Why not make a version of Glock with a thumb safety?

[JR24]

I'd have no problem with a safety on a Glock if it were well designed. You could choose to use it or not. Carried in a proper holster it isn't needed. But if used as a night stand gun, purse gun, stored in a cars console or glove compartment with no holster a safety would be an asset

I absolutely hate the idea of not training yourself to use a safety if present on a gun. If the gun has a chance to be "safe" IMO it is best to train to disengage it every time.

You really don't want to have it engaged (clicked on in the holster, or maybe you forgot to take it off after nightstand duty), draw your gun when you need it, and not have your hands trainedto make it work.

IMO if it has a safety, use it.

As for the OP I'm sure it is simply market forces. If the market determined an optional safety would be profitable, they'd offer one. My thinking with S&W was they intended it optional from the start, so no need for redesign or retooling.

Perhaps in 30 years we'll see if they still offer it, or if it will be phased out.

 

[grampajack]

I am not saying stop making them as they are, just offer a 2nd model with the safety option. Why would that kill the Glock for you? Would you stop using Glocks if they added a model with the thumb safety? If you like the Glock as is, it would still be available.

That would be fine, but it would complicate an already bloated product lineup. Essentially it would double the number of offerings, and logistically I don't think they could handle that. They're already showing signs of stress in their QC department as it is.

What could happen is a company could start buying Glocks wholesale and remanufacturing them with safeties. I imagine it could be done for less than $100 above normal retail, and probably far less if the demand were there. At the very least, someone could make an aftermarket safety that you could have your gunsmith install.

 

[bassjam]

While I think a safety option on Glocks would be popular enough to warrant producing them, Glock doesn't care what we think. In typical German / Austrian fashion, they produce a perfect product in their eyes and there's no need for us to ask for anything more. We should be lucky they blessed us with .45 ACP variants, because I'm sure that was a heated internal discussion. "Stupid Americans, don't they realize the 9mm Luger is the optimum handgun round!!! A Glock 21 will be inferior in every way to the 17!! When will those Americans understand that we will give them what is best for them and they will like it!"

 

[Kleanbore]

There are pros and cons to thumb safeties.

People really should understand, however, that pressing the trigger with a finger is not the only way to activate a trigger.

Got that reason, I carry a firearm with a grip safety.

That, too, has its disadvantages, in that it seems to increase the trigger pull with on a striker pistol.

 

[lordhamster]

While I think a safety option on Glocks would be popular enough to warrant producing them, Glock doesn't care what we think. In typical German / Austrian fashion, they produce a perfect product in their eyes and there's no need for us to ask for anything more. We should be lucky they blessed us with .45 ACP variants, because I'm sure that was a heated internal discussion. "Stupid Americans, don't they realize the 9mm Luger is the optimum handgun round!!! A Glock 21 will be inferior in every way to the 17!! When will those Americans understand that we will give them what is best for them and they will like it!"

As a passport holding German, I can concur that you are 100% right with your assessment of the germanic attitude.

 

[Balrog]

As a passport holding German, I can concur that you are 100% right with your assessment of the germanic attitude.

I don't really have a problem with that attitude. Steve Jobs had pretty much the same attitude. Geniuses have trouble accepting criticisms from what they consider lesser minds. I was just curious if that might be the case. I like Glocks as is, but would like even better if they added a thumb safety.

 

[mjsdwash]

having a safety is an admission you need one... weaker market than expected.... change from "perfection"... Putting a safety on would nullify the argument of the fanboys that the safety is unnecessary, alienating the loyal market.

 

[Good Ol' Boy]

I have seen at least one company in a gun magazine that will put a thumb safety on your Glock for $115, so there is an option.

 

[Varminterror]

Why doesn't Glock add a thumb safety? Why don't you wear a helmet while driving your car to work?

 

[Fine Figure of a Man]

Why doesn't Glock add a thumb safety? Why don't you wear a helmet while driving your car to work?

Perfection

 

[herrwalther]

I realize a Glock does not need a thumb safety. I am not suggesting otherwise. If you don't pull the trigger, the gun will not fire. Safety is the responsibility of the shooter.

Because Glocks are absolutely perfect and you are a lesser man (or woman) for thinking otherwise. Or something along those lines that would come from a traditional Glock uber- (see what I did there?) fan.

 

[1911 guy]

Glock's biggest asset is their marketing campaign. The pistols are decent but not good. Deviating from their design and image erodes their marketing and thus their market strength. Glock is the Yugo of the handgun world. It doesn't excel at anything, but it works well enough. So they use marketing to compensate. Messing with the design messes with the marketing.

 

[Schwing]

This sure seems to be a big point of contention among both Glock fans and detractors. One thing I have to say is that I personally know 2 folks who handled firearms for decades but never had a ND until they started carrying Glocks. Both are LEOs and are not stupid. Both had their NDs while holstering. One shot a hole in his foot and the other one barely grazed his leg.

I agree that you are 100% responsible to be trained and proficient with whatever you chose to carry. Having said that, and I have no stats to prove this, but it is certainly my opinion that people carrying Glocks seem to have more issues than others. They call it "Glock leg" for a reason.

Now ask most LEOs if they want to draw and disengage a slide safety before they can shoot and you will hear some pretty good arguments FOR trigger safeties.

 

[420Stainless]

I don't know the reason why, but since Ruger, FN, and H&K all offer carry size versions with a manual safety, Glock doesn't really need to.

 

[cfullgraf]

Why doesn't Glock add a thumb safety? Why don't you wear a helmet while driving your car to work?

No helmet on the street in a four wheeled vehicle. At legal street speeds driving defensively at speeds safe for the conditions in a hard top automobile, I feel the risk of injury is manageable. But I have always worn seat belts since the late 1960s when I first got my driver's license.

I always wore a helmet and heavy coat when on two wheels before helmets were mandated by the government.

I began using a Hans device in my race car years before it was mandated by the sanctioning body.

My three Glocks are safe queens because I deem the risk too high for personal injury or collateral injury without a safety. Great range guns though.

 

[tarosean]

No helmet on the street in a four wheeled vehicle. At legal street speeds driving defensively at speeds safe for the conditions in a hard top automobile, I feel the risk of injury is manageable.

Ah but some bureaucrat mandated airbags.. you have your instant helmet of sorts..

 

[rskent]

Glock doesn't care what we think.

Yes, only what I think. That’s why they have no safety, and they do have finger groves. Perfection!
.
.

 

[grampajack]

"Stupid Americans, don't they realize the 9mm Luger is the optimum handgun round!!!"

Well, when you're right you're right.

 

[Kendal Black]

The trouble with manual safety catches is twofold; they can be off when you want them on, and on when you want them off. I prefer to have nothing of the sort. I am, though, a semi-fossilized specimen who started out with the DA revolver.

Glock has, see above, shown that they are able to make pistols with thumb safeties, but such guns look to me like mistakes.

"Glock leg" seems almost always a matter of finger on trigger when holstering, a mistake DA revolver users have made too, with similar results. But with a DA revolver you can push your thumb against the hammer spur so that you can resist any motion toward firing. Below, someone has brought that idea to the Glock, but the solution leaves a question in the air, I think. Is this trip really necessary?

 

[Kleanbore]

The trouble with manual safety catches is twofold; they can be off when you want them on, and on when you want them off.

True fact.

"Glock leg" seems almost always a matter of finger on trigger when holstering....

I do not know your source tor "almost always", but some of the incidents have resulted from the trigger being activated by pieces of garments that had made their way into the holster before the gun was inserted. In some cases the gun didnot fire until some time later, when the carrier moved in such a manner as yo cause the garment to pull the trigger.

One can say over and over that one will be sufficiently disciplined to prevent that, and one can believe it.

That will not eliminate the risk.

I carries a striker fired pistol with a thumb safety for some time, but the operation was nowhere near as positive as that of a 1911. For that reason I now carry a pistol with grip safety or or a 1911 design .

 

[Zerodefect]

If I want "safety", I'll carry a 1911 cocked and locked.

A Glock in good kydex is perfectly safe. It's only a PITA to reholster IWB.

 

[Kano383]

If I want "safety", I'll carry a 1911 cocked and locked.

A Glock in good kydex is perfectly safe. It's only a PITA to reholster IWB.

Absolutely. In a good kydex, a Glock is safe. One problem is that too many people fail to understand that a good holster is part and parcel of the Glock. The holster is actually the safety.

And the next thing is... As long as it's cocked and not in the holster, it is not safe, and the most likely point of failure for the owner is at time of reholstering, followed by time of de-holstering.

 

[bassjam]

Glock's biggest asset is their marketing campaign. The pistols are decent but not good. Deviating from their design and image erodes their marketing and thus their market strength. Glock is the Yugo of the handgun world. It doesn't excel at anything, but it works well enough. So they use marketing to compensate. Messing with the design messes with the marketing.

There's really a lot of truth your statement about marketing. Glock is a lot like Harley Davidson. There was a time Harley was doing a lot of cool and innovative stuff, but they really haven't offered anything new in 3-4 decades and they use marketing power to hoodwink, I mean persuade the public that they are still relevant.

Glock is no different, their innovation stopped in the 80's and they keep selling the same old product and rely on marketing to make sales.

 

[grampajack]

There's really a lot of truth your statement about marketing. Glock is a lot like Harley Davidson. There was a time Harley was doing a lot of cool and innovative stuff, but they really haven't offered anything new in 3-4 decades and they use marketing power to hoodwink, I mean persuade the public that they are still relevant.

Glock is no different, their innovation stopped in the 80's and they keep selling the same old product and rely on marketing to make sales.

What does that say about the people who more or less just copy Glock? If it ain't broke don't fix it.

 

[Kano383]

What does that say about the people who more or less just copy Glock? If it ain't broke don't fix it.

They don't really "copy" Glock, they ride the marketing wave for striker-fired-safetyless guns masterfully created by Glock. If you take note, there are no real "Glock clones" out there, to the contrary: everybody is selling something that they think addresses one shortcoming or the other of the self-appointed "perfect" 2"x4".

People have "just copied" the 1911, more than 80 manufacturers. And the CZ 75. And S&W revolvers, and Colt revolvers. And others. But Glock? Apparently it's not so perfect that people just want to copy it... They're interested in copying the sales, yes and double yes, but not the graceful lines and creaking trigger...