Glock trigger safety?

Discussion in 'Glock Forum' started by themanbeau, Sep 16, 2009.

  1. themanbeau

    themanbeau New Member

    107
    0
    0
    Hello, All Glockophiles-

    I re-joined the Glocker ranks recently (had a 21 before/now 23) and still don't like the lack of a manually operated safety. Yes, before you 'experts' go into 'attack' mode, I know about the safeties Mr. Glock designed in, etc. Now-to my point, please....there is a safety (seems to be the only one not involving cutting the frame) that only requires replacing the inner 'hook' in the trigger with one that features a Marlin-type push-pull locking mechanism. Does anyone have one of these installed on his/her weapon, and if so, how do you like it? I feel strongly that this is the way for me to go, but would like a bit of previous user 'T&E' imput, if I can find any.

    Thanks!-
     
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2009
  2. Rentacop

    Rentacop Well-Known Member

    1,105
    39
    48
    Sorry to say I've never seen the safety you refer to.

    I think you will find that keeping your Glock in a good holster ( one that covers the trigger ) is plenty safe. That way, there is no safety to forget in an emergency.
    You can leave it in its holster almost all the time. If you need the gun for home defense at night, simply pull the holster off to put it in " fire" mode.
     

  3. spittinfire

    spittinfire New Member Supporter

    9,663
    4
    0
    Personally....I would get as far away from Glock as I can. They are about as safe as a zip gun.
     
  4. themanbeau

    themanbeau New Member

    107
    0
    0
  5. AFPVet

    AFPVet New Member

    15
    0
    0
    We were always trained not to use the external safety with the Beretta M9. Even though the M9 had an external safety, we were not to place the weapon on safe prior to holstering. In my opinion, external safeties impede the emergency use of the weapon. If someone likes a manual safety—and trains with it—this is fine... not my cup of tea however:D I love the Glock safe action and wouldn't have it any other way. Many of my law enforcement colleagues agree....
     
    Last edited: Sep 17, 2009
  6. Glockanista

    Glockanista New Member

    64
    0
    0
    The only Glock thumb safeties I have seen are the ones that cut the slot in the frame. If i run across the one you are referring to I will pm you with the info.
     
  7. themanbeau

    themanbeau New Member

    107
    0
    0
    Thanks, Glockanista-

    You know, I've been giving that a lot of thought, and I think I see a solution
    in a very similar design:

    [ame=http://www.vimeo.com/6365723]Austrian Sporting Arms M22 on Vimeo[/ame]

    Especially if someone (how about you smart gunsmiths here?) could figure out
    a way to reverse the safety lever, so that it engaged/disengaged like a 1911.
    And (personally) I would much prefer a hole in my slide, than a huge cut in my
    frame, which makes it look like my teenager took it out to the back workshed to
    "repair" it.....:p What say you?

    Waiting on you, armorers!-

    P.S.-Is that a pic of you and your faithful hound, in the van?
     
  8. Ram Rod

    Ram Rod New Member

    414
    0
    0
    Glock pistols are just as safe as you are.
     
  9. themanbeau

    themanbeau New Member

    107
    0
    0
    Hi, Again-

    Yes, I agree with Ram Rod; I'm not questioning the overall safety of the
    Glock design (it was genius, in the mid-80s!) or I certainly wouldn't have
    bought another one. Equating one to a 'zip gun' is pretty far out in left
    field. :eek:

    I will say this, though-I just wonder if one day the "Glock Perfection" logo/idea might
    come back to bite the boys in Smyrna, because it implies that if they change anything
    (like adding a manual safety option) that they are 'admitting' the original design had a
    'flaw' (not literally, hence the ' ') in it. I am really beginning to suspect that Glock's
    corporate attorneys are the true reason they are stubbornly refusing to offer anything
    like this to their customers, and I have spoken to them about this, personally. Not about
    their attorneys, but asking them to please give me this option. They were pretty darn
    arrogant about it last time (in an email) and said essentially, "shut up about this, we are
    NOT going to put a manual safety on our guns." :rolleyes: This is not even true, because
    they already DID, when they submitted a .45 for the military trials, a few years ago. I think
    that showed a little bit of flexibility on Glock's part, when there was (potentially) some
    big bucks to be made, and to get their weapons in the hands of the mass-military in the U.S.
    So-for that reason, I will withhold final judgement, and hope the market FORCES them to re-
    consider.

    I'm sure the folks at Springfield and (especially) S&W (since they offer it on all M&P auto
    models, now) grin about this all the way to the bank, since more-and-more police agencies
    and individuals want this on their automatics.

    I also would like to see Glock (not holding my breath here, either :p) offer different color frames,
    and a stainless (silver) slide option, because these guns (work well) but are pug-ugly! :)

    My 2 pennies-
     
    Last edited: Sep 18, 2009
  10. M14sRock

    M14sRock New Member

    5,549
    2
    0
    Nobody ever seems to question the safety of a good, double action revolver. Yet they have no "external safety". Hmm.

    I've yet to discover a pistol with better inherent safeties than a Glock. If the operator keeps their finger off the trigger, it is 100% safe. And anyone who feels it is OK to keep their finger on the trigger of ANY firearm just because it has a manual safety, is a dangerous liability. If you rely on any manual safety over safe gun handling, YOU are the ticking time bomb.

    When you truly understand the engineering behind how the safeties on the Glock work, you will not have any fears of "accidental" discharge. "Negligent" discharges happen with every firearm, but they are due to the idiot behind the trigger. The Glock can NOT go off unless the trigger is all the way to the rear.

    And when the thumb safety on the 1911 is improperly fitted, or worn, it can allow the hammer to fall if the trigger is squeezed, even when the thumb safety is fully engaged. This is an attention getter on the range.
     
  11. themanbeau

    themanbeau New Member

    107
    0
    0
    Hm-m-m>there are many, many multiple cases of police officers (admittedly not always 'gunnies') and others who have had ADs/NDs (whichever term/acronym you like) with Glocks-this cannot be denied. Are you saying that not even ONCE in your life have you had a weapon discharge when you didn't intend it to? If so, I will take that statement with a very healthy grain of salt. :rolleyes: Even if you say such a thing, how much of your good fortune was skill, and how much just being lucky? Even you couldn't say, for sure.

    I don't think they would be very appreciative of having an 'idiot' label applied to them, due to this. I never advocate (or practice) leaving a finger on the trigger at any time, post-firing. I do honestly admit to being somewhat "dangerous" (not just with guns) when I am very fatigued. I have always been this way, so evidently this is just part of my nature, which I have to be aware of, and guard against. I think this is common to most (really, all) people, and wouldn't be quick to slap a 'dumbass' label on someone doing a 'Barney Fife' in such cases. ;)

    As previously posted, I do not think Glock has a flawed design, I just like the extra security of a locked weapon, which doesn't negate any of Cooper's rules, or common sense gun-handling. The incidents of ADs which come to mind which (more-than-likely) would have been prevented by such a device involve re-holstering, either in a duty rig, or some sort of C.C.W. setup, like an inside-the-waistband. I knew a fellow in the armored car industry (who was very far from an idiot) who had this happen with a D.A. .357 Smith, when an item on his belt got somehow snagged (during qualifying/re-holstering) between the trigger guard and trigger, causing him to 'donate' part of his thigh meat to a local hospital. Fortunately, he lived to serve another day.

    Another 2 pennies-
     
    Last edited: Sep 19, 2009
  12. themanbeau

    themanbeau New Member

    107
    0
    0
    Cases in point: (thanks, Rentacop)

     
  13. M14sRock

    M14sRock New Member

    5,549
    2
    0
    Somehow "fieldstripping a loaded Glock" that leads to shooting oneself is now the problem of the Glock? I think YOU just made my point. If every gun is treated as if it is loaded at all times, these things would not happen.

    I met a cop several years ago who told me his story. He went into the mens room to take a dump, and hung his cocked and locked 1911 on the coat hook on the back of the door. When he was finished he reached up, grabbed his 1911 and while removing it from the hook the trigger hit the hook (thumb safety engaged). The gun went off 3 times and fired 3 rounds up into a desk on the floor above. He was stunned when this happened, as he had no idea his thumb safety had been improperly fitted and was unsafe. Nobody was at the desk at the time, his department disapproved the 1911 as a duty or backup weapon after this.

    Now, was that a problem with the safety, or his gun handling? I think both.

    And to answer the previous question, I have never had a gun go off "accidentally". And none of the professional gun people I know have had it happen either. Why? Because we are careful, and treat every gun as if it is loaded all the time.

    And, police departments have been plagued with unskilled officers "accidentally" firing their weapons for as long as they have carried them. Not all LEOs are gun people.

    Keep your finger off the Glock trigger, and the gun won't go off. Simple.

    And if you rely one some magical, manual safety to keep you from accidentally firing your weapon, you are destined to do it. Manual safeties wear out frequently, so learn to rely on the one between your ears to keep your finger off the trigger.
     
  14. Ram Rod

    Ram Rod New Member

    414
    0
    0
    I've never had a weapon discharge unless I intended it to do so. 4 years in the USMC and an extensive history with firearms after that and to this day.
    Now I'm thinking that maybe humanity as a whole wasn't ready for Glocks. I'd say over half of humanity are not adept enough to drive a vehicle satisfactorily either.
     
  15. themanbeau

    themanbeau New Member

    107
    0
    0
    I never said or (even intimated) that! M14-that's a very irritating habit-to put words in people's mouths all the time. :mad: I DID say-Cooper's rules (and common sense) still apply. I DID say-I just like the ADDED security of a locked weapon, for cases like the re-holstering without a finger on the trigger issue, cited; which was a revolver, in that one instance.

    I have never had an AD since I learned (or at least began applying) good gun handling habits, either. Even in gun stores (right after watching the counter clerk check the chamber) I still treat it as a loaded weapon, as rule #1 states.

    The incidents I put in quotes actually came from Rentacop (as I said) so that can be taken up with him. I wasn't saying that nothing stupid was done; I was re-citing these to illustrate that these were cases of Glock-involved incidents, nothing more.
     
  16. themanbeau

    themanbeau New Member

    107
    0
    0
    Ram Rod:

    Good! That's proof that Cooper's rules really DO work, when properly and consistently applied. My AD was when I was only 19, prior to joining the military, and being very wet behind the ears. The details are a bit too embarrassing to go into, but that was my LAST one, and will stay that way.

    There's an old maxim that says the only (true) fool is one who can't learn from his past mistakes. So, since no one was injured, (in one sense), I'm glad it happened to me-nothing like an incident such as that to prevent over-confidence. ;)

    Which brings me to the point I possibly didn't make completely clear when I mentioned Mr. Fife's name previously:

    I appreciate everyone's service who served (or is serving) in the military or police here, but the attitude that, "I am this, or I did that, so therefore I CANNOT have an AD/NG" (even though unspoken) makes me more than a bit nervous to hear. As said, age, fatigue, or even distraction can have a great effect on anyone, no matter how 'bad' they are, or were, with a weapon.

    To use a non-gun example: I rode motorcycles for more than 20 years...and we say in it that there are only 2 kinds of riders: Those who have fallen off, and those who WILL (one day) fall off. Now, I'm sure someone will weigh in and say, "I've been riding for 50 years, and..." Great! Fantastic! But I am talking about the masses of riders (and 'common' gun owners) not the exceptional (or exceptionally lucky) ones.

    There's no way I would (personally) recommend buying a Glock to someone who was brand-new to guns. If you do-fine-but I want people new to our industry/sport to have good (largely meaning "safe") experiences, as I'm sure everyone else on this board does. It takes a while for someone who lacks a police or military background to get these practices down, just as we were once all novices. I know (particularly among the ladies) the idea of even holding a gun makes (most of them) apprehensive, because not only is it obvious, but they say so. It doesn't help them to hear/think that one must be some sort of "super-human" military android to know how to carry and utilize a gun safely. Let's show them the way, minus the machismo. :)

    Thanks, guys-
     
    Last edited: Sep 20, 2009
  17. AFPVet

    AFPVet New Member

    15
    0
    0
    Exactly. The more experienced we are, the more we have to resist complacency. Firearms are just like shop tools... you get complacent, it has nothing to do with external safeties—you will get injured! Finger off the trigger and watch the muzzle. Safeties fail, you shouldn't....
     
  18. themanbeau

    themanbeau New Member

    107
    0
    0
    Amen! Good re-make of my point about the 'can't happen to me' mindset.

    Uh-I think if you went back and asked the 'victims' (yes, some were dumb, but not all) if it (having a safety engaged) would have made a difference, their answer(s) would contradict this. My co-worker with the .357 Smith (revolver) was doing everything 'right' when it happened to him-pretty darn rare, but still happens.

    Plus, you guys who keep pounding me with this 'Glock don't (sic) need it' line haven't even addressed the question Ayoob brings up....the gun snatch!

    2 more pennies-
     
  19. SGT-MILLER

    SGT-MILLER New Member

    2,350
    0
    0
    I fail to see the big deal of whether or not themanbeau puts a manual safety on his Glock.

    If he wants one, then he's welcome to do it (it's his gun after all). I say good luck to him, and I hope he posts a pic of his results.

    I think the sliderlock safety would work well on a Glock. Having that safety won't change the manual of arms too much, and it looks like a drop in component (which is always a plus).

    I would say to try it out, and let us know. With minimal practice you'll be able to manipulate it with ease.
     
  20. themanbeau

    themanbeau New Member

    107
    0
    0
    Thank you, Sgt. :)

    Good point-that was the original question (issue) of this thread, until it got highjacked onto some rabbit trails! ;)

    But the trails were fun!!-:p

    Thank you, too; 'rabbitmen'. :p
     
    Last edited: Sep 20, 2009