When Glock put it's trigger safety into use it was to prevent

>>32595740
The illusion of safety

>>32595740
They were still trying really hard not to get sued.

>>32595740
>So tell me, what is the point of pic related?
>Is S&W completely retarded?
they couldnt copy glock again without getting sued so they did their best attempt which is shit

File: hummingbird.jpg (121KB, 640x768px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 640x768px

>>32595740
The newer M&Ps are not bad. They are not bullseye guns but they do the job. The apex triggers are a to make them better, way better. There are things about the M&Ps that are better than glock in my opinion and experience but that's just me. I own 4 glocks and 1 M&P.

>>32595878
I just bought a vtac m&p and it was really disappointing.

CA drop safety stuff?

Is there any chance of dropping a gun and if it lands with the barrel pointing straight up having inertia pull the trigger downwards and fire?

That's about the only thing I can think of that the M&P trigger safety would prevent

Oh yeah, didn't they get sued by Glock for the early Sigma pistols violating patents?
Maybe they wanted to change the trigger safety enough to avoid that

>>32595757
>>32595776
>>32595804
All of these

Pistol is required to have a positive aafety, and they copied Glocks triggers on the Sigma and got sued out the ass, and I guess they're trying to avoid that again while still having a "safety" on the pistol.

>>32596192
No chance. Most triggers weigh less than 6 ounces. Pull weight is usually at least 3 lbs if SA and 9 or so DA. At 3 lbs the gun would need to be falling roughly 80m/s or from about 60 feet or so.

>>32595961
>>32596192
>Is there any chance of dropping a gun and if it lands with the barrel pointing straight up having inertia pull the trigger downwards and fire?
No, not the trigger but the firing pin. Most guns now have a firing pin block that doesn't allow the firing pin to move unless the trigger is pulled. Beretta 92s are good to look at the mechanism that does that.

Another safety is having the hammer not rest on the firing pin, and again, not being allowed to move unless the trigger is pulled.

>>32596406
wow that was a very mathematical response

File: glocksnag.jpg (57KB, 600x424px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 600x424px

>>32595740
>When Glock put it's trigger safety into use it was to prevent the trigger from being accidentally pulled by snagging the side of it on a holster or something.
How'd that work out for them?

Those are drop safeties

literally

it

no snag safety.

drop

safeties.

When developed wasn't it just another means of making the pistol drop / concussion safe?

Glock's early PR stunt was dropping the thing out of a helicopter.

File: sr9 trigger safety recall.png (101KB, 731x307px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 731x307px

>>32596192
actually yes, the Ruger SR9 was recalled because it wasn't drop safe. The fix was to change the trigger safety to a Glock style. I think the old safety would actuate with inertia because the pivot pin wasn't placed at the center of mass of the safety.

>>32596465
...
Highschool physics mate.

File: p7ad.jpg (287KB, 1218x1609px) Image search: [Google]

287KB, 1218x1609px

>>32595740
drop safety iirc

>>32596961
>Galco shit holster made of the hinnest leather on the market
>using a Galco holster on anything that isn't double action, or with a safety

Confirmed for retarded. Opinion disregarded.

File: 1459727468461.webm (444KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

444KB, 480x480px

>mfw striker fags still think their firearms are safe to carry

>>32598292
It's not the holsters fault you're retarded m8

>>32595913
considering that's a old model that doesn't feature any of the M&P line changes over the years, it's not surprising.

>>32598345
>her face when you ask if she want's to go shooting

>>32595740
>is smith and wesson completely retarded.
Fucking nigger. Come back when you shoot a model 19 and say smith is shit compared to glock