Oh this is rich, ruin a Glock with a lever "safety"

Status
Not open for further replies.
Here's the problem with manual safeties as I see it: The reason we accept that a gun is loaded whether it really is or not, is because humans make mistakes. A manual safety is no different. To be truly safe you must have the mindset that the safety is always off. And if you do that, what's the point in having one?

Again, the brain is the only safety that really works.
 
So then an argument could be made that a 1911 does not need a safety? The brain is the safety that fails the most often.
 
Basically, who CARES about it? The majority of the people don't want it. It isn't like Glock is putting them on all the new models. So, it's not a concerning matter. However, there are enough people that do want it that an aftermarket company us able to make money doing it. LIKE THE MAJORITY of aftermarket Glock (or other duty pistol) upgrades it doesn't do anything other than make the gun a little more personalized to the owner's taste. It is really a non-issue.


This! No way in hell I would put one of these on any of my Glocks. Also, I don't give a rat's hind end what other folks do with their weapons. I think that my free time is better spent opposing the anti-gun establishment that engaging in senseless arguments with my fellow pro-Second Amendment brothers and sisters.
 
I would consider it if it was a facotry option. I don't think I'd want to chop my own Glock though. As a concept it has it's place for sure. Everyone's sense (yes, feelings) will be different as to what they are comfortable with. Most important is to be familiar and comfortable with your weapons.
 
This thread is comical at best and pointless at worse... WHO CARES??? :banghead: Clearly no one here!! They are more interested in making themselves and each other laugh and others to feel like dog crap! :mad:

To say a safety is a must or not is pointless. Should we ban revolvers because virtually none of them have safeties?!? Should we ban all autos that don't have safeties!?!

You guys are just feeding fuel to the fire in regards to gun control. The next thing you know some gun control freak is going to catch wind of this thread and make it mandatory that we carry. whether serious or not I almost spit my coffee all over the computer when Vonderek said...
Vonderek said:
Still not safe enough for me. I'm gonna wait for a frame-mounted keylock before I order mine. For now I carry the frame in one pocket and the slide in the other and it only takes me a sec to assemble the gun and get it into action!

So think about that and leave the pointless opinions to yourselves and let's get to talking about something that matters as opposed to personal preference topics.
 
Anyone here actually have a Glock with Cominolli safety?

Or even handled one?

Two of my Glocks have added safeties.
icon14.gif
Glad I did it, would do it again, and have no plans to add safeties to my other Glocks.

Manual safeties have more purposes than preventing NDs by untrained owners. Guns can be used in different roles, in different environments. In some of those roles and environments, a manual safety makes more sense than in others.

Interesting thought, about "ruining" a Glock--I supposed you mean ruining the aesthetics? ;)
 
Last edited:
Glocks are designed with a long, awful trigger pull to do away with the safety. Of course, then you have to deal with that long, awful trigger pull.
 
Doesn't bother me. I carry a Glock 19 and wouldn't add a manual safety to it, but if you want to add one to your gun feel free.

FWIW, some departments require a manual safety on their sidearms and Glock will add one for you (slide-mounted, I believe) if you place a large enough order.
 
Glocks are designed with a long trigger pull and no external manual safety to meet the preferences of some military and many law-enforcement procurers. And are sometimes provided with factory safeties to meet the preferences of others.
More accurate this way?
 
I own, shoot, compete and carry Glocks and revolvers. However, I like for my PISTOLS to have a manual safety. It is a piece of mind thing. When I purchased my M&P 9 and my M&P 45, I chose the model with the optional safety.

I believe that Mas Ayoob's preference for manual safeties has to do with handgun retention, or situations where someone had gain possession of your gun and the well documented fact that sometimes an activated safety can save your life in those situations where you are struggling for a weapon or you have lost possession of your weapon to your opponent.
 
It seems contradictory for the macho no-safety set here to claim they are so gun-proficient they don't need a safety, while at the same time saying a safety is too-complicated and would slow them down. Which is it? If you can't figure out how to use a safety should you be carrying a gun?

The famous video with the black LE 'Glock foty' guy shooting himself is often used to say what an idiot he was, I say it is why I don't use Glocks or any other guns with no safety, DA autos or revolvers excluded. That particular incident would have been less likely if there were a safety or hard DA first pull.

Even Col. Jeff Cooper once had a ND.
 
Paul7 said:
That particular incident would have been less likely if there were a safety or hard DA first pull.
That particular incident would have been totally avoided if the officer'd have kept his sidearm in its holster - where it belonged.

You can't fix stupid.
 
That particular incident would have been totally avoided if the officer'd have kept his sidearm in its holster - where it belonged.

You can't fix stupid.

I agree. Genius has its limits but ignorance knows no bounds. Most unintentional firearm discharges are the fault of the operator and not the design of the weapon. Valid arguments can be made either way when it comes down to manual safeties.
 
I decided a long time ago that if I ever choke down buying a Glock, I will be adding a Cominoli to it.

Still don't own one. :D
 
It seems contradictory for the macho no-safety set here to claim they are so gun-proficient they don't need a safety, while at the same time saying a safety is too-complicated and would slow them down. Which is it? If you can't figure out how to use a safety should you be carrying a gun?

The famous video with the black LE 'Glock foty' guy shooting himself is often used to say what an idiot he was, I say it is why I don't use Glocks or any other guns with no safety, DA autos or revolvers excluded. That particular incident would have been less likely if there were a safety or hard DA first pull. OR IF THE GUY HAD KEEP HIS FINGER OF THE TRIGGER OR CLEAR THE WEAPON BEFORE ENTERING A CLASSROOM FULL OF KIDS.

Even Col. Jeff Cooper once had a ND.

i added a few things.
 
Last edited:
I don't see the need for a manual safety on a glock but I do own an XD45 and I like the grip safety. The grip safety isn't really needed but it is a passive safety that requires me to do nothing more than grip the gun normally so I don't see a problem with it. If I owned a glock I wouldn't feel the need for a manual safety, I would invest in a good holster through.

I also own a Sig P238 and I am happy to have the manual safety on that pistol because of the single action trigger. I carry it cocked and locked in my front pocket in a pocket holster and I haven't had a problem yet.

It really just comes down to personal preference. If you really don't feel comfortable with out the safety then go for it or maybe look at a different gun.
 
I have 2 SA .22LR range pistols with super light triggers and they aren't even drop safe. They have manual safeties. I NEVER use them. When I want to shoot them, I load them. When I'm done shooting them, I unload them. Even if the manual safety was on, they still wouldn't be drop safe. When I carry one in a holster, it's with an empty chamber. I have never had reason for either of these guns to leave my shooting grip with a round in the chamber, with one exception - clearing a jam for a friend and passing the gun back, muzzle pointed downrange.

Have I ever pulled a trigger meaning the gun to fire, but accidentally had the safety on? Dozens of times.

Have I ever accidentally pulled the trigger when I didn't want the gun to fire? No.

Does a manual safety have a place? Yes. IMO, there at least 3 good reasons to have one.

1. Holster substitute. The only handgun I'd keep chambered and lying around unholstered is a gun with a reasonably heavy trigger and/or a manual safety, and complete drop safety. I do not leave a loaded and unholstered Glock lying around, but I do that with some of my other DA pistols with manual safety. That is a useful feature for this purpose, whether you want to have a gun on a nightstand or center console, or w/e. It takes 2 hands to remove a gun from a loose retention holster or to rack the slide, and only one hand to pick up a loose gun, acquire an appropriate grip, then finally flick off the safety. Adding a good, stiff manual safety to a Glock would give it this one benefit at the cost of increasing the manual of arms when you are not doing this one specific thing.

2. If a gun has a very light trigger pull and you intend to keep it chambered. A Glock trigger is lighter than most DA revolvers. But the gun is lighter, too. For me, the trigger weight must be heavier, as the weight of the gun goes up. It's physics. If you mishandle or bobble a heavier gun, the trigger can get pulled harder. Also, the huge triggerguard on a Glock is a safety feature. Most revolvers have a very thin trigger guard. I think Glocks are just as safe as a typical DA revolver.

3. If a gun is otherwise not dropsafe, but the manual safety is there to make it so. Of course, it would be preferable if the gun were drop safe even without the manual safety being applied, but not all guns are designed as well as a Glock. The only example I can think of is my P-64. The manual safety is the only thing that blocks the firing pin, which is why I use it even though the DA pull is 25 lbs! Or course, I'd want to cite the 1911, but most are not completely drop safe even with the safety on, though the safety helps in this regard by locking the sear.
 
Last edited:
OP assumes that those who like manual safeties are automatically unsafe in their gun handling.

That's a prime example of an all too common logical fallacy - "begging the question".

OP should feel free to continue banging his head :)banghead:), but for an altogether different reason.
 
A lot of idiocy in this thread so I stopped reading after the first page.


The REAL purpose of this safety kit is for police officers that want to carry a Glock but their department regs require a pistol with a manual safety. Period.
 
I've been thinking about an XD in 9mm, and keep coming back to the fact that I prefer a manual safety. I do keep my finger off the bang switch, but I also often wear layers of clothes w/ drawstrings in the jackets. With Murphy's law and all, I do have concerns about something getting tangled in the trigger when I'm reholstering.

I wouldn't add one to a Glock (and don't shoot a Glock), but it's enough to keep we away from the XD, for now.
 
A lot of idiocy in this thread so I stopped reading after the first page.


The REAL purpose of this safety kit is for police officers that want to carry a Glock but their department regs require a pistol with a manual safety. Period.
It's really hard for me to believe this target market is big enough for it to be the only purpose, "period." I can't imagine very many departments that would prohibit a Glock but allow a gun that has been significantly altered from factory spec in such a fundamental way. Some departments don't even allow officers to even make simple repairs or parts replacements to their guns. They have to go back to the armorer.
 
I have carried and used a 1911 for over forty years. Carrying in Condition One is a way of life. Sweeping the safety off is subconscious. Years ago, I could hit the A zone from seven yards in .75 seconds from the holster. Chapman high ride.
I have a couple of handguns. One is a G34. I bought it because. I have revolvers. I have DA/SA handguns. I have some SA semis. I have SA revolvers.
But I carry a 1911. Simply because all these years has been imbedded in my subconscious and I know I would go on auto pilot.

Now a curious question.

How many of you that are against the Glock manual safety have faithfully carried a 1911 before you owned a Glock. Simply curious.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top