Glock unintended discharges

Status
Not open for further replies.
So you're blaming the gun for a discharge that occurred when a worn out holster depressed the trigger?

:banghead:

Sounds more like user error to me. If a holster has softened and worn to the extent that it freely enters the trigger guard, it's time to replace that holster.

Overall:
The Glock fired when the trigger was pulled. That's exactly why I own one. :cool:
 
I'm with Rick. If the gun fired because your holster is garbage and depressed the trigger, that's a non-gun related equipment failure that unfortunately resulted in your gun being fired when you didn't want it to.

Lesson? If your holster is loose enough to enter the trigger guard and stiff enough to trip the trigger, you definitely need a new holster.
 
Nice muzzle blast fatigue. :)

I would never carry any pistol in a holster / strap like that. I've always thought that style of gun thing was a disaster waiting to happen.
 
No way would i blame the gun for this. Glock or M&P or any other brand that uses a trigger/safety syst em like this. This was fault of the operator not recognizing that his equipment was worn out and in need of repair or replacement. I own some Galco holsters and ive had some that weren't cut with enough material covering the trigger guard.

The smart and safe gun owner is aware of his equipment's condition at all time.

JOe
 
I'm not a fan of Glocks, but the gun is not the sole source of blame for this one. That holster is worn out and needs to be replaced, as it would likely protrude into the trigger guard of any gun, creating a dangerous condition regardless of the make and model of weapon being carried.
 
Well I have never like Glocks but have had friends that really enjoy them. Our local P,D. went to them several years ago I don't have anything confirmed but I overheard a couple of high ranking member of the PD talking about the number of AD that they have had. Didn't think much of it then last week while haveing lunch with the task force members which some are local PD I was told they are getting ready to change over to the S&W mp don't know if it have anything to do with what I overheard on not. We have had our sigs for twice as long as they have had thier glocks and we are not thinking of changing yet.

be safe
 
How did the holster get that suspicious looking wrinkle in the exact spot necessary to fire the gun? You sure you didn't holster the gun with your finger on the trigger?
 
This isn't an Accidental Discharge, this is a NEGLIGENT discharge. Seriously, look at the worn holster. It's obvious that the leather caught the trigger causing the NEGLIGENT Discharge.

glock_04.jpg

Here:
glock_05.jpg

and probably the best representation, here:
glock_06.jpg

When one's gear wears out like this, it's time to replace the holster. In the blog, the guy goes on and on about how a 1911 wouldn't do anything like this because of the manual safeties involved. Don't even get me started on the nuances of the useless grip safety. I love how it's typical for the owner to blame a gun for his own errors.
 
Settle down boy and girls. Lets read again.

OP:
Glock unintended discharges
Click to expand...

OP said Nothing about negligent or accidental.
OP said Nothing about the gun being at fault.

OP said "inintended discharges".

It seems that many are either:

So quick to pounce they forget to read and comprehend.

Or

Are so hypersensitive to any criticism to their beloved glock that they forget to read and comprehend.


The thread was started about uninteded glock discharges.

unintended:
adj
not intended; unplanned
 
You are absolutely correct towboat er...I would call it a NGO (Neglegent Gun Owner). If he had inspected his equipment and [maybe] use a better quality holster this would never have happened. The holster, the Glock trigger safety system and the failure of the owner to do regular inspection...OR...carry anything other then a Glock, would have prevented this from happening. My Firestar, Colt, BTA 90, and Kimber would not have gone off in this situation.
 
Saw this elsewhere, it's the owners fault for not tossing the holster. I believe in the article he even admits flat out that he trained himself to push that crease out when he holstered the weapon, and wonders if he forgot to do that on the day of the ND.

Even WORSE in my opinion, the guy goes on to blame the holster! He titles his article "SAFETY WARNING! Worn Leather Holsters Can Cause Accidental Discharges!"

No buddy... Idiots who continue to use a holster they know doesn't cover the trigger cause NEGLIGENT discharges...

This wouldn't happen with any of my guns, not because they have safeties, but because I don't train myself to deal with faulty holsters! I toss them!
 
Saw this elsewhere, it's the owners fault for not tossing the holster. I believe in the article he even admits flat out that he trained himself to push that crease out when he holstered the weapon, and wonders if he forgot to do that on the day of the ND.
Click to expand...

Well it sounds like he knew better and should have tossed the holster.

Leather is fine for glocks, but i prefer kydex. It's just easier to reholster when running drills. Still, I run my finger along the lip to check for cracks daily after I put the holster on and before I holster the weapon.
 
When is the last time you heard of an unintended discharge that couldn't be traced back to mishandling (it has to be extremely rare or we would see recalls left and right)?? That doesn't change the fact that some semi-auto's have safety features that would minimize the likelihood of THIS situation (something snagging the trigger) leading to a discharge. Glock (among others) doesn't; some love it for this, some don't. Even the most responsible can make a mistake (not that I would have kept using this obviously messed up holster!), and some firearms are built with this in mind. Glock isn't, no need to :cuss::banghead::fire:
 
Unless there's a mechanical failure, if the gun fires when you don't intend for it to be fired, then it's a negligent discharge. "Accidental" and "unintended" are weasel words intended to deflect blame from the negligent operator.

And look at that poor, abused, holster. Galco and most of the others produce quality products, but they have no control over their merchandise after it's purchased. They're not to blame when the customer treats their vital, self-defense gear in such a shabby manner.
 
If the injured person had any kind of reinforced holster it would never have happened. Instead of a thin cheap leather hoster pinched between his belt and and body. Wonder how he ever hostered it before this happened. Least he's luckly enough to live and learn with no more damage than he received. That could have been any of several companies guns and done the same thing. Looking at those pictures the holster looks like a lefty holster that he use as a righty inside the belt. It is double thick only on one side. Not ment for the way he used it for sure.
 
Echoing what everyone else said about the holster, but also, it is gibberish to say it could never happen with a 1911. And I switched from a Glock to a 1911. Someone who would let their equipment go THAT FAR into disrepair could also fail to put a 1911 on safe or let it get worked off in the waistband, (I know, it has happened to me,) press down on it on the grip safety to make sure it's snug, and the next thing they know, they will be showing embarrassing photos of their butt wound on the internet. If you let it happen with a bad holster and a Glock, you will do it a hundred times with the safety ON on a 1911 until that one day you leave it off. BANG.
 
This is a good example of why I use only stiff Kydex holsters for Glocks.

Raven Concealment Systems for OWB.
Crossbreed for IWB.

You still have to take care reholstering into a Crossbreed. But for range time when I'm doing alot of reholstering I only use Kydex OWB like the Ravens with my Glock.




In other news: I was testing different trigger setups and realized that the wrong setup enables me to bump fire my Glock 23! Back to the drawing board. :(
 
Last edited:
Another thread started to blame negligent gun discharges on the Glock platform when it was either poor gun handling or a faulty holster. The post that shows a severely worn holster and then blaming the gun for a discharge that the holster caused is just pathetic. I could care less that your 1911 might not have discharged. Why is it that 1911 owners will go out of their way to tell everybody how much they hate Glocks? I'm getting tired of hearing the rubbish that they spew out.

Next I think you need to start a thread blaming your hand for slapping your wife. If you don't like Glocks that's great, but thread after thread attacking the platform because you don't want one is a waste of time.
 
No, it's not the guns fault, but I know I can't be the only person who see's it a a flaw that we try to enforce only a single adjective on a situation.

Was this negligent? Yes. Was it unintended? YES. Was it accidental? YES.

The words aren't mutually exclusive people. We are the most intellectually capable critters to ever walk this Earth. We are more than capable of parsing a situation more complex than just slapping a single adjective on a situation.
 
Last edited:
Incidents like these are one reason why I carry a DA/SA Sig. With a gun with a hammer and a DA/SA or DAO system, you should ride the hammer down into the holster. With these systems, this owner would have felt the hammer moving back when the trigger met the leather. And, with his thumb blocking the rearward travel of the hammer, the gun could not have discharged.
 
Are so hypersensitive to any criticism to their beloved glock that they forget to read and comprehend.

The thread was started about uninteded glock discharges.

unintended:
adj
not intended; unplanned
Click to expand...


"So hypersensitive to criticism of their beloved Glock"...

Well when the <person> is blaming a gun for a completely non-gun related equipment failure that he was aware of and never corrected, despite it being a pretty cheap fix, and then claims that the wonderful Gun X (in this case the 1911) would have let him carry on being negligent with his equipment for far longer, he needs to be corrected. Not just because he is aggressively wrong, but because these forums are read by a lot of people new to guns and shooting who don't know any better, and probably ouldn't realize that it really is entirely this guy's own damn fault.

It has nothing to do with anyone's "beloved Glocks", there are literally dozens and dozens of makes and models of handgun that don't have a manual safety, but I didn't see him or anyone else trying to throw S&W, CZ, Springfield Armory (Oh wait, the XD has that rere grip safety, nver mind), FN, Taurus, Beretta, Walther, EAA, or any of the other companies that offer pistols with no active manual safety under the bus did I?

It's like a slightly less egregious myth like the "Glocks can go through metal detectors" garbage that was all over the news 25 years ago. It's completely false, but people who don't know any better might take it seriously, and then you have to have mind-numbingly tedious conversations explaining how guns are made of metal, or in this case that Glocks are no different from dozens of other guns in their lack of a manual safety and what matters is user care.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

gun_with_a_view
  • Locked
New Accidental Shooter On The Block
2
Replies
42
Views
2K
Walkalong
Walkalong
G
  • Locked
Why trigger safety on Glock?
2
Replies
41
Views
4K
MythBuster
M
D
  • Locked
Glocks... Operator error or Weapon error?
2 3
Replies
53
Views
3K
holsm50
H
J
  • Locked
Discharges - Accident or negligence
2
Replies
28
Views
2K
WardenWolf
W
R
  • Locked
Accidental discharge?
2
Replies
44
Views
2K
magsnubby
M
Back
Top