[wobblie]

i have always been critical of striker pistols without a safety.. Not so much the Glock but the fully cocked striker of the VP9 from HK. These are single-action-no-safety guns and inherently unsafe, or so I thought. Now i’ve discovered an old video of The Master saying, toward the end and referring to the Browning Hi Power,that if the safety is difficult to use just don’t bother. Condition Zero is just fine. Now i’m confused. I thought I was well read concerning Cooper but this is new to me.

 

[mikegalway]

I know I'm surprised .

 

[zChambers]

He was saying that if he had a double action pistol, he would carry it in condition zero because firearms don't shoot themselves (and I guess he doesn't like double action triggers?).

 

[Ohio]

i have always been critical of striker pistols without a safety.. Not so much the Glock but the fully cocked striker of the VP9 from HK. These are single-action-no-safety guns and inherently unsafe, or so I thought. Now i’ve discovered an old video of The Master saying, toward the end and referring to the Browning Hi Power,that if the safety is difficult to use just don’t bother. Condition Zero is just fine. Now i’m confused. I thought I was well read concerning Cooper but this is new to me.

Ok, I’m not trying to start a fight, but please explain to me why a Glock, with all the know issues with their trigger safety, is safer then a VP9. I’ve never heard of, or read about, VP9 safety issues and I currently carry the VP9SK. And you might want to look at the VP9 again....the trigger has a “safety” that must be depressed to fire ala Glock.

In the past I always carried a pistol with a hammer (HK LEM) or a 1911. The VP9 was the first and only striker fire pistol I’ve owned, and then only because it was an HK, excellent quality and reliability.

Please enlighten me. Again, not trying start anything but just have not heard of the issue you mention.

 

[Cop_Out]

Thanks for posting.

 

[Ohio]

I know I’ve read a lot of posts where guys carrying 1911’s get all excited about the thumb safety being disengaged while in the holster. I always thought that was a little over exaggerated concern because you still had the grip safety to engage.

Cooper’s logic goes back to the “Blackhawk Down” movie where the “operator” so elegantly explained to the officer that “this is my safety” and extending his trigger finger.

Not sure I would follow Cooper’s advice, but there are likely more advanced shooters who would have no issue carrying a Hi Power with the thumb safety off.

 

[razorbacker]

Wait, condition 0, 1, 2, or 3? Ok, I'm ready.
opcorn:

 

[Au Jus in Bello]

HO-LEE-****! :jawdrop: A "Condition Zero" meets "Are Glocks inherently unsafe" thread? This should go nuclear. It's like when Abbott and Costello met Frankenstein.

Must to get the corn that POPS... :brb:

 

[Ohio]

I just asked a simple question!

 

[wobblie]

Ok, I’m not trying to start a fight, but please explain to me why a Glock, with all the know issues with their trigger safety, is safer then a VP9. I’ve never heard of, or read about, VP9 safety issues and I currently carry the VP9SK. And you might want to look at the VP9 again....the trigger has a “safety” that must be depressed to fire ala Glock.

In the past I always carried a pistol with a hammer (HK LEM) or a 1911. The VP9 was the first and only striker fire pistol I’ve owned, and then only because it was an HK, excellent quality and reliability.

Please enlighten me. Again, not trying start anything but just have not heard of the issue you mention.

If you don’t want to start a fight don’t start one. I do not care about YOU or YOUR VP9. I stated I was uncomfortable with the VP9 because it seemed less than safe to ME. The Glock striker is half-cock with a slight double action pull, the HK striker is fully cocked. Cooper wrote disparagingly of the trigger dingus “safety” and didn’t consider it a proper safety. That is why I found the video startling.

 

[ZoidMeister]

My understanding is that most striker fire guns are not fully cöcked when a round is chambered.

The shooter must overcome the final tension on the spring to shoot. This is considered part of the guns "safety."

 

[Ohio]

If you don’t want to start a fight don’t start one. I do not care about YOU or YOUR VP9. I stated I was uncomfortable with the VP9 because it seemed less than safe to ME. The Glock striker is half-cock with a slight double action pull, the HK striker is fully cocked. Cooper wrote disparagingly of the trigger dingus “safety” and didn’t consider it a proper safety. That is why I found the video startling.

Well, that didn’t go well....did it.

I was actually interested in the information on VP9’s not safe. Just asking for more.

 

[ZoidMeister]

I know I’ve read a lot of posts where guys carrying 1911’s get all excited about the thumb safety being disengaged while in the holster. I always thought that was a little over exaggerated concern because you still had the grip safety to engage.

Cooper’s logic goes back to the “Blackhawk Down” movie where the “operator” so elegantly explained to the officer that “this is my safety” and extending his trigger finger.

Not sure I would follow Cooper’s advice, but there are likely more advanced shooters who would have no issue carrying a Hi Power with the thumb safety off.

The reason that is disconcerting is that most rely on the thumb safety to be there and locked. They will pull the weapon and immediately place finger on the trigger. In that position, the gun is ready to fire if the thumb safety managed to get clicked off inadvertently.

This is the one advantage I see in an ambi safety for right handed shooters. You can always verify the thumb safety is engaged when carrying.

Z

 

[Ohio]

The reason that is disconcerting is that most rely on the thumb safety to be there and locked. They will pull the weapon and immediately place finger on the trigger. In that position, the gun is ready to fire if the thumb safety managed to get clicked off inadvertently.

This is the one advantage I see in an ambi safety for right handed shooters. You can always verify the thumb safety is engaged when carrying.

Z

I can see that. When I carried a 1911 I tended to disengage the thumb safety before my finger went to the trigger. Different strokes...so they say.

I’m going to be carrying a 1911 again, so I need to retrain myself.

 

[Spokes]

The reason that is disconcerting is that most rely on the thumb safety to be there and locked. They will pull the weapon and immediately place finger on the trigger. In that position, the gun is ready to fire if the thumb safety managed to get clicked off inadvertently.

This is the one advantage I see in an ambi safety for right handed shooters. You can always verify the thumb safety is engaged when carrying.

Z

Thanks I never thought of that. Now I have to put the ambie safety's back on all my Baers...

 

[ZoidMeister]

Thanks I never thought of that. Now I have to put the ambie safety's back on all my Baers...

It is a distinct condition check. I've had thumb safeties migrate off more often than I would expect. I can easily check those guns with a ambi.

 

[Au Jus in Bello]

If you don’t want to start a fight don’t start one. I do not care about YOU or YOUR VP9.

Ohio seems to me to be asking an honest and politely worded question. We can talk to each other civilly.

I stated I was uncomfortable with the VP9 because it seemed less than safe to ME. The Glock striker is half-cock with a slight double action pull, the HK striker is fully cocked.

I know shooters who agree with you here because, yes, the HK is fully cocked whereas technically the Glock isn't, and stock also has a lighter trigger pull than Glock.

Cooper wrote disparagingly of the trigger dingus “safety” and didn’t consider it a proper safety....

Cooper -- like many -- didn't understand the Glock trigger "safety"; it isn't a safety at all (in the traditional sense), it's a drop-safe device in the event of a muzzle-up landing, just like the grip safety on a 1911.

 

[Au Jus in Bello]

My understanding is that most striker fire guns are not fully cöcked when a round is chambered.

The shooter must overcome the final tension on the spring to shoot. This is considered part of the guns "safety."

This is true on Glocks, but many striker-fired pistols forgo this and when charged are at full striker tension.

Glock not being so is in part why its design technically is considered double-action, but for practical purposes we all know that a mostly cocked striker is mechanically and from the end user experience very different from a true double action, especially with Glock's comparatively much shorter and lighter pull.

 

[Au Jus in Bello]

The reason that is disconcerting is that most rely on the thumb safety to be there and locked. They will pull the weapon and immediately place finger on the trigger. In that position, the gun is ready to fire if the thumb safety managed to get clicked off inadvertently...

I hope that most aren't doing that -- it's a major violation of the third cardinal rule of safe firearms handling: keep you're finger off the trigger until you're on target and ready to fire.

Coming out of the holster with finger on the trigger is all kinds of wrong whether the manual safety is engaged or not.

 

[mikegalway]

He was saying that if he had a double action pistol, he would carry it in condition zero because firearms don't shoot themselves (and I guess he doesn't like double action triggers?).

Cooper said a DA SA pistol was a solution to a non existent problem . I actually like them for carry , especially with the decocker .JMO