"...but Glocks aren't safe!"

[Cousin Mike]

Accidental duplicate... please close or remove.

Edit: Haha! you need to get your mouse looked at, Cuz. You might have to register it with the ATF as a automatic weapon. - Coronach

 

[Cousin Mike]

I've been noticing this recently, and maybe I need to vent a little. Actually, this has only recently come to my attention. I've owned all kinds of pistols, but recently, wanting a smaller pistol for everyday CCW, I bought myself the perfect gun (for me). A light, small, G33 - my first Glock ever. I came home to post about it, and immediately I noticed something that I'd never relly noticed before. It went something like this...

"But Glocks aren't SAFE!! They don't have a safety! You'll shoot yourself!"

At first, I thought maybe this was a here & there type of thing... After all, I'd been more of a "SIG guy" since joining here, and never really paid much attention to the Glock threads... I was quickly realizing though that some people were actually serious about this - and not only are they serious, but they bring it up almost everytime someone even asks about a Glock. Now this is mostly where I hang out on THR - here in the Autopistol subforum - and we have our little ongoing "wars" here. I always get a kick out of people's responses in those ____ vs. ____ threads, and I play along sometimes - all in good fun.

The Glock safety thing, OTOH, is starting to irritate me, and here's why.... it's just utter crap. I carried a SIG in one flavor or another for a long time. SIG pistols, as most of you know well, do not have any type of external safety. Nobody ever said carrying a SIG was unsafe.

I have revolvers, which also do not have external safeties. Once again, nobody has ever said that carrying a revolver is unsafe.

I own, and have carried on occasion, a 1911. Another tidbit of info for you guys - the FIRST and ONLY thing to ever go wrong with my 1911 was the GRIP SAFETY! More on that later...

I have a Beretta Cougar... No external safety on it either... and no one has said that it's unsafe to carry it. I guess it's because it has an 8lb. DAO trigger - which we all know makes it impossible to fire unintentionally.

And what about Kel-Tec? I've never seen a safety on one of those pocket pistols a lot of you guys tote around... but nobody says that they're unsafe...

NONE of the Glockbasher-safety-nazi's criticize the XD... the excuse being, the XD has a grip safety. Yeah... because grip safeties NEVER fail.

Someone please explain to me how you reholster an XD (which is supposed to be one of the more dangerous activities for Glock owners) without depressing the grip safety?!!?

I've noticed that nobody criticizes the Walther P99, either. Does it have a manual safety?

Nobody says Hi-Points are unsafe... last I heard, they didn't come with safeties either.

I could go on and on... there are plenty of popular guns out there without manual safeties... yet the Glock is the only one that gets picked on about this feature. Something stinks here, and it ain't Hoppe's #9 I'm smellin'. One of the first things I learned about guns is that the safety is a mechanical device... and like any mechanical device, a safety can fail! I have seen proof of this with one of my own weapons... Safeties DO fail. Your mindset, training, and resolve to follow the 4 rules are what keep ND's - and resulting tragedy - from happening. I thought most everyone knew this.

So what's up with the double standard?

I bring this up, not because I'm partial to Glock, but because I feel like this is a real problem. It's not cool to try and scare newbies out of buying a Glock by retelling these horror stories, as if the error was on the part of the weapon system... and not the idiot who had his finger on the trigger while reholstering. The bottom line is that the Glock is just as safe as any other pistol, if not safer. It's virtually impossible to fire one without pulling the trigger, and there are three internal safety systems in place. The Glock may be a little less tolerant of blatantly unsafe handling, but I don't see this as being a problem... Actually, I think it's a good thing. If you don't think you can keep your finger off the trigger of a loaded weapon, then maybe you shouldn't have a gun. To say the Glock, or any weapon system without an external safety is inherently unsafe is not only silly, it's just factually incorrect, and based in nothing more than personal emotion.

If you think a 10 lb. DA trigger pull is a safety, or a mechanical safety is a guarantee that you'll never have a ND, then in my opinion ANY weapon YOU are carrying is unsafe - because your mindset is unsafe. Relying on a safety is dangerous and irresponsible. If you prefer a gun with a manual safety, that's great... and I can definitely understand that. But just as I would never berate someone for carrying a gun equipped with an external safety, I shouldn't be chastized for choosing to carry a pistol without one.

Your pistol is only as safe as you are - whether it's equipped with a safety or not. A safety is not a substitute for safe gun handling. If you don't like Glocks, there are plenty of other pistols out there. But to say that the Glock - or any modern, quality weapon without a manual safety - is inherently unsafe... IMHO... is to show everyone exactly how much you don't know about firearms.

What say y'all? I got my gasoline drawers on... flame away!

 

[vintage68]

A little bumper-sticker wisdom: "The index finger is the only safety I'll ever use on my pistol"...

I carried a Glock as my CCW pistol for many years and never had a problem, nor did I have problems reholstering when I took some intense training with it over two and four day courses.

I've since "upgraded" my weapon to a "cocked and locked" 1911, but the Glock never gave me any problems.

Safety is a mindset.

 

[Lonestar]

What is the difference between a Glock with a NYC trigger spring and a revolver??? The glock can shoot more bullets.

 

[03Shadowbob]

I agree with everything you wrote actually.

 

[Majic]

You may have just noticed it, but that has been said ever since the first Glock came on the market. No need to get your undies in a knot over a statement that has been repeated for over 20 years.

 

[two tone]

question, who i more is was more brilliant. John Moses Browning or Gaston Glock?

answer: neither. i read somewhere that John Moses Browning did no feel the need for either the grip safety of the thumb safety on his 1911 design.

 

[AZGlock13]

I couldn't have said it better myself. As long as one keeps their finger out of the trigger guard until actually ready to immediately shoot and as long as one carries in a holster that completely covers the trigger guard area, a Glock is a perfectly safe firearm. Everyone should always treat a Glock, all guns for that matter, as if it was loaded and act accordingly. Glocks do not just go off all by themselves, the trigger must be pulled to accomplish this (the internal safeties of the pistol ensure this). I have personally witnessed a co-worker/friend accidentally drop his chambered G30 from waist level and it hit on its rear sight on the hard concrete. The gun did not discharge. The rear sight was a little marked up, but that was it (man, was he ticked with himself for that though).

 

[gudel]

People who claim GLOCKs aren't safe, are the same people who say guns kill people.
who's the shooter here?

 

[Cousin Mike]

Thanks a million, Coronach!

You may have just noticed it, but that has been said ever since the first Glock came on the market. No need to get your undies in a knot over a statement that has been repeated for over 20 years.

Hmmm... you're right. I think now that it's come to my attention though, it's a little scary. The first time I really thought about it was last year in school. A couple of friends were at my house, and one mentioned wanting to get his carry permit... I asked him what kind of gun he was thinking about, and he said a Glock.

I told him that was a good choice, even though (at the time) not my particular cup of tea. The conversation went on, and after a little while he concluded that the only way to decide was to handle them himself... all was well.

When he left, my other friend was a little upset with me. He didn't understand why I would recommend a Glock to a new shooter. This is a guy I've written about here on several occasions, and he owns a G21C he never shoots. A little background on this friend... one day I asked him (as a joke) whether his gun was chambered for .45ACP or .45GAP - he got angry at me for asking, but had to admit that he didn't know the answer. A true gunowner...

Friend #2: "But [friend #1] will shoot himself with it... That isn't a gun for a beginner, he needs something with a safety!"

Me: Why do you say that?

Friend #2: Because he don't know nothin about guns, that's why...

Me: Well, neither do you, to be frank... and you've managed not to shoot yourself in the last 5 or 6 years you've had a Glock. Why do you think that is?

Friend #2: I don't know nothin' about guns? Oh, so you're Mr. Funny Guy now?

Me: Let's not start, ok? You don't know **** about guns and you know it as well as I do. Let's leave it at that.

Friend #2: Well I know more than him! (speaking of Friend #1)

Me: At least he wants one to protect himself, and is willing to go through the legal process, and learn to shoot... I honestly don't even know what the hell you even have one for. Do you even have any ammunition for it?

Friend #2: Man, let's just drop it...

Me: I'll take that as a no.

Well, the arguments I see here at THR about Glocks and how "unsafe" they are strike me as very similar... Not only to the intellectually bankrupt statements made by my "friend" (who I no longer hang out with), but to the arguments of the anti's as well - as gudel pointed out.

Anti-gun politicians use those same arguments to try to legislate against our 2A rights. "This weapon is unsafe!" I don't know exactly how to articulate how I feel about that, but suffice it to say I don't like it. It reminds me of my cousin - who is a self-admitted big-government liberal in every sense of the word - but owns an "assult rifle" M4gery with 30 round magazines, and CCW's everyday... it's a contradiction to say the least, with overtones of willful ignorance thrown in for good measure.

If you think Glocks aren't "safe", what else isn't "safe"?

 

[gc70]

EVERY gun has a primary safety - between the shooter's ears. Some guns also have a secondary safety that can be valuable in cases in which the primary safety is not engaged.

 

[Mandirigma]

I tend to just not listen to it. People that discriminate against Glocks just will. They are quick to pull a story that they heard, or happened to a friend or etc of a ND. The times I've had any friends ever comment that Glocks don't have a external saftey I just tell them its the same safety as the one on revolvers and hold my trigger finger up

 

[tydephan]

The first handgun I owned was a Glock 22 (purchased 4 years ago).

I am the son of an LEO and the brother of another LEO. I have never had extensive training, but I was blessed with decent common sense, which has enabled me to survive this far with such a dangerous weapon that has such a dramatic lack of safety mechanisms.

The criticism of the Glock platform is also due to the prominence of the weapon. It has been so widely adopted that there are bound to be people that dislike it. I, however, am not one of those people. As long as I'm breathing, I will own at least one Glock.

 

[wally]

big +1 to what gc70 has said.

The theory of evolution says any effort to make things foolproof is doomed to failure because doing so selects for bigger fools in future generations.

--wally.

 

[JAMES77257]

I agree with everything you wrote actually.

+1000

 

[zachsm]

yeah i don't mind that glocks don't have an external safety

but ive actually SEEN these cases of stupidity where people have accidently shot themselves with glocks/sigs etc and i wonder what would have happened if there was a safety on the gun

 

[Cousin Mike]

The only 2 cases I know the specifics of are:

1.) A nurse, from the Glocktalk website, who was kind enough to share his experience in a blog. He shot himself through the hand. IIRC he was going to field strip the gun, and opened the slide - with a full magazine still in the gun - to make sure the chamber was clear. When he saw the clear chamber, he let go of the slide - chambering a round - then dropped the magazine, and grabbed the pistol at the front to get ready for takedown. When he went to pull the trigger to take it down, he shot himself through the hand and wrist. He had some pretty nasty pics to post as well of his injury - but he never blamed the gun for his stupidity.

How many no-no's can you spot in that story?

Then there's 2.) - The infamous "I'm the only one in this room professional enough..." guy.

I've heard of other people shooting themselves with them, and I'm sure it's happened more than a few times. But given the two stories I actually know the specifics of, I wonder myself...with such reckless gunhandling, and apparent lack of any mental function while dealing with loaded guns - would they have even remembered to engage a safety if their pistol had one?

Something tells me, "prolly not."

 

[pablo45]

In my opinion, Gaston as done an excellent thing with his firearm's. I would not trust my life with anything but a Glock. If you want to believe all the hype then that is your decision. I will not let these statement's change my mind.

 

[mierda]

keep your finger off of the trigger, till you are ready to shoot .

 

[gbran]

I still haven't figured out all of Glock's safties, even the little thingy on the trigger. All you have to do to defeat any of their safties is to pull the trigger.
My 2 main carry guns are a Glock and a smaller Kahr. Niether has an external saftey and both triggers are pretty much the same in action and weight.

I am however, gonna sell all my guns and replace them with air pistols, because I've learned here that caliber is not important, only shot placement. You know, a hit with a .22 is better than a miss with a .45.

 

[ATAShooter]

OK bear with me... I had a Glock 36, I did not like that thing. HOWEVER, NEVER through the time that I carried it, did I feel it was unsafe or not trustworthy. That is one thing I can confidently say is I fully trusted the 3 safety system of it and felt ok. When asked nowdays about a Glock, I don't say it's crap, because it is not. It just wasn't my cup of tea.

 

[PhillyGlocker]

I agree. I hate when people refer to Glocks as being unsafe. Duh! No gun is safe if you don't keep your finger off of the trigger until you're ready to fire. As long as I handle my Glock with care will be no AD's or ND's.

 

[Glockfan.45]

I have had many a Glock for years. I have yet to shoot anything I didnt want to shoot. Any gun is safe as long as you follow the 4 rules, shoot the proper ammo, and the gun is in good condition. If Glocks were so dangerous I am sure that the vast majority of police departments wouldnt continue to issue them.

 

[10-Ring]

When properly trained, a Glock is a very reliable, dependable & safe firearm. Those that say otherwise are just ignorant

 

[AcenJay]

The problem with the Glock is that in order to field strip the gun, you have to break one of the four safety rules "Keep you finger off the trigger until you are ready to shoot" by pulling the trigger before you can remove the slide.