Why are Glocks designed without safeties?Seems dangerous.
Nice b8 m8 I r8 8/8.
>>65339623You're acting like what I wrote isn't the objective truth.
>>65339579it's only dangerous if you're stupid
>>65339707That's the point of safety - to save you from accidental mistakes.
>>65339715Necklickcunt discard ist a normal part of gunownership. It heppans from time to time.
>>65339579What trips me up is the Umarex BB glocks are surprisingly close to the real thing at a glance but features a crossbolt safety on the trigger. Tripped me up first time I tried to shoot one and it didn't work. I guess it's just odd the toy gun has more safety features than the real thing, you'd think it'd be the other way around
theyre meant to be carried in holsters. why do you need a safety if your gun is in a holster?
>>65339883>inb4 fold of clothing (or even just a strand) gets caught while you're putting your unsafe glock into holster
>>65339904>inb4 you forget to put your safety on because you're blind and retarded, so you shoot yourself in the head while playing with your gun because it was "on safe"if you need to rely on a safety, you are exactly the kind of person who cannot be trusted with a gun.
>>65339579>Seems dangerousit is dangerous
>>65339579it rally should have been DA/SA with a decocker
>>65339943da/sa is trash that exists for the incompetent. Single action is superior.
>>65339579It was designed by a European
>>65339715All mistakes are accidental, you retard. An "intentional mistake" is just murder, assault or sabotage.
>>65339955Ok, Jesse. Say hi to The Duke
>>65340010No, they can result from intentional action stemming from lack of (or incorrect) knowledge.
>>65339964So was pictured.
>>65340140Glocks are good though
>>65339920>>65339920>>inb4 you forget to put your safety on because you're blind and retardedso you're an average glock owner?>if you need to rely on a safetyif you need to carry the gun loaded you should be denied medical care when you inevitably glockleg your femoral. see how those statements work?
>>65339579the biggest danger with glocks are the retarded following that deride firearm safety features to pretend they're L337 high speed oper8trs because glock marketing convinced them that saving them 10 pennies on designing and producing a small part is a license to be a badass.
>>65339955well da/sa is good for duty/conceal carry sa is good for target range/competition
>>65339579it is baffling because it’s like if the 1911 didn’t have a thumb safety and people just carried them cocked. seems like a crazy thing to do but glocks are carried like that essentially all the time
>>65339579Glock is designed for perfection.Giving idiots glock leg and getting cops killed for limp-wristing make it more perfect.
>>65340181>so you're an average glock owner?No, I don't own a glock.>if you need to carry the gun loaded you should be denied medical care when you inevitably glockleg your femoral. see how those statements work?Yes, mine are correct, yours are stupid.
>>65339579
>>65339579They can, the Austrians just didn't bother since they carry empty chamber, and Gaston decided the lever in the trigger is good enough, convincing retards almost all over the planet to trust it. There are aftermarkets, too, like Comonolli and RDIH.>>65339943I would like for someone to copy and adapt Walther's design from the P99 to the Glock. But optics cuts would certainly get in the way.
>>65341079>No, I don't own a glock.So you're an average glock owner without a glock?>Yes, mine are correct, yours are stupid.there's nothing more stupid that a strikertard insisting that a safety feature "needs to be relied on" or exists as a substitute for safe handling, yet you post this drivel in every related thread.
>>65341230I'm not a strikerfag. This just gets funnier.Safeties suck ass and are for retards. Retards shouldn't have guns in the first place.
