Glock unintended discharges
- Thread starter charlie echo
- Start date
- Status
Glock knows very well that anything that comes into contact with the trigger of its pistol can potentially cause an unintentional discharge. Snagging the Glock trigger on a holster or a article of clothing, with a resulting accidental discharge, has occurred on numerous occasions. Glock is well aware of this. I am not suggesting that Glock can prevent someone from using a worn-out holster. What I am suggesting is that Glock knows how to decrease the risk of injury to the user when this happens. Glock has sold hundreds of thousands of pistols with conventional manual safeties all around the world, but refuses to sell them here in the U.S.
As I stated earlier, people sometimes make mistakes in the handling of firearms. It happens. Most responsible manufacturers try and incorporate safety features to minimize the risk of injury when these mistakes occur. Glock, unfortunately, does not. That is why there have been so many cases of Glock leg, and worse. In my judgment, a manual safety or a grip safety most likely would have prevented the unintentional discharge that happened to this guy.
Last edited:
How about all the other pistol and revolver designs without an active manual safety? If you follow all the standard handling practices none of these pistols are any more prone to unintended discharges than any other platform, and something like a wrecked old holster is a pretty obvious weak link, it's hard to miss that something you use on a daily basis is worn out.
Mishandling and no regard for the safety and suitability of your carry rig is not a Glock-specific problem, it is something simple that everyone is responsible for, regardless of the platform they carry.
Even if they chose to offer their models with manual safeties optional, what about the pretty large portion of users who opt for the pistol in it's original, intended design? doesn't make them negligent or anything.
Practicing due diligence will both prevent and mitigate any unfortunate, unforseen incidents. Ignoring the state of your holster when you carry a loaded firearm is not practicing due diligence.
Mishandling and no regard for the safety and suitability of your carry rig is not a Glock-specific problem, it is something simple that everyone is responsible for, regardless of the platform they carry.
Even if they chose to offer their models with manual safeties optional, what about the pretty large portion of users who opt for the pistol in it's original, intended design? doesn't make them negligent or anything.
Practicing due diligence will both prevent and mitigate any unfortunate, unforseen incidents. Ignoring the state of your holster when you carry a loaded firearm is not practicing due diligence.
Ledgehammer
Member
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2010
- Messages
- 492
I'm not so sure a guy that would use a holster in that bad of condition would even operate a safety properly if he had one. When I saw the way that holster was bent, it looked like an accident waiting to happen. That's what I view as negligence.
RidgwayCO
Member
Man, with all this talk about "unintentional discharge" and "accidental discharge" you'd think that these Glocks are going off by themselves! Unfortunately, it requires negligent handling by a negligent person to cause a negligent discharge. Anything else is just "pretty words" to make people feel better about their negligent actions.
I'm not a Glock fanboy (although I have a few), but blaming the manufacturer for negligent operation is just stupid. If you can't be trusted to own and/or use a weapon that doesn't have multiple safeties, then by all means get them! Heck, get 'em all! But don't make the rest of us put up with them because you refuse to be trained or take responsibility for your actions.
OK, rant over. (I feel strangely relaxed now...)
I'm not a Glock fanboy (although I have a few), but blaming the manufacturer for negligent operation is just stupid. If you can't be trusted to own and/or use a weapon that doesn't have multiple safeties, then by all means get them! Heck, get 'em all! But don't make the rest of us put up with them because you refuse to be trained or take responsibility for your actions.
OK, rant over. (I feel strangely relaxed now...)
Your point is well taken, but there's more to the human factor than the ability to employ a manual safety. I'm trying to be skeptical, not cynical. Please allow these questions:
You go on to note that Glock sells manual safety models around the world, but not here in the states. Assuming that the owner from the story had forgotten to engage his manual safety, so all he was left was his traditional Glock safe-action, and the incident occurred as reported... whose fault is it? Regardless of the presence of manual safety or not, this incident could have happened, and I'm willing to bet that manual safetied firearms have seen this very incident. Owner forgets, discharge.
You concede that people make mistakes handling firearms. It happens. However, your statement above then implies that Glock is an irresponsible manufacturer because they do not minimize the risk of injury when these mistakes occur. Last I checked, an unsafe weapon is an unsafe weapon and a manual safety, which requires human manipulation, is no less capable of injury than a gun without a manual safety.
Not remembering to use the manual safety with a resulting accidental discharge, has occurred on numerous occasions. Glock is well aware of this, too.
If the ultimate point is that a manual safety should exist on every firearm, I can't say I agree or even disagree. Your point is well taken and I'm wishing to sound skeptical, not cynical. I love the 1911, it is what it is. I love the Glock, it is what it is, but I lean more toward people should not get so comfortable with the safeties inherent on a weapon, and maintain an awareness of their gear, gun, and person that is just short of paranoid.
I am in complete agreement with your comments that there is no substitute for safe handling practices and due diligence on the part of the user. It goes without saying that anyone who chooses to carry or handle a firearm has an awesome responsibility, not only for his own safety, but the safety of others around him. The same can be said of driving a car. I am not attempting to minimize personal responsibility for one's own actions.
Having said this, I also believe that firearm safety is a duel responsibility. While the user is responsible for exercising the utmost care in handling and maintaining his firearm and equipment, the manufacturer also has a responsibility for designing a firearm that incorporates reasonable safety features that minimize the risk of injury in the event that user makes a mistake. Some of the people responding to this thread seem to think that the manufacturer has no responsibility whatsoever for safety, and that anyone who makes a mistake while handling a firearm gets what he deserves. I don't see it that way, and frankly some of the best firearm designers the world has ever known haven't seen it that way. The basic safety features I discussed earlier (ie. manual safety, grip safety, etc.) have been around since the very first semi-automatic pistol was designed in the late 1800's. It makes sense for a manufacturer to incorporate safety features that protect the user against his own errors. Until Glock came along in the 1980's and eliminated the manual safety, virtually every manufacturer in the world designed their pistols with manual safeties and/or grip safeties. Why? Because they prevent injuries.
"Safety" when it comes to gun design should not be a bad word. It should be a standard that every manufacturer strives for. I don't hear anyone complaining about Glock's drop safety. In fact, most Glock owners applaud it. Obviously, a responsible user is not supposed to drop his gun. Some would say that it is negligence to do so. But it happens. Glock recognized this risk and sought to protect users from their own negligence by designing a good drop safety. That's a good thing. My problem with Glock is that he completely ignored the risk of discharge through inadvertent contact with the trigger. In my opinion, that is irresponsible.
With respect to your comment about revolvers and other platforms not having manual safeties, I do not believe that a revolver carries the same risk of accidental discharge as a semi-auto. I certainly do not believe that a revolver would have discharged under the conditions described in the holster incident. As to other platforms that are similar to the Glock and fail to incorporate basic safety features like a manual safety or grip safety, my criticisms would be the same.
Last edited:
This is a great, and I believe very fair response to my inquiries as well.
For the record, if an AD/ND happens to someone with a Glock, my attitude isn't that they deserved it. My attitude is that they could have prevented it, and those are two different attitudes with the latter being way more helpful, especially in re: to RKBA.
Last edited:
I don't agree with your comment. I read the full article and saw all of the photos taken. My impression was that this guy was not some "numb nuts" or an idiot, but rather a responsible gun owner who made a mistake. In fact, I thought it took a lot of guts to come forward with the story so that others might avoid the same mistake.
Texshooter
Member
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2004
- Messages
- 481
At least you HAD a holster.
I pray I am never near some of the idiots who post on websites talking about how they carry a chambered Glock in their pocket sans holster.
I pray I am never near some of the idiots who post on websites talking about how they carry a chambered Glock in their pocket sans holster.
Single Action Six
Member
Glock Trigger Safety..!..?
I agree with all that "Holsm50" said.
Thinking along the same lines, why is it Glock's the only manufacturer I know of that places their "SAFETY" right in the middle of their "TRIGGER"..!!..?
That's like having your brake in the middle of your gas peddle. Now how smart would THAT be?
NO, I'm not really a Glock hater.. I just think it's a "stupid" design that way. I'm willing to bet that some of the Glock discharges were because the owners bought into the unspoken Glock brainwashing of "with the safety in the trigger, your chances of problem discharges are reduced".
Single Action Six
I agree with all that "Holsm50" said.
Thinking along the same lines, why is it Glock's the only manufacturer I know of that places their "SAFETY" right in the middle of their "TRIGGER"..!!..?
That's like having your brake in the middle of your gas peddle. Now how smart would THAT be?
NO, I'm not really a Glock hater.. I just think it's a "stupid" design that way. I'm willing to bet that some of the Glock discharges were because the owners bought into the unspoken Glock brainwashing of "with the safety in the trigger, your chances of problem discharges are reduced".
Single Action Six
Ledgehammer
Member
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2010
- Messages
- 492
What mistake do you think he made? I can count more than one, but I wouldn't call him numbnuts or an idiot either like you suggested. Just careless.
It isn't an active safety, the safety bar is just to help prevent the trigger from being operated by a non-finger item. In this case the problem item protruded too far into the trigger guard for the Glock's problem reducer to help.
How would you feel if it didn't have that at all, like so many other pistols without an active safety? Would it be better to not have it at all, or to have the simple item that could help prevent a discharge due to the trigger snagging on something?
dprice3844444
member
is the guy gonna sue for brain damage?that'll teachem to use cheap holsters
KimberUltra
Member
Not to knock anyone's choice of holster but that holster in the pictures seemed kinda shoddy for a glock, even if it was new. Didn't seem like there was a whole lot to it. Maybe it's just me.
Zerodefect
member
It's a drop safety only.
Zerodefect
member
There are a few pistols out with Glock style drop safeties. The M&P is similar.
Don't want the gun to go off? Don't pull the trigger. It's that simple. No Glock has AD'd without someone or something pulling the trigger.
alsaqr
Member
It's called negligence.
jackpinesavages
member
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2009
- Messages
- 809
Well, thanks for being honest about the holster causing the AD, and not just the pistol going off by itself, w/o cause.
Here. hold my beer......
Here. hold my beer......
Hello all. First post here. Glad to be part of the group, and I hope to learn or contribute something with each visit.
I read through the entire thread here, but didn't find my point addressed, so here goes...
By looking at the pictures, I got the impression that it was not fully holstered just before the ND, due to the amount of trigger travel required to cause discharge. It seems that pressure on the muzzle brought the gun up and slightly out of the holster. The resulting re-holstering (downward pressure on the grip by hand, a seatbelt, etc.) is what then caused the discharge.
Having said that... had he been carrying a 1911, is it possible that a grip safety in this case would then be just as ineffective as no safety?
I read through the entire thread here, but didn't find my point addressed, so here goes...
By looking at the pictures, I got the impression that it was not fully holstered just before the ND, due to the amount of trigger travel required to cause discharge. It seems that pressure on the muzzle brought the gun up and slightly out of the holster. The resulting re-holstering (downward pressure on the grip by hand, a seatbelt, etc.) is what then caused the discharge.
Having said that... had he been carrying a 1911, is it possible that a grip safety in this case would then be just as ineffective as no safety?
BrainOnSigs
Member
This has always been a pet peeve of mine. Folks spend $400-$800 for an excellent combat handgun and then spend as little as possible on a holster for it. They complain about it being uncomfortable and/or having poor retention capabilities.
My preference is a good leather holster with a reinforced mouth. I carry my handguns IWB.....mostly using a Milt Sparks Versa Max II. Well made, reinforced mouth, excellent retention, comfortable, etc.
I shoot quite a bit. I take several defensive shooting courses a year. I draw from concealment, shoot, then reholster repeatedly. A holster like a VM-II gives me confidence that the gun will stay put while moving around and I won't have an issue reholstering.
Spend the money and buy a decent rig....not only a holster but a solid belt also.
My preference is a good leather holster with a reinforced mouth. I carry my handguns IWB.....mostly using a Milt Sparks Versa Max II. Well made, reinforced mouth, excellent retention, comfortable, etc.
I shoot quite a bit. I take several defensive shooting courses a year. I draw from concealment, shoot, then reholster repeatedly. A holster like a VM-II gives me confidence that the gun will stay put while moving around and I won't have an issue reholstering.
Spend the money and buy a decent rig....not only a holster but a solid belt also.
Zerodefect
member
That is possible. But unlikely. Even with that garbage holster his luck has to be terrible to get that Glock to go off. Usually the Glocks wide trigger guard pushes the holster away from the trigger. That's how Glocks work with tight Kydex at least.
And yes, the 1911 grip safety deos get depressed sometimes in a car seat or by heavy set Ohio shaped people. Still the 1911 has a thumb safety. Getting both safeties overrided and pulling the trigger on a 1911 to get it to go off is impossible on accident. Never heard of that happening ever. 1911's are still the safest pistol out there IMO.
hardluk1
member
Anyone think that this same guy could have shot himself with a REVOLVER too. Probably, so let start bashing revolver desogn in general.
Get a life and stop all the my gun would not have done this cr*p. Stupid allows strang things to happen like useing a warn out holster for a job it was never intended for. He has more than likely learned by his mistake so whats the point.
Get a life and stop all the my gun would not have done this cr*p. Stupid allows strang things to happen like useing a warn out holster for a job it was never intended for. He has more than likely learned by his mistake so whats the point.
- Status
