A very PC ad, but it makes the point, to a point. The safe is unnecessary if she lives alone and is not at risk of having the gun be discovered by a child or prohibited person. Some will beg to differ, I know, but to me it unnecessarily adds a layer of complexity and a time delay to her ability to respond. The depiction of the robber/rapist fainting when he sees the muzzle of a gun pointed at him is unrealistic and idealistic; it implies that just having the gun--even unloaded, one could think--will deter the intruder. A better but less PC version would have the guy rush her and getting a triple tap to the chest and head.
There's another Glock ad that's similarly weakened in its attempt to be PC. A guy in a mask enters a diner with a shotgun and demands everyone comply with his attempt to rob them, then stumbles, at which point everyone in the place, badges now in evidence, draws on him. Obviously he surrenders at once--as in the girl at home ad, nobody fires. Then, in case viewers miss the badges, the camera pulls back and pans to reveal a banner posted in the diner--a banner welcoming patrons to a LEO convention in town. That's good to a point as well, but why the LEO convention? Why not simply present all the diner patron as CCW holders exercising their rights? OK, it's trying to make the point about Glocks being popular among LE agencies, but still, it's an opportunity missed.
Good ads, but Glock shies away from depicting actually firing a pistol in SD in one and implies that only LEOs should have guns in the other. In both cases, the message is weakened.