"... accidentally discharged while he was seated ....."

Clearly another case of wanton 'gun violence'! If only we had 'common sense' laws against this sort of thing!!!

 

Not even Sig 320 should go off in that situation provided it was carried in correctly fitted holster of good quality and condition. If he was:🤸,🏃,⛹🤾🤾 ,.... then🤔

 

Sigfoot

 

I'm stealing that one.

 

Taurus Thigh?

Canik Calf?

Nighthawk Knee?

The possibilities are endless!!

 

Taurus Thigh?
Canik Calf?
Nighthawk Knee?

The possibilities are endless!!

Cold cocked, I mean Colt cocked.

 

Details?
SRO dicking around with his gun?
Wrong holster for the gun?
In a seated position, all our holsters do not point anywhere near our bodies so in the "EVENT" of a discharge, it won't hit any part of your body.

 

Lack of training and discipline leg.

AKA "lawyer leg".

 

No where was there any indication it was a Glock that I saw.

 

Didn't follow the ''five beans in the wheel'' rule!

 

Could be me but I'm thinking dealing with a bullet wound is beyond basic first aid. When I think basic first aid I think of more minor issues. But I reckon that's splitting hairs.

I agree we'd definitely be better off if we spent some time teaching kids more on the topic than we do. I remember them breaking out the CPR dummies in high school and teaching us how to do chest compressions. But one 30 minute lesson I didn't take serious is hardly enough to make that something I would feel confident doing if I were put in a literal do or die situation. Same could be said for applying a tourniquet. They told us what they were for and the basic use cases for them. At the time I wrote that off as information I would only need to know for the health class test and rapidly forgot because in the next breath they were telling us, "Never use these if you don't have to, you might lose the limb." Which in my head was simplified to 'never use this.'

Now I kinda wish I had paid more attention to it.

 

JROTC! see, there are kids that have their heads out of their phonies! we have some great kids out there, lets recognize them. WELLDONE, ya'all!!

 

It'll be interesting to see if this is "Glock Leg"

You know it is.

 

Wishing it don't make it so.

 

Now that so many Glock fans are running appendix perhaps it should be called Glock groin instead?

This is why I only buy handguns with a manual safety or a heavy DA or DA/SA trigger.

 

Now that so many Glock fans are running appendix perhaps it should be called Glock groin instead?

This is why I only buy handguns with a manual safety or a heavy DA or DA/SA trigger.

I'm sure that your gun selection will prevent any negligent discharge but this video that you reposted is a fake. It has been discussed here numerous times so I will not repeat why.

To the point of the original question of this thread, a cursory web search would lead one to believe that SRO's gun was a Glock. If it proves something to someone, I hope they are happy.

 

Maybe 15 years ago, I would have thought Glock. In the last few years if I hear about a gun going off when somebody is sitting down, I’m thinking Sig P320.

 

It wasn't me!

I have an airtight alibi....

...or do I?

 

This 1911 ND ain't fake!! Fudd strikes again!!

 

This 1911 ND ain't fake!! Fudd strikes again!!

This one is famous but it's certainly not the only ND for the serpa holster and it's happened with plastic and steel guns as evidenced by the almost universal.... objection to its use in classes and training environments.

 

He would've shot himself just the same because he would have deactivated that safety as soon as he gripped his gun. He pushed for a level of speed that he never trained for enough and he had no control over his fingers, thumb or index.

Manual safety on a 1911 does not introduce additional safety. It is a required part without which 1911 is patently unsafe for EDC. It simply makes 1911 "safe enough".

 

He would've shot himself just the same because he would have deactivated that safety as soon as he gripped his gun. He pushed for a level of speed that he never trained for enough and he had no control over his fingers, thumb or index.

Manual safety on a 1911 does not introduce additional safety. It is a required part without which 1911 is patently unsafe for EDC. It simply makes it "safe enough".

I mean additional safety beyond other guns with 4-5lb triggers that don’t have proper manual safeties.

A gun that requires the user to use two active controls in order to fire, is inherently safer than one where you only have one control to use.

It’s like any other safety feature on any other machine. The emergency stop on a saw, for example. Yeah, keep your fingers away from the spinning blade. I get it. But screw-ups happen and safer is safer.

 

This vid gets posted here regularly and I wrote several times why I said what I said. It is long and I don't want to keep writing the same stuff. I also don't want to get involved into discussions about Glocks, legs, safeties, appendix etc too much. Perhaps you can utilize the search function and find my previous posts on this, or some else might help. Sorry.

If you weren't willing to explain and support the statement here, then why did you bother making it? Either support your statement here where you chose to make it or retract it. I'm not doing research into what you think.

I suspect you have zero data to back up your assumption.

It's gun people who are scared of striker fired guns who scare me, because it means they have not had adequate training.

I'm not "scared of striker fired guns". I do prefer striker fired guns to have a manual safety, but I have owned a glock 19. I sold my 19 after a few years, not because it did not have a safety, but because I never grew attached to it. My 19 was a range toy I bought to see what the glock fuss is about, and to be honest with you, I still don't know. More power to those that do like them.

For a carry gun, that you are constantly handling, day in day out, when you're at your best AND your worst, I don't think that a striker fired handgun, with a trigger weight that used to be reserved for firearms that have manual safeties, is best of choices. I think carrying such a gun, depending on where one lives, the average person is far more likely to ND than to need to shoot a bad guy.

 

If you weren't willing to explain and support the statement here, then why did you bother making it?

For your information and to stimulate independent thinking and critical reasoning. If you don't want to find my previous writings about, that's fine. I said that bit multiple times, I am not going to give that fake a minute of my time anymore. However, I want to ask you something. You posted a video. Can you prove that it is genuine and not staged? Because if you can't, you should retract it.

 

I mean additional safety beyond other guns with 4-5lb triggers that don’t have proper manual safeties.

A gun that requires the user to use two active controls in order to fire, is inherently safer than one where you only have one control to use.

It’s like any other safety feature on any other machine. The emergency stop on a saw, for example. Yeah, keep your fingers away from the spinning blade. I get it. But screw-ups happen and safer is safer.

Not true.

Sig 226 does not require "two active controls" in order to fire and has no safety. Just as safe as a 1911. One relies on the user to drop the hammer (not always done, results in NDs) or flip the thumb safety on (not always done, results in NDs). I didn't get into the other DA/SA guns because many of their hammer drops also act as safeties...although most people don't use them as such.

Smith and Wesson revolvers have no safety and are exponentially safer than any 1911 (especially those with pinned grip safeties and hair triggers) unless of course the user cocks the hammer and runs around or holsters like that (it has been done, results in NDs). Obviously some revolvers do not have the option to be cocked and are even more safe. DA only autos similarly do not allow the hammer to be cocked.

The problem with safeties is that we have to count on people to use them. And then they assume since they have a safety they don't have to be as careful. And then they figure since they have one safety they can disable some others and tweak their trigger down to 2 lbs. And the thing that most amateurs don't consider is while a manual safety might stop some idiot from shooting himself while holstering, when the fun starts, everybody will be running around with their hammers/strikers fully cocked (except Glocks) with no safeties on anyway.

I'm not "scared of striker fired guns". I do prefer striker fired guns to have a manual safety, but I have owned a glock 19. I sold my 19 after a few years, not because it did not have a safety, but because I never grew attached to it. My 19 was a range toy I bought to see what the glock fuss is about, and to be honest with you, I still don't know. More power to those that do like them.

For a carry gun, that you are constantly handling, day in day out, when you're at your best AND your worst, I don't think that a striker fired handgun, with a trigger weight that used to be reserved for firearms that have manual safeties, is best of choices.

If you put a well designed pistol (some aren't) in a well designed holster you will be safe...I don't know why you would be constantly handling it. If you need a safety, get a safety.

I think carrying such a gun, depending on where one lives, the average person is far more likely to ND than to need to shoot a bad guy.

Why do people come to a gun site and talk like the anti-gunners??

 

Not true.

Sig 226 does not require "two active controls" in order to fire and has no safety. Just as safe as a 1911. One relies on the user to drop the hammer (not always done, results in NDs) or flip the thumb safety on (not always done, results in NDs). I didn't get into the other DA/SA guns because many of their hammer drops also act as safeties...although most people don't use them as such.

Smith and Wesson revolvers have no safety and are exponentially safer than any 1911 (especially those with pinned grip safeties and hair triggers) unless of course the user cocks the hammer and runs around or holsters like that (it has been done, results in NDs). Obviously some revolvers do not have the option to be cocked and are even more safe. DA only autos similarly do not allow the hammer to be cocked.

The problem with safeties is that we have to count on people to use them. And then they assume since they have a safety they don't have to be as careful. And then they figure since they have one safety they can disable some others and tweak their trigger down to 2 lbs. And the thing that most amateurs don't consider is while a manual safety might stop some idiot from shooting himself while holstering, when the fun starts, everybody will be running around with their hammers/strikers fully cocked (except Glocks) with no safeties on anyway.


If you put a well designed pistol (some aren't) in a well designed holster you will be safe...I don't know why you would be constantly handling it. If you need a safety, get a safety.


Why do people come to a gun site and talk like the anti-gunners??

I mentioned trigger weight and DAO and DA/SA guns above. I am not saying that revolvers or DA/SA guns are unsafe.

As for your point about modified guns, even the safest designs can be made unsafe with modifications. People have a way of screwing up good things.

I don’t think I’m talking like an anti-gunner. I am not saying that glocks or the many Glock clones should be banned.

 

"People that own guns are more likely to shoot themselves or a family member than use it for self defense" is a common anti gun statement.

 

It also happens to be true if by use you mean fire. Display? I don’t know of any way to get reliable stats on that.

 

To be honest I’m surprised that I’m allowed to even make my argument. That’s pretty cool.

My motto: “Anything that can go wrong, will go wrong.” I live by it and it has saved me from trouble a bunch of times. In my mind guns, for carry especially, are just too serious a thing to go without either a safety or a very heavy first shot.

Not that I think anyone should be prevented by law from carrying whatever kind of gun they please. It is (or at least it is supposed to be) a free country.

 

I know but it was too good to pass. I'll go stand in the corner.

Might have been kidding

I don't do 7 yards, not with the dots. The dispersion is too small at that distance for me to tease out any errors. Usually 2 inch Shoot-N-See targets at 10-12 and 3 inch from there out to 15. My go to test at 7 yards is Frank Garcia’s Dot Drill, six rounds into 2 inches but it is timed. I have not ever cleaned the entire set, and only a handful of times cleared a half.Within 2 inches at 7 would probably be my current goal with irons. It used to be a 5 rounds single hole at 5.

6 rounds also for the 2" at 10 and 3" at 15? I need some motivation so maybe we can develop a long distance (well 10 to 15 yards to start) rivalry. My main "practice" lately has been spraying the steel USPSA silhouette at 100 yards. I know I don't care enough right now to mess with a timer.

 

6 rounds also for the 2" at 10 and 3" at 15?

5. I only do 6 when the drill description calls it.
I get very bored shooting groups so usually it is for zeroing. My final confirmation, and thus the standard, is 5 at the head of USPSA target at 25. I want at least three hits at the upper A and if I land all five, I start looking for somebody to give me a group hug. Somewhat amazingly to myself, I had the same standard when I shot iron sighted Tanfo some 7 years ago.
At 25, but not at 10, I give some extra allowance to my 6 lbs Glock trigger.