Glock "safety" vs. other striker-fired pistols...


PDA






Chris17404
January 10, 2007, 09:30 AM
Hi all,

I am wondering why Glock pistols (at least to me) seem to get so much more criticism that "they're not safe" or "they really have no safety" or "I'd never carry a Glock with a round chambered" over other similar trigger-action pistols much as the new S&W M&P, or Walther P99, etc.

To me, there's really no difference, is there? They all have a relatively short trigger pull and no external safety (other than on the actual trigger). It seems like Glock gets a bad rap. Is it just because they've been around the longest?

Chris

If you enjoyed reading about "Glock "safety" vs. other striker-fired pistols..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
SDC
January 10, 2007, 09:41 AM
I think it's likely a combination of "success envy", and the fact that there are so many Glocks out there; therefore, everytime someone tries to re-holster their duty pistol with their finger on the trigger, you have someone willing to jump all over "those unsafe Glocks".

Maxinquaye
January 10, 2007, 09:51 AM
I think the Glock is plenty safe in most situations. However, I think the XD system with the grip safety is a big leap forward. I wouldnt throw a Glock in a crowded backpack with one in the pipe cause you never know when a magic marker will be in just the wrong spot. with the grip safety on the XD I would feel much more comfortable in such a situation.

cane
January 10, 2007, 11:57 AM
I wouldn't throw any loaded semi-automatic pistol in a crowded backpack.

Manedwolf
January 10, 2007, 12:01 PM
I consider Glocks the equivalent of a lap seatbelt only in a car. At one time, they thought it was safe enough. Now, all cars have shoulder belts, because they know better.

So many things can catch in a trigger guard, from a holster retaining part to a coin to the edge of a holster itself. And push on that 'trigger safety', and that it...you've got an ND happening.

No external safety, no grip safety? No thanks. YMMV.

RNB65
January 10, 2007, 12:21 PM
The main issue with Glocks is that if something snags or enters the trigger well during holstering it can easily cause an accidental discharge. A number of LEO's have experienced AD's (and accidental self-inflicted injury in some cases) due to their holster straps or other items getting inside the trigger guard while reholstering. Find the video of the infamous DEA agent who accidently shot himself while reholstering in front of a classroom of kids for a great example.

With the XD, as long as you keep your hand off the grip safety while reholstering, you can snag the trigger all day long and it won't AD. Just hold it using the frontstrap with the thumb on top of the slide as you holster the weapon and the grip safety will prevent any AD's.

AD's = BAD!

Cousin Mike
January 10, 2007, 12:30 PM
I've been carrying a Glock for a week now, and I've never had a problem reholster-...



uh oh... :eek:




...I think I need to call 911.


:D

Seriously though, I have been carrying a G33 for a little over a week, and I'd be lying to you if I said I wasn't extra careful when reholstering. The trigger isn't hard to manipulate at all, and you'd be surprised how easily you can "accidentally" put 5 and a half lbs. of pressure on something. That said, a good holster shouldn't have components that will enter your trigger guard and cause a discharge. I'm not against retention holsters for most guns, but I probably wouldn't use one with my Glock.

I personally prefer not to have a manual safety on my carry gun.

shooter71
January 10, 2007, 01:06 PM
not knocking the Glock..since i know at some time i ll either own a G19 or a G23..but id love to see the grip safty on one like the XD..i like my XD but the mid size Glock feels better in my small hands..but its taken Glock this long just to put a chamber loaded indicator on them..waiting on a grip safty which prb wont happen anyway would be light yrs away lol

i agree with the other forumite..never really thought about it..but yeah i could see a big ole Sharpie or something getting wedged in the trigger guard and popping of a round..but on the other hand if someone is that careless to just use a reg ole backpack or school bag ..and not one from Galco or Maxpedition etc they shouldnt even attempt to carry one in that manner..and this goes for women to..dont just toss a piece in your Dooney & Bourke bag cause it looks good and you spent a bunch of money on it either..ok im done..man that coffe was strong :what:

AcenJay
January 10, 2007, 02:12 PM
I'm not really a fan of the grip safeties. Sure it helps prevent an accidental discharge, but it is one more thing that can go wrong, and more parts. The Glock, on the other hand, is very simple with something like only 33 parts. Also, what if one were to find themself in a situation where you are struggling for the gun, but can't get your hand in a position to press down on the grip safety in order to pull the trigger?

never_summer
January 10, 2007, 02:29 PM
i just bought a kimber 1911 and think its scarier to have that thing cocked and locked instead of a glock. My DAO sig p226 doesnt even have a safety but nobody knocks on it. I just think practice and knowledge of your gun will help with AD's, but everyone has a bad day now and then haha

CountGlockula
January 10, 2007, 03:44 PM
Honestly, Glocks are the safest weapons in the market. I hear too many "what if's" and "imagine if". The reason why people get a NEGLIGENT (NOT accidental) discharge on a Glock while holstering is that they kept their finger in the trigger. Didn't they remember the 4 rules?

Whenever I holster my Glock my finger is always away from the trigger.

Glocks do not need an external safety because there's three safeties within the gun: 1) the trigger safety, 2) the firing pin safety, and c) the drop safety. Having an external safety like the beaver tail safety on an XD or 1911, causes the shooter to think too much and not focus on the target/accuracy.

Still 2 Many Choices!?
January 10, 2007, 03:52 PM
"Glock", has become the generic term for all stirker-fired pistols, don't have a manual safety or grip safety:D . So these people that complain don't like that S&W knock off either...

Still 2 Many Choices!?

das028
January 10, 2007, 03:53 PM
"I think the Glock is plenty safe in most situations. However, I think the XD system with the grip safety is a big leap forward. I wouldnt throw a Glock in a crowded backpack with one in the pipe cause you never know when a magic marker will be in just the wrong spot. with the grip safety on the XD I would feel much more comfortable in such a situation."


I dont mean to sound rude, but that is just a stupid thing to do with any loaded gun!:scrutiny:

Guzzizzit
January 10, 2007, 03:53 PM
It's odd. I heard someone at the range give me this same argument just this weekend. I watched as he Holstered his XD and realized that he was dipressing the grip safety as he holstered it. So, i ask you, how did the grip safety help anything as he holstered his XD?

I have 4 holsters for my glock 22. One shoulder, on thigh, one belt and one slider type. They were all designed to be used solely with glocks, and i cant even see how it would be POSSIBLE to snag the trigger on the holster.

Also, putting ANY firearm into a crowded backpack loaded but uncased is just plain asking for trouble. I wouldnt even hike with someone who did that.

das028
January 10, 2007, 04:02 PM
If you like to follow the basic firearms rules then a Glock is as safe as any pistol or revolver. Think of a glock like any othe D/A revolver or pistol.

I think you can blame most Glock ND's on something us guys at work call OE. Operater Error!



But, by all means, carry what you are comfortable with. There are so many choices, anybody can find something to fit their needs.

Sniper X
January 10, 2007, 04:41 PM
I owned 4 glocks. I must say I am a total 1911 guy. I got rid of my glocks because of the fact that Glock Safety is such an oxymoron. In my experience, a carry gun with no external safety is dangerous to carry "cocked and locked". I carry my 1911 C&L and have been since 1975 and have never had an AD when handling. I know 3 Glock owners who have had multiple AD's and never had one with 1911's, or any other gun with a safety.

torpid
January 10, 2007, 05:24 PM
I like glocks just fine, but seriously... I always wonder why did they put the "safety" on the trigger? Of course the "just keep your dang your finger off" mantra applies, but it seems to me if something snags the trigger it'd fire just like a finger would anyway, so the addition of the "safety" seems redundant.

Just seems an odd location, but hey- it seems to work for folks who obey the rules.

(not a Glock hater)

ugaarguy
January 10, 2007, 06:17 PM
Having an external safety like the beaver tail safety on an XD or 1911, causes the shooter to think too much and not focus on the target/accuracy.
:rolleyes: Yeah, right, tell that to the FBI HRT, LAPD SWAT, and The Marine Expeditionary Units.

Manedwolf
January 10, 2007, 06:42 PM
seems to me if something snags the trigger it'd fire just like a finger would anyway, so the addition of the "safety" seems redundant.

*DING DING DING DING*

This would be why I chose a PT745 instead. I see NO delay in swiping the mechanical safety with my thumb, which can be done from a firing grip without any other hand movement.

torpid
January 10, 2007, 06:47 PM
This would be why I chose a PT745 instead.

Would a PT-145 count? :D

Soybomb
January 10, 2007, 07:36 PM
This horse is dead. Some people feel safe with no manual safety, some don't. Do whichever you like. Millions of glock owners use their pistol every day without shooting themselves.

One of the versions of the P99 is TDA though so you might argue that the heavier initial double action pull makes it different from the glock.

avpro
January 10, 2007, 08:59 PM
Hey Glocks do have a thumb activated safety. Except Glock builds it into the holster (http://www.glock.com/english/index_safety.htm) :) :) Now why does Glock go to the trouble of building a contraption like that?? Hmmmm.......

S&W 910
January 10, 2007, 09:37 PM
i just got a glock 33

first thing i did was switch to the new york trigger.stock trigger is way to light imo

graywolfkayak
January 10, 2007, 09:46 PM
If Glocks are so dangerous, then revolvers must be also since they have no external safeties. Correct?

torpid
January 10, 2007, 10:09 PM
If Glocks are so dangerous, then revolvers must be also since they have no external safeties. Correct?

DA revolvers with triggers as light as a Glocks?

Yes, probably so.

tango3065
January 10, 2007, 10:11 PM
I am a glocker but I will say in my opinion the factory trigger is to light. Thats why I put a 8Lb trigger spring in it before I ever fired it, and now it perfect for me.

10-Ring
January 10, 2007, 10:20 PM
Stick w/ what works best for you! Me, I own 2 striker fired guns & love them both...my Glock 19 & my HK P7M8 :cool: I just figure - why does everyone have to like what I like???? :scrutiny:

MCgunner
January 10, 2007, 10:25 PM
I think the XD system with the grip safety is a big leap forward.

Agreed

S&Wfan
January 10, 2007, 10:29 PM
Putting a safety on the trigger, is like putting the brake petal on the gas petal.

Glocks are perfectly safe except for morons who finger the trigger when the finger should NOT be on the trigger. This happens mainly to folks who don't shoot much, but have to tote a weapon daily, such as some LEOs.

Be as it may . . . I feel MUCH safer toting my cocked and locked Kimber 1911-style auto than with my Glock 23.

Both are fine handguns though.

foob
January 10, 2007, 10:30 PM
Find the video of the infamous DEA agent who accidently shot himself while reholstering in front of a classroom of kids for a great example.

Unless I'm mistaken, his finger did it...

I think the XD system with the grip safety is a big leap forward.

Yes tell that to JMB.

Cousin Mike
January 10, 2007, 10:35 PM
Putting a safety on the trigger, is like putting the brake petal on the gas petal.

That made me laugh... :p

...but it's the truth.

avpro
January 10, 2007, 10:48 PM
How would you know if that little trigger thing even does anything? I mean seriously, how would you know if it's broken? Maybe it's not even connected to anything. There really isn't anyway to know if it even works.

Putting a safety on a trigger is an engineering oxymoron.

I have to pull the trigger to take the safety off, but I can't pull the trigger because the safety is on, but I have to pull the trigger to take the safety off, but I can't pull the trigger because the safety is on, but I have to pull the trigger to take the safety off, but I can't pull the trigger because the safety is on, but I have to pull the trigger to take the safety off, but I can't pull the trigger because the safety is on, but I have to pull the trigger to take the safety off, but I can't pull the trigger because the safety is on, but I have to pull the trigger to take the safety off, but I can't pull the trigger because the safety is on, ....... :neener:

SDC
January 10, 2007, 11:41 PM
All the "little trigger thing" does is block the rearward movement of the trigger unless it's depressed (it pivots around a blind pin in the trigger itself); no rearward trigger movement means the pistol can't be fully cocked, and if the pistol isn't fully cocked, the pistol can't fire.

Guzzizzit
January 11, 2007, 02:23 PM
"How would you know if that little trigger thing even does anything? I mean seriously, how would you know if it's broken? Maybe it's not even connected to anything. There really isn't anyway to know if it even works."

Simple, with the pistol unloaded, pinch the sides of the trigger and pull it to the real. If it moves back and the pistol dry fires then your safety device is faulty. If not your good to go.

This procedure is explained in more detail in the Glock owners manual inculed with the pistol.

CountGlockula
January 11, 2007, 02:47 PM
Hey Glocks do have a thumb activated safety. Except Glock builds it into the holster Now why does Glock go to the trouble of building a contraption like that?? Hmmmm.......

Because you don't want anything else bulging out on your holster. Glocks are meant to be smooth and streamlined in design; when holding it. No other obstructions are needed.

gezzer
January 11, 2007, 09:06 PM
When you are to STUPID to keep your freaking finger out of the trigger guard you should not carry a Glock or any other firearm IMHO. ND's are operator errors period.

distra
January 11, 2007, 09:19 PM
When you are to STUPID to keep your freaking finger out of the trigger guard you should not carry a Glock or any other firearm IMHO. ND's are operator errors period.

This is true, however in today's society one must be protected from themselves :banghead: :banghead:

JAMES77257
January 11, 2007, 09:51 PM
The only saftey that matters is the one between your ears.:)

simulatedjim
January 11, 2007, 11:06 PM
Some have added external safeties to their Glocks. Lets hear why it is good or bad?

RevolvingCylinder
January 11, 2007, 11:48 PM
I think the Glock pistol is "safe" enough as is in regard to the trigger and manual "safeties". I find the prong sticking out of the trigger to be a stupid design also. I don not like Glocks "DAO"(if that's what you can call it) and all other pistols that have it as well because it implements the disadvantages of both the SA and DA without the advantages of either. I have no use for such a design. I would prefer a true DAO in a pistol like Glock's.

The reported "ADs" were negligent in nature and I don't think that "safeties" are the answer to the improper handling of arms. It's like the ridiculous key-locks that some manufacturers are integrating into some of their products now.

bondjames628
January 12, 2007, 12:09 AM
Personally, I think a lot of people get too dependent on manual external safeties. I was always told that a gun is loaded no matter what. And that just like any other mechanical device, the manual safety on any weapon can fail. The trick is to always treat it as if it were loaded, and as if it had no safeties installed at all. Just my 2 cents.

Manedwolf
January 12, 2007, 12:58 AM
To me, no external safety is like not wearing a seatbelt because you don't think you'll ever crash the car...that it'd be operator error if you did.

torpid
January 12, 2007, 02:54 AM
When you are to STUPID to keep your freaking finger out of the trigger guard you should not carry a Glock or any other firearm IMHO. ND's are operator errors period.

Yes, I agree that one should practice safe gun handling and keep the finger off the trigger until ready to shoot.

So why is there even a "safety" on the Glock trigger at all if keeping your finger off is the Glock's real safety? When the trigger's pulled, it's pulled. :confused:

(still not a Glock hater) :)

Master Blaster
January 12, 2007, 09:45 AM
Dont pull the trigger and the gun wont fire, pull the trigger and the gun will fire.

Its simple its reliable, its quick to put into action.
It requires the operator use his head for more than a hat rack.

What more could you want?????

das028
January 12, 2007, 10:02 AM
"To me, no external safety is like not wearing a seatbelt because you don't think you'll ever crash the car...that it'd be operator error if you did."


BS

I have total control of my glock when its on my hip. I, and only I, control what happens to my pistol. If something happens its my responsibily. not anyone else.

On the other hand, in a car, I cant control what the moron next to me is doing.

Steve C
January 12, 2007, 03:39 PM
The passive safety systems found on a Glocks probably makes it one of the most “safe” pistols available. It requires no remembering to engage the safety. The only thing you need to remember is to keep your finger off the trigger until you want to shoot.

There isn’t a safety made that makes any gun safer when it’s not being safely handled. How many times do you read about someone getting “accidentally” shot where “I thought the safety was on” or “I didn’t know it was loaded” is the excuse you hear. The only completely safe gun is an unloaded gun and even then you need to: treat it as if it is loaded, finger off the trigger, keep pointed in a safe direction. You need to violate at least 2 of the safety rules to get yourself or someone else hurt.

It is pretty hard to get something caught inside the trigger guard and then apply enough force on top of that to get a 5lb pull trigger to go off. Leaving your finger on the trigger while reholstering certainly has set off double action revolvers and semi autos. Again it’s a handling issue.

There’s no way to make something idiot proof, idiots are too ingenious.

GeorgiaGlocker
January 12, 2007, 05:25 PM
The real safety is "between your ears". I love Glocks and have been carrying them chambered for over a year without a problem. Any person can have a AD with any gun! Period. I practice good gun handling techniques daily. If you are scared to carry chambered you either need more training or another gun. I have no problems with the standard 5.5 pound trigger pull of my Glocks. Just my 2 cents worth.

doublebarrel
January 14, 2007, 05:27 PM
Putting a safety on a trigger is an engineering oxymoron.

It's a drop safety. When the gun is dropped from above, like the space shuttle orbit, the gun will/might smash to pieces when it hits the ground, but the trigger won't move. So it has values, just not the same thing as a manual/grip safety, or the HK squeeze-cocker, or even a simple hammer block...


ND's are operator errors period.

Is this also an operator error?

http://www.thegunzone.com/mos/ad.html

If so, I guess I'm one of those seem possible to commit this kind of offence...:o

JAMES77257
January 14, 2007, 05:40 PM
Is this also an operator error?


Absolutely, who stuffs a loaded gun in their pocket/holster, w/o checking for obstructions. Not me.

Black Snowman
January 14, 2007, 05:50 PM
Just because something has extra gadgets to make it more difficult to do something stupid is no excuse to go ahead and do that stupid thing. I've been living with Glocks for 14 years and never once had a ND or AD. You shouldn't let external safeties make you any less careful of a firearm. I treat all my guns the same, and I learned how to treat them right with the "unsafe" Glock. IMHO, if you can't be safe with a Glock, you have no business with any gun until you learn better gun handling.

Harsh, but that's how I feel. Gadgets are no subsitute for proper gun handling.

Plink
January 14, 2007, 05:58 PM
To me a safety that "keeps something from pulling the trigger unless something pulls the trigger first" is laughable.

I've had many Glock owners tell me that they like not having a manual safety. They're worried that they might not remember to turn it off when they need the gun. They don't trust themselves with a safety? But they trust themselves with a gun that doesn't have one? Trust themselves to keep their finger off the trigger under all circumstances, through stress and distraction? With enough training and practice, sure! But how many owners actually have that level of competence?

Since when is the generally dumb public safe with anything? These are the same people who have no concept of lane discipline, can't figure out how to work something as simple as a four way stop and can't even figure out how to walk past an oncoming pedestrian without doing that stupid side to side dance. But they'll buy a gun with a relatively light, short trigger pull with no safety, then try to convince me that THEY are the safety!

Law enforcement receives more firearms training than most gun owners do, yet they've had so many accidental discharges that the New York trigger came about in an attempt to reduce them. Not too long ago a lady officer shot herself in the neck cleaning her Glock. If her gun had a grip safety like the venerable 1911 or the XD, I doubt that would have happened.

Then comes the stress of a violent confrontation. With the rush of adrenaline and focusing on the scene, the brain tends to blurr out things like where the trigger finger is. On one of those cop shows, an officer had wrestled a perp to the ground and was cuffing him. A second officer was covering the perp with a Glock and while the first was cuffing him, she touched off a round into the ground next to them. Luckily no one was hurt. Her focus was on the scene in front of her rather than where her finger was.

Am I saying the Glock is an unsafe design? No, not at all. It's not going to go off by itself. I'm saying that most people are unsafe and don't realize it until their mind is elsewhere and an accident happens. I'd like to see at least a grip safety on Glocks and most other guns. It's a non obtrusive solution to at least some safety issues.

In my opinion, a cocked and UN-locked 1911 is as safe as any Glock, and perhaps more so. It's not going to go off unless the trigger is pulled either. It's not going to go off it it's dropped either. The big difference is that it also has to be gripped firmly to fire. If it's being holstered properly by the butt, it won't go off if the holster strap snags the trigger or something.

JAMES77257
January 14, 2007, 06:35 PM
Just because something has extra gadgets to make it more difficult to do something stupid is no excuse to go ahead and do that stupid thing. I've been living with Glocks for 14 years and never once had a ND or AD. You shouldn't let external safeties make you any less careful of a firearm. I treat all my guns the same, and I learned how to treat them right with the "unsafe" Glock. IMHO, if you can't be safe with a Glock, you have no business with any gun until you learn better gun handling.

Harsh, but that's how I feel. Gadgets are no subsitute for proper gun handling.



+1 :)

JAMES77257
January 14, 2007, 06:39 PM
Law enforcement receives more firearms training than most gun owners do

Careless has nothing to do with training. I have many shooting buddies that are cops, and I've seen them do some stupid/dangerous things.

rmw
January 14, 2007, 09:53 PM
There’s no way to make something idiot proof, idiots are too ingenious.

I really like that statement:D

browningguy
January 14, 2007, 10:19 PM
I have to agree with the poster referencing the AD's because something got caught in the trigger as being a problem.

Comparing a Glock trigger to a DAO revolver is a little foolish as most DAO revolvers have 8-12 pound triggers unless you muck about with them.

You think you are safer than me because you're smart enough to carry a Glock? That would be hilarious if it wasn't such a pitifull argument, and you better hope you're right. And make absolutely sure you are not wearing a coat with drawstrings, or that your shirt tail doesn't get close to the holster, or...

My carry guns, BHP's, cocked and locked, because I'm smart enough to operate a safety. I do have an XD9 I bought for IDPA shooting, chose it specifically because it has the grip safety (and fits my particluar hand better), and no, my hand doesn't engage the grip safety when reholstering.

SDC
January 14, 2007, 10:59 PM
Your argument is that you're "smart enough" to operate a safety, but at the same time, you're NOT "smart enough" to both A) keep your finger off the trigger unless you want to fire, and B) make sure that there are no obstructions in or around your holster? Something doesn't seem to add up...

The Amigo
January 14, 2007, 11:19 PM
Seriously Ive got a headache over this one. Its easy if you think a Glock is not safe buy another gun if you don't care carry it. If your in between use this Ive been carrying with no safety my Glock 19 but if I'm around the kids where they tend to jump all over daddy I use this trigger safety all you do is push it sideways and the gun is ready to fire.

doubleg
January 14, 2007, 11:22 PM
No gun is safe. Thats why people use them.

JAMES77257
January 14, 2007, 11:48 PM
Your argument is that you're "smart enough" to operate a safety, but at the same time, you're NOT "smart enough" to both A) keep your finger off the trigger unless you want to fire, and B) make sure that there are no obstructions in or around your holster? Something doesn't seem to add up...



Exactly.

browningguy
January 15, 2007, 12:32 AM
No, I'm not smart enough, or observant enough, to avoid every possibility that might inadvertantly compress a trigger, ... every time, ... for the rest of my life.

And nobody else on the planet is that smart either. If anyone thinks they are the exception, then they are a true danger. Some of the smartest people I've met have had "stuff" happen. And once upon a time I was an engineer specializing in high energy devices and delivery platforms, so I've met some pretty smart people in my day.

A.Fischer
January 15, 2007, 12:33 AM
I don't really consider the trigger safety a "safety". Same with the Grip safety of an XD. You grip the gun, pull the trigger, it's going to fire. Perfect, that's exactly what I want in a life or death situation. From personal experience, I know, there is no way I'm going to be able to manipulate a safety 100%. Glock, XD, Kahr, M&P, seem plenty safe to me.

mcmjr
February 14, 2007, 11:13 PM
Not too long ago a lady officer shot herself in the neck cleaning her Glock. If her gun had a grip safety like the venerable 1911 or the XD, I doubt that would have happened.


Why on earth would you clean your gun with a round in the chamber?

briansp82593
February 14, 2007, 11:17 PM
who said she knew about it?

ugaarguy
February 14, 2007, 11:33 PM
Why on earth would you clean your gun with a round in the chamber?
who said she knew about it?
:what: Brian, please go get some training. NEVER pull a trigger unless you've triple checked that chamber (or ALL chambers on a revolver) are empty. There is no excuse for not knowing a round is chambered. The gun is loaded until YOU verify it is not loaded.

briansp82593
February 15, 2007, 12:16 AM
i never leave excess ammo laying around in my gun and my gun has a loaded chamber indicator
ammo is stored near the gun but never in it

Panthera Tigris
February 15, 2007, 12:34 AM
I know several people, possibly dozens, including policemen who own and carry Glocks and not a single one of them has ever had an AD or any other mishap with a Glock. Most of them have carried them for several years. My local gunshop owner (sheriff) ditched the 1911 he was carrying and now carries a Glock, along with all of his employees.

Flopsy
February 27, 2007, 05:36 PM
All the "little trigger thing" does is block the rearward movement of the trigger unless it's depressed (it pivots around a blind pin in the trigger itself); no rearward trigger movement means the pistol can't be fully cocked, and if the pistol isn't fully cocked, the pistol can't fire.

In other words, you can't pull the trigger back unless you pull back the trigger :uhoh:

I have had a G27 since September and I thought I would get used to it, given its fine engineering and reliability...I just can't. I'm going to sell it. It's in great shape, leave me a PM if you're interested.

HorizonSon
February 27, 2007, 06:38 PM
I'm still having trouble wrapping my tiny brain around this whole grip-safety and how it would have stopped these AD's from occuring?!?!?!?!?!?!...

If I'm holstering or removing my pistol from my holster, am I not gripping the handle and deactivating the grip-safety in the proccess???... :confused: Would I not have the same end result in way of an AD occur???... :uhoh: I only see the grip-safety being a viable safety when the pistol is NOT in-hand... Please forgive my ignorance and apparent naiviety...

YES; I agree that people do STUPID things in the heat-of-the-moment... And guess what? That's NOT going to change, no matter how many 'safeties' you put on anything (guns or not)!!! Nature has a way of always producing 'better' idiots (and in large abundance) vs smart inventions, LOL...

P.S. I hope my first post on here doesn't get my banned...:o

BTW (and I'm probably mistaken on this); I believe the trigger-safety was part of the Austrian Army's 'requirments' that the Glock ended up 'winning' the contract on... Please correct me if I'm mistaken...

SDC
February 27, 2007, 08:16 PM
In other words, you can't pull the trigger back unless you pull back the trigger

The principle is no different than having a transfer-bar safety on a DA revolver; it won't fire unless the trigger is pulled, which (unless I'm mistaken) is what WE WANT, remember?

Scottmkiv
February 27, 2007, 09:38 PM
I really like the fact that Glocks are always ready to go when you pull the trigger. You never have to worry about your thumb slipping off a safety (like on a 1911) or your grip not being quite right (many different guns), it means there is one or two less things you have to worry about in a situation where your adrenaline may case your fine motor skills to deteriorate. These things may waste precious time in a life or death situation.

At a range or in the field hunting it is easy to deal with external safeties, but that is because it is possible to take your time and go slowly. Even in this type of controlled environment most people I know have missed clay pigeons, dove, deer etc, at least once because they accidentally left the safety on. I remember losing a round of sporting clays to my dad because I forgot to take the safety off at the last station.

In a combat or other high stress situation I may have too many other things on my mind. I consider the simpler user interface to be a decided plus for Glocks, revolvers, and other extrenal safety-less pistols.

Calhoun321
February 27, 2007, 11:45 PM
I have a problem with all these guns which have a short trigger throw, a short trigger pull in the 5 pound range (Glock, M&P, etc.), and no manual safety.

Carrying these guns is functionally equivalent to carrying a cocked and locked series 80 1911 with a sloppy trigger and no functional thumb or grip safety. This 1911 with all the safeties removed will not fire unless the trigger is pulled - - just like any of these striker fired wonder guns.

Furthermore, I can't believe people are still equating the safety of DA/SA decocking autos and revolvers with that of a Glock or similar pistol. To do so IMHO, suggests a lack of fundamental firearms knowledge, as there is no relevant comparison.

jlh26oo
February 28, 2007, 01:40 AM
To me, there's really no difference, is there? They all have a relatively short trigger pull and no external safety (other than on the actual trigger). It seems like Glock gets a bad rap. Is it just because they've been around the longest?

Yeah, for the most part. They are the standard to which all others are measured. Try to read an m&p or xd thread without learning just how much better they are than GLOCK.

Having said that, I still wouldn't dispute that additions such as grip safeties make the pistol "more" safe. It's an upgrade in terms of safeties. For some, heavier triggers also. I just don't feel like I need them however- and will always choose the MOST "point and click"able design offered; firing pin/loaded chamber indicators, grip safeties, manual external safeties, etc need not apply.

However, for those who are ok with:
Why on earth would you clean your gun with a round in the chamber?
who said she knew about it?
I can see why such things are needed (and hope that they work for them).

But even as a staunch glock-o-phile, I will agree the passive trigger safety is kind of silly- UNLESS (as some have said here) that it's the safety which prevents momentum from moving the trigger if it's dropped muzzle up- it was my understanding that there exists a separate "drop safety" mechanism, and that the passive trigger safety is simply for preventing something that might clip the EDGE of the trigger from moving it, that wouldn't otherwise cover the whole trigger (pretty low probability imo).

Anyways, bottom line is, whatever flavor people choose, they'll tend to preach the virtues of their platforms configuration, and bash those of the competition. HUman nature.

They're all good imo.

gbran
February 28, 2007, 02:25 AM
I bought my 1st Glock because it was simple, just point and click. Have been carrying Glocks over 10 years. Also carry a Kahr PM9.

sm
February 28, 2007, 02:49 AM
-Safety is between the ears.
-Training reinforces the safety between the ears.
-Never trust any mechanical safety device.

One example, and it was legal and acceptable to do so. WE on purpose removed mechanical safeties from competition shotguns. NEVER ever had a problem over thousands of thousands of rounds fired.
Guns varied from O/U to 870, 1300, 1100s ...etc.
Kept two trigger set ups, one with safety, one without.

TheWanderer
February 28, 2007, 03:07 AM
If I'm holstering or removing my pistol from my holster, am I not gripping the handle and deactivating the grip-safety in the proccess???... Would I not have the same end result in way of an AD occur???... I only see the grip-safety being a viable safety when the pistol is NOT in-hand... Please forgive my ignorance and apparent naiviety...


I was thinking this exact thing. I used to own an XD along with some 1911s and yes, everytime I either put them in a holster or withdrew them, I had to depress the grip safety in order to handle them.

I never touch the trigger on my Glock, and I holster it before putting the holster onto my belt and pants. While carrying, I never take it out of the holster. As I'd only need to take it out to defend myself, I see no issue with an AD while re-holstering. And yes, I prefer a weapon where I can just draw and fire if I ever need to, and not have to fiddle with a safety. I've trained enough however to handle both types, and I will continue to train.

I don't think the Glock trigger is too light either. I've never had an issue with any Glock I've ever fired. One of the greatest things I like about Glocks is once you learn how to handle and fire one model, you can handle and fire any of the other models. I've never owned or fired any other brand of handgun where there was not a noticeable difference between two of the same type models, much less other calibers. All the various Glock calibers I've owned or fired operated the same.

GRIZ22
February 28, 2007, 08:02 AM
Careless has nothing to do with training. I have many shooting buddies that are cops, and I've seen them do some stupid/dangerous things

I was the Senior Firearms Instructor for a Federal agency for the last 10 years before I retired with a total of 30 years as a LE firerams instructor and I agree with this quote.

You hear a lot about LEOs and unintentional discharges because they're pretty public. Most civilian UIDs are unreported unless someone gets hurt.

The agency I worked for changed tp Glocks with a 8 lb trigger in 1998 with now close to 200 agents in the office. Since then there has zero UIDs with Glocks. When we carried revolvers there were 2 or 3 a year.

There are two reasons Glocks have gotten this bad rap regarding the trigger safety from my viewpoint:

1. Switching to the 3.5 lb trigger. If you can't shoot, a lighter trigger is not much of a help. You can shoot a 8 lb trigger as well as a 3.5 if you know how to shoot. 3.5 is okay on a competition only gun but IMO no place on a carry gun.

2. The use of Mexican Carry (stuffing it in you waistband without a holster). Not a really smart way to carry a gun as you have zero weapon retention from a snatch or from activity. Use a holster.

Mixing the two is a sure recipe for disaster.

TheWanderer
February 28, 2007, 08:48 PM
GRIZ22, I think you've hit it right on the head!

That's why whenever a newbie asks me about getting into shooting, I emphasize that they need to take the NRA's beginners course first.

fogdor
March 1, 2007, 02:21 AM
Is "Glock Perfection" for you? Ask yourself if you agree with the following statements.

"The best safety is between your ears"

Glockers say this because it's true. The two main things that keep you from hurting yourself and others with a firearm are muzzle discipline and trigger discipline.

However, the way you hear Glockers tell it, you might suspect that nobody BUT Glockers practices muzzle discipline and trigger discipline. I'll leave it up to you whether that statement has any veracity or not.

It is undeniable, practicing both muzzle discipline and trigger discipline can make you safe, but practicing muzzle discipline and trigger discipline with a firearm that has a manual safety will possibly make you safer.

"A manual safety adds complexity you do NOT need during a life or death situation"

Glockers say this because it is (again) very true. Simplicity is a virtue.

However, some guy I really respect once said "Make things as simple as possible, but no simpler". There are two types of complexity a manual safety adds to a firearm. Mechanical complexity and cognitive (human) complexity.

About mechanical complexity:

Single action semiautomatic handguns have been around for about a century. Very few of them have been offered without a manual safety, and none come to mind that were a commercial or military success. At least a couple early designs with manual safeties have stood the test of time, and I do not remember anyone ever stating their manual safeties made them any less reliable or that removing the manual safety would make them a better operational weapon.

However, lots of double action/single action or double-action-only semiautos do not come with manual safeties, and for the most part, no one demands them. Additionally, double action revolvers do not come with safeties.

This brings us to an important question: is the glock a single action or double action pistol? In my opinion, the term "Safe action" is marketing fluff. I would argue that with its 1/2 inch of trigger stroke, the stock trigger pull of 5.5 pounds walks a very fine line between the two. Apparently many Glockers agree with me, as the "New York" trigger (8-ish pounds?) is a fairly popular modification made to new glocks.

Another important question: would adding a manual safety to a glock compromise its reliability? For part of the answer, look to the Glock company itself, as they have produced a glock model with a manual safety. On the other hand, there is no reasonable way to procure one of these models. The only way to add a manual safety to a glock is to buy and install a non-factory modification. In my opinion this does raise legitimate concerns. Only time and experience will tell if these devices harm the vaunted glock reliability.

About cognitive complexity:

Forgetting to release the safety is a real issue. While not a hunter myself, it seems more than a few of the hunters I know have a story or two to tell about the one that got away, especially fast prey such as birds in flight, due to a forgotten safety. However, most of these errors occurred very early in their hunting days and did not repeat after a single or few embarrassing incidents. Military experience also shows us that people can be trusted to make their weapons live during the stress of combat. The key seems to be training, hopefully training that is as realistic and stressful as possible. In summary, I do NOT think a manual safety adds any level of risk to a dedicated owner of a semiautomatic pistol.

So, is "Glock Perfection" for you? Hopefully, you will know by now. The glock is what it is, making it your "own" does entail a certain amount of risk. I would like to see them offer a manual safety on some of their models, but I don't think they ever will for a couple of reasons. First is the "Glock Perfection" marketing myth itself - does adding a manual safety make a perfect firearm "pefecter"? Secondly, it is not difficult to imagine a legal scenario where those injured by glock firearms would consider the addition of a manual safety an admission of guilt on the part of the Glock company. For myself, I have decided to seek out a carry weapon with a manual safety which operates "1911-style" like my house gun. I will probably steer towards an HK USP Compact in variant 1, but that doesn't mean the glock doesn't have a lot going for it; Light weight, low bore axis, very reasonable pricing, a huge aftermarket, etc. Perhaps one of these days I will pick up a lightly used glock 19, add a Cominolli safety, and report back here after a few thousand rounds.

Hypnogator
March 1, 2007, 02:07 PM
Would you carry a 1911 cocked, safety off, with the grip safety taped down?

That's what you've got with a Glock. The only thing the trigger "safety" does is prevent the weapon from firing if the edge of the wide trigger snags on the holster when re-holstering.

If you enjoyed reading about "Glock "safety" vs. other striker-fired pistols..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!