Quoted:
Here is the thread where I heard of the idea of no safety:
http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=4&t=448412
Just being honest I don't know enough about the safety systems present in an AR15 and a Glock pistol to tell you exactly what the differences are and why they are each set up the way they are. I know an AR15 has a hammer and a Glock uses a striker setup, but beyond that I'm limited on my knowledge.
However, if all the safety on an AR15 does is just stop the trigger from being moved, then I don't see why not having that would be such a big deal. A Glock pistol has several safeties and is a very safe pistol if you drop it but no matter what if you pull the trigger it fires. Trigger discipline becomes the safety.
I just asked the question because it seemed like a cool idea to build a smooth sided gun with no safety selector. Like I said earlier, I really don't have a good enough understanding of what goes on in the guts of an AR15 to make it fire, but it seems to me that if the safety selector was deleted (and lets say the trigger pull remained unchanged) then all you'd have is trigger discipline as a safety and is that such a big deal?
***This idea is for fun for a gun to be used as a range toy. I (usually
) don't jump out of helicopters or storm houses in full swat gear with AR in hand for a living.
Good on you for admitting that you don't know everything.
As for the safety, look at what many soldiers and LEOs have on their uniforms. It's an assortment of straps, belts, buckles, loops, cuffs, hooks, snaps, pockets, and what not. Unlike a pistol, which generally rides safely in a holster that covers the trigger guard, a rifle trigger is generally just flapping in the breeze.
IMO, I'd be more concerned about a piece of gear pressing against the trigger of an AR than an errant finger.
While you intend this to be a range gun, maybe there's a slight chance you'll take a carbine class in the future. In such a case, I can't fathom an instructor allowing such a rifle in their course.