McPatrickClan

I have only owned one pistol (Springfield XD40) and I really like the grip safety. Do you guys think the grip safety is a good idea or is it just a way to make us feel warm & fuzzy?

MattLarson

The grip safety is certainly a useful safety feature, IMHO.

Matt

__________________
Hope is not a plan.

retsupt99

An excellent way to have yet another AD/ND prevention device......even IF the finger is #1...

__________________
"That I cannot do."

"Give this to, uh, Clemenza. I want reliable people, people who aren't going to be carried away. After all we're not murderers in spite of what this undertaker thinks."


***********************************

NRA Life Member

ExactlyMyPoint

Let me take the counter view.

I was all set to buy an XD because I liked the idea of a grip safety. As far as safeties go, it is a good idea. But someone brought to my attention that if you do not hold the gun just right, you cannot fire it. Not a problem in say competition or at the range, but what happens if you get into a (gun) fight, and your hand is injured? You cannot hold the gun properly to grip the safety and therefore cannot fire it to maybe save your life. But if you had, say a Glock, you could still fire a gun.

Just something to think about.

__________________
- Let me explain. No. There is too much. Let me summarize.
- Doing my part to create a huge carbon footprint
- Be still, and know that I am God; Psalms 46:10
- You are God and that's just the way it is

Pizza Bob

On an XD (or any traditional DA/SA pistol) I think it is superfluous. On a SA semi-auto that I'm going to carry cocked and locked (read that 1911), then I welcome the extra margin of safety it imparts - real or imagined. John Browning designed the gun with it for a purpose, I'm not about to think I know more than he did.

Adios,

Pizza Bob

grady

I appreciate that extra safety every time I reholster in my Smartcarry, or am involved in some physical contortion that might put some pressure on the gun, even in an IWB.

At some point I'll probably own a Glock, but having a grip safety on a gun I own now isn't a bad thing.

Shizzlemah

somewhere between Superflous and detrimental....

pogo2

One of the traditional objections by some gun buyers to the design of the Glock pistols is that they don't seem very safe, as they don't have any obvious manual safety devices. Glock probably loses some potential buyers over this point.

The Springfield XD, which was introduced as a direct competitor to Glock at a slightly lower price, evidently tried to capitalize on this perceived safety weakness of Glock by adding a grip safety in addition to the Glock-like trigger safety on the XD. I noticed today on the Springfield website that in 2008 they are also offering a thumb safety on the XD. So Springfield has some safety "talking points" when selling against rival Glock.

I don't think a grip safety is really required on the XD, but then I own two Glocks and haven't had a problem yet.

__________________
Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the Peoples' Liberty's Teeth." - George Washington

QKShooter

It's just one of those things that would really not bother me if it was missing. I could take it or leave it.

One of the older custom modifications was just to simply pin it down.

The old solid aftermarket backstrap that totally eliminated the 1911 grip safety by just extending the mainspring housing up to flow right into a beavertail is not being made anymore.

I had one on one of my older .45s but, frame disassembly was a PITA so I dumped it. (at a Very Nice) profit By the way.

__________________

Captain Crunch

The designers of the XD apparently thought it was.

__________________


Memo to the President:
I'll keep my guns, money & freedom...
You can keep the "change!"

Terry