Another new "Glock Safety" hitting the market

[fatdog]

This thing holds zero interest for me but it appears one more aftermarket device coming out.

[voodoo_man]

If the Glock needed a safety it would have been designed with one.

[Rmiked]

I am not familiar with the Glock action or how it is intended to function as I am a Beretta 92 fan. My son has a Glock 19 and I have shot it. Since I have not studied the Glock action I am not familiar with its limitations. I believe the Beretta firing pin block, interrupting the firing pin force transmission path, is intended to prevent accidental discharge w/o pulling trigger however, and I like that feature. I prefer the Beretta SA/DA mechanism because it is similar to my SW 686 revolver and I have had that pistol for 32 years not necessarily because I think it is safer. I have watched some U-tubes of Glocks accidental firing upon slide release as if firing pin was already forward and the round in chamber went off upon release of slide. I intend to study striker fired pistol designs and understand on what basis they are intended to be safe. If it was as simple as "the trigger is the safety" that would be good. I believe nothing takes the place of " don't point a loaded gun at anything you don't wish to shoot". That would cover mechanical malfunctions and human errors. I am a structural Engineer and work at a Nuclear Plant for 37 years. Mechanical devices do malfunction and humans make errors. When I bought my only semi-auto pistol I wound up with a Beretta 92 due to familiarity to my SW 686. I do think it is a safe pistol with reliable barriers to both single mechanical malfunction and human error. Since my son owns a Glock 19 I intend to study them. I have not met but a few guys that understand the design of their pistols so that they can minimize the likelihood of accidental discharge and therefore the possibility of accidental death. My son has a PhD in Mathematical finance and is totally clueless as to how the Glock 19 action works, why it could be possibly safe and what it's limitations are. He is a very bright kid (34 yrs old). At the end of the day, most firearm owners trust the manufacturer. Probably the best thing going for Glock is the millions of owners and relatively few accidents which is a good testament to safety. I don't see anything wrong with someone designing a safer device for Glocks if the Owner wishes to modify his/her pistol. My 686 does not have a safety but I can see the hammer, and it takes much force to pull trigger. I guess it is possible for something (clothes) to catch trigger inside guard and pull it back and accidentally discharge it. Beyond that design, if you can't see hammer or firing pin, seems like you might put a safety on the firearm like for rifles and shotguns?

[Chance]

Glock's are extraordinarily simple. Because of this, people try to modify them in dumb ways. A Glock isn't going to discharge a round when the slide is released unless a dumb person has done something dumb to it.

Get a copy of this and learn how they work.

[Rmiked]

Thanks, I will. So someone likely modified their Glock IF firing pin was forward upon slide release?

[GAP]

It looks massive. I prefer no manual safety, but I do enjoy "thumbing" the gadget.

[CCT125US]

I lost count of how many times he flagged himself. That was actually painful to watch.

[spinmove_]

I am not familiar with the Glock action or how it is intended to function as I am a Beretta 92 fan. My son has a Glock 19 and I have shot it. Since I have not studied the Glock action I am not familiar with its limitations. I believe the Beretta firing pin block, interrupting the firing pin force transmission path, is intended to prevent accidental discharge w/o pulling trigger however, and I like that feature. I prefer the Beretta SA/DA mechanism because it is similar to my SW 686 revolver and I have had that pistol for 32 years not necessarily because I think it is safer. I have watched some U-tubes of Glocks accidental firing upon slide release as if firing pin was already forward and the round in chamber went off upon release of slide. I intend to study striker fired pistol designs and understand on what basis they are intended to be safe. If it was as simple as "the trigger is the safety" that would be good. I believe nothing takes the place of " don't point a loaded gun at anything you don't wish to shoot". That would cover mechanical malfunctions and human errors. I am a structural Engineer and work at a Nuclear Plant for 37 years. Mechanical devices do malfunction and humans make errors. When I bought my only semi-auto pistol I wound up with a Beretta 92 due to familiarity to my SW 686. I do think it is a safe pistol with reliable barriers to both single mechanical malfunction and human error. Since my son owns a Glock 19 I intend to study them. I have not met but a few guys that understand the design of their pistols so that they can minimize the likelihood of accidental discharge and therefore the possibility of accidental death. My son has a PhD in Mathematical finance and is totally clueless as to how the Glock 19 action works, why it could be possibly safe and what it's limitations are. He is a very bright kid (34 yrs old). At the end of the day, most firearm owners trust the manufacturer. Probably the best thing going for Glock is the millions of owners and relatively few accidents which is a good testament to safety. I don't see anything wrong with someone designing a safer device for Glocks if the Owner wishes to modify his/her pistol. My 686 does not have a safety but I can see the hammer, and it takes much force to pull trigger. I guess it is possible for something (clothes) to catch trigger inside guard and pull it back and accidentally discharge it. Beyond that design, if you can't see hammer or firing pin, seems like you might put a safety on the firearm like for rifles and shotguns?

Basically what Chance said. Glock's "Safe Action" system incorporates 3 passive safeties that require no additional manipulation on the part of the end user. Beretta's 92 is a fantastic pistol as well, it just happens to have a different trigger system which either incorporates a safety or decocker.

Your son's G19 isn't going to get him "kilt in da streetz" as long as he observes the 4 firearm safety rules. If you require an additional layer of safety, I'd suggest our own Tau Development Group's Striker Control Device. Just got mine and I'm totally digging it.


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

[SeriousStudent]

I'll stick with my Gadgets, thanks.

I am a computer nerd by trade. Like very many people here, I work with very complex systems. I like building simple solutions that work inside those complex systems.

The Gadget works very well, and to me seems to be an elegantly simple solution. Simple is easier to fix, simple does not break as easy. Simple is also easier to operate when reholstering, which is kind of the point......

It is not, however, always easier to design. Hence the years of testing that I believe Tom had to perform.

And I saw Tom's observation about four hundredth's of an inch of clearance. I'll keep using the Gadget, thankyouverymuch.

[ST911]

Parts interaction and tolerances in Glock's fire control are really underappreciated. The gun is stupid simple to build and run, but simpler still to dangerously booger up.