for those who carry glocks

[remington79]

I think it has to do with the level of parts availability and how easy it is to change parts out. I didn't care for the grooves on my G30 trigger so I bought a smooth G21 trigger and had them swapped out in about 15 minutes.
As far as putting a heavier trigger in for so called liability reasons sounds like something that someone in administration came up with. It is an idea brought up by someone with no real world experience. I think the standard Glock trigger is just fine. I think heavier triggers are more of a liability do to them being harder to pull because they are harder to shoot accurately. Putting a heavier trigger in place to prevent an AD just breeds complacency and sloppy gun handling.

[remington79]

Here's a link to another take on the issue. http://www.warriortalknews.com/2011/01/ ... apons.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[silverbear]

My 19 and 26 carry weapons and have stock triggers with the 25 cent trigger job. I noticed a small improvement in smoothness after the buffing and polishing. You can always start there as its free except for your time.

[RECIT]

I think it has to do with the level of parts availability and how easy it is to change parts out. I didn't care for the grooves on my G30 trigger so I bought a smooth G21 trigger and had them swapped out in about 15 minutes.
As far as putting a heavier trigger in for so called liability reasons sounds like something that someone in administration came up with. It is an idea brought up by someone with no real world experience. I think the standard Glock trigger is just fine. I think heavier triggers are more of a liability do to them being harder to pull because they are harder to shoot accurately. Putting a heavier trigger in place to prevent an AD just breeds complacency and sloppy gun handling.

[MostlyHarmless]

10 pages of light bathroom reading on this topic can be found here....

http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1259716" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[garcia946]

I run the OEM Glock 3.5-lb connector in all my Glocks for consistency's sake.

I`m the same here , all my Glocks have 3.5lb triggers

[Grog]

I carried an issue Glock with the NY trigger (8ish) for nine years and it felt better to me than the standard trigger pull. I also had a G24C (marked as a 24) and never would have felt comfortable using it for defense with the 3.5lb trigger.

When the time comes and I buy a Glock, I'll likely switch to the 8lb, it just feels the best to me.

[Scott in Houston]

A justified shoot is a justified shoot.
If you were justified, it doesn't matter what trigger setup you had/have. If you weren't, you can have a 100 lb trigger and you're still in trouble.

[Y2bad4u]

A justified shoot is a justified shoot.
If you were justified, it doesn't matter what trigger setup you had/have. If you weren't, you can have a 100 lb trigger and you're still in trouble.

For all of us thats a no brainer, but if your in court I doubt you will have 12 txchlforum members on the jury and thats the issue. All they have to say to the jury is your handgun had a custom "hair trigger" in your gun and paint you out to be some gun freak just wanting to shoot someone. Just something to think about considering the times. Even if you were "justified".

[Scott in Houston]

A justified shoot is a justified shoot.
If you were justified, it doesn't matter what trigger setup you had/have. If you weren't, you can have a 100 lb trigger and you're still in trouble.

For all of us thats a no brainer, but if your in court I doubt you will have 12 txchlforum members on the jury and thats the issue. All they have to say to the jury is your handgun had a custom "hair trigger" in your gun and paint you out to be some gun freak just wanting to shoot someone. Just something to think about considering the times. Even if you were "justified".

I'm saying it won't go to court. A justified shoot won't get passed a Grand Jury. There would be no trial. What am I missing?

[RPB]

A justified shoot is a justified shoot.
If you were justified, it doesn't matter what trigger setup you had/have. If you weren't, you can have a 100 lb trigger and you're still in trouble.

For all of us thats a no brainer, but if your in court I doubt you will have 12 txchlforum members on the jury and thats the issue. All they have to say to the jury is your handgun had a custom "hair trigger" in your gun and paint you out to be some gun freak just wanting to shoot someone. Just something to think about considering the times. Even if you were "justified".

I'm saying it won't go to court. A justified shoot won't get passed a Grand Jury. There would be no trial. What am I missing?

Disputable fact situations.
Situations such as the Police officer who was holding a gun on a suspect and the suspect reared his head back in resistance while reaching for his own gun, hitting the barrel of the officer's gun with his head and suspect's family saying it was an "accident" negligent homicide due to the "hair trigger" instead of a justifiable shoot.
So, Grand Jury decides to hand it over to a "trier of fact" jury to make a determination, because they don't want the responsibility.

Not sayin' it's common, but possible. You know juries read the papers, watch the news, and know "lots of guns" just "go off" even if no one touched them.

[MostlyHarmless]

For a civilian, it's the civil lawsuit by the perpetrator (or his/her family) and their ambulance chaser which comes after the criminal case, even if the criminal case is dismissed as justifiable. The legal standards are different, and juries are a random variable. You may be totally in the right, yet still not prevail.

[remington79]

I thought they changed the law so if you shot in self defense and it was ruled as such you were protected from civil liability.

[RPB]

I thought they changed the law so if you shot in self defense and it was ruled as such you were protected from civil liability.

"and it was ruled as such" that's key

Suppose a grand jury sends it to a prosecutor or whatever for a trial to determine facts on whether or not it's a justified shoot

While a criminal trial is pending in the backlogged Criminal Courts, a civil suit is filed

(We need a shrugging shoulders "i dunno" emoticon thingie, I'd use it a lot)

[The Annoyed Man]

Not trying to ignite a platform war, but....

It strikes me that there are fairly good reasons to keep trigger pull for "non-safety" guns a little bit heavier than it is for guns with a safety that can be disengaged. Now, I realize that Glocks actually do have a safety built in. BUT, that safety is only as good as the person whose booger hook is not on the bang switch. The absence of a safety that has to be switched off or disengaged probably gives the Glock bearer a micro second or two advantage in bringing a gun to bear, over say the reaction time of a 1911 carrier, who has to switch off his safety before he can fire. OTH, a 1911 carrier can accidentally squeeze the trigger all he wants. He can mash it 'til his finger breaks. But until he sweeps off that thumb safety, no bang. But the Glock user who inadvertently mashes the trigger stands a high probability of Glock leg, or worse, he'll accidentally shoot a comrade.

Ask gigag04 (I think it was him) if he ever accidentally "shot" a training partner in the back of the head with simunitions during the stress of a training drill when he inadvertently squeezed the trigger without meaning to. (Am I remembering that correctly?) And he is an experienced user who has to train at a higher level than most of us ever do. So there are distinct advantages to the Glock system, but it seems possible to me that A) a lightened Glock trigger is never going to have the feel of a good 1911 trigger; and B) a lightened Glock trigger without some kind of active safety system such as as a thumb safety or grip safety is asking for trouble.

We only own one Glock, my wife's G19. It's a pretty standard fare third generation pistol. I don't really know what the trigger pull is on it, but it doesn't seem that bad to me, and I wouldn't want it any lighter than it is without a safety. I just think that is asking for trouble. But that's just me. BTW, my M&P 45 gives me the best of both worlds - thumb safety when I want it, but you don't have to have it on. You can rely on its "trigger safety" type mechanism if you want.

None of this is to say that I think that Glocks are inherently unsafe, at least not anymore than any other pistol design. BUT... I think we can render them unsafe if we take too much tension out of the trigger pull...

...or maybe I'm a little too paranoid...