” straight. Just because something is invented at a later date(AR-15) with a different mechanism(safety) that invention seems to put in some minds that the previous product is somehow bereft of the attributes that made it great in the first place. Thank you, sir for your “short” but very informative video👏
I dont want to assume that, that's the case but I have an itching feeling that you may be right.
There's so much "out with the old" mentality lately that these meat heads seem to think that its a righteous principle to get rid of anything that's old now.
Functionality is functionality...no matter who used it or how long ago it was used.
I think the writer who made that statement couldn't push the safety out of the way with his dainty little index finger so he immediately came up with a case for why it's stupid to have it there. Haha
@@nsob8897 and probably has no confidence in his own dexterity. So then it becomes unsafe for everyone in there own mind. I think this is what happens when we let schools, government, TV and social media raise our kids
@@nsob8897- It is a bias which is pervasive amongst the young, and perhaps for understandable reasons, that newer is always better. Their youth can be blamed, and the lack of life experience, for holding such an outlook. What is mysterious, though, is how so many older folks who ought to know better still subscribe to this tired trope. Maybe we ought to use the word "old" less, and substitute "time-tested" in its place....
Trigger guard safety like this works great, it's just that a lot of the current gun enthusiast community has grown up with the AR platform safety, and subsequently feels more comfortable and safer with those controls. AR style controls do tend to be a little bit faster on the clock in competitive shooting, but outside that environment where strict administrative procedure must be followed (including when safeties must be engaged and disengaged) under time pressure, there's not a huge objective advantage over the older style trigger guard safety.
If it wins wars why is it not allowed at competitions? Unless soldiers are better trained than competitive shooters that is?
Love your work! Super relaxing to come and listen and learn from an experienced person like yourself. Thank you!
I’ve fired thousands of rounds from my M1A and my mini 14. I’ve never accidentally disengaged the safety, never.
I agree with your video. I consider my Mini14 safety to be the most intuitive and easiest safety to use and understand on all my rifles. The closest 2nd place intuitive safety on a rifle I own is the common bolt action rifle safeties. It's my opinion...should be yours :) Thanks for the discussion
I stopped reading gun magazines probably 20 years ago.
Collecting and shooting M1 rifle and carbines for 35 years. Never thought the safety was not safe. For the reasons you have stated. Carry on Sir.
Maybe the risk from an accidental discharge come from the action of pulling the trigger being similar to the action of engaging the safety.
One action requires the finger be INSIDE the trigger Guard.
The other, OUTSIDE . . .
@@fjb4932 Look at the video at the video 7:11 time, his finger is on the safety just like it would be on the trigger. It would be easy pull the trigger while thinking you are setting the safety. A similar finger movement is used to set the safety as it is to pull the trigger.
This right here. Same actions in close proximity is the kind of thing you try not to design into machinery for safety reasons. Mistakes and fumbles happen, try not to set operators up for failure.
You’re 💯 % correct in what you said and your reasoning. People who think that it’s dangerous are just stupid.
Sir, your take on this safety comes from a place of wisdom and common sense. For most people of today, those two things have become a lost art.
The other giant advantage of the M1/M14 safeties is they double as a PADLOCK hasp. I imagine that a properly drilled hole would allow the Mini's safety to be padlocked too.
It was common practice in armories for a rod to be passed through all the safeties and secured in gang fashion to the gun rack. Yes, the Mini-14 could be drilled, but I suspect such tough steel might require annealing and re-hardening.
People who think that the Garand-style safety is 'dangerous,' they don't shoot Garands, and they know just enough about firearms to get themselves into real trouble.
Keep up the great content sir
Well sir I like that design much better than the AR so my friend you can't fix stupid .Wish we could .We wouldn't have the bozos we got in government now .
The safest thing about a mini 30 is that if someone has a negligent discharge and also bad muzzle awareness, the person in the line of fire will not get injured.
Love your videos, love your logic and knowledge GunBlue! Thanks for sharing it with us
As always great information & no bull. 👍
I agree with you 100% best safety design there is!!!!
Disengaging the M1 safety is a very conscious and deliberate act. The trigger guard protects it from being accidentally disengaged. To disengage the safety and fire at the same time you need two fingers in the trigger guard going in opposite directions. As a result, having the safety lever inside the protective trigger guard but *opposite* the trigger in both direction and actuation is genius. It is extremely hard to accidentally mis-use, it is protected from normal handling. it is simple, and it is tactile so you don't have to look at it, at the same time it resists finger pressure making it harder to disengage. What in the hell is unsafe about any of that, I'd like to know.
I was trained to shoot on grand at age of 9 when I started using other rifles I thought all of them needed the same safety system of the m1 grand and still do. Thank you for what you do for all of us.
Enjoy your videos, no BS just the facts
Same opinion if you have a winter glove on? Other than a heavy glove I agree 100%
Soldiers carried the M1 Garand across Europe in one of the worst winters recorded, and they wore gloves. There's plenty of room in that generous guard.
@@GunBlue490 Excellent point! However I doubt the military would tout any data of some GI getting shot in the bum from the guy behind him fumbling through the trigger guard.
@@chrishill1286
I received military firearms training. GIs are taught to not place their finger on the trigger until they can safely shoot at the enemy. The last person to shoot their buddy in the bum is someone who received military training.
2 quotes I've heard in my 70 years.
1. ignorance can be fixed, stupid is forever.
2. Stupid is as stupid does.
Thank you for bringing wisdom, experience, and Truth to the Firearms community. I hope and pray you do not waiver or fatigue. God Bless you, your family and Benny we need more people like you.
Thanks again for the education
Totally agree 😎👍
The first military rifle I trained on was the M1. The second rifle was the M-14. I don't ever recall any negligent discharges that were attributed to the manual safety. Writers from the generation that grew up first learning to operate the AR pattern rifles seem to be the ones complaining the most about this earlier system. The only plausible concern I might have with operating the M1 or M-14 is under winter conditions when I am wearing heavy gloves or mittens. It is conceivable one could disengage the safety and accidentally activate the trigger, but this is averted by installing a winter trigger and winter safety. For those who prefer to use an AR in winter, you can unlatch and fold down the flat trigger guard to allow better access by a gloved hand.
When I was 16 years old and someone tried to sell me a m1 garand I looked it over and said thats a dumb place for the safety. 15 years later when I wasn't a dumb smart ass kid, I looked at another m1 closely and thought the man who invented this gun was a genius. Today at 60 years old, my 30 year old son and I took my cmp m1 made in December 1941 to the range and while we were zeroing in he said to me, this is the best shooting rifle I ever put my hands on and whoever designed this rifle is a gun genius. Im thankful he didn't say that saftey was in a dumb place.
In the military service I was trained on the M-1 & M-14 rifles. The instructors always said that the trigger safety also blocked the hammer mechanism.
Great video, I like the safety position on the mini-14 because I don't have to change the position of my hand as I do when using a tang safety or crossbolt. My mini is a favorite "walk around" rifle.
Albert Einstein said it best . " Two things are infinite : the universe and human stupidity ; and I'm not sure about the universe " .
Love the directness and how you present. One of my favorite gun channels.
Thank you Mr GB,, and Happy New Year to you and your family.
If you reviewed the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals decision regarding the ATF "bump stock" ruling you would see the emphasis there on true mechanical function versus the untrue & emotionally charged version of mechanical reality. There's a bit of serendipity between that 5th Cir decision and your fine video above. God Bless you.
Easy for someone who hasn’t ever used this type of firearm to make false statements of its safety features, thank you for telling the truth, it is a safe firearm.
This is gonna be tasty...like the time Paul Harrell .22lr reliability test to make a point that someone is dead wrong. Teachable moment incoming.
Everyone on the internet is a firearm genius without credentials. Today hardly anyone served in the US military, when I was young everyone I knew had a father that served in WW2. I’m a veteran and a hunter, I’ve never thought about complaining about safety placement. It must be exasperating to listen to all the geniuses that populate the internet.
The "M-1 Garand" Safety is also Ambidextrous
Religion, politics and gun safety. These topics bring the fruits and nuts out of the woodwork every time.
Very very well stated....
Great system, for right or left handed .... I get worked up when a homeowner hires me then tells me how to do the job they are paying me for ..... Your a great person to explain things even as I may know somethings well, I will never know it all, anyone can always learn ....
I instantly fell in love with that safety. Extremely intuitive, and perfect for a southpaw.
It's the most convenient, foolproof and safe safety I've ever encountered and I don't think I ever will encounter one better. Whoever says otherwise needs to get out of the gene pool.
I totally agree. I have never understood the idea that the safety on this design isn't safe. I find it to be the best safety our there for all of the reasons you mentioned.
the key concept is INDEXING
... if youre pulling back on an off-safe
trigger mistaking it for the safety then
its bcs youve failed to use your finger
to trace the guard thus assuring
whether youre inside or in front
I think the unsafe idea goes back to gloves in cold weather. The army had a cold weather extended safety for the m1 rifle where all manipulation was done external of the trigger guard.
Honestly I understand the criticism about the location of the safety.
Having to enter the trigger guard to switch the safety off is not the safest option in my oppinion.
Training emphatizes heavily (and has for at least the last twenty years) that the finger enters the trigger guard only when the sights are on the target, no matter what type of firearm you are using.
I personally wouldn't want to keep the rifle on safe until I am on target, that costs precious moments when you might not have that time.
I also see the risk of an accidental discharge while disengaging the safety. You are right that humans have fine motor skills, but those skills degrade heavily under stress.
When you put the first digit of your trigger finger into the trigger guard (safety engaged) there is maybe 1/8th of an inch between your finger and the trigger. Getting bumped by someone or something, getting the rifle or sling caught on something or a slight trip when you disengage the safety on the move and you fire at least one round (maybe more) accidentaly.
When you are wearing a glove I would guess that there is no wiggle room at all between your finger and the trigger blade when disengaging the safety, plus that sensation and dexterity are already lower than normal.
I always thought the Garand - type safety was the greatest .
An added feature of the safety is that when the safety is depressed into the trigger guard is you can tell the gun is cocked at a glance. If someone hands you the rifle, it lets you know right away if it might have a round chambered.
I'm not sure if the original comment was to say that the safety was mechanically unsound, or ergonomically unsound. It's well known that mechanically speaking, that safety is sound. However, if I may share an experience, I was once shooting my mini 30 in the winter and was wearing gloves. As I raised the rifle up to take a shot, I inserted my trigger finger into the trigger guard to switch the safety off. Along with switching the safety off, the trigger depressed and I ended up firing a round into the burm when I wasn't ready to fire. It was because of the glove material making my trigger finger "fatter". Upon inserting my finger into the trigger guard, it disengaged the safety AND depressed the trigger at the same time. Now this can be looked at under alot of different lights, but the bottom line is, it happened, and for me, that's an ergonomic error on the design of that safety. Everyone will say, just don't shoot it with gloves on, ok fair enough, but regardless, I just wanted to share this with everyone. Something to think about
Thank you!
The thing I want to know is how people who say never look down the barrel of a gun clean their guns?
Good points. Too bad those are banned in my country.
BTW thanks for the videos on using mineral spirits and mineral oil for cleaning and lubricating. Walmart only just got some in stock. Best price. Went to the paint section and picked up a quart of mineral spirits for $6.
The added bonus of stocking up on the mineral oil is that if I or the wife ever get constipated the mineral oil will help. 🙃
This is quickly becoming my favorite channel.
It is a well designed safety. The only detriment that i've personally ever experienced with this type of safety is when trying to operate it in cold weather with a gloved hand. You slide your gloved finger into the trigger guard and its very difficult to manipulate the safety without physically moving the trigger. The touch and feel factor just simply isn't there on a gloved hand. I've always just chose to just remove the glove on my trigger hand and just deal with the cold. A good design - yes, an ideal design - not so much
Thanks for the explanation. This why I watch your channel - common sense instruction based on knowledge and experience.
I mean… really shouldn’t be putting your finger inside the trigger guard until you’re ready to shoot, right? Not only is the Gerand safety the safest out there, it’s the most obvious and intuitive safety ever devised. Now, if you had to put your finger inside the trigger guard in order to engage the safety? Sure, but that would ludicrous.
I am a US Marine veteran. Sir you are 1000 % correct.
Whenever I have an anxiety attack, I don't curl up in a blanket, stick a binky in my mouth, or play with a fidget spinner. I can feel assured thst I'm the most safe holding my mini 14 with the safety on and trigger finger in the trigger guard.
Thank you for making this video. I feel more at ease.
Very very outstanding video. Great job. Keep up the good work. Thanks a lot friend. SC Navy vet. 1965.
Any safety system that introduces the finger into the trigger guard is inherently more dangerous than a thumb activated safety found on modern combat rifles. Notice I am not saying that it is unsafe, just LESS safe. A tired soldier could miss the safety and hit the trigger. Stranger things have happened.
Thank you for the best explanation that I’ve ever heard on this type of safety!
Just stumbled across your channel…good channel with good content. I’m now subscribed! Just watched your video comparing the synthetic versus wood stock Mini 14. Excellent video! What do you think about longer, stiffer recoil springs with a buffer on the Mini 14?
The safety placement on the Garand action weapons is THE BEST place to put it. At night, in the cold rain, YOU KNOW if the weapon is safe without any high tech device.
One of the smartest safeties out there. Your finger has no place inside the guard unless you are ready to fire, with any other safety location, you might be fumbling to locate it and then heading back to the trigger...this way, the safety is positively locked until you are 100% ready to fire.
I believe it comes from the old mantra of “keep your finger off the trigger until you’re ready to shoot”. Some people need mega doses of discernment.
I'm so glad that you put this video out because there are a lot of potato heads out there that are confused about that safety. Keep up the great content
I understand where the complaint is coming from in the "You should keep your finger off the trigger until you're ready to fire" part of gun safety, but the thing is the only reason you'd have the safety off is if you're getting ready to fire, so your finger is going to go on the trigger anyways. If you're not ready to fire, leave the thing on safe, and putting the safety on is outside of the trigger guard.
Granted, in general I've found that most people of my generation are used entirely to AR-15 style ergonomics that the Garand style ergonomics of the M1, M14, Mini-14 etc. are weird and a lot of knowledge is lost. That's why I do like watching your videos on the platform as I have an interest in it, but most people my age don't know how to use or maintain these guns anymore.
Whats even more dumb about the mini 14, is the fact I didn’t buy one 25 years ago when they were 250-300 bucks at wal mart. Sooooo dumb.
I have said the same thing for years. I think what is driving a lot of it is the need for most folks to feel very secure and safe with firearms, so people come up with all manner of things to do or not do in the name of safety. When I was growing up there was safe practices, but it boiled down to basic firearms safety and my brain.
It always makes me laught when people on CZcams bring up the M1 / M14 type safety, and how unsafe it is. Then I think about the millions of Garands and M-14's that were manufactured and used in wars and conflicts. If it was a problem, the M-14 would have been designed with a different type of safety.
I love the Garand safety and I'm a lefty, but, playing devil's advocate, the danger of the safety is when wearing thick gloves, it can be difficult to get your finger into the guard without disabling the safety and possibly causing a ND. Just saying, be aware of this during winter months and use extra caution.