A lot of NDs

[Chuck]

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Safeties on Glocks were required because of ham fisted professionals who could not stop faffing with he trigger.

As for ergonomics, our Sig P229's have a god awful set up, decock and slide release too close together.

Funny that in all the high speed / advanced CQB courses etc I have been on these last 6 years or so I have NEVER seen an ND. Operator error YES, I myself am guilty (dropped mag through not checking it was fully seated, ) Oh and this bit of quick thinking when I forgot to close the bolt when doing a demo that's a DOUBLE


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yLLIEcURhiA


.............but never an ND.

[tackb]

it's a long while since I've handled a glock chuck , do they have another safety other than the little one on the trigger now?

[froggy]

my point is that an operator is the cause of an ND not the weapon

I dont think anybody would disagree with the above statement.

My comment is actually that an extra safety added to a fundamentally safe pistol, the glock 17, as a palliative measure to "human error", could actually create an operating issue. I think it still within the scope of the topic

The only Glock external safety is the one positioned on the trigger.

[tackb]

then we agree froggy ! (your not to tell anyone I've agreed with a Frenchman though!)

so I must have misunderstood chucks comment , I've always liked the glock , it's a bit like me, ugly but functional and great in a crisis

[Chuck]

I'll agree with you too foggy...

hi tack, yes some do - some police depts. asked for them as their officers were too dumb to operate a normal Glock by all accounts.



http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009 ... fety-saga/



my G23 is simple: Point, Pull and BANG! I got a natty wee .22 LR (CCI Mini Mag) conversion for it - now I can't get the darn ammo! sign01 sign01 sign01

[Sim G]

hi tack, yes some do - some police depts. asked for them as their officers were too dumb to operate a normal Glock by all accounts.

How do you get what you said from;

A few years ago, in a classic case of government bureaucracy covering their ass, the Portuguese Police decided that one requirement of their future pistol is that it must have a manual external safety.

So it was the bureaucrats who reckoned the police couldn't be trusted with a standard Glock...? So how does this feature...?

A few weeks ago the Portuguese media discovered that the police have signed a contract with Glock to retrofit all their pistols with normal, safety-less, Glock 19 frames.

[ordnance]

Most agree that N/D-S are caused by human error. So I think that having layers of safety without making the firearm to slow to bring into action makes sense Safety catch decocker etc. Glock have removed all safeties so its not surprising that the chance of N/D-S go up. There is the trigger safety remembering that unintentionally pulling the trigger is the cause of N,D-S the trigger safety is as useful as an ashtray on a motorbike.

[froggy]

Glock have removed all safeties
?? actually two internal + 1 external


the trigger safety is as useful as an ashtray on a motorbike

But forget the theory and be honnest , ask yourself how happy would you be to carry 24/24 straped to your leg or against your hipo a pistol in Cond Zero, ie : live round chambered, hammer cocked & ready with the safety off ?

[tackb]

I would carry a glock in that condition.

[froggy]

Tackb, my point precisely but I doubt you would be that happy to do so with let's say a 1911, CZ75
etc... Anyway as Chuck mentioned before, a good holster that covers/protect the trigger, always treating the weapon as loaded and under no circunstances any wandering trigger fingers would solve a lot if not all probs ...