FOREFRONT feature
weight of pull. In a 1992 study conducted by the Federal Law Enforcement Training Cen- ter (FLETC), 50 percent of the female test subjects could not reach the trigger on four of the 17 test weapons and the lower 25th percentile (in terms of hand dimensions and strength) of the test group couldn’t reach the trigger on nine of the 17 test weapons. T is phenomenon is not restricted to fe- male shooters, either. An increasing number of smaller statured males have entered the law enforcement profession in the last 40 years as well, and many of these male offi cers have diffi culties reaching the trigger on a DA weapon and getting the proper leverage on it. Whether it occurs to a male or female, this creates an increased hazard for the pub- lic, who could be hit by errant shots fi red by an offi cer who is unable to properly control the trigger on his/her fi rearm. Even the most robust trigger pull weights
(upward of 12 pounds) cannot come close to matching the 25 pounds of clenched grip force, which FLETC research indicated could be generated by a startle refl ex (or the 126 pounds of maximal grip strength of an aver- age male—80 pounds for the average female), so they off er little protection against this cir- cumstance. Indeed, the two unintentional shootings noted by Mr. Owens in his article involved NYPD offi cers fi ring Glocks with agency-modifi ed triggers. T e NYPD inten- tionally modifi es all their guns to provide a pull weight in excess of 12 pounds, which is more than double the standard weight on the Glock pistol, but it’s still not enough to prevent an unintentional discharge caused by startle refl ex or inter-limb response, as these two incidents demonstrated.
Hardware “Solution” #2: Mechanical Safeties Another popular fi x (and one promoted by Mr. Owens) involves adding a mechanical safety that operates independently of the trigger, usually via movement of the fi ring hand thumb. T e theory is that these kinds of safeties will prevent an offi cer from unin- tentionally pulling the trigger by disabling it until the safety is released, but in practi- cal application it doesn’t work this way. T e history of these guns in law enforcement and
10 The Police Marksman Summer 2015
The downward motion required to deactivate a frame-mounted safety is a natural and effi cient movement that strengthens the fi ring grip. Most autos with this kind of safety have SA triggers though, which are short and light, and therefore easier to unintentionally discharge under stress.
military service indicates that when the user feels threatened enough to deploy the gun and point it at someone, then they are also likely to simultaneously disengage the safety in preparation to fi re. T is happens regardless of
training protocols that may discourage releas- ing the safety until the actual decision to fi re has been made. In fact, most law enforcement training protocols have traditionally encour- aged the offi cer to disengage the safety as the
www.policemarksman.com
No Glocks For Cops? An Alternative View
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76