I have no objection to people properly carrying a Glock with a Loaded chamber, but the devil is in the details, and those details don't get discussed enough.

The Glock was designed to Austrian military specs that required one hand operation, so it was indeed intended to be carried with a round in the chamber. However, it was also intended to be carried in an outside the waist band duty holster that provided ample protection for the trigger and less chance of an intrusion into the trigger guard when re-holstering.

However, it also had the side benefit of working well for European agencies that still preferred to carry pistols with an unloaded chamber, which didn't hurt potential sales.

I certainly have no objection to a Glock being carried with a round in the chamber, provided it's properly carried in a holster that fully encloses and protects the trigger.

With all handguns, pistol, revolver, single action, double action, striker fired, etc, the holster is the first level "safety". With a Glock, it's arguably a little more important as once it's out of the holster, all of the safeties are tied to the trigger and any trigger contact has the potential to de-activate all the safeties.

Where I get critical of some Glock users is when I start seeing Glocks used in concealed carry with poorly thought out carry methods like a belt clip on the slide or a Versa Carry style holster that does not adequately protect the trigger.

One of the common denominators in "Glock leg" accidents is when the shooter/victim is carrying a Glock in an IWB holster where a wad of shirt, a jacket drawstring or other foreign object finds it's way into the holster. That's a much more significant problem with an IWB holster than it is with a duty holster, particularly with many of the current duty holsters that sit fairly far out from the waist.

Historically it's also not unheard of for a police officer under extreme stress after a shoot to try to re-holster his pistol with his finger still in the trigger guard. The combination of:

A) a lack of any other trained action such as de-cocking or applying the manual safety; and/or
B) the comparatively short and light trigger pull relative to a DA revolver or DA semi-auto pistol; and/or
C) the lack of a hammer on a striker fired pistol than could otherwise be felt coming back when re-holstering with a trigger guard intrusion;

makes an AD slightly more likely with a Glock than with a traditional DA revolver, DA semi-auto, or a 1911 style single action semi-auto.

Thus, while there is less training required in the actual operation of the pistol, compared to a 1911, there is an increased need for training the shooter how to safely holster and carry a Glock - a point that is often lost on armed citizens who decide they want to carry a Glock.

As noted above, with an OWB duty holster, an AD that occurs in a re-holstering situation is less likely to hit the shooter in the leg or foot In contrast, with an IWB holster any AD with a Glock while re-holstering is very likely to hit the leg. For that reason I advise concealed carry permit holders who want to carry a Glock in an IWB holster to use a holster that:

1) fully encloses and protects the trigger;
2) has a reinforced mouth that will not fold over and potentially intrude into the trigger guard; and
3) has a belt clip that allows the holster to be removed, so that the pistol can be re-holstered with the pistol out in front of the shooter where he can visually confirm nothing is obstructing the trigger, and then be inserted back into the waist band as a unit with the trigger fully protected.

If a CCW permit holder with a Glock isn't willing to take this approach, then he or she is better off carrying it with an unloaded chamber and racking the slide during the draw to make it ready to shoot. It's just a matter of risk management - the odds of an armed citizen ever actually needing a handgun for self defense are extremely low, while holstering the handgun is a daily event, and the frequency of that event combined with poor holster choice and/or poor technique creates a significant risk.

In short, as noted above, in the absence of adequate training or standardization, carrying on an empty chamber has some merit, and that applies to the Glock as much as any other handgun type.