To be fair, a comparable test would be trying to see if various other guns would fire from the half-cock position if the various safeties that prevent it were deactivated.Show me how to fire a S&W Model 10, at rest, without you adding the energy to fire it. (By cocking the hammer). That’s the way you would carry it. Not cocked, that would be unsafe. You can take out the hammer block, file down the block on the trigger rebound slide and, it still won’t fire. There’s no stored energy to fire the gun.
Glock doesn't claim there's no energy in the striker spring or that it's completely uncocked in the trigger forward position, just that it's not fully cocked until the trigger is pulled nearly all the way to the rear.
It IS partially cocked. About 50% of the striker spring compression by distance is performed by the trigger pull. About 75% of the striker spring energy is generated by the trigger pull. Regardless of whether there's enough energy stored to fire some types of ammunition when the gun is placed into a configuration that could never be realistically achieved in the real world, the gun is still only partially cocked in the trigger forward position....I too believed, that a Glock was partially cocked.
Let's say you found out that a particular revolver had enough mainspring energy to fire from the half-cocked position. Would you then say that the half-cocked position is now the fully cocked position? Of course not. Partially cocked is partially cocked regardless of how much energy is stored in the main spring/striker spring.
In a 17 or 19 sized Glock the trigger pulls the striker back by about a fifth of an inch--about half the overall amount.But, there’s enough stored to fire it pretty regularly, without that last 1/8” or so of movement.
If you want to be technical about it, the energy was added when the gun was picked up. Raising the gun up creates potential energy. Dropping it just converts the potential energy created by picking it up to kinetic energy as it falls.Adding the energy to fire it.