On 4/2/13 11:57 AM, J Herring wrote:
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 20:20:11 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:



I have seen two demonstrations at big-time firing ranges where the range
safety officer has shown how a Glock can be fired without a finger on
the trigger. A "Sharpie" marking pen can fit in the trigger guard, and
press the "safe action" blade in the middle of the trigger and if more
pressure is exerted the back part of the "safe action" blade will clear,
and the trigger will let the gun fire.

I'll bet a small dildo, popsicle stick, or butter knife could do the same thing. How stupid one must
be to think that only a 'finger' can pull a trigger.

Herring finally figures some of it out...but wait...


Thus, semi-autos without safeties, like the Glocks, are inherently less
safe than weapons with a thumb safety.

Why? Unless you run around with a round chambered sticking things in the trigger guard. Do you not
think it possible to 'accidentally' put the thumb safety into the fire position?

....because something can snag the "safe action" trigger accidentally and
fire the weapon. That's why. That kind of **** happens. With a thumb
safety, it takes two bites...first, the safety has to be switched off,
and then the trigger has to be pulled. And thumb safeties are typically
a lot stiffer to operate than a mushy "safe action" trigger, which,
after all, has nothing more than a little piece of plastic or metal
lever floating on a pin as the "safe" part.



Here's an interesting web page that shows an accidental discharge on a
semi-auto with no thumb safety:

http://tinyurl.com/brpzttc

Moral of the story - don't use old, oil-softened leather holsters when carrying with a round in the
chamber.

No, the moral of the story is that **** happens.