Glock Safety

[saintsfanbrian]

Glock = Good Gun, could use and external safety or a decocker at the least. Another poor design (in my opionion) is having to pull the trigger to take it down. I would much rather have the decocker option than that.I do carry one most days and haven't shot myself (prays)

[Guest jackdog]

Do Glocks have design problems, Yes. Mars I do see you point of view, and I respect what your saying. Based on your augurments I will concede that the Glock is more dangerous than other weapons. I still like my Glocks, it's a matter of personal preference. But safe gun handling is and always will be the key to safe firearms. Poor safety = poor preformance or worse. If a person gets in a car and backs over there child, it is not the cars fault it is the fault of the operator. Good car safety says walk behind your vehicle before you get in and drive.

[Marswolf]

A car isn't designed by the manufacturer so it normally has a child behind it that you have to remember to remove before backing up.

I'd love to hear a tape of the meeting when they decided to actually design in the unsupported part of the Glock chamber.

[Guest jackdog]

How many unsupported chamber incidents were not caused by ammo or owner abuse. Do I like the chamber design no. But then again I have never had a failure with my Glock stock barrel, nor has my Glock ever failed to fire, and I carry it mainly for that reason. Perhaps you should sue Glock for their design.

As far as thcar scenario, Glock did not design their firearm so it normally has a operator pointing it at his or chest and pulling the trigger.

[molonlabetn]

Glock = Good Gun, could use and external safety or a decocker at the least. Another poor design (in my opionion) is having to pull the trigger to take it down. I would much rather have the decocker option than that.I do carry one most days and haven't shot myself (prays)

Hmmm...

A Glock with a decocker, and better ergonomics perhaps...

Sounds alot like a Walther P99AS...

I want one of those! The differences that make me want a P99, are the same differences which cause me to reject Glocks. That about sums it up. I would even prefer a P99AS to my XD (especially if available from the factory chambered in .357sig).

[saintsfanbrian]

Actually, Molon, I am wanting a P99QA I think. I almost bought one when I got my Glock 19 but the Glock just felt better at the time. Oh well, one day they will all be mine.

[Marswolf]

How many unsupported chamber incidents were not caused by ammo or owner abuse.

How many kabooms were caused by the unsupported chamber and would not have happened in any other gun? It's a lousy stupid design.

BTW, in the nuclear power industry we used to have DBAs - "Design Basis Accidents". Someone decided that this was bad PR and so DBAs became "events". I'd say blowing up the barrel in a Glock is more than an "incident" to those it happens to.

[towerclimber37]

Oh well, one day they will all be mine.

I know that feeling!

[GhostDog]

This just my opinion, so take it for whatever you think it's worth:

I don't buy into the "Glocks are unsafe" theory. If the guns were unsafe, everyone else would not be in such a hurry to copy them/follow in Glock's footsteps. The gun functions as it was designed to and does it very well.

The Glock functions just like a DA revolver. Is the trigger lighter? Yes, it is but the function is the same. Is the revolver more tolerant of a finger on the trigger when it shouldn't be? Yes, but only slightly. You pays your money and you takes your chances. Trying to make an "idiot proof" gun is an exercise in futility.

I help one of our local instructors with permit classes. I don't teach the class, I just help out as an RO with the shooting portion of the class (I am no expert and don't claim to be). I have made a few observations; Most people can use their sights and, if they understand trigger control, can put holes in a target. However, when it comes to gun handling, far too many are clueless. Many don't understand how their own gun functions regardless of the gun type. More levers do not solve their problem. Can you suggest that they may be better off with a good DA revolver? You sure can, but they won't listen. Then again, some people buy their 16 year old a brand new Mustang and then wonder why the car is wrecked and their child injured. You ain't gonna fix it, they have to figure it out for themselves.

As far as "trained professionals" are concerned, some of the same observations apply. I was a police officer for over 10 years. Again I'll say that I'm no expert but I did notice a few things. Skill level varies from individual to individual. Give a man a rope, it don't make him a cowboy. There are plenty of cops out there who are little better than the average joe when it comes to gun handling. Not a knock on cops, just the way it is. It's up to the individual to build skill. Most departments train to the lowest common denominator.

DA/SA pistols are slightly more tolerant of the "finger on the trigger" problem UNTIL the first shot is fired. After that, they are actually worse. I'm sure there are plenty of cases of "trained professionals" trying to holster a cocked DA/SA pistol with predictable results.

If a person is uncomfortable with Glocks, buy another pistol but it ain't gonna fix the problem. You can put a heavier trigger (8lb/12lb) in the Glock if it helps you sleep at night but it ain't gonna fix your problem.

I am NOT trying to sound superior and I hope this won't be taken that way. I'm no better than anyone else. I could have an ND tomorrow but it's MY RESPONSIBILITY to prevent it, not a gun's.

Before anyone brings this up let me say: I am not Gaston Glock, do not sell Glocks, and do not own stock in the company. I just like the guns. I have owned and carried many different guns. I like 1911s, S&W pistols, and Berettas as well. Don't care for SIGs but they are fine pistols. All that is required of a good self defense pistol is that it go bang when you pull the trigger and keep going bang until you stop pulling the trigger. Other than that, the choice is yours. Pick what you shoot best.

[Marswolf]

My view is simply that while it is the responsibility of the user to prevent ADs / NDs. The design of the Glock makes that event much more likely with a lapse in concentration and I think empirical evidence indicates that.

I'm not trying to beat up on Glock lovers. As I've said, it is a perfectly adequate duty weapon.

I do think it has three problems:

1) It is too easily fired inadvertently.

2) The design that requires it to be dry fired in order to field strip it is poor.

3) The partially supported chamber is unnecessarily dangerous.

And these are all problems other quality handguns do not have. So why on earth buy a Glock?

[GhostDog]

Believe it or not, I'm not trying to get into a "peepee" contest with you. I respect your opinion, I just disagree.

1- The same quality that makes it easier to fire inadvertently also makes it easier to fire fast and accurately.

2- "Back in the day" the Beretta was knocked because it could be taken apart by a "bad guy" while a "good guy" was holding the loaded pistol. This is not a shooting problem, it's a gun handling problem (meaning an "operator" problem).

All guns should be checked before anyone tries to take them apart. Changing guns/designs won't fix this.

3- This chamber problem seems to be a 40S&W problem rather than a Glock problem. I don't know why Glock hasn't changed this unless they fear it will affect reliability. I do know that many police depts love their 40 Glocks and have not had any problems. I suspect that the problem is more ammo related than most folks will admit. Are other 40S&W pistols more tolerant of "less than optimum" ammo? Probably, but that doesn't mean that the problem is mostly a Glock problem. If a man wants to be able to shoot crappy 40S&W ammo, don't get a Glock. Personally, I don't really care for 40S&W. If I were to want a 40, I would probably get a Beretta/Stoeger Cougar. These were designed for the 40 so they are NOT 9mms that were "redesigned" to handle the 40. It's kind of like squeezing a fat guy into a VW Beetle: you might be able to do it, but that don't make it a good idea.

[Marswolf]

Hi GhostDog. This is just my day to PO other people.

1- The same quality that makes it easier to fire inadvertently also makes it easier to fire fast and accurately.

Well, yes and no. I find that consistency in the trigger helps make the bullets land where they are supposed to. I added a dual stage Jewell trigger to my Remington 700 VS because I know exactly when it will fire. My USP and Beretta are very repeatable in SA mode. It doesn't have to fire easily, it has to fire consistently. I have said all along that Glocks can be very accurate. But something, whatever it may be, makes them go off more often than other guns when not expected. That, in my view is not good.

2- "Back in the day" the Beretta was knocked because it could be taken apart by a "bad guy" while a "good guy" was holding the loaded pistol. This is not a shooting problem, it's a gun handling problem (meaning an "operator" problem).

All guns should be checked before anyone tries to take them apart. Changing guns/designs won't fix this.

I'm well familiar with this. I've carried a 92SB for a couple of decades. I know a LE guy in Bristol that can remove the slide from a 92 before you know what is happening. I use the 92 as a long-range handgun or make sure any potential BG doesn't get close.

Of course guns should be checked before disassembly. The point I keep making is that for one reason or another sometimes they aren't checked. In Berettas, or H&Ks, or SIGs that does not result in the gun firing. In Glocks, it does because you have to pull the trigger to un-cock it in order to remove the slide. You may not consider this a design flaw, but I do. It should be fixed. It's the same design "feature" that drove Jennings into bankruptcy. But the Jennings is considered a cheap crappy gun, while a Glock is revered as professional.

3- This chamber problem seems to be a 40S&W problem rather than a Glock problem. I don't know why Glock hasn't changed this unless they fear it will affect reliability. I do know that many police depts love their 40 Glocks and have not had any problems. I suspect that the problem is more ammo related than most folks will admit.

Factory ammo works fine in a Glock. I strongly suspect Glock (Gaston and the rest) decided that feed reliability was more important than additional safety factor. My contention is that other quality firearms have that same reliability with additional safety. It's possible to blow up any handgun with sufficient overpressure. But rounds that would be easily handled by other handguns blow up a Glock. There is really no reasonable excuse for this. This is a needless danger.

I owned Glocks but took a hard look at design and function. I didn't like what I saw.

With so many better guns out there, I easily found some that have equal reliability and more safety. I just can't understand this loyalty so many people have to what is in my view an inferior handgun.

[Guest LiLBucket]

Man, this is an interesting debate!! I own a S&W SW9VE and have mixed feelings about the points of interest here.

First of all, I love the gun and have had no issues with the Sigma stlye trigger. I'm no "tactical" (I love it when I get to use that word!!) expert when it comes to handing, shooting, or whatever else applications might be in question, I'm just a guy with a gun.

The thing that I feel most strongly about is the fact that it's about the individual holding the weapon. Darwin always seems to win when it comes to these things. Lack of training and abundance of ignorance will never mix.

I know poeple that have gone out and bought an ovepowered croctch rocket just because their friends all rode and they wanted the neatest, fasted name available. A few of them shouldn't have bought anything above a moped let alone a sportbike that'll do over 120mph! It didn't work out for some, others it has. One needs to know their limits and the capabilities of the things they're dealing with. Sure, sportbikes aren't safe and have limited safety features build in, but they also have their respective purpose as do guns. Said sportbike maker can't be at fault for said ignorance.

I wonder how many people go out and buy a Glock as their first gun based on the popularity of the Glock name alone with little knowledge or research of what they're getting into. Accidents happen. Accidents that could be avoided by certain safety features. Where's the line drawn though?

These are just my feelings and pennies worth. Sorry if it seems like a bit of a rant!! Where else to rant than TGO though!!

[Marswolf]

I wonder how many people go out and buy a Glock as their first gun based on the popularity of the Glock name alone with little knowledge or research of what they're getting into.

Lets see if I can dig my hole a little deeper....

It's not just first gun buyers. I did that. [hiding face in shame]. I had used a Beretta 92SB for years in the field and decided to "update" to a modern weapon. Went out and bought a shiny new black Glock 26 because so many of my LE friends used them. Even after I traded it for an XD-9 sub, I bought a G23 for a carry gun - duh!

I view Glocks as acceptable but not preferred for a LE duty weapon.

I think most people buy a Glock because they want a gun like the cops carry. I think they believe there is some sort of inherited mystique and professionalism that goes with the Glock. But the top professionals I know don't carry Glocks. It's one of those things you look for when sizing up someone in law enforcement. Maybe it's snobbery. Maybe it's experience.

Sort of like years ago when I bought a Mazda RX-7. Renaissance Red and a real babe magnet. Nice vehicle, until you put it up against a "real" sports car.

[Guest LiLBucket]

I'm guilty of said offense as well! (buying for "coolness" or reputation factor)

Luckily I was and am surrounded by good influences when it comes to firearms.

I'm sure the "Glock safety" issue will be debated as endlessly as Ford and Chevy (PLLLLEAASSEE don't start that here).

[Marswolf]

I like Fords.

[Guest Archimedes]

I've never had a handgun that was more comfortable to shoot than the Glock.

I'm not going to get into this debate, but I will ask Mars exactly what he hopes to accomplish in arguing this repeatedly.

Do you hope to turn Glock owners away from their pistols one-by-one or are you just making sure we all know your position?

I'm all for a good flak session, but I'm not swayed at all from using my Glock.

There's a reason that Glock is so popular among LE and Military forces around the world. If it’s not for their reliability and ease of use, then what?

I respect you, Mars. You seem to really have a lot of useful experience, but I really think you're tirades on Glocks fall on deaf ears.

ADs are purely the fault of the user….nothing more, nothing less.

I’ve not had a ton of experience with firearms, but I’ve never heard of any firearm spontaneously firing itself without any outside interference.

Ghostdog was on the right track when he was talking about automobiles. A Charger with a HEMI is more likely to get the user in trouble than a GEO with a three-cylinder, but the user must accept that responsibility going in. An individual must know how to handle the equipment they are using and accept the increased risk, if they wish.

~Archi

[Guest GlocKingTN]

I've never had a handgun that was more comfortable to shoot than the Glock.

I'm not going to get into this debate, but I will ask Mars exactly what he hopes to accomplish in arguing this repeatedly.

Do you hope to turn Glock owners away from their pistols one-by-one or are you just making sure we all know your position?

I'm all for a good flak session, but I'm not swayed at all from using my Glock.

There's a reason that Glock is so popular among LE and Military forces around the world. If it’s not for their reliability and ease of use, then what?

I respect you, Mars. You seem to really have a lot of useful experience, but I really think you're tirades on Glocks fall on deaf ears.

ADs are purely the fault of the user….nothing more, nothing less.

I’ve not had a ton of experience with firearms, but I’ve never heard of any firearm spontaneously firing itself without any outside interference.

Ghostdog was on the right track when he was talking about automobiles. A Charger with a HEMI is more likely to get the user in trouble than a GEO with a three-cylinder, but the user must accept that responsibility going in. An individual must know how to handle the equipment they are using and accept the increased risk, if they wish.

~Archi

Easy there Archi......Easy! He has a right to his opinion, just like you and I do! No matter if its good or bad! Its just like the Ford/Chevy argument, no one wins!

[GhostDog]

because I really don't care if it's a ford or chevy as long as it goes "vroom" when I turn the key and doesn't have to go to the shop every other week.

Mars,

Again I'll say that I'm not trying to start anything with you. You obviously have a wealth of experience so... please believe me when I say that I'm smiling as I type the following: I noticed that when you mentioned the USP and Beretta being repeatable, you mentioned the SA mode and not the DA mode. Maybe you should try a Glock again. {said jokingly, let's keep it civil}

[Guest Archimedes]

I didn't mean for my post to be offensive at all.

Like I said, I have the utmost respect for Mars.

I think I'm entitled to my opinion too, though.

Actually, I agree with Mars that the Glock is inherently more dangerous than some other pistols, but that doesn’t necessarily make it bad.

Helicopters are innately more dangerous than fixed-wing aircraft, but their advantages far outweigh their risks.

SUVs and such are intrinsically more prone to roll-overs, but you have to have the ground clearance to do any serious off-roading.

And I don't care what it is either as long as it's cool in my eyes.

Like this, for example:

~Archi

[Marswolf]

I think we are getting on the same track. My point is not to offend any of you, but to get you thinking critically. I am very critical of all of my guns and look realistically at their problems - and they all have them. I could improve on all of my guns. In some cases, I have improved them.

As I've said, Glocks are fine for duty weapons for LE. They are also fine for MPs but not general military personnel.

Glock came around when LE was going through an early fit of political correctness. Those nasty cocked hammers on duty weapons scared the public. Basically, a 1911 with a cocked hammer is the same thing as a Glock as long as you don't use the safety but a less safe Glock for some reason doesn't bother the brain-dead public as much.

I'm sorry guys but I'm not going to say that a handgun intentionally designed with a unsupported section of the chamber is anything but a dumb design. I don't care how reliable it makes feeding. If it was on a Saturday Night Special, all of you would be saying it was a gun only a retard would carry. Now be honest....

And this is only one of its bad design features.

Ghostdog, you are correct that I specifically mentioned the SA mode on the Beretta and USP as being repeatable. Actually, both are also repeatable in DA mode too, but the USP DA mode pretty much sucks although it did smooth out pretty well with a few hundred DA trigger pulls. I really use it as an emergency mode only, but it is a mode I insist on.

My procedure is to de-cock the USP for normal carry (can't do that with a Glock - can you? ) but cock it, in the holster, as I'm going into any expected confrontation. If something happens that I'm not expecting before it is cocked, I can always fire the handgun from the hammer down position (can't do that with a 1911). Typical "panic" trigger pulls are around 50#. Best of both worlds as far as I can see. It gives safe carry but can always be fired.

BTW, not having a safety on the handgun is something that Glock did right and is another reason LE carries the guns. Cops panic too and you don't need a safety to prevent them from firing when they need to do so. My USP is variant 3 - de-cocker but no safety. That was a simple modification I made.

The Glock design goes back about 20 years and in my opinion was a bad design even for back then. I understand why it became popular but the design needs updating to fix its bad aspects. And it seems to me that today there are better handguns available.

That really is my point. There are better handguns available for every single thing a Glock is used for.

[GhostDog]

We don't disagree about everything. You make some good points but I still disagree about the Glock trigger. It's advantages outweigh the disadvantages in my humble opinion. The person using the gun has to know the weapon and make their own decision. It's hard to beat a Glock for that first shot and short/quick trigger reset. Based on what you said about how you employ your USP, it seems we both seek the same thing in a carry gun, we just don't agree on how to accomplish it.

Speaking of DA triggers, I only recently became familiar with shooting Beretta pistols (believe it or not) and found the DA trigger on a Beretta to be one of the best (smoothest) I have ever used.

I hope the guys on the forum here can organize the East Tennessee TGO "get together". I would like to meet you guys.

[molonlabetn]

Beretta 92/96D pistols have one of the best DAO triggers on the market... Installing a 92/96D mainspring in a 92/96F gun provides a phenominal DA and SA trigger pull.

[Marswolf]

Have to agree that the 92 has a good DA trigger action, but I still cock it when possible.

[Guest Archimedes]

Glock came around when LE was going through an early fit of political correctness. Those nasty cocked hammers on duty weapons scared the public. Basically, a 1911 with a cocked hammer is the same thing as a Glock as long as you don't use the safety but a less safe Glock for some reason doesn't bother the brain-dead public as much.

A Glock is less safe than a locked'n'loaded 1911 with the saftey off?

BTW, is it possible for a de-cocked, chambered 1911 with the saftey off to fire if enough force is placed on the hammer like the Colt SAAs?

~Archi