Glock Talk banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

Glock with a manual safety

9K views 102 replies 50 participants last post by  RussP 
#1 ·
Let’s make believe that Glock put out their most popular firearms with a manual safety. Would you actually buy one? Why? I thought it was perfection as it is.


Sent from my iPad using Glock Talk
 
#40 ·
The simplicity of Glock's design may not lend itself to inclusion of a manual safety without compromising long-term reliability.

The Cominolli aftermarket safety doesn't allow for easy operation under stress because the lever surface is too small to be flipped off with force. Likewise, the lever on Glock's military model provides little surface for the thumb to exert much force.

Compare this Glock military offering safety to the M&P lever shown in post #30.
Firearm Gun Trigger Tan Gun barrel
 
#45 ·
Me personally, if it happens, I just want to have to draw and shoot so I like simplicity for that reason, that's probably why I gravitate towards Glocks and J-Frames. My guns get cleaned after a range session, reloaded and put back into a decent holster(I like the BladeTech Klipt personally) and left there until the next range session. AD's/ND's really only seem to happen when dudes are "playing" with their guns, I don't do press checks or nightly unload/reloads so once secured in a decent holster they are left there so I'm comfortable without a manual safety.
 
#50 ·
Let’s make believe that Glock put out their most popular firearms with a manual safety. Would you actually buy one?
If your hypothetical 'manual safety impaired readiness, reliability, or functionality, then no, but... if your hypothetical 'manual safety' did not impair readiness, reliability, or functionality, then maybe.

When I say this, I'm thinking about the Tau Dev Group 'striker control device'; if Glock were to offer new Glock pistols equipped (OEM, from the Glock factory) with a Tau Dev Group 'striker control device', I would actually prefer such a version.

 
#51 ·
People have complained for years, that Glocks didn't have a manual safety. People also complained that the Smith and Wesson Shield did. I'm not a fan of manual safeties on carry guns, but if a gun I want has one, I simply don't use it. My wife happens to like manual safeties, but doesn't use it when the gun is holstered for carry. To answer the question though, no, I wouldn't.
 
#54 ·
To me...

An external, thumb actuated safety would have to be placed on the frame.

My issue is that it would have to closely approximate that if he 1911.

What folks confuse to no end is that when drawing the pistol properly no safety is really required.

It’s when you are reholstering a hot weapon is where things can get dicey.

Just because it hasn’t happened to you does not mean it won’t.

Also, grappling while wearing a firearm opens your eyes a bit as to what is safe and what is prudent. Many think they’ll have plenty of time to recognize a threat. Not always. Perhaps even rarely.

Yet people will say “you can forget to swipe the safety on a 1911!” To which I answer, “can you forget to walk?”

It’s TRAINING. If all you ever do is sit at a flat range and shoot cans or paper targets with no real focus... yes, you can probably forget. If you train with self-defense/fighting with a pistol I think the answer is, “no, you won’t forget!”

That said, adding an external safety on a Glock frame would not interest me.

Having them all come with a Striker Control Device/“Gadget” makes all the sense in the world.

I wish Tau Development made one for the P-10C but that’s another conversation.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#63 ·
Yet people will say “you can forget to swipe the safety on a 1911!” To which I answer, “can you forget to walk?”

It’s TRAINING. If all you ever do is sit at a flat range and shoot cans or paper targets with no real focus... yes, you can probably forget. If you train with self-defense/fighting with a pistol I think the answer is, “no, you won’t forget!”

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Well, the problem with that analogy is that it’s not valid. Yes, people can forget to walk. I’m sure that you’ve heard of fight or flight. I would think that you’ve heard of people freezing in place, not doing anything when under stress. So yes, you can “forget” how to walk under certain circumstance. Now I’m sure that your answer will be that they need more walk training. And that if all they do is walk on a flat sidewalk with no focus instead of walk training on grass, gravel, and volcanic ash, then it is their fault that they forgot how to walk. But will your swiping of the safety really occur when you’re truly under life-threatening stress? Well of course you would do great, because your TRAINING makes you infallible.
 
#67 ·
Pistols with safeties are cool range toys. They are not serious use defensive firearms. So no, I would never carry a Glock with a safety. That’s my opinion based on years of tactical training and experience . Your experience and opinion may be different, but that’s my opinion.
 
#68 · (Edited)
I'll say what I always say when the subject of Glock putting a manual safety on their pistols comes up. I like the concept of a manual safety on a striker gun. I think it would prevent far more injuries and/or deaths (from AD/NDs) than it might cause (from failure to deactivate the safety when needed.) I realize this opinion is FAR from universal.

This is what I'd like to see. Glocks, as now, would not come from the factory with a manual safety. But all models would be designed to take a user installable kit that would add a manual safety. If the buyer wants a safety on the gun, he could buy and install the kit. Everyone could have what they want, without Glock having to make, and gun sellers having to stock, two SKUs for every gun (and every permutation of gun.)
 
#70 ·
If you a using a high power or 1911 in 2019, ask yourself “why”.

Maybe you were a tunnel rat in Vietnam and are intimately familiar with the 1911, you trust it, it saved your life. Ok, you get a pass. Your a 23 year old with no real experience with firearms? Pick something more modern, with more modern training to go with it.

My 2 cents.

I’m not a 1911, High Power, or CZ75 fan for defensive use. Sure they can work and many people do make them work. I’ve owned all of them, several examples of them. I don’t carry them out of the house.
 
#73 ·
Please stop saying "manual safety".... Glocks HAVE a "manual" safety, at least my Gen 2 G17 does - a safety lever on the trigger... it has to be "manually" depressed before the trigger can function.

Please say "thumb safety" if that is what you mean.
 
#74 · (Edited)
Please stop saying "manual safety".... Glocks HAVE a "manual" safety, at least my Gen 2 G17 does - a safety lever on the trigger... it has to be "manually" depressed before the trigger can function.

Please say "thumb safety" if that is what you mean.
What should we call the safety mechanism on a rifle or a shotgun if not a ‘manual safety’?

A so called safety device that doesn’t prevent the gun from firing if pressure is applied to the trigger isn’t actually a ‘safety’ in the traditional sense. I’m not sure what it should be called.
 
#77 ·
Let’s make believe that Glock put out their most popular firearms with a manual safety. Would you actually buy one? Why? I thought it was perfection as it is.


Sent from my iPad using Glock Talk
NOT having a manual safety is probably the main reason I ever bought a Glock and continue to buy them. I would not but a Glock with a safety, ever.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top