Glock 22 safety system

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'll agree that's what you can and SHOULD do what you train to do. But, a dud round isn't a jam. And if your training causes you to turn your brain off and do things that may not be necessary or appropriate, you might want to reexamine your training.

What if the round that didn't fire was a SQUIB? Not all squibs are that noticeable. If you're shooting in a noisy or distracting environment, you may not always notice a big difference in sound or recoil. Sometimes the slide will cycle, sometimes it won't. Sometimes a spent casing will be in the chamber, and sometimes it won't. Sometimes that spent case will cause a jam. Racking the slide, putting a fresh round in the chamber, and reacquiring the target and pulling the trigger -- without assessing the situation -- could put both you and your weapon out of action.
In a life-threatening situation -- as might be the case in a real-world self-defense conflict -- you may have no choice but to continue as you've trained. But shooting at the range isn't a life-threatening situation and knowing the difference is important, too.

I'm 62, and have been shooting since my dad put a 22 in my hands when I was five. I certainly don't need education about squibs from you.
If a combat pistol, with a round in the chamber doesn't go bang, that's a jam in my book ..you can call it whatever you want.
 
amd6547 said:
I'm 62, and have been shooting since my dad put a 22 in my hands when I was five. I certainly don't need education about squibs from you.
If a combat pistol, with a round in the chamber doesn't go bang, that's a jam in my book ..you can call it whatever you want.

I guess your book needs a few more pages, then.

Based on your comments above, I graduated from high school before you started shooting and was in the military 6-7 months later. I may have begun shooting before you were even born. So what? Being old (or even older) doesn't automatically make you smarter or right.

Every jam is a STOPPAGE, but not every stoppage is a JAM.

Double-feeds are considered jams. Stove-pipes are considered jams. Failures to extract might cause a jam. Failures to feed will likely cause a stoppage. A failure to eject may cause a jam.

A dud round isn't a JAM -- there's nothing to unjam. But you may have to drop the magazine and pry the unfired case out of the chamber. (Forcing the extractor over the rim to get the case out might be a problem with some guns. The Beretta 92/M9 is one of a few semi-auto designed to allow that without damage to the extractor.)

If you have a squib -- where the bullet is in the barrel and the slide is closed (with or without a round in the chamber), doing the tap-rack-bang drill without assessing what has happened can be downright dangerous.

Increasingly, we hear firearms instructors teaching folks to add a step to the traditional TAP/RACK/BANG clearance drill: tap/rack/assess and then bang only if you really understand what has happened. ATLDave said it more directly than I did, and I agree with him.

ATLDave said:
I think the short version of this is that there is not really any such thing as a "non-diagnostic response" to gun malfunctions. You always have to use your brain. It's highly advantageous to have encountered similar problems in the past so that your brain can recognize the issue at an unconscious-competence level of operation, but nonsense about always tap-rack-bang-ing is just that: nonsense. There are plenty of common malfunctions where that is not the right response.

If you have a double-feed JAM, for example -- like in the image below -- the tap-rack-bang routine won't solve the problem. You will likely end up with another jam... You've got to get that chambered round out of there before you can resume firing. Just like with a dud round.

doublefeed.jpg

Perhaps YOU do take that extra diagnostic/analytical step when you have a stoppage, but that's NOT what you posted in your response.
 
Last edited:
I thought we were talking about Glock Safe Action System's internal safeties? :D


And I agree with ATLDave and Walt. For me, it's TAP - RACK (But quick visualization of chamber to see if there is a round in there) - BANG

If there is a round in the chamber or a squib bullet, slide gets locked back and barrel/chamber cleared and resume program.
 
They all do...

However, pressure applied to the dingus will fire the gun.. this has been caused by keys, strings and many other things aside from a finger. (also not Glock centric)
However, it's mostly been caused by carelessness and bad holsters.

Pocket carrying a Glock without a holster is just dumb, about as dumb as doing gymnastics on a concrete floor while Mexican carrying a Colt SAA with six in the cylinder.

A decent holster, even an inexpensive one like a Don Hume 715M will eliminate most Glock mishaps.
 
The Glock Safe Action is neither DA or SA, but is much closer to SA.

If you were to pull the trigger on a Glock that is ready to fire, and the round doesn't fire, can you simply pull the trigger again and have it pull the striker back to release it again like a DA auto would do? No, because at that point, the striker has already dropped, and no amount of trigger pulling will cock it again unless you rack the slide. It operates just like an SA auto that needs to have the hammer cocked before pulling the trigger to allow the hammer to fall. The Glock needs the striker cocked, by racking the slide, to allow the trigger to drop the striker. Additionally, when you field strip a Glock you have to pull the trigger to decock the pistol. If it actually were a DA pistol, and the trigger did all the cocking, you wouldn't have to do that.

Think of a Glock Safe Action as relative to a CZ 75B.

Glock marketing, and many users, would have you believe the partially cocked, ready to fire Glock is in the same status as the CZ75B in double action mode with the hammer at half cock. With the CZ 75B hammer at half cock, the hammer is partially cocked and you complete the cocking by pulling the trigger. If all safety devices were to fail (no matter how unlikely that would be) the hammer of the CZ 75B at the half cock position simply doesn't have enough stored energy ignite a round.

The cocked Glock striker is closer to the CZ 75B in single action mode. When in single action mode, the CZ 75B hammer is back, but when the trigger is pulled, the hammer cams back further and then releases. That's what the Glock striker does. When you load a Glock, the slide cocks the striker back, but not all the way. Pulling the trigger cams the striker further back and then releases. The cocked Glock striker has enough energy to ignite a round.
The Glock owes much more to the Roth-Krnka than to a double-action revolver or any current DA/SA semi-automatic handgun.

Unless the Glock's striker is pre-cocked by retracting the slide, it cannot be fired by pulling the trigger, which fully retracts and releases the striker.

Double-action revolvers and DA/SA semi-auto pistols have a second strike capability merely by pulling the trigger a second time. Glocks lack this completely.
 
This was posted earlier but I didn't see anyone address the comment made, below:



You can't chamber a round in a Glock (or most striker-fired guns and a few of the older (metal framed) S&W hammer-fired guns without racking the slide.
This isnt entirely true, with the Glocks anyway.

You can load a Glock, with a live round in the chamber, and have the trigger not set. Its not loading the gun in the traditional manner, and its a bit of a PITA, but it does work.

You do end up with a live round in the chamber, and the trigger not set. Just move the slide rearward a hair to set the trigger, and youre ready to go.

What happens when you do load them like this, you do bypass the firing pin safety, so I do believe the gun isnt 100% "drop safe". Probably no more or less safe than a 1911 that was dropped though.

Im simply pointing this out, as it can be done, but Im not recommending you do it. Do what you want and feel comfortable with. A lot of people seem to freak out and get their panties in a knot when you bring it up.

But then again, look at what goes on when you bring up Glocks and safety in general anyway. :thumbup:
 
Man, reading all this post make me want to go back and just use a revolver.Jam this, Jam that, fix Jam this way, fix Jam that way, Dingus Safety, no safety, Dingus, ditch the Dingus. Fortunately I seldom get a failure with all my semi auto guns. Less after I stopped reloading 9mm which is my main stay.
 
Last edited:
Man, reading all this post make me want to go back and just use a revolver.Jam this, Jam that, fix Jam this way, fix Jam that way, Dingus Safety, no safety, Dingus, ditch the Dingus. Fortunately I seldom get a failure with all my guns. Less after I stopped reloading 9mm which is my main stay.
Naw. Revolvers are even worse when you have a problem. :thumbup:

I load a lot of 9mm. Somewhere around 20K a year on average. What trouble were you having? Its a pretty simple, easy round to load for.

The only time I see a problem is when the brass starts to wear out (I shoot my brass to failure). And the problem, actually turned into a training aide, so its more a plus than a negative.

As the brass wears out, the rims are getting pretty tore up from constant extraction, which starts to cause random function failures. Ill start to see extraction issues and more and more stovepipes, double feeds, etc.

It might sound like a problem, but it lets me practice malfunction drills without having to set them up and expecting them. I get random and unexpected failures, and at this point, can clear them quickly, and without thought. As I said, great practice. :thumbup:
 
I'm amazed about how much has been posted that has nothing to do with the OP's question. ;)
Its a thread with "Glock" in it.

Its just like the Democrats hearing "Trump" in anything and off they go. :rofl:
Thankfully "unsupported Glock chamber and Glock KaBoom" ferver have died down but I am afraid talk of "Glocked brass" will continue even though Gen3 on (Since 1995) Glock chambers have been tighter with better case base support than most factory barrels. Many people don't even know Glock changed the polygonal rifling with longer leade on Gen5 Marksman barrel with different rifling and shorter leade for "Match grade" accuracy - https://www.glocktalk.com/threads/questions-on-the-gen-5-marksman-barrels.1749728/

It's the internet. Nothing new.;)
If it's found on the internet, it must be true, right? :rofl:

And getting back to OP, if Glock's internal safeties without external safety was really an issue, we would see never ending posts on all the gun forums about it.
 
AK103K said:
You can load a Glock, with a live round in the chamber, and have the trigger not set. Its not loading the gun in the traditional manner, and its a bit of a PITA, but it does work.

You do end up with a live round in the chamber, and the trigger not set. Just move the slide rearward a hair to set the trigger, and youre ready to go.

What happens when you do load them like this, you do bypass the firing pin safety, so I do believe the gun isnt 100% "drop safe". Probably no more or less safe than a 1911 that was dropped though.

Im simply pointing this out, as it can be done, but Im not recommending you do it. Do what you want and feel comfortable with. A lot of people seem to freak out and get their panties in a knot when you bring it up.

OK. I guess I've learned something new. But now that you've brought it up, you may have to explain how this can happen for those of us who haven't discovered the secret handshake! :).

If you're talking about something that can be done accidentally, or requires disassembly and reassembly, I'd still be interested, but consider that sort of situation really unique and not likely to happen with a typical shooter.

Does it involve manually inserting a round in the chamber and then installing the slide?

Otherwise, even if you hold the trigger to the rear as you pull the slide back and keep it there as you let the slide go forward, as soon as you release the trigger the trigger/striker interface is reset and pulling the trigger can cause the striker to be released.

But, if the Glock striker is only partially charged, as would have to be the case if the trigger isn't set and the trigger isn't able to complete charging the striker spring in the unusual situation you describe, does it even matter if the firing pin safety (i.e., striker safety) isn't functional? Is a partially-charged Glock striker spring strong enough to make a primer ignite if the striker somehow released IF a DROP/BLOW could cause that to happen

Unlike most guns with inertial firing pins (and no firing pin safety), drops do not seem to be as big a concernl with a striker-fired gun.
 
Last edited:
OK. I guess I've learned something new. But now that you've brought it up, you may have to explain how this can happen for those of us who haven't discovered the secret handshake! :).

If you're talking about something that can be done accidentally, or requires disassembly and reassembly, I'd still be interested, but consider that sort of situation really unique and not likely to happen with a typical shooter.

Does it involve manually inserting a round in the chamber and then installing the slide?

Otherwise, even if you hold the trigger to the rear as you pull the slide back and keep it there as you let the slide go forward, as soon as you release the trigger the trigger/striker interface is reset and pulling the trigger can cause the striker to be released.

But, if the Glock striker is only partially charged (as would have to be the case if the trigger isn't set and the trigger isn't to complete charging the striker spring in the unusual situation you describe, does it even matter if the firing pin safety (i.e., striker safety) isn't functional? Is a partially-charged Glock striker spring strong enough to make a primer ignite if the striker somehow released IF a DROP/BLOW could cause that to happen

Unlike most guns with inertial firing pins (and no firing pin safety), drops do not seem to be as big a concernl with a striker-fired gun.
Yup, you take down the gun, take the RSA out, slip a round into the chamber, just leave enough out that you can slip the rim under the extractor, and let the barrel slip into place. Replace the RSA, and slip the slide back on, just till it "clicks" locked.

The gun is now loaded, with the trigger unset. All you have to do to make the gun ready, is move the slide back enough to load the striker and youre all set. You can actually draw the gun and "cock" it one-handed, with a little practice.


I had a Glock armorer tell me the only thing he could see wrong with it, was the firing pin block is not engaged, and that it "might" fire, if dropped just right. Other than that, and maybe "why", he didnt see anything wrong with doing it.

Of course, every time I bring it up, I usually get chewed out by the "experts" and safety freaks.

I just look at it as "knowing my gun".
 
I look at it as ludicrous.
Look at it any way you want, it works. :thumbup:

Just another option and way to carry a Glock, if youve been scared by the haters and nay sayers with their BS about them being unsafe to carry loaded.

And likely from the exact same guys and their descendants, who used to try and tell us that carrying a 1911 C&L was unsafe. "Fear is the mind-killer.....", knowledge will set you free. :)
 
Yup, you take down the gun, take the RSA out, slip a round into the chamber, just leave enough out that you can slip the rim under the extractor, and let the barrel slip into place. Replace the RSA, and slip the slide back on, just till it "clicks" locked.


If one has to jump through those hoops.. they purchased the wrong type weapon.
 
tarosean said:
If one has to jump through those hoops.. they purchased the wrong type weapon.

Nobody has to jump through those hoops. AK103K was describing what may be the ONLY WAY to bypass safety features of the Glock design. To do it, someone has to use a very unusual, non-standard, and arcane technique to bypass the striker safety and MAYBE make the gun NOT DROP SAFE. (That said, I wouldn't be surprised if the gun was still drop safe after all of that sleight-of-hand work -- but that is guesswork on my part.)

What about that strange technique makes it the wrong type of weapon? Better yet, why would anyone NEED to bypass the safety features that were bypassed? To me that suggests a pretty good and reasonably safe gun design if you follow the basic safety rule of keeping your trigger finger (and foreign objects) away from the trigger.

It would also appear that at least one Glock Armorer had too much spare time on his hands. :)
 
If one has to jump through those hoops.. they purchased the wrong type weapon.
No doubt. But if you want a Glock and people have you scared, it is an option.

A better option would be to put in the time and effort to learn the gun youre planning on using, no matter what it is, but you know how that tends to go.

About 10-12 years ago, I kept hearing it wasnt possible to safely carry a Glock "Mexican Style", sans holster, just stuffed in your pants. I took a spare 17 and carried it every minute I was home, doing everything around the house I would normally do in daily life, doing just that, and a lot of other things that were actually be considered inappropriate to safe gun handling, like picking it up by the trigger from the table, etc, and did that for a year and a half, and as much as I actully tired to get it to drop, never once had the trigger trip, unless I intentionally pulled it.

If youre the least bit reasonable in your gun handling, and in many cases, even if youre not (not that Im suggesting that), its not going to be an issue if its not in a holster.

But try telling that to someone who only learns from the BS constantly told/sold as "truth", on the internet, in gun shops, etc, and usually from someone whos never owned or carried/used one, and goes with what theyve heard, and never proves anything to themselves.

Regardless of what the gun is, if you plan on using and/ or carrying it, you have to vet it for yourself.
 
Nobody has to jump through those hoops. AK103K was describing what may be the ONLY WAY to bypass safety features of the Glock design.


I realize that. Just expressing that if that makes a person safe with a Glock then they chose wrong.
I have no clue why a person would think of that method to be honest.

One of my Glocks is unsafe to EDC. Due to an extreme competition trigger and all springs well under factory specs, FP plunger reduced to an inch of its life, etc. etc.
I have no qualms carrying the rest of them.
 
About 10-12 years ago, I kept hearing it wasnt possible to safely carry a Glock "Mexican Style", sans holster, just stuffed in your pants. I took a spare 17 and carried it every minute I was home, doing everything around the house I would normally do in daily life, doing just that, and a lot of other things that were actually be considered inappropriate to safe gun handling, like picking it up by the trigger from the table, etc, and did that for a year and a half, and as much as I actully tired to get it to drop, never once had the trigger trip, unless I intentionally pulled it.


But try telling that to someone who only learns from the BS constantly told/sold as "truth", on the internet, in gun shops, etc, and usually from someone whos never owned or carried/used one, and goes with what theyve heard, and never proves anything to themselves.

What do you think of all the video evidence of Glocks (and others) going off without being touched by a intentional finger? All hoaxes??????

As you kind of stated.. You have to be pretty fricken honest and take of the rose colored glasses.
 
What do you think of all the video evidence of Glocks (and others) going off without being touched by a intentional finger? All hoaxes??????

As you kind of stated.. You have to be pretty fricken honest and take of the rose colored glasses.
As I said, if you're "reasonably competent" in your gun handling, it shouldn't be an issue.

If you aren't, you're probably not going to be safe with anything.

I've seen a lot of supposedly trained people do stupid things over the years, and a lot of them were done with things other than Glocks. In fact, most of them were NOT Glocks.

Funny how you never hear about all the others though. Must be the "Trump Syndrome" thing again. :)
 
Well, the striker is not "always down" once the slide is racked. The striker is not fully cocked, but it is more like two thirds cocked rather than "always down".
Based on measurements with a cutaway and standard pistols, the striker spring compression, by length, with a round chambered is about half of what it is at the point of firing. Total compression is about 11mm in a standard-sized Glock and the preload is 5 or 6mm, can't remember off the top of my head.

That works out to roughly 25% of the striker spring energy stored by the preload compared to what is stored in the spring immediately at the point that the striker is dropped to fire the gun.
Yup, you take down the gun, take the RSA out, slip a round into the chamber, just leave enough out that you can slip the rim under the extractor, and let the barrel slip into place. Replace the RSA, and slip the slide back on, just till it "clicks" locked.

The gun is now loaded, with the trigger unset. All you have to do to make the gun ready, is move the slide back enough to load the striker and youre all set. You can actually draw the gun and "cock" it one-handed, with a little practice.

I had a Glock armorer tell me the only thing he could see wrong with it, was the firing pin block is not engaged, and that it "might" fire, if dropped just right. Other than that, and maybe "why", he didnt see anything wrong with doing it.
With the trigger to the rear (in the "fired") position, all of the passive safeties on the gun are inoperative.
  • The firing pin safety is held in the upward ("Fire") position by the trigger since the trigger is to the rear.
  • The trigger safety is moot since the trigger is already rearward.
  • The cruciform portion of the trigger bar is behind the safety ramp which means that the safety ramp is not restraining the trigger.
Basically the striker can move freely in the channel--a condition that should never occur in a Glock with a chambered round.
On the other hand the firing pin spring is under no tension at all, which is sort of a plus except when you consider that in order for that to happen the firing pin must be unrestrained which means that since the firing pin safety is in the "fire" position the gun is not drop safe.

The above is consistent with my understanding of the operation of the Glock firing mechanism per my own study and per the instruction provided in the Glock armorer's and advanced armorer's courses. It was further verified by observing the condition/position of the various internal passive safeties on a cutaway Glock pistol.

Besides the safety problem, here are a few other disadvantages to this approach.
  • You have to rack the slide (at least a small amount) to reset the trigger so the gun can be fired. Your handgun is now a "handSgun".
  • If you don't pull the slide back far enough you won't reset the trigger and the gun won't fire.
  • If you pull the slide back a little too far you'll eject the chambered round which means in this situation, at best, if the next round chambers, you could have achieved the same effect by carrying the chamber empty. At worst you may cause a misfeed by partially operating the slide.
  • If you accidentally eject the chambered round by pulling the slide back a little too far you may not have pulled it back far enough to chamber a new round especially since you were trying NOT to pull the slide fully to the rear. The gun won't fire in that condition and may misfeed.
  • Pulling the slide back only partially to reset the trigger doesn't let the slide go into battery with any force or velocity which can result in the gun not achieving full battery. That can result in a failure to fire or, if the gun is badly worn, it may fire slightly out of battery which could be dangerous.
In summary: Carrying a Glock set up this way is unsafe and offers several ways for a user operating under stress to put the gun into a condition where it will not fire, will jam or perhaps could fire out of battery. It is an interesting way to make an otherwise fully functional Glock non-dropsafe and to carry a chambered round without the pistol actually being ready to fire.

There is another issue as well. The gun appears to be chamber empty to anyone with a basic knowledge of Glock operation. Anyone who rigorously follows the gun safety rules should check properly to insure that is really the case. That aside, it's highly unlikely that most folks would consider the possibility that someone actually took a gun apart, loaded the barrel while it was apart, and then carefully put it back together while loaded to achieve a condition which is not otherwise possible. It creates a situation that makes the gun appear to be in a condition different than reality.

It should go without saying, that when you have to disassemble a firearm, load it while disassembled and then reassemble it loaded to achieve a particular condition, you've put the gun into a condition that the manufacturer never envisioned. That means you may uncover idiosyncrasies of the design that no one else has been "ingenious" enough to find before you--and that's generally not a good thing.

For those who wish to carry a Glock chamber loaded without a holster, or in a soft holster, or in one that doesn't protect the trigger, there are ways to accomplish that safely that have none of the drawbacks of the above method. Probably the simplest and cheapest is to use a Saf-T-Blok.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top