my opinions on some very old arguments
Is "Glock Perfection" for you? Ask yourself if you agree with the following statements.
"The best safety is between your ears"
Glockers say this because it's true. The two main things that keep you from hurting yourself and others with a firearm are muzzle discipline and trigger discipline.
However, the way you hear Glockers tell it, you might suspect that nobody BUT Glockers practices muzzle discipline and trigger discipline. I'll leave it up to you whether that statement has any veracity or not.
It is undeniable, practicing both muzzle discipline and trigger discipline can make you safe, but practicing muzzle discipline and trigger discipline with a firearm that has a manual safety will possibly make you safer.
"A manual safety adds complexity you do NOT need during a life or death situation"
Glockers say this because it is (again) very true. Simplicity is a virtue.
However, some guy I really respect once said "Make things as simple as possible, but no simpler". There are two types of complexity a manual safety adds to a firearm. Mechanical complexity and cognitive (human) complexity.
About mechanical complexity:
Single action semiautomatic handguns have been around for about a century. Very few of them have been offered without a manual safety, and none come to mind that were a commercial or military success. At least a couple early designs with manual safeties have stood the test of time, and I do not remember anyone ever stating their manual safeties made them any less reliable or that removing the manual safety would make them a better operational weapon.
However, lots of double action/single action or double-action-only semiautos do not come with manual safeties, and for the most part, no one demands them. Additionally, double action revolvers do not come with safeties.
This brings us to an important question: is the glock a single action or double action pistol? In my opinion, the term "Safe action" is marketing fluff. I would argue that with its 1/2 inch of trigger stroke, the stock trigger pull of 5.5 pounds walks a very fine line between the two. Apparently many Glockers agree with me, as the "New York" trigger (8-ish pounds?) is a fairly popular modification made to new glocks.
Another important question: would adding a manual safety to a glock compromise its reliability? For part of the answer, look to the Glock company itself, as they have produced a glock model with a manual safety. On the other hand, there is no reasonable way to procure one of these models. The only way to add a manual safety to a glock is to buy and install a non-factory modification. In my opinion this does raise legitimate concerns. Only time and experience will tell if these devices harm the vaunted glock reliability.
About cognitive complexity:
Forgetting to release the safety is a real issue. While not a hunter myself, it seems more than a few of the hunters I know have a story or two to tell about the one that got away, especially fast prey such as birds in flight, due to a forgotten safety. However, most of these errors occurred very early in their hunting days and did not repeat after a single or few embarrassing incidents. Military experience also shows us that people can be trusted to make their weapons live during the stress of combat. The key seems to be training, hopefully training that is as realistic and stressful as possible. In summary, I do NOT think a manual safety adds any level of risk to a dedicated owner of a semiautomatic pistol.
So, is "Glock Perfection" for you? Hopefully, you will know by now. The glock is what it is, making it your "own" does entail a certain amount of risk. I would like to see them offer a manual safety on some of their models, but I don't think they ever will for a couple of reasons. First is the "Glock Perfection" marketing myth itself - does adding a manual safety make a perfect firearm "pefecter"? Secondly, it is not difficult to imagine a legal scenario where those injured by glock firearms would consider the addition of a manual safety an admission of guilt on the part of the Glock company. For myself, I have decided to seek out a carry weapon with a manual safety which operates "1911-style" like my house gun. I will probably steer towards an HK USP Compact in variant 1, but that doesn't mean the glock doesn't have a lot going for it; Light weight, low bore axis, very reasonable pricing, a huge aftermarket, etc. Perhaps one of these days I will pick up a lightly used glock 19, add a Cominolli safety, and report back here after a few thousand rounds.
