How dangerous would a Glock be sans trigger safety?

Originally Posted by barnbwt
Wait, wouldn't inertia pull the safety lever down along with the trigger?

Click to expand...

The little dingus is at least as heavy or heavier on top than on bottom. So inertia would cause the trigger safety to engage harder, if anything, when the gun is dropped on the back of the slide.

On most guns, what is called the drop safety is there to prevent the firing pin to hit the primer when the gun is dropped on the muzzle. The Glock has that one, too, which is the spring loaded plunger that blocks the striker. That's the end-all of drop safeties... but it only works when the trigger is NOT pulled. In a gun where inertia can potentially pull the trigger, you obviously need something more.

In the Glock, a fall on the rear of the slide can not only pull the trigger (the trigger bar is below the trigger pivot point, rather than above), but it would also pull the striker back, essentially "fully cocking" it. In fact, the trigger spring on a Glock is oriented to PULL the trigger. It works in opposition to the striker spring. If you pull the striker back in a Glock, the trigger (in absense of that trigger dongle) pulls itself all the way to the point it will release the striker. When it reaches that point, it's over. Pulling the striker back on a Glock effectively fires the trigger! The trigger goes click and is now stuck all the way back until the gun is cycled, again. Both the sear and the firing pin safety are now locked out of the way. The striker is all the way back. All systems are go, and inertia is spent, so now the striker spring fires the gun. So that little trigger safety is essential in a Glock. A muzzle-up AD is way more dangerous than muzzle-down.

Of course Glock says this trigger safety prevents the trigger from being pulled by indirectly applied pressures to the sides of the trigger, such as a too-tight holster or stray finger. That's a side benefit, in marketing hindsight. But that's not the reason the trigger safety is there. The Glock NEEDS it to be drop safe.

It doesn't necessarily take a high velocity drop to make this happen. One of the most variable factors is how fast the gun stops. This is determined by how hard and solid is the surface that the gun lands on. Dropped out of a plane into soft grass and earth might not be able to cause an AD, at all. But a fall from 3-4 feet onto a thick slab of concrete might be enough.

Its my opinion that the little thingy in the middle of the trigger is pointless. A gimmick. A requirement for importation possibly. I dont know. But it definitely isnt a drop safety.

Click to expand...

It is not a gimmick, it is not a drop safety. You don't seem to understand what it does.

A drop safety will prevent the gun from firing if it is dropped and the trigger is NOT pulled. Any gun will fire if the trigger is pulled. Without the Glocks trigger safety inertia will pull the trigger if the gun is dropped and if it lands in just the right way. The blade in the center of the trigger prevents it from being pulled unless it is depressed. The Savage Accutrigger blade as well as the blades in all the guns that copied Savage are the there for the same reason.

i still wish the glocks had a manual safety you could put on when not carrying it,to give you time to get it from a child or a non gun person. i know kids are not to get your handgun or a no gun person,but it does happen. i keep the one glock i own with a empty chamber when not carrying. eastbank.

i still wish the glocks had a manual safety you could put on when not carrying it,to give you time to get it from a child or a non gun person. i know kids are not to get your handgun or a no gun person,but it does happen. i keep the one glock i own with a empty chamber when not carrying.

Click to expand...

Why in the world did you buy a Glock (or a revolver, for that matter) if you wish you had a gun with a manual safety?

Sell the Glock and get something that functions like you really want.

i like the glock for carrying and the trigger safety set up, but to be able to put a manual safety on gives me piece of mind knowing that it can,t be just picked up and the trigger pulled for it to go off. my S&W 3913 has a decocker left&right hand safety that i like and wish the glocks had one like that, yet it can be carried with the safety off and ready to fire with a pull of the trigger. eastbank.

jmr40 said:

It is not a gimmick, it is not a drop safety. You don't seem to understand what it does.





A drop safety will prevent the gun from firing if it is dropped and the trigger is NOT pulled. Any gun will fire if the trigger is pulled. Without the Glocks trigger safety inertia will pull the trigger if the gun is dropped and if it lands in just the right way. The blade in the center of the trigger prevents it from being pulled unless it is depressed. The Savage Accutrigger blade as well as the blades in all the guns that copied Savage are the there for the same reason.

Click to expand...

Correct.

Not sure why this is so hard to understand. Without the trigger safety, a drop-and-sudden-stop could cause the trigger to press under its own weight. (Remember, if the trigger is pressed, the other two safeties are deactivated.) The trigger safety prevents this, because the trigger safety must be pressed first. The reason the trigger safety will not press under its own weight is due to the fulcrum location and the weight being heavier on the "important" end.

It wouldn't be able to fire on its own or without the trigger being pulled, so no less safe in my opinion

It is a drop safety, as has been explained many times on this thread already. I'm also not understanding why people don't want to believe this.

Name a striker fired polymer pistol that doesn't have a "trigger safety". They aren't putting these things on the pistols for nothing.

Wow, Mr. Gloob knows what he's talkin' about. Nice run down of the Glock action, and not in marketing-speak for a change . I appreciate the straight explanation. As slick as the rest of the design was, I'd always thought the little trigger tab was a rather inefficient way of accomplishing what they wanted, but hearing how the whole trigger system is somewhat prone to inertial movement/firing, I can see how a dedicated countermeasure had to be tacked on at some point (how early on was it incorporated?)

As far as the flaming of the comp-modded Glock discharging; how many race-tuned 1911's with the half/quarter sears knocked off and grip safeties pinned are floating around out there? I dunno, maybe their trigger safety is more robust to dropping . Apparently didn't help Patton, or so the story goes...

TCB

When is a dingus a drop safety?

Directly from Glock's explanation of “Safe Action”:

The trigger safety is designed to protect against firing if the pistol is dropped or the trigger is subjected to lateral pressure.

http://us.glock.com/technology

So they call it a trigger safety, but it is mainly there to prevent inertia from pulling the trigger if the gun is dropped - a drop safety.

S&W came up with the "hingus" that provides the same function in the M&P pistols.

Firearm companies making striker fired guns aren't copying Glock's dingus because it is useless, but it is a widely misunderstood feature.

Just need to re-iterate an important point here... disabling a trigger safety on a Glock, VERY BAD IDEA.

If you are not comfortable with the trigger safety or other safety features on the Glock, don't carry one.

So the question isn't "what if," it's more a question of "what is the impact when something bad happens" like if you are involved in a shooting or ND...

PLEASE BE SAFE.

Taking the OP's point of discussion - the trigger dingus is removed, how dangerous is it?

It would result in the gun being no more dangerous than a LCP, or any of dozens of revolvers that are DA with no other safety at all. It would require the full depressing of the trigger to finish cocking the striker before it could be released by the sear, right? At that point it would be just as if a P7 with the grip safety, or a P938 with the thumb safety off. In other words, something with nothing more than the trigger pull to make it go bang.

Plenty of guns do that, and they are actually preferred by some who claim they don't want to fumble with any safety in a moment of stress. To add to the comparison, that is exactly why Glock put the lever in the trigger, so that it would closely resemble the same actions needed as if it were a service revolver - which was his target market and one he conquered quite successfully.

As with any DA action, the Glock was always required to have a holster to protect the trigger from accidental or premature use, which is when the technique of keeping the finger alongside the slide became much more used, too. We now had to pay attention, as a ND was still possible if placing the finger on the trigger during the draw. That also reinforces that the gun would be just as safe - or dangerous - as the average service revolver.

We generally don't mess with safeties, but in this case, I don't see it being any worse than tens of thousands of other guns that don't come with any.

And that story does sound bogus. Lost his FFL? Link or citation, please, or it didn't happen.

It sounds like some are suggesting that a Glock trigger has enough mass/inertia
in a "drop" ( butt or back of slide down )to have the energy to fire the gun.
I'd suggest that even on a "hard" surface that this can't happen.
I don't have the physics education to do the math though.
Edit
Re-read Gloob's post....ok, maybe, depending on the weight of the
parts and strength of the springs.
Dave

I read Tirod's post and theoretically agree with his assessment.

A few points though...the average DA Revolver has an 8 to 12 lb DA trigger, so much safer than an average Glock with a 5.5 lb trigger without a trigger safety, especially in a high stress situation. This is the reason why the NYC Police (Transit first) went with the NY1 Trigger to up the trigger pull to 8 lbs.

I said "theoretically" because removing the trigger safety or disabling it on a Glock will lead to major issues in court if there is a shooting or ND. Just because something makes sense in theory doesn't make it a good idea.

A few things:

It IS a drop safety! It prevents the trigger from moving if dropped from a sufficient height.

The XD series of guns do not have a hinged trigger. They have a centered lever, very similar to Glox.

How would a cord on your coat pull a trigger if you're 1/2 way paying attention?

If the gun is being dropped accidentally, what could be on the trigger, defeating the safety lever?

An UNMODIFIED Glock must fall from a height greater than waist high to fire. Seems like I read it's between 12-18 feet (not from a tall building or flying aircraft) landing "just right" on concrete. This presumes the gun is only under control of gravity as opposed to someone flinging it.

If you don't like a Glock or similar type guns, or are not comfortable with them, use something else. But don't make stuff up about them to justify your feelings.

eastbank said:

i still wish the glocks had a manual safety you could put on when not carrying it,to give you time to get it from a child or a non gun person. i know kids are not to get your handgun or a no gun person,but it does happen. i keep the one glock i own with a empty chamber when not carrying. eastbank.

Click to expand...

A manual safety would defeat the purpose the Glock in the first place. It's pointless and completely contrary to the reason the pistol was designed.

stress said:

But don't you remember? Glock is the original Safe-Action(TM) pistol

I'm not even sure what they mean by "Safe Action"

Click to expand...

The term refers to the three passive safeties working in concert with each other, not just the trigger safety.

took a glock 17 with the dingus removed, dropped it from 5 feet a few times. smacked it on my desk like a hammer a few times. my trigger is 3lbs. could not get the trigger to pull from the drop or repeated smacks to a solid wood workbench. this is one of the silliest threads ever.

Skribs
How dangerous would a Glock be sans trigger safety?
I own an XDm and a M&P with the APEX trigger. So...not exactly Glocks, but similar enough.

Click to expand...

A Glock w/o the trigger safety is no more dangerous than a lighter trigger on a revolver or semi (w/o trigger safety). Actually, your XDm is more "dangerous" than a Glock w/o a trigger safety.

The Glock trigger safety does two things:
1) it prevents the trigger from being pulled if the force is applied on the side(s) of the trigger;
2) it prevents the trigger from being pulled if the gun is dropped from heights where the inertia of the drop could be enought to allow the trigger to move to the rear (in that case, the inertia of the drop, if there's no trigger safety, could work as a trigger pull, pushing the firing-pin safety and releasing the striker, and the pistol could go bang). That's why Ruger recalled the SR9 and added a "Glock style" trigger safety. And that's why Glocks passed drop tests from couple undred yards...

They are trying to prevent what is perhaps the most dangerous ND -- muzzle up drop on a hard surface. I'd not consider carrying one with out it!

Wow, Mr. Gloob knows what he's talkin' about. Nice run down of the Glock action, and not in marketing-speak for a change . I appreciate the straight explanation. As slick as the rest of the design was, I'd always thought the little trigger tab was a rather inefficient way of accomplishing what they wanted, but hearing how the whole trigger system is somewhat prone to inertial movement/firing, I can see how a dedicated countermeasure had to be tacked on at some point (how early on was it incorporated?)

Click to expand...

I agree. Admittidly, I always thought the "dingus" on the trigger was akin to putting the brake on the gas pedal in a car . Now I know better, learned something new today.

Skribs said:

It's been far too long since I've taken a math or science course, so I'm rusty on the physics (and I don't know what a Glock trigger weighs, because if you look up "trigger weight" all you get is pull weights, not the weight of the part itself). What velocity would it take to get a couple-ounce (or less) trigger to pull through a 5# trigger pull? If there are some weird mechanics that could go on with other parts in the gun, then I could see that happening, but I thought Glock had internal drop safeties to prevent that.

It's kind of the same principle as the difference between a bug flying into a window and a bird flying into the same window. The bug will fly full-speed several times over and not bat an eye (or a thousand eyes), because it doesn't have enough mass to hurt itself. Meanwhile the bird will KO itself or worse from the impact. Does the Glock trigger have enough mass by itself to pull itself?

Click to expand...

You're forgetting about the metal transfer bar and the return spring pulling on it.



And don't forget that a muzzle-up drop would also cause a rearward inertia on the striker also.

The Glock does have a firing-pin block but this is deactivated by the motion of the trigger and the transfer bar.


As mentioned you can also see in the pic that the larger heavier part of the little trigger lever is on top and to the rear and is going to pull back rather than the thin exposed area, on a muzzle-up drop.

It's been far too long since I've taken a math or science course, so I'm rusty on the physics

Click to expand...

F=mA, dropped on a hard surface A (deceleration in this case) can exceed 50g.

Weevil explains the rest of it quite well.

Its there for a reason! Variations of it abound in other pistols because all the striker fired guns have the issue -- if the trigger moves backward the firing pin block safety is deactivated, although the XD took the 1911 approach and used a grip safety instead of the trigger doohickey.

It would result in the gun being no more dangerous than a LCP, or any of dozens of revolvers that are DA with no other safety at all. It would require the full depressing of the trigger to finish cocking the striker before it could be released by the sear, right?

Click to expand...

Wrong, the mass of the striker works to complete the cocking when dropped on a hard surface, and if the trigger is back to deactivate the firing pin block the gun will fire on the rebound.

took a glock 17 with the dingus removed, dropped it from 5 feet a few times. smacked it on my desk like a hammer a few times. my trigger is 3lbs. could not get the trigger to pull from the drop or repeated smacks to a solid wood workbench. this is one of the silliest threads ever.

Click to expand...

Unless you've got a primer in there, you can't tell if it have fired or not. The exact orientation at which it hits matters a lot. A tile or concrete floor will cause much higher deceleration than your wood workbench surface. A 1911 without a firing pin block won't discharge every time its dropped muzzle down, but it has happened, can be dangerous, but nowhere near as dangerous as a muzzle up discharge!

Nothing silly about gun safety!