Notices
Results 1 to 32 of 32
Like Tree5Likes
  • 1 Post By sculptor
  • 1 Post By AlexG
  • 1 Post By sculptor
  • 2 Post By Harold14370

Thread: Security Gizmo Applied to Firearms

  1. #1 Security Gizmo Applied to Firearms 
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,771
    Since the raging Gun Control thread is closed, may I offer a thought related to safety? I don't know if something similar was "touched on" or not. I.D. devices, passwords, etc., are pretty useless when applied to guns.

    There is, however, a concept applied to ultimate security of goods used in the industry which builds large safes. I acquired one from a Sears store which had been closed, and learned of this concept from it. The safe weighed 8,000 lbs, obviously precluding thieves hauling it away. It's dimensions were approx. 80 inches high, 40 inches wide, and 34 inches deep, it had twin front doors with a combination lock mechanism, these when opened revealing an additional "hiding place" set back in the lower interior, having a very massive round door about 30 inches in diameter similar in appearance to that of old banks' vaults.

    This interior door had a tag warning of being equipped with a "relocking device". I took the damn thing all apart, to find out what this all meant. Within the door's mechanism was a spring-loaded massive bar which, if entry were attempted by almost any mechanical means other than properly using the combination dial, would positively prevent opening forever. Entry could then only be made by cutting through about 6 inches of steel door, or perhaps a nuclear bomb!

    Could a similar security means be designed to absolutely disable a firearm completely, but still allow authorized use? Such an arm, if stolen, would be useful to the possessor only as a blunt instrument, or perhaps small boat anchor. jocular


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Sure such things are entirely possible, such as a safety tied to an RF signal worn on a key chain or something similar. Of course there's no hope for such things, in a nation that can't even bring itself to require a safety on any kind of firearm.


    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Of course there's no hope for such things, in a nation that can't even bring itself to require a safety on any kind of firearm.
    Validate this statement.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    k.i.s.s.
    The safety switch on my winchester is quite adequate thank you.
    Adding anything that might permanently disable the weapon would be the last thing I would want to do to a weapon.
    .....................
    This thread reminds me of the trigger/misfire problems with the remington model 700.
    jocular likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Of course there's no hope for such things, in a nation that can't even bring itself to require a safety on any kind of firearm.
    Validate this statement.
    Validate what? Walk through any Cabella's to the gun section, there are many guns, particular handguns with no safety at all, the Berrata 92Gs, SIG P226 the Kel-Tec PF-9 (the one now famous from the Zimmerman trial) and many others. While many of these have double action which adds some small measure of safety, some don't even have that much and are unnecessarily dangerous even to their owners.

    My point in a nation that has almost no safety standards what so ever on guns, isn't going to require built in security for a very long time. (whether we agree or disagree with that). The closest we get is some states require selling of safety locks with a purchase.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6 Firearms "Safeties" 
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,771
    A "safety" as traditionally applied to firearms is NOT a means of either totally disabling the arm, nor is it a means to prevent use by the unauthorized. It IS a device which normally blocks the firing mechanism from responding to trigger pull. The idea is to minimize the unexpected "accidental discharge" occurring due to inadvertant trigger pull, or dropping the arm to the ground, which can often cause firing.

    Safeties ARE present on the greater majority of all arms sold. The John M. Browning designed pistol adopted in 1911 by the U.S. Army had 2 safeties! That weapon served through two world wars, Korea, Viet Nam, and innumerable other skirmishes.

    Notable exceptions, in a way, are the Glock pistol design, and it's "copies". Still, the Glock design incorporates a "safety" of sorts: the trigger is blocked against movement until a tiny lever is activated by the trigger finger. jocular
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    You might be interested in this article about smart guns, which seem to be what you are after. Towards the end they suggest attempts to mandate such technology--for the record I'm completely against that.

    Hardly Anyone Is Buying 'Smart Guns' | Motherboard


    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by jocular View Post
    Safeties ARE present on the greater majority of all arms sold.
    This is how I understood it, as well, causing me to question the validity of the above claim. Looking through a Cabelas catalog that offers revolvers without a "safety" is not a compelling argument.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by jocular View Post
    Safeties ARE present on the greater majority of all arms sold.
    This is how I understood it, as well, causing me to question the validity of the above claim. Looking through a Cabelas catalog that offers revolvers without a "safety" is not a compelling argument.
    I'm not going to belabor the point, go to any gun range--the Kel Tech's and especially the Glocks which don't have manual safeties are very popular. I can't help it if you've never noticed.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Anti-Crank AlexG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,809
    I've found Kel Techs to be cheap pieces of crap.

    At the range in the alley next to me, a husband and wife with their brand new KT fires off the first round and the retaining ring for the return spring shatters, the spring flies out to the 5 yard marker, and the slide flies backwards and lands on the floor with all the used brass.

    I must admit I laughed my ass off.

    I like my Beretta. I also like my Springfield Arms 1911. Now that's a safe gun.
    Neverfly likes this.
    Its the way nature is!
    If you dont like it, go somewhere else....
    To another universe, where the rules are simpler
    Philosophically more pleasing, more psychologically easy
    Prof Richard Feynman (1979) .....

    Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    I'm not going to belabor the point, go to any gun range--the Kel Tech's and especially the Glocks which don't have manual safeties are very popular. I can't help it if you've never noticed.
    Ok so go to a gun range- or read a catalog... Call me crazy... But wouldn't a showing of gun sales of those with or without safety's make more sense?
    Some statistics? Not anecdotal catalogs or look at what is directly around a very limited number of people in a very limited space?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,771
    Quote Originally Posted by AlexG View Post
    I've found Kel Techs to be cheap pieces of crap.

    At the range in the alley next to me, a husband and wife with their brand new KT fires off the first round and the retaining ring for the return spring shatters, the spring flies out to the 5 yard marker, and the slide flies backwards and lands on the floor with all the used brass.

    I must admit I laughed my ass off.

    I like my Beretta. I also like my Springfield Arms 1911. Now that's a safe gun.
    John Browning's design. Excellent battle-proven weapon. I love them, gave the Colt my Dad handed down to me, made in 1916, to my nephew; it's a keeper!

    However, to me, NO gun is safe. (not meaning the absence of one). Safe to me means unable to provide protection for self defense use. Sorry for nit-picking. I'm just good at it! Not much else, though! jocular
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    No weapon is safe
    Safety resides in the mind and hands of the operator.
    anecdote:
    I once owned a semiauto(self loading) shotgun. It could hold 5 in the tube, and one in the chamber. Normally it had a plug equal to 2 in the tube,so 3 in the tube, none in the chamber(normally)----------I had been shooting clay pidgeons and had removed the plug, so 5 and 1.
    My brother borrowed the gun to teach his wife how to shoot. He fired off 3, and announced that the gun was empty. Then he told his wife, "even when you know the gun is empty never trust that" whereupon he flipped the gun to show her the loading port. At this time, he must've touched the trigger. The gun fired---blind luck nobody got hit, however, he blew a hole through the front wall of my mom's house, and shattered 2 wall lamps in the dining room.
    He paused, reflected on the events, and said "See what I mean?"

    (I still chuckle when i retell that story)
    Neverfly likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Malignant Pimple shlunka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dogbox in front of Dywyddyr's house.
    Posts
    1,785
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Of course there's no hope for such things, in a nation that can't even bring itself to require a safety on any kind of firearm.
    Validate this statement.
    Validate what? Walk through any Cabella's to the gun section, there are many guns, particular handguns with no safety at all, the Berrata 92Gs, SIG P226 the Kel-Tec PF-9 (the one now famous from the Zimmerman trial) and many others. While many of these have double action which adds some small measure of safety, some don't even have that much and are unnecessarily dangerous even to their owners.

    My point in a nation that has almost no safety standards what so ever on guns, isn't going to require built in security for a very long time. (whether we agree or disagree with that). The closest we get is some states require selling of safety locks with a purchase.
    Double action... is that not the safety itself? It's no easier to fire a double action revolver than it is to flip the safety off a 1911 and fire.
    "MODERATOR NOTE : We don't entertain trolls here, not even in the trash can. Banned." -Markus Hanke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    The self defense expert who testified for the defense in the Zimmerman trial says he recommends the DAO style like the one Z was carrying, with a round chambered, for civilian use. The reason is that without lots and lots of practice, somebody in a life threatening situation will probably have trouble with the 1911 style safety, and the gun would be useless to him. Same thing with trying to rack the slide to chamber a round. You may as well not even have a gun for self defense.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    The self defense expert who testified for the defense in the Zimmerman trial says he recommends the DAO style like the one Z was carrying, with a round chambered, for civilian use. The reason is that without lots and lots of practice, somebody in a life threatening situation will probably have trouble with the 1911 style safety, and the gun would be useless to him. Same thing with trying to rack the slide to chamber a round. You may as well not even have a gun for self defense.
    That "expert" was in essence arguing that untrained people should carry the weapon "Z" was carrying-- damn irresponsible. Every aspect of your particular weapon should be practiced often enough that it's muscle memory--if not, it shouldn't be carried at all.

    --
    Shlunka, yes DA with the longer travel and heavier pull weight helps. My issue 1911 back in the day had a 12 pound DA pull and about 6 for the rest.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,771
    Quote Originally Posted by sculptor View Post
    No weapon is safe
    Safety resides in the mind and hands of the operator.
    anecdote:
    I once owned a semiauto(self loading) shotgun. It could hold 5 in the tube, and one in the chamber. Normally it had a plug equal to 2 in the tube,so 3 in the tube, none in the chamber(normally)----------I had been shooting clay pidgeons and had removed the plug, so 5 and 1.
    My brother borrowed the gun to teach his wife how to shoot. He fired off 3, and announced that the gun was empty. Then he told his wife, "even when you know the gun is empty never trust that" whereupon he flipped the gun to show her the loading port. At this time, he must've touched the trigger. The gun fired---blind luck nobody got hit, however, he blew a hole through the front wall of my mom's house, and shattered 2 wall lamps in the dining room.
    He paused, reflected on the events, and said "See what I mean?"

    (I still chuckle when i retell that story)
    Was he really, ya think, as unshaken as you indicate? Most A.D.s (Accidental Discharges) carry with them immediate shocking reactions. As you say, and I said above it, NO gun is safe. jocular
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,771
    Quote Originally Posted by shlunka View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Of course there's no hope for such things, in a nation that can't even bring itself to require a safety on any kind of firearm.
    Validate this statement.
    Validate what? Walk through any Cabella's to the gun section, there are many guns, particular handguns with no safety at all, the Berrata 92Gs, SIG P226 the Kel-Tec PF-9 (the one now famous from the Zimmerman trial) and many others. While many of these have double action which adds some small measure of safety, some don't even have that much and are unnecessarily dangerous even to their owners.

    My point in a nation that has almost no safety standards what so ever on guns, isn't going to require built in security for a very long time. (whether we agree or disagree with that). The closest we get is some states require selling of safety locks with a purchase.
    Double action... is that not the safety itself? It's no easier to fire a double action revolver than it is to flip the safety off a 1911 and fire.
    1911 safety involves use of TWO distinct parts of the gun, and adequate understanding of useage. A revolver is useable by anyone, regardless of prior knowledge of the gun; children know very well how to pull a trigger. Thus, so must adults. jocular
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post

    That "expert" was in essence arguing that untrained people should carry the weapon "Z" was carrying-- damn irresponsible. Every aspect of your particular weapon should be practiced often enough that it's muscle memory--if not, it shouldn't be carried at all.
    No, not untrained. Just somebody that doesn't have time to spend hours practicing with their gun. This guy had 20 plus years of teaching police fighting tactics, so I kind of think he knows what he's talking about. Lots of cops don't spend so much time at the range either. Maybe that's why so many carry Glocks.
    Neverfly and jocular like this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,771
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post

    That "expert" was in essence arguing that untrained people should carry the weapon "Z" was carrying-- damn irresponsible. Every aspect of your particular weapon should be practiced often enough that it's muscle memory--if not, it shouldn't be carried at all.
    No, not untrained. Just somebody that doesn't have time to spend hours practicing with their gun. This guy had 20 plus years of teaching police fighting tactics, so I kind of think he knows what he's talking about. Lots of cops don't spend so much time at the range either. Maybe that's why so many carry Glocks.
    I believe the type and/or make of sidearm carried is often dictated by Department. Thus, when the infamous "squeeze-cocker" Walther pistol was adopted by New Jersey State Police, (think it was that branch), after several incidents of cops shooting themselves in the leg the "Powers that Be" changed their minds, and went to another design. The squeeze cocker, I recollect as Model MP 7 and MP 13 (could be wrong here), had a unique "safety" which was squeezed by the palm when gripping the weapon, like a "grip safety", EXCEPT that action also COCKED the firing mechanism, rendering the pistol "live" for trigger pull. The cops mistakenly put pressure on the trigger while unholstering their guns----the rest is history! Public opinion of the design became pretty low, understandably, and today they are likely collector items. I sure as hell wouldn't have one, though at one time or another I owned almost every pistol type designed. jocular
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    I believe the type and/or make of sidearm carried is often dictated by Department. Thus, when the infamous "squeeze-cocker" Walther pistol was adopted by New Jersey State Police, (think it was that branch), after several incidents of cops shooting themselves in the leg the "Powers that Be" changed their minds, and went to another design.

    New York police departments gone through a similar mess over the past few decades....rather than the best weapon they purchased and fielded Glocks which are cheaper but without manual safety and a relatively light trigger. The results were predictable and the department started having accidental discharges. To improve officer safety they eventually ended up changing all the triggers to heavier and heavier versions: I think they are now up to 12 pound triggers (more than most people can fire accurately with). Many departments who also purchased the mediocre quality Glocks (but CHEAP!) have followed suit. Meanwhile civilians continue to purchase unnecessary unsafe weapons, get a class, shot a few times and think they are good--it's irresponsibility sanctioned by the NRA (and their supposed "experts") that fringes on negligence.

    As for smart guns, my biggest objection is a basic distrust for the technology under the worst conditions when it might be needed--will they work when it's 20 below, or 20 above in a heavy rain, or if I'm wearing thin gloves, or my hands are beat up after building a deck, or if some battery isn't replaced every month etc.
    Last edited by Lynx_Fox; July 24th, 2013 at 10:37 PM.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,771
    Just typed a complete Glock comparison, vanished, forum claimed not logged in, though it says logged in. If this flies, be aware I may also. jocular

    It did not! 2nd try logged in separate page; I'm getting a bit ticked!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,771
    The 2nd. try also failed, after 30 minutes typing. Fuck this kind of system reliability. Sure as hell, thois one WILL post!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by jocular View Post
    The 2nd. try also failed, after 30 minutes typing. Fuck this kind of system reliability. Sure as hell, thois one WILL post!
    Suggestion. Type your magnum opus in Notepad or some word processing program, then copy-paste. That way you won't lose your work when there is a glitch.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    New York police departments gone through a similar mess over the past few decades....rather than the best weapon they purchased and fielded Glocks which are cheaper but without manual safety and a relatively light trigger. The results were predictable and the department started having accidental discharges.
    Then the New York police are
    untrained people .... damn irresponsible
    and their Glocks
    shouldn't be carried at all.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Exactly Harold. Which is why their weapons were modified and their training has more then doubled since their first issue of those weapons and still being modified based on only a 3rd of their shots in actual shoot outs hitting their targets (better accuracy than national average), and 15% of their cops shot during shoot outs from their own weapons. Such numbers bolstered by studies and research from Rand and other credible sources combined with my own decades of weapons experience in the military are why I question the value of handguns in our society. To be a responsible handgun owner goes far beyond most recommended self-defense course training and should require regular realistic training on courses that many police departments and few civilians have access too; it also means judicious selection of the right weapon in the first place something an entire gun industry is dead set against and practiced at spreading misinformation and "tyranny" fear mongering so it doesn't happen. At least half the handguns on the market shouldn't be sold at all. Most handgun owners when they enter a store should be steered towards some other self-defense tools (e.g. sprays, or Tasers), because they aren't going to be able to get and maintain the training they really need. But whatever.... I'd rather focus on the OP which is about smart guns.

    Now I hope this post...sorry Jocular....I often have the same problem--my solution is to control-A, control-C before I hit the reply button.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,771
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by jocular View Post
    The 2nd. try also failed, after 30 minutes typing. Fuck this kind of system reliability. Sure as hell, thois one WILL post!
    Suggestion. Type your magnum opus in Notepad or some word processing program, then copy-paste. That way you won't lose your work when there is a glitch.
    The glitch seems to be ongoing though. Happens occasionally, then repeatedly. I have copy/pasted, opened Forum on a new page, thus 2 opened at same time, both logged in, one fails to post, loses entire text, copy to other open Forum page, it did same there. My contribution this time is not wanted due to some grinch! joc
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,771
    Glock was introduced to the American shooting fraternity long before any interest here by Law Enforcement. I bought one of the early ones, a Model 21, .45 ACP caliber. Took some time to figure out exactly how they work. Their instruction booklets proclaim "Glock Perfection". Experience with it proved otherwise.



    The last 1/4-inch of forward slide travel partially "cocks" a spring-loaded firing pin. Depressing the trigger completes the cocking process, the sear then disengaging the trigger, freeing the firing pin to jolt forward, firing the chambered round of ammunition. Recoil then pushes the slide backward it's full travel, expelling the spent shell casing, pushing a fresh round off from the top of the magazine into the chamber, and again partially-cocking the firing pin. Meanwhile, these events having occurred very quickly, the trigger is released, and again becomes connected to the mechanism. Thus, Glocks are double-action semi-automatic pistols in reality.



    The frame is plastic, barrel and mechanism parts steel. A slender spring-loaded piece of metal rests cross-wise in the frame below the slide, which when pulled downward, allows the slide to be moved forward and off the frame. Many reports have surfaced of this locking part failing in service, allowing the slide to fly off the frame after it's firing cycle; Glock denies that.



    Magazines are plastic also. I noted that when fully-loaded, mine was tight in being introduced into the grip; the sides bulged outward when loaded. Removing a mag with rounds in it required pulling it manually out of it's well. Couldn't be denied, Glock re-designed their magazine, calling the new ones "drop-free", but every member of the Gun Culture already knows ALL magazines should "drop free", either due to their own weight, or an additional spring load. Early mags had a half-round shaped aperture at the top rear of the mag, drop frees have a rectangular opening, thus allowing one to tell them apart. I heard there was also yet another mag designed by Glock, the Generation 3.



    The final part of this indictment concerns the large, unobstructed opening in the bottom of the grip, behind the magazine well. It communicates up into the frame, allowing dust, dirt, and any other shit the gun encounters to find it's way up into the operating mechanism. Clever marketing has produced a rubber plug being sold to "stopper" this hole!



    Do I dislike Glocks? Actually I like any handgun which shoots, and Glocks do shoot. Entrust my life to a Glock? No. Recommend it to the novice? No. Especially not in the larger calibers; my .45 recoiled viciously, lightweight plastic is only a virtue for carrying the weapon, not firing it. A novice using that gun in a self defense scenerio would be at a disadvantage.



    Smith & Wesson got on the plastic "safe handgun" bandwagon, marketing a similar weapon of their own design, but similar to the Glock. Glock sued, claiming infringement and use of patented mechanism, won the suit, but Smith kept making theirs, perhaps due to some kind of back-room agreement with Glock. The Smith design fully cocks the firing pin, as opposed to Glock's partial-cocking design. This means the "active" trigger pull on the Smith is shorter, allowing better awareness of just when the blast will occur. I currently carry a Smith in .40 caliber; it's recoil is awful, worse than the Model 1911 .45.



    Now to try the post! jocular

    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,771
    Quote Originally Posted by jocular View Post
    Glock was introduced to the American shooting fraternity long before any interest here by Law Enforcement. I bought one of the early ones, a Model 21, .45 ACP caliber. Took some time to figure out exactly how they work. Their instruction booklets proclaim "Glock Perfection". Experience with it proved otherwise.



    The last 1/4-inch of forward slide travel partially "cocks" a spring-loaded firing pin. Depressing the trigger completes the cocking process, the sear then disengaging the trigger, freeing the firing pin to jolt forward, firing the chambered round of ammunition. Recoil then pushes the slide backward it's full travel, expelling the spent shell casing, pushing a fresh round off from the top of the magazine into the chamber, and again partially-cocking the firing pin. Meanwhile, these events having occurred very quickly, the trigger is released, and again becomes connected to the mechanism. Thus, Glocks are double-action semi-automatic pistols in reality.



    The frame is plastic, barrel and mechanism parts steel. A slender spring-loaded piece of metal rests cross-wise in the frame below the slide, which when pulled downward, allows the slide to be moved forward and off the frame. Many reports have surfaced of this locking part failing in service, allowing the slide to fly off the frame after it's firing cycle; Glock denies that.



    Magazines are plastic also. I noted that when fully-loaded, mine was tight in being introduced into the grip; the sides bulged outward when loaded. Removing a mag with rounds in it required pulling it manually out of it's well. Couldn't be denied, Glock re-designed their magazine, calling the new ones "drop-free", but every member of the Gun Culture already knows ALL magazines should "drop free", either due to their own weight, or an additional spring load. Early mags had a half-round shaped aperture at the top rear of the mag, drop frees have a rectangular opening, thus allowing one to tell them apart. I heard there was also yet another mag designed by Glock, the Generation 3.



    The final part of this indictment concerns the large, unobstructed opening in the bottom of the grip, behind the magazine well. It communicates up into the frame, allowing dust, dirt, and any other shit the gun encounters to find it's way up into the operating mechanism. Clever marketing has produced a rubber plug being sold to "stopper" this hole!



    Do I dislike Glocks? Actually I like any handgun which shoots, and Glocks do shoot. Entrust my life to a Glock? No. Recommend it to the novice? No. Especially not in the larger calibers; my .45 recoiled viciously, lightweight plastic is only a virtue for carrying the weapon, not firing it. A novice using that gun in a self defense scenerio would be at a disadvantage.



    Smith & Wesson got on the plastic "safe handgun" bandwagon, marketing a similar weapon of their own design, but similar to the Glock. Glock sued, claiming infringement and use of patented mechanism, won the suit, but Smith kept making theirs, perhaps due to some kind of back-room agreement with Glock. The Smith design fully cocks the firing pin, as opposed to Glock's partial-cocking design. This means the "active" trigger pull on the Smith is shorter, allowing better awareness of just when the blast will occur. I currently carry a Smith in .40 caliber; it's recoil is awful, worse than the Model 1911 .45.



    Now to try the post! jocular
    Just tried to edit above post, it just sat there doing nothing.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,771
    This is getting maddening!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,771
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    ........Now I hope this post...sorry Jocular....I often have the same problem--my solution is to control-A, control-C before I hit the reply button.
    Sorry, I know firearms, but not computer use! CTRL-A is new to me; I used C-C, then C-V to save and paste over again several times to get the damn post posted! joc
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and in Bayside, Ca. since 1981, Humboldt since 1977
    Posts
    13,159
    Quote Originally Posted by jocular View Post
    Since the raging Gun Control thread is closed, may I offer a thought related to safety? I don't know if something similar was "touched on" or not. I.D. devices, passwords, etc., are pretty useless when applied to guns.

    There is, however, a concept applied to ultimate security of goods used in the industry which builds large safes. I acquired one from a Sears store which had been closed, and learned of this concept from it. The safe weighed 8,000 lbs, obviously precluding thieves hauling it away. It's dimensions were approx. 80 inches high, 40 inches wide, and 34 inches deep, it had twin front doors with a combination lock mechanism, these when opened revealing an additional "hiding place" set back in the lower interior, having a very massive round door about 30 inches in diameter similar in appearance to that of old banks' vaults.

    This interior door had a tag warning of being equipped with a "relocking device". I took the damn thing all apart, to find out what this all meant. Within the door's mechanism was a spring-loaded massive bar which, if entry were attempted by almost any mechanical means other than properly using the combination dial, would positively prevent opening forever. Entry could then only be made by cutting through about 6 inches of steel door, or perhaps a nuclear bomb!

    Could a similar security means be designed to absolutely disable a firearm completely, but still allow authorized use? Such an arm, if stolen, would be useful to the possessor only as a blunt instrument, or perhaps small boat anchor. jocular
    My late BIL had one made...and the only way you could have gotten into it was to blow it up.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Security lessons applied to climate change?
    By Lynx_Fox in forum Environmental Issues
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: November 1st, 2012, 07:25 PM
  2. Which is the best security tool available on internet?
    By chetanbhasin in forum Computer Science
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: August 21st, 2012, 02:56 AM
  3. How to check our program's security?
    By Steve_Mauna in forum Computer Science
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: May 1st, 2009, 09:53 PM
  4. Objectivity is our security blanket
    By coberst in forum Philosophy
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: March 11th, 2008, 05:10 AM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •