Are Glocks unsafe ?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I personally believe that if a person can not understand the complex operation of a manual safety then perhaps they are not quite ready to own a firearm.
Click to expand...

LOL!!! I personally refuse to own a handgun that does not have a manual safety.
 
I have other guns without manual safeties, but they are all DA/SA carried with hammer down, and thus have heavier (initial) trigger pulls.

Anyway, it's not the lack of a safety that bothers me, really. It bugs me that they call that nub on the trigger a safety. I don't see it as any more of a safety than the trigger itself.

I would actually just prefer the decocker switch that the p99 has. From world.guns.ru:

"The standard P99 is double / single action with a decocking button..... despite being striker-fired, these pistols do not require the user to press the trigger during disassembly to disconnect the sear from the firing pin. This is done by using the decocking button, built into the top of the slide. "
Click to expand...
 
Glocks are 100% safe as long as you adhere to the rules of firearms safety (which have been around longer than Glocks themselves).

Now, if you don't adhere to the rules of firearms safety, is it really the Glock that's unsafe?
 
Glocks are 100% safe as long as you adhere to the rules of firearms safety (which have been around longer than Glocks themselves).

Now, if you don't adhere to the rules of firearms safety, is it really the Glock that's unsafe?
Click to expand...

A Ford Pinto without seatbelts is 100% safe so long as everyone adheres to the rules of motorway safety (which have been around longer than Ford Pintos themselves).

Now, if someone doesn't ashere to the rules of motorway safety, is it really the Ford Pinto without seatbelts that is unsafe?



Tools people use are generally better when they help protect against known human failings.
 
Now, if you don't adhere to the rules of firearms safety, is it really the Glock that's unsafe?
Click to expand...

Nope, just poorly designed for use by anything but infallible human beings. Oops, sorry, there is no such thing!

One could say a car with no seatbelts is completely safe as long as all the rules of the road are followed!

HELP, Zukiphile is reading my mind!!!!
 
Last edited:
A Ford Pinto without seatbelts is 100% safe so long as everyone adheres to the rules of motorway safety (which have been around longer than Ford Pintos themselves).
Click to expand...

Not to join the argument in either direction but this is the dumbest thing I've ever heard..... A Glock does not require everybody else to follow the rules - only you.

You could follow all the rules of the road and still get hit by a retard. But if a retard has your gun and is running around willy nilly pulling the trigger while it's loaded....... The lack of a manual safety doesn't even begin to address the problem.
 
Not to join the argument in either direction but this is the dumbest thing I've ever heard.....
Click to expand...

Did you read this?

You could follow all the rules of the road and still get hit by a retard. But if a retard has your gun and is running around willy nilly pulling the trigger while it's loaded.......
Click to expand...

I don't pretend to know the percentage of ADs caused by "retards" with stolen glocks "willy nilly pulling the trigger while it's loaded", but I doubt that it is a statistically significant part of the discussion.:D

The planted axiom in your post is that ADs only harm the people who cause them. I doubt that too.
 
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/local/longterm/dcpolice/deadlyforce/police4page1.htm

In the 10 years since D.C. police adopted the Glock 9mm to combat the growing firepower of drug dealers, there have been more than 120 accidental discharges of the handgun. Police officers have killed at least one citizen they didn't intend to kill and have wounded at least nine citizens they didn't intend to wound. Nineteen officers have shot themselves or other officers accidentally. At least eight victims or surviving relatives have sued the District alleging injuries from accidental discharges.
Click to expand...

I am certain the people shot or killed by SOMEONE ELSE not following the rules aren't upset...

Yes, training is lacking, at the same time departments seem to see quite a few NDs with Glocks, more so than with other autos incorporating things like

Manual Safety
Magazine Disconnect Safety (How many morons drop the mag and then pull the trigger? Too Many!)
Not needing to pull the trigger to disassemble the gun!

Gun handling, like driving, does not take place in a vaccuum . Mess up and it is more than just the moron who may pay! Some form of safety should be designed in from a simple human engineering standpoint! Glcok has NO human engineering built into it with regards to human error.
 
Yes, training is lacking, at the same time departments seem to see quite a few NDs with Glocks, more so than with other autos incorporating things like

Manual Safety
Magazine Disconnect Safety (How many morons drop the mag and then pull the trigger? Too Many!)
Not needing to pull the trigger to disassemble the gun!
Click to expand...

And just what exactly is the ratio of Glocks NDs to NDs with other guns? There used to be an article talking about the hundreds of NDs the LAPD experienced during the time period they predominently armed with the manual safety equipped Beretta. I believe the article pointed out how they shot themselves nearly as much as they had been shot by suspects. Unfortunately the LA Times doesn't have it online anymore.
 
Another gem frmo the article I linked before...

"Some of the same factors that give it tremendous high-speed hit potential while you're fighting for your life also make it more prone to accidental discharges," Massad Ayoob, a New Hampshire police captain who also runs a firearms instruction institute, said. "You don't want your 16-year-old kid out of driver's ed driving a Corvette Stingray. The Glock is like a Corvette Stingray."

...

Officers are told during training to avoid such accidents by being attentive to the Glock's unique, simplified design: An officer cleaning a Glock has to pull the trigger before removing the slide to get access to the gun barrel. In many other pistols, taking the magazine of bullets from the gun renders it unable to fire. But the Glock has no "magazine safety" – if an officer leaves a bullet in the chamber, the Glock will still fire if the trigger is pulled.
Click to expand...

I am looking for the rates of incerase in accidents for Glocks outside of the article I have already provided. I know NYPD had a big jump, leading to the NY1 and 2 triggers, just have to find the burried numbers.
 
I'm going to play the devil's advocate...

...I don't believe forone second that Glock's are unsafe, but statistically, it may appear that there are more mishaps with Glocks if for only one reason...and that's because more folk carry, use for plaesure, and use for work Glocks more often than any three other gun brands combined...it is the workhorse of the masses.
 
I personally like this Massad Ayoob quote:

"We had a lot of students come to class with GLOCK's," agrees Massad Ayoob of the Lethal Force Institute. "I do not think there is an easier handgun with which to teach a new shooter." - From "The GLOCK 19: The Perfect Handgun" by Gila Hayes on page 46 of the 2006 Glock Annual.
 
Interesting question...

I agree that the gun is not inherently "unsafe" and that it places the impetus of safety on the user, as do all guns. However, I do have one concern...

As a father of two young girls, I constantly have to consider their safety as well as mine. I am always diligent NOT to give them access to a firearm of anykind, much less a loaded one. All of my guns are kept locked up and I teach my children NOT TO TOUCH any gun unless I am there. However...

Does the lack of any kind of safety worry any of the parents here? If a child were to somehow find the gun, all they would have to do is pull the trigger. That seems awefully dangerous to me. I am considering a Glock 19, but this scenario repeats itself in my mind constantly.

I don't need anyone bashing me and calling me an unsafe dad, as I am not! I would like to say that accidents don't happen, but they do. So, can anyone make me feel better about the "trigger safety" of a Glock and how safe they are?

Todd
 
You could always store the Glock with a mag in the gun and the trigger in the rearmost position, requiring the slide to be racked before the gun can be fired. Some people will probably poo-poo this idea though, as if a BG entered your house the gun wouldn't be ready to fire until you racked the slide.

I don't know how old your daughters are and if they possess the strength to rack the slide, but it's a thought. An accident could still happen if they were determined enough, though, and that's why I am a huge proponent of educating kids on guns...spend some time with them and the gun so that their curiosity is satisfied and they won't be tempted to play with it when you're not there. But really, any gun can be as unsafe as Glocks if someone doesn't know what they are doing. I don't care if your gun has an external safety -- that too can be switched off quite easily and the gun is then an accident waiting to happen in the hands of someone that doesn't fully realize how dangerous it can be.
 
Glock safety

Todd - first - let me say how astonished I am that you are finally coming over to the Glock side! Safety in a Glock around children is as you stated, don't touch. If a concern - four things -- never let it out of your sight or, lock it up or, keep the magazine out and no round chambered or, add one of those trigger locks and wear the key around your neck. Didn't Glock just announce some sort of key lock for the Glock pistols?
 
Does the lack of any kind of safety worry any of the parents here?
Click to expand...

No. I don't for a minute believe that a manual safety adds any measurable amount of "child proofing" to a gun. If a firearm is to be kept loaded it needs to be on your person or in a specially designed handgun safe at all times.
 
I personally believe that if a person can not understand the complex operation of a manual safety then perhaps they are not quite ready to own a firearm.
Click to expand...

And I personally know that if a person can not understand the complex concepts behind basic safety rules, they are definitely not ready to own a firearm.
 
Manual safeties are there for the LEGAL protection of the manufacturer against frivolous lawsuits due to Morons who should not be handling guns! "See, we put a manual safety on it and the Jacka$$ STILL managed to hurt himself/others with it"
 
:) Todd,

That's a poignant post! (alliteration!) :D

I know I'm the odd man out; but, I live with a Glock all day and all night long. After 5 years of doing this, I can assure you there is no way to keep your finger outside the trigger guard absolutely all of the time - No way! Sooner or later it's going to happen: You reach across the table for it and ... . You reach underneath a pillow for it, and ... . You loose your grip and ... . You reholster in the bathroom or the car, and ... ! You get the idea.

This is one of the reasons, 'Why' I use an Israeli carry and a Mossad draw. Glocks and their lack of a conventional mechanical safety have become a passionate firearms' website issue. (Thanks, GT!) I have to wonder how many of us would think about operating a lawnmower or an automobile in the same way? How about the safety shutdown on a chainsaw - Is it really necessary in the hands of an experienced logger?

(Probably not, huh! I mean loggers are real men; what do they need extra safety devices for? Their real safety is between their ears - Isn't it!) :p

In the tradeoff between some bad hombre walking up to me, someday, and suddenly blasting me from 3' away, and the everyday risks a Condition One Glock poses to: my family, myself, and our critters, I honestly believe that I'm better off keeping my Glock in Condition Three.

(I mean just play the percentages, the probabilities. Which event is likely to occur sooner, if at all?) :cool:

In an aside: One year, one of my well-to-do aunts, a woman who spoiled her only son absolutely rotten, came up to me at a Christmas party. She told me that her son, Tommy, wanted to buy a motorcycle. She knew that I rode, and asked me about motorcycle riding. I told her that I didn't think it was a good idea for her to let Tommy buy a motorcycle. I reminded her that I had sold my Harley Sportster the same day that my son was born. She thanked me for my advice, agreed that it wasn't a good idea, and walked away.

That next Summer, we got a call: Tommy's new bike had gone off the road on a sharp curve. His body slammed into a road sign; he had internal injuries; but, he was expected to recover. Several days later we learned that, 'complications' had set in; and, Tommy was dead. After that, my aunt never spoke to me again. Whenever I came into a room where she was sitting, she would get up and walk away.

Why am I telling you this? I don't think it's a good idea to go against your better judgment. To my mind, strong personal reservations are always warnings - harbingers of whatever is most likely to happen in your life. Consequently, I'd be careful about letting myself get carried away with either too much internet, 'glamour' or other people's strongly prejudicial (albeit, popular) opinions.

All guns are inherently dangerous. Glocks are a little bit more so. A Glock will, 'go bang!' easier than any other pistol in the world - That's one of the things I really like about them! (And, of course, a Glock is easy to train on - Why not? All it does is go, 'Bang!') :eek:

In the final analysis, you're the only one who's going to pay your bills! If you don't feel quite right about it then, in my opinion, you shouldn't do it. ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top