Can someone explain the Glock safety?

[Guns and more]

I don't mean technically.
The Glock has a lever in the middle of the trigger. I understand this is a safety.
I'm having trouble imagining a situation where something that would potentially pull the trigger accidentally would be stopped by the trigger safety.
Finger? check.
Tree branch? check.
Cat scratch? Check.
Falling on the ground hard enough to release the trigger but not the trigger safety. Check.

So what is it?

 

[21bubba]

It's perfection, don't you read the ads?

 

[JohnKSa]

The trigger safety has two functions.

The first, and most important, function is to lock the trigger bar in place unless the trigger is actuated. Since the passive safeties in the Glock depend on the trigger bar not moving until the gun is supposed to fire there has to be something the keeps the trigger bar from moving until the trigger is depressed. It completely prevents the trigger bar from moving from impact, such as when the gun is dropped from a significant height onto a hard surface.

The second function is to make the trigger more snag-resistant. The trigger safety only occupies about 13% of the trigger face. That means that contact on the other 87% of the trigger face will not actuate the trigger. The trigger safety occupies only the lower center part of the trigger which means that if a snagging object contacts the trigger edges or follows the normal tendency to ride up the curve of the trigger to the upper part of the trigger it will not be able to actuate the trigger. The trigger guard of the Glock is also proportionally wider than is typical which means that it overlaps the trigger farther on either side making the "reach" to get to the trigger (and trigger safety) longer than would be necessary to fire most typical pistols.

I know that it seems to be in vogue to espouse the opinion that the Glock trigger safety doesn't do anything useful, but even if you don't know or understand the above explanation, the fact that the design has been copied on other manufacturer's firearms should make a rational person stop and wonder why a useless feature would be copied.

Ruger actually went so far as to recall all of their SR9 pistols and replace their initial proprietary trigger safety with one that is a copy of Glock's design. Why would they spend the time, money and effort and undergo the corporate embarrassment of a recall to make such a change if the device they're installing has no purpose?

 

[okespe04]

Your finger is the safety, If you don't put your finger on the trigger and pull it, the glock will not go off. Safe enough for me

 

[hammerklavier]

"The safety is between your ears" is the expression I've heard.

 

[Omaha-BeenGlockin]

To fire--put finger on trigger and pull

To not fire---don't

Any good holster will completely cover the whole trigger guard---get a good holster---don't touch the trigger until ready to shoot.

Get it now?

 

[JCisHe]

Yup...

 

[9mmepiphany]

i'm pretty sure the OP wasn't asking about safety with his Glock or even what it's function is...he understands that.

he's asking why it is that way and where it is...at least that's the way i read it.

and here's one i actually know the answer to, because i remember when the Glock first came to this country and i haven't drunk the Kool-Aid

the safety lever was place on the face of the trigger to fulfil a requirement for a manually actuated safety that was a requirement of the military contract (Austria) that he was bidding for.

Glock has no experience building pistols prior to this design and had to design the gun from a clean sheet...his company built plastic tools. he simply researched sucessful military handguns designs and fit them into the required specs. other oddites, at least to americans, about the Glock 17 design:

1. non-drop free mags...no lost mags in the snow/mud
2. a slide stop designed not to be used to release the slide...released by overhand grasp
3. a hole in the backstrap...use with a lanyard
4. it's field strip sequence...meant to be carried with an empty chamber

 

[cerberus65]

it seems to be in vogue to espouse the opinion that the Glock trigger safety doesn't do anything useful

I'm never in vogue. This is a weird feeling. But, here goes...

There is no safety on a Glock. Just like there is no safety on my LCP. By that I mean an active safety, a lever (or other doojigger) you move which prevents the trigger from discharging the gun - just to be clear. The funny thing on the trigger is a marketing gimmick. Glock has convinced a bunch of people that it's really a safety and so created a demand for it (and hence the copying by others) but that doesn't make it a safety. Folks still shoot themselves so it obviously doesn't completely prevent a snag. A 1911 has a real safety. My Beretta has a real safety. My Guardian and LCP do not. Glock doesn't either. I have no problem with that. Guns with long, squishy triggers don't need a safety like a 1911 does. But it has to be handled correctly. I don't worry about not having a safety on my LCP. I wouldn't worry about a Glock if I had one. I understand why the Glock folks need to sell it as a safety. In some corners, not having a safety = unsafe! Oh no! We know that's untrue but gov't bureaucrats who purchase guns for policemen don't. So Glocks have to have safeties or they wouldn't get contracts. But here among gun-loving, gun-savy folks I think we're safe to admit that that trigger thing just ain't a safety. Nope. Sorry. That dog just will not hunt. Don't matter how many times you whack it with a 2x4.

 

[Guns and more]

I'll bet Plaxico Burris is glad his Glock had that safety in the trigger.

Actually JohnKSa had a great explanation, and he had me until he got to the part of

The trigger safety only occupies about 13% of the trigger face. That means that contact on the other 87% of the trigger face will not actuate the trigger.

 

[okespe04]

There is no safety on a Glock

Yeah pretty much. A high cap auto that functions like a dao revolver once it is locked and loaded. I don't like safeties on handguns seeing has I carry them in a holster. If I ever have to draw having no safety is one less thing I have to remember during a potential life saving situation. Rifles and shotguns however need doojiggers as they are not carried in a holster.

 

[gb6491]

Falling on the ground hard enough to release the trigger but not the trigger safety. Check.

How would that be possible (as the lever physically blocks the trigger)? If you mean the striker could be knocked off the trigger bar by falling on the ground, there is still a firing pin block in place.

 

[JohnKSa]

There is no safety on a Glock. The funny thing on the trigger is a marketing gimmick.

The funny thing on the trigger is not a manual safety but it performs at least two important safety functions. That makes it more than a marketing gimmick. Glock didn't invent the idea of passive safeties. The industry and gun community has been aware of and accepted the purposes and usefulness of passive safeties for many, MANY decades prior to the introduction of Glocks.

It's far too late to try to claim that the only real safeties are manual safeties.

Glock has convinced a bunch of people that it's really a safety and so created a demand for it (and hence the copying by others) but that doesn't make it a safety.

There's no need to convince anyone of anything, it is a safety, it's just not a manual safety. You don't get to redefine words (i.e. passive safety is not a safety) just because it doesn't fit with your view of things. Reality doesn't work like that.

The SR9 was recalled because it had drop safety issues. Ruger fixed the guns at their expense by installing a copy of the Glock trigger safety on them. You're really trying to claim that the only reason they did that was because Glock created a marketing demand for the trigger safety? Wow. Again, a clear case of someone redefining reality to match their idea of how they think things ought to be.

Actually JohnKSa had a great explanation, and he had me until he got to the part of:

Take a close look at the Glock trigger. There is a large portion of the trigger face area that can be contacted without disengaging the trigger safety.

You asked for an explanation, you got an explanation that is clear and accurate. Of course, both of us know that an explanation isn't really what you wanted out of this thread.

 

[carguy2244]

Glock Safety.

I've been carrying and shooting Glocks for 20 years - never had a Glock fire unless I squeezed the trigger.

Seems safe to me.

 

[gallo]

Cerebrus,

You explain it so clearly and almost poetically. Thank you, thank you, thank you.

I'm never in vogue. This is a weird feeling. But, here goes...

There is no safety on a Glock. Just like there is no safety on my LCP. By that I mean an active safety, a lever (or other doojigger) you move which prevents the trigger from discharging the gun - just to be clear. The funny thing on the trigger is a marketing gimmick. Glock has convinced a bunch of people that it's really a safety and so created a demand for it (and hence the copying by others) but that doesn't make it a safety. Folks still shoot themselves so it obviously doesn't completely prevent a snag. A 1911 has a real safety. My Beretta has a real safety. My Guardian and LCP do not. Glock doesn't either. I have no problem with that. Guns with long, squishy triggers don't need a safety like a 1911 does. But it has to be handled correctly. I don't worry about not having a safety on my LCP. I wouldn't worry about a Glock if I had one. I understand why the Glock folks need to sell it as a safety. In some corners, not having a safety = unsafe! Oh no! We know that's untrue but gov't bureaucrats who purchase guns for policemen don't. So Glocks have to have safeties or they wouldn't get contracts. But here among gun-loving, gun-savy folks I think we're safe to admit that that trigger thing just ain't a safety. Nope. Sorry. That dog just will not hunt. Don't matter how many times you whack it with a 2x4.

 

[gallo]

Top 5 reasons why a Glock is a safe-enough pistol:

5. The trigger is between your ears
4. It only fires if you press the trigger.
3. Your finger is the safety.
2. The holster will save the family jewels.

And the number 1 most cited reason....drum roll.....

1. It's as safe as a revolver

 

[saturno_v]

To put it in a few words...I feel much more safe from accidental discharging with my little Kel-Tec P-11 (which does not have a safety at all) with its heavy very long DAO trigger pull than with a Glock.

One of the reasons why I will never own one of Gaston's creatures.

I been close to seal a deal on a G20 twice....but I just could not do it.

 

[Steve C]

Gocks have all kinds of safeties, they are however all passive. Chamber a round in a Glock and slam it on the ground and it will not go off, Drop it from a 20 story building and it will not go off. For the most part its much safer than most mechanically locked pistols in that even with a mechanical failure it will not fire if dropped.

Now put your finger on the trigger and overcome the DA like trigger pull and it will go off, just like a DA revovler.

Safeties are placed on a gun to prevent accidental discharge if the operator looses control of the weapon when carrying or not intending to shoot like an accidental drop. In a drop situation the Glock is more safe than most pistols if dropped when they happen to be cocked but not locked.

Unfortunately many people use a manual safety as an excuse to negligently handle a firearm and will put their finger on the trigger or point it at things they don't want to shoot, in the believe that the safety makes it "safe" to do so. Lots of people have been inadvertently killed that way.

Tree branch? check.
Cat scratch? Check.
Falling on the ground hard enough to release the trigger but not the trigger safety. Check.

Nothing is idiot proof and IMO most who shoot themselves unintentionally with a perfectly functioning firearm are just improving the gene pool. Darwinism in action.

Tree branch, not going to happen unless done on purpose, branch would have to be the right size, inserted in the right location and the pistol would have to be pussed hard enough to overcome the trigger pull distance.

Cat scratch, not going to happen.

Falling to the ground, not going off if there's no finger on the trigger and person pulling it.

 

[9mmepiphany]

1. It's as safe as a revolver

i wasn't sure if you were being serious or facetious...isn't the internet great

anyone who truely believes that has surely drunk the Kool-Aid

 

[gyvel]

I know that it seems to be in vogue to espouse the opinion that the Glock trigger safety doesn't do anything useful, but even if you don't know or understand the above explanation, the fact that the design has been copied on other manufacturer's firearms should make a rational person stop and wonder why a useless feature would be copied.

Trigger safeties are nothing new; Glock certainly didn't invent them. Two that come to mind immediately (I'm sure there are more) are the Sauer .32 ACP autos of 1913 and 1930 and the Steyr Model SP .32 auto.

In fact, Gaston Glock didn't invent anything new in his pistol; Every feature of a Glock was just "borrowed" from an older design, and that includes the semi-double action which is pretty much a direct steal from the Austro-Hungarian Roth-Steyr Model 1907 cavalry pistol.

 

[kanook]

Glock Safety.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I've been carrying and shooting Glocks for 20 years - never had a Glock fire unless I squeezed the trigger.

Seems safe to me.

This sounds close too, I am the only qualified person in this room to handle this "safely".5. The trigger is between your ears
The safety is between your ears

4. It only fires if you press the trigger.

heard to many times, I didn't touch the trigger

3. Your finger is the safety.

and again You are the safety, not just your finger

2. The holster will save the family jewels.

and again, more than one AD/ND while reholstering
or when it catches on something, just ask Plaico and the agent

1. It's as safe as a revolver

Don't hear to many stories about a DAO revolver having an AD/ND. Not saying it hasn't happened, just not as many.
(two kool aids in one thread, gotta love it.)

 

[bigfatdave]

JohnKSa explains it nicely. I would say that the Glock trigger was designed to make re-holstering and dropping safer, NOT to provide a manual safety lever.
If Glock would get their ergonomics into a configuration that vaguely resembled my hand, and if they would perhaps make their pistols a bit slimmer, I would have no issue packing one. The pistol I do pack has a "Glock-style" trigger. The pistol I helped MrsBFD select has the "Glock-style" trigger and a grip safety (PPS9 and XD9sc) ... passive safeties are preferable to a manual lever for a defensive pistol unless the user feels the need and is willing to train the disengagement of the safety lever into a muscle-memory habit.

 

[MM60]

How has anyone arrived at the idea that the Glock has a trigger pull resembling a revolver or any DAO firearm? DAO firearms typically have long, heavy triggers. Glock triggers are SAO with an internal firing pin; their trigger pull closely resembles that of a 1911, but with more slack.
Here is a very nice one I'm selling if you're interested:

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=146113953

 

[HexHead]

How would that be possible (as the lever physically blocks the trigger)? If you mean the striker could be knocked off the trigger bar by falling on the ground, there is still a firing pin block in place.

And there is also that whole it's not cocked thing too. The "safe action" is only partially cocked with the trigger in it's reset position. Pulling the trigger completes the cocking action.

 

[ny32182]

JohnKsa explained it nicely. I like it because it should make clothing that could possibly bunch up near the trigger during a reholster *less likely* to pull the trigger during that motion. The Glock trigger is plenty heavy enough, especially in concert with the trigger safety, to resist firing from any reasonable or unreasonable "accidental" snag on the trigger.

I believe that 99.9% of people who fire their Glock during a reholster do so with their finger and not their shirt tail. The reason for this is that I don't believe that clothing could have any real possibility of getting all the way across the trigger with enough force to press the trigger safety and the trigger through its pull. Nothing is impossible I guess... but I just can't really see it happening.

Also, Glocks are double action, not single action. XD's are single action.

It all comes back to one simple generalization: Pull the trigger if you want the gun to fire. Don't pull the trigger if you don't want it to fire. I spent time shooting several types of pistols when I was relatively new to shooting, and then after a while the simplicity and raw functionality of that idea just started appealing to me. Yeah, I've drank the koolaid.