Carrying a GLOCK.... Safely?

[caliberetta]

well, if, if and when you do get a carry permit, then report back. Until then, it's just imagination.

gee, let me check... looks like my pick up date is next week.

Are you this loveable in real life, or is it just your internet persona?

[Erick Danielsen]

Best of luck caliberetta, and I mean that. You are entitled to carry your Glock however you wish, as odd as these things seem to me... Please report back how you choose to train with this sac-t-block thingy. Just my opinion but I think this thing is more likely to get you shot than save yourself from a ND.

[bigcalidave]

Learn how to use the gun properly, and don't add other parts to it.

[caliberetta]

Best of luck caliberetta, and I mean that. You are entitled to carry your Glock however you wish, as odd as these things seem to me... Please report back how you choose to train with this sac-t-block thingy. Just my opinion but I think this thing is more likely to get you shot than save yourself from a ND.

Thanks, I guess?

-----------------------------------------------

To Calgunners:

To be closed-minded to these innovations and those that are willing to experiment with them does not follow a plausible line of reasoning to those that fight for the second amendment. It is contradictory.

Many on this thread suggest: "You shouldn't have a GLOCK because you are not responsible enough to have it."

Sound familiar?

Legislators say: "You shouldn't have a GUN because you are not responsible enough to have it."

Do you see the contradiction?

We all say: "We want to have a gun for our safety, to protect us from the unknown."

Is not much different from:

"I want to install a safety on my Glock to protect me from the unknown."

Why would you want to impose your beliefs upon the OP and people like myself, when you yourself follow a similar tenor of reasoning that serves as the very foundation of your gun ownership?

Lastly:

Has it ever crossed anyone's mind that safety innovations such as the siderlock etc, may be the only reason why we can possess current generation Glocks and Khars and Nanos in the future California? It would be unwise to bet against the possibility that California will one day lead the country in banning ANY handgun without a safety device. You may find yourself thanking these firearms safety innovators of today for having taken the lead and had a readily available product that has been widely used and extensively tested before any such legislation.

Those of you guys that have the privilege to enjoy AR's here in Cali in this day and age should be able to relate to this 100%. Strange innovations is the only reason why you can have and enjoy an AR in Cali.

Innovation should be met with an open mind. It is unwise to criticize products that you haven't even tried. It is unwise to criticize those seeking an added layer of safety when you yourself own a gun for the very same reason. It is presumptuous to speculate that a device is unsafe or adds risk when there is little or no evidence to make such an assumption, especially when that devise has already been in the marketplace for a long time and used by thousands.

As I have said before, we are all on the same team. The OP asked a simple, valid question. The backlash of unreasonable, contradictory and speculative responses is a shame and makes 2014 look like the middle ages.

.

[romadant]

Sorry but these "safety" devices for Glocks are ridiculous.

Keep you effing finger off the trigger and you aren't going to have a problem. Both devices (the block and the Siderlock) require you to be poking around in the trigger guard. That's the wrong place for your finger to be unless you're ready to fire.

Last thing I want is some whiny dude who is already shaking in his boots over carrying a "dangerous" Glock poking his finger around the trigger to remove some dumb *** "safety" he added.

There a plenty of guns to choose from if you're scared of Glocks. Pick a different one.

[caliberetta]

^^ Case in point. Thanks.

[romadant]

^^ Case in point. Thanks.

You're not as clever as you think you are and you only think I made some point for you. I didn't.

All I'm saying is if a Glock scares you because there isn't a safety then you should probably carry something else instead of putting some crap on it that does nothing but complicate the pistol and puts your finger where it shouldn't be.

Those devices are more likely to cause a ND and you should instead just learn to keep your finger away from the trigger. Trust me - don't touch the trigger and the scary Glock won't fire.

[caliberetta]

Trust me - don't touch the trigger and the scary Glock won't fire.

Whatever you say, boss.

.

[davidb]

those trigger safeties look like a stupid idea, and like others have said, promotes/forces bad handeling practices...

if i were to ever carry a glock and wanted extra safety features, id install one of the thumb safety levers that require cutting the frame and test it a lot to ensure it is mechanically sound

i dont think theres anything wrong with adding/removing safety features (prosecutors may think otherwise though) as long as everything is done right and you ensure everything works

[Grumpyoldretiredcop]

Whatever you say, boss.

.

You keep using that example. I do not think it means what you think it means. Given the same circumstances, it's possible that a pistol other than a Glock (my Kahr carry pistol, for example) might also discharge. The cure is eliminating operator recto-cranial inversion (in specific, the operator is responsible for ensuring that nothing enters their weapon's trigger guard except their finger when ready to fire), not adding a useless safety. You'd be better off never wearing anything with a drawstring by your own reasoning. However, it's your pistol... add it if you want to. Don't expect glowing agreement from too many folks around here for it, though. If that lack of worshipful adoration for your position is painful for you (and from your rhetoric, this appears to be the case), guess you'll have to learn to live with disappointment.

[mr2ndamendment]

Whatever you say, boss.

.

Alright man let's inject some clarity.

Is this an equipment problem or a user problem? Why is it that millions of Americans and users around the globe can safely and properly carry a Glock all day but these several dudes couldn't? I'm not a Glock fanboy, I don't own one and I hate shooting them, but it's still an effective design but more importantly we have to bring common sense and reason to this debate.

As a former gunshop salesman, I gotta say, NOBODY is allowed to pull out a hot weapon for "comparison." NOBODY -LE, Chuck Norris, or Jesus -does not matter, NO ONE should be pulling out a hot weapon in a gun shop PERIOD. No gunshop salesman should EVER allow anyone to pull out a hot weapon and hang out with it at the counter, this is beyond ridiculous. If you want to compare guns, pull out the same model of the guy's holstered weapon from under the glass so he can look at two UNLOADED guns side-by-side, this is bull**** for the officer and the shop owner to have done/allowed this ****.

Next, what did you see after the dude shot himself? He proceeds to flag everybody in the shop with the [STILL] hot weapon while he's bleeding from the leg. Really? How clear does it have to be that the cop needs some remedial safety culture training?

This is a user issue. No cop should feel the need to pull a hot weapon in a gun store, and whenever you re-holster you keep that finger off the trigger and ensure you get an obstruction-free seat into the holster, set retention, then continue on. Good God man, don't tell me you're going to defend this man's actions in this case.

This reminds me of the liberals crying about how we're too stupid to own handguns that don't have chamber indicators or mag disconnects. It's not that humans cannot be trusted with great responsibility it's that SOME humans get lazy, get arrogant, and don't hold safety as a premium and bad things happen when you've got bad safety culture. This doesn't mean the equipment is crap, this means some training and a stern kick in the *** is required so your people don't get arrogant and lazy with safety. How many people have NDed or shot themselves because they got lazy and stopped treating their equipment with respect? If you carry a safe-action gun you should be aware of the clothing you're wearing -Hell, if you're carrying any gun you should be aware of your clothing. Doesn't matter if it's a drawstring or a tree branch getting in the way, when you re-holster you shield that trigger guard and provide a proper seat.

As much as I hate the ergonomics of a Glock it's a weapon that's earned my respect and (as all weapons do) requires a basic level of respect for what it can do. I've chosen the M&P9 for better design/ergos but the same thing applies, it's a solid design just know what the hell you're doing and don't get lazy. Anything can happen to anybody if you grow incompetent and as the police chief I'm sure he thought he "had it handled" and that he was impervious to NDs/ADs just because he's the top cop. Not an equipment error, this is a user error, I will defend that to the death, no excuse for this trash.

[lawaia]

Amen.

Alright man let's inject some clarity.

Is this an equipment problem or a user problem? Why is it that millions of Americans and users around the globe can safely and properly carry a Glock all day but these several dudes couldn't? I'm not a Glock fanboy, I don't own one and I hate shooting them, but it's still an effective design but more importantly we have to bring common sense and reason to this debate.

As a former gunshop salesman, I gotta say, NOBODY is allowed to pull out a hot weapon for "comparison." NOBODY -LE, Chuck Norris, or Jesus -does not matter, NO ONE should be pulling out a hot weapon in a gun shop PERIOD. No gunshop salesman should EVER allow anyone to pull out a hot weapon and hang out with it at the counter, this is beyond ridiculous. If you want to compare guns, pull out the same model of the guy's holstered weapon from under the glass so he can look at two UNLOADED guns side-by-side, this is bull**** for the officer and the shop owner to have done/allowed this ****.

Next, what did you see after the dude shot himself? He proceeds to flag everybody in the shop with the [STILL] hot weapon while he's bleeding from the leg. Really? How clear does it have to be that the cop needs some remedial safety culture training?

This is a user issue. No cop should feel the need to pull a hot weapon in a gun store, and whenever you re-holster you keep that finger off the trigger and ensure you get an obstruction-free seat into the holster, set retention, then continue on. Good God man, don't tell me you're going to defend this man's actions in this case.

This reminds me of the liberals crying about how we're too stupid to own handguns that don't have chamber indicators or mag disconnects. It's not that humans cannot be trusted with great responsibility it's that SOME humans get lazy, get arrogant, and don't hold safety as a premium and bad things happen when you've got bad safety culture. This doesn't mean the equipment is crap, this means some training and a stern kick in the *** is required so your people don't get arrogant and lazy with safety. How many people have NDed or shot themselves because they got lazy and stopped treating their equipment with respect? If you carry a safe-action gun you should be aware of the clothing you're wearing -Hell, if you're carrying any gun you should be aware of your clothing. Doesn't matter if it's a drawstring or a tree branch getting in the way, when you re-holster you shield that trigger guard and provide a proper seat.

As much as I hate the ergonomics of a Glock it's a weapon that's earned my respect and (as all weapons do) requires a basic level of respect for what it can do. I've chosen the M&P9 for better design/ergos but the same thing applies, it's a solid design just know what the hell you're doing and don't get lazy. Anything can happen to anybody if you grow incompetent and as the police chief I'm sure he thought he "had it handled" and that he was impervious to NDs/ADs just because he's the top cop. Not an equipment error, this is a user error, I will defend that to the death, no excuse for this trash.

[romadant]

Whatever you say, boss.

.

If he can't be trusted to make sure his holster is clear during reholstering then how can he be trusted to use the stupid little block or trigger pin junk correctly?

If his safety habits are that bad then all the more reason I don't want him poking his finger around the trigger hunting for the block or lock.

As others have already said - user error.

[caliberetta]

The cure is eliminating operator recto-cranial inversion

Which takes us back to $h|t happens

[romadant]

Which takes us back to $h|t happens

Which is why if you think you are unable to safely handle a Glock you should choose something you're more comfortable with instead putting stuff in and around the trigger and making a cluster**** out of the weapon. Sticking your finger in to pop out a block or slide a pin attached to the trigger is not increasing safety.

Sorry, buddy. The little devices you're arguing so hard for are crap. I appreciate that someone took the time to invent and create them - but they are not safer.