Not sure why the naysayers are so passionate about what other people want on their guns. As stated in the video it's not a replacement for safe handling activities but I can definitely see some validity for those that would want this to add another aspect to their handling practice. If it works for them, why do you care?
Glock striker control device - the gadget
- Thread starter 901Memphis
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: JDM396
If it works for them, why do you care?
I carry a gun, and I don't. You don't carry, and you do.
If it works for them, why do you care?
I carry a gun, and I don't. You don't carry, and you do.
Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: JDM396
If it works for them, why do you care?
I carry a gun, and I don't. You don't carry, and you do.
Not sure what you are babbling about here. If you're trying to say I don't carry, well I'll let you think that if it makes you feel better?
Back to my point though, people carry in all sorts of ways, I don't see how this is unsafe. The notion that it would promote unsafe practices is coulda, shoulda, woulda. What we DO know is that some individuals, even highly trained ones, have had issues with snags inside the trigger guard with platforms like Glock. Now I know those on their pedestal will talk about how safe they are with their finger on the trigger. However, the best mentality to have IMO, as given by many instructors worth their salt, is not IF you have an ND, but when.
Originally Posted By: JDM396
If it works for them, why do you care?
I carry a gun, and I don't. You don't carry, and you do.
Not sure what you are babbling about here. If you're trying to say I don't carry, well I'll let you think that if it makes you feel better?
Back to my point though, people carry in all sorts of ways, I don't see how this is unsafe. The notion that it would promote unsafe practices is coulda, shoulda, woulda. What we DO know is that some individuals, even highly trained ones, have had issues with snags inside the trigger guard with platforms like Glock. Now I know those on their pedestal will talk about how safe they are with their finger on the trigger. However, the best mentality to have IMO, as given by many instructors worth their salt, is not IF you have an ND, but when.
Originally Posted By: JDM396
However, the best mentality to have IMO, as given by many instructors worth their salt, is not IF you have an ND, but when.
That's nothing but a load of pure B.S. to make people feel better who have had one. Instructors are PAID by the same people they're selling this nonsense to. You don't bite the hand that feeds you. You stroke it. They do that well.
However, the best mentality to have IMO, as given by many instructors worth their salt, is not IF you have an ND, but when.
That's nothing but a load of pure B.S. to make people feel better who have had one. Instructors are PAID by the same people they're selling this nonsense to. You don't bite the hand that feeds you. You stroke it. They do that well.
I carry a hammer fired DA/SA and I think it's a good idea.
Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: JDM396
However, the best mentality to have IMO, as given by many instructors worth their salt, is not IF you have an ND, but when.
That's nothing but a load of pure B.S. to make people feel better who have had one. Instructors are PAID by the same people they're selling this nonsense to. You don't bite the hand that feeds you. You stroke it. They do that well.
No clarification on you telling me I apparently don't carry?
To your frustration with other people's philosophy, it has nothing to with making people feel better. Let's try to look at this outside of a superficial manner. Namely, it's a preventative approach and it has more to do with a mindset of not becoming complacent and expecting human error. I've heard several individuals employ this philosophy. If you believe yourself to be above all possibilities of having an ND, then more power to you.
I still must ask, what is your problem if someone wants to put this on the back of their Glock? It's their money, their method of carry practice.
Originally Posted By: JDM396
However, the best mentality to have IMO, as given by many instructors worth their salt, is not IF you have an ND, but when.
That's nothing but a load of pure B.S. to make people feel better who have had one. Instructors are PAID by the same people they're selling this nonsense to. You don't bite the hand that feeds you. You stroke it. They do that well.
No clarification on you telling me I apparently don't carry?
To your frustration with other people's philosophy, it has nothing to with making people feel better. Let's try to look at this outside of a superficial manner. Namely, it's a preventative approach and it has more to do with a mindset of not becoming complacent and expecting human error. I've heard several individuals employ this philosophy. If you believe yourself to be above all possibilities of having an ND, then more power to you.
I still must ask, what is your problem if someone wants to put this on the back of their Glock? It's their money, their method of carry practice.
JHZR2
Staff member
Originally Posted By: hatt
My usually carry gun is a S&W J frame. If it's convenient to carry OWB sometimes I carry a compact Glock.
And to that Ill give a
S&W 317 has been a favorite of mine forever. Not a lot of punch (Im sure you carry one with more punch), but I just love shooting it.
My usually carry gun is a S&W J frame. If it's convenient to carry OWB sometimes I carry a compact Glock.
And to that Ill give a
S&W 317 has been a favorite of mine forever. Not a lot of punch (Im sure you carry one with more punch), but I just love shooting it.
Originally Posted By: JDM396
I still must ask, what is your problem if someone wants to put this on the back of their Glock? It's their money......
I agree, it's their money. If they choose to waste it, and in the process think it will produce some false form of a plateau of safety, I have no problem with it or them. Any more than I do with anyone who parts with money for a product, thinking it's going to deliver something it doesn't. Saturday morning television....... and garage sale tables throughout suburbia, are full of such products. And the wheels on the bus go round and round.
I still must ask, what is your problem if someone wants to put this on the back of their Glock? It's their money......
I agree, it's their money. If they choose to waste it, and in the process think it will produce some false form of a plateau of safety, I have no problem with it or them. Any more than I do with anyone who parts with money for a product, thinking it's going to deliver something it doesn't. Saturday morning television....... and garage sale tables throughout suburbia, are full of such products. And the wheels on the bus go round and round.
Originally Posted By: JDM396
If you believe yourself to be above all possibilities of having an ND, then more power to you.
I'm 64 and have been handling firearms since I was 10. Carrying daily since 1991. No A.D.'s EVER. Never even close. I know people older than I who can say much the same thing. This whole idiotic concept of, "not if but when", is pure B.S. It's a scare tactic, nothing more. Something these "trainers" tell people to drum up business. (They'll teach you how not to have one). It works because here you are parroting it. And buying into it hook, line, and sinker.
I put shooters who "need a safety" into the same category as pilots who need an auto pilot. I don't want to be near either.
If you believe yourself to be above all possibilities of having an ND, then more power to you.
I'm 64 and have been handling firearms since I was 10. Carrying daily since 1991. No A.D.'s EVER. Never even close. I know people older than I who can say much the same thing. This whole idiotic concept of, "not if but when", is pure B.S. It's a scare tactic, nothing more. Something these "trainers" tell people to drum up business. (They'll teach you how not to have one). It works because here you are parroting it. And buying into it hook, line, and sinker.
I put shooters who "need a safety" into the same category as pilots who need an auto pilot. I don't want to be near either.
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Originally Posted By: hatt
My usually carry gun is a S&W J frame. If it's convenient to carry OWB sometimes I carry a compact Glock.
And to that Ill give a
S&W 317 has been a favorite of mine forever. Not a lot of punch (Im sure you carry one with more punch), but I just love shooting it.
Mine's a.38. 8 rounds of .22 is a whole lot better than harsh words!
Originally Posted By: hatt
My usually carry gun is a S&W J frame. If it's convenient to carry OWB sometimes I carry a compact Glock.
And to that Ill give a
S&W 317 has been a favorite of mine forever. Not a lot of punch (Im sure you carry one with more punch), but I just love shooting it.
Mine's a.38. 8 rounds of .22 is a whole lot better than harsh words!
Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: JDM396
If you believe yourself to be above all possibilities of having an ND, then more power to you.
I'm 64 and have been handling firearms since I was 10. Carrying daily since 1991. No A.D.'s EVER. Never even close. I know people older than I who can say much the same thing. This whole idiotic concept of, "not if but when", is pure B.S. It's a scare tactic, nothing more. Something these "trainers" tell people to drum up business. (They'll teach you how not to have one). It works because here you are parroting it. And buying into it hook, line, and sinker.
I put shooters who "need a safety" into the same category as pilots who need an auto pilot. I don't want to be near either.
Trust me, I've met the "I know it all" types like yourself and taken classes/shot matches with them.... "I've been handling firearms since I was 4 months old blah blah." You always know who's the insecure one because they will spout off their experience first chance they get. Get them out on the range and they are usually novice at best. Naturally, because again, they know everything so they're not open to learning anything. It's too easy to run circles around them at a class or a match.
However, to your assumption, I was never speaking of a safety class or something of the like. So the drum up business theory goes out the window. Some people prepare themselves differently than you, heck they may even use a safety, or a "doohickey" as you call it. You come off as you believe yourself to be perfect and that your way or philosophy is the only way. Hope that's working out for you, and more power to you. I'm much younger than 64, and I'm thankful that along the way, I learned that when it comes to firearms and shooting, there's several choices that work. I don't agree with everything I've seen or been exposed to but I sure don't know what's best for everyone else like some.
Originally Posted By: JDM396
If you believe yourself to be above all possibilities of having an ND, then more power to you.
I'm 64 and have been handling firearms since I was 10. Carrying daily since 1991. No A.D.'s EVER. Never even close. I know people older than I who can say much the same thing. This whole idiotic concept of, "not if but when", is pure B.S. It's a scare tactic, nothing more. Something these "trainers" tell people to drum up business. (They'll teach you how not to have one). It works because here you are parroting it. And buying into it hook, line, and sinker.
I put shooters who "need a safety" into the same category as pilots who need an auto pilot. I don't want to be near either.
Trust me, I've met the "I know it all" types like yourself and taken classes/shot matches with them.... "I've been handling firearms since I was 4 months old blah blah." You always know who's the insecure one because they will spout off their experience first chance they get. Get them out on the range and they are usually novice at best. Naturally, because again, they know everything so they're not open to learning anything. It's too easy to run circles around them at a class or a match.
However, to your assumption, I was never speaking of a safety class or something of the like. So the drum up business theory goes out the window. Some people prepare themselves differently than you, heck they may even use a safety, or a "doohickey" as you call it. You come off as you believe yourself to be perfect and that your way or philosophy is the only way. Hope that's working out for you, and more power to you. I'm much younger than 64, and I'm thankful that along the way, I learned that when it comes to firearms and shooting, there's several choices that work. I don't agree with everything I've seen or been exposed to but I sure don't know what's best for everyone else like some.
People will decided how they want to carry and how many "safety features" their guns have. Nobody but them should decide or try to say they are wrong for doing so. When I bought a S&W Shield 9mm I purposely bought the model with the thumb safety ... because I like a safety on a carry gun, period. I'm sure some "purest" is gonna back mouth that decision because it might "cost me my life" if I have to flick the safety off while I'm simultaneously drawing the pistol. Whatever, worry about yourself.
Originally Posted By: JDM396
Trust me, I've met the "I know it all" types like yourself and taken classes/shot matches with them....
You are the one who believes EVERYONE will have a ND in a matter of time, and you call me the "know it all". I suppose you can now add clairvoyance to your list of attributes. You're turning into a real piece of work right before our eyes, aren't you? You must be related to this guy. Perhaps you should sell him on your wonderful new do dad.
Trust me, I've met the "I know it all" types like yourself and taken classes/shot matches with them....
You are the one who believes EVERYONE will have a ND in a matter of time, and you call me the "know it all". I suppose you can now add clairvoyance to your list of attributes. You're turning into a real piece of work right before our eyes, aren't you? You must be related to this guy. Perhaps you should sell him on your wonderful new do dad.
Originally Posted By: JDM396
Some people prepare themselves differently than you,.........
If you rely on a safety, you're not "prepared" at all. Have you even read the most basic rules of firearms safety? Because from the way you've been babbling here, paragraph after paragraph, it's becoming painfully obvious you have not.
Some people prepare themselves differently than you,.........
If you rely on a safety, you're not "prepared" at all. Have you even read the most basic rules of firearms safety? Because from the way you've been babbling here, paragraph after paragraph, it's becoming painfully obvious you have not.
Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: JDM396
Trust me, I've met the "I know it all" types like yourself and taken classes/shot matches with them....
You are the one who believes EVERYONE will have a ND in a matter of time, and you call me the "know it all". I suppose you can now add clairvoyance to your list of attributes. You're turning into a real piece of work right before our eyes, aren't you? You must be related to this guy. Perhaps you should sell him on your wonderful new do dad.
Ad Hominem doesn't help your case.
I'm just relaying observance to an attitude I've seen before. Related to this guy? That doesn't even make sense lol. This guy probably NEVER had an ND.... until he did. He probably would tell you his firearms experience quite handily too. Sound familiar?
Point STILL remains, that some people go about safety in several ways. If they cater to the basic rules, (in which nothing here stated compromises the basic rules of firearm safety) then again, what is your problem? People add levels of safety to their carry method all the time. This product isn't dangerous and if someone wants one, so be it.
Originally Posted By: JDM396
Trust me, I've met the "I know it all" types like yourself and taken classes/shot matches with them....
You are the one who believes EVERYONE will have a ND in a matter of time, and you call me the "know it all". I suppose you can now add clairvoyance to your list of attributes. You're turning into a real piece of work right before our eyes, aren't you? You must be related to this guy. Perhaps you should sell him on your wonderful new do dad.
Ad Hominem doesn't help your case.
I'm just relaying observance to an attitude I've seen before. Related to this guy? That doesn't even make sense lol. This guy probably NEVER had an ND.... until he did. He probably would tell you his firearms experience quite handily too. Sound familiar?
Point STILL remains, that some people go about safety in several ways. If they cater to the basic rules, (in which nothing here stated compromises the basic rules of firearm safety) then again, what is your problem? People add levels of safety to their carry method all the time. This product isn't dangerous and if someone wants one, so be it.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: JDM396
Some people prepare themselves differently than you,.........
If you rely on a safety, you're not "prepared" at all. Have you even read the most basic rules of firearms safety? Because from the way you've been babbling here, paragraph after paragraph, it's becoming painfully obvious you have not.
It's interesting that you believe you know so much about my carry habits. You stated earlier that I didn't carry at all, dunno where that came from. Here you're ranting about how I supposedly don't know the basics of safety. Just because I disagree with you? Stunning logic. You're kind of proving my point about "know it all" mentality. FWIW, though, learned the basics at a very young age. How does acknowledging the habits of other people's safety philosophy compromise MY standards? Hint: It doesn't
You need to calm down my friend and employ some reading comprehension. Didn't say "I" rely on a safety now did I? I said others do, and it works for them. Granted I do carry 1911 in certain situations, so I do carry in the safest manner I see fit, and that's condition 1. Most other platforms that I carry have no external safety. They do however have internal ones, like almost every modern firearm I can think of.
Originally Posted By: JDM396
Some people prepare themselves differently than you,.........
If you rely on a safety, you're not "prepared" at all. Have you even read the most basic rules of firearms safety? Because from the way you've been babbling here, paragraph after paragraph, it's becoming painfully obvious you have not.
It's interesting that you believe you know so much about my carry habits. You stated earlier that I didn't carry at all, dunno where that came from. Here you're ranting about how I supposedly don't know the basics of safety. Just because I disagree with you? Stunning logic. You're kind of proving my point about "know it all" mentality. FWIW, though, learned the basics at a very young age. How does acknowledging the habits of other people's safety philosophy compromise MY standards? Hint: It doesn't
You need to calm down my friend and employ some reading comprehension. Didn't say "I" rely on a safety now did I? I said others do, and it works for them. Granted I do carry 1911 in certain situations, so I do carry in the safest manner I see fit, and that's condition 1. Most other platforms that I carry have no external safety. They do however have internal ones, like almost every modern firearm I can think of.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: JDM396
How does acknowledging the habits of other people's safety philosophy compromise MY standards?
Here is a hint for you. They're called negligent discharges for a very good reason. They require negligence to make them occur. Just like the fool in the video. What was he doing with live ammunition in a classroom in the first place? Everything that happened after that was all but assured, because he's an idiot. No device on Earth is going to help someone like that. And there are plenty of them out there. He's "a trained law enforcement official", who carries all the time. So what? It doesn't change the obvious fact he's a complete idiot every time he touches a weapon. That he proved.
If you are not negligent in the manner of how you handle a firearm every time you touch one, (it doesn't matter if you carry one or not), you will NEVER have one. It really is that simple. All of your carrying on about this or that, in some half baked attempt to defend your logic through all of this is meaningless. If you don't trust yourself to handle a weapon in a manner that does not constitute even the slightest form of negligence, in any way, shape, or form, then you should not touch one. And if you want, need, or require some silly add on device, in order to increase your peace of mind while doing so, the same applies. You are either negligent, or you are not.
Perhaps this will help you:
neg·li·gence
noun
noun: negligence; plural noun: negligences
failure to take proper care in doing something.
"some of these accidents are due to negligence"
•Law
failure to use reasonable care, resulting in damage or injury to another.
How does acknowledging the habits of other people's safety philosophy compromise MY standards?
Here is a hint for you. They're called negligent discharges for a very good reason. They require negligence to make them occur. Just like the fool in the video. What was he doing with live ammunition in a classroom in the first place? Everything that happened after that was all but assured, because he's an idiot. No device on Earth is going to help someone like that. And there are plenty of them out there. He's "a trained law enforcement official", who carries all the time. So what? It doesn't change the obvious fact he's a complete idiot every time he touches a weapon. That he proved.
If you are not negligent in the manner of how you handle a firearm every time you touch one, (it doesn't matter if you carry one or not), you will NEVER have one. It really is that simple. All of your carrying on about this or that, in some half baked attempt to defend your logic through all of this is meaningless. If you don't trust yourself to handle a weapon in a manner that does not constitute even the slightest form of negligence, in any way, shape, or form, then you should not touch one. And if you want, need, or require some silly add on device, in order to increase your peace of mind while doing so, the same applies. You are either negligent, or you are not.
Perhaps this will help you:
neg·li·gence
noun
noun: negligence; plural noun: negligences
failure to take proper care in doing something.
"some of these accidents are due to negligence"
•Law
failure to use reasonable care, resulting in damage or injury to another.
Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: JDM396
How does acknowledging the habits of other people's safety philosophy compromise MY standards?
Here is a hint for you. They're called negligent discharges for a very good reason. They require negligence to make them occur. Just like the fool in the video. What was he doing with live ammunition in a classroom in the first place? Everything that happened after that was all but assured, because he's an idiot. No device on Earth is going to help someone like that. And there are plenty of them out there. He's "a trained law enforcement official", who carries all the time. So what? It doesn't change the obvious fact he's a complete idiot every time he touches a weapon. That he proved.
If you are not negligent in the manner of how you handle a firearm every time you touch one, (it doesn't matter if you carry one or not), you will NEVER have one. It really is that simple. All of your carrying on about this or that, in some half baked attempt to defend your logic through all of this is meaningless. If you don't trust yourself to handle a weapon in a manner that does not constitute even the slightest form of negligence, in any way, shape, or form, then you should not touch one. And if you want, need, or require some silly add on device, in order to increase your peace of mind while doing so, the same applies. You are either negligent, or you are not.
Perhaps this will help you:
neg·li·gence
noun
noun: negligence; plural noun: negligences
failure to take proper care in doing something.
"some of these accidents are due to negligence"
•Law
failure to use reasonable care, resulting in damage or injury to another.
Didn't need the hint lol but I'm glad you're up to speed. I'm not sure why you again are making assumptions. I'm fully aware of what ND means, hence my initial ND comment not the "AD" as you were using. This SHOULD be very telling as I was initially using the correct (IMO) terminology. Either way, I'm not really going to follow your red herring of what this individual you posted will or will not do. I don't care. Every scenario/individual is different. What I'm saying, is that I could see this Glock accessory working well with someone, IF THEY CHOOSE TO USE IT.
One thing that surprises me though.... in 64 years.... you've never learned even the most competent of humans can be negligent for a fraction of a second? Or are you just that perfect in your reality?
Originally Posted By: JDM396
How does acknowledging the habits of other people's safety philosophy compromise MY standards?
Here is a hint for you. They're called negligent discharges for a very good reason. They require negligence to make them occur. Just like the fool in the video. What was he doing with live ammunition in a classroom in the first place? Everything that happened after that was all but assured, because he's an idiot. No device on Earth is going to help someone like that. And there are plenty of them out there. He's "a trained law enforcement official", who carries all the time. So what? It doesn't change the obvious fact he's a complete idiot every time he touches a weapon. That he proved.
If you are not negligent in the manner of how you handle a firearm every time you touch one, (it doesn't matter if you carry one or not), you will NEVER have one. It really is that simple. All of your carrying on about this or that, in some half baked attempt to defend your logic through all of this is meaningless. If you don't trust yourself to handle a weapon in a manner that does not constitute even the slightest form of negligence, in any way, shape, or form, then you should not touch one. And if you want, need, or require some silly add on device, in order to increase your peace of mind while doing so, the same applies. You are either negligent, or you are not.
Perhaps this will help you:
neg·li·gence
noun
noun: negligence; plural noun: negligences
failure to take proper care in doing something.
"some of these accidents are due to negligence"
•Law
failure to use reasonable care, resulting in damage or injury to another.
Didn't need the hint lol but I'm glad you're up to speed. I'm not sure why you again are making assumptions. I'm fully aware of what ND means, hence my initial ND comment not the "AD" as you were using. This SHOULD be very telling as I was initially using the correct (IMO) terminology. Either way, I'm not really going to follow your red herring of what this individual you posted will or will not do. I don't care. Every scenario/individual is different. What I'm saying, is that I could see this Glock accessory working well with someone, IF THEY CHOOSE TO USE IT.
One thing that surprises me though.... in 64 years.... you've never learned even the most competent of humans can be negligent for a fraction of a second? Or are you just that perfect in your reality?
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: JDM396
One thing that surprises me though.... in 64 years.... you've never learned even the most competent of humans can be negligent for a fraction of a second?
It only "surprises you" because you are willing to accept some degree of negligence while handling weapons. I don't.
One thing that surprises me though.... in 64 years.... you've never learned even the most competent of humans can be negligent for a fraction of a second?
It only "surprises you" because you are willing to accept some degree of negligence while handling weapons. I don't.
Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: JDM396
One thing that surprises me though.... in 64 years.... you've never learned even the most competent of humans can be negligent for a fraction of a second?
It only "surprises you" because you are willing to accept some degree of negligence while handling weapons. I don't.
Again, reading is fundamental. Bless your heart, what I said doesn't have anything to do with accepting negligence, I just understand that humans aren't perfect, anything can and will happen with firearms, and thus I plan accordingly. Others do too, as they see fit.
In all this hissy fit you've thrown about this thing, you've yet to provide why it's such a problem that others use it?
Originally Posted By: JDM396
One thing that surprises me though.... in 64 years.... you've never learned even the most competent of humans can be negligent for a fraction of a second?
It only "surprises you" because you are willing to accept some degree of negligence while handling weapons. I don't.
Again, reading is fundamental. Bless your heart, what I said doesn't have anything to do with accepting negligence, I just understand that humans aren't perfect, anything can and will happen with firearms, and thus I plan accordingly. Others do too, as they see fit.
In all this hissy fit you've thrown about this thing, you've yet to provide why it's such a problem that others use it?
- Status
