We have two instances, one involving an "experienced gun handler", in which both individuals had loaded Glocks "tucked" into their waistbands. This begs the question, were these weapons in a holster, or were they carried mexican-style, which is frowned upon by Glock inc. and any intelligent firearms instructor, unless carrying with an empty chamber as some folks do. (Glock's fault, or prehaps a poor choice of carry mode given the pistol's manual of arms?)
We have another instance involving an officer cleaning a "loaded" Glock in another room, resulting in the shooting of his roomate. (Glocks fault, or the fault of the officer for not following proper procedures and the manual's directions by unloading the pistol and clearing the chamber prior to cleaning and maintenance?)
We have another instance in which it would appear that the officer attempted to reholster his weapon with his finger indexing the trigger. (Glocks fault, or the fault of the officer for not following remedial gun safety rules by keeping his finger clear of the trigger if not intending to fire the weapon?)
In yet another questionable incident, we have an officer attempting to handcuff a suspect with one hand, while still holding a loaded weapon, and his weapon discharges. It seems most officers either holster their weapons first, or another officer is covering the suspect while a fellow officer handcuffs the perp. This could also potentially pose a weapons retention problem should the BG resist, as the officer only has one hand controlling the pistol vs. reholstering his weapon and applying the retention strap. (Again, is this Glocks fault, or that of the officer?)
Additionally, instead of capitalizing on the inherently dangerous design as this article indicates, several manufacturers are now utilizing a "Glock like" trigger mechanism. This includes Sig (DAK or K trigger), HK (LEM), Walther (Quick Action), Kahr (light DAO), and the Springfield XD (USA trigger), Para-Ordnance (LDA)........Only two have a safety, the XD and the Para, and IIRC, both utilize a 1911 style grip safety. I would suspect that other manufacturers would shy away from this type of MOA if it were really a safety issue, instead of negligence on the part of the end user seemingly resulting in the majority of these incidents.
The Glock should be carried in the manner in which it's intended to be carried eg: a quality holster covering the trigger gaurd. A heavier trigger can be used if the department or individual so chooses. Proper unloading and cleaning procedures must be followed eg: ejecting the mag and clearing the chamber. Safe firearms practices MUST be followed eg: keeping one's finger clear of the trigger. One must become familiar and train with it's unique MOA, just like one has to train to master the DA/SA transition on a TDA pistol, learn to safely manipulate the 1911 or BHP, or become at ease with the HK P7 and it's squeeze cocking mechanism, ect. ect......Hmmmm, all of the above applies to ALL firearms doesn't it?
Speaking on keeping one's finger off of the trigger while covering a BG or reholstering, there are some interesting examples involving pistols with differing MOA's. At Front Sight's training facility, they have recorded two incidents of ND's. One involved a Sig P229 in which the user forgot to decock prior to reholstering "with his finger on the trigger." This resulted in him shooting himself in the leg. Now, not only did this individual not adhere to his pistols MOA by decocking, but he also violated a major safety rule by having his finger on the trigger in the first place. Should he have sued Sigarms?
The other, involved a 1911 which the user did not "on safe" prior to reholstering, in addition to having a holster not compatible with his pistol, which allowed for an inner piece of material to engage the trigger when he attempted to shove the gun in. This resulted in a bullet through his foot. Should he have sued the maker of the 1911 or the holster company, for not applying the safety on his pistol as it's MOA and design dictates for safe operation?
Yet another example, is the female LVMPD officer who was covering a suspect with her finger on the trigger of a DA Beretta 92, when it discharged, luckily missing both the BG and her partner. Should she sue Beretta for having her finger on the trigger during a stressful encounter resulting in the ND of her weapon?
It would be nice to see some folks take responsibility for their own actions, be they right or wrong, much like they used to do. Unfortunately, that does not seem like it will happen, as folks would rather divert blame, save themselves embarassment and teasing, avoid the legal ramifications of their actions, ect......
jnb01
