You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
An honest question about striker-fire and young kids
- Thread starter JSMidd
- Start date
I'm unconcerned with one in the tube under any circumstances. A better holster ought to afford you the same confidence. They aren't common but get a thumb break glock holster if that's what it takes to make you confident.
Personally, I'm more worried about racking the slide during a grapple than I am with accurately discharging the firearm during a grapple, so I carry loaded chamber.
Personally, I'm more worried about racking the slide during a grapple than I am with accurately discharging the firearm during a grapple, so I carry loaded chamber.
wild cat mccane
New member
I actively challenge the poster saying it is the media that is creating a fear.
Post research from an academic journal showing gun safety lessons stop young kids from play with guns.
My Glocks all come with stickers noting "Children are attracted to firearms."
If you can't maintain control of the gun, YOU are the danger you believe you are mitigating by carrying a firearm.
I do not accept what many do. "Accidental" child deaths from an unattended firearm is NOT a cost of freedom. It is this disgusting bravado that makes me think we do need better firearm intelligence testing at sells.
Post research from an academic journal showing gun safety lessons stop young kids from play with guns.
My Glocks all come with stickers noting "Children are attracted to firearms."
If you can't maintain control of the gun, YOU are the danger you believe you are mitigating by carrying a firearm.
I do not accept what many do. "Accidental" child deaths from an unattended firearm is NOT a cost of freedom. It is this disgusting bravado that makes me think we do need better firearm intelligence testing at sells.
Last edited:
"Accidental" child deaths from an unattended firearm is NOT a cost of freedom.
The cost of freedom includes paying the price when people are free to make the wrong choices, as well as the right ones.
It is this disgusting bravado that makes me think we do need better firearm intelligence testing at sells.
I'm not sure what you mean by "disgusting bravado" but I can tell you that "better intelligence testing at sells" does nothing to guarantee that the people who "pass the test" will not later do irresponsible things.
wild cat mccane
New member
Again, research please.
We already accept at least the basic level of testing is good in the US during the FBI background.
Asking if one type of trigger is safer than another is scary. If a kid is touching a trigger in the first place, owner shouldn't own a firearm. In fact, a crime has been committed in most states at that very second. If you like it or not, doesn't matter. That is a legal fact.
We already accept at least the basic level of testing is good in the US during the FBI background.
Asking if one type of trigger is safer than another is scary. If a kid is touching a trigger in the first place, owner shouldn't own a firearm. In fact, a crime has been committed in most states at that very second. If you like it or not, doesn't matter. That is a legal fact.
There's a vid floating around of a kid (4-yr-old I think) at a party
draws his dad's pistol from waist holster while Dad is talking to someone else,
and accidently shoots him in the guts with it right after he draws it.
Training kids Early and Often is KEY.
Making sure they know the Destructive Power is also KEY.
Probably the most important part...that they understand Totally Broken/Unfixable.
And this...
Buy one of those cheap glass plates at Walmart for $1.50,
take kid outside to a relatively safe parking area near a dumpster,
have the kid throw the plate on the ground...plate breaks, of course,
have the kid tell the plate he's sorry...
Ask the kid, did saying "I'm sorry" fix the plate??
(no)
That's what happens when you do wrong things,
sorry can't fix very much.
It is a concept every kid needs to Understand.
draws his dad's pistol from waist holster while Dad is talking to someone else,
and accidently shoots him in the guts with it right after he draws it.
Training kids Early and Often is KEY.
Making sure they know the Destructive Power is also KEY.
Probably the most important part...that they understand Totally Broken/Unfixable.
And this...
Buy one of those cheap glass plates at Walmart for $1.50,
take kid outside to a relatively safe parking area near a dumpster,
have the kid throw the plate on the ground...plate breaks, of course,
have the kid tell the plate he's sorry...
Ask the kid, did saying "I'm sorry" fix the plate??
(no)
That's what happens when you do wrong things,
sorry can't fix very much.
It is a concept every kid needs to Understand.
Prof Young
New member
For what it's worth . . .
I live in the center of a rural small town where home invasion type crime is nearly unheard of. So I take the risk of having my HD guns in "quick open" safes. All my other firearms are in safes that need a key.
As we were getting into the safe to get the "cricket" for my seven year old grandson he said, "It's a good idea to keep your guns locked in safes."
I'm sure he didn't mean that he had pernicious intentions, but he has another grandpa who, I'm told, has a lot of guns around the house not in safes. His comment showed me how aware he was of the presence of firearms in the home.
Live well, be safe
Prof Young
I live in the center of a rural small town where home invasion type crime is nearly unheard of. So I take the risk of having my HD guns in "quick open" safes. All my other firearms are in safes that need a key.
As we were getting into the safe to get the "cricket" for my seven year old grandson he said, "It's a good idea to keep your guns locked in safes."
I'm sure he didn't mean that he had pernicious intentions, but he has another grandpa who, I'm told, has a lot of guns around the house not in safes. His comment showed me how aware he was of the presence of firearms in the home.
Live well, be safe
Prof Young
It is this disgusting bravado that makes me think we do need better firearm intelligence testing at sells.
We already accept at least the basic level of testing is good in the US during the FBI background.
We check criminal behavior. An "intelligence" test is a different story. How do you propose measuring intelligence? One such way might be knowing the difference between sells and sales, or verbs and nouns more generally. Now that might seem snide, but my point is it's easy to judge others. We're all human, and asking questions is one way we learn. That's what the OP is doing here on this forum. For that matter, I'm unaware of any test that precludes lapses in judgement.
Asking if one type of trigger is safer than another is scary.
I don't think so at all. We've had numerous discussions on this forum as to whether certain designs are "safer" than others.
If a kid is touching a trigger in the first place, owner shouldn't own a firearm. In fact, a crime has been committed in most states at that very second. If you like it or not, doesn't matter. That is a legal fact.
If you read all the posts from the OP on this thread you'll see his concern wasn't about leaving a pistol in reach for an unattended child.
Last edited:
We already accept at least the basic level of testing is good in the US during the FBI background.
I think you need to define what you mean by "test", so that we're on the same page.
The FBI background check is no kind of test, it is a records check. Period.
And it is no indicator of intent, nor competence. ALL it is a check for prior convictions and outstanding wants & warrants (in the best case).
If a kid is touching a trigger in the first place, owner shouldn't own a firearm.
That is a hugely overbroad statement. If we assume you are talking about unsupervised access to a loaded gun, and we assume the kid you are referring to is not capable of responsible control of the gun, then the statement just becomes one of extreme opinion.
However the broad brush of the statement does not require us to assume that. We could just as well assume that the kid is a 17yr old Marine with government provided access to a machine gun. Should the Federal Government be in the "shouldn't own a firearm category? Sure, this is the absurd extreme end of the range, but the broadness of the statement allows for it.
Kids with guns, without adult supervision is a crime in many states, quite true. Kids with guns UNDER adult supervision isn't.
Kids with guns, without adult supervision is a crime in many states, quite true. Kids with guns UNDER adult supervision isn't.
+1.
wild cat mccane
New member
Thank you for the qualifier. The point being, under the parameters of the OP concerned about safety and kids, if a kid is playing with the trigger, it is unsupervised. I assume the fear of the OP isn't for attending a range, true? I don't think you were giving me a fair shake in this obvious assumption.
So my argument, and the law, stands. Kid touching that trigger, not at the range and intending to hit a target, is a crime. If your kid somehow fires your gun you are carrying in public, you will get charged for a crime against the society you live in.
The overarching premise of some course/test needs to be administered is proven by a thread of a gun owner asking about different trigger "safeness." The trigger is the action step to a bullet firing.
I am not even talking about going to the rigors of other countries like Israel with phsyc approval and all that.
So my argument, and the law, stands. Kid touching that trigger, not at the range and intending to hit a target, is a crime. If your kid somehow fires your gun you are carrying in public, you will get charged for a crime against the society you live in.
The overarching premise of some course/test needs to be administered is proven by a thread of a gun owner asking about different trigger "safeness." The trigger is the action step to a bullet firing.
I am not even talking about going to the rigors of other countries like Israel with phsyc approval and all that.
Have you read the 2nd amendment? Or the most recent SC rulings regarding same? We have a right to keep and bear arms: that right does not presuppose the ability to pass some "test" of our competence. Freedoms do come with costs, and sharing those freedoms with those YOU FEEL are unworthy is one of the cost I'm happy you are required to bear.
I am chaffed by those who want to tell others how others must behave in the exercise of rights. I have a few 1st amendment rights I would like to exercise, but I will refrain.
I am chaffed by those who want to tell others how others must behave in the exercise of rights. I have a few 1st amendment rights I would like to exercise, but I will refrain.
The point being, under the parameters of the OP concerned about safety and kids, if a kid is playing with the trigger, it is unsupervised. I assume the fear of the OP isn't for attending a range, true? I don't think you were giving me a fair shake in this obvious assumption.
Did you even read the follow up from the OP? There is no hypothetical at this point, we know what his concern was, and it has nothing to do with unsupervised children.
Kid touching that trigger, not at the range and intending to hit a target, is a crime.
Under the supervision of an adult? No that by itself is not a crime in a number of states. You keep omitting supervision. It doesn't have to be at a range either. You could have private property large enough to allow shooting on it. For that matter what is your definition of a target?
44amp already pointed out your penchant for making very broad statements. For someone that keeps pointing to the law and potential crimes, you should know broad statements rarely if ever apply. The law is a very specific thing, intentionally so.
If your kid somehow fires your gun you are carrying in public, you will get charged for a crime against the society you live in.
If an adult discharges a firearm in public without due cause that adult will likely be charged with a crime. Negligence with a firearm is a crime and I don't see anyone arguing against that here.
The overarching premise of some course/test needs to be administered is proven by a thread of a gun owner asking about different trigger "safeness." The trigger is the action step to a bullet firing.
While pressing a trigger does fire a bullet, there has been no shortage of debate by both members here, instructors, police officers, the military, and even members of the media about whether firing mechanisms should included additional safeties, whether it be additional force such as in a DA/SA pistol or the manipulation of an added mechanical device like an external safety. This debate has been ongoing for decades. I expect a shooter at some point in his/her time as a shooter to wonder about safety and whether all designs are equal. No doubt you can bring up the "keep your booger hook off the trigger" argument, but the reality is other designs do require more force or more steps to discharge a firearm. I don't think that makes them inherently safer nor is there any firearm I would leave accessible to a child, but I completely understanding someone asking if some designs are safer as those designs are championed as such.
Make no mistakes here. I have no tolerance for leaving firearms in reach of unsupervised children, loaded or not, as was the entire point of my first post. I am a big proponent of safes and bedside lockboxes. What I fail to agree with is your assertion that the OP's question is akin to incompetence and should make us question whether he should have the right to own a firearm. To me the OP's question is that of a concerned father and gun owner seeking to do all within his power to prevent a firearm related incident/injury.
Last edited:
Relying on an external safety to child safe a firearm is unwise.Do you feel 100% safe with a chambered firearm that can go "boom" at the press of a trigger around young kids? I have never, ever, ever, had my striker-fire firearm come out of its IWB holster, but I got too close for comfort today, and it's got me thinking. To be fair, I think that we carry "just in case", and that line of thinking has me considering a semi-auto with external safeties of some kind for the same "just in case" thinking with my younger kids.
By "unwise", I mean it's a really, REALLY bad strategy.
The type of gun and what kinds of controls it is equipped with has no bearing on whether or not it's child safe. Guns are not child safe. Guns without manual safeties are not child safe. Guns with manual safeties are not child safe.
kilimanjaro
New member
Consider you don't need a chambered round at home.
cougar gt-e
New member
Consider you don't need a chambered round at home.
Home invasion robberies are on the rise. You NEED one chambered AND the gun on your hip at home as well as when you're out. The chances of attack are essentially identical in the home or out and about.
The anti-safety people always use the phrase "relying on a safety to prevent ND's is a bad idea". Who's relying on a safety? A manual safety makes ND's, LESS LIKELY, because an additional step is required to make the weapon fire. Of course training, supervision, and proper holsters are extremely important. Guns without manual safeties are not child-safe, I agree. But they are child-SAFER. I would bet the 2 year old who killed her mother in Walmart when she got her hands on the mother's M&P Shield from her purse did not disengage any safety. I bet it was either the no safety model or the gun was carried off safe.
But I have seen way too many stupid people with guns. And since the odds of an ND are MUCH HIGHER than forgetting to use a safety in a real life or death situation, I choose to only own semi auto's with manual safeties. I do own two striker fired guns, a Ruger SR9 and a Ruger LC9-S. Both with manual safety and mag disconnect.
And yes, striker fired guns are generally more likely to be the ones involved in ND's. Especially the Glock, that requires you to pull the trigger to field strip. People ren't perfect. They make mistakes.
But I have seen way too many stupid people with guns. And since the odds of an ND are MUCH HIGHER than forgetting to use a safety in a real life or death situation, I choose to only own semi auto's with manual safeties. I do own two striker fired guns, a Ruger SR9 and a Ruger LC9-S. Both with manual safety and mag disconnect.
And yes, striker fired guns are generally more likely to be the ones involved in ND's. Especially the Glock, that requires you to pull the trigger to field strip. People ren't perfect. They make mistakes.
Walt Sherrill
New member
What's being overlooked late in this discussion is that one of the folks involved in this discussion (P71pilot) -- one who seemed put off by being told he needs to lock up his weapon when he wasn't in personal control -- has begun to rethink his position.
P71pilot, after apologizing for an earlier "snarky" response as the result of a bad day at work, wrote "I appreciate the suggestions and concern, I will rethink my current home defense setup."
In this sort of discussion, that's a big change -- and at least he's looking at his original position from a different perspective.
Anyone commenting after having read THAT comment, is just piling on... That said, I know that not everyone reads to the end before of the current responses before posting their comments. I've been guilty of THAT bad practice from time to time, and then I see things that later make me want to (or actually) adjust my response...
.
P71pilot, after apologizing for an earlier "snarky" response as the result of a bad day at work, wrote "I appreciate the suggestions and concern, I will rethink my current home defense setup."
In this sort of discussion, that's a big change -- and at least he's looking at his original position from a different perspective.
Anyone commenting after having read THAT comment, is just piling on... That said, I know that not everyone reads to the end before of the current responses before posting their comments. I've been guilty of THAT bad practice from time to time, and then I see things that later make me want to (or actually) adjust my response...
.
Last edited: