Are Glocks Safe?

[woolleyworm]

Originally Posted by rentalguy1

If you pull the trigger on a "decocked" 92, you better believe it will go bang! The decocker is just that, not a safety. I puts the gun into double action mode, and will most certainly still fire if the double action trigger is pulled.

If the OP is worried about safety mechanisms, then IMHO you don't need to me CC'ing. Your safety is your index finger and your brain. You have to get your mind around that first.

Oh yeah, and Glocks suck...

On a 92FS, the decocker is not truly a decocker; it IS a manual safety that performs a decocking action and MUST be moved to the fire position in order to fire. Pulling the trigger does NOT move this. There is a version that has a decocker only, but very few of these are out there and I don't think they were on the civilian market; so only hold me to the standard 92FS that is common. I think 007 should have stated his comment more clearly as "Beretta 92FS SAFETY engaged pull the trigger nothing."


Oh yeah, LMAO - just a little stirring the pot??

[rentalguy1]

That's funny, I just took the one out of my holster, and checked....and it is exactly like i said. You push down on the decocker and it automatically returns to center (fire). It does not stay in the down position. Up is for safe, and it would not fire if in that position....

[Cavik]

Are Glocks safe? I don't know if any gun can concretely be called "safe". Are Glocks equally as safe as any other pistol? I don't think so. I've read a lot of posts saying "know your weapon", "always treat it as if it were loaded", and basically just don't be stupid; but everybody seems to forget one very important fact: we're human. Accidents happen, mistakes get made, no matter how much training you've had; that's common sense. When an accident happens or a mistake is made, I'd rather have a manual safety. Who knows how many triggers have been pulled on accident, unknowingly, but nothing happened because the gun had a manual safety. Remember, you're only human.

[johnlives4christ]

Originally Posted by Cavik

Are Glocks safe? I don't know if any gun can concretely be called "safe". Are Glocks equally as safe as any other pistol? I don't think so. I've read a lot of posts saying "know your weapon", "always treat it as if it were loaded", and basically just don't be stupid; but everybody seems to forget one very important fact: we're human. Accidents happen, mistakes get made, no matter how much training you've had; that's common sense. When an accident happens or a mistake is made, I'd rather have a manual safety. Who knows how many triggers have been pulled on accident, unknowingly, but nothing happened because the gun had a manual safety. Remember, you're only human.

using your way of thinking should we not also conclude that one might make the mistake of forgetting to or neglecting to engage the safety of a gun that has one?

which would be safer a glock that has no external safety or a 1911 that is not on safe because you neglected/forgot to do so?

as you say we are all humans, and we are not perfect. mistakes get made. so safety is a compromise between what we each consider safe. for me. i consider 1911's with manual safeties, glocks with trigger safeties, revolvers with no external safety and smith and beretta autos with safety or decockers all safe.

safety is not for me an issue of the features of a particular gun, it is something that is learned and then practiced. the safest gun is one that is not being handled by anyone.

[Cavik]

Originally Posted by johnlives4christ

using your way of thinking should we not also conclude that one might make the mistake of forgetting to or neglecting to engage the safety of a gun that has one?

which would be safer a glock that has no external safety or a 1911 that is not on safe because you neglected/forgot to do so?

as you say we are all humans, and we are not perfect. mistakes get made. so safety is a compromise between what we each consider safe. for me. i consider 1911's with manual safeties, glocks with trigger safeties, revolvers with no external safety and smith and beretta autos with safety or decockers all safe.

safety is not for me an issue of the features of a particular gun, it is something that is learned and then practiced. the safest gun is one that is not being handled by anyone.

I'm not saying a manual safety makes a gun completely safe. Like I said, I don't know if any gun can concretely be called "safe". I'm also not saying a gun with a manual safety should be treated any more lightly, and with any less caution and respect, than a gun without a manual safety like the Glock. The same safety guidelines should apply to all guns. But I think having a manual safety is a good precaution for if and when unforeseen and possibly inevitable sh** happens.

[rentalguy1]

Originally Posted by Cavik

But I think having a manual safety is a good precaution for if and when unforeseen and possibly inevitable sh** happens.

you mean like a BG taking your CCW from you and beating you to death with it because you forgot that the first thing to go in a high adrenaline situation are the fine motor skills it takes to actuate the manual safety?

[johnlives4christ]

Originally Posted by Cavik

I'm not saying a manual safety makes a gun completely safe. Like I said, I don't know if any gun can concretely be called "safe". I'm also not saying a gun with a manual safety should be treated any more lightly, and with any less caution and respect, than a gun without a manual safety like the Glock. The same safety guidelines should apply to all guns. But I think having a manual safety is a good precaution for if and when unforeseen and possibly inevitable sh** happens.

i see how a manual safety might keep you from negligently discharging your weapon, say when holstering if you forgot to remove your finger from the trigger guard. but i dont see that, given a person practices basic firearms safety how a gun without a manual safety is any less safe then a gun with one.

a person that practices safe firearms handling will be equally safe with all firearms. where you run into problems is when people do not learn the characteristics of the particular firearm they are using.

for example, if a person was used to glocks. they then would be unsafe switching to a 1911 without having a proper amount of handling time to familiarize themselves with the gun. they most likely would forget to put the safety on, or forget to take it off when drawing the weapon. which could get you killed.

any gun argument always goes to 1911 vs glock, but lets take a beretta 92 and look at it. you have two options. either put the gun on safe and leave it there, flipping the safety off when drawing. or put the gun on safe to decock and then take the gun off safe and carry it with the safety off. this is my preferred method.

my argument isnt that one type of gun is any more safe then another, but that all guns are unsafe it handled while loaded by those that are untrained/unfamiliar with the weapon.

i am familiar and comfortable with many types of weapons. 1911, glock, single action, double action revolvers, berettas. but when i tried a friends taurus 24/7 i was dumbfounded. it has a manual safety to carry it cocked and locked, a decocker to carry it beretta style ,but it works like a glock or something. was just weird because im not used to it.

[rentalguy1]

does all of this mean I am wrong for carrying a Taurus 92 or a 1911 at condition 0?

[Cavik]

Originally Posted by rentalguy1

you mean like a BG taking your CCW from you and beating you to death with it because you forgot that the first thing to go in a high adrenaline situation are the fine motor skills it takes to actuate the manual safety?

No, that's not what I mean at all. Though, if you know your weapon; if you've practiced and trained with it, those reflexes don't just go out the window. Such as the simple flick of the thumb to switch off the manual safety. You do it enough times and it becomes automatic.

[rainmaker]

I've owned a Glock since the late 80's, and I feel that Glocks are "safe", at least as safe as the .357 revolver I carried previously (which has no safety at all).

A conventional safety is great for hunting and target practice, but in a combat situation, it can get you killed.

[rentalguy1]

Originally Posted by Cavik

No, that's not what I mean at all. Though, if you know your weapon; if you've practiced and trained with it, those reflexes don't just go out the window. Such as the simple flick of the thumb to switch off the manual safety. You do it enough times and it becomes automatic.

Not to be a smart alek, but it sounds like you read a lot...

[Slabsides]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

I've owned a Glock since the late 80's, and I feel that Glocks are "safe", at least as safe as the .357 revolver I carried previously (which has no safety at all).

A conventional safety is great for hunting and target practice, but in a combat situation, it can get you killed.

+1!

VERY. SIMPLE. CONCEPT.

Why isn't anyone jumping on revolvers? Good Lord, look how many of those things are out there and how long they have been around. They have NO mechanical safety. It's a wonder people are not having ADs by the hundreds every day.

[Cavik]

Originally Posted by Slabsides

+1!

VERY. SIMPLE. CONCEPT.

Why isn't anyone jumping on revolvers? Good Lord, look how many of those things are out there and how long they have been around. They have NO mechanical safety. It's a wonder people are not having ADs by the hundreds every day.

Glocks are said to have much lighter and smoother trigger pulls than DA revolvers. Might be why.

[noslolo]

I was taught the the safety is sitting on your shoulders and if you keep the booger picker off of the boom stick, you will be fine.

[Slabsides]

Originally Posted by Cavik

Glocks are said to have much lighter and smoother trigger pulls than DA revolvers. Might be why.

It's a humorous comparison. The simple rule of keeping your finger off of the trigger applies to both.

It's just amazing to see someone who knows nothing about Glocks attack them for "having no safety" and rant about how "dangerous" they are when Glocks have 3 built-in safeties (besides the one in your head). Yet DA revolvers truely have NO safeties.

I've always maintained that if someone is too dumb to absorb the simple concept of NOT TOUCHING the trigger until ready to fire, then they either need to get a gun with as many safeties as possible, or consider getting rid of their guns before an accident happens.

If someone cannot be trusted to keep their finger off the trigger until ready to fire after being told numerous times, how are they to be trusted to use a manual safety?

Manual safeties are not the be-all-end-all. They are NOT to be trusted. They are simply an added precaution (which NEVER EVER replaces proper training and techniques). Would you chamber a round, place the safety to "safe", point it at your head and pull the trigger?

NO.

Not only would you have broken several rules, but deep down you would not trust that blessed manual safety.

[RunningOnMT]

I personally prefer a thumb safety on a semi auto. I also prefer steel frames. That doesn't mean for the right purposes I wouldn't carry a Glock or XD if otherwise suitable. The bottom line though is that many law enforcement agencies issue Glocks. They can't all be wrong.

[CampingJosh]

Is a Glock safe? Well, I suppose it depends which side of the gun you're standing on.

[flyboyvet]

Originally Posted by graehaven

Manual safeties are dangerous. You may disagree. That's fine. You've been wrong before.

I agree with you on that. This clown friend of mine shot his pinky off with his Glock and now he says they are unsafe and he is getting a gun with a manual safety! I told him that even with a manual safety he would still have shot himself because he was being careless with his gun. He said he was just cleaning it and when he put it back together and pulled the trigger there was a round in the chamber!! WHAT??? I'm thinking he was under the influence...either drugs/alcohol or a few too many shots of STUPIDITY...

[DixieLandMan]

... This CLOWN friend of mine shot his pinky off with his Glock and now he says they are unsafe and he is getting a gun with a manual safety! I told him that even with a manual safety he would still have shot himself because he was BEING CARLESS WITH HIS GUN. He said he was just cleaning it and when he put it back together and pulled the trigger there was a ROUND IN THE CHAMBER!! WHAT??? I'm thinking he was under the influence...either drugs/alcohol or a few too many shots of STUPIDITY...[/QUOTE]

I think the capitialized words are where he went wrong.

[ryan42]

Glocks have 3 safety's a trigger safety,firing pin safety and a drop safety.They are all redundant.I find that most of the people that talk down the glock had never had one let alone even held one.If you practice basic gun safety you will never have a problem period.

[ryan42]

Originally Posted by rentalguy1

If you pull the trigger on a "decocked" 92, you better believe it will go bang! The decocker is just that, not a safety. I puts the gun into double action mode, and will most certainly still fire if the double action trigger is pulled.

If the OP is worried about safety mechanisms, then IMHO you don't need to me CC'ing. Your safety is your index finger and your brain. You have to get your mind around that first.

Oh yeah, and Glocks suck...

Really I just thought glocks were for shooting bullets I didnt know the sucked too.Do you pay extra for that feature?

[Hammerslagger]

Ruger pointed out around 1973 (when they left the original Colt SA design for their new "transfer bar" firing design) that there had been a long (100 years plus) history of accidents involving Colt's design that could only be carried safely when carried with the hammer all the way down on an empty chamber.

Ruger went on to say that some persons expected a gun to be completely safe; and that there was no such thing as a completely safe gun.

Persons who are, by nature, careless or have little common sense; should avoid interaction with all firearms.

[Regular Joe]

I just don't have a round in the chamber of ANY of my guns unless I expect to need it. I've been doing that for many years now, and there have been times when I did need to chamber a round. If you have time for ANY manipulation of your gun, like taking it off of manual safety, you have that very same time to rack the slide. It's funny, what thinking can do for a man.

[76Highboy]

Originally Posted by CampingJosh

Is a Glock safe? Well, I suppose it depends which side of the gun you're standing on.

Ha, ha, ha. Words of wisdom.

[norahc]

Originally Posted by CampingJosh

Is a Glock safe? Well, I suppose it depends which side of the gun you're standing on.

Stealing that for my signature. Thanks, josh.