Home Main Category Personal Defense

Time for an honest discussioin on Glock pistols

1235710

Replies

  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 12,336 Senior Member
    BAMAAK wrote: »
    Just last week in Decatur, someone was shot by AD/ND while hugging someone. They did not say what kind of gun but it was a .380 so doubt if it was a Glock. Of course they blame the gun.

    http://www.waff.com/story/24510250/stepmother-tells-police-teens-shooting-accidental

    I smell a rat here since she had TWO UDs with the pistol. The first one should have caused her to put the gun down. Time will tell.
    Concealed carry is for protection, open carry is for attention.
  • twatwa Senior Member Posts: 2,245 Senior Member
    I am really surprised manufacturers don't offer the same basic gun with an optional manual safety. If anything I would think it would be a great marketing ploy, you covered both sides of the spectrum with buyers.
  • twatwa Senior Member Posts: 2,245 Senior Member
    Gene L wrote: »
    My Shield also has an external thumb safety. Not that I use it.

    Honest question here, if the gun was made with an external thumb safety, why wouldn't you use it? Do you find it impedes your speed to get lead down range? I have not handled a shield, do you find it too small, where you can not engage it at times?
    The whole reason I went to a LC9 was because of the manual safety, I am old school, grew up shooting Smith 4500 series autos and 1911's that have a thumb safety, it is just natural for me. I was taught shooting these types of guns growing up that after you take a shot down range, the FIRST THING YOU DO IS ENGAGE THE SAFETY. How times have changed.
  • Diver43Diver43 Senior Member Posts: 11,696 Senior Member
    JasonMPD wrote: »
    I've carried a Glock both professionally and personally for several years. Every holster, duty or CCW, I've ever fielded has never had a single portion of it protrude inwardly in such a way that any part of it would access the inside of the trigger guard during holstering. I hate to armchair quarterback those LEOs untimely retirement, but I'd be willing to bet they both had trigger fingers involved.
    twa wrote: »
    Honest question here, if the gun was made with an external thumb safety, why wouldn't you use it? Do you find it impedes your speed to get lead down range? I have not handled a shield, do you find it too small, where you can not engage it at times?
    The whole reason I went to a LC9 was because of the manual safety, I am old school, grew up shooting Smith 4500 series autos and 1911's that have a thumb safety, it is just natural for me. I was taught shooting these types of guns growing up that after you take a shot down range, the FIRST THING YOU DO IS ENGAGE THE SAFETY. How times have changed.

    I carry a SW Shield. My previous carry gun was a Colt Combat Commander that was carried in condition ONE. From the first time I chambered a round for CCW I engaged the safety. It felt normal to engage the safety that while smaller than that of a 1911 is located in the same area. I have also caried a J-Frame revolver and for a short time a P229 neither of which has a safety, but the double action trigger is aprox. Twice as heavy. In my mind the only safety REQUIRED on a gun is the one located between your ears. If your mind cant tell you to keep your finger off the trigger nothing will.
    Logistics cannot win a war, but its absence or inadequacy can cause defeat. FM100-5
  • BAMAAKBAMAAK Senior Member Posts: 4,484 Senior Member
    Chief you need to empty your PM inbox. No doubt it's full of love notes from Glock folks
    "He only earns his freedom and his life Who takes them every day by storm."

    -- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, German writer and politician
  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 12,336 Senior Member
    twa wrote: »
    Honest question here, if the gun was made with an external thumb safety, why wouldn't you use it? Do you find it impedes your speed to get lead down range? I have not handled a shield, do you find it too small, where you can not engage it at times?
    The whole reason I went to a LC9 was because of the manual safety, I am old school, grew up shooting Smith 4500 series autos and 1911's that have a thumb safety, it is just natural for me. I was taught shooting these types of guns growing up that after you take a shot down range, the FIRST THING YOU DO IS ENGAGE THE SAFETY. How times have changed.

    They're made both ways, with/without a safety, and since it doesn't need the safety, which is pretty small, I don't use it. I guess the safety is for people who don't trust the DA only. Plus I'm used to not using it. When I carried a PPK-S, I disengated the hammer-block safety on that as well. I'm not interested in speed necessarily, but since I've pretty well used to a DA only pistol, I'll carry it safety off.

    When I carry a 1911, it's cocked and locked. My thumb falls naturally on the safety. The 1911 is a pistol that either must have the safety engaged or not with a round in the chamber.
    Concealed carry is for protection, open carry is for attention.
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 25,777 Senior Member
    Gene L wrote: »
    My Shield also has an external thumb safety. Not that I use it.

    My bad again. I was thinking in regards to the rest of the M&P line that has no external thumb safety or at least has it as an option.

    Learning something new here. Thanks.
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 25,777 Senior Member
    Wambli Ska wrote: »
    Yes the outcome would have most likely been the same. But we are discussing Glock here right?

    But the implication of this thread is that the Glock is inherently more dangerous (in so many words) than other guns. My point is that technically, many other guns operate the same way.

    One can choose to single out a system of operation as being "less safe" than another system. But to single out a particular gun regardless others seemingly exactly alike in operation............smacks of a witch hunt or at least ignorance.
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 12,336 Senior Member
    Zee wrote: »
    My bad again. I was thinking in regards to the rest of the M&P line that has no external thumb safety or at least has it as an option.

    Learning something new here. Thanks.

    It's an option on the Shield, too. Most don't have them.
    Concealed carry is for protection, open carry is for attention.
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 25,777 Senior Member
    Wambli Ska wrote: »
    I think the point that some are making is that Glocks, and by default similar systems, are inherently less tolerant of mistakes than other designs. A point which could be made when the other system is let's say, a DA revolver. But if you forget to lock a 1911 or decock a SIG I believe you have an even less forgiving scenario. BUT the Glock is meant to operate in this fashion with a relatively light trigger pull and no external safety, while the 1911 and Sigs have these secondary methods of making the gun "safe".

    And I can buy that completely when expressed intelligently as you did. Well, except the trigger part. The Glock trigger is (was?) available from 3.5-12 pounds of pull. If 5 was too light for you.......get the 8. If that's a no go........get the 12.

    I am cool with an intelligent stance. A blind witch hunt lacking substantiated facts..........not so much.
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,692 Senior Member
    Just a thought, but if someone is inattentive enough to have an inadvertent discharge with a Glock, what makes folks think they'll engage the thumb safety/decocker of a 1911 or SIG and have that supposed added margin? No data to back it up, but if you're inattentive in one area, you might be in others...

    Heck, how many folks buy Glocks or carry Glocks because they say they don't have the time to train up on a manual safety or for the DA/SA transition? I've heard that stated in a gun shop (and on some forums) PLENTY of times.
    Overkill is underrated.
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 25,777 Senior Member
    Oh, an Glocks do have an external safety. It's on the trigger. The lever has to be depressed to pull it to the rear.

    Just say'n. You know........for all those that think they have no external safety. Ya know..........kinda like the lever on the S&W pistols as well. But a little more effective in my experience than the S&W version.
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 25,777 Senior Member
    Wambli Ska wrote: »
    I think the point that some are making is that Glocks, and by default similar systems, are inherently less tolerant of mistakes than other designs. A point which could be made when the other system is let's say, a DA revolver. But if you forget to lock a 1911 or decock a SIG I believe you have an even less forgiving scenario. BUT the Glock is meant to operate in this fashion with a relatively light trigger pull and no external safety, while the 1911 and Sigs have these secondary methods of making the gun "safe".

    So, you're saying you need one of these......

    C40AF775-8839-4CC0-AE7F-2D5AB2E6CE2B_zpsod0gfu4s.png


    ......to own one if these.......

    ABE321DF-8F7B-4CB0-B960-E5D8A626F540_zpsfcpap2za.jpg

    .......then you better sell this.......

    04F57D42-B40E-4BC8-A1AC-C136316BBB03_zpsgetkvyyy.jpg

    :-)
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 12,336 Senior Member
    Wambli Ska wrote: »
    I think the point that some are making is that Glocks, and by default similar systems, are inherently less tolerant of mistakes than other designs. A point which could be made when the other system is let's say, a DA revolver. But if you forget to lock a 1911 or decock a SIG I believe you have an even less forgiving scenario. BUT the Glock is meant to operate in this fashion with a relatively light trigger pull and no external safety, while the 1911 and Sigs have these secondary methods of making the gun "safe".

    There were UDs back in the revolver days as well. Without pulling the trigger on a Glock, it's not fully cocked. There is zero room for mistakes with any handgun. Good training means no mistakes.

    I believe the standard trigger pull on a Glock is 5 pounds, but higher pull weights (and one lower) are available. Five pounds is pretty considerable. We at my SO had the NY Triggers, which IIRC is eight pounds. But time taught us it wasn't necessary as there were no mishaps (well, one, but that's an entirely different story) with the NY triggers. I think the newer Gen 3 and Gen 4 Glocks they bought had the five pound triggers. Not sure about that, though.
    Concealed carry is for protection, open carry is for attention.
  • jbp-ohiojbp-ohio Senior Member Posts: 10,404 Senior Member
    They are even making Kahr's with a manual safety now............

    PM9193.jpg
    "The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not." Thomas Jefferson
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 25,777 Senior Member
    I agree.
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • jbp-ohiojbp-ohio Senior Member Posts: 10,404 Senior Member
    cpj wrote: »
    Yes, techically it's an "external" safety. However, it's one that requires zero additional steps to operate.
    And to be quite honest, I think it's simply a feel good measure. Because I SERIOUSLY doubt it helps to prevent a UD. If your finger is in the trigger gaurd, chances are it's far enough in to depress the "safety", not just on the edge of the trigger.
    This post was pure speculative opinion, with no facts to back it up.

    And a grip safety might of helped Plaxico to not shoot himself when his Glock slipped in his sweat pants...... not going to help with reholstering with booger hook in the trigger guard...
    "The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not." Thomas Jefferson
  • 5280 shooter II5280 shooter II Senior Member Posts: 3,923 Senior Member
    Am I the ONLY one that thinks that Glocks looks are sexy in simplicity? The XD is a Glock with a grip saftey....but it looks much uglier to me......Glock can be the new "slabsides".....just gotta be smarter than the average bear.....hey hey boo-boo!? I've worked with complicated fire control system........simple is better.
    God show's mercy on drunks and dumb animals.........two outa three ain't a bad score!
  • TSchubTSchub Senior Member Posts: 783 Senior Member
    This debate could go on for eternity, and has since Glocks first appeared on the market. Glock makes an affordable, reliable pistol that is well within the means of most people out there. You can buy two of them for around the cost of one Sig, HK, ect. MY OPINION is that the shear numbers of Glocks over other brands would make it look like they are less safe.
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,995 Senior Member
    BAMAAK wrote: »
    Chief you need to empty your PM inbox. No doubt it's full of love notes from Glock folks

    Thanks, I just did. Anyone who attempted to send me an IM please resend.
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,995 Senior Member
    Hey, great replies.

    I don't know how many times I have to repeat myself and say I DO NOT HAVE ANY DATA ON AD/ND INVOLVING GLOCKS VS OTHER PISTOLS.

    I wanted to get other forum members experiences and opinions. Numbers for comparison, if available.

    I don't want to start WWIII on here. I'm not trying to insult anyone or their intelligence or choice of a pistol. I'm not trying to discourage anyone from owning a Glock or buying one or more of them.

    Great gun safety awareness expressed by all of you. Just goes to show never get complacent around ANY firearm and follow the safety rules at all times.

    Again, please go back and read my very first post again, thanks.
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,995 Senior Member
    "Does that make it the fault of the gun? NOPE, but you can not say that the design of the gun did not contribute to the incident. If they had been carrying their old Model 10's the substantial extra effort required to make the guns go boom in DA would have probably avoided the discharge that occurred. God only knows how many times they tried to holster their guns with their fingers on the trigger and got away with it! But the Glock had a much smaller margin of error in that one last instance. That does not make the Glock an unsafe gun., that only makes the design a lot less tolerant of mistakes."

    I agree Wambli :that::agree:
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,995 Senior Member
    Zee wrote: »
    They most likely own the first G42 to hit the market. At least, we can assume such is the case. Facts are not important.

    :-)

    I doubt it was a Glock 42, but they claim the gun went off just sitting on their dresser days before this happened! I sure would like to know what gun was involved though.

    http://www.decaturdaily.com/news/local/article_3113232e-825d-11e3-9dfe-001a4bcf6878.html
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • Diver43Diver43 Senior Member Posts: 11,696 Senior Member
    Gene L wrote: »
    It's an option on the Shield, too. Most don't have them.

    Gene

    Where have you found a S&W Shield WITHOUT a thumb safety?

    The only time that I saw one without, it was removed by the owner which voids the warranty.
    Logistics cannot win a war, but its absence or inadequacy can cause defeat. FM100-5
  • JasonMPDJasonMPD Senior Member Posts: 6,557 Senior Member
    Diver43 wrote: »
    Gene

    Where have you found a S&W Shield WITHOUT a thumb safety?

    The only time that I saw one without, it was removed by the owner which voids the warranty.

    And you merely reinstall it before warranty work is done...
    “There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.” – Will Rogers
  • twatwa Senior Member Posts: 2,245 Senior Member
    jbp-ohio wrote: »
    They are even making Kahr's with a manual safety now............

    PM9193.jpg

    Now that interests me!
  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 12,336 Senior Member
    Diver43 wrote: »
    Gene

    Where have you found a S&W Shield WITHOUT a thumb safety?

    The only time that I saw one without, it was removed by the owner which voids the warranty.

    Sorry, I was thinking about the M&P.
    Concealed carry is for protection, open carry is for attention.
  • bobbyrlf3bobbyrlf3 Senior Member Posts: 2,571 Senior Member
    Am I the ONLY one that thinks that Glocks looks are sexy in simplicity?

    Yes, you are. :tooth:
    Knowledge is essential to living freely and fully; understanding gives knowledge purpose and strength; wisdom is combining the two and applying them appropriately in words and actions.
  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 12,336 Senior Member
    Big Chief wrote: »
    I think maybe like Army Jeeps I used to drive you had to be careful and fully understand how they operate. They would flip over because the center of gravity if you yanked the steering to hard for a sharp turn, but were capable of of going on forever if knew how too properly drive one. I did for years with no problems, but saw many rolled over when the operator got careless.

    The Army jeeps I'm familiar with, the M115A1, were not subject to overturning, IIRC. I was in a Mech unit for a year, and a Motor Officer. The "gun jeeps" which were sprung to carry the 106mm Recoiless Rifles, when the guns were dismounted, were bad to turn over. Still, you needed to be careful.
    Concealed carry is for protection, open carry is for attention.
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,428 Senior Member
    Big Chief wrote: »
    I sure would like to know what gun was involved though.

    According to the Channel 48 news report I saw, it was a Cobra .380. Can anybody say "Saturday Night Special"?

    0210110.jpg

    The whole thing fails to pass the smell test, and I'll bet that after midnight "alcohol was involved" in some way or another!
    Jerry
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.

Advertisement