Home Main Category Personal Defense

Time for an honest discussioin on Glock pistols

1246710

Replies

  • JasonMPDJasonMPD Senior Member Posts: 6,557 Senior Member
    Teach wrote: »
    Glocks appear to be high-capacity revolvers designed to serve the lowest common denominator shooter- - - - -"professionals" who qualify once a year and carry the things as another accessory on their duty belts hoping none of it ever needs to be used. The guns perform well in that capacity- - - -as tools- - - -butt-ugly but effective tools when used as they are designed. They've got all the aesthetic appeal of a framing hammer, a skilsaw, or a pipe wrench.

    Sort of like the AR-15, or the "sniper" bolt actions, Glocks are the fat, ugly chicks of the shooting world. Useful, but not necessarily something you brag to your friends about.
    :vomit:
    Jerry

    And every gun toting Joe Shmoe, too, according to "civilian" Glock sales too. They just stand still and shoot at paper with cartoon zombies on them all day with poor habits and no formal training...not even once a year. Gimme a break...

    Glocks are designed for simplicity of function to reduce the action necessary to make the gun ready for business. It's your own damn fault if you don't train with it appropriately!
    “There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.” – Will Rogers
  • jbp-ohiojbp-ohio Senior Member Posts: 10,404 Senior Member
    Big Chief wrote: »
    Wait a minute, almost all the threads on this forum are not supported by "Facts' just what members experience and see, their likes and dislikes and personal perceptions. Since when does anything posted on the forum on any topic have to proven with statistics.

    I was honest and admitted I don't have any solid data/facts/numbers beyond what I read and see on this and other forums. Therefore I'm totally wrong when I say Glocks are more prone to AD/NDs than other makes of pistols?


    I wanted others members honest opinions on Glocks because I do see a lot of AD/ND reported in the news and it so happens the majority are with Glocks. I wanna know why and get input from others on here how they feel about Glocks.

    I fired a compact Glock 9mm last weekend and the owner told me he carries it with an unloaded chamber because he doesn't feel comfortable carrying it "Loaded" and will sacrifice the time he will need to rack the slide if he needs to use it. He has been around guns a long time and I don't take his opinion lightly. It was his personal choice, not mine or anything I said to him.

    I still say special precautions are needed with Glocks and for whatever reason folks seem to forget common good sense gun handling safety precautions with them. They work as advertised and there would be no AD/NDs if they followed safety steps 100%, but they don't and I want to know why. What is it about a Glock they seem to get a brain fart about they ordinarily wouldn't with other makes?

    Is it because they are internally "Cocked" and they can't see it? Is it because they somehow lend themselves to being fired when a foreign object is caught in the trigger guard and the trigger is tugged/pulled slightly rearward, when they load or unload one or when they un-holster or re-holster one?

    I do think I'm on to something here.


    I'll be sure to post any pertinent data I can find (when and if it is ever available) on here that supports my theory or disproves it entirely.

    In the meantime I appreciate all the input from all of you and am looking forward to hear from those who haven't expressed their opinions/experiences yet. Thanks in advance.

    Besides I ain't French and I ain't surrendering. :tooth:

    They will not fire until the trigger is fully pulled to the rear........ no slight.

    Screen-Shot-2013-09-01-at-8.01.54-AM.png

    Actually safer than my Kahr. It has zero safeties.....
    "The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not." Thomas Jefferson
  • olesniperolesniper Senior Member Posts: 3,763 Senior Member
    You may be on to something. Seems like in the old days people who became LEOs were gun people. They loved firearms and used them on and off the job. They could talk about them knowledgeably and with enthusiasm. Nowadays a lot of LEOs seem to view their sidearm as just a tool. I don't know.

    As far as the folks on this forum not having Glock discharge issues, I think it just proves we have a smarter class of people on this forum.

    My point, exactly. I've lost count of the number of times I've seen a cop, on the "COPS" tv show, fiddle with a gun, trying to clear it. A common gun that any one of us would have cleared, field stripped, and cleaned in half the time.
    Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death,
    I will fear no evil: For I carry a .308 and not a .270
  • gatorgator Senior Member Posts: 1,746 Senior Member
    Eli wrote: »
    Talk to horse or Sam....they can help you out on that front.

    Just getting caught on this thread....

    Can someone tell me how to get Copenhagen off a computer screen?

    As for the Glock debate......I have never owned, or even shot, one so I don't have much of an informed opinion but I can see both sides of the argument, and am enjoying this thread....so, carry on, I'm learning something today.
    USMC 80-84
    -96 lbs
  • olesniperolesniper Senior Member Posts: 3,763 Senior Member
    gator wrote: »
    Just getting caught on this thread....

    Can someone tell me how to get Copenhagen off a computer screen?

    Vinegar and water work pretty good............if you got any on the keyboard, you're screwed.
    Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death,
    I will fear no evil: For I carry a .308 and not a .270
  • JasonMPDJasonMPD Senior Member Posts: 6,557 Senior Member
    You may be on to something. Seems like in the old days people who became LEOs were gun people. They loved firearms and used them on and off the job. They could talk about them knowledgeably and with enthusiasm. Nowadays a lot of LEOs seem to view their sidearm as just a tool. I don't know.

    As far as the folks on this forum not having Glock discharge issues, I think it just proves we have a smarter class of people on this forum.

    So an exact date when LEOs were gun people and when they stopped being gun people? Those old S&W .38 revolvers were simpler than a Glock...they must have been made for some really ignorant shooters...
    “There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.” – Will Rogers
  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 12,336 Senior Member
    I got into law enforcement 42 years ago, and LEOs were no more into guns then than they are now. Sure, some were, but the majority were just gun toters instead of gun people.

    One of the reasons, among others, that LE agencies got into automatics is because revolvers weren't simple, they were complicated. The skill level to repair a revolver is WAY complicated when repairing an auto, which basically is changing parts. A revolver requires hand fitting and filing. When we got new revolvers from S&W, in the late 70s and early 80s, about one in five had to be returned because they weren't operating properly. Before that, I don't know. The older revolvers you see now are survivors of the cutting process.

    My 28 had to be sent back because the pin in the barrel broke. While it was at S&W, the revolver had to be timed as well.
    Concealed carry is for protection, open carry is for attention.
  • JasonMPDJasonMPD Senior Member Posts: 6,557 Senior Member
    Gene L wrote: »
    I got into law enforcement 42 years ago, and LEOs were no more into guns then than they are now. Sure, some were, but the majority were just gun toters instead of gun people.

    One of the reasons, among others, that LE agencies got into automatics is because revolvers weren't simple, they were complicated. The skill level to repair a revolver is WAY complicated when repairing an auto, which basically is changing parts. A revolver requires hand fitting and filing. When we got new revolvers from S&W, in the late 70s and early 80s, about one in five had to be returned because they weren't operating properly. Before that, I don't know. The older revolvers you see now are survivors of the cutting process.

    My 28 had to be sent back because the pin in the barrel broke. While it was at S&W, the revolver had to be timed as well.

    You're right with regards to complicated with reloading for instance. But they are point and shoot simple in all other regards.
    “There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.” – Will Rogers
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 25,776 Senior Member
    Big Chief wrote: »

    I'm not knocking Glocks, but honestly think of all the firearms on the market it has to be the most misunderstood on how it mechanically functions.

    So what say you?

    What say I? Well, I say.......you can say THAT again! Why? Because you later said this.........

    "Is it because they are internally "Cocked" and they can't see it? Is it because they somehow lend themselves to being fired when a foreign object is caught in the trigger guard and the trigger is tugged/pulled slightly rearward, when they load or unload one or when they un-holster or re-holster one?"
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 25,776 Senior Member
    Big Chief wrote: »
    However I do think/believe/have a gut feeling that Glocks require special handling procedures/extra precautions other makes of semi-autos do not.

    Do you feel the same way about a Kahr? How about a KelTec? Maybe a S&W M&P series pistol like the popular Shield? Beretta 96D or Nano anyone? Diamondback DB9 or Ruger LC9 perhaps? Or even the new Taurus? OK, maybe we won't talk about the Taurus.

    But, none of the above mentioned pistols have an external thumb or grip safety and a few have even LESS internal/structural safeties than the Glock. If you think/believe/have a gut feeling about the Glock...........does that apply to other firearms as listed above? If not........why?

    If the Glock is guilty.........would the reasoning not apply to these others as well?
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 12,336 Senior Member
    JasonMPD wrote: »
    You're right with regards to complicated with reloading for instance. But they are point and shoot simple in all other regards.

    My wife preferred a revolver because she didn't have to remember anything. She could use it without having to press levers or other things. This was in the pre-Glock days when autos had external safties or hammer block levers. So revolvers are simple to use, just not simple to use often. For the shooter, an auto is much simpler to reload, and to repair for that matter. Revolvers are somewhat challenging to a point-and-shoot user. I'm surprised in modern days how many seasoned auto shooters do not know how to properly reload a revolver. It's not intuitive.
    Concealed carry is for protection, open carry is for attention.
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 25,776 Senior Member
    For the record, I never argued or disagreed with your speculation that Glocks were responsible/used for/in more NDs than any other pistol. I just requested that you back your assumption with facts........since you stated it was a fact. Which, you can't do. You can only assume/speculate.

    You are throwing out a fair amount of false/unproven/speculative/uninformed statements and I am just addressing them in discussion.
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 25,776 Senior Member
    Big Chief wrote: »
    Well it must be my imagination when I read (in almost every instance) on the news a Glock was involved in what they call an "Accident" ....taking a crap....thought it wasn't loaded......caught my clothes.....car keys...showing off at a school by cops.....yep no Glocks..................lets see can I remember back through many decades of S&W models 10 revolvers causing so many problems..or even Wondernines that weren't Glocks, nope.

    I'll bet you the next one we hear about such an incident will be with a Glock and I venture to say 7 outta the next ten will be too.

    I see y'all s point I really do. Sheer numbers in use and non-familiarity with how it operates. I'm telling you I firmly believe the nature of the Glock beast lends itself to folks screwing up with them. I don't care if I'm the only one on here who believes that or not.

    Maybe someday somebody has the resources to gather and feed the statistics into a database and put it on a spreadsheet. I searched and can't find any concrete information on numbers of Glocks involved vs non-Glock semi-auto pistols.


    '

    What about all the other guns I mentioned above? They are of similar design in that they have no thumb, grip safety.
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 25,776 Senior Member
    And it's sad that the following need be stated but,

    Chief, I am not mad, upset, disgruntled, indignant, hurt, or otherwise displeased with you in any way................we are simply discussing. Right? Heck, I'm not even trying to defend Glock!!! Just trying to keep the discussion on an even keel.

    Just wanted you to be clear on that.
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 25,776 Senior Member
    And an ironic twist for those if you who think I'm only in this conversation because I'm a Glock-o-phile or something of the sort..........I actually carried a S&W 340M&P in .357 Mag around town yesterday and wore a HK-PSP (P7) to church today.

    So, I'm not all about Glocks.

    :-)
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • NNNN Senior Member Posts: 24,954 Senior Member
    Chief:

    Looking at this thread some more, I do see an issue that is real life; 1 or 2 yrs ago some cleb was carrying his glock, I believe it was a glock, in the waist band of his sweats.
    the gun started to slip, so he said, and he grabbed it and shot himself.

    I suppose if he had been carrying a XDm he would not have shot himself because he might not have depressed the grip safety.
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,995 Senior Member
    Zee wrote: »
    And an ironic twist for those if you who think I'm only in this conversation because I'm a Glock-o-phile or something of the sort..........I actually carried a S&W 340M&P in .357 Mag around town yesterday and wore a HK-PSP (P7) to church today.

    So, I'm not all about Glocks.

    o you feel the same way about a Kahr? How about a KelTec? Maybe a S&W M&P series pistol like the popular Shield? Beretta 96D or Nano anyone? Diamondback DB9 or Ruger LC9 perhaps? Or even the new Taurus? OK, maybe we won't talk about the Taurus.

    But, none of the above mentioned pistols have an external thumb or grip safety and a few have even LESS internal/structural safeties than the Glock. If you think/believe/have a gut feeling about the Glock...........does that apply to other firearms as listed above? If not........why?

    If the Glock is guilty.........would the reasoning not apply to these others as well?

    :-)

    I've fired my German policeman friends P-7 on several occasions, good choice and great pistol, but it does have a front of the grip safety that must be depressed before it will fire.

    I'm not remotely familiar with any of those you mentioned, except from posts on this forum and gun rag articles. I assume they are all striker fired too and are their triggers light as Glocks are?
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 25,776 Senior Member
    I was not stating that the P7 was without safety. Just that I carried guns other than Glock. That's the only reason it was mentioned.

    And none of the pistols I mentioned as similar to the Glock have external hammers so their system of operation is similar to Glock in that regard. Yes, their trigger pull is similar to factory Glock triggers in that they likely fall somewhere between 3.5 - 12 pounds of pull. Just like various model Glocks.
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • twatwa Senior Member Posts: 2,245 Senior Member
    Zee wrote: »
    What about all the other guns I mentioned above? They are of similar design in that they have no thumb, grip safety.

    The LC9 does have a thumb safety, I have one in my pocket almost at all times, and trust me it does. The Kel-tecs I have are more like a double action revolver force wise to pull the trigger, but the Kahr I would definitely consider in the same category. But generally speaking the above fore mentioned besides the LC9, you pull the trigger and it goes boom.
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 25,776 Senior Member
    twa wrote: »
    The LC9 does have a thumb safety, I have one in my pocket almost at all times, and trust me it does. But yes I would consider the others in the same category as a Glock, all you have to do is pull the trigger nothing more.

    My bad on the listing of the LC9. I remembered incorrectly. Should have recalled Rugers propensity to "Lawyer up" an gun.

    ;-)
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,995 Senior Member
    I don't have numbers say of every per capita 10,000 Glocks issued or used there are X number of AD/ND incidents that compares them to other makes of pistols.

    But it does look like a high % of Glocks (65%) are issued/ used by LEOs in the US. So it does stand to reason a greater number of AD/ND occur using a Glock.....so I wuz right all along! :tooth::rotflmao:

    Seriously, I hear/read Glock this and Glock that and seldom any mention of any other make of pistol involved in AD/ND situations.

    I haven't proved I'm right, but I'm not convinced from responses on here that I'm wrong either.

    If anyone on here has a link to any pertinent data that would be useful in this discussion no matter which side of this discussion it points to, please post it. Thanks.
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 25,776 Senior Member
    Are you basing your assumption strictly on LE agencies? Yes, they employ a high percentage of Glocks in the field and since they are about the only ones who "keep track" of ND.s............it would reflect a high percentage result possibly. If there was actual data. But, being none presented. An assumption.

    What of the civilian market and unreported NDs? What guns were used in those?

    Media? Honestly, I don't hear of that many except the occasional celebrity or who's who. Like that politician lady a couple weeks ago. What gun was it that she had?
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 12,336 Senior Member
    Zee wrote: »
    I was not stating that the P7 was without safety. Just that I carried guns other than Glock. That's the only reason it was mentioned.


    And none of the pistols I mentioned as similar to the Glock have external hammers so their system of operation is similar to Glock in that regard. Yes, their trigger pull is similar to factory Glock triggers in that they likely fall somewhere between 3.5 - 12 pounds of pull. Just like various model Glocks.

    Speaking of the P7, and a slight diversion for the moment, but where did you get a holster for that piece? I have one, a slide that was difficult to find, but would like another holster. Any help?
    Concealed carry is for protection, open carry is for attention.
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 25,776 Senior Member
    I also remember the video of the stupid cop lady pointing her Beretta at her partner and subject on the ground and subsequently putting a round in the pavement alongside the subjects head............accidentally?

    And yes, who can forget "I'm the only one in this room professional enough to carry this gun...........BAM!"

    funny moments in stupidity.
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 25,776 Senior Member
    Gene L wrote: »
    Speaking of the P7, and a slight diversion for the moment, but where did you get a holster for that piece? I have one, a slide that was difficult to find, but would like another holster. Any help?

    I have two. An IWB and slide that were given to me with the gun. Don't recall the make and I'm not at home right now. I'll check later.

    Oh, for the rest.........I have an HK P2000 and P2000SK on me right now. Both without external safety and with LEM trigger. So, watch out!!! I'm a safety hazard.

    ;-)
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • BAMAAKBAMAAK Senior Member Posts: 4,484 Senior Member
    Just last week in Decatur, someone was shot by AD/ND while hugging someone. They did not say what kind of gun but it was a .380 so doubt if it was a Glock. Of course they blame the gun.

    http://www.waff.com/story/24510250/stepmother-tells-police-teens-shooting-accidental
    "He only earns his freedom and his life Who takes them every day by storm."

    -- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, German writer and politician
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 25,776 Senior Member
    What if they'd been carrying a S&W M&P Pistol?

    Obviously they werent so we can't know. But, same mechanism and trigger. No?
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 25,776 Senior Member
    BAMAAK wrote: »
    Just last week in Decatur, someone was shot by AD/ND while hugging someone. They did not say what kind of gun but it was a .380 so doubt if it was a Glock. Of course they blame the gun.

    http://www.waff.com/story/24510250/stepmother-tells-police-teens-shooting-accidental

    They most likely own the first G42 to hit the market. At least, we can assume such is the case. Facts are not important.

    :-)
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • JasonMPDJasonMPD Senior Member Posts: 6,557 Senior Member
    Wambli Ska wrote: »
    Ok, throughout my life I have met exactly TWO LEO's that "retired" after being shot on duty. Both shot themselves with Glocks while holstering their own weapons. Both, I'm sure, are in some data base as "officers shot with their own guns", even though they shot themselves. BOTH are the victim of a fast, under funded transitions to semi-auto pistols from their previous duty weapons (S&W Model 10s) and almost no training (small town PDs) and ingrained bad habits that were never corrected because through their careers their qualification was 50 rounds a year in a classic NRA bull eye shooting stance.

    Does that make it the fault of the gun? NOPE, but you can not say that the design of the gun did not contribute to the incident. If they had been carrying their old Model 10's the substantial extra effort required to make the guns go boom in DA would have probably avoided the discharge that occurred. God only knows how many times they tried to holster their guns with their fingers on the trigger and got away with it! But the Glock had a much smaller margin of error in that one last instance. That does not make the Glock an unsafe gun., that only makes the design a lot less tolerant of mistakes.

    I've carried a Glock both professionally and personally for several years. Every holster, duty or CCW, I've ever fielded has never had a single portion of it protrude inwardly in such a way that any part of it would access the inside of the trigger guard during holstering. I hate to armchair quarterback those LEOs untimely retirement, but I'd be willing to bet they both had trigger fingers involved.
    “There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.” – Will Rogers
  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 12,336 Senior Member
    Zee wrote: »
    My bad on the listing of the LC9. I remembered incorrectly. Should have recalled Rugers propensity to "Lawyer up" an gun.

    ;-)

    My Shield also has an external thumb safety. Not that I use it.
    Concealed carry is for protection, open carry is for attention.
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.

Advertisement