Bodyguard 2.0 owners: Safety concerns?

[YetAnotherKnifeEnthusiast]

Last week, I picked up a BG2.0 at my LGS, took it home, cleaned it, oiled it, etc. Haven't had a chance to get some range time yet (work) but that's okay, because my AHolster pocket holster is still at least a week away. I won't carry ANY gun unless I put at least 200 rounds through it and have a proper holster, so I'm in no rush. My BG1.0 will suffice in the meantime.

However, I've been taking it out, loading it with snapcaps, playing with it, inspecting it, etc.

As you know, it's a TOTALLY different gun than the 1.0, a gun which has 100% of my confidence. But taking apart the 2.0 raised some concerns for me. Likely just paranoia, but I wanted to run it by this by you all first. I have 2 safety concerns:

This gun is striker fired. That's not a bad thing, and I don't distrust strikers. In fact, I'm a HUGE Glock fan, because Glock does strikers right. The striker rests in sort of a half-cocked position, where if it slipped out somehow AND defeated the firing pin block, it still wouldn't fire because it doesn't have enough momentum behind it to fire.

That's not the case with the BG2.0. The striker is FULLY cocked. That concerns me.

The trigger safety also concerns me. On most guns with trigger safety, the lever is considerably thinner than the trigger. On the BG2.0 the trigger safety is as wide (if not a hair wider) than the trigger, rending it totally useless. It defeats the purpose of a trigger safety.

I love this gun, I DO plan on carrying it once it's in a proper holster and has some rounds through it, not going to sell it...

But all the same, I wanted to hear from people more knowledgeable than me.

Thanks in advance!

 

[DocJD]

I don't own and have not shot or even handled the BG2.0 . Yet . Claims to have less recoil and better handling than my Ruger LCP MAX .

I like an easy carry , compact .380 , with increased capacity . I think the sights on the MAX are much better ,at least .

After you put in some range time , you should have a better idea about safe handling issues .

No thumb (manual) safety on yours ? I read those are difficult for many to operate . Many do not want any manual safety on a self defense weapon , anyway .

I don't like to carry a trigger safety only pistol , without a holster that completely protects the trigger access .

Training and practice builds the proper habits and reflexive safe handling . Like: keep out of the trigger guard , until you are on target and need to shoot .

You can shoot yourself , even with a Glock , if you holster with your finger on the trigger . Etc .

 

[LMT66]

Last week, I picked up a BG2.0 at my LGS, took it home, cleaned it, oiled it, etc. Haven't had a chance to get some range time yet (work) but that's okay, because my AHolster pocket holster is still at least a week away. I won't carry ANY gun unless I put at least 200 rounds through it and have a proper holster, so I'm in no rush. My BG1.0 will suffice in the meantime.

However, I've been taking it out, loading it with snapcaps, playing with it, inspecting it, etc.

As you know, it's a TOTALLY different gun than the 1.0, a gun which has 100% of my confidence. But taking apart the 2.0 raised some concerns for me. Likely just paranoia, but I wanted to run it by this by you all first. I have 2 safety concerns:

This gun is striker fired. That's not a bad thing, and I don't distrust strikers. In fact, I'm a HUGE Glock fan, because Glock does strikers right. The striker rests in sort of a half-cocked position, where if it slipped out somehow AND defeated the firing pin block, it still wouldn't fire because it doesn't have enough momentum behind it to fire.

That's not the case with the BG2.0. The striker is FULLY cocked. That concerns me.

The trigger safety also concerns me. On most guns with trigger safety, the lever is considerably thinner than the trigger. On the BG2.0 the trigger safety is as wide (if not a hair wider) than the trigger, rending it totally useless. It defeats the purpose of a trigger safety.

I love this gun, I DO plan on carrying it once it's in a proper holster and has some rounds through it, not going to sell it...

But all the same, I wanted to hear from people more knowledgeable than me.

Thanks in advance!

The blade size on the trigger doesn't matter. It's purpose it to prevent rearward movement of the trigger if you drop it. It's a drop safety.

 

[bikerector]

I have one, I have no concerns. There are plenty of guns that have a trigger blade safety that's the whole width of the trigger, like the FN509, and it seems to do alright. IMO, this style doesn't do the trigger feel any favors, but they work like they're supposed to.

My PDP is also a fully-cocked striker and seems well regarded for safety, function, and very shootable.

 

[bdmicarta]

I have not heard of any problems with them. All striker-fired guns should be carried in a manner that completely protects the trigger, and always be very careful when holstering that nothing manages to access the trigger. If you do that you shouldn't have any concerns. Carry it around your house for awhile unloaded and verify for yourself that the striker doesn't fall on its own.

 

[BMCGear]

No issues with mine. It’s not a 320 after all.

 

[eveled]

I would not carry a striker fired gun that was at full cock. (My personal opinion is) they aren’t as safe as one that is partially cocked.

My understanding of the trigger safety. It stops a ND when the trigger gets pressure from the side like when holstering. I’ve never heard of them as a drop safety.

I prefer hammer fired guns in general, but I consider partially cocked strikers safe.

 

[LMT66]

I would not carry a striker fired gun that was at full cock. (My personal opinion is) they aren’t as safe as one that is partially cocked.

My understanding of the trigger safety. It stops a ND when the trigger gets pressure from the side like when holstering. I’ve never heard of them as a drop safety.

I prefer hammer fired guns in general, but I consider partially cocked strikers safe.

It’s one part of the system in the Glock.

 

[eveled]

Stand corrected on the drop safety on the Glock. Do we know it’s the same on every striker fired gun?

 

[bdmicarta]

I would not carry a striker fired gun that was at full cock. (My personal opinion is) they aren’t as safe as one that is partially cocked.

My understanding of the trigger safety. It stops a ND when the trigger gets pressure from the side like when holstering. I’ve never heard of them as a drop safety.

I prefer hammer fired guns in general, but I consider partially cocked strikers safe.

Some striker-fired designs have a spring-operated plunger in the slide that blocks the striker from moving enough to strike the primer. These devices are disengaged by the pull of the trigger so the trigger has to be pulled before the gun will fire. If somehow the gun is dropped or whatever and the striker is released, the striker is still blocked from hitting the primer because the trigger hasn't been pulled. A lot of other guns have similar firing pin blocks- S&W revolvers, Ruger new model single actions, Colt Series 80 handguns, Kimber Custom II handguns among others. There is still some controversy about how there have been rare instances of SIG P320 firing "on their own". And yes in most instances these spring-loaded safety devices degrade the trigger pull, Kimber being the only one I'm familiar with off the top of my head that does not.