The Striker Generation (everyone under about 60) generally learned to shoot on striker-fired pistols and assumes they are the standard. Many shooters in this generation strive to make their striker-fired guns' triggers as light and short as they can be [exhibit A: Apex parts] because a lighter, shorter trigger gives the shooter more practical accuracy, e.g., it is easier to press the trigger without moving the sights off target if that trigger is light. The Striker Generation has generally worked without safeties -- most striker-fired guns don't have them, and in pistol types that do have safeties, sales of guns with safeties are far below sales of the same gun's variant without the safety. A lore has sprung up among hardened internet posters that safeties are "bad" and that someone who is "trained" doesn't ever need or want a safety. Indeed, some folks in some roles have little need for a safety -- based on the way they use the pistol. Safeties may not be as useful to patrolling police officers (whose belt-carried holster is a sort of safety, and whose trigger-off-the-trigger-until-ready-to-fire is another sort of safety) and to those in active and continuous combat, or, for that matter, most competition shooters. In the case of the cop, if the pistol is out because a suspect is being apprehended, if that suspect suddenly pulls a gun -- well, a safety would be an impediment. For an assaulter, under the assumption that there is an armed combatant at the target, a safety "on" would only be an intermediate step that would slow him down (the "safeties" in combat are mental discipline and tactical control measures like the line of departure, assigned duties in the stack, general muzzle discipline, etc.). The competition shooter generally doesn't need a safety -- his or her "safety" is muzzle discipline on the course and the beeper, I'd guess. For people who carry and handle the pistol a lot more than they shoot it in anger (or competition), a mechanical safety (and a long trigger pull for the first shot, and a decocker) might be very useful indeed. The cop is only supposed to shoot to protect life or stop a dangerous felon; the soldier is only supposed to shoot when confronting a threat that meets the ROE; these are more on-off situations where training can indeed be beneficially focused in advance, and where having a pistol with a mechanical safety "on" could cost precious response time. For all other soldiers who are not imminently engaged in combat but who carry weapons around a lot while performing other duties; or for security guards on routine patrols; or for civilian concealed carry permittees, etc., the decision to shoot is going to generally have more ambiguity and require more situational analysis (which take time). In those cases, a safety can be operated fairly easily during the time period where assessment and decision making are taking place. In these type of situations, where the individual has to determine if he or she has justification or need to use force, that short period of time to operate the safety is probably a blessing. (The Army apparently believes that most of its people who might have to carry a pistol as a personal defense or backup weapon are not in active combat most of the time and benefit from having a safety -- and has specified their variants of the P320, the M17 and the M18, will have one). Thus for the non-operator or non-competitor, the benefits of a mechanical safety on the pistol (e.g., the prevention of accidental or negligent discharges during long periods when the gun is carried and during repeated instances of loading or unloading a weapon, or holstering and unholstering a weapon for administrative purposes) out weigh the down side (a half a second delay in firing up a possible target in the rare instances when such presents itself unambiguously). That a return to the hammer-fired pistol with a long trigger pull and a safety might make for a realistically safer pistol for the civilian user under every day conditions has been discovered by some members of the Striker Generation. The XDE fits the description of a desirable type of pistol for those who have made this discovery. For the person who prefers a striker-fired pistol with a pre-tensioned striker with a light and short trigger, and wants to carry that IWB, pointed at his crotch day in and day out for years in anticipation of the imminent need to draw and fire the weapon instantaneously, there are plenty of other choices on the market. But for the person who wants a pistol with a safety -- because it is a little bit safer when there are dangly pull cords on jackets, and bunched up T- shirt material around the beltline where the IWB holster resides, or little kids who might reach into Momma's purse in the back seat of the car, or extra trigger fingers inadvertently left in trigger guards when a pistol is reinserted in the holster repeatedly -- well, the XDE might be a reasonable proposition. [I mention those examples because each of those scenarios has accounted for at least one fatal shooting of an innocent person by a good guy or girl in the past year]. Now, how good is the XDE's trigger? How reliable is the action? I'll find out as I run the first couple of thousand rounds through my XDE, which just joined my collection of revolvers and hammer-fired pistols with safeties and decockers.