Andrew Wyatt
Member
My 1911 is easy to shoot and has a more positive safty. too bad it's not as reliable as the glock.
Glock's trigger safety not enough?
- Thread starter DentThat
- Start date
- Status
Dan Crocker
Member
Holy #^$% I can't believe this keeps coming up.
If you are soooo worried about it, THEN DON'T GET ONE! Am I the only one in the room!?!?!?!?
If you are soooo worried about it, THEN DON'T GET ONE! Am I the only one in the room!?!?!?!?
Dead on! Too bad there is no such thing as personal responsibility for being an idiot anymore!
You have the wrong 1911.
The OP was a reasonable question – I’ve wondered the same myself; now I know: Glocks don’t have a safety per the design – the trigger safety was never designed to stop the trigger from being pulled inadvertently. If you don’t like it, don’t buy a Glock.
Got it, thanks.
Hawk
Member
I've always been of the assumption that the Glock does a good job of acting like a DAO revolver.
However, I've also found that people are sometimes excellent judges of their own limitations even if sometimes on a subconscious level.
If, holding a Glock, someone's stomach starts doing flip-flops, I would assume he or she is an excellent candidate for a trigger block, add-on lever or similar. It's not like the "Glock issue" was so far under the radar it hasn't inspired an entire cottage industry of add-on safety suppliers, most of which seem to be deriving a handsome living therefrom.
So, if a private citizen contemplating a Glock feels their sphincter clench up such that they can't stand without bringing the chair with them, they should either not buy a Glock or invest in some aftermarket muscle relaxant such as a push-out trigger block.
If issued a Glock and denied the "buy something else" option, I'd support the option to add an aftermarket gizmo of some type.
What's puzzling is that, on rare occasion, someone who feels the Glock manual of arms is an accident waiting to happen will post proposing that the Glock safety is insufficient and they feel better buying something with an additional level. The puzzling part, of course, is that they've already solved their personal issues by buying something else and are apparently here solely to tweak those that don't share their personal issues.
But I guess that's what "versus" threads are all about.
However, I've also found that people are sometimes excellent judges of their own limitations even if sometimes on a subconscious level.
If, holding a Glock, someone's stomach starts doing flip-flops, I would assume he or she is an excellent candidate for a trigger block, add-on lever or similar. It's not like the "Glock issue" was so far under the radar it hasn't inspired an entire cottage industry of add-on safety suppliers, most of which seem to be deriving a handsome living therefrom.
So, if a private citizen contemplating a Glock feels their sphincter clench up such that they can't stand without bringing the chair with them, they should either not buy a Glock or invest in some aftermarket muscle relaxant such as a push-out trigger block.
If issued a Glock and denied the "buy something else" option, I'd support the option to add an aftermarket gizmo of some type.
What's puzzling is that, on rare occasion, someone who feels the Glock manual of arms is an accident waiting to happen will post proposing that the Glock safety is insufficient and they feel better buying something with an additional level. The puzzling part, of course, is that they've already solved their personal issues by buying something else and are apparently here solely to tweak those that don't share their personal issues.
But I guess that's what "versus" threads are all about.
mljdeckard
Member
I very much agree with Mainsail. If you can't keep a Glock safe, you can't keep anything else safe either.
They are only really safe . . . if you are "professional" enough to carry one!
Here's a professional ATF agent teaching the importance of gun safety to little elementary school kids. Luckily, he only shot himself . . . and survived to remain stoooo-pid.
Funny video . . . and true:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_91jcFTbLE8
This one . . . not so funny, as the idiot shot another LEO also, then dropped his tupperware on the floor where prisoners were lined up mere feet away . . .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHS_9iQ0P2Q
Here's a professional ATF agent teaching the importance of gun safety to little elementary school kids. Luckily, he only shot himself . . . and survived to remain stoooo-pid.
Funny video . . . and true:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_91jcFTbLE8
This one . . . not so funny, as the idiot shot another LEO also, then dropped his tupperware on the floor where prisoners were lined up mere feet away . . .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHS_9iQ0P2Q
+1 for mainsails post, I can't believe the people who worry about those of us who buy, carry, shoot our glocks I NEVER put anything including my finger into the trigger guard unless I want to pull the trigger and destroy something. why is this so hard for some to understand and do if someone can't trust themselves enough to keep from having a ND with a glock then you shouldn't own any firearm you would just be an accident waiting to happen.
jaholder1971
Member
I think this is the point where someone's supposed to give the whole "keep the booger hook off the bang switch" speech.
Like abstinence, it works 100 percent where practiced.
Like abstinence, it works 100 percent where practiced.
The agency I worked for changed over to Glocks in 1998. I was a firearms instructor so I was privy to all the details of any unintentional discharges so I could incorporate the mistakes in teaching safety I retired in 2005 and in those 7-8 years there were three UIDs I remember:
2 were while clearing the gun prior to cleaning. One happened in a kevlar clearing station which worked as advertised. No injuries in either.
An agent that liked to carry Mexican in an appendix position had the trigger snag on the buttons for his braces (he did buy good suits apparently) and caught the round in his thigh.
There was another but that was with a H&K.
That's 3 with Glocks over 7-8 years with asampling over maybe 15,000 in use by the agency.
Prior to getting Glocks we had 1-3 UIDs a year with DA revolvers and DA autos just in my office. We never had a UID with a SA auto.
Glocks are no more unsafe than any other handgun as long as you use a good holster and follow the rules.
2 were while clearing the gun prior to cleaning. One happened in a kevlar clearing station which worked as advertised. No injuries in either.
An agent that liked to carry Mexican in an appendix position had the trigger snag on the buttons for his braces (he did buy good suits apparently) and caught the round in his thigh.
There was another but that was with a H&K.
That's 3 with Glocks over 7-8 years with asampling over maybe 15,000 in use by the agency.
Prior to getting Glocks we had 1-3 UIDs a year with DA revolvers and DA autos just in my office. We never had a UID with a SA auto.
Glocks are no more unsafe than any other handgun as long as you use a good holster and follow the rules.
GregGry
Member
Simple designs are bad when it comes to people who get complacent a lot. Glocks are very simple, thus complacency can cause issues.
jester_s1
Member
Good one, Mainsail.
I'd add voter registration cards, P.A. Systems, and children to that list also.
I'd add voter registration cards, P.A. Systems, and children to that list also.
mgkdrgn
Member
Mainsail
Member
TAB said:
They wreck a lot of Crown Victoria Police Interceptors too, and many more die doing so. Should we take their cars and give them scooters?
VINTAGE-SLOTCARS said:
Maybe we should ban all guns then? Or just guns that don’t have an external safety? Or people who don’t use proper spelling, grammar, and punctuation? The police (who, by the way, are civilians too) are no more or less apt to have a negligent discharge. We might expect more from them because they are supposed to be better trained, but many times they are not. It takes a lot of training (and $) to train the stupid out of some people.
Guillermo
member
That would be funny. When Bush was still governor of Texas he would run around Town Lake and he would be followed by a Texas Ranger on a mountain bike. Even with the radio, the guns and the mirrored shades, it is impossible to look tough on a bicycle. I would bet the same is true of a scooter.
Dan Crocker
Member
Ha ha, especially when this little button on the corner of the 'reply' screen will check and correct your spelling and grammar for you. My goodness!
Whenever people bring up the fact that double action revolvers don't have a manual safety either, they neglect to mention that revolvers have around a 12 pound trigger pull while the Glock pull is 5.5 pounds. The weight of the revolver trigger makes it very difficult to unintentially pull the trigger.
oneounceload
member
Glocks are easy to operate and no more safe or unsafe than any other pistol - if you don't know how to operate the gun safely, then perhaps you should be limited to a baseball bat.
The ONLY safety you need is the one between your ears........
If the grip safety is so much better, than why do 1911's have to have a namual safety in addition?
The ONLY safety you need is the one between your ears........
If the grip safety is so much better, than why do 1911's have to have a namual safety in addition?
Hawk
Member
Say what? Do I need to edit user cp or something?
Izzit browser specific?
/hijack
Hawk
Member
Those few of us that are accused of reading too much Jeff Cooper will note that the Great One pinned his grip safety. I'm curmudgeon enough that I believe any manufacturer offering a "Jeff Cooper Commemorative" should pre-emptively pin the grip safety. That's an opinion not shared by anyone else so far as I know.
I don't recall if the thumb safety or grip safety wasn't part of JMB's original design. JMB was a accommodating sort so both are there now but t'wasn't meant to be so.
KBintheSLC
Member
I am impressed... 2 pages and still no rabid Glock haters telling us how stupid and reckless we are for owning them. Congrats.
BTW... To the OP if you do a search for <glock trigger safety> or <glock accidental/negligent discharge> you will find that this has been hashed out hundreds of times here... the result is always the same. It just becomes a good Glock - bad Glock argument.
In the end... Glocks are not for people with bad safety etiquette... come to think of it, guns are not for people with bad safety etiquette.
...
BTW... To the OP if you do a search for <glock trigger safety> or <glock accidental/negligent discharge> you will find that this has been hashed out hundreds of times here... the result is always the same. It just becomes a good Glock - bad Glock argument.
In the end... Glocks are not for people with bad safety etiquette... come to think of it, guns are not for people with bad safety etiquette.
...
The Glock's trigger safety is not enough for me. I prefer the XD's design, for a number of reasons.
You go ahead and shoot whatever you want. Just don't point it at me.
The only gun I have owned that had no means by which to prevent the gun from going off with a simple trigger pull (hammer to lower or safety to engage) was a single-shot Trap shotgun. It is designed to be transported disassembled, carried open and unloaded, and only loaded at the range firing line.
I came too close to shooting it way too close to my face by accident once, and had a couple AD's (not really negligent, because it was pointed safely downrange, but I didn't intend to shoot the gun at that exact moment). And I'm pretty careful, a LOT more so than many that I see. Probability catches up to all men.
But again, do what you want.
I still don't think that there is any number of posts from the Glock Cult, repeating how a Glock is perfectly safe, will change reality. Furthermore, I think that believing that being in the habit of keeping your finger off the trigger is sufficiently safe -- until it's not.
Glocks are for people who don't believe in Murphy's Law.
I do believe in Murphy's Law. I have known too many people with missing fingers, eyes, etc., to dismiss the possibility of accidents, and to neglect opportunities to minimize that possibility.
That's my opinion, and there's not a damn thing a Glock Cultie can post that will change it.
You go ahead and shoot whatever you want. Just don't point it at me.
The only gun I have owned that had no means by which to prevent the gun from going off with a simple trigger pull (hammer to lower or safety to engage) was a single-shot Trap shotgun. It is designed to be transported disassembled, carried open and unloaded, and only loaded at the range firing line.
I came too close to shooting it way too close to my face by accident once, and had a couple AD's (not really negligent, because it was pointed safely downrange, but I didn't intend to shoot the gun at that exact moment). And I'm pretty careful, a LOT more so than many that I see. Probability catches up to all men.
But again, do what you want.
I still don't think that there is any number of posts from the Glock Cult, repeating how a Glock is perfectly safe, will change reality. Furthermore, I think that believing that being in the habit of keeping your finger off the trigger is sufficiently safe -- until it's not.
Glocks are for people who don't believe in Murphy's Law.
I do believe in Murphy's Law. I have known too many people with missing fingers, eyes, etc., to dismiss the possibility of accidents, and to neglect opportunities to minimize that possibility.
That's my opinion, and there's not a damn thing a Glock Cultie can post that will change it.
KBintheSLC
Member
I spoke too soon.
... and so it begins.
...
I hope you never have to find out for yourself, KB.
Murphy is real.
I do, however, find it amusing that you appear to have some objection to anything other than another "Glocks are GRRREAT!!!" post.
That's not the way that someone who has a rational basis for his opinions reacts to differing views.
Murphy is real.
I do, however, find it amusing that you appear to have some objection to anything other than another "Glocks are GRRREAT!!!" post.
That's not the way that someone who has a rational basis for his opinions reacts to differing views.
KBintheSLC
Member
You are right... I am wrong. Please forgive me for finding your false personal accusations objectionable.
It would be fine by me if people bashed the Glock... your opinion is your right. Unfortunately, guys like you bash Glock owners... here it is again... "Glocks are for people who don't believe in Murphy's Law."
Sorry holy one... us lowly Glock owners are humbled by your sage wisdom in defining our incompetence.
...
- Status
Similar threads
