ARE GLOCKS UNSAFE?

[MountainBear]

Hell no it's not safe. It's a gun. It's an explosion being contained in your hand. If you want safe, go play with a stuffed teddy bear.

But if you follow the four rules of gun safety, you'll mitigate the danger as much as you can with any gun.

 

[NWGlockgal]

You seem to be throwing around a lot of assertions without any proof.
How about citing some statistics and evidence?
The guns are not unsafe, it's some people that handle them.

 

[Quackerbacker]

Is it easier to be safe with a Ruger SR series than a Glock?

Yes.

People, really smart, well trained people, make mistakes. Some mistakes can't be helped by any amount of safety features. Others can.

I switched from Glock 23 to Ruger SR40C in part because i liked having a manual safety. I did yank the mag safety out in the first 48 hours i owned the pistol though...

 

[PotterCountyPa]

Well, like I said in my last sentence, I know my thoughts are controversial. However, if a safety, loaded chamber indicator, and internal lock did not enhance safety, why is Ruger (and now many other manufacturers) designing and manufacturing them with these features? And why do they require locks on guns at gun shows? The fact is that even those who are the best trained and most safety conscious among us make mistakes, and that is just the way it is.

As far as my statement that most gun accidents occur with either a striker fired pistol without a safety, or a loaded revolver, I have no statistics except that every time I read about such an accident, it seems to me that the majority of accidents occur with this type of firearm. Yes, it could be because there are so many of these in use, but like I say, I choose to use a pistol with a safety, and better yet (in my view) a hammered action with a long first shot trigger pull like my Ruger P95.

Best regards to all.

 

[JGRuby]

I know that we are talking aboput glocks but there are some pistols I am happy that there is a manual safety - a 1911, a Browning Hi Power is another one, I choose to carry those pistols cocked and locked. I have no doubt that 99% of all situations as long as the trigger is not contacted the pistol except in extreme/rare circumstances is 100% safe. That manual safety does make me feel just a wee bit better but I also know that it is subject to failure. If you have it - it would be foolish not to use it.

James Ruby

 

[Blitzkrieg]

The best safety is between your ears.. a Glock is perfectly safe if you follow safety rules.. no gun is safe if you don't

Many 1911s and BHPs have poor safety positions and the safety can come off easily.. had it happen to me many times while carrying, no problem because I follow safe gun handling rules

 

[solv3nt]

As far as my statement that most gun accidents occur with either a striker fired pistol without a safety, or a loaded revolver, I have no statistics except that every time I read about such an accident, it seems to me that the majority of accidents occur with this type of firearm. Yes, it could be because there are so many of these in use, but like I say, I choose to use a pistol with a safety, and better yet (in my view) a hammered action with a long first shot trigger pull like my Ruger P95.

Best regards to all.

It took some series digging, but the accident in Washington, where the kindergartener stole a gun from his mom's BF's house, and then took the gun to school, dropped his bag, and it shot a girl, the gun was an HK with a manual safety.

You will obviously read about more Glock's going KB or some idiot putting their meat hooks on the trigger and shooting something negligently, but this can also be contributed to the fact that the Glock is a VERY popular pistol.

"65% of Police Departments use Glocks"
America's 25-year love affair with Glocks - Business - World business | NBC News

Ya, ya, ya, NBC news, it was a quick search.

No gun is inherently safer than any other. With modern firearms that have firing pin blocks, the gun will not go bang unless you put your finger on the trigger. I don't believe in "accidental discharges" I believe in negligent discharges. Keep your meat hooks off of the trigger unless you plan on shooting whatever the gun is pointed at.

If you can't figure out that there's a round in the chamber before you pull the trigger to clean your gun, you probably shouldn't be handling guns. The reason that companies are moving towards the extra indicators, is because they are trying to remove the stupid from people. It's also called C.Y.A. and litigation mitigation. There's plenty of people trying to sue gun companies because of negligent discharges. Take Freedom Arms for example, a guy was carrying a .454 Casull in a holster and he blew his leg off. He sued, and won... Nevermind that they say not to carry over a loaded round due to the fact that there's not a firing pin block, he still won. He claims that the gun "just went off" when he moved his duster. I don't buy that at all, his duster somehow managed to hit the hammer hard enough to cause the primer to ignite? I call BS, it sounds like he was trying to play cowboy and fast-draw a .454 out of the holster while thumbing the hammer.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

A child cannot steal a gun that is locked up. The safety issue is irrelevant

 

[solv3nt]

This one says that the man shot himself in the junk with his G/F's pink handgun. Ruger LCP or possibly a Smith Revolver, definitely not a Glock.
Local Arizona News: Man Shoots Self in Groin | UPROXX

Man shoots himself in the junk with a flare gun, not a Glock
Man shoots himself in groin with flare gun - NBC-2.com WBBH News for Fort Myers, Cape Coral & Naples, Florida

Bremerton boy brings HK cocked and unlocked in his bag
Girl shot: 9-year-old boy in orange jail jumpsuit cries in court - U.S. News

 

[Blitzkrieg]

A number of children drown in pools each year. Life is unsafe

 

[JGRuby]

Thats true but why stack the odds against yourself. Its one thing to play football its quite another to play football without a helmet. Why put yourself at unnessecary risk when you can accomplish the same thing safely.

James Ruby

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Thats true but why stack the odds against yourself. Its one thing to play football its quite another to play football without a helmet. Why put yourself at unnessecary risk when you can accomplish the same thing safely.

James Ruby

Oh how have I managed to carry cocked n locked for over 20 years and even have the safety come off numerous times and never had a harm or foul? I guess I'm safer now since I carry Glock

 

[solv3nt]

Thats true but why stack the odds against yourself. Its one thing to play football its quite another to play football without a helmet. Why put yourself at unnessecary risk when you can accomplish the same thing safely.

James Ruby

Not entirely sure where you're going with this....


On a different note. I challenge any one of you to make your firearm go bang without your meat hook on the trigger. Obviously unload it first, and check it a few times, then you can check your chamber indicator to verify that it's unloaded. Take the safety off, and try to get the hammer, striker or whatever you have drop. If you can catch this on film, I'll stand aside to your "inherently safer" firearms. Until then, you can give me your striker fired pistols.

 

[JGRuby]

Oh how have I managed to carry cocked n locked for over 20 years and even have the safety come off numerous times and never had a harm or foul? I guess I'm safer now since I carry Glock

I am indicating if the safety is there use it - in no way did I imply that one is less safe than another. Whats your point if there is one?

James Ruby

 

[glockman99]

To answer the OP's question: No.

Now carry on...

 

[JGRuby]

Not entirely sure where you're going with this....


On a different note. I challenge any one of you to make your firearm go bang without your meat hook on the trigger. Obviously unload it first, and check it a few times, then you can check your chamber indicator to verify that it's unloaded. Take the safety off, and try to get the hammer, striker or whatever you have drop. If you can catch this on film, I'll stand aside to your "inherently safer" firearms. Until then, you can give me your striker fired pistols.

There are pistols and rifles with floating firing pins - a model 70 1911 has been dropped from a height that would cause it to fire and has been recorded as such - it is one reason for the model 80 1911. A SKS has a floating fring pin and can do the same. This not normal care or operation of a fire arm but has been documented as happening. DO I drop my pistol from 15 feet - no way but that doesnt mean it cant or hasnt happened. I cant access the sites cuurrently but google "1911 firing pin drop test" and there are several documented.

James Ruby

 

[solv3nt]

There are pistols and rifles with floating firing pins - a model 70 1911 has been dropped from a height that would cause it to fire and has been recorded as such - it is one reason for the model 80 1911. A SKS has a floating fring pin and can do the same. This not normal care or operation of a fire arm but has been documented as happening. DO I drop my pistol from 15 feet - no way but that doesnt mean it cant or hasnt happened. I cant access the sites cuurrently but google "1911 firing pin drop test" and there are several documented.

James Ruby

Yes, I wouldn't necessarily consider the Model 70 to be modern firearm since it is based on the original design of 1911. I would have this one had I been able to have previously found one in stock. Instead, I have the Model 1991 with the series 80 firing pin safety. The series 70 pistol has a floating firing pin, and for it to drop, I believe the tests require that the pistol be dropped straight down and the firing pin follows as the gun hits the floor.

 

[Quackerbacker]

I am indicating if the safety is there use it - in no way did I imply that one is less safe than another. Whats your point if there is one?

James Ruby

His point is that if you don't pull the trigger it won't discharge. To which i agree.

But it is simply a true statement that a Ruger SR series (or other similarly equpped pistol) is safer than a Glock. In the world outside of our minds that is not a sterile environment things can and do go wrong and an additional step, check, or indicator can help. We don't live in a sterile environment. We live and operate in a disruptive environment. People trip and fall at exactly the wrong moment. Our hunting buddies knock us over, bad guys grapple with us, we come home after working 18 hours and make mental mistakes, kids figure out how to access our safes, we do dumb things.

I've been handling firearms for well over three decades and have yet to make one these mistakes or have an incident of any kind in large part because i follow the rules that were layed out to me when i was 6 years old shooting my grand-dads old remington .22. I still switched from Glock to Ruger SR because i liked the thumb safety and to a lesser extent the loaded chamber indicator. None of my practices have changed.

The statement "no gun is inherently safer than any other" is patently false, sorry.

Are Glocks safe enough? Yes, absolutely. They are extremely safe. A Glock with a round in the chamber is as safe or safer than a single action pistol with a round in the chamber and the safety on. It's still not as safe as a Glock with a thumb safety and a loaded chamber indicator (ruger sr40c in my case ).

 

[Quackerbacker]

His point is that if you don't pull the trigger it won't discharge. To which i agree.

But it is simply a true statement that a Ruger SR series (or other similarly equpped pistol) is safer than a Glock. In the world outside of our minds that is not a sterile environment things can and do go wrong and an additional step, check, or indicator can help. We don't live in a sterile environment. We live and operate in a disruptive environment. People trip and fall at exactly the wrong moment. Our hunting buddies knock us over, bad guys grapple with us, we come home after working 18 hours and make mental mistakes, kids figure out how to access our safes, we do dumb things.

I've been handling firearms for well over three decades and have yet to make one these mistakes or have an incident of any kind in large part because i follow the rules that were layed out to me when i was 6 years old shooting my grand-dads old remington .22. I still switched from Glock to Ruger SR because i liked the thumb safety and to a lesser extent the loaded chamber indicator. None of my practices have changed.

The statement "no gun is inherently safer than any other" is patently false, sorry.

Are Glocks safe enough? Yes, absolutely. They are extremely safe. A Glock with a round in the chamber is as safe or safer than a single action pistol with a round in the chamber and the safety on. It's still not as safe as a Glock with a thumb safety and a loaded chamber indicator (ruger sr40c in my case ).

On the other OTHER hand, which is "safer" when you are toe to toe with a bad guy in your living room at 0245 in the morning?

The Glock with no safety..

You pays your money and you takes your chances

 

[solv3nt]

The statement "no gun is inherently safer than any other" is patently false, sorry.

Are Glocks safe enough? Yes, absolutely. They are extremely safe. A Glock with a round in the chamber is as safe or safer than a single action pistol with a round in the chamber and the safety on. It's still not as safe as a Glock with a thumb safety and a loaded chamber indicator (ruger sr40c in my case ).

So depending on your definition of safe...
Let's define safe as "not discharging unless you plan on it discharging"
So, if a Glock won't fire unless you want it to fire, and a Ruger SR whatever won't fire unless you want it to fire. By definition, neither is safer than the other. Therefore, no gun is inherently safer than the other.