Glock Perfection. Uhhh...

Status
Not open for further replies.
I guess the 1911 ers hadn't practiced enough amybe.

Have you seen them practice?

After the match, did they all trade in their 1911s for something else without a safety?

The champion IPSC shooters that use 1911's don't seem to have any of these problems?

Sorry I just don't buuuy it.

Have you fired the XD and had the grip safety prevent you from firing?


I know I'm long winded, and it might be painful to read my entire post, but I also clearly said:
I'm not slamming anyone or anything, there were some very proficient shooters that had obviously practiced a lot w/ their weapons, and it's good that they are training w/ their weapon, and I'll probably look way more silly to someone else when I get out there, but I'm just saying it made me really think about real-world scenario responses when I saw some dealing with that.
which meant, that despite the observed challenges of some, there were other QUITE PROFICIENT SHOOTERS THAT DID NOT HAVE THAT PROBLEM, and I WAS GIVING KUDOS TO THOSE W/ CHALLENGES FOR PRACTICING W/ THEIR WEAPON, and that admittedly I WOULD PROBABLY HAVE CHALLENGES TOO OF ANOTHER TYPE WHEN I GET OUT THERE, so I really don't see what your point is, w/ all due respect, I did not intend to as I said SLAMM ANYONE OR ANYTHING, but merely was pointing out a real-life observation, rather than a pure theory, that MAY BE WORTH THINKING ABOUT TO SOME, but MAY NOT APPLY TO EVERYONE.

As to the XD, I fired an XD in the proper way, as part of my tests before purchase, it wasn't until I later went back at a gun show, after much more research and learning, that the thought occured to me to hold the weapon in such a way, and consider the consequences, I was not in a position to then fire it, as I was at a gun show, and not a range. And again, I clearly stated that I considered myself as NO EXPERT, and was clearly stating my OPINION.

YMMV. Thank you for your time.

Regards,

Karz
 
Karz,

I would hate to think that I'm "lazy and stupid" but still possessed the unforseen power to read your blog and understand it. Anyway, I got it. I suppose, if the officer in the article had used a 1911 we could have misconstrued every point given in its defense and had us a old fashioned 1911 bashing. Ten Bears
 
LOL Ten Bears. Yeah, I mean I guess my comments about my IDPA and the manual safety was not required in my response to the Original Poster, but it seems like everyone else always talks about guns w/ manual safety and compare them to glock's internal safety, whenever something like this comes up.

I don't have a problem with a manual safety, and I would probably be one of the weirdos in the Glock community that would buy one if it had one on it, since I would have the choice to use it or not, assuming they kept their internal safety as is. I don't have anything against most of the safety devices available, but there are responsibilites and concerns about every style of safety, or lack there of, either when it comes time to disable them in a SD situation, or to protect you and others in handling the weapon.

I only even said anything about the IDPA thing because it was something I witnessed happen, was fresh on my mind, and made me imagine how some people could be concerned about it and prefer an internal safety gun for SD, not to say either way is right or wrong. At the end of the day, I'd like to think we're all on the same page here, comparing guns to find the ones that work for us, safely handle them, and use them successfully if we need to.

Regards,

Karz
 
"Glock's internal safety" always cracks me up. Most pistols on the market have "internal safeties"(which I guess is a new buzz word that manufacturers are using too frequently to market with along with "polymer" and "tactical") but why whenever "Glock" is mentioned that this design or "feature" as the market it, must be mentioned is something I don't understand.

The problem here is seems not to be the fault of the pistol as it occurred as he was holstering it.It can be debated whether or not that the individual here had the appropriate equipment for him but I'm sick of hearing the same old "Glock goes off on its own" crap get rehashed all the time.
 
accidents happen.

wasn't the fault of the gun most likely though.

the guy probably learned a valuable lesson about handling loaded weapons.
 
. . . because everyone knows that accidental/negligent discharges didn't happen until Gaston make the Glock, right?

jm
 
And quietly in the back of the room, 3rdpig stands up, raises his hand in the air with his index finger extended and wiggling and says "This is my safety".
 
now now yall you know it HAS to be the gun NO WAY its a TRAINING problem if it had been a pencil he might have the tip too sharp:evil:
 
I sometimes wonder if the purpose of the GLOCK trigger safety is very well understood. I agree, it looks kind of pointless at first - the safety is on the trigger? However, it's not so much to allow the trigger to move all the way back when it is being deliberately pulled, but rather to prevent it from moving all the way back when it is not being deliberately pulled - such as in the case of an off-axis pull by a wandering finger or a foreign object in a holster, range bag, etc. It's perhaps debatable how significant the additional layer of safety gained is, but let's be clear on what it is and why it's there before we argue its merits.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top