Glock

[AirTech]

As posted by Greg Bell:
Since "Keep your finger off the trigger" is all that is needed, why does Glock disapprove of 3.5LB triggers for carry? Perhaps they have fallen prey to the dreaded "victim mentality?" Or, more likely, they realize that "keep your finger off the trigger" isn't always enough.

Greg - As Tamara stated, no pistol should be carried for self defense with a 3.5lb. trigger.
I don't recall Glock disapproving the 3.5lb. trigger for carry, although I would understand if they did. The Glock safeties are incorprated into the trigger and work simultaneously with it. If you lighten the trigger, you are effectively lightening the safeties. The 5.5lb Glock trigger and internal safeties coupled with the trigger safety bar is more than enough for an effective safety system. You had referred to carrying a cocked and unlocked Sig
as being the same as carrying a Glock- The Sig is dangerous in this condition. A Glock is safe with a round chambered because none of it's safeties have been disengaged at this point. If you drop the Sig, chances are more than likely that it will go off. No chance of that with a Glock.
I too was fearful of Glock's safety system until I actually understood how it worked. I believe Glock's safety features along with it's ability to provide quick self defense is the reason that Glock has sold more handguns in the past 10 years than any other manufacturer.

Hope this helps!
AirTech

 

[WalterGAII]

According to our local range officer, at our Dept. of Natural Resources-maintained public range, Glock offered 3.5# connectors to all the Dept. of Nat. Resources enforcement officers. I personally carry my G30, with a Scherer 3.5# connector, with all moving parts polished. I get a true pull of about 3.25#. I have no more concerns about an irresponsible discharge than if I had an 8# trigger. I'd think that the improved accuracy offered by the lighter trigger would outweigh any disadvantages. As a matter of fact, I can't think of any REAL (as opposed to only imagined by others) disadvantages.

 

[MRW]

Greg,

As always, you see the forest through the trees in the subtle but critical issues you bring up.

In these various lengthy discourses on Glocks and safety, what's interesting is the issue that has NOT come up:

A dual factor system for bringing a pistol into battery--trigger and external safety--cannot but statistically reduce the incidence of user-induced AD's. Two things, rather than one, have to happen before the gun shoots. In this case, that's an advantage.

A dual factor system that requires the user to physically manipulate an external safety cannot but statistically reduce the incidence of a gun firing when brought into battery, given the lightspeed responses required within an armed encounter. Again, two things rather than one have to happen before the gun shoots. In this case, that's a disadvantage.

Training reduces the probability of user-induced AD's, and increases the probability of a gun going bang when it's supposed to. But humans will always be subject to imperfect responses and freak circumstances--even the well trained, and of course not everyone who owns a Glock is well-trained.

Which makes me wonder why, in this highly litigation oriented society of ours, and given Glock's vast user base, they haven't come up with some sort of bomb-proof dual factor system for bringing their pistols into battery that doesn't have the disadvantage of requiring the user to physically manipulate an external safety.

 

[krept]

I carried my G27, unloaded, but "cocked" in my pocket for the past week without a holster. Even though I had never bought .40 ammo, I still acted as if it were loaded. After practicing draws, hiking around, putting it down and picking it up, etc. not once during that week did I ever find the pistol to have discharged. Of course, I would use a holster for loaded carry, but I wanted to familiarize with just how safe the seemingly unsafe Glock would be. Everything worked out fine. There were no "Whew, I'm glad it wasn't loaded" moments where the trigger was inadvertently pulled or the striker was disengaged.

Some (many) agencies outlaw carry in SA mode. Does this make C&L carry unsafe? I don't think so, but to each his/her own...

 

[Greg Bell]

Guys,

I want to thank everyone here for their input. While many of us disagree, we all acted like adults. I sometimes wish that we could have a "members only" forum where we could discuss things honestly without having to read through "Gun X sucks/rules." Sometimes it is really frustrating. For example, a lot of you know I am a real P7 nut. A few months ago I was trying to determine all the negative things that could reasonably be said about the P7. From the start people began accusing me of having never shot a P7, of not understanding it...and so on. I got e-mail from people who actually know me who said they laughed their butts of when they read that my experience wasn't "anything extensive." I could probably build a house out of the lead that I have sent downrange out of my P7s (One member here has seen a tree that I cut down with my old M13). Anyway, the point is, some opinions are worth less than others. I don't see why we can't have a serious discussion forum with fewer slogans and more actual thoughts.

GHB