View Full Version : Gunshot wound to leg...cautionary tale. (Cameon Eisenzimmer Video, May 2016)
Multiple lessons to be learned from this event. High points, IMHO:
if you buy a used gun, especially a game gun that's been modified, especially if it's a home modification, have it checked out thoroughly by a gunsmith
practice, including draw, more than 100 rounds before using a gun, especially in competition, that you bought second-hand from Bubba the Gunsmith
overuse of tourniquets is common. They are NOT the universal solution to an extremity gunshot wound
compartment syndrome is a completely predictable event in a GSW like this...in fact IMHO it's an expected event. That the first hospital sent her home from the ER is bad medical care
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPxQsP7_ZQw
Dist. Expert 26
03-02-17, 11:18
I'd attribute the over use of tourniquets in large part to military shock trauma courses. I was taught to throw one on any arm or leg wound regardless to immediately stop bleeding.
A-freaking-men on people overrelying on tourniquets.
The Yeager bunch think cinching down anything and everything is the answer. And its also a good way to lose a body part when you otherwise wouldnt have had to.
I like boring guns. Geissele triggers are as far as I go
I'd attribute the over use of tourniquets in large part to military shock trauma courses. I was taught to throw one on any arm or leg wound regardless to immediately stop bleeding.
Same here.
Tourniquets have their place and can be a lifesaving tool in some rare circumstances, I'm sure. Mostly, the holy grail that they have become makes me roll my eyes.
Multiple lessons to be learned from this event. High points, IMHO:
[LIST]
Don't buy a used gun, especially a game gun that's been modified, especially if it's a home modification.
Fixed it for ya. :cool:
Compete with a gun you didn't vet? Never. Buy some home tweaked race gun from anyone but a competent smith and competitive shooter? No. Buddy of mine who buys all manner of stuff without paying much attention did exactly that: some used race gun with mods. He gives to me to test a bit, and it was a jam o matic POS, and on inspection internally, the crude dremel marks and such could be seen. When even I gave spot such things, it's a POS. I told him to return it to the seller, which he did.
Tourniquets have their place and can be a lifesaving tool in some rare circumstances, I'm sure. Mostly, the holy grail that they have become makes me roll my eyes.
I'd assume they are a life saver in those cases where you're in genuine risk of bleeding rapidly to death having hit say femoral artery and possible loss of a limb secondary concern to imminent death. Other then that, do they have any uses? My understanding, a pressure bandage and quickclot or similar the best option in many cases. Correct?
Eurodriver
03-02-17, 11:37
Same here.
Same here.
When should you then use a tq??
Averageman
03-02-17, 11:42
All blood is going to look like a hell of a lot of blood.
Is this arterial bleeding, how quick can you move to evacuate, how much time to the nearest trauma center and how effective have your attempts with a pressure bandage been so far?
I would guess unless you're arterial or your time to a trauma center is being measure in hours go with a pressure dressing and direct pressure.
It's highly unlikely that most of us will have a medevac Blackhawk available ever again.
I'd attribute the over use of tourniquets in large part to military shock trauma courses. I was taught to throw one on any arm or leg wound regardless to immediately stop bleeding.
That's because I believe we've done a poor job of explaining the differences between providing care under fire and general bleeding control. The missing link is not understanding that even in a combat environment, medical providers are going to reassess all previous interventions and adjust accordingly. Tourniquets can (and absolutely do) save lives, but proper education in their employment and limitations is crucial to their effective use. I was an 11B who had the fortune of going through an EMT-B course before my 2nd deployment, and even I was trained to do TQ conversions and did one in theater once the gunfight ended.
Personal experience has also taught me that a TQ can stay in place for a very long time without necessarily guaranteeing loss of limb. Proper placement of the tourniquet plays a big part in this, as well as getting them to definitive care as quickly as possible. Also, if you have the time to give it a read, here's a great AAR detailing prolonged field care done properly:
https://prolongedfieldcare.org/2016/11/18/video-aar-of-the-jan-2016-marjah-firefight-and-pfc-medevac/
Thank you for the link to the video, Hmac.
Same here.
When should you then use a tq??
Arterial bleeding that you can't control satisfactorily with direct pressure. That might include a prolonged transport time. My guess is that the tourniquet that they applied contributed to the compartment syndrome that she developed. It's conceivable that the delay in diagnosis of her compartment syndrome caused as much injury to her leg as the GSW.
Same here.
When should you then use a tq??
Arterial bleeding (bright red, spurting...unmistakable when you see it)
Controlling bleeding under fire (reassess when situation allows)
When firm, direct pressure fails
Most bleeding can absolutely be controlled with a properly applied pressure dressing.
Dist. Expert 26
03-02-17, 12:02
That's because I believe we've done a poor job of explaining the differences between providing care under fire and general bleeding control. The missing link is not understanding that even in a combat environment, medical providers are going to reassess all previous interventions and adjust accordingly. Tourniquets can (and absolutely do) save lives, but proper education in their employment and limitations is crucial to their effective use. I was an 11B who had the fortune of going through an EMT-B course before my 2nd deployment, and even I was trained to do TQ conversions and did one in theater once the gunfight ended.
Personal experience has also taught me that a TQ can stay in place for a very long time without necessarily guaranteeing loss of limb. Proper placement of the tourniquet plays a big part in this, as well as getting them to definitive care as quickly as possible. Also, if you have the time to give it a read, here's a great AAR detailing prolonged field care done properly:
https://prolongedfieldcare.org/2016/11/18/video-aar-of-the-jan-2016-marjah-firefight-and-pfc-medevac/
Thank you for the link to the video, Hmac.
We were always taught to reassess, but also that a tourniquet should only be removed by a Corpsman or other medical personnel. Maybe doctrine changed over the years, but this was at a live tissue course in 2011 where all the instructors were SF medics/SEALs/PJs.
My training was enough to keep people alive long enough to get them off the x and into a higher echelon of care. I suspect that many others were taught along the same lines.
That's because I believe we've done a poor job of explaining the differences between providing care under fire and general bleeding control. The missing link is not understanding that even in a combat environment, medical providers are going to reassess all previous interventions and adjust accordingly. Tourniquets can (and absolutely do) save lives, but proper education in their employment and limitations is crucial to their effective use. I was an 11B who had the fortune of going through an EMT-B course before my 2nd deployment, and even I was trained to do TQ conversions and did one in theater once the gunfight ended.
Personal experience has also taught me that a TQ can stay in place for a very long time without necessarily guaranteeing loss of limb. Proper placement of the tourniquet plays a big part in this, as well as getting them to definitive care as quickly as possible. Also, if you have the time to give it a read, here's a great AAR detailing prolonged field care done properly:
https://prolongedfieldcare.org/2016/11/18/video-aar-of-the-jan-2016-marjah-firefight-and-pfc-medevac/
Thank you for the link to the video, Hmac.
Good post. Somewhere along the way we (the collective "we") have gone from putting TQs on those who need it, to putting them on every swinging dick with an extremity injury. There are a bunch of reasons why...pushing TCCC down to the masses, enforcing TQ use doesn't mean loss of limb, etc. As we have been walking down that path we stopped teaching traditional wound care.
As frontline providers we never see the third-order effects of leaving on a TQ too long; particularly in those who did not need them to begin with. Hmac has seen these patients, operated on them, and round on them, so he is in a unique position to judge their long-term efficacy, even if anecdotally.
In the civvy world, before wide-spread EMS use and when I was an ED nurse, we had a motorcycle MVC roll in who had a traumatic amputation of his leg. EMS could not get the bleeding under control, I advocated using a tourniquet. The trauma team looked at me like I had a third eye, said they could stabilize him in the OR. He bled to death. My point to bring up that story is illustrate a moral: When you need it, you need it. But for every patient like that, there are hundreds of others where TQs would not have mattered in patient outcome.
Somewhere along the way we (the collective "we") have gone from putting TQs on those who need it, to putting them on every swinging dick with an extremity injury. There are a bunch of reasons why...pushing TCCC down to the masses, enforcing TQ use doesn't mean loss of limb, etc. As we have been walking down that path we stopped teaching traditional wound care.
As frontline providers we never see the third-order effects of leaving on a TQ too long; particularly in those who did not need them to begin with. Hmac has seen these patients, operated on them, and round on them, so he is in a unique position to judge their long-term efficacy, even if anecdotally.
The bolded above can be attributed to battlefield care tunnel vision. A lot of us were taught by our medics who used words like "always" when describing interventions, and so it just became the way it was. This then carried over to guys who were teaching their buddies, who then took it as gospel because their friend had BTDT.
I whole heartedly agree that TQs can and do save lives. They have probably saved hundreds in combat who didn't have the chance for more focused health care at the time they were bleeding. I've been able to see the videos companies like North American Rescue put up on Instagram of shark attacks, traumatic amputations, and work related accidents where the timely application of a TQ likely contributed to saving their life.
But we've gotten to a worrisome point where some people just blanket recommend TQs for extremity bleeding, and it leads to injuries like the lady in the OP had. Proper explanation on the why and when is just as important as the how, and I personally believe that's the missing link.
And you bring up another excellent point. Hmac is an invaluable resource here because he sees the long term effect. I only get a 15 minute snapshot with patients, while he IS their definitive care. His insight on this topic is appreciated, for sure.
Outlander Systems
03-02-17, 12:54
Real question:
For self-aid, in the event of a GSW to an extremity, is there even an alternative to a TQ?
We've gone from gross underutilization of tourniquets to gross overutilization. As with much of health care, fads come and go like a pendulum. This one will swing back too...hopefully to a more rational position.
My comments and opinions are indeed shaped by the consequences, potential and real, of tourniquet use, and only in a civilian EMS world. I don't deal with these treatment decisions in the field...I deal with the consequences of those decisions as well as the original injury. I see what works, what doesn't, and what is actually counterproductive.
Lessons learned in combat have served us well to raise awareness of the potential rewards of aggressive pre-hospital treatment of traumatic injuries, but they have served us poorly in that the realities of combat means that that paradigm has little applicability to the civilian world.
We've gone from gross underutilization of tourniquets to gross overutilization. As with much of health care, fads come and go like a pendulum. This one will swing back too...hopefully to a more rational position.
My comments and opinions are indeed shaped by the consequences, potential and real, of tourniquet use, and only in a civilian EMS world. I don't deal with these treatment decisions in the field...I deal with the consequences of those decisions as well as the original injury. I see what works, what doesn't, and what is actually counterproductive.
Lessons learned in combat have served us well to raise awareness of the potential rewards of aggressive pre-hospital treatment of traumatic injuries, but they have served us poorly in that the realities of combat means that that paradigm has little applicability to the civilian world.
Thank you, Sir, for addressing the pendulum. That is my soapbox. We have been told that the panacea for trauma, the silver bullets, are tourniquets and hemostatic dressings. Although there is a percentage of patients for whom these are beneficial, it is a very, very small 'n', and most patients respond well to 'conventional' non-TCCC treatment.
I'd assume they are a life saver in those cases where you're in genuine risk of bleeding rapidly to death having hit say femoral artery and possible loss of a limb secondary concern to imminent death. Other then that, do they have any uses? My understanding, a pressure bandage and quickclot or similar the best option in many cases. Correct?
Same here.
When should you then use a tq??
See my comments from another thread on this topic:
TQ's have enjoyed a resurgence in popularity largely due to their performance during the GWOT. However, what is good for the goose is not always good for the gander. During the GWOT, the IED introduced an injury pattern ideal for the TQ - massive, bilateral lower extremity trauma with complex vascular injuries. Many times soldiers would lose 25%+ of their blood volume in an instant as both legs were amputated. How is 1 medic going to apply pressure to both lower extremities on 1 patient when there were several other equally critical patients? How about applying pressure on a patient while firing your weapon or reloading? Fortunately, that injury pattern is exceedingly rare in the US.
So, the TQ served as a lifesaving force multiplier that was good enough but far from ideal. Fast forward a decade and people who saw the TQ save lives in the sandbox are now applying those lessons state side. Unfortunately, I'm seeing A LOT of TQ's applied inappropriately or on wounds that do not involve serious bleeding. Are they harming people? Rarely. But they certainly are not helping.
So yes. I keep a TQ along with an Israeli Combat Dressing in my kit. However, I invision it being used when faced with a situation where there are more injuries than hands or all hands are preoccupied trying to prevent further injury.
Arterial bleeding that you can't control satisfactorily with direct pressure. That might include a prolonged transport time. My guess is that the tourniquet that they applied contributed to the compartment syndrome that she developed. It's conceivable that the delay in diagnosis of her compartment syndrome caused as much injury to her leg as the GSW.
I could not help but notice that she mentions being diagnosed with compartment syndrome, was told that she needed a fasciotomy or amputation, but it does not appear that she ever actually received a 4-compartment fasciotomy. Moreover, the part about being made to keep her leg elevated made me cringe (assuming no fasiotomy was done).
I could not help but notice that she mentions being diagnosed with compartment syndrome, was told that she needed a fasciotomy or amputation, but it does not appear that she ever actually received a 4-compartment fasciotomy. Moreover, the part about being made to keep her leg elevated made me cringe (assuming no fasiotomy was done).
I am completely dumbfounded that a patient would be discharged from the ED with a gunshot wound through the posterior lateral calf, exit the medial ankle, take out the posterior tibial artery. How any trauma-trained physician could NOT have compartment syndrome at the top of their list of concerns is totally beyond me. If she DIDN'T get a 4-compartment fasciotomy, like...immediately, when she came back then I am even more dumbfounded. Nobody likes doing a 4 quadrant fasciotomy. It's a morbid procedure with a potentially long recovery...but it's often the best chance at keeping the leg. I'd love to know what the pressures were when she came back after 3 days.
FromMyColdDeadHand
03-02-17, 15:15
4 quadrant fasciotomy
Getting close to dinner. The short version of what this means?
hmac and GTF are the MVPs of this thread.
TQs will always have a place but like anything require training and quality. Like CATs and SOFTTs.
I think the potential downsides, as I was discussing with someone else is this slipshod, makeshift bootlegged TQ and improper placement/usage.
Like as was mentioned....you can get same or better results with gauze, maxipads, quikclot, Israeli bandages, Ace wraps, and pressure.
Getting hit with a bullet doesnt automatically hurt like hell. So her not even knowing she was shot is believable.
I am not a doctor and while I have had some medical training I'm not a Para-god.
Most shit has been handled with gauze and pressure and not this Doogie Howser James Yeager Ricky Ranger shit they go on about on youtube.
It all goes to basic BBC (or ABC, whichever) and let the guy who went to college for this shit handle it with other guys who went to college for this shit in an area designated specifically for this kind of shit.
JMO/JME
Real question:
For self-aid, in the event of a GSW to an extremity, is there even an alternative to a TQ?
I have 2 Israeli Dressings, 2 SWAT-T's, Kerlix 4.5 & 2.5 rolls, as well as a couple of ACE bandages in my range GSW first aid box for use as direct pressure bandages. It always stays in my truck.
When I'm on the range by myself I try to remember to put a SWAT-T in my back pocket. I feel that should take care of my direct pressure needs.
hmac and GTF are the MVPs of this thread.
TQs will always have a place but like anything require training and quality. Like CATs and SOFTTs.
I think the potential downsides, as I was discussing with someone else is this slipshod, makeshift bootlegged TQ and improper placement/usage.
Like as was mentioned....you can get same or better results with gauze, maxipads, quikclot, Israeli bandages, Ace wraps, and pressure.
Getting hit with a bullet doesnt automatically hurt like hell. So her not even knowing she was shot is believable.
I am not a doctor and while I have had some medical training I'm not a Para-god.
Most shit has been handled with gauze and pressure and not this Doogie Howser James Yeager Ricky Ranger shit they go on about on youtube.
It all goes to basic BBC (or ABC, whichever) and let the guy who went to college for this shit handle it with other guys who went to college for this shit in an area designated specifically for this kind of shit.
JMO/JME
We better not hang together, if someone gets a paper cut I'm going for the needle decompression AFTER I dump QuikClot down their throat so I can do a field cricothyrotomy. George H.W. Bush sent out cool certificates for field saves, I'll bet Trump will give me an aircraft carrier.
And dont forget to be like that YouTube boy and fall back on your training to call your parents. Lady in the video did and it helped save her life. :)
We better not hang together, if someone gets a paper cut I'm going for the needle decompression AFTER I dump QuikClot down their throat so I can do a field cricothyrotomy. George H.W. Bush sent out cool certificates for field saves, I'll bet Trump will give me an aircraft carrier.
Bro you know I got tripanonphobia like a mofo.
Getting close to dinner. The short version of what this means?
Compartment syndrome is an increase in the pressures in the anatomic compartments of a limb or organ due to increased interstitial pressures. Classically, it occurs in the lower leg after a fracture of the tibia, but it can occur in the hand, orbit, abdomen, etc. Vascular, crush, and electrical injuries are less common but well described causes. Compartment syndrome is a microvascular phenomenon and a frank loss of blood flow to the limb or organ is a late and ominous finding. The only accepted method to diagnose a compartment syndrome is to directly measure the tissue pressures within the compartment. The only accepted treatment for a compartment syndrome is surgical decompression. If a compartment syndrome is suspected but pressures cannot be measured, then surgical decompression is generally performed. In the case of the lower leg, that involves taking down the fascia so that all 4 compartments (anterior, lateral, superficial posterior, and deep posterior) are decompressed. Here is an example:
https://youtu.be/yhIEXC3JrYs
sevenhelmet
03-02-17, 16:11
Holy @#$%. I'm amazed the human body can actually heal from that.
The recovery is long and most can expect a permanent 20-30% reduction in limb strength. However, that beats the hell out of an AKA.
I know some folks in that class, and it was the same location for my Tom Givens class the next month. Craig Douglas was there shortly thereafter. Good range, great host. Students in the class can flesh out the story a bit more if they're posting anywhere. The gun was a no-go, and went off without external influence while others watched. The med response was not quite as smooth as described.
Napoleon is a small ag town ~50 miles from Bismarck. You can see the range at 46.522951°, -99.765624° and the neighboring sale barn where classroom training is held. Rescuers are volunteers. Bismarck is the nearest med facility (Sanford), level 2 trauma, GTG, and has helo service. LZs are plentiful.
Pre-hospital care for this type of injury is BLS and stone-simple. Nothing to do for compartment syndrome. A nearly identical GSW I've worked didn't even need a TQ and was really meh.
When messing with M&P internals, it's good to remember that it's a fully cocked striker. I'm surprised we don't see more of these.
Adding... On the question of TQ use, a big reason direct pressure fails is that people are generally doing it wrong. Direct pressure isn't holding a dressing in place, it's sustained aggressive pressure and compression to bleeding tissues. Done correctly, it works more often than most would believe.
Switching from medical response, the home "tuned trigger" crowd has always scared the crap out of me.
I have been handed "custom sniper rifles" to try out and just as soon as I was settling in and put my finger on the trigger in preparation to fire on the target the damn thing fired. I understand the "broken glass rod" trigger break everyone is chasing, but the "a fly landed on the trigger" shit is scary.
Same goes for competitive handguns, especially 1911s and revolvers. People love to hand them to me to "try out" and I always end up with a very premature trigger break. I am talking about triggers so light that lateral pressure from the side can drop a hammer.
And for some reason, a lot of other competitive shooters think it's a good thing and it quickly becomes a case of "can you tune mine for me?" Hopefully that video will be shared far and wide and people will start to rethink their 1.5 lb speed triggers.
. Here is an example:
https://youtu.be/yhIEXC3JrYs
THAT is a very nice fasciotomy. Very skillfully done and a great video.
http://68.media.tumblr.com/8c38ef53df91862baf85764e4ef48e2a/tumblr_inline_o1z66tUrY11qa4rug_400.jpg
The recovery is long and most can expect a permanent 20-30% reduction in limb strength. However, that beats the hell out of an AKA.
I can personally attest to how much a fasciotomy sucks.
Not sure what AKA means but I am assuming Ankle to Knee Amputation?
1. Geissele, Apex, etc... Ain't no reason for a hobbyist to do anything besides assemble without conventional training under an experienced gun smith.
2. From the DOD's lessons learned; compilation of knowledge gained from battlefield research: "No amputations resulted as a primary effect of field tourniquet placement" (Paraphrased from memory). IE: amputations were attributable to blast, GSW and nerve damage in the presence of obliteration of vasculature. Bridging procedures, developed at FAS's have been noted to salvage 70-80% of isolated damage when neuro status was intact.
Also: No casualty that arrived at a forward aid station died as a result of hemorrhagic shock IF tourniquets were correctly applied in the field. That statement (Again taken from memory) is what made TQ's the rock star they've become.
3. What the DOD did not study during CRASH2 et al, was the extended transport times that would become commonplace after the pullout. Instead of air evac, ground transport with its longer transport times became the norm, leading to reassessment of "Up-Time" for TQ's. It wasn't until a soldier was flown from RG to WR that a TQ was caught left in-place for >8 hours. This is the only recorded amputation that was directly attributable to a tourniquet and prompted the DOD to evaluate up times. As a result the military has published a 2 hour maximum up-time before reassessment for conversion to other bleeding control; a more than safe buffer that allows most TQ's to be set/forget within the civilian sector as well as for medic to surgeon/corpsman transport times.
The moral of the story is that tourniquets are a destination, not a first resort (unless your internal voice is going OH FACK!!!). They are not a convenience item so that somebody can get back to charting.Their main indication is bright red, spurting bleeding although the primary treatment is still direct pressure, with two hands, maybe some hemostatic, but that doesn't excuse a person from holding pressure for at least 5 minutes - Basics pave the road for advanced care. You'll know you're doing it right if the patient screams bloody murder. This also tells you the patient has not bled to the point they can't scream! Also, STOP PEEKING! This is called incremental exsanguination as the patient bleeds to death one peek at a time. The next person to see that wound (inside two hours of course, as little as 30 minutes in some systems) should be the TS.
I used to be in the FD and we mostly ran medic calls
never needed a tourniquet and we never used them always pressure points or direct and other ways to stop the bleeding etc..
even on pretty much severed arms we could stop and control back then we did a 30 second thing to release and reapply
for me tourniquet is great if you are out on your own and you think OH crap I am going to pass out rather then bleed out :)
the old saying if you need one you might need two besides GSW things like winch cables breaking but again rare case and I know some off road guys carry them for being way out in the bush where medical could be a helicopter or long way out but again I think to many would use them without knowing how why when and not AFTER other methods did not work but sadly be used as first panic thing ?
Not sure what AKA means but I am assuming Ankle to Knee Amputation?
Above Knee Amputation
quickclot was before my time but I have read so many also using that on things that do not need it at all ??
and have read it can be a mess for doctors to clean up ?
would love the doctors here to chime in on their thought about that stuff :)
quickclot was before my time but I have read so many also using that on things that do not need it at all ??
and have read it can be a mess for doctors to clean up ?
would love the doctors here to chime in on their thought about that stuff :)
Personally, in civilian practice, I think it's a solution looking for a problem. It's not particularly hard to deal with in the OR, but I'm opposed on the grounds of pointlessness for the vast majority of civilian penetrating injuries.
Combat gauze. HemCon, etc.. has the hemostatic agent impregnated into gauze, or sewn into sponges vs. the granules. Those were unpopular because in the desert, the wind blows it into medic's eyes and the early version generated a lot of heat. The whole mechanism of that stuff is to reduce the liquid component of blood, leaving a more viscous, clot-prone substance.
You haven't seen it all until you see documentation of positive distal pulse, motor and sensory function on a patient with a TQ in place...
Narcan is still the most inappropriately performed procedure in EMS. Everybody gives it to anybody who refuses to open their eyes. We're heading for a national shortage worse than anything previously seen now that it actually gets used a little more appropriately. And the public can buy it and use it as a safety net.
You haven't seen it all until you see documentation of positive distal pulse, motor and sensory function on a patient with a TQ in place...
...wut
...and just so there is no confusion, CRASH2 was not a DOD trial. It was a multinational study of TXA in trauma that took place in multiple developing countries. It had nothing to do with tourniquets.
platoonDaddy
03-02-17, 19:49
One of my shooting partners, recently introduced his neighbor to the sport of shooting. I emailed him the link to the video and this is his reply:
Wow. Thanks very much for sharing this video. I have to say, I think guns are amazing things but I have the utmost respect for them. They are products of human hands and used by humans and thus subject to failure, misuse and plain old human error. Please make sure that you monitor everything I do at the range and critique any errors. To me, this is very serious business.
Yep, I mis-spoke. Researched that when we incorporated it into our NOT. It's all Mud. Basics usually prove all that's necessary. Most people leapfrog right over them.
sandsunsurf
03-02-17, 20:05
When messing with M&P internals, it's good to remember that it's a fully cocked striker. I'm surprised we don't see more of these.
THIS.
When I first broke down the M&P I noticed this. Pulling the trigger moves the striker to the rear just a hair. Like less than a millimeter. It's not a "safe action" or "double action" as the first M&P brochures claimed. It's a single action striker fired pistol. About 6-8 months after I made my discovery, the local sheriff's office had video of an M&P being dropped while retrieved from a gun locker, and it discharged.
Needless to say, the M&P is not an approved weapon at many of the law enforcement agencies around here.
M&P has a striker block, so firing when dropped shouldn't happen with a functional M&P.
That tiny movement of the striker to the rear is what constitutes double action rather than fully pre-cocked, according to S&W.
THIS.
When I first broke down the M&P I noticed this. Pulling the trigger moves the striker to the rear just a hair. Like less than a millimeter. It's not a "safe action" or "double action" as the first M&P brochures claimed. It's a single action striker fired pistol. About 6-8 months after I made my discovery, the local sheriff's office had video of an M&P being dropped while retrieved from a gun locker, and it discharged.
Needless to say, the M&P is not an approved weapon at many of the law enforcement agencies around here.
This. Once I figured out the multitude of flaws with M&P, I knew I would never tote one. I was forced to for 5 months but I campaigned hard to personal carry a Glock.
It seems like everyone who jumped on the M&P train were people who just pathologically hated Glock.
Nobody carries a Glock because they are pretty or fancy. It works, doesn't screw up unless you screw up, and is reasonably accurate.
If you want a show off gun get a P226 or a 1911.
The only other pistol I would seriously consider carrying if Glocks magically didnt exist would be some flavor of HK.
For me, some dumbass Skynyrd listening, Pibb Drinking wacko....the lightest trigger I feel comfortable with is 3.5lbs. Put in the work and practice. I had over the years an old A1, an M14, and a rackgrade JAR Remington with a 3.5-10 Leupy that was neither bedded nor tricked out and had a stock factory trigger. Just do what the instructors say and know your math and you will hit.
In fact we were actively told a fancy trigger or "custom" trigger can get you reamed if you go to court. 3.5 lbs is plenty.
Geissele, I think, has become predictable and reliable enough that it wouldn't broach conventionality.
I like boring guns that actually require intent and deliberation to fire.
This is why I gloss over guns on the local board with any mention of polishing or trigger modifications. Way too many home 'gunsmiths'.
I've modified my own by exchanging factory parts, but I won't even "25 cent trigger job" my Glocks, I just shoot them in.
Moose-Knuckle
03-03-17, 05:00
And another reason I'm boring and like factory installed OEM FCGs, but I'm not a racer either.
I've swapped out a few FCGs in rifles over the years but I did those myself and knew what I was doing.
Gives pause in acquiring used firearms, especially in the competition crowd. Yikes.
Good video. Good lessons in this thread. Thanks to all for posting.
M&P has a striker block, so firing when dropped shouldn't happen with a functional M&P.
That tiny movement of the striker to the rear is what constitutes double action rather than fully pre-cocked, according to S&W.
The M & P isn't a series 70 1911. If the striker block hasn't been disabled somehow it wouldn't matter what you did to the sear. The gun shouldn't fire unless the trigger is pulled. Just like any other striker fire pistol the the striker won't move unless the trigger is pulled. I'm not convinced of anything by this video. The video doesn't say that the striker block was disabled. Even if the striker somehow slipped off the modified sear the block would keep the gun from firing.
If there was some terrible flaw with the M & P, causing many AD's or ND's where is this information to be found? There are thousands of M & P's out there some of which, like mine, have thousands of rounds through them, where is all the dope on AD's?
Mine's modified with an Apex sear and a light polishing (not filing, grinding or sanding) job.
She didn't say or verify from what I heard that the striker block was or wasn't modified or functioning properly.......that seems important to me.
She didn't say or verify from what I heard that the striker block was or wasn't modified or functioning properly.......that seems important to me.
It isn't in the video, but MarkCO mentioned (and has been mentioned in this thread) that the striker block was modified to the point of being disabled. These modifications are done by some people to reduce the trigger pre-travel.
Does anyone know if the sear on an M&P is through hardened?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.