Hmmm Maybe a thumb safety is not so bad....

[LockedBreech]

I can't find the video, but a few years back there was a self-defense shooting at a gas station. Weapon was a G36 that the victim had in his center console. Perps were trying to drag him out of the vehicle by one of his arms when, with his other, he was able to get the pistol and fire at his assailants. I hate to think how that might have turned out if he didn't have one chambered.

[Nathan]

Interesting comments. I'm sorry this challenge of thought hit too close to home for some.

I'm not really blaming anything on Glock although they did bring us the first 5-6lb trigger with no active safeties.

That has bit a couple of people publicly....I can think of ~5 that made news.

All have something that the person should have done better to avoid the situation.

I personally have no Glock issues. I fixed that by selling them off.

If you jumped on the not carrying loaded, please read the op as you missed any point I was trying to make.....I guess that is an option for some.

[mrray13]

Glock has several "active" safeties, they just don't have a thumb or grip safety. And, imo, they still have a manual safety...the trigger safety. If it isn't depressed, the trigger can't move. Period. In your example, a faulty holster depressed the safety, and the trigger.

You say you're not blaming the Glock, so then what are you blaming? The worn out holster? The individual? No, all you mention is the Glock. Again, if the individual had done his part and maintained, and or replaced, his holster, your example would have never happened. But he didn't, and the holster did something it wasn't supposed to do. The firearm functioned perfectly.

Like you mentioned, you resolved your issue with Glock by getting rid of yours. The individual in your example doesn't have a Glock issue, he's got a failed Galco holster issue that was his fault.

As to the chambered/unchambered thing, to each their own. But I see zero reasons to carry and to do so with an empty chamber. Save a pre-transfer bar SA.

I wonder if one was able to go back in time, if there were discussions at the bar about how one's Colt, or S&W, was designed poorly due to a AD when a round went off under a hammer at rest?

[Jim567]

I really liked my Glock 19.
But - almost every AD I read about seems to be a Glock.
I sold mine and am staying with Sig double single action.
Makes ME feel good.
Others miliage will vary of course.

[chadio]

Nathan, thanks for posting the link.

This is a good reminder of what can happen, I hope it saves someone some grief one day....

[Hiker 1]

I've always wondered why Glock didn't offer a model with a manual safety. It seems they would have a whole new set of customers.

I'm a Glock guy at heart but my EDC is M&P9c with thumb safety. I like the option.

[Erno86]

I'm not a Glock guy at heart...but care has to be taken, that no foreign objects {like wooden sticks} get lodged in a holster --- especially in a Glock holster --- that can trigger a negligent discharge; upon insertion of the pistol.

That is one of the reasons why I'm not Glock guy.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Glock has offered safeties to agencies that demanded such for their incompetent weapons users.

It's simple - if you don't feel safe with a weapon that just takes a trigger pull and no other manipulations, don't carry it.

BTW, I almost had my foot shot by a 1911 user who couldn't handle his gun with a manual and grip safety.

[OldMarksman]

Pos7ed by adamBomb:

As a result, I have to practice drawing but I dont think racking the slide adds any time for those that practice it.

I have trouble visualizing how adding an extra step in the process would not add time.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

The Israeli types argue that you rack as you bring the gun to eye level, so you don't add time.

It has to be highly practiced and it still adds time for most, IIRC from folks who time such.

Our proponents of unchambered carry should watch folks screw up the rack or forget the safety. This is with skilled competitors and not just newbies.

How is the proponents automatic clearing routines? I've gone through a lot of training to handle the standard jams on Glocks and 1911s. Then you get the weird one ... Racking under stress increases such.

It's also like the fabled shotgun. Take a stress shotgun class - watch trained people screw up the pump.

[Erno86]

I was 10 feet away from a guy on our pistol range, who almost shot his foot with his 1911, while on the concrete firing pad --- The bullet put a crater hole in the concrete. I warned the shooter not to put his finger inside the trigger guard while not aimed an ready to fire at the target. He kept performing the same error {finger inside the trigger guard while not on target}...so I reported his range badge number to the RSO.


Turns out...he borrowed the range badge from another member, and I got that member into range trouble --- A month later ---- A UPS guy shows up at my house front door, with a C.O.D. order, that held a package of 237 AK-47 firing pins, that was addressed to me but not ordered by me.

Now our range has photo I.D's for members.

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Originally Posted by adamBomb

Hows having a gun worthwhile when no handed? We can come up with scenarios all day that make having a gun, a certain kind, etc all worthless

Except having only one hand available during a self-defense shooting isn't all that uncommon: http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=528314

[pete2]

Those who are careless and the inexperienced are most likely to have an accidental discharge. This applies to a Glock or any other type of firearm. The Glock has no safety and is therefore a little more dangerous to handle than a gun with a safety. Yes, it's operator error if you make it go bang by accident, but that's the reason guns have safetys. The safety must be released to pull the trigger. The glocks and Glock copies, you just pull the trigger.

[TailGator]

To me, the important reminder in this story is that the gun is not the only component of the system that needs attention and maintenance. The holster matters, clothing matters, the belt matters, and thought and attention to what we are doing all matter. Thumb safeties are available on lots of models of guns for those who prefer them, but they are not a replacement for conscious thought about how we are handling our handguns, simply because they can fail or, more commonly, be accidentally left off. The results of supposing that you have some sort of fail-safe crutch that allows you not to think about what you are doing with your firearm can be far worse than what we saw in this instance.

[Nathan]

Originally Posted by mrray13

Glock has several "active" safeties, they just don't have a thumb or grip safety. And, imo, they still have a manual safety...the trigger safety. If it isn't depressed, the trigger can't move. Period. In your example, a faulty holster depressed the safety, and the trigger.

Let me define "active safety": An additional action to pulling the trigger to fire the firearm. By that definition, Glock has no active safeties.

BTW, I'm speaking of several incidents:
- this guy
- the officer reholstering n the gun store.
- the officer who had the kid reach in his holster and fire his duty weapon
- the dancing cop who had the AD in Detroit?? Killing the lady
- the officer in Cincinnati in the elevator
There migh be 1-2 more, I forget.


Let's get Glock out of the conversation.....let's say Joe's guns designs a gun. It is about the same size, shape, capacity, reliability, accuracy and durability as an XD9, M&P 9, or Glock 19. It has similar 5! internal passive safeties and a trigger face safety. Joe has so developed his internals that the trigger is 3 lbs, minimal pretravel, no over travel and it breaks like a glass rod. 1911 guys are blown away. Joe calls it the SSA Pro Carry. SSA stands for Super Safe Action. His ads all say when pro's carry, pro's carry the SSA Pro Carry. Joe is such a genius he gives out 100's of gun writer/blogger guns. They all sign a simple agreement saying they will describe the SSA talking points: 5 internal safeties + a trigger safety, a professional 3lb safe trigger pull, SSA assures the gun goes off only when you tell it to by pulling the trigger.

Would you buy it? Would it have the same, less or more AD incidents. Could it be manage by individuals effectively?

[JohnKSa]

Would you buy it?

Maybe. It would depend on what I intended to do with it. I wouldn't buy one to carry in a soft holster, in a holster that didn't cover the trigger, or shoved into my waistband without a holster. But then there are many, many guns that fit that description--some with heavy trigger pulls, some with light trigger pulls.

Would it have the same, less or more AD incidents.

How many AD incidents that involved the gun would be more dependent on how many guns they sold than on any features of the guns.

If one compared ADs based on the AD rate corrected for the number of guns out there, it's harder to make a clear prediction. It would depend on a number of things. For example: Is this a gun that's going to be a high-end gun that is used mostly by people who are particularly "gunny"? Or is it going to be a budget gun that's going to be put into the hands (and holsters) of a lot of marginally trained people who don't really care much about guns in the first place but have to carry one because it's a requirement of their job?

Could it be manage by individuals effectively?

Sure, if they paid attention what they were doing and were versed in firearm safety. Just like any firearm.

[Nathan]

street price of $440.

[mrray13]

There's a agency in California switching to the M&P from the Beretta 92, IIRC. The number of AD/NDs have gone up, and the agency is attributing that to the different fire control group of the M&P.

I have transitioned from a USP 40, which was carried cocked and safety on, in a Uncle Mike's Pro3 holster to an M&P 40, carried in a Safariland lvl 3 lightbearing holster. Going by my previous example, I should expect an AD/ND any moment now. I mean it's the gun at fault, right? I no longer have an active safety, and I even changed holsters and the technique to "clear leather" as well. So, should I switch back, or do I continue to train and maintain?

I'm sorry, but it's user error in the majority of cases. If your finger is in the trigger guard, or a piece of holster, it's not the gun's fault, regardless of the number of safeties, or lack thereof. If you want a gun with a safety you have to flick off, by all means, get one. You still have to do your part, keep equipment maintained, keep finger off trigger, etc, to prevent AD/NDs..as this fella found out with his 1911....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3kJ6SU3ycs..

Maybe he needed a safety with a combination.

[OldMarksman]

I'm sorry, but it's user error in the majority of cases.

That could be said about tragedies involving chainsaws without guards, lawnmowers without positive cutoff brakes, ejection seat actuators without safeties, and any number of other things. Even cuts to the web of a hand caused by recoiling parts.

That does not mean that such cases are more acceptable--and they will happen.

If your finger is in the trigger guard, or a piece of holster, it's not the gun's fault, regardless of the number of safeties, or lack thereof.

Or if a jacket sting gets into the holster....

It all gets back to the nexus between risk management and human factors engineering. I the main issue is to prevent discharges caused by human error, design in a positive safety. But if there is concern that releasing that safety might prevent the gun from being forced timely when needed, at least take that into account when designing the safety.

I've gone a step further. My firearm has a grip safety that requires no separate movements or operations to discharge the gun.

[pete2]

Folks, it's always user error, always. A manual safety has to be disengaged to fire the pistol. It's an extra step that has to be taken to fire the pistol. I've heard of 'Glock Foot", never heard of Colt foot, wonder why? I carry my LC9 with the safety on even tho it would be hard to fire it by accident due to the 3/4" trigger pull. Any accidental discharge is due to operator error, a safety is there to make it less likely to occur.

[2damnold4this]

Folks manage to shoot themselves accidentally with 1911s.


Link

link2

link3

I'm sure I could find more but the point is that good, safe gun handling is important no matter what firearm is being used.

[skizzums]

don't forget my mom's county sheriff who shot his wife in the back on New Year's when he was drunk. or the Dekalb County sheriff that shot the woman that he was doing "tactical training" with. oops.

i have no problem with civilians carrying Glock-type pistols, but there are too many incident where the police put civilian lives at risk with these firearms. i don't believe it's the guns fault or anything, but i do believe an active safety will prevent many ND's in police ranks. the stories are just too plentiful to keep going "business as usual".

sept in seattle "Police say the woman refused to show her hands, so the officer drew his gun. While drawing the gun, police say the officer accidentally shot the 19-year-old woman in the leg. "

sept in NY "Investigators believe the impact of Cuevas running into the officer caused him to fire one round, striking the 20-year-old victim in the left shoulder, police Commissioner Raymond Kelly said at a news conference. Cuevas died later at a hospital."

sept in Lodi "During the Little Buckaroos Reading Round-up event, Officer Robert Rench was helping a boy try on pieces of SWAT team gear, when another young boy approached unnoticed. The boy, who witnesses told police was about 6 years old, reached his finger toward the gun and pulled the trigger, Piombo said."

from above story, this quote is priceless and explains why some people are against the idea of glock's and police........."The Glock handguns that SWAT members carry aren’t equipped with a safety", Piombo said.
“There is nothing we could have done differently,” he said. “It was just an accident. It boggles the mind why a child would do that.”.

well, okay then, nothing can be done i guess, they said so

these are a couple cherry picked stories from the DOZENS similar in the last two months.

if glock's are not part of the problem, then what's the solution? i believe a simple switch safety would stop SOME of these incidents, of course not all. i understand that the safety will likely be off after drawn, so alot of these will still happen.

[AK103K]

but i do believe an active safety will prevent many ND's in police ranks.

I think something the "safety" people seem to be forgetting is, when the gun has been drawn, and is in hand, the "manual" safeties are disengaged, or should be, at the time of the draw.

Guns like the Glock, with the trigger safety, only have the safety removed, when the finger is placed on the trigger, and rearward pressure applied.

Anyone holstering without watching what they are doing, is the problem, regardless what the gun is.

[skizzums]

none of th stories I showed had anything to do with reholstering. a kid walked up and pulled the trigger between the cops holster, how do you argue with that?

[AK103K]

a kid walked up and pulled the trigger between the cops holster, how do you argue with that?

I guess Im just not getting that picture, and how its happening. I know of no duty holsters that would allow that to occur.

It doesnt say anything about the gun being in a holster. Sounds more like the gun was out of the holster.