Glock safety concerns

T

three_grams

Inactive
Regarding some recent threads on Glock. While everything that has been said about it is true, consider this:

The Glock has no safety. If you work in Law enforcement or have CCW and have it taken away from you, under any circumstances, all the criminal has to do is pull the trigger. Like the old 38 special revolvers. Read articles by Massad Ayoob, for instance in September 1990 issue of _Guns_ magazine and in many other articles. He documents how cops had their weapons taken away from them but weren't killed because their S&W, Sigs, etc were carried on safe. And also what happened in the instances where deparment mandated off-safe carry. Glock is an easy gun to fire. It is both a bonus and a liability. All you have to do is pull the trigger. That is all the criminal has to do.

Further problems with lack of safety is that if you shove it in your wasteband ("Mexican" carry) and something gets in the way, like the belt buckle, keys or whatever and pulls the trigger, it *will* go off. This is not mere speculation. There are documented cases of this happening as well (agains, see Massad Ayoob). I think about a 115 grain JHP cruising down my leg or pelvic bone at supersonic speeds and I shudder. I want something safer. I want something idiot-proof.

Think about the fact that under real stress, your fine motor skills will disappear and you might do something stupid, like re-holster it with trigger on the finger or accidently pull the trigger while aiming at someone. A 1911A1, while not my choice, is a far safer handgun due its non-trigger related safeties, the muzzle safety, the grip safety, cocked and locked safety or hammer down ways of carrying it.

This does not deny that the Glock is a great weapon with a lot of loyal followers, however, they sometimes tend to underestimate the problems with it and just don't see any faults in it whatsoever. It is a cheaply manufactured polymer-frame pistol. Price is certainly a big factor in its popularity especially with big contracts. I think that HK P7 (or any other HK) is a far better pistol, more accurate, more safe but it is also 3 times as expensive which ensures that it will never become popular.

When the Glock comes out with a new generation of pistols that have redundant slide or frame safeties in addition to the trigger safety, I will probably buy one. It is the first step in the right direction. I think that Glock is like the Broomhandle Mauser of the 21 century polymer pistols, it is a first, and more of a success than failure but needs improvements with regard to safety.
 
three_grams; IMHO, Glocks are just as safe as any other pistol. That said, they centainly have a different manual of arms. With a chambered round you don't stick it in your waistband (Mexican carry). With a chambered round you don't carry it in a holsterless fanny pack. IMO, the pistol is at it's best in a rigid holster, period. That's why I feel it's a better LE pistol than it is a civilian pistol. Just my thoughts, J. Parker
 
Also BTW,

When Mas Ayoob came to Dallas last year to teach his LFI courses, he carried a (oh, so unsafe) Glock 30.

FWIW
 
Non-holstered carry: Sig/Glock/etc

To echo on a thought JParker had:

If you are not using a rigid holster, or any holster, how are all of you carrying handguns with no manual safety? I find myself using a fanny pack sometimes. Beretta- safety on. Sig- unchambered round. Does anyone feel comfortable carrying a chambered round in something that could potentially have a trigger hang up?

Had a guy in the E.R. 3 months ago who shot himself in the hand with his Glock .45 (didn't catch the model). He was really hard on himself. He had placed his Glock in a gymbag with some assorted stuff. He 'thought' that there was no round chambered. He reached into the bag to remove the gun, it had shifted around, and he grabbed the muzzle. As he pulled it toward him, the trigger got hung up on something, and the gun went off. He was lucky, because it just caught the bottom of his hand. My understanding was that there were a few other people in the room. No one else was hit.

I pride myself in being a safe gun handler, and I'm not saying that just because a weapon has a manual safety makes it full proof, nothing is, but I am a little bit 'extra' cautious with my Sig, than with my Beretta, if you know what I mean.
 
As long as you follow the rules, the Glock (or any gun) is safe. If you break the rules, you are risking injury to yourself or others, no matter what gun you have.

Mechanical safeties will not prevent accidental discharges 100% of the time. In fact, lots of people have been shot with guns that the operator thought were "on safe".

People who dislike the Glock frequently bring up the fact that it does not have a conventional safety. I would probably like Glocks better if they did. But I do not feel it is unsafe.

The original poster asked for an "idiot-proof" gun. The best choice for that is probably one like Barney had on The Andy Griffith Show... you know, unloaded, with one bullet in his shirt pocket.

I also disagree that glocks are "cheaply manufactured", and dont really understand why that statement was made. I think experience with Glocks has proven them to be well made and quite durable.

If someone doesn't consider themselves competent to be armed with a Glock, then they are wise to select something else, as no gun is right for everyone. No reason, though, to make unfounded derogatory comments about them.
 
I'm sure this would never happen to any of us... but I've read of several incidents where people panicked and got gun taken away from them or shot because they forgot to remove the safety when trying shooting the bad guy. Had burglary several years ago in the county where the BG got a ruger Blackhawk away from the owner held it to his head in the ensuing scuffle and pulled the trigger repeatidly (BG dind't know he had to cock it) burglar ended up fleeing and no harm done. Six of one half a dozen of the other.

Blue Duck
 
sig970; I've never had a holster in my fannypack and carry a Beretta Centurion (with the safety off) and a Sig P-220 in it all the time (with a round in the chamber of course). I've Mexican carried Beretta's and Sig's for years without the least concern. We're talking 12 to 14 pounds of trigger pull. That's the same as many revolvers. I wouldn't hesitate carring a revolver in my fannypack. It's that long heavy trigger pull that is comforting but Glock's are a whole different story. Best, J. Parker
 
If you're really worried about the Glock's lack of a manual safety check out the Saf-t-Block, its just a small piece that is pressure fitted behind the trigger of a Glock, you can snap it out in a second. Personally I believe it is extraneous just because you shouldn't have your finger on the trigger no matter how excited you are, it should be automatic to keep it off the trigger. Imagine if you were really excited/scared/etc. do you think you could still put a fork in your mouth? Probably. Because this is something that's practiced so much its automatic as should gun safety rules.
 
Hey, you're right about those fine motor skills going south in times of stress. You know, those fine motor skills that are required to flip off a 1911 safety. I use both 1911 pistols and Glocks. Just from my personal experience, the answer to the question raised by the originator of this thread would most likely be found in a bottle of Paxil.
 
This subject comes up on a frequent basis and is due to not understanding the Glock's special operating requirements. You never put a loaded Glock into anything other than a holster that covers the trigger. If you insist on putting a loaded Glock into a bag or a pocket without a holster and the gun goes off it's your fault. Keep your finger off the trigger unless you want to discharge the piece. Loss of retention of a loaded pistol can get you shot, but this is not unique to Glocks, LEOs need to be properly trained.

Finally, to call the Glock cheaply made doesn't make any sense to me, the quality of metal work on the slide is as good as any mass produced modern pistol I've seen and the use of alternative materials such as plastic is not cheap it's innovative and better.
 
As with any weapon, common sense should be used.

If we use the no second safety arguement, then you are saying that all the LEO's that have been carrying revolvers all these years are in just as much "danger" as Glock users.

>> Like the old 38 special revolvers. <<

What about all the folks carrying modern 686's and other modern wheelguns? No safety except for the one pulling the trigger. Are they in danger now because they don't carry a weapon with a manual safety? Don't forget that the BG also has to get the weapon out of a high retention level holster and away from the officer to use it.

>>Think about the fact that under real stress, your fine motor skills will disappear and you might do something stupid, like re-holster it with trigger on the finger or accidently pull the trigger while aiming at someone. <<

Under real stress you go back to your training. What you train to do you subconsciously perform. If you pull the trigger while aiming at someone it is because a lack of training, not the weapon. If you reholster the weapon with finger on the trigger, again it is the lack of training, not the weapon.

>>A 1911A1, while not my choice, is a far safer handgun due its non-trigger related safeties, the muzzle safety, the grip safety, cocked and locked safety or hammer down ways of carrying it. <<

What is a muzzle safety?..ya got me there. To go back to the above arguement, if you say in a real stess situation your motor skills will dissapear-- you really think you can thumb cock a hammer while having to draw at the same time if you don't have any fine motor skills?

>>It is a cheaply manufactured polymer-frame pistol.<<

Also, the HK comes in Polymer models. What evidence do you have that makes the Glock workmanship or quality less than any other pistol? Is the arguement based on quality? Or perhaps you base it on durability of the pistols? I would really like to know why they are cheaper.

>>I think that HK P7 (or any other HK) is a far better pistol, more accurate, more safe but it is also 3 times as expensive which ensures that it will never become popular.<<

You really think your beloved P7 will outshoot a G19L or 21?..I really don't think so. You say or any other HK...does that mean the USP Compact .40 will shoot better than any Glock? You are kidding right? Show me some proof other than opinions and I will believe you.

>>I want something idiot-proof.

When you find the idiot proof gun, I would love to see it. I really don't think there is such a weapon made today.


I carry a Glock as my personal CCW and have no problems with it. Some people don't feel comfortable and thats fine also. Some people don't feel comfortable cocked n locked, but there are many people here who do feel comfortable. Some people feel more comfortable with no round in the chamber and prefer racking one in prior to engaging the target..and that's fine also. Each to his own. But don't go dogging a weapon system without proof other than Mr Ayoobs statements when he also carries a Glock routinely.

Good Shooting
RED
 
Don't point the muzzle at anything you aren't ready to destroy.

Don't put your finger inside of the trigger guard unless you are ready to fire.

If you frequently let someone else take your pistol from you, you need to stop carrying one. If you continue, is it a surprise when a crook shoots you with your own pistol?
 
So, you don't like Glocks. Fine. Don't buy one. I think posting this kind of crap (yes, this is CRAP. DA revolvers don't have safeties either, I don't see you bitching and whining about them) over and over again just makes you look like an instigator and a troll.

My 2¢
 
when the original poster of this thread said they are cheaply made, i believe he was refering to the fact that they are cheaper in price. perhaps he should have used the word less expensive, as cheap implies poor craftsmanship. i don't believe that is what he was implying at all. if you read his post, and not jump to conclusions, he states that, "This does not deny that the Glock is a great weapon with a lot of loyal followers..." and, Price is certainly a big factor in its popularity especially with big contracts." you can see that what he meant was that it's a less expensive gun in regards to it's price and not it's quality. so, you die hard glock fans...take it easy, he meant no disrespect to your glocks.
 
I carry a Glock several ways: in an ankle holster, in a holster inside my pants (a setup I rigged myself), in a pocket holster, and in a holster inside a fanny pack. I have absolutely NO safety worries. I just know to be careful when holstering/unholstering. Also, I have been in a very high stress situation (at gunpoint). My reactions and thinking were clearer than normal. So I have no worries of an ND in a high stress situation.

If someone isn't this confident, then don't carry a Glock (or Sig, or condition one 1911, or whatever). As far as LEOs that don't have a choice, they should train with their issued sidearm until they are that confident.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top