why no love for grip safeties?

[Hungry Seagull]

Ah yes, good old duct tape will fix that right up.

 

[basicblur]

It was designed to kill another human being

Not mine-I buy the models that are designed to protect human beings!

not be "safe" for carrying about.

Semantics, I know, but I see no problem with designing a safe gun. Just about everything you lay your hands on in daily life can kill you if improperly used, and most of it has some degree of safety designed into it to prevent you from doing so.

I think it was Ayoob that has said "ain't nothing wrong with a Glock, but I wouldn't ever Mexican carry one" (but he has done so with an XD).

Guess everybody has to decide what level of safety they desire?

 

[verdun59]

Can you guys talk some more about Glocks......

 

[KenW.]

The grip safety is why I chose the XD over the other available pistols. I've grow to like and trust them on my 1911s, and now my XD45.

When pressing downward on the rear of the slide with my thumb to get the weapon seated into the holster, the grip safety is realeased, and won't let it fire should something become lodged in the holster or trigger guard.

There shouldn't be a problem with a safety device... Especially a passive device like the grip safety.

 

[sohcgt2]

Can you guys talk some more about Glocks......

On which side of the isle do you stand? Glocks are the best guns ever made, dark and menacing, and they never ever break. Or if you prefer they are cheap ugly plastic imitations of a gun and should be gathered up and destroyed before they cause any more injuries to inocent people.

Hows that Vern.

 

[Reaper!]

Lastly, who ever heard of a revolver with a damned safety? Who would want one? When gun designers start putting "safeties" on revolvers, everyone will be irate and refuse to buy one. Guess what happens when you pull the trigger on your Colt or S&W revolver? What else would you want to happen?... Good grief.
-Bill
You have either never pulled the trigger on a Glock (or similar gun) or you have never pulled the trigger on a revolver. Which is it? To compare those triggers is ignorant at best.

 

[verdun59]

sohcgtz,
Thanks for sharing that info about Glocks. You know they are hardly ever discussed except maybe when the topic is about bullets,
sights, grip safeties, safeties in general, revolvers, NDs, random shootings, ejectors, "clips", bad guys, all the world's police departments,
slides, plastic of any type, dependability, combat, the UN, obama,
triggers, etc., etc.

 

[Davionmaximus]

I love them on my XD. Just that extra bit of safety when holstering with one in the pipe.
Never had an issue with firing it.

 

[sohcgt2]

sohcgtz,
Thanks for sharing that info about Glocks. You know they are hardly ever discussed except maybe when the topic is about bullets,
sights, grip safeties, safeties in general, revolvers, NDs, random shootings, ejectors, "clips", bad guys, all the world's police departments,
slides, plastic of any type, dependability, combat, the UN, obama,
triggers, etc., etc.

I think no one talks about them because they are so hard to find. Until a few days ago I thought they were a myth like dragons and bigfoot.

 

[verdun59]

sohcgt2
Yes they are real but very rare. I saw one once at a gun show but I wasn't interested because it didn't have a manual safety...it was scary looking...

 

[alistaire]

Lastly, who ever heard of a revolver with a damned safety? Who would want one? When gun designers start putting "safeties" on revolvers, everyone will be irate and refuse to buy one. Guess what happens when you pull the trigger on your Colt or S&W revolver? What else would you want to happen?... Good grief.

Smith & Wesson 'Safety Hammerless' - with a grip safety.

(Sorry, Yeti beat me to it.)

 

[sohcgt2]

While I appreciate your respect for safeties and the need for understanding how to operate and to carry through on those principles when handling a firearm, your "negligence" statements are the exact same arguments used by gun control lobbies to sue gun manufacturers. Are you aware of this irony? Case in point, when you say.

Quote:
No safety, or in the case of revolvers lack of safeties, is responsible for some idiot "accidently" shooting something not previously targeted.

, you are (probably unintentionally) making the argument that gun manufacturers share the responsibility for shootings with the gun handlers. In fairness, I believe after reading your whole post that you were trying to lay blame soley on the handler, yet you do implicate the gun maker by such a statement.

I also can appreciate a well laid-out safety design. No reason not to if it doesn't get in the way, but if it causes the least bit of trouble with me operating the system or in my comfort or speed in doing so, I'm not happy with it. Surely a simple safety can help a responsible gun operator to more safely carry or to be protected against accidental discharges if the weapon is dropped. But I'd not go as far as to say that it is negligent in any way to either include or not to include a safety on a gun. I'd rather leave that up to the operator to decide whether the gun he is choosing has adequate safety features for his or her comfort or skill levels. Accidents do happen, but I don't think it is justified to blame someone miles away in another state when they do. Again, not that it was your point, but some of us like to be careful with how we use the word negligent.
-Bill

O.K Bill try this english. There is No safety that is responsible for some idiot "accidently" shooting something not previously targeted.
Guns don't go off by themselves ever. Period. It does not happen, regardless of what lies the nearest person told.
It makes no difference if the gun is genuine Kentucky muzzle loader or a series 80 Colt 1911. Before it will fire certain steps must be taken. NGs are the result of negligence.

 

[KenW.]

BTW for all those that think JMB designed the 1911 with one should read some history of the guns development. To be precise the original desing of the pistol was single action with no safeties other than you had to thumb the hammer to fire the weapon, just as you would any single action revolver of the day. The manual safety and then the grip safety was a design requirement of the military, not some brainchild of JMB who obviously though the pistol would be quite safe without them.

My understanding was that Browning already had put the grip safety on the pistol, and the Army insisted on the thumb safety.