Are Glocks unsafe ?

[Musketeer]

Personal preference does NOT have to be defended as if it's gospel truth. It's OK to have a preference just because that's the way you feel. There's no need to try to prove that anyone with different preferences and opinions is risking death or is dangerously ignorant.

and I disagree.

Listen, I know I am not going to convince anyone here to give up their Glock and I am not trying to do that. I freely admit I don't like them and would not choose one for myself.

What bothers me is the gun is priced for, marketted towards, and pushed by a huge amount of people as perfect for the NEW SHOOTER. People are angry because I have the audacity to tell someone what they shouldn't shoot while others seem to think it perfectly fine to tell them what they should shoot or is good for them. No hypocrisy there!

I cite genuine safety reasons based on the fallibilty of people, especially the new shooter while the opposition sticks to the "Just Follow The Rules" mantra. Great, you can engrave that on the tombstone of someone killed by a Glock ND.

Get something straight, I don't think ANY automatic is the weapon of choice for a new or casual shooter. Period. If one is going to get an auto though I think those new and casual shooters are worst served by the Glock.

I meerely say it is a question of suitability. If it were legal would you suggest that a new shooter carry a MP5K fully auto as a CCW piece? Of Course Not. We admit that some weapons are not suited to some people based on skill, experience and physical capability. I simply say the Glock is unsuited to the new shooter because of its operating mechanism.

 

[BluesBear]

I have next to me at this moment an HK USP, a Glock, and a 1911. All three of them can be made to fire with their slides slightly out of battery.

And yes, the slide is locked with the lugs on the barrel in the 1911 I used as well, even though the slide can be held about 1/16 of an inch to the rear and the hammer will still drop when the trigger is pulled. In the same manner, the Glock and the HK USP can both have their slides held a fraction of an inch to the rear and the hammer/striker will drop, but the barrel is already locked in with the slide.

So which is it? Will they or won't they fire out of battery?

My comment was only directed to your 1911. IF it will fire out of battery then it needs to be worked on. I don't own either of the others so I cannot attest to them.

 

[JohnKSa]

Get something straight, I don't think ANY automatic is the weapon of choice for a new or casual shooter. Period. If one is going to get an auto though I think those new and casual shooters are worst served by the Glock.

Fair enough. My opinion is somewhat different.

If it were legal would you suggest that a new shooter carry a MP5K fully auto as a CCW piece?

Again, we're wandering far afield in our comparisons. Better than landmines, better than pit vipers, but still not a reasonable analogy. Full auto weapons are not simply semi-auto pistols without manual safeties. There are other issues in shooting them accurately and safety and also issues with control of fully automatic fire that don't exist in a semi-auto handgun.

I'm not saying that Glocks are the best guns out there for new shooters. I don't think there is such a thing as a "best gun for new shooters" since all new shooters are different. I think that some new shooters will find that Glocks provide safe service and meet their handgun needs. Others will be better suited to something else. However, I'm not making that assessment based on how well new shooters will follow the basic safety rules. If they can't or won't do that, then they're not suited to firearms ownership at all.

I cite genuine safety reasons based on the fallibilty of people...

People are fallible. If they exercise their fallibility while driving, operating heavy machinery, using firearms, or engaging in other risky activities, there is a risk of injury or death. Designers must compromise between trying to eliminate the effects of fallibility and maintaining the suitability of the product for its intended purpose.

Clearly a gun that will not fire is perfectly safe as is a car that won't move, unfortunately those are not a reasonable solutions. Each designer chooses where to draw the line, motivated by ethics and the knowledge that an improper choice will result in financial loss and possible criminal penalties.

You don't like where Glock drew the line, but the Glock's designers, BATF, most LE agencies in the U.S., hordes of responsible gun owners, the courts and even the State of California have all acknowledged that the design is not defective, it's not deficient and that it provides adequate safeguards to prevent accidents. So while it's fine for you to have and voice your opinion, it's also important for you to understand that there is a vast number of well-informed people who do not share it.

So which is it? Will they or won't they fire out of battery?

I have yet to see documented evidence that a Glock will fire out of lockup unless there is a problem with the pistol.

Handy's test was interesting, but based on his results and on my testing with multiple pistols, the locking surfaces of the barrel/slide were still in contact when the primer popped. The primer showed that the strike was about 0.75 to 1.0 mm high indicating that the barrel had dropped that far down when the primer strike (a very light strike, I might add) was made. That is not sufficient to take the gun out of lockup--the locking surfaces will still be engaged albeit not fully. That will provide adequate protection although it's not an ideal situation.

Furthermore even the short video clip he posted clearly showed that he had to repeatedly manipulate the gun to achieve the result he did. Interesting result, but a bit pathological IMO.

My guess is that most of the "out of battery" incidents we hear about are due to poor maintenance--specifically firing pins that get jammed in the forward position due to firing pin channel fouling or other problems.

 

[BluesBear]

I have yet to see documented evidence that a Glock will fire out of lockup unless there is a problem with the pistol.

Neither have I.
That's why I asked my question. We have a poster who claimes he has three different guns that will but then in another post they won't.

There have been various reports floating around, and I'm sure most of us have seen them, that either imply or outright state that a Kaboom occured because the gun fired out of battery. The usual evidence is a bulged or burst cartridge case still in the chamber or nearby.
The question is, or at least should be, Did the gun fire before the slide was fully locked or did the slide move to the rear before the pressure dropped?
Without visual confirmation of the sequence of events it's almost impossible to determine which one happened.

Judgement should be based on the facts and not on which side of the fence your loyalties lay.


And everytime someone interjects "The real safety is between your ears" I am reminded of MarlKarx's video in the Gun Safety For Dummies thread.
Knowing it's there and using it are like leading two horses of a different colour to water.

 

[SpectreBlofeld]

Do you personally know of a single case of that happening?
I don't.
And I was working when that type of holster was still in use by well over 50% of uniformed officers in my area. I never even heard of it happening.

As follows:

Glock Holster Safety Recall
http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml05/05175.html

CPSC, Michaels of Oregon Announce Recall of Handgun Holsters
Released: May 17, 2005

WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission announces the following recall in voluntary cooperation with the firm below. Consumers should stop using recalled products immediately unless otherwise instructed.
Name of Product: Kydex Belt Holsters for Glock model handguns
Units: About 8,000
Manufacturer: Michaels of Oregon, of Oregon City, Ore.
Hazard: The holster’s retention strap can move out of position and could cause a handgun to unexpectedly discharge while being re-holstered, posing a serious injury risk to consumers.
Incidents/Injuries: The firm has received three reports of unexpected discharges. In one incident, a law enforcement officer was shot in the leg while re-holstering his firearm.
Description: The recall includes Kydex Belt and Tactical Holsters with thumb break fits for Glock model handguns. The holsters are rigid and are made of black Kydex and come with tension screws for a proper fit. The words, “Uncle Mike’s by Michaels of Oregon” are printed on the back of the holster. The recall involves sizes 12, 21, and 25, which is printed on the inside of the holster between the two screws securing the holster to the belt slide.
Sold through: Uncle Mike’s and Uncle Mike’s Law Enforcement catalogs and at sporting goods stores and gun supply stores nationwide from January 2002 through October 2002 for between $25 and $50.
Manufactured in: United States
Remedy: Consumers who have purchased a Kydex Holster with a Thumb break for a Glock Handgun should stop using it immediately and contact Michaels of Oregon for a replacement retention strap free of charge.
Consumer Contact: Call Michaels of Oregon at (800) 471-4999 between 7:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. PT Monday through Friday, or visit their Web site at www.michaeloforegon.com

Fobus also had to issue a recall:

CPSC, First Samco Inc. Announce Recall to Replace Gun Holsters
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission announces the following recall in voluntary cooperation with the firm below. Consumers should stop using recalled products immediately unless otherwise instructed.

Name of product: Fobus GLT gun holsters

Units: About 3,200

Manufacturer: First Samco Inc., through its Fobus USA Holster Division, of Southampton, Pa.

Hazard: A plastic or leather strap on the gun holster can catch the trigger of the gun when inserted into the holster causing the gun to unintentionally discharge, posing an injury hazard to the user.

Incidents/Injuries: There have been eight reports of the Glock handgun unintentionally discharging when being inserted into the gun holster, and one report of a user injuring his finger when a Glock handgun unintentionally discharged while being inserted into the gun holster.

Description: The gun holsters are designed to hold a Series 17 and Series 19 Glock handgun fitted with a laser-sight light. "GL 2*EMZ" is engraved in the top of the gun holster and "FOBUS" and "MADE IN ISRAEL" is printed on the back of the gun holster. This recall involves two early versions of the Fobus GLT gun holsters, one with a plastic retention strap less than one inch wide and one with a leather retention strap less than one inch wide. The new design includes a strap that is more than one inch wide with a plastic tip too wide to be caught inside the trigger guard.

Sold at: Gun accessory retailers and distributors nationwide, as well as on-line at www.fobusholster.com between March 2002 and March 2003 for about $40 to $45.

Manufactured in: Israel

Remedy: Consumers should stop using the gun holsters immediately and bring the recalled gun holsters to an authorized Fobus USA distributor for a free replacement gun holster or contact First Samco Inc. for instructions on how to return the product for a replacement item. Consumers also may send their recalled gun holsters to Fobus USA, 1300 B-3 Industrial Highway, Southampton, PA 18966. First Samco, Inc. will reimburse consumers for return shipping.

Consumer Contact: Call First Samco Inc. toll-free at (866) 508-3997 between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET Monday through Friday or visit Fobus USA's Web site at www.fobusholster.com

Media Contact: William McManimen at (215) 355-2621, Ext. 21.

I don't have a picture of the first holster, but here's one of the Fobus:

Between those two blurbs, that's three reported ADs with one holster and nine with another. However many unreported.

So people and holsters can be unsafe, but never a Glock, right?

 

[Musketeer]

Between those two blurbs, that's three reported ADs with one holster and nine with another. However many unreported.

So people and holsters can be unsafe, but never a Glock, right?

No! It is obviously the user's fault for incorrectly holsterring the firearm. I'll bet those people never actually read the manual and didn't follow all the rules for proper care and use of their Uncle Mike's and Fobus holsters.

 

[greenparrot]

My very first handgun was a Glock 19... my first holster was a Uncle Mike's IWB holster. Funny how I never ended up shooting myself or others. Same thing with a few of my friends that had a Glock as their first CCW weapon.

Why is that? Because we ALWAYS keep my fingers off of the trigger. Because we ALWAYS follow the basic rules of firearm handling.

As a ex-computer tech... I have met A LOT of people who are completely slow, clueless, or just plain dumb. Give them any guns, no matter what kind of safety features it has... they WILL eventually end up shooting themselves or others. It is always USER error that comes into play.

 

[greenparrot]

The selling price of the Glock IS a HUGE selling point to a novice.

And how is Glock marketed for the novice?

There are plenty of other guns out there that fall in the same price range. M&P, XDs, PP9, HK P2000 & Sigmas to name a few, and some others that go for even cheaper.

 

[KodiakCoastie]

All the safites in the world cant prevent an accident if someone does not use comon sence and acts carelessly.



________________________________
"The reason that Christianity is the best friend of Government is because Christianity is the only religion that changes the heart." Thomas Jefferson

"I have lived, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth -- that God Governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid?" Benjamin Franklin

"It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible" George Washington

 

[Musketeer]

And how is Glock marketed for the novice?

I see it every time a new person walks up to the case at a store and asks to see a handgun.

Line heard at gunstore all the time:

"This is a Glock. It will never jam, is accurate, holds plenty of ammunition and is easy to use. All you have to do is align the sights and shoot; no safeties to be worried about."

 

[Musketeer]

All the safites in the world cant prevent an accident if someone does not use comon sence and acts carelessly.

Except for that magazine disconnect safety if an idiot drops the mag and forgets a round it in it.

Human stupidity can overcome any safety. Designs should account for the most common stupid actions.

 

[MTMilitiaman]

So which is it? Will they or won't they fire out of battery?

In each case, the locking surfaces of the pistol are not fully engaged, but they are still engaged, at least partially, as JohnKSa suggests. The slide can be pulled back a small fraction of an inch and still allow the hammer to fall against the firing pin, or in the case of the Glock, to allow the striker to travel forward. So none of the pistols are fully in battery, but all retain some amount of lock-up.

If a highly tuned 1911 can get past this, I do not know. But every 1911 I've ever handled at a gun counter, and the few 1911s I actually have experience shooting, have all done this.

The fact remains that in addition to being the standard issue service weapon for the FBI and numerous other alphabet agencies and large-scale police agencies, the Glock has also underwent and passed individual military trials for the Austrian, Swedish, and Norweign militaries (among others), as well as the extremely capable German GSG-9 anti-terrorism unit. None of them have been able to make the Glock fire out of battery. Glock has also demonstrated its ability to take huge amounts of shock force without firing. Above and beyond the standard drop tests, and any tests conducted by military forces, the Glock has undergone some pretty ridiculous torture tests, including being dropped out of airplanes and shot nearly 1000 feet into the air by cannon--all without discharging. I'll take that knowledge to heart long before I believe the ramblings of a self-proclaimed expert on the Internet.

 

[greenparrot]

I see it every time a new person walks up to the case at a store and asks to see a handgun.

Line heard at gunstore all the time:

"This is a Glock. It will never jam, is accurate, holds plenty of ammunition and is easy to use. All you have to do is align the sights and shoot; no safeties to be worried about."

Thats funny... most of the gun shops down here in TX push the XDs or M&Ps mainly. Gander's even go as far as to bash the Glocks and push XDs since Springfield offers the salespeople an incentive. A few shops push more expensive guns since novices are easier to sell to.

 

[greenparrot]

Except for that magazine disconnect safety if an idiot drops the mag and forgets a round it in it.

Human stupidity can overcome any safety. Designs should account for the most common stupid actions.

The magazine disconnect safety can be seen as a down fall too. If you are in a close quarters fight and the opponent manages to drop your mag... your gun is nothing but a paperweight.

 

[greenparrot]

I'll take that knowledge to heart long before I believe the ramblings of a self-proclaimed expert on the Internet.

Hehe. +1

 

[JohnKSa]

So people and holsters can be unsafe, but never a Glock, right?

Let's see. The holsters were recalled. The holsters were redesigned.

The instructions say to stop using the holsters. To contact the holster manufacturers for replacement holsters or holster parts.

Yeah, that looks like a pistol problem...

Getting back to what I said earlier. A user or a holster designer or manufacturer who doesn't realize that a foreign object inside the trigger guard during the holstering process is a problem needs a bit more firearms education.

Except for that magazine disconnect safety if an idiot drops the mag and forgets a round it in it.

Agreed, a magazine safety might prevent some NDs, even the kind where the shooter intentionally "dryfires" a loaded gun. However, magazine safeties are the exception rather than the rule... Why do you suppose that is?

I see it every time a new person walks up to the case at a store and asks to see a handgun.

Line heard at gunstore all the time:

If I made decisions about firearms based on what I've heard at gun shops, I'd be in a world of hurt.

I agree 100% that there is a lot of bad advice handed out in gun shops, but that's hardly an indictment of any brand or firearm. It is strong evidence that, unfortunately, gun store clerks tend to be a poor source for gun advice.

 

[BluesBear]

HOLD THE BUS!
I don't mind folks using my words. I am noted for standing by what I say. But this is just bullsh... er, um, this is just ridiculous!

Why is a comment I made regarding skinny straps on leather, REVOLVER holsters used in the 1980s being used as the preface on a post (#305) about the recall of wide straps on a plastic holster made for an automatic pistol in the 2000s?
Man, talk about taking something out of context.

SpectreBlofeld, as a rule I enjoy most of your posts. I agree with you quite often. So far I've never had a problem with you.
But man this is just insulting.
Who are you trying to make look stupid you or me?
PM inbound

As I said, I don't mind folks using my words, just DO NOT twist them to suit your personal agenda.

 

[BluesBear]

Is it just me? Or does a holster with a snap DIRECTLY over the trigger just look scarry to anyone else?
Seems like a bad idea to me.

 

[greenparrot]

Is it just me? Or does a holster with a snap DIRECTLY over the trigger just look scarry to anyone else?
Seems like a bad idea to me.

Looks like a bad idea to me too.

 

[Ocraknife]

If it were legal would you suggest that a new shooter carry a MP5K fully auto as a CCW piece? Of Course Not. We admit that some weapons are not suited to some people based on skill, experience and physical capability. I simply say the Glock is unsuited to the new shooter because of its operating mechanism.

Doesn't the US military sometimes outfit novices with fully auto weapons (or at least 3 round burst weapons)?

Secondly, how exactly is a Glock less safe than a revolver?