OK, here's an example of what I have been talking about ------- hot off the press. Yesterday, an Alabama guy retrieved his Glock pistol from the glove compartment of his truck and as he walked back to his house, he tripped and fell, causing the gun to discharge into his leg. As the guy was calling to wife for help, his young son arrived at the scene and picked-up the pistol. As his wife arrived, the boy inadvertently touched the trigger, shooting his mother in the neck.
In my opinion, this was a totally preventable accident. I am assuming that as the guy tripped, he accidentally pulled the trigger (probably a reflex response), causing the discharge. It does not sound like he intentionally pulled the trigger. Had this Glock had a manual safety, this double tragedy never would have occurred.
You can call the guy dumb, stupid or any name under the sun, the fact remains that this was an accident, pure and simple, that could have been prevented with a simple manual safety ---- the type of safety design feature that has been around for over 100 years, that Glock continues to ignore, at least with respect pistols it sells in the U.S.
This guy sounds like the poster boy for gun safety... not.
First, why did he have a gun free flowing in his glove box, not having any gun, let alone a Glock, in some type of holster like that is asking for it.
Why was he walking around with a loaded gun in his hand, especially with kids around? Why was it pointed at his leg? Why did he not have it in a holster?
Had this Glock had a manual safety, this double tragedy never would have occurred.
Well, not really. Based on the story it does not sound like the guy would have used the manual safety even if it existed on the Glock.