Rastoff
US Veteran
I figured someone would say that; it's not. The comparison is apt and appropriate. They are indeed similar and if we're talking about a Series 80 1911, exactly the same.
I figured someone would say that; it's not. The comparison is apt and appropriate. They are indeed similar and if we're talking about a Series 80 1911, exactly the same.
![]()
Seriously, if you're not comfortable with them, that's fine. But a lot of us are, and have been successfully not shooting ourselves for years. Get off the crusade. I think the .380 is dumb, but you don't see me writing threads about it.
And c'mon, m8...if you really think that a single-action 1911 trigger is even remotely like an average striker-fired trigger, there is something horribly wrong with your 1911.
But again, unlike a 1911, or all revolvers, or a DA auto, holsters cannot ADD a level of safety to compensate: covering the guard only adds danger.
The P38’s DA/SA trigger gave it a leg up on many of its contemporaries. Generally, pistols such as the M1911 were supposed to be carried in condition 3 (hammer down, chamber empty), meaning the slide must be racked to get it into action. On the other hand, the P38 only took a squeeze of the trigger to send a round down range.
On top of that, it had a unique aspect when it came to DA/SA pistols — it could be carried in condition 1. Going “cocked and locked” appealed to many (once again, think competitors) and is a rare feature on this style of pistol.
But again, unlike a 1911, or all revolvers, or a DA auto, holsters cannot ADD a level of safety to compensate: covering the guard only adds danger. Yet we cant fail to cover the trigger because Glock actions dont have separate safeties. Sophies Choice, and I simply wanted to make you all aware of the conundrum.
That's a right nice picture on your website of a Glock in an IWB holster you designed for DeSantis, covered trigger guard and all . . .
That's a right nice picture on your website of a Glock in an IWB holster you designed for DeSantis, covered trigger guard and all . . .
Handsomely reasoned and worded, Wise A. These are from my armourer:
“Striker fired guns require no input from the user, but (also) do not offer any feedback if the trigger is obstructed. In *most* cases you can look at your holster and see it's clear and then keep your fingers out of the trigger guard. Sometimes in the real world you have to transition from lethal to non-lethal quickly and without looking away from your target, though.”
Note the comment about "looking" one's pistol back into the holster. Now, he's proven under fire, but most of us will be mighty shaky from fear and adrenalin if we're holstering after a shootout, and might even be under pressure to put our pistol away before the LEOs respond. So we just might not 'look' it into the holster and so ordinary people run the risk of being careless with their finger or their clothing, thereby getting caught in the covered guard.
Yes, I was late to this new understanding WHICH WAS THE POINT OF MY POST. Very late; for my clients 1985-2000 I created many, many designs for the Glock because I didn't realise. Then when I started up Red Nichols Holsters, I still didn't understand; but now I do.
NOW. When another holster maker tells me they 'get it' now that it's been raised, then we can move forward. I for one discontinued Glock and similar holsters when I worked it out. On my own. With active argument against, by holster makers, I will add.
This case reminds what we makers are all up against:
CHAVEZ v. GLOCK INC | FindLaw
Please read it, Muss. It's timely, and it's a "case on all fours" as it's known in law. Regular people have been affected by this belief, that all pistols are equally safe, and that holster makers have a responsibility to them (those people involved).
Mentioning this is not about lawsuits. Little makers don't have any money and don't need much to worry about lawsuits. Glock has high visibility and deep pockets and 'maybe' has products insurance; so they get sued. It's about how regular people's expectations have been violated, and that makes them v unhappy.