
http://texaschlforum.com/viewtopic.php? ... n+the+pipe" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton
Interesting, but I would never recommend an after-market safety.The Annoyed Man wrote:Interesting apropos article: http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2013 ... ck-safety/
03Lightningrocks wrote:IMHO, that thing is going to get somebody killed. Either it will fail to work when someone points the gun in the wrong direction and pulls the trigger or when it engages and doesn't release when the gun is needed.
I keep telling the Glockistas that, but they won't listen.WildBill wrote:03Lightningrocks wrote:IMHO, that thing is going to get somebody killed. Either it will fail to work when someone points the gun in the wrong direction and pulls the trigger or when it engages and doesn't release when the gun is needed.If you want a gun with a safety, then buy one that has a safety.
jmra wrote:You are absolutely correct that the term exist for a reason. The term "Glock leg" was created as a fear campaign by Glock's competitors when Glock took the police industry by storm.jsk wrote:There's a reason the term "glock leg" exists; I've never heard it called "1911 leg". :)
There is no proof whatsoever that on average Glock owners experience more NDs than owners of any other brand. I have seen just as many examples of injuries with 1911s as I have Glocks despite the fact that Glocks see many more times the service hours on daily basis.