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.
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
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.
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
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
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
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.
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
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
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
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
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.
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!
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
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.
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
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!
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
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.
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
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
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.
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.
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
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.
I am really surprised manufacturers don't offer the same basic gun with an optional manual safety. If anything I would think it would be a great marketing ploy, you covered both sides of the spectrum with buyers.
My Shield also has an external thumb safety. Not that I use it.
Honest question here, if the gun was made with an external thumb safety, why wouldn't you use it? Do you find it impedes your speed to get lead down range? I have not handled a shield, do you find it too small, where you can not engage it at times?
The whole reason I went to a LC9 was because of the manual safety, I am old school, grew up shooting Smith 4500 series autos and 1911's that have a thumb safety, it is just natural for me. I was taught shooting these types of guns growing up that after you take a shot down range, the FIRST THING YOU DO IS ENGAGE THE SAFETY. How times have changed.
Replies
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.
-96 lbs
Vinegar and water work pretty good............if you got any on the keyboard, you're screwed.
I will fear no evil: For I carry a .308 and not a .270
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...
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.
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?"
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?
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.
You are throwing out a fair amount of false/unproven/speculative/uninformed statements and I am just addressing them in discussion.
What about all the other guns I mentioned above? They are of similar design in that they have no thumb, grip safety.
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.
So, I'm not all about Glocks.
:-)
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.
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?
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!
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.
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.
My bad on the listing of the LC9. I remembered incorrectly. Should have recalled Rugers propensity to "Lawyer up" an gun.
;-)
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.
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!
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?
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?
And yes, who can forget "I'm the only one in this room professional enough to carry this gun...........BAM!"
funny moments in stupidity.
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.
;-)
http://www.waff.com/story/24510250/stepmother-tells-police-teens-shooting-accidental
-- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, German writer and politician
Obviously they werent so we can't know. But, same mechanism and trigger. No?
They most likely own the first G42 to hit the market. At least, we can assume such is the case. Facts are not important.
:-)
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.
My Shield also has an external thumb safety. Not that I use it.
I smell a rat here since she had TWO UDs with the pistol. The first one should have caused her to put the gun down. Time will tell.
Honest question here, if the gun was made with an external thumb safety, why wouldn't you use it? Do you find it impedes your speed to get lead down range? I have not handled a shield, do you find it too small, where you can not engage it at times?
The whole reason I went to a LC9 was because of the manual safety, I am old school, grew up shooting Smith 4500 series autos and 1911's that have a thumb safety, it is just natural for me. I was taught shooting these types of guns growing up that after you take a shot down range, the FIRST THING YOU DO IS ENGAGE THE SAFETY. How times have changed.