TexasCHLforum.com

Interesting that the story mentioned that the shooter/victim carried a Glock [which has no safety] and that Ohio was an Open Carry State.
They also didn't mention if he had his handgun in a holster. Of course this is from the NY Daily News, it is to be expected.
Fortunately his wound wasn't too serious.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nationa ... -1.2202960

I can't see how he would manage it with the pistol in a holster. Though the line "This is what happens when you come into a chicken restaurant cocked." made me laugh.

Jago668 wrote:I can't see how he would manage it with the pistol in a holster. Though the line "This is what happens when you come into a chicken restaurant cocked." made me laugh.

This is the mark of professional journalism!

I had to go read the article to see if you were quoting or you adding to it..
Likely I know what you meant,, but how you said it..feeds the anti gun narrative in my opinion. (unintended by you i am sure )

WildBill wrote: the shooter/victim carried a Glock [which has no safety]

As Im sure you and most here know.. The Glock does very much have a safety,, and is very safe, assuming the shooter knows how to operate the weapon and uses it accordingly

GLOCK pistols are equipped with the “Safe Action”® System, a fully automatic safety system consisting of three passive, independently oper-
ating, mechanical safeties, which sequentially disengage when the trigger is pulled and auto-matically reengage when the trigger is released

https://us.glock.com/technology/safe-action

No that is not a manual lever operated safety, but a very effective safety it is, when there is a trained operator handling the pistol.
Idiot proof no..but every time they build one of those, a smarter idiot is born it seems.

E.Marquez wrote:I had to go read the article to see if you were quoting or you adding to it..
Likely I know what you meant,, but how you said it..feeds the anti gun narrative in my opinion. (unintended by you i am sure )

WildBill wrote: the shooter/victim carried a Glock [which has no safety]

As Im sure you and most here know.. The Glock does very much have a safety,, and is very safe, assuming the shooter knows how to operate the weapon and uses it accordingly

GLOCK pistols are equipped with the “Safe Action”® System, a fully automatic safety system consisting of three passive, independently oper-
ating, mechanical safeties, which sequentially disengage when the trigger is pulled and auto-matically reengage when the trigger is released

https://us.glock.com/technology/safe-action

No that is not a manual lever operated safety, but a very effective safety it is, when there is a trained operator handling the pistol.
Idiot proof no..but every time they build one of those, a smarter idiot is born it seems.

The remark about the safety was not mine - of course I know better, but it's irrelevant to what happened. Perhaps I should have directly quoted the article.

This is what happens when you come into a chicken restaurant cocked.

An Ohio man accidentally shot himself in a Chick-fil-A while pulling up his pants in the bathroom Tuesday afternoon, police said.

The 45-year-old man was licensed to carry the concealed Glock pistol that fired one shot, grazing his leg, but the weapon did not have a safety, the Journal-News reported.

WildBill wrote:Interesting that the story mentioned that the shooter/victim carried a Glock [which has no safety] and that Ohio was an Open Carry State.
They also didn't mention if he had his handgun in a holster. Of course this is from the NY Daily News, it is to be expected.
Fortunately his wound wasn't too serious.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nationa ... -1.2202960

What a place to Experiance "Glock Leg"!

WildBill wrote: The remark about the safety was not mine - of course I know better,

Than I apologize I read the article and missed that it stated the glock did not have a safety ..It did not make sense to me that YOU said that, but it was my impression. Thank you for clearing that up.

E.Marquez wrote:

WildBill wrote: The remark about the safety was not mine - of course I know better,

Than I apologize I read the article and missed that it stated the glock did not have a safety ..It did not make sense to me that YOU said that, but it was my impression. Thank you for clearing that up.

Since I was paraphrasing the article, I can see how you got confused. No offense taken.

Non-gun people do not understand the idea of a safety on the trigger. They only think it is a safety if it is a separate button/lever. Something designed to only prevent discharges due to impacts and such is beyond their thinking.

I don't really see the point of calling it a safety myself, but I guess it does perform a safety function even if not a traditional safety latch.

The article states it went off as he was pulling his "pants up"...it doesn't say as he was putting the pistol back in. If the pulling of the pants upward pulled the trigger...then he already had the gun positioned somehow? Stuck in the waist of his underwear?