Gun Accidents.....how safe are you? really?

[FireDrgn]

Crikey Tank-Ace, does this pass for logic in your circles?


Well it is reification in a way. Realistically there may or may not be a capsule of low explosive present in the mechanism when you depress the firing mechanism to disassemble it. I'm sure the person the OP posted about was convinced the chamber was empty, it's easy for human beings to make procedural mistakes, we are not machines. Pulling the trigger is an action which should be reserved for firing the gun when all of the safety features have been satisfied. The designers failed to do everything they could to minimise ND. Poor design.  

Just for the sake of argument, what if the disassembly process involved moving the slide rearward, pressing a button inside the mouth of the ejection port and then continuing to move the slide backwards off the rails to remove it? Then even with a chambered round there would be no danger. You do not have to press the trigger and any round you failed to clear would just plop out. Whereupon you could slap yourself and review your gun safety, instead of counting how many fingers you have left  

I agree on pulling the trigger is an action designed for firing the gun.  That includes any time deductively. Thats why you always  point in a safe direction and empirically check the chamber and magazine. The same rules have to be applied to a gun with a decocker.   The rules work for all guns. 

I will post more later if your up for it sounds like a great conversation. I am short on time tho. cheers

[SmokinLoon]

I don't know why the cops went to the Glock when the S&W 9mm they were carying is such a fine gun . Where I got mine the cop went to the Glock so I got his 9mm .
(Image removed from quote.)

Much of it had to do with marketing, maintenance, and ease of usage.  A Glock is an idiot's gun, *anyone* can pick it up and operate it.  There is no safety, no de-cock lever, no hammer, no single or double action, it required minimal maintenance (much of it is plastic).  Glock came in and undercut S&W in a major way in the late 1990's and early 2000's.  Ultimately they went to the extreme to get government contracts.

There is a reason LEO's have the worst hit ratio in history right now.  This can be proven easily once the stats of the NYPD are examined. When they carried the S&W Mod 10 revolver in .38 Special the average shot fired in an engagement was less than 4.  Now it is over 10.  IIRC, the NYPD switched to the Glock 19 in 1996 and since then accuracy has plummeted.

Here is a good article on the NYPD version of the Glock 19:  http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/08/foghorn/nypds-choice-of-firearm-may-have-contributed-to-the-terrible-shooting/         

[nrshida]

I will post more later if your up for it sounds like a great conversation. I am short on time tho. cheers

Yes great, the more input and opinions the better. 

[Maverick]

That's interesting. I wouldn't know that not being a Glock expert. But I assume you still wouldn't trust the position of the trigger as an indicator of decocked? How about a chamber indicator or a a 'cocked / uncocked' indicator? How much confidence do they inspire?

A chamber indicator only tells you that there is a cartridge case in the chamber. It does not tell you if the gun is cocked, the cartridge is empty, loaded or a dummy cartridge. FWIW even in a gen 1 Glock the extractor sticks out a bit and you can tell the chamber is occupied by running your finger along it. It doesn't work on all makes of semi auto's. Some do "show" a bit of change in extractor position and others like the standard 1911 have totally enclosed extractors.

I should also tell you that the gen 1 through 3 Glock plastic case (I haven't seen any gen 4 yet) that the gun came in was made in a manner that it requires the trigger to be pulled to fit inside. There is a plastic protrusion in the base of the container that sticks up into the trigger guard and won't fit unless the trigger is to the rear.

As far as telling if a weapon is loaded s concerned it's simple, check it manually by opening the action. That works for revolvers, semi auto, bolt actions, crack barrel, lever action or slide action. It does not work with muzzle loaders. To me the only "safed" weapon is one that is in pieces on a mat. If it has been taken apart it can't fire. ALL other weapons must be checked by the person handling it to determine it's loaded / unloaded status. I don't care if the clerk in a gun store hands me the gun after checking the chamber. I will still open the action and look for myself. Otherwise the gun is loaded as far as I am concerned and is handled as such. Even after I have unloaded the gun I will still try to insure the muzzle never covers anyone while I am handling it.

[Ripsnort]

How safe am I? You tell me...

I ALWAYS consider...
1) All guns are ALWAYS loaded.
2) Never point the muzzle at anything you aren't willing to destroy.
3) Keep YOUR FINGER OFF THE TRIGGER until you are ON TARGET
4) Be sure of your target before moving the finger onto the trigger.

How safe am I?

Edit: I might add, I can't tell you how many people NEVER ask "Is the gun loaded?" when I hand them an empty pistol with the action pulled back. You're never considered a stupid person if you ask me that question, even WITH the barrel clear and action open. And if you check yourself after I say yes, I buy you beer for life!

[Maverick]

Much of it had to do with marketing, maintenance, and ease of usage.  A Glock is an idiot's gun, *anyone* can pick it up and operate it.  There is no safety, no de-cock lever, no hammer, no single or double action, it required minimal maintenance (much of it is plastic).  Glock came in and undercut S&W in a major way in the late 1990's and early 2000's.  Ultimately they went to the extreme to get government contracts.

There is a reason LEO's have the worst hit ratio in history right now.  This can be proven easily once the stats of the NYPD are examined. When they carried the S&W Mod 10 revolver in .38 Special the average shot fired in an engagement was less than 4.  Now it is over 10.  IIRC, the NYPD switched to the Glock 19 in 1996 and since then accuracy has plummeted.

Here is a good article on the NYPD version of the Glock 19:  http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/08/foghorn/nypds-choice-of-firearm-may-have-contributed-to-the-terrible-shooting/        

You do realize that the article you listed does not indicate that the Glock per se is a cause or contributor to poor shooting. It along with the other two weapons listed in the article are all modified to have 12 lb trigger pulls for NYPD use. The author's premise is that the trigger pull is excessively strong to allow "good" accuracy. I tend to agree, as far as target shooting is concerned. I am not a fan of a light SA trigger on a combat weapon, especially when the operator is expected to have more than one task to do when holding the weapon. It's one thing to just be shooting it, it's another when you have to chase someone or secure the person(s) in a hurry.

It's a fallacy to think that just because a person is a LEO and qualified with a weapon that they can really shoot well. Lots of cops are not gun people. I would say that in the case of NYC given the prevalent bias of the area towards firearms that almost all of the NYPD are not "gun people". I've known some that never fired their weapon unless it was for annual (or even less frequent) qualification. I talked to one armorer in my own Department who had to work on a gun one of the detectives carried. It fired 3 of 5 shots and couldn't be unloaded. The cartridges had been inside the gun so long the brass corroded and "welded" themselves to the chamber. Another "idiot" actually believed the wives tale that you could clean a stainless steel revolver in the dishwasher and was surprised when the gun was all locked up and non functional.

Other folks also forget there is a huge difference in shooting capability between shooting at a range and having to fire in defense of your life in a full crisis especially when it's totally unexpected. It's way different when the rounds can go both directions.


Hey Ripsnort. I expect to be up in your area again this spring / summer. I'll hold you to that!   

[Dadsguns]

Standard weapon clearing drill Norwegian Army:

Step one: Make sure the weapon is pointing in a safe direction (always).

Step two: Remove the magazine.

Step three: Visually and/or physically (with your fingers) check that the chamber is empty.

Step four: Close the slide/bolt and pull the trigger while keeping the weapon pointing in a safe direction.


Is this clear enough? (after how many posts?)

Crystal thanks, Glocks are not a favorite for SOF or US conventional forces for a reason and this is one of them.

STEP 4 above was not intended to be the fail safe to ensure its a clear and safe weapon, its to take the weapon down and out of the firing postion AFTER you verified clear and safe by inspecting it visually and physically, it was NOT to be meant as a means of ensuring its clear and safe.

Your statement I quoted initially was "As long as there is a chance that there is a live round in the chamber no gun is safe, period. The only way to make sure is to pull the trigger in a safe direction and see what happens." The comment in italics is what I have heartburn with and its completely wrong no matter what gun you use.  

[Ripsnort]

Hey Ripsnort. I expect to be up in your area again this spring / summer. I'll hold you to that!  

I'd buy ya beer for life just based who you are Mav. I didn't specify how MANY, or intervals, etc.

[Maverick]

I'd buy ya beer for life just based who you are Mav. I didn't specify how MANY, or intervals, etc.

Yeah, but only the good die young. I'm gonna be here a LOOOOONNNNGGG time. Run a tab...... 

[Ripsnort]

ON another related subject, how many here fear going to public gun ranges these days?
There are so many new shooters it really scares the crap out of me.
Even though our local indoor ranges all require a 30 min safety re-cap (required by EVERYONE once a year) I still see stuff on the range that just makes me cringe. I've reported safety violations as well.

I just don't shoot as much as I used to because it's a good 45 min to an open range with no one around. I really don't 'trust my fellow shooter' any more.  

[Ripsnort]

Yeah, but only the good die young. I'm gonna be here a LOOOOONNNNGGG time. Run a tab...... 

[Major Biggles]

Very interesting. Most of my experience with weapons, as a Brit, is through the military. The lack of safety and solid weapon handling drills among american recreational shooters, or perceived from my point of view, has always shocked me. I suppose coming from a military background, safety is obviously the most important thing about weapon handling (an ND can earn you jail time or a serious fine in the British Army).

I'm always amazed at how brazen some american shooters are when it comes to shooting safety, especially some of these YouTube vids, etc. One big problem with the american culture of shooting just for fun is that many seem to see their weapon as a toy or sporting item rather than a deadly weapon, which is instilled in you from day one in the military.

A lack of basic skills and drills was the failure here. I'm completely amazed to read stories of people testing head-space of rounds, with their rifle pointed towards a residential area. That's the sort of thing that should earn someone a life-time ban from ever owning a firearm.

[Major Biggles]

A thought; Are Americans truly happy in the knowledge that a complete f****ng moron has the same right to bear arms as an intelligent person?

I love guns, and I love the fact that they are protected under american law. But surely even the most gun-crazed of you can accept that tighter gun controls are needed when idiots like these are allowed to own a deadly weapon. Even if those gun controls were a simple license you had to pass a safety test to apply for...

[nrshida]

Oh boy. There is the end of the technical discussion.

[Condor11]

Oh boy. There is the end of the technical discussion.

It was bound to happen eventualh