Sage comments on "trigger control" from my friends at ASTA:
"On the issue of trigger-cocking pistols, ASTA conducted an experiment not long ago. We constructed a darkened alley. At the end we put a group of actors, posing as of noisy, obnoxious, drunken miscreants. They were loud and verbally threatening at times but clumsy and disorganized, and none produced a weapon. All kept their distance. Each practitioner tried to make his way past the reprobates to the end of the alley, and an exit.
During the exercise, most practitioners found it necessary to draw a snubby revolver (loaded with Simmunitions cartridges) and engage perceived threats with verbal challenges. The revolver, issued to each practitioner, had a long trigger pull of fourteen pounds. The inexperienced had their fingers on the trigger immediately and kept it there through the entire confrontation. The sage, of course, kept their fingers in register. Our cadre of actors was instructed to conduct themselves in a way that made it unnecessary for practitioners to actually fire at them, and, in fact, no practitioner ever fired intentionally.
Leaning against a wall was a semi-conscious drunk, wrapped in a tarp, complete with a bottle in his hand. He periodically mumbled to himself but presented no verbal threat and did not make eye contact with practitioners. Our resident 'bum' was scarcely noticed by most practitioners, as they were far more interested in what they perceived as active threats. When each practitioner passed the 'bum,' without a word, he reached out and grabbed them by the ankle!
During the 'grabbing' phase, most practitioners already had the pistol in their hands. Our survey quickly noted that nearly all practitioners who had fingers inside the trigger guard at the moment they were grabbed fired a shot unintentionally as a result. Practitioners who kept their finger in register almost never experienced an ND when grabbed.
What we were trying to evaluate was the premise that long, heavy trigger pulls were, or were not, useful in preventing NDs during pernicious confrontations. The inescapable conclusion to which we all came was that THE ONLY RELIABLE PREVENTOR OF SUCH NDs IS THE PERSONAL DISCIPLINE TO ADHERE TO CORRECT PROCEDURES OF PRIMARY COMPETENCY IN GUN HANDLING. Obviously, triggers that are long and heavy were of little use therein, in and of themselves.
Our dispute with the mistaken premise that long, heavy trigger pull weights meaningfully contributing to the reduction of NDs is that there is little credible evidence to support it. In fact, what believable evidence there is suggests exactly the opposite! It is a false assumption, promoted by big-city police executives and mayors who are motivated neither by officer welfare nor public safety but are desperately motivated by the fearful specter of seeing their own names prominently displayed on case captions!
This situation is likened to the current dispute within the police community over the 'design flaw' in the Glock system that does not permit take-down of the pistol without first dry-firing. This 'flaw,' so goes the trumped-up argument, results in NDs. Removed from this curious equitation is the conspicuous violation, by the operator who experienced the ND, of primary competency skills, basic gun-handling rules one learns on his first day at the range!
Modern pistols are designed and manufactured so that they are as 'safe' as they can be and still reasonably function in the role into which they are cast. As with all 'nanny-state' ideology, THE MORE WE EXCUSE BANEFUL, STUPID BEHAVIOR, AND INDEED FUNCTION AS FACILITATORS BY FABRICATING DELUSIONAL, ILLOGICAL 'CURES,' THE FASTER WE, AS A CIVILIZATION, DESCEND INTO CHAOS!"
Comment: Any gun that can be made to fire at all can be made to fire (1) at the wrong time, (2) in the wrong place, (3) in the wrong direction, and (4) for the wrong reasons. The fool's errand of attempting to manufacture 'safe' guns invariably results in the creation of impotent guns. It is akin to attempting the manufacture of 'safe' rat poison! So long as it is genuinely functional as rat poison, it cannot be made inherently 'safe.' Guns are currently as safe as they're ever going to be! Issuing guns that are unusable, because they are nearly unfireable, may make some police chiefs sleep soundly, but it does nothing to promote officer or public safety. So long as good people have operative guns, bad/stupid people will have them too. Welcome to Planet Earth!
"On the issue of trigger-cocking pistols, ASTA conducted an experiment not long ago. We constructed a darkened alley. At the end we put a group of actors, posing as of noisy, obnoxious, drunken miscreants. They were loud and verbally threatening at times but clumsy and disorganized, and none produced a weapon. All kept their distance. Each practitioner tried to make his way past the reprobates to the end of the alley, and an exit.
During the exercise, most practitioners found it necessary to draw a snubby revolver (loaded with Simmunitions cartridges) and engage perceived threats with verbal challenges. The revolver, issued to each practitioner, had a long trigger pull of fourteen pounds. The inexperienced had their fingers on the trigger immediately and kept it there through the entire confrontation. The sage, of course, kept their fingers in register. Our cadre of actors was instructed to conduct themselves in a way that made it unnecessary for practitioners to actually fire at them, and, in fact, no practitioner ever fired intentionally.
Leaning against a wall was a semi-conscious drunk, wrapped in a tarp, complete with a bottle in his hand. He periodically mumbled to himself but presented no verbal threat and did not make eye contact with practitioners. Our resident 'bum' was scarcely noticed by most practitioners, as they were far more interested in what they perceived as active threats. When each practitioner passed the 'bum,' without a word, he reached out and grabbed them by the ankle!
During the 'grabbing' phase, most practitioners already had the pistol in their hands. Our survey quickly noted that nearly all practitioners who had fingers inside the trigger guard at the moment they were grabbed fired a shot unintentionally as a result. Practitioners who kept their finger in register almost never experienced an ND when grabbed.
What we were trying to evaluate was the premise that long, heavy trigger pulls were, or were not, useful in preventing NDs during pernicious confrontations. The inescapable conclusion to which we all came was that THE ONLY RELIABLE PREVENTOR OF SUCH NDs IS THE PERSONAL DISCIPLINE TO ADHERE TO CORRECT PROCEDURES OF PRIMARY COMPETENCY IN GUN HANDLING. Obviously, triggers that are long and heavy were of little use therein, in and of themselves.
Our dispute with the mistaken premise that long, heavy trigger pull weights meaningfully contributing to the reduction of NDs is that there is little credible evidence to support it. In fact, what believable evidence there is suggests exactly the opposite! It is a false assumption, promoted by big-city police executives and mayors who are motivated neither by officer welfare nor public safety but are desperately motivated by the fearful specter of seeing their own names prominently displayed on case captions!
This situation is likened to the current dispute within the police community over the 'design flaw' in the Glock system that does not permit take-down of the pistol without first dry-firing. This 'flaw,' so goes the trumped-up argument, results in NDs. Removed from this curious equitation is the conspicuous violation, by the operator who experienced the ND, of primary competency skills, basic gun-handling rules one learns on his first day at the range!
Modern pistols are designed and manufactured so that they are as 'safe' as they can be and still reasonably function in the role into which they are cast. As with all 'nanny-state' ideology, THE MORE WE EXCUSE BANEFUL, STUPID BEHAVIOR, AND INDEED FUNCTION AS FACILITATORS BY FABRICATING DELUSIONAL, ILLOGICAL 'CURES,' THE FASTER WE, AS A CIVILIZATION, DESCEND INTO CHAOS!"
Comment: Any gun that can be made to fire at all can be made to fire (1) at the wrong time, (2) in the wrong place, (3) in the wrong direction, and (4) for the wrong reasons. The fool's errand of attempting to manufacture 'safe' guns invariably results in the creation of impotent guns. It is akin to attempting the manufacture of 'safe' rat poison! So long as it is genuinely functional as rat poison, it cannot be made inherently 'safe.' Guns are currently as safe as they're ever going to be! Issuing guns that are unusable, because they are nearly unfireable, may make some police chiefs sleep soundly, but it does nothing to promote officer or public safety. So long as good people have operative guns, bad/stupid people will have them too. Welcome to Planet Earth!
A few more like that and you could be Willy. 
If you follow the more important rule of checking to make sure a gun is unloaded before handling, than there is no problem. Glock owners don't point the thing at their wives while they dry-fire it before dissassembly!