View Single Post
Old February 13, 2018, 13:23   #64
bubbagump
Stand-Up Philosopher
Silver Contributor
 
bubbagump's Avatar
 
FALaholic #: 21705
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Marietta, Georgia
Posts: 9,658
Quote:
Originally Posted by yellowhand View Post
Oh hell yea!

The only safety or mechanism I want on a hand gun, actually any firearm, something to insure it does not go off when dropped, shit happens, but other than that, I want that sucker plain dangerous and sure fire at all times.

I've met a lot of people in my life, where no amount of added on safeties to any firearm would make them safe around firearms, nor, cars, trains, boats, walking down the street, sleeping in their beds, using a hammer, etc.

Dumb asses always find a way to do dumb shit.
This, exactly. A moron is a single-point failure for any mechanical safety device. Add three safety devices on a pistol and you still have a single common-mode point of failure. Additional safeties are useless from an engineering standpoint as long as they have a common point of failure and since the moron factor can be eliminated by (drum roll, wait for it ... ) not being a moron then any mechanical safety at all on an intrinsically, passively-safe design is a step in the wrong direction. An answer looking for a problem.

Color me with GP on this one insofar as the Glock action is concerned. I am not overly fond of the damn things but the chance of an uncommanded discharge is simply not one of their faults. Quite the opposite, actually.
__________________
Urban free range hippies are pushovers. Especially with a D-9 Cat. -L. Haney
If God wanted us to carry Glocks, John Browning would have invented them. -shooter_37
bubbagump is online now   Reply With Quote