GLOCK safety


PDA






Chris95
August 27, 2010, 07:54 PM
Where is the safety on a GLOCK pistol. I was thinking that its on the trigger.
thanks

If you enjoyed reading about "GLOCK safety" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
smhbbag1
August 27, 2010, 08:02 PM
No, the safety is off the trigger until until it's ready to shoot :)

omegaflame
August 27, 2010, 08:03 PM
That weird thing on the trigger is the "Safety" according to Glock.

Essentially there is none.

W.E.G.
August 27, 2010, 08:04 PM
http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd7/rkba2da/humor/mysafety.jpg

Chris95
August 27, 2010, 08:22 PM
That's scary a touching the trigger to operate the safety.

average_shooter
August 27, 2010, 08:23 PM
There are multiple, redundant drop safeties within the Glock design. Operating the trigger (which you only touch when you are ready to shoot, right ?) disengages the safeties and allows the weapon to be fired.

There is no "safety" in the traditional sense of a button or switch that needs to be manipulated before being able to fire.

Full Metal Jacket
August 27, 2010, 08:30 PM
there's no active safeties you can engage/disengage yourself. there's drop safety (plunger), and the safe action trigger design (essentially useless).



That's scary a touching the trigger to operate the safety.

lol, that was my first reaction before buying one. you get used to it. (i'm a 1911 guy, so i'm used to having a thumb safety). the glock safe action trigger isn't a safety in sense you're thinking about it. it simply keeps off center "tugs" from pulling the trigger.

just keep your finger off the trigger, and you'll be fine :)

gofastman
August 27, 2010, 08:36 PM
whats a safety? guns are dangerous.

rscalzo
August 27, 2010, 08:38 PM
http://www.midwayusa.com/viewproduct/?productnumber=247176

There is an aftermarket manual safety available. Glock at one time offered a manual safety from the factory on a special order. No idea if they still do.

Hangingrock
August 27, 2010, 08:41 PM
For a complete explanation 1-2-3 http://www.glock.com/english/pistols_adv01.htm

Nushif
August 27, 2010, 09:15 PM
This may be a bit off-topic, but why do people capitalize all of Glock. As opposed to like ... Colt or something?

TheProf
August 27, 2010, 10:03 PM
There are three passive safeties on a GLOCK. See their website for more details. But the short version is.... it won't fire unless you pull the trigger. Think of it as as 15-shot revolver.

If you really want an additional external safety...like in a 1911... keep your GLOCK holstered whenever possible. Avoid unnecessary handling of an unholstered gun. Think of the holster as an "extra safety".

burley
August 27, 2010, 10:11 PM
GLOCK, that's how they spell it. All caps. In factory ads, on the side of the gun, etc.

I've heard it said that the trigger safety is also a drop safety. Keeps the trigger forward in the event of a drop that could move the trigger and fire the gun. I don't know, seems if there's enough inertia to move the trigger, there would also be enough to move the trigger safety.

PT1911
August 27, 2010, 10:16 PM
From what I have seen/heard, the trigger safety is used on the Glock (and other guns) because it must be depressed in order for the trigger to be pulled and the gun to consequently be fired... IOW, it prevents little things like say, loose thread in a purse, from catching on the trigger and pulling it as the "safety" would direct it upwards on the trigger and thus it could not cause an AD.

Glocks are "safe action" meaning that they are not fully cocked even when a round is chambered... Essentially, they are PARTLY double action as the trigger pull actually finishes the cocking process and and fires the gun...

9mmepiphany
August 27, 2010, 10:42 PM
While it is popular to attribute different reasons for the placement of the lever blocking movement of the trigger on the Glock, if you go back to the G17's origins, you'll find that it was incorporated into the pistol's design to meet a requirement, for a safety, in the Austrian military contract for which the G17 was birthed...it is much like the non-drop free magazines and the slide stop not being designed to release the slide

REAPER4206969
August 27, 2010, 10:54 PM
The trigger safety is to prevent inadvertent firing if dropped from extreme heights onto its rear. That is why it is used on most modern pistols and a few rifles (Savage and Marlin) as well.

Strahley
August 27, 2010, 11:35 PM
As with any gun, YOU are the safety

HOOfan_1
August 27, 2010, 11:41 PM
The trigger safety is to prevent inadvertent firing if dropped from extreme heights onto its rear. That is why it is used on most modern pistols and a few rifles (Savage and Marlin) as well.

Mossberg as well

John Wayne
August 27, 2010, 11:46 PM
This may be a bit off-topic, but why do people capitalize all of Glock. As opposed to like ... Colt or something?

Because it's Austrian and is supposed to be spoken in a loud, angry tone.

Strahley
August 27, 2010, 11:54 PM
Yeah, you have to imagine Ahhhnold saying it really loud

killchain
August 27, 2010, 11:59 PM
Oh, you're talking about the little bit of plastic in the middle of GLocK triggers.

You depress that down with your finger and it allows the pistol to fire.

Because we all know that those accidental twigs, poles and non-trained people who jam their fingers in the trigger well immediately all drag on the very side of the trigger, missing the center and this, therefore, is safer for everyone involved.

Do I think that your finger is your main safety? Yes.

Do I think manual safeties are good? Yes.

metalman8600
August 28, 2010, 02:33 AM
Glocks are "safe action" meaning that they are not fully cocked even when a round is chambered

Even a partially cocked striker can set off a primer.

REAPER4206969
August 28, 2010, 02:53 AM
Even a partially cocked striker can set off a primer.
The Glock firing pin is blocked by a firing pin safety and a solid drop safety. Even without these features the Glock does not have sufficient energy at 34% cock to detonate a standard primer.

12131
August 28, 2010, 06:37 AM
It's only scary if you don't understand its operation.

Same kind of thing with non-gun folks. They almost invariably say, "guns are scary", at the mere mention of the word gun.

TheProf
August 28, 2010, 06:40 AM
"GLOCK" is all capitalized to show respect for such a reliable pistol. Most people who do this do it unconsciously. It just happens. It's like when you are in the shooting range and you realize that you stand next to a skilled shooter. You know, you give that knowing and respecting nod.

Chris95
August 28, 2010, 03:30 PM
Thanks guys for all the info. Really enlightning stuff, I couldn't care less whether it has a safety or not just dont chamber a round until ready to fire.

rcmodel
August 28, 2010, 03:39 PM
just dont chamber a round until ready to fire. Then what good would it be if you feel you can't carry it loaded?

rc

ABTOMAT
August 28, 2010, 04:19 PM
I don't hate on Glocks, I just find them unappealing to use. Just talking about the safeties I like a gun you can use in either full SA or DA, and decock on a live chamber. Like a Sig or a Smith.

Red Cent
August 28, 2010, 04:45 PM
The first safety is the articulated trigger. The second safety is a grooved piston held down with a spring. After the first safety is passed the trigger and the trigger bar moves to the rear. On its way a small ramp raises the piston to a position that allows the firing pin/striker a clear shot at the primer. At the same time another small horizontal tab is riding in a very narrow slot. At the same time the sear/cruciform (the horizontal tab is out to the left as part of the cruciform) begins compressing the firing pin/striker spring. At the time of firing pin/stiker release, the horizontal tab slot opens under it and the sear drops and releases the firing pin/striker.

http://www.sniperworld.com/content.aspx?ckey=Sniper_World_Glock_Index

I would not carry a Glock without it being in a holster. The Glock has a lot of pretravel before it starts to compress the striker spring. After encountering the spring, another small movement will fire the Glock. I have set up my G34 with almost Zero resistance on the pertravel and just over two pounds final trigger. Strictly for competition. Normal on the G34 is about 4-5#s. NY triggeris 8#s.

One interesting thing about the Glock. It is the only pistol I know that has a spring assisting in the trigger pull.

The Lone Haranguer
August 28, 2010, 04:52 PM
It is as safe as you are. Care must be taken, however, to be sure objects other than your finger cannot get inside the trigger guard and press the trigger. While the safety mechanisms are probably as foolproof as it is possible to make a mechanical device, sooner or later along will come a bigger fool. ;)

Chris95
August 28, 2010, 08:03 PM
rcmodel I mean for defense have the magizine loaded with an empty chamber.

THE MACHINIST
August 28, 2010, 08:41 PM
its your brain.......think, decide ,point, click-------------

Strahley
August 28, 2010, 09:54 PM
A gun without a round in the chamber is a paperweight. Chamber a round, top the mag off, put the mag back in, and put it in your safe or holster. Keep your finger away from the trigger and it will NOT to off

Can you react fast enough to put your seatbelt on seconds before a crash? Probably not. Can you react fast enough and remember to rack the slide when an angry thug is sprinting at you with a knife? Probably not

Sky
August 28, 2010, 10:50 PM
http://www.siderlock.com/

http://www.cominolli.com/ourproducts.html

http://www.clipdraw.com/store/index....on=show_detail

http://www.brownells.com/.aspx/sid=4...00000841_d_318

These might help. I have a 23c great gun shoots well but I won't carry it with a round chambered...thusly I don't carry it.

GLOOB
August 28, 2010, 11:02 PM
I can't remember how many times I've pulled a trigger expecting a bang, and instead realizing "oops, the safety is on."

I can remember how many times I wanted a gun to NOT fire, so without checking to make sure it's unloaded, I pointed it at my self or others and pulled the trigger, relying on the manual safety to deliver my expected result. Zero.

If it can fit in a holster, doesn't have a hair trigger, and is completely drop safe, it doesn't need a safety, IMO.

All the GLOCK safeties are there so that the gun will not go off unless the trigger is pulled. There are a surprising number of guns on the market that are not truly safe to carry chambered, even if the manual safety is on.

As an example, my HP22A has TWO manual safeties. See, they couldn't make the gun drop-safe, even with the trigger block safety, so they had to add on a separate manual lever to block the firing pin. Many older (yet currently produced and/or sold) designs are in the same boat as the HP22, but without a FP safety, at all. They just said "screw it, that's close enough."

If you want an additional manual safety on your GLOCK, go ahead. You can have one installed. But the other GLOCK safeties are still doing their intended job.

Zerodefect
August 28, 2010, 11:16 PM
Glocks have no safety. All those things Glock calls a "safety" is just marketing, feature that enable the gun to operate safety are what they are, calling them "safeties" as we know them to be like on a 1911 or M9, is a bit silly.

The thing on the trigger is to prevent trigger movement if the Glock is dropped and lands tail first. If you throw a Glock at the gronud super hard and it lands tail first the triggers momentum can cause it to move. That safety lever thing prevents that.

The fireing pin block is exactly that, you can't call that a safety. It is safer, but thats not a safety.

Glocks lack of safeties, but completly safe operation is why it's one of my favorite pistols. No fuss on the draw. Just draw and shoot, no safety to forget about. Just make sure it's in a proper holster, and take your time reholstering.

Full Metal Jacket
August 28, 2010, 11:39 PM
:eek:

Onward Allusion
August 28, 2010, 11:50 PM
Same as a revolver, except a revolver doesn't have the trigger "safety". Think NOT touching the trigger as your safety. ;)

Chris95 (http://www.thehighroad.org/member.php?u=128080)
That's scary a touching the trigger to operate the safety.

duns
August 29, 2010, 01:28 AM
I think the OP must have had his tongue in cheek. He knows full well the Glock has no safety -- like someone said, think of it as a 15-shot revolver.

BTW companies may use All Caps to make their products look more important. Some may use lower case and italics and a blue font to make themselves look trendy. It is well accepted in technical writing that one does not have to reproduce these affectations.

holsm50
August 29, 2010, 01:32 AM
The best that can be said about Glock pistols is that they are reliable and relatively inexpensive and that they have a good “drop safety.” Beyond that, they are not a safe pistols because they lack an effective means of preventing a discharge in the event that the user inadvertently squeezes the trigger. This is a risk that has been appreciated by virtually every reputable designer/manufacturer of semi-automatic pistols for the past 100 years ------- Mauser, Browning, Colt, Luger , Walther, Smith & Wesson, to name a few. It is for this reason that manual safeties have been the state of the art and gold standard for safe pistol design since the inception of semi-automatic pistols.

I appreciate that Glock owners are very protective of the design of their beloved pistol, which is why whenever there is an accidental discharge of a Glock they are often heard to say things like “the best safety is between your ears” or “keep your finger off the trigger stupid and everything would have been fine.” In my judgment, this is nothing more than a macho rhetoric and a lame excuse for a fundamental design flaw in the Glock pistol, namely the absence of a conventional manual safety.

I have been shooting for over 40 years and I agree that there is no substitute for safe gun handling practices when it comes to preventing firearm injuries. Safety must be the primary responsibility of every gun owner. Having said that, safety should also the primary responsibility of the designer/manufacturer of the firearm. There is a dual or shared responsibility when it comes to safety and the manufacturer has an obligation to design a firearm in such a manner as to reduce the risk of injury in the event that the user has a brain fade. That is the reason why best and brightest semi-automatic pistol designers since the late 1800’s have incorporated manual safeties in their pistols. That is also the reason why the U.S. military demands manual safeties on virtually all of its firearms, both long arms and pistols. The simple truth is that save lives. I am not suggesting that manual safeties will prevent all accidental discharges, but they will certainly prevent some of them. That is why they are a necessary component on a semi-automatic pistol.

Fast forward to 1980. Along comes Gaston Glock with no experience in the design of any firearm and no combat experience (except for a brief stint as a youth in the German army) and in his infinite wisdom decides to eliminate the manual safety from the design of his pistol. The result of this so-called “genius” is that there have been hundreds of accidental, negligent, inadvertent or unintentional (call it whatever you like) discharges of Glock pistols, resulting in many unnecessary injuries and deaths ------ so many that they even coined the phrase “Glock leg.” And keep in mind that often these accidental discharges were caused by highly-trained LEO’s who handle firearms for a living. There have been reports of cops unintentionally shooting themselves with their Glock, accidentally shooting their partners with their Glock, and accidentally shooting suspects when they inadvertently touched the trigger on their Glock. I would venture to guess that just as many good guys (from friendly fire) as bad guys have been injured by Glocks.

If Gaston Glock is a genius at anything, it is surely marketing. He came to the United States at a time when police departments were transitioning from revolvers to semi-automatics. His plastic gun was cheaper to manufacture than the competition, thus giving him a significant price advantage. He further offered buy back programs wherein he would purchase and resell the old revolvers. He further hired ex-cops to as sales reps who then went back their former departments and used their connections for a competitive edge. Then he turned a negative into a positive by convincing police departments that the absence of a manual safety was actually a good thing because the departments could save money by not having to provide additional training to officers transitioning from revolvers because, like a revolver, you simply had to draw the gun and fire. Sounds great, except for the fact that there is a world of difference between the long , hard 10-12 trigger pull of a revolver and the 5-6 pound pull of a Glock. As a consequence of the absence of a conventional manual safety, the number of accidental discharges soared. The Washington D.C. police department had somewhere in excess of 60 accidental discharges as soon as they switched to Glocks. The NYPD had problems as well and insisted on a modification commonly referred to as the New York trigger which had a much heavier trigger pull, perhaps somewhere around 10-12 lbs.

By the way, I am not criticizing Glock’s marketing strategy. He certainly is a genius in this regard and you have to admire him for that. My criticism is that he has no qualms about misleading the public. In this regard, he seems to have adopted the philosophy that if you say something enough times, people will begin to believe it. The constant reference to the Glocks having a “safe action” with 3 so-called independent safeties is misleading in that they are interdependent and are all deactivated by simply pulling the trigger. The truth is that the “safe action” amounts to nothing more than a good drop safety, and is useless in preventing discharges caused by inadvertent contact with the trigger. The little thing on the trigger that Glock calls a trigger safety is a gimmick . Accidentally touch the trigger on a pistol with a manual safety, nothing happens because it is safe. Accidentally touch the trigger on a Glock and it is likely to go boom.

One last point and I will get off my soapbox. Guns are not meant to be dropped. However, we all know that people make mistakes and it happens. And when it does happen , there is a risk that the gun will discharge and someone may be seriously injured. Gaston Glock recognized this risk and sought to prevent injuries by designing a pretty good drop safety. Great idea.

Likewise, the user is not supposed to place his finger on the trigger unless he is ready to fire the pistol. However, we all know that people make mistakes and this also happens, and when it does there is a risk that the pistol will discharge and someone will be seriously inured. If Gaston is so concerned about safety, then why has he done nothing to reduce the risk of accidental discharge resulting from inadvertent contact with the trigger? Why has he refused to incorporate manual safeties in the pistols he sells in the United States? It is not because he doesn’t know how to do it or that he is philosophically opposed to the idea. Indeed, he has designed several variations of conventional manual safeties for Glock pistols and sold them in at least 17 countries around the world, but not in the United States. Why won’t he even offer it as an option here? Go figure.

Sorry for writing a book here, but I just had to say what I think.

Full Metal Jacket
August 29, 2010, 01:43 AM
that's ok, i didn't read your book.

duns
August 29, 2010, 01:46 AM
To holsm50: Wow! I agree. Welcome to the forum.

NMPOPS
August 29, 2010, 02:46 AM
As a former police firearms instructor, I saw zero ADs with the Glock. However, with our former DA/SA pistol we had several as officers would forget to decock before they holstered. We also had several ADs with personal 1911s. The most important safety is still between the ears.

GLOOB
August 29, 2010, 05:08 AM
Beyond that, they are not a safe pistols because they lack an effective means of preventing a discharge in the event that the user inadvertently squeezes the trigger.
No, that's wrong. First, there's this thing called safe gun handling. Second, there's this other thing called a holster. See, unlike with a rifle, you don't attach a strap onto a pistol then sling it over your shoulder all willy-nilly. OTOH, if you want to carry a handgun in your waistband or drop one into your purse, then by all means buy something more suited to your preferences.

I appreciate that Glock owners are very protective of the design of their beloved pistol, which is why whenever there is an accidental discharge of a Glock they are often heard to say things like “the best safety is between your ears” or “keep your finger off the trigger stupid and everything would have been fine.”
Well, first of all, I don't know of a single incident where a GLOCK has AD'd. If you know of one, please enlighten us. Second, please show us where anyone else has used one of those horrible cliches in this thread, then tell us why you'd want to drag a discussion down to that level of idiocy to begin with. Finally, hey you said it. And it's true. If you can't remember that pulling the trigger makes the gun fire, then what makes you think you can remember what the safety does? Also, please tell us in what circumstance one would put a gun on safe before placing their finger on the trigger? In order for a manual safety to make a save, the user has to forget it's on, then accidentally pull the trigger. What kind of success rate do you think that really has? Face it, your stats are all made up. There are plenty of AD's happening, and most of them occur with guns that HAVE a manual safety.

This isn't the GLOCK fanboy thing you want to make it into. It's a just a philosophy. One that's shared by SIG and revolver users, too, btw. It's the philosophy that to make a gun safe, it should be unloaded. And that manual safeties are there to prevent foreign objects from triggering a gun, not to protect from someone "inadvertently squeezing the trigger."

Think of the safety on a switchblade. Is it there in case you accidentally put your thumb on the button and press? No. It's there so it doesn't get pushed by the loose change in your pocket. For a pistol, a holster takes care of foreign objects pretty darn well. For the other problem of people who can't remember what pulling the trigger does, a manual safety is highly unlikely to help in that regard, anyway. In other words, if they were gonna have an ND with a GLOCK, they would probably have had an ND with a Beretta, too.

GLOOB
August 29, 2010, 05:35 AM
edited.

TimboKhan
August 29, 2010, 05:42 AM
Beyond that, they are not a safe pistols because they lack an effective means of preventing a discharge in the event that the user inadvertently squeezes the trigger.

With respect, by that logic, virtually every revolver ever made is also unsafe.

Still, I see where you are coming from, and I even thought similarly for many years. That was then and this is now, so I bet you can guess what is sitting literally a foot from my hand as I type this, though? I should add that I have owned this Glock for like 3 weeks now and got it from my close buddy who has carried it every day since 2001 with no issues. It also happens to be my very first Glock, so it's not a Glock thing with me, though I am a pretty hardcore Ruger fan.

Fact is, none of what you said is technically incorrect, but I disagree with you because you are just focusing on the lack of a safety without considering the other factors involved in an inadvertent trigger pull. Namely, minus some sort of aftermarket tomfoolery, the trigger pull is heavy enough in and of itself to keep inadvertent discharges from happening. Certainly it could happen, but at a certain point, it really does become a matter of safe gun handling. I can't think of a single reason why you would ever need to jam a pistol roughly and without care back into it's holster (which I mention because that would seem to be the most logical place for this to happen), nor is there ever any excuse for somehow not knowing your finger is on the trigger (true of any gun, ever).

I don't bring this up very often because I don't want to make it sound like I am trying to sound tough or like an expert, but it has some bearing on this topic so I will bring it up now: I have been shot. It really sucks pretty badly and as a result I am pretty darn keen on gun safety, and I after much experimentation and learning on my part, I feel that Glocks are just as safe, if not safer, than any other gun out there. At the very least, I consider them as safe as any revolver. While the possibility exists that they could have an inadvertent discharge, I don't believe (and I bet the numbers would bear this out) that they are any more susceptible to this than any other handgun.

BamAlmighty
August 29, 2010, 08:12 AM
In the last 3 years, the sheriff's office here has had 2 ADs with glocks. 1 deputy who has been in the business for over 20 years shot himself in the hand while working in the jail and securing his weapon and another had his go off in the locker room while holstering. It happens to the best of them.

rromeo
August 29, 2010, 10:43 AM
And keep in mind that often these accidental discharges were caused by highly-trained LEO’s who handle firearms for a living. There have been reports of cops unintentionally shooting themselves with their Glock, accidentally shooting their partners with their Glock, and accidentally shooting suspects when they inadvertently touched the trigger on their Glock. I would venture to guess that just as many good guys (from friendly fire) as bad guys have been injured by Glocks.
From my experience, I do not find that LEOs on whole are better at safe handling of firearms than the general shooting enthusiast public. A lot of my friends say that LEOs at the range are the worst at firearms safety, but I just hold the view that we're holding them to a higher standard, therefore it's more noticeable when they commit numerous safety violations.

Sky
August 29, 2010, 10:58 AM
Holsm 50 well said and written with a big "AMEN" !

You tube has an instructor with a class of kids shooting himself. Not worth my time to look it up.

Glock probably won't market one of their safeties in the U.S. due to admission of guilt for all the lawsuits that might be filed; just speculation?

My 23C is in a holster that has no straps that can get hung in the trigger guard; never is there a round in the chamber until I am ready to fire so it is relegated to car or bedroom duty. I do not like getting shot nor do I want to pop someone or thing unless intended.

It is a personal thing. I am not really worried about me inadvertently pulling the trigger as I am about familiarity with the gun and being so fast/excited/dumb something like a strap or snap does the trigger pull thing. Those who love GLocks have their reasons and those who don't have theirs. Does not make either camp wrong just different philosophies.

After market plugs and triggers with additional manual safeties are available as previously posted so maybe it is not all that personal.

jem375
August 29, 2010, 11:20 AM
Holsm50 stated it very well... I have been shooting firearms since 1945 and just about every firearm I own has some kind of a safety version that you can depend on except the Glock. I carried a G26 for about a year before trading it off for a CZ PO1, I was careful with it with no problem but could see where there would be a problem with someone new with firearms. I just bought a G17 for a range handgun along with others, but I would not want anyone carrying a Glock to walk behind me in the woods.

Onward Allusion
August 29, 2010, 11:31 AM
I'm just wondering if any of the folks who think Glocks are unsafe ever shot a revolver.

These types of threads have flavors of antis trolling for ammo (pun intended) for their......

"guns are unsafe slogan" (especially the millions of Glocks out there). Look - even the gun owners and enthusiasts agree.

Don't buy into the scam. The only "safety" in the one between your ears. These threads are usually started by accounts with low thread count, btw.

jem375
August 29, 2010, 11:42 AM
I'm just wondering if any of the folks who think Glocks are unsafe ever shot a revolver.

These types of threads have flavors of antis trolling for ammo (pun intended) for their......

"guns are unsafe slogan" (especially the millions of Glocks out there). Look - even the gun owners and enthusiasts agree.

Don't buy into the scam. The only "safety" in the one between your ears. These threads are usually started by accounts with low thread count, btw.
I have shot quite a few revolvers, single action you have to cock the hammer to fire, and double actions mostly have a trigger that are pretty heavy enough not to have a AD or ND........

Sky
August 29, 2010, 12:02 PM
All revolvers I ever used had the trigger pulled, cylinder revolved and hammer went back for striking the firing pin. If one of these three conditions were not met gun could not be fired. Hammer pulled back cylinder rotated then trigger was pulled; still three. A lot of monkey motion involved. Tis true with a hammer if the gun is dropped and the hammer strikes a firm surface it might go off.

Like has been said before the best safety is between the ears.

Even in the great patriotic war shoulder holster rig we left the cylinder empty under the firing pin in our revolvers. Probably a bunch of pansies.

Again not any reason to argue; what works for someone and they are comfortable more power to them. Lets' just be glad we have the right/privilege to carry and discuss such things.

Flfiremedic
August 29, 2010, 12:08 PM
"Ahhhh Hell Lady if the damned old thing wasn't dangerous I wouldn't be carrying it"...seriously, keep your finger off the Trigger till you want it to go bang...same as a revolver...

gofastman
August 29, 2010, 01:24 PM
This isn't the GLOCK fanboy thing you want to make it into. It's a just a philosophy. One that's shared by SIG and revolver users, too, btw. It's the philosophy that to make a gun safe, it should be unloaded. And that manual safeties are there to prevent foreign objects from triggering a gun, not to protect from someone "inadvertently squeezing the trigger."

So well said, bravo sir!

KodiakBeer
August 29, 2010, 01:43 PM
Is Gun! Is not safe.

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:PV4UWwx1isSutM:http://img293.imageshack.us/img293/2351/welcomepg9.jpg&t=1

Strahley
August 29, 2010, 02:17 PM
If you NEED a manual safety, that only tells me that you don't know how to keep your finger off the trigger until you're ready to shoot it

The safety purists would have a heart attack if they ever saw my collection. Not a single one of my guns sits with a safety on, if it even has one. Somehow, none of them have ever managed to "go off" without me intending them to :eek:

Chris95
August 29, 2010, 06:37 PM
Strahley, any and every gun should be treated as it will and can dicharge rifle, shotgun, revolver, automatic pistol etc.
Onward Allusion, this is not an anti-GLOCK scam I was just curious as to where the or if it has a manual safety.
No I dont use manual safetys on my firearms because I realize it WILL fail, so with all due respect both of you can go home.

JohnBiltz
August 29, 2010, 06:59 PM
I'm a Glock guy. Its all I've owned for near 20 years. My carry is a Glock 26. Saying that, I'd welcome an XD type safety on it. I'm going to keep on carrying Glocks without it but I think it would be a good idea.

killchain
August 29, 2010, 07:03 PM
"GLOCK" is all capitalized to show respect for such a reliable pistol. Most people who do this do it unconsciously. It just happens. It's like when you are in the shooting range and you realize that you stand next to a skilled shooter. You know, you give that knowing and respecting nod.

Oh. Okay then, I think we should compare your GLOCK to my BERETTA, or maybe to the couple of pistols I own made by FABRIQUE NATIONALE.

GLOOB
August 29, 2010, 08:07 PM
Not a single one of my guns sits with a safety on, if it even has one
Amen. I try to make a habit out of sweeping off the safety, anyway, just in case. Like I said earlier, I can't count how many times I have followed all gun safety rules, aimed, placed finger on trigger, and pulled, only to find out the manual safety was on. Side note: notice that manual safeties aren't even mentioned in the 4 gun safety rules? If people are having ND's, they need to go back to those four rules before worrying about any other extraneous stuff, like manual safeties.

Now I do set the manual safety on my P64, only because that's the only thing blocking the firing pin despite it having a 30 lb trigger. Yes, the seeming redundancy is painful, but it's the only way I will keep it chambered. And it still beats leaving the chamber empty, then having to visually check or sweep to make sure the safety is still off after racking it. Also, if I had a 1911, I think I'd use the manual safety.

Re: highly trained LEO having ND's when switched to GLOCK:
This is because some LEO's are highly trained and practiced in unsafe gunhandling, and they've gotten away with it due to heavier triggers. The solution is two fold. Give them heavier triggers, and RETRAIN THEM, anyway. Because understanding and adhering to the 4 basic gun safety rules is the only way to prevent ND's. Triggers heavier than 5 lbs only mask some degree of incompetency. So for the average police force, by all means a heavy trigger is a wise choice (because in any large group of people, there will be some incompetency), but trainees should still be reamed for putting their finger on the trigger when it doesn't need to be there, even if the trigger is 20 lbs, otherwise the "safety feature" of a heavy trigger is only going to encourage unsafe practices. On that note, I read somewhere that the FBI used to actually train agents to prestage the trigger when taking aim... What could go wrong there, eh?

omegaflame
August 29, 2010, 08:34 PM
I just make it a habit to flip the safely off as I bring the gun up to fire (1911 owner).

GLOOB
August 29, 2010, 09:16 PM
Yeah, that's probably the only way to do it. Even if the safety is already off, you have to treat it as on when you want the gun to fire. And even if the safety is on, you have to treat the gun like it's off at all other times, anway. So I'd rather it just not be around, so I can concentrate on stuff that actually has a purpose.

357reloading
August 29, 2010, 09:21 PM
forget the name of the Texas Ranger, when asked if carrying a 45 auto cocked and locked was dangerous? His reply was, "hell if its not dangerous I dont wnat the gun"

GLOOB
August 29, 2010, 09:26 PM
I wanna say Bill Jordan?

REAPER4206969
August 29, 2010, 09:32 PM
forget the name of the Texas Ranger, when asked if carrying a 45 auto cocked and locked was dangerous? His reply was, "hell if its not dangerous I dont wnat the gun" ...

oneounceload
August 29, 2010, 09:37 PM
If you cannot figure out how to safely handle/carry a Glock, then get something else - it isn't rocket science, my son at age 8 was able to handle it easily.......what's the big deal?

Red Cent
August 29, 2010, 09:50 PM
I do not carry a Glock. My 1911s have done well lo these 35 years. The few times I carry the M39 or the M59, I put the safety on holstering and then take the safeties off. The 1911s are carried C1. Revolvers are revolvers. I particularly would not choose to carry a Glock IWB.
Having said that I recently acquired a G34 and it is extensively tuned. I picked a Blade-Tech Stingray kydex holster for IDPA. I do practice the draw and dryfire quite bit. I would carry a Glock with a 5# trigger OWB. Never loose focus.

Jordan was famous for his revolver. Didn't he convince S&W to do the M19? Not sayin' it wasn't him.

jem375
August 29, 2010, 11:03 PM
All revolvers I ever used had the trigger pulled, cylinder revolved and hammer went back for striking the firing pin. If one of these three conditions were not met gun could not be fired. Hammer pulled back cylinder rotated then trigger was pulled; still three. A lot of monkey motion involved. Tis true with a hammer if the gun is dropped and the hammer strikes a firm surface it might go off.

Like has been said before the best safety is between the ears.

Even in the great patriotic war shoulder holster rig we left the cylinder empty under the firing pin in our revolvers. Probably a bunch of pansies.

Again not any reason to argue; what works for someone and they are comfortable more power to them. Lets' just be glad we have the right/privilege to carry and discuss such things.
not true with all revolvers, Rugers have a transfer bar that rests between the hammer and the case and only goes away when cocked and will not fire if dropped .... So, you can load all 6 instead of 5, it's been that way for a long time..... I also carried 6 in the chamber with my S&W's...681,686, and 66's....

Bulldawg55
August 30, 2010, 12:23 AM
My holstered GLOCK's have no external safety but my beltclip/pocket G33 does!
http://i800.photobucket.com/albums/yy284/npjr55/IMG_0494.jpg
http://i800.photobucket.com/albums/yy284/npjr55/IMG_0450-1.jpg
http://i800.photobucket.com/albums/yy284/npjr55/IMG_0448-Copy.jpg

holsm50
August 31, 2010, 01:16 AM
As I stated in my earlier post, I am a firm believer in manual safeties on semi-automatic pistols because they provide an additional layer of protection against AD/NG discharges. Obviously, there are different opinions on this subject.

One particular member wondered whether the folks who feel that Glocks are unsafe had ever fired a revolver. I own a Glock 17 and many revolvers. In my opinion, there is a huge difference between the trigger pull of most revolvers and a standard Glock. Most revolvers have a trigger pull of 10-12 lbs. in double-action mode. Because it takes a long, hard and consistent pull, it is very difficult to inadvertently discharge a revolver. I personally have never heard of this happening (in double-action mode), although I am sure that someone out there has. Additionally, you can also see the hammer moving rearward and the cylinder rotating before the weapon discharges. Compare this to the 5-6 lb. trigger pull of the standard Glock (after you take up the slack) and now you’re comparing apples to oranges.

Simply put, the reason you don’t need a manual safety on a revolver is that they are very difficult inadvertently discharge. On the other hand Glocks are notorious for inadvertent discharges, even in the hands of highly trained experts.

I often hear Glock fans say that they have no concern about carrying their Glock with “one in the pipe” and I have to wonder whether they ever spent the time to read their Glock manual. It specifically warns “civilians” not to carry the pistol with a round in the chamber because of the risk of unintentional discharge. So there you have it, even Gaston recognizes the risk. However, instead of offering a manual safety to reduce the risk of unintentional discharge, he recommends that you carry the pistol unloaded.

Nushif
August 31, 2010, 01:19 AM
Glad I'm not a civilian, then.

Zerodefect
August 31, 2010, 01:51 AM
As I stated in my earlier post, I am a firm believer in manual safeties on semi-automatic pistols because they provide an additional layer of protection against AD/NG discharges. Obviously, there are different opinions on this subject.

One particular member wondered whether the folks who feel that Glocks are unsafe had ever fired a revolver. I own a Glock 17 and many revolvers. In my opinion, there is a huge difference between the trigger pull of most revolvers and a standard Glock. Most revolvers have a trigger pull of 10-12 lbs. in double-action mode. Because it takes a long, hard and consistent pull, it is very difficult to inadvertently discharge a revolver. I personally have never heard of this happening (in double-action mode), although I am sure that someone out there has. Additionally, you can also see the hammer moving rearward and the cylinder rotating before the weapon discharges. Compare this to the 5-6 lb. trigger pull of the standard Glock (after you take up the slack) and now you’re comparing apples to oranges.

Simply put, the reason you don’t need a manual safety on a revolver is that they are very difficult inadvertently discharge. On the other hand Glocks are notorious for inadvertent discharges, even in the hands of highly trained experts.

I often hear Glock fans say that they have no concern about carrying their Glock with “one in the pipe” and I have to wonder whether they ever spent the time to read their Glock manual. It specifically warns “civilians” not to carry the pistol with a round in the chamber because of the risk of unintentional discharge. So there you have it, even Gaston recognizes the risk. However, instead of offering a manual safety to reduce the risk of unintentional discharge, he recommends that you carry the pistol unloaded.

A few point your going to get torn up on:

1. The manual also says that Glock firearms are not for shovel snow of of your roof. And something about taking strudel onto a sailboat. The manual has lots of legalese, that;s just the way it goes these days.

2. Never seen a highly trained expert Nd, but if they did, they must not have trained well.

3. Every IDPA, Uspca or whatever comp I've seen. There's allways at least one shooter per event that I expect to do really well, then forgets to turn his safety off after drawing. The time it takes to realize that mistake often is the complete length of time most CCw senerios last. I prefere 0 safeties. Faster, easier, more reliable. Shorter manual of arms allmost allways wins.

Just need a good holster, and reholstering disiplne.

MTMilitiaman
August 31, 2010, 02:21 AM
And keep in mind that often these accidental discharges were caused by highly-trained LEO’s who handle firearms for a living. There have been reports of cops unintentionally shooting themselves with their Glock, accidentally shooting their partners with their Glock, and accidentally shooting suspects when they inadvertently touched the trigger on their Glock.

Maybe they should have been more highly trained?

I don't claim to be a pistol expert or even particularly knowledgeable about Glocks. I have Ptooma's manual on hand to consult and I have become a pretty big fan of Glocks since acquiring my Glock 20 a few years ago.

But I don't see what all the hub-bub is about. I'll go so far as to say that if you don't trust yourself with a Glock because it doesn't have an external active safety, you shouldn't be trusted with any firearm. A traditional safety on an automatic pistol is not a crutch. It doesn't excuse poor gun handling. Even as a little boy, I can remember my grandfather emphasizing the importance of never trusting the safety. These were lessons that stuck with me.

I won't say I've never had a brain fart and did something stupid with a firearm. I've had an AD before. But it was with a .22 caliber rifle that, interestingly enough, has an external safety. No one was hurt, because thankfully, I forgot my trigger discipline but not my muzzle awareness.

Maybe it is being aware that there is no safety, but even more than with other automatic handguns, I find myself being religiously diligent to safe gun handling with my Glock. Since I've owned it, these practices have expanded to include other handguns, but they originated with the Glock. My Glock made me a safer gun owner. I'd check the chamber every time I picked up a gun before, but I wasn't as anal about dropping the mag, racking the slide 2 or 3 times, locking it back, then checking the chamber. That is a habit my Glock got me into, namely out of necessity cause I don't want to put a hole in something breaking it apart to clean it, ect.

I don't buy the "Glocks just going off" thing either. People claim thumb breaks on holsters will make them go off. I call BS. Once I was running along some tracks. I had my G20 in the Uncle Mikes on my hip, as is customary for me. A railroad tie shifted underneath my step, and snagged my other foot as it came down. I went down hard, and my G20 was sent clattering across the tracks. It came to a rest with its muzzle oriented straight at me as I laid their sprawled out next to the tracks. So I put the thumb break on the holster to prevent such accidents from occurring again in the future. People keep telling me the thumb break can catch the trigger and cause it to go off during reholstering. This is understandably troubling for me, so I clear the pistol and spend the next 30 to 45 minutes jamming it in at every conceivable angle trying to make this thumb break drop the striker. In the end, the only way I succeed it removing the holster from my hip, taking the stiffer inboard plastic end that the strap snaps too, orienting the pistol 90 degrees to it with it in the trigger guard, and jamming it forward. This motion was so awkward even with the holster off my hip that I am going to go ahead and say that if you manage to accomplish this feat in real life, you deserve a gunshot wound to the leg--you earned it.

And if you are really that worried, there are several heavier trigger options out there known as New York 1 and New York 2 which provide a, IIRC, 8 and 12 pound trigger pull, respectively. This makes the trigger pull pretty much identical to a revolver.

So again, what was the issue?

GLOOB
August 31, 2010, 05:58 AM
Permit me to flip that over on you. I carried a S&W model 36 for years and had two AD. Both times the hammer had became cocked by my clothing and when I grabbed for the gun it went bang. Thankfully both times nothing got hit except the ground and my pride. Any gun can AD and revolvers are no exception.
What does the hammer getting cocked have anything to do with this ND? Hammers being cocked or uncocked aren't part of the 4 gun safety rules. The problem was your finger on the trigger before you wanted the gun to fire. Follow the rules, and you don't have ND's.

This is the reason so many "highly trained LEOs" shot themselves with GLOCKs. Years of carrying a DA revolver made them feel ok to leave their finger on the trigger even when they are pointing a gun at their own leg and shoving the gun into a holster.

Rule #3 doesn't say: keep your finger off the trigger until you're on target and ready to fire... if your gun is SA. But if it's a DA, put your finger on the trigger and rest it there at all times. You may prestage it a little, but don't get carried away. And if your gun has a manual safety, congratulations. If you yank on the trigger every now and then to make sure the safety still works, you may disregard the other 3 rules.

See, you can actually get away with that kind of idiocy when you're really familiar with your specific gun. But if you take liberties with the universal rules because of some idiosyncrasies of your own platform, you will have made yourself unqualified to handle any other gun.

If you enjoyed reading about "GLOCK safety" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!