It’s kinda obvious what could go wrong with the forthcoming Sure-Draw GLOCK safety: you draw your gun and forget to turn off the safety. Like you might do with every other handgun equipped with an external safety. Only not. ‘Cause the Sure-Draw safety is a press n’ hold affair. Unless you push in the safety and hold it the gun is hot. So what’s the point? It’s not a final precaution.It’s designed to prevent Tex Grebnerization. You press the button with your thumb as you draw the gun and then release it as you bring it to bear on the bad guy (or paper target). Same deal when you return the gun to the holster. [Click here for instructions.] Used properly you can’t ND your femoral artery or (for fans of appendix carry) endanger your genetic legacy. Your thoughts?
or just don’t put your finger on the trigger.
seems like this design would invite the shooter to place more pressure on the trigger area in order to gain leverage against the thumb while pressing this “safety button”.
I was thinking this as well. No I don’t really see the point of this device, but if you were going to have such a device on the gun, having something that needed to be engaged by the trigger-finger make a hell of a lot more sense, doncha’ think? So while that would be equally useless, it would at least train your to keep your finger off the damn trigger.
This is a solution in search of a problem.
Agree, an answer to a question they haven’t asked yet.
It’s a hideous solution to a questionable problem… I’d never put that on my gun, though, based both aesthetics and the K.I.S.S. principle.
Still, I can see where they’re going with it. When I’m reholstering my PPS, my thumb will be against the back of the slide like that, so I can tell if the cocking indicator is beginning to protrude – which would only happen if the trigger is being pulled. Of COURSE I’m careful while reholstering, but I appreciate the extra safety feature. I wish Glocks had a feature like that.
Still…fugly, dude.
Hmmmm, let me clarify. I could barely justify something like this for reholstering. If you feel you need a safety for *drawing* a handgun, well…practice a little more before you show yourself in public, would be my suggestion.
Yeah, it sure would be a shame to ruin the graceful, cinder-block-esque lines of a Glock with this ugly add-on… 😉
Agreed. Idiot proof devices just breed better idiots. Generally speaking, people will only learn the bare minimum required to operate a tool, so if dangerous tools require less thinking, you’ll have people using them with less thought.
Not ideal.
“A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools.” -Douglas Adams.
Goddammit.
I hate this fvcking phrase so much. Every time there’s some sort of innovation in the firearms industry, everybody and his brother comes by and says, “This is a solution in search of problem!” So far for solutions in search of problems that I’ve come across, in no order at all:
The doohicky above
Tactical holsters
Leather holsters
P90s/PS90s
Bullpup rifles
100 round magazines
5 round magazines in non ban states
30 round magazines
Five seveN handguns
5.7mm cartridge
The Ruger SR762, from the recent review
Laser sights
.357 Sig
.40SW
10mm
Piston driven ARs
Pistol grip sleeves
.300 Blk/AAC/ Whatever the TLA is
The entirety of Magpull
The Beretta Nano
The KelTec KSG
The DHS
Coonan .357s
The Desert Eagle
The Kriss Carbine/Pistol
Angled iron sights for use with optics
Polymer guns
And the list continues…
Except that I (and most people commenting) don’t see this as an innovation. Your results may vary. But I agree with you. We should all go back to black powder muskets.
What they said – why not just follow proper pistol handling procedures and keep your finger outside the trigger guard until the barrel aligns with the target?
Thoughts?
Indeed, a great many handgun owners are too incompetent for words.If you can’t safely handle a 3lb striker fired handgun, you’ve got no business near any bullets or firearms.
BTW: one had best make sure there’s no drawstrings or FOD near the holster before inserting a loaded gun.Even a DA/DA weapon will fire -as it should-if there’s crap near or in the holster which actuates the trigger.
I’d be more interested in being able to buy the thingy that goes back there that has a selector switch!
Agreed with above, especially the extra pressure being more likely to cause a ND.
Plus a very weak basically thumbless grip on your draw stroke. Does not seem wise in the context of an adrenaline fueled self defense scenario.
I am still surprized Glock has not put a grip safety on thier pistols for the finicky American market.
Also, $39.99 for piece of mind, extra level of safety, extra step to get you killed, or whatever…..pass.
Because the lack of a grip safety distinguishes them from the Springfield XD/XDM. People buy the Glock because it does not have a grip safety, which could, under rare occasions make the gun inoperable at the wrong time if your grip is not right. Granted, that has never happened to me when I owned a couple of XDMs or on my 1911, but I’ve heard more than one firearm salesperson cite that feature as a reason to prefer a Glock over an XD. Plus, if Glock is going to start to monkey around with the insides of the gun, perhaps making it so you don’t need to pull the trigger to take the gun apart would be a better place to start. That feature is probably responsible for more dumbasses having NDs anyway.
The 1911 has a grip safety. The 1903 colt, one of my faves, has a grip safety. Well over a hundred years of grip safeties. I’ve never heard of one not firing because of an improper grip. Maybe the salesman just wanted to sell Glocks?
I don’t claim to be an expert, but the grip safety not working properly seems like a non issue to me.
It is a non-issue, of course.
People have been obsessing over the Colt grip safeties for a century now, especially people transitioning from revolvers. I, like you, have never had an issue with them on any Colt semi-auto that has them.
I’d vastly prefer my carry piece to have one. The problem is, (IMO) is that the concept is ill-executed in the striker pistols in existence to date.
Jim, this is what I meant – I think that there alot of people who would jump on the Glock bandwagon if they made a model with a grib safety. Some people can accept the doctrine ‘Keep your finger off the trigger’ and ‘there is no safety mechanism’ with a revolver but cannot make that logical step with a Glock. I wonder how many people look at the Glock but pass on the purchase of one because they want some form of safety on it. I’d would say Springfield asked that question and thus started producing the XD line just to compete with Glock.
Tell that to the IVAC guy in ohio that shot his manhood off last summer when he readjusted his concealed glock to be able to get to a tight place in the unit. Gun went off. Cops had to go to 8.5 lb trigger pulls because of all of the unintended discharges.
You cant idiot proof everything but you can make it harder for accidents to happen.
For those of you who love your Glocks and always keep your finger off the trigger and properly store them away from Kids, God Bless you. I’ll keep my Sig with its thumb safety and love it just as much.
That guy was carrying in his waistband, without a holster, as I recall. That’s not the gun’s fault.
All of you are right. Salespeople will talk up the lack of a grip safety on a GLOCK if they (the salesperson) like GLOCKs, and talk up the presence of a grip safety on an XDm if they (the salesperson) like Springfield products. It’s what salespeople do. That goes double if the customer has already expressed an inkling of an attraction to either brand, because now it’s about talking up the features (whatever they are) of the brand the customer has expressed an interest in, in order to close the deal.
By extension, A-Rod said there’s a bunch who would jump on the GLOCK bandwagon if they offered a grip safety, but it cuts both ways. There’s also a reasonable (probably not as large) number who would, not necessarily jump off, but would certainly retain their old, non-grip safety GLOCK for as long as possible, because one of the reasons they chose the GLOCK was because they dislike or distrust grip safeties.
There was one self defense case posted on Glocktalk where the citizen, shot in the arm early in the fight, wasn’t able to grip his 1911 tightly enough to disable the grip safety.
It’s all well and good to discuss grip strength at the square range.In real life things get murkier, and the bad guy always gets the first move.A grip safety doesn’t seem that bad….until you meet a committed thug who announced his intent by shooting first.Bad enough you’re down to one hand ,and now your gun won’t work because your grip sucks.
At least it’s safe, right?
how many times must it be said. no modifications to the mechanical operation of self defense/carry handguns. that means no extended takedown tabs, slide release mods, triggers, safeties (!!), etc. Change the grip if you must.
I have to disagree with that. If a modification is made that makes the operation of the firearm better without changing how if functions than I don’t see a problem with it. For example, I have fairly large hands, but I still need to rotate my 1911 ever so slightly to manipulate the slide release. I removed the original slide release and “installed” an extended slide release. Now I can release the slide without having to change my grip on the gun. Changing that one part didn’t do anything to how the gun actually operates, but I am able to change magzines faster and quicker to re-engage targets.
“Used properly you can’t ND your femoral artery”
That goes for ANY firearm regardless of it’s safety devices.
Possibly a good idea for the mass market. People here that like to say, “Solution looking for a problem” need to come to the understanding the average gun owner is not as well versed in safety and knowledge like a good portion of us TTAG members.
Keep in mind with the general populous to you need to make something as idiot proof and safe as possible. If this stops Bubba from shooting himself while holstering his Glock, then the product did exactly what it was designed to do.
I’ll give the company credit, the idea is sound. Just because us pro-gunners wouldn’t have a need for it, doesn’t mean others won’t. Can we say police departments? Ahem…
if you want a safety, choose a different weapon. Get a V1 HK.
You are not grasping my point. We might say that, but the average gun owner who is dead set on a Glock might not get it.
That is my point. Not to sound demeaning to the general populous, but as a whole they are not very bright… at all.
agreed. most gun owners are not too bright. very few do their due diligence and wind up buying crap as a result.
The problem is this is not idiot proof.
If a person can’t figure out that you shouldn’t insert your finger in the trigger guard as you draw, how is that person going to hand the additional task of pressing down a button with the thumb, which requires an action with pressure, when that person can’t handle the training to not do something?
Then the problem is, simply because it exist, and there will be a false illusion that somehow this will make handguns safer (when in fact it will do the opposite) States will start demanding it on all handguns.
“If a person can’t figure out that you shouldn’t insert your finger in the trigger guard as you draw . . . ”
For birthdays and Christmases from when I was two to probably ten, I received and played with piles of toy six-shooters, GI Joe weapons, plastic Walthers . . . During that entire period, there was never a time when I had no toy guns, and I’m sure I averaged at least eight or nine during most times.
And we all ran around with them firmly in our hands, with our fingers clutching the trigger just softly enough to not fire them, for that entire time.
Of course, when we got our first training at around ten, we were all “fingers off triggers!”, but an awful lot of muscle memory got built up and cemented in during those eight years of make-believe. So, it’s not just a no-brainer for people who grew up in the years when all little kids carried guns daily.
Many states will mandate this except for police who never ND their guns.
Some years ago, in my city, a police officer had an accidental discharge from his Glock 22, whilst seated in his cruiser. It was apparently a piece of material from his holster that peeled off and caught the trigger when he shifted his body. And I remember a picture of the backside of a female officer in a local paper: she was arresting Johns on the hooker stroll, apparently pretending to be one of them (girls, not Johns), with her Glock stuffed in her butt cleavage. The risks of this (paraplegia, anyone?) are obvious. Some sort of manual safety, or even grip safety is an obvious asset, in certain situations. And people with revolvers used to hold their thumb over the hammer when holstering–a tactile safety that is obviously absent from striker-fired guns. Unless one is a cop, or cash in transit guard (or one of the handful of people with an ATC Type-3 permit), few people carry handguns up here, but–if I was allowed to, and it was a striker-fired weapon, or something with a bobbed hammer–I would use a very rigid Kydex holster and avoid, at all costs, any clothing with strings, or ties. Murphy’s law would dictate that one of these would find their way into the trigger guard:
http://loadoutroom.com/3826/jacket-togle-causes-unintentional-discharge/
This is a cop thing. Or rather, a thing for cops.
Guess what the new training maxim is? “Keep your thumb on the nipple!”
Also: Making Perfection better
And I’m out.
Let’s just take off the warning labels and let God or Darwin sort em out.
Looks like a selector switch, but isn’t a selector switch.
Better to buy a gun that suits your purpose as designed, when it comes to the basic functionality, than to jack around with after market gimmicks, especially if you’re one who’s new or otherwise of marginal proficiency.
Exactly. If you’re worried about the lack of a safety, get an XD with a grip safety. Problem solved. GLOCK-brand glocks are not magical. There are plenty of other handguns out there that do the job just as well.
I suppose this gadget has its place. Practice with it, and it should be fine.
Still, the second I saw what it was, I had one thought: SPRINGFIELD XD. If you’re interested in extra safety in non-emergency handling of your pistol, buy one that’s designed for it in the first place.
Agreed. This made me think instantly about how I reholster my XD. I move my thumb to the back of the slide on top of the cocked indicator and off of the grip safety. It gives me a little piece of mind while I reholster. But still I always visually check the holster area at least briefly to ensure there are no obstructions.
It also is a habit that I use to the same effect of hammer fired pistols as well. Can’t go off if your thumb is over the hammer preventing from moving.
On draws though I just make sure I practice a lot to make sure my finger is high up on the receiver. Even in my Serpa I don’t have any issues with my finger coming any where close to the trigger.
I’d love to hear from one of our resident attorneys who has some insight into product liability on this.
As with all legal questions, the lawyerly answer is “It depends….”
In all seriousness though. From the looks of it, it is designed to push against the striker so that it blocks the striker from moving rearward in the event that the trigger is pulled while it is activated. So unless it fails to function at that task due to some manufacturing flaw, or unless it fails to disengage when released, and thereby directly results in injury, it’s hard to see where the potential liability would lie in making a firearm less likely to discharge unintentionally.
Even if an injury does occur as a result of the devices failure to engage or disengage, the ultimate liability might also be dependent on the kind or amount of contributing or superseding negligence on the part of the end user.
So that is why the answer is “It depends.”
Seems like a pretty good way to drop your gun to me. It would also slow your draw stroke as you would have to draw then grip instead of grip and draw.
Robert, I know you don’t like handguns with external safeties in general, but this thing has me scratching my head as to how safe this safety is. My first non-revolver was the 1911-A1 and the side mounted safety became instinctual after a gazillion hours of practice. I find I sometimes swipe the side of my Glock with my thumb when I switch to that. But this safety is like no other I have seen and would require training for a gun unlike any other. Not the greatest idea for law enforcement depts that skimp on training, and in my opinion, even worse for guys that might own 6 or 7 handguns , say 4 with external safties on the left side (like a 1911) and 2 or 3 without , like a Glock. This makes your Glock and odd thing, not good in my opinion.
It’s called “negligent discharge” for a reason – it is HUMAN negligence, not weapon malfunction that causes all of these “the gun just went off” events. A fool & his money!
One of the reasons I like SA/DA pistols is that when I re-holster I can place my thumb over the hammer. If something enters the trigger guard and presses on the trigger I get instant tactile feed back that something is amiss. I wonder what happens with this thing if you get something inside the guard pressing the trigger and then once you are re-holstered you let go of the button. Does the button give you the same feedback when the trigger is pressed?
This. I do the same thing with my LEM-trigger HK guns.
I think this is an excellent product, and if I ran Glocks, I’d use this on all of them. I LOVE being able to prevent an AD during holstering with my thumb on the back of the slide.
+1000 I always put my hand on the hammer on my sig or my revolvers. Even if something were to press the trigger, it would not go off unless I let the hammer continue rearwards. If some people are too stupid to figure out hammer going back = houston we have a problem, then let them win the Darwin awards and hopefully take themselves or their legacy out of the gene pool.
I think this is a great idea. Everyone I know with a hammer fired pistol puts their thumb on the hammer when they reholster. There are huge amounts of stories of people shooting themselves in the leg when they reholster and the story always includes a striker fired gun. I wouldn’t use it while drawing though.
… and the story always includes pulling the trigger while reholstering.
FIFY.
Not always, sometimes it involves a piece of clothing or even the holster in a few cases.
Lip of a leather holster:
http://acidcow.com/pics/18523-worn-leather-holsters-can-cause-accidental.html
Just keep your bugger hook off the bang switch and Problem Solved!
“Just keep your bugger hook…”
The single most unintentionally hilarious comment in this thread.
I’m sure my wily Glock is just bidding its time but in over 20 years it has yet to fire without a trigger pull.
In order to be truly safe, the acts of activating and deactivating a safety must be so habitual that they become automatic, or the whole situation will fall apart under stress. Having “learned” the habit of flicking a thumb safety, unlearning that habit and acquiring a new one is just begging for trouble.
I automatically put my thumb on the hammer of my non-1911 pistols when holstering. Because training.
I’ve found that I generally sweep my thumb up and out of the way when reholstering anything, but that’s because all my holsters are IWB and it’s more comfortable that way.
IMHO, the back of the slide qualifies as out of the way for IWB or AIWB holstering. It’s a very minor tweak to switch from an upward-flagged thumb to thumb-on-slide. Took me maybe 50 repetitions over a few days to change over.
The base of my thumb still indexes on my abdomen to guide the gun into the holster, just like I used to do with the side of my thumb.
is there a chance the shooter would leave his/her finger on or near the switch? when the slide goes back after letting off a round, wouldn’t it hit/jam the shooter’s finger/thumb?
Nope. You’d either rip your thumb off when the slide cycled, or you’d prevent the trigger from moving at all.
Your thumb will not rip off.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zH5ipW7HGa4
“Captain! The hyperbole detector will nae engage! We’re flying blind here!”
Garbage.
Glock was designed by Gaston Glock for the Austrian military. Later it was adopted by US law enforcement agencies. Both use external, hard case holsters. An external safety wasn’t nessasary. The problem is that Glock is now used by people in the concealed carry universe and predictably one after another keep blowing a hole in their leg. The pistols are exceedingly dangerous as ccw and if you disagree I’m sorry for you. In aviation we have a saying, “There are 2 types of pilot… Those who’ve had a gear-up landing and those who will have a gear-up landing.” The parallel I’m drawing is that even with experienced pilots, if you fly in retractable gear aircraft enough, one day you’ll make a mistake and forget to lower the landing gear. Clearly it isn’t true in all cases but there is meritt to that old saying. Likewise, if you carry a Glock in a soft IWB holster long enough and are stupid enough to chamber a round, you are courting disaster. I cringe at the local gun store watching new gun enthusiast by a Glock as their ccw. I know someone will insult me and say grip safeties are dumb ( I guess JM Browning was a dunce…) but I will laugh too as I hear story after story of pistols discharging into purses, legs, your junk, etc.
Your comment is absolutely full of FUD and supposition. I’m certain there are people who have carried GLOCKs very nearly daily since they were introduced, and have yet to shoot themselves in the leg. I’m not gifted enough to know one of those people, but I do know folks who have carried them for ten years or more without shooting themselves. Is it your position that they simply haven’t lived long enough?
It’s true that shit happens. It’s completely false that that fact somehow makes GLOCKs inferior, or even unsuited for concealed or open carry. That’s assigning blame where there is none.
And I don’t even like GLOCKs.
You didn’t mention if the people you know carry with a round in the chamber. You didn’t mention what type of holster they used (I specifically said soft IWB holsters that are so popular with the ccw crowd). You didn’t mention the level of training the people you know have. Indeed you didn’t mention much because you don’t know much. Once on TTAG I recommended to a new shooter that he should NOT carry a chambered round in a Glock if he values safety. Some simpleton came back and said, “That’s as stupid as having a sprinkler system to put out fires but having to run outside and turn on the water first!” My reply to this low intellect fool was, “… Yes, if you can run outside and turn on the water in one half of one second.”…… Because that’s the amount of time it takes me to charge my slide. It takes half a second. I doubt the fire would destroy much in that .5 of a second. What a moron.
“Indeed you didn’t mention much because you don’t know much.”
Well that was just unnecessarily rude, but that’s OK, I can be rude too. You ready?
I didn’t mention if they carry with a round in the chamber because I think that’s a stupid question. I don’t find it necessary to specify. It goes without saying. If you’re carrying without a round in the chamber, you’re doing it wrong, unless you’re carrying hammer down on an empty chamber on an old revolver. There is no reason whatsoever to carry on an empty chamber on a modern semiautomatic pistol. If someone who is new to carrying wants to carry on an empty chamber until they get over their nervousness, that’s fine. I did. I was concerned, so I carried on an empty chamber for a month or so, until I realized that in that month my finger had never come anywhere near the trigger. Then I grew up, put a round in the chamber, and never looked back.
As far as your “it only takes half a second” to rack your slide, I’ll say this: I hate to use him as an example because he’s such a horrible example for so many other things, but you think George Zimmerman had the time or ability to rack the slide?
As far as training levels, and holster types, my answer would be “it varies.” If they’ve been carrying for 10 years or more, I would assume they have some training, but I don’t know how much. But they all started at zero. For holsters, I know there’s a couple Crossbreeds, a Comp-tac, and at least one Remora.
Now, let me retract my first statement. If you want to carry without a round in the chamber, that’s fine. I think you’re wrong, but it’s your choice. If you want to explain why you do, that’s also fine. But the moment you start telling me or anyone else that we’re doing it wrong, you can take the proverbial long walk off a short pier.
For the record, my carry weapons are occasionally a Springfield XDm 3.8 in .40 (hey look, striker-fired and grip safety!), and the majority of the time a SIG P238 (hey look, SAO, cocked and locked, manual safety!).
Glocks without this addition have worked great for militaries, civilians and police. Yeah, a jagoff has an ND once in a while but it’s easy to blame the gun when the alternative is blaming the jagoff.
You make a good point. I can’t get online without reading of some police officer accidently discharging his Glock while reholstering at the range. The report in the MSM says something like ,”gun malfunctions” or “injury caused by malfunctioning pistol.” People understand that if there is a round in the chamber of a Glock, the trigger is depressed, and the gun does anything but go BOOM… Then and only then did the weapon malfunction. The Glock performed exactly as it was designed to perform. What people miss yet history will remember is that the flaw in Glock pistols is assuming user error will not occur. It will occur and every time it does (especially if innocents are hurt) you come a step closer to increased regulation or a ban. Glocks are excellent pistols but are designed for professional soldiers carrying in hard, external, holsters, not the Uncle Mike’s neoprene appendix holster or flopping leather speed holster on a dress belt. Why is this so hard to grasp? The data is becoming overwhelming. What have I wrote that isn’t true?
We get it… You’re not a Glock fan and think they are a poor choice for CCW. Unfortunately all of the Glock owners out there seem to prove you wrong. If ND’s were so endemic among the Glock crown I think we would hear about it all the time. Until you can provide cold, hard data your argument seems to be base on supposition and bias. I don’t own a Glock, but if someone gave me one; I would carry it daily with a round in the chamber.
A man just had his concealed pistol discharge in a church yesterday. It happened when he sat down. It made national news. TRY to find out what pistol he had through the media or normal channels. I’ll be waiting….. Still waiting….. You simply don’t know and neither do I. The average person will never take the time to investigate the data nessasary to find out. Additionally, Glock USA will pay him atleast 500,000 to sign a non joindr release so he can’t speak to the press. Google it if you think I’m lying. Finally, your safety was my primary interest in posting this information. If you’d like to carry a Glock with a chambered round by all means do it. But don’t say the data isn’t there to support these facts. Insults against and dangerous loyalty to any product will alert thinking men as to who is telling the truth.
Wait. If you don’t know what kind it is and neither do I, then how do you know it’s a GLOCK? How the hell do you say “I don’t know” and then use that as an example to support your case? That makes no sense.
Sidenote: Don’t cite a specific example and then tell us to Google it. Cite the example, and give us a link. Don’t be lazy.
Oh, and while we’re on the subject, the guy’s gun was in his front pants pocket. This is not a “GLOCK/not-GLOCK” example, this is a “Don’t pocket carry without a holster, numbnuts” example.
Seriously man, listen to yourself. I get it, I really do, you’re anti-Glock. Did you accidentally shoot yourself in the thigh? Do you have a ND story you want to share with all of us? Are you a Springfield man?
In all honesty; I do not believe you have the data to support your claims. I’m not a Glock fan boy; I prefer 1911’s myself. I d,o however, trust enough in Glocks and my own capabilities to carry one. Round in the chamber and all. Besides being lazy and not citing your examples; where do you have all this inside info that Glock will drop big time money on every ND that happens?
Wait a minute… Were you the guy in the church? What Glock were you carrying?
This is just so stupid.
If you don’t want a handgun that is able to be shot the instant you pull the trigger, then do NOT buy a Glock. It’s that simple.
So we’re talking carry gun. What’s a safety?
As a range item having unnecessary and odd controls added don’t really help anyone.
I’m not advocating for this product… But it’s clear some of you don’t understand the purpose, so let’s clear that up.
The purpose is to make reholstering safer. Nothing else (even though they call it the sure-DRAW, that’s a little misleading), reholstering is the only time you’d really use this. It’s possible that something, like an article of clothing, could get snagged on the trigger while reholstering. It has happened to people, don’t pretend it can’t… You can’t always pay 110% of your attention to making sure your holster is clear, and it has nothing to do with remembering to keep your finger off the trigger.
The idea isn’t new, for example some people who use hammer fired DA/SA handguns place their thumbs on the back of their hammers while reholstering to ensure that not only did they remember to decock but if something snags the trigger they’ll notice and be able to stop before an ND can occur.
You draw as quickly as you are able, you reholster, VERY slowly, watching it back in the holster and keeping your trigger finger far away from the trigger. That’s how it is done.
There is no need to reholster quickly.
Looks like it would increase the chance of discharging with your thumb in the way of the slide. That would hurt.
Not really. I’ll have a video on this in the Digest tonight.
I actually like the concept, even if the execution is a little bit ugly. I don’t think the trigger finger is the be-all-end-all when it comes to AD/NDs in Glock/S&W/XD/Etc. type trigger systems.
It is not impossible for a foreign object, other than the index finger, to protrude into the trigger guard or depress the trigger when operating such firearms outside the sterile confines of a gun range. I myself have felt like something just wasn’t quite right when re-holstering a similar firearm, only to look down and see something foreign beginning to make it’s way into the trigger guard, e.g. a peice of my cover garment, etc. Gladly I noticed something was not right and reversed and restarted the process rather than forcing the firearm into the holster, but I can see how under stress or hurry such an occurrence could result in a discharge. I have even seen some accounts of worn out leather holsters getting floppy and having a tab of leather eventually protrude into the trigger guard causing a discharge upon re-holstering .
To mitigate the risk of that ever happening to me, I make sure I always actively concentrate on actually watching (with my eyes) my firearm go into the holster so that I am absolutely sure nothing is pressing the trigger as it is going into the holster. However, I know that I can’t control every variable in every possible situation, so I now favor a firearm with some type of active safety (e.g. Ruger SR9 series, which have a safety that is easy to reach and low profile enough to keep from accidentally disengaging like S&W M&P series safeties tend to do), or some additional passive safety like the long DA first trigger pull on Sig and Beretta pistols. That’s not to say that a safety like the Sure-Draw wouldn’t be better, in fact it might actually be, but I just haven’t ever used such a safety system.
But I know it would give me extra piece of mind knowing I could block the firearm from firing during the holstering process without compromising trigger consistency or having to worry about actually deactivating a safety after the draw in a defensive situation. I just hope that subsequent generations of this and similar devices are more stream lined and less obtrusive, as well as perhaps more ergonomic.
One thing is for sure in my mind, the idea of using that kind of safety on the draw is completely out. I’ll let someone else try and refine that technique.
The name is ridiculously misleading. This is used when holstering, not on the draw or any other time.
Precisely!
It’d be better if they renamed it to something like “Tuck-Safe” or “Holster-Safe”
BTW. Those suggestions are not free advice if “Sure-Draw” agents are watching this space, but I’d be glad to sell them to you.
Given the applicability to AIWB carry, I’m claiming prior art on “Nut-Safe”, “Junk-Safe” and “Package-Safe”…
Not only no, but HELL no! Have run Glocks for 17 years now without a single AD/ND.
Arent’ you supposed to draw with a fully proper grip on the pistol? Meaning a grip where your thumb is most certainly not on the back of the slide?
Despite the stupid name, this has nothing to do with drawing. It’s about reholstering without shooting yourself in the leg, because some people are incapable of doing it on their own.
So instead of a dreamcatcher it’s a Darwin-catcher?
That’s a bit pejorative, Matt. When I’m returning a light-LEM HK (5lb trigger) to an AIWB holster, it’s not that I’m incapable of doing it on my own. I could certainly stare down my pants for a few seconds, peering into the holster, then gather up cover garment etc and holster (slowly!) without thumb on hammer. However, I’m convinced that it’s safe to holster more quickly, without an extensive visual survey of my holster, if I keep the thumb on the hammer. Why wouldn’t a Glock shooter want the same?
You may not be aware, but this device is quite possibly a copy of the “Gadget” concept developed by Todd Louis Green over at pistol-forum.com. You might want to check out some of the discussions in this sub-forum:
http://pistol-forum.com/forumdisplay.php?17-Holsters-Accessories-and-EDC-Gear
Fair enough.
What manner of tomfoolery is this?
Or… you could just buy a pistol that doesn’t require such a device. Heck, if you’re this careless on your draw/holstering technique, then just buy a HK P7M8/PSP/P7M10/P7M13 and have one of the safest pistols around.
That being said, I have no problem holstering my pistols with my booger hook off the bang switch. And I’d never consider carrying a pistol without a round in the chamber, unless I somehow inherited some pre-1900 antique revolver that wasn’t drop safe.
Grip safety or no grip safety is not important. What is important is that TTAG commentators learn to use POPULACE instead of POPULOUS when referring to our fellow citizens.
You’re in for it now, friend… the Wounded Feelings Brigade is gonna have you for dinner.
“[Firearms] Used properly you can’t ND your femoral artery or (for fans of appendix carry) endanger your genetic legacy.”
Esta muy estupido!
Nice. Accidentally shoot someone and break your thumb off too.
You won’t break your thumb. You’d barely feel it.
Let’s see the Glock was supposed to be Wunderkind of all pistols and be really safe. Now I get to put my thumb in the way, awkward, makes it difficult to draw and I really don’t want my thumb in the way if the thing was to fire while I’m busy trying to figure out how to operate the thing (wax on: wax off). The opposable thumb is one key that separates us from lower life forms. Is the training and operation now so complicated that we are now losing these abilities. Proper training and Keep your digits off the trigger would seem to be the simple and most sound solution. I can see the report now as the cop shoots himself trying to perform the proper hold/draw/squeeze with his thumb balanced against the back of a pistol. The thumb is supposed to wrap around the grip and give you a proper/safe hold. I regard the Douglas Adams quote as the best answer to this solution in search of a problem.
I have to agree with a couple folks above-
why make it more complicated than necessary?
Keep your finger off the trigger until ready to shoot.
Reholster slooowwwllyyy.
It seems to me the Grebner ND was due to a habit pattern of trying to put his gun away hastily while getting ready for next timed shot. I’ve heard of and read stories of similar range habits that got cops in trouble when those habits kicked in during real world shootings.
I’m interested in hearing from those who have been in a real gun-fight –
how often are you really going to need to holster your gun in a rush?
From what I’ve been taught and read you most likely would be in low ready looking around keeping the weapon pointed in a safe direction while moving to cover, etc. When all is safe, REALLY safe, then you would want to stow the weapon. Sloowwwllly.
IN re the guy who caught his holster on his trigger- well, I guess it should go without saying you keep your gear clean and snag free.
And finally, If you are worried about blowing body parts off:
a. dont carry that way, or
b. use a different gun with as many safeties as you need
c. carry israeli style with empty chamber.
d. dont carry at all.
There is no room left for the electronic thingy that keeps it from being shot by anyone but the owner!
I saw this in a Bond movie, it works every time.