All this hubbub... Wonder how many more pages will come from mentioning the fact that Massad Ayoob even recommends adding aftermarket frame safeties to Glocks (along with New York triggers).
Pot stirrer!
All this hubbub... Wonder how many more pages will come from mentioning the fact that Massad Ayoob even recommends adding aftermarket frame safeties to Glocks (along with New York triggers).
All this hubbub... Wonder how many more pages will come from mentioning the fact that Massad Ayoob even recommends adding aftermarket frame safeties to Glocks (along with New York triggers).
TEN RING will install a frame mounted thumb safety on a GLOCK for $125
Ahhh ...the plot thickens! This isn't about "external safety hatred syndrome" after all. It's really "Hey, what's wrong with your Glock?!? AKA: Why your pistol should really have an external safety like mine does!"
I'm only, maybe, 5% Freudian in my psychology, but he got the defense mechanisms down pretty well, and there's a lot to be said about projection in many of the arguments presented within this discussion. ...just sayin'.
Again, it really comes down what your preference and training dictates. Use what you have, yet always keep in mind that your life may depend on someone who has your back with a Glock, XD, 1911, Sig, Kahr, Ruger, Taurus, or maybe even a Hi-Point someday. Be glad that we live in a state that allows us (for now) to choose.
It is inarguable that if you never break even one of the four rules, if nothing ever snags the trigger, if you never exhibit any signs of imperfection there is no reason to worry about carrying a firearm without a safety. The truth, however, is that we should all be wise enough to understand those things are either impossibilities or fail any sort of reasonable risk/benefit test.
It's not about preference and it's not about convincing others to make the same decisions we did.
Good neutral start there...It's not about preference and it's not about convincing others to make the same decisions we did.
Experience tells us that negligent discharges are more likely with a firearm that has a shorter, lighter trigger pull such as single actions and striker fired designs. It is unsafe to carry such a weapon in that condition. The problem is, as this thread demonstrates, there is such a tendency to focus on hypothetical and ideal circumstances and arguments.
It is inarguable that if you never break even one of the four rules, if nothing ever snags the trigger, if you never exhibit any signs of imperfection there is no reason to worry about carrying a firearm without a safety. The truth, however, is that we should all be wise enough to understand those things are either impossibilities or fail any sort of reasonable risk/benefit test.
I've decided to do away with all safeties on my Beretta and fill the barrel with lead. That should be safe enough, right?
The same argument exists for safeties malfunctioning and costing you your life. That's a chance I'm not willing to gamble with.
And yet, the title of the thread would (has, and does) suggest otherwise in a way that Freud would call projection. Certainly, it wasn't begun as a call to action by those who choose striker-fired weapons. Frankly, the title would suggest that those who use a striker-fired weapon are "up in arms" (pardon the pun) about external safeties. Maybe I don't hang around enough Glock guys ...but is that true? (Seriously, I just don't see that being an issue.) If the discussion had no intent or motive to do other than what it's done (25+ pages of beating a dead horse), it might have gone to four posts....Bob: I think people who shoot Glocks have something I'll call "external safety hatred syndrome."But then, except for the frying bacon, what would be the fun in that?
Doug: Yep.
Bob: So ...think I'll have some bacon for lunch today.
Murphy: [belch] Fry some up for me.
Good neutral start there...
Huh...
All the ND/AD that I have personally observed have occurred only with Firearms with an External safety...
Really, realizing that there has been should stress the concept of safety in layers. People do stupid things. It is simply wise to all the controllable circumstances as safe as possible without rendering the shooter ineffective.
If this thread hasn't shown you that there is a significant number of people with a vehement dislike (hatred might be too strong a word) towards safeties as well as erroneous information and assumptions about them I doubt anything will. The OP noticed this, labeled it "external safety hatred syndrome" and asked the reason for it. Again, no projection. The real question is why you're trying sweep away the real issue in the thread with the psychobabble nonsense.
If you'd like, I could quote Shakespeare and (little rusty) just say "me thinks thou dost protest too much.' Essentially, it means the same thing....projection involves imagining or projecting the belief that others have those feelings...
Yup, that's why if I'm not ready to shoot at a target, it remains in the holster in condition 0. If I remove it for any other reason, the safety is flipped on. Always follow the 4 rules of gun safety.
I'm not going to read through 7 pages of the squabbling that I am sure followed the original post.
I carry an M&P 45 with no safety whatsoever cocked and locked, round in the chamber, and thats fine with me. Some times I even gangsta carry it in the front of my pants Did the same with my XD45, my Sig P250 45, and my 1911 that preceded this M&P.
I carry a Kel Tec P3AT in a pocket holster, with a round in the chamber, and a full magazine too.
I ain't skeert. Some of you guys worry too much. If you don't have the gun on your person, unload it,lock it up, and hide the ammo. DUH!!!!!
No psychobabble ...when a person makes a big thing out of something that really isn't, they can "project" their feelings onto others.
INyooper said:If you'd like, I could quote Shakespeare and (little rusty) just say "me thinks thou dost protest too much.' Essentially, it means the same thing.
INyooper said:I have no problem with safeties ...use 'em if you've got 'em. My Glocks have three. I had a Taurus that had a thumb safety; it didn't make it impossible to draw and fire ...even while deactivating the safety. My AK and Mosin each have their own safeties as well and, you know, they're all implemented differently and, dang, if I'm not able to figure each of them out and use them as designed (though, admittedly, the Mosin's a bit difficult to implement at the moment).
INyooper said:Where the psychobabble comes in is that I don't see those who use striker fired weapons creating threads about how much they hate, despise, agonize, or lose sleep over weapons (or the people who use them) with external safeties. Please, direct me to such discussions that were started by these safety-hating people. It may just be I don't read them (?) ...idunno.
Inyooper said:While there has been "spirited discussion" (and that's an understatement, I'm sure ), throughout this thread (contributed by various points of view), the whole thing wasn't initiated because a striker-fired firearms user was making a confession. Some might call that projection ...some might not, I suppose.
INyooper said:Honestly (and I've said this before) use and train with what you have. Gain competence and confidence with whatever you use and whatever styles of firearms you have. But please don't tell me that I have a problem just because I happen to use a firearm that you might happen to have a problem with. Again, some might call that projection ...psychobabble notwithstanding.
https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo.../66491-close_contact_shooting_with_an_xd.html
This is my favorite anti-safety thread. It demonizes grip safeties because you can't have one and do a particular new super ninja technique.
I will admit that you are miles ahead of anyone who carries without a safety at all.
It's funny how some folks portray external safeties as some complex device to be manipulated. It's not a combination lock for crying out loud! It's just a simple paddle that rests right under your thumb anyway. I just spent more energy typing this message into this stupid phone than I will expend on my 1911s safety over the next year.