Why can't this be made

[Nom de Forum]

Americans say patience is a virtue. When Glock comes out with single-stack 9mm you can get NY trigger and some Krazy glue.

Use that Krazy glue to fix a broken plate. If you use it to disable the trigger safety on a Glock, you risk legal repercussions that will be far more punitive should you have an ND. All this talk about a dangerous attempt to get a trigger pull just a little better when as much time spent practicing would be as effective in improving marksmanship!

 

[gruney]

Glock trigger dingus

The trigger blade is primarily a drop safety. The striker block is effective if the gun is dropped on the muzzle, but not if dropped on the butt.

The trigger and trigger bar could have enough inertia to "pull" the trigger if dropped, which defeats the striker block. The blade weighs very little and pivots at a different point, so a drop can't disengage it, preventing the trigger from moving.

That is why all the striker fired guns have the blade or something that does the same thing (M&P, Bersa). I think the first Ruger SRs didn't have the blade and were recalled to add it, so it CAN really happen.

I have a Kahr CW9, and I found adapting to the trigger pretty easy. I shoot it as well or better than other 9s with SA triggers.

 

[gym]

A half drop of locktite on the safety, Worse case you scrape it off if need be. I never understood the problem of having something and not using it, as opposed to not having it and needing it.
If a perp grabs your gun, the little known fact that he just can't shoot you by pressing the trigger, could save your butt. You folks who are "just a little bit handy" or have a gunsmith, can tighten up that safety slider, to make it very difficult to move without intent.
Heck I installed a faucet in my kitchen between posts.And I hadn't taken that apart before, not do I like plumbing.
Guns are pretty simple unless you really start doing things that change tolerances or remove metal. A simple little bend here or there and the safety is no longer a problem.

 

[jon_in_wv]

I've read of instances where people carried a gun with the safety off only to pull the hi. Out at the end of the day and discovered it was turned on. That could be dangerous

I don't get this philosophy. If I carry a weapon with a safety I use it. When ever I train with it the manual of operation is to disengage the safety, or ensure it is off when I prepare to fire. It seems people either don't practice enough of familiarize themselves enough with their weapon to be confident with it. A lack of confidence in a manual safety is a lack of training, not the fault of the weapon. If a manual safety was so cumbersome to employ and such an unsafe mechanism I wonder how the 1911 has remained so popular all these years? The answer is because they always use it so disengaging it is a natural part of its use. I agree if you want pure simplicity because you are unwilling to put in the time then by all means try to get one without the safety but you would be safer to practice more and familiarize yourself with your weapon more regardless how it functions.

 

[stogiegila]

I've.carried a 1911 more than once only to discover the safety was disengaged when I went to out the pistol away

I just prefer no manual safeties. Just that much less to worry about

 

[JR24]

I've.carried a 1911 more than once only to discover the safety was disengaged when I went to out the pistol away

I've had that happen, good reminder to keep on the 4 rules.

I also notice that when I draw non-safety guns my thumb still swipes by reflex, which is good.

 

[PedalBiker]

Then there is the up to fire vs down to fire mess. I sold my P345 only because it had a backwards safety, everything else about the gun was to my liking. If it was a decocker only I'd have kept it, but in the end an up to fire safety just didn't make the cut as every other gun I've ever owned had down to fire safeties.

The Army kind of goofed on this one too, they switched form the 1911 to the Beretta which have opposite direction safeties.

 

[Nom de Forum]

This is the biggest difference between a Glock type pistols and semiautomatics with manual safeties you engage and disengage - When using a Glock type you can't rely on a manual safety and have to strictly adhere to the "Four Rules". When using semiautomatics pistols with manual safeties you have a manual safety you can't rely on and have to strictly adhere to the "Four Rules".

 

[Nom de Forum]

If a manual safety was so cumbersome to employ and such an unsafe mechanism I wonder how the 1911 has remained so popular all these years? (Bold added by Nom for emphasis).

Primarily because of a lack of a good alternative for gun game playing for many years, it is easy for owners to tinker with, and a mystique/mythology similar to that of Harley Davidsons was well crafted by its proponents.

 

[gym]

Kimber is the company who put the 1911 back on the map, with their array of flashy small guns. I believe it was Ayoob who said this in an old news letter. It is true, they really had tapered off except for 1911 addicts, until the 1996 or so, when Kimber made small 1911's, after that everyone jumped in, and the gun made a huge comeback.
Trust me back in the 70's and 80's very few guys carried 1911's, they were very iffy at best for carry use by agents or cops, unless they were gun enthusiasts.
Plus everyone wanted one of those new hi-capacity Glocks that could sneak through an airport metal detector.

 

[jon_in_wv]

Plus everyone wanted one of those new hi-capacity Glocks that could sneak through an airport metal detector.

Oh the media had a field day with all the ceramic Glocks that can't be detected in metal detectors. Never mind they are steel and ammo is still detectable. Why do people even still trust the media? The haven't sought the truth for decades.