Welcome to the forum, even if you decided to cannonball into the pool 🤣
Glocks require several pounds of pressure applied to the trigger before they “go BANG” especially inside a holster where the probability is near impossible.. That is hardly a “touch” the trigger situation. So that statement by itself is at best an exaggeration.
You may have noted that around here all topics are considered for discussion but if you read the thread in it’s entirety you’ll also notice that as a group we require empirical data before accepting anyone’s premise. And unfortunately facts and data are not on your side.
I also do not like Glocks, although for different reasons than you. Welcome and tell us about what guns you consider safe to carry and what you enjoy shooting.
Logistics cannot win a war, but its absence or inadequacy can cause defeat. FM100-5
I have never been able to see why it's so damned hard for folks to wrap their heads around the concept of keeping your freaking finger off the freaking trigger until you're ready to shoot...
Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
Could it be said that the Glock pistol, being without a conventional mechanical safety. Has transformed conventional gun handling technique into an inherently safer modus operandi???
I have never been able to see why it's so damned hard for folks to wrap their heads around the concept of keeping your freaking finger off the freaking trigger until you're ready to shoot...
People don’t like responsibility.
Guns kill people, don’t ya know?!?
"To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
Could it be said that the Glock pistol, being without a conventional mechanical safety. Has transformed conventional gun handling technique into an inherently safer modus operandi???
Nope, couldn't be said. Glock's trigger safety IS a conventional mechanical safety. Not sure how this whole Glocks have no safety on them thing got started but after so many decades and millions of them out on the streets you'd think folks would know better?
Saw this old discussion and just HAD to comment. Glocks are unsafe, period! I'm amazed how many jump to defend this ugly duckling that has NO MANUAL SAFETY! If keeping you finger off of the trigger is the only safety, it has none, eh? Fact: "Touch" that trigger and it will go BANG, whether in your holster, pointed at your femoral artery or a perp.
Welcome.
How about telling us something you do like, something you shoot or hunt, and pictures are helpful.
Saw this old discussion and just HAD to comment. Glocks are unsafe, period! I'm amazed how many jump to defend this ugly duckling that has NO MANUAL SAFETY! If keeping you finger off of the trigger is the only safety, it has none, eh? Fact: "Touch" that trigger and it will go BANG, whether in your holster, pointed at your femoral artery or a perp.
Welcome.
How about telling us something you do like, something you shoot or hunt, and pictures are helpful.
Glocks are unsafe, period! I'm amazed how many jump to defend this ugly duckling that has NO MANUAL SAFETY! If keeping you finger off of the trigger is the only safety, it has none, eh? Fact: "Touch" that trigger and it will go BANG, whether in your holster, pointed at your femoral artery or a perp.
So it's as dangerous as a typical double action revolver?
Could it be said that the Glock pistol, being without a conventional mechanical safety. Has transformed conventional gun handling technique into an inherently safer modus operandi???
Double action revolver was around hiw nany years before Glocks? And still fashionable today
Logistics cannot win a war, but its absence or inadequacy can cause defeat. FM100-5
So it "does," have a conventional mechanical safety.
Very good information.
Yes, and it's so good S&W got sued for trying to steal the design before the patents expired. It's probably one of the most copied features in gun modern gun manufacturing with dozens of firearms incorporating a version of the Glock trigger safety.
I did not favor Glocks for a loooooong time until their Gen 5 guns changed my mind but SAFETY was NEVER the concern that turned me away from them. They are as safe or even SAFER than anything out there today.
Guess I should get rid of my CZ since it doesnt have a safety. It just has some useless de-cocker thing on the side of it. Who knows what that even does....
Guess I should get rid of my CZ since it doesnt have a safety. It just has some useless de-cocker thing on the side of it. Who knows what that even does....
I'll take it. I need a new.... eeeerrrrrr, paperweight, yeah paperweight since you really can't trust it as a handgun, right?
I have never been able to see why it's so damned hard for folks to wrap their heads around the concept of keeping your freaking finger off the freaking trigger until you're ready to shoot...
People don’t like responsibility.
Guns kill people, don’t ya know?!?
You really meant that PEOPLE can kill people with a gun, knife, rock, fist, foot, plastic bag,........
Logistics cannot win a war, but its absence or inadequacy can cause defeat. FM100-5
I have never been able to see why it's so damned hard for folks to wrap their heads around the concept of keeping your freaking finger off the freaking trigger until you're ready to shoot...
People don’t like responsibility.
Guns kill people, don’t ya know?!?
You really meant that PEOPLE can kill people with a gun, knife, rock, fist, foot, plastic bag,........
Nope. It’s the gun’s fault when there is a ND/AD, or a death occurs.
Guns = Bad Personal Responsibility = Bad Scapegoat = Good
"To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
I just read through this whole menagerie and I'm sitting here cracking up laughing at the stupidity of some people. Carrying a glock on an empty chamber out of fear of a ND from a gun with an inch long, 5lb trigger pull 😂😂😂
We've been conditioned to believe that obedience is virtuous and voting is freedom-
Could it be said that the Glock pistol, being without a conventional mechanical safety. Has transformed conventional gun handling technique into an inherently safer modus operandi???
Yeah. . .possibly.
I taught an "intro to firearms" class yesterday to a room full of folks who are on the "evidence" side of the house. None of them shooters. Most of them not terribly likely to become one.
After going over the four primary safety rules, I broke out a 1911 and a Beretta 92 - - both U.S. military sidearms for a very long period of time, each with a safety that operates in the completely opposite direction, and unless you count red paint on the Beretta, NEITHER ONE is marked with any kind of clue as to which way is "hot" and which way is "cold", both of them could have been found in the field during an overlap period at the end of the service of one and the start of service of the other, and both of them very likely to be encountered in quantity now.
I can teach you the four basic safety rules in pretty significant detail in about ten minutes, after which you'll be a great deal less dangerous out in the world with a Glock or anything else.
If you want me to cover where everything's safety devices are, what they do, and how to manipulate them, we need to book a flight to the Cody, Wyoming firearms museum, spend several days there studying a thousand years of gun history, and STILL have significant concerns that we probably missed a few things.
The simple fact is that we come into the world knowing only how to cry, suck, and soil ourselves - - everything else has to be learned. A lot less to learn in the Glock system, but a lot in it that is globally applicable.
To follow up Bigslug’s post. I teach an intro to handguns personal class in which I have new shooters learn the shooting fundamentals and then I have them try out a bunch of different handgun platforms and apply what they just learned. I do not try to influence their decisions and yet just about all of them have liked the Glock the most and most have bought one as their first EDC.
An old crusty ARMY Master Sergeant once taught a couple young knuckleheads about hand guns.
He held up a gun that none of us had ever seen or heard of before. He asked "where is the safety on this weapon?" Everyone was pointing to the lever on the side of the pistol. He shouted WRONG, every swinging %$!* sitting here. The main safety of every weapon/gun is BETWEEN YOUR EARS. Use your brain and do not touch the trigger.
Seeing that happened in 1979, I would say that the lesson stuck for me.
Logistics cannot win a war, but its absence or inadequacy can cause defeat. FM100-5
Firing a gun with an external safety like a 1911 is pretty simple, you are just adding one movement out of the holster and one movement before, and they are both rather user friendly for most folks. I never really had an issue with the design.
That being said, operating a Glock is easy enough that you can train ANYONE to do it safely and efficiently. I'm dealing with NEWBIES!!!!! and I have not encountered ONE issue!
An old crusty ARMY Master Sergeant once taught a couple young knuckleheads about hand guns.
He held up a gun that none of us had ever seen or heard of before. He asked "where is the safety on this weapon?" Everyone was pointing to the lever on the side of the pistol. He shouted WRONG, every swinging %$!* sitting here. The main safety of every weapon/gun is BETWEEN YOUR EARS. Use your brain and do not touch the trigger.
Seeing that happened in 1979, I would say that the lesson stuck for me.
That's why I was pointing out on another thread that a thumb safety accidentally sweeping off on a 1911 is really not a big deal. Probably more psychological than anything else. The chances of the holstered 1911 just going off in your holster are non-existent. You still need to disengage the grip safety AND press the trigger for the gun to go off. Unless you have no clue what you are doing, or have poor training or bad habits these two things do not coincide until you are on target and have decided to shoot. Otherwise having a gun with an external safety won't save you from an eventual AD or ND.
I have a preference for my carry gun to have a manual safety. That's just me. I own numerous pistols without one, or they have a decocker. As everyone here knows, most modern Rugers have a "Pro" version without a manual safety. I guess that makes the version with the safety the "Tyro" version - and I'm OK with that.
As for Glocks in general, I've shot several of their models. Good shooters all, but they didn't do anything for me - until I shot a 43. Hitherto, all Glocks I had shot had been gen 3s, the 43's gen 4 ergonomics put it neck on neck with the Ruger LC9s as a carry piece, lack of safety be damned. I ended up with the Ruger mainly because Big Chief - Goddess bless that evil enabler! - found the LC9s at an unbelievable price on one of PSA's blowouts. And it is nice - for my brain - to have that manual safety - I'm always concerned I may do something stupid drawing it out of the holster. But I would have been happy with the G43, and I certainly like a certain Glock 17 clone that I may or may not have in my possession....
-Zorba, "The Veiled Male"
"If you get it and didn't work for it, someone else worked for it and didn't get it..."
Replies
Glocks require several pounds of pressure applied to the trigger before they “go BANG” especially inside a holster where the probability is near impossible.. That is hardly a “touch” the trigger situation. So that statement by itself is at best an exaggeration.
Welcome and tell us about what guns you consider safe to carry and what you enjoy shooting.
"The Un-Tactical"
Very good information.
Paul
I did not favor Glocks for a loooooong time until their Gen 5 guns changed my mind but SAFETY was NEVER the concern that turned me away from them. They are as safe or even SAFER than anything out there today.
I've not owned one. But I might in the future. Or not.
Personal Responsibility = Bad
Scapegoat = Good
Maybe someone else will fish a spicy meatball from the archival crock?
I taught an "intro to firearms" class yesterday to a room full of folks who are on the "evidence" side of the house. None of them shooters. Most of them not terribly likely to become one.
After going over the four primary safety rules, I broke out a 1911 and a Beretta 92 - - both U.S. military sidearms for a very long period of time, each with a safety that operates in the completely opposite direction, and unless you count red paint on the Beretta, NEITHER ONE is marked with any kind of clue as to which way is "hot" and which way is "cold", both of them could have been found in the field during an overlap period at the end of the service of one and the start of service of the other, and both of them very likely to be encountered in quantity now.
I can teach you the four basic safety rules in pretty significant detail in about ten minutes, after which you'll be a great deal less dangerous out in the world with a Glock or anything else.
If you want me to cover where everything's safety devices are, what they do, and how to manipulate them, we need to book a flight to the Cody, Wyoming firearms museum, spend several days there studying a thousand years of gun history, and STILL have significant concerns that we probably missed a few things.
The simple fact is that we come into the world knowing only how to cry, suck, and soil ourselves - - everything else has to be learned. A lot less to learn in the Glock system, but a lot in it that is globally applicable.
"Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
Kind of like a light switch.
He held up a gun that none of us had ever seen or heard of before. He asked "where is the safety on this weapon?" Everyone was pointing to the lever on the side of the pistol. He shouted WRONG, every swinging %$!* sitting here. The main safety of every weapon/gun is BETWEEN YOUR EARS. Use your brain and do not touch the trigger.
Seeing that happened in 1979, I would say that the lesson stuck for me.
That being said, operating a Glock is easy enough that you can train ANYONE to do it safely and efficiently. I'm dealing with NEWBIES!!!!! and I have not encountered ONE issue!