Posted on 03/06/2010 8:03:05 PM PST by smokingfrog
You've seen the endless discussions on internet discussion sites. You've read the articles. You've seen the topics discussed ad nauseam by gun owners who range from novices to experts. What all these pundits have in common is a simple enough prospect, but one in which they hold the firmest of convictions and the most powerful of faiths: They are convinced that the Glock pistol is inherently unsafe.
In fact, the Glock is a remarkably popular weapon with civilians and law enforcement agencies alike. There are very good reasons for this. If the Greek philosopher, Plato, could have imagined a handgun in his world of forms-those concepts that embody the ideal versions of all we are capable of imagining, the earthly manifestations of which are but imperfect copies-he would have envisioned a combat firearm with a simple means of sighting, a barrel, a hand grip, a simple and light trigger, and a cocking and ignition mechanism that fires when the user pulls the trigger (but does not fire unless the trigger is pulled).
The closest "imperfect" manifestation of this Platonic form would be the Glock. Available in multiple popular calibers, the Glock comprises precisely the minimum number of features a combat handgun must possess. It has a comfortably sized, slip-resistant grip for the average male or female hand, which remains comfortable across a broad range of ambient temperatures. It offers a simple, easily upgradeable sighting system. It exhibits reasonable combat accuracy at 25 meters. It has an acceptable light trigger that is long enough on the first shot to permit mere mortals to recognize that the trigger finger is moving, but it has a very short trigger reset that permits rapid fire of multiple shots.
(Excerpt) Read more at humanevents.com ...
As a combat weapon, I look at it in terms of the old AK-47 vs. M16 argument of reliability vs. performance. I tend to favor the performance of the M16 and its progeny.
However, when it comes to a sidearm, reliability is far more important as far as I’m concerned. If you need to use your pistol, you’re probably in a pretty desperate situation in far from ideal conditions, and you’re probably closer to point-blank range from whatever you have to shoot than at a range where the pistol’s accuracy is going to matter much.
When it comes to trusting the pistol to shoot when I pull the trigger in adverse conditions, I’ll take the Glock every time. The 1911’s accuracy and rate of fire won’t matter much if it jams or if haste or panic causes you to forget or miss the safety.
I’d also dispute the relevance of the difference between accuracy or rate of fire. Combat with a pistol is extremely unlikely to occur at ranges where the accuracy will make a difference. Also, assuming for the sake of argument that the 1911 has a substantially higher cyclical rate of fire (which I’m not sure I believe), I don’t think there is any difference whatsoever in effective rate of fire when it comes to controlled shooting, based on my own experience firing both weapons chambered for .45 ACP.
I have a Springfield XD-9 and a S&W M&P .40. They both have similar attributes of the Glock and a couple of specific wrinkles on each that may better suit the user or not. Shoot what you like and is well made and reliable.
p.s. I have been reading Phil Elmore's stuff for years. Another good read.
The one exception was with the 20. It had a bad sear. I was at the range one day and it fired twice with one pull of the triger. I thought I had done something wrong but it happened again. At this point the range master came over to scold me for shooting too quickly. One shot per second rule. I told him that there seemed to be something wrong with the pistol. He tried it himself and started geting 3, 4, and sometime 5 shots with a single pull of the triger.
Turns out to be a bit sporty to hang on to a 10mm Glock with full power loads when it starts shooting full auto.
I sent it to Glock and fixed it very quickly and at no cost.
Still, don’t have one now, and probably never will. Like I said, nothing wrong with them, they just don’t appeal to me.
That video is hilarious every time I see it. Socrates might have some interesting things to say about his pedagogical method.
Stupid and incompetent people should not handle firearms - Glocks or otherwise. Make or model doesn’t really make much difference.
1. Keep all guns unloaded until you need them loaded. Then have plenty of ammo available.
2. Treat all guns as loaded. It’s just a good habit.
3. Never point a gun at anything you don’t plan to destroy.
4. Be aware of what your target is, what is between you and your target and what lies beyond your target. Don’t shoot if there is anything out there you don’t want to kill.
5. No matter what kind of gun you are using keep your finger off the G. D. trigger until you are ready to shoot.
I have one in S&W .40 - a most excellent machine for those shopping.
Same here. Love it. Fits my hand perfectly, and the balance and weight are very comfortable. The precision angle of the grip also mimics the body's natural angle of the hand, so that it tends shoot whatever you point at.
Wonderful gun.
LOOL
I carried a M1911A1 for years as my “tier 3” backup.
Secondary Weapon, a GUA-5 (CAR-15)
Primary weapon?
F-4 loaded with Mk 82/MK 84s.
Talk about stand off and range weapons......
I carry a Beretta Tomcat in .32cal with Glaser Safeties and Hydra-shocks mixed. The 1911A1 is my dad’s ... brand new (few months old)
I also carry the M&P 45 without the manual safety. The post i was responding to was opining for a pistol with a manual safety, so I recommend the M&P with the optional safety. The point being that the M&P offers the optional safety and the Glock does not.
A properly fit 1911 is a VERY dependable piece of machinery. Easily as good or better than a Glock. Accuracy is generally vastly superior in the 1911, but as you noted, match grade accuracy is not required for pistol combat. The rate of fire discussion is preposterous, as both of these firearms cycle faster than you can get back on target.
I build custom 1911’s and work on Glocks as well. I carry an M&P at times and a 1911 that I built for myself at other times.
I agree with your reasoning but think you are applying it to the wrong guns.
Glock has at times had a real problem with reliability. I am sure the problems which were traced to magazines, were corrected many years ago, but still their record is not perfect by any means.
I have heard a lot of stories of 1911’s jamming so will have to assume there is some truth to it but I personally have had extraordinarily good luck with .45 autos. I have never owned one made by Colt which has jammed.
I once got a good buy on some PMC made 90 grain JHPs in 9mm and bought several boxes. I am sure it was an effective load but it would jam a lot of guns. Even my Sig P225 jammed on it.
My Argentine made Browning HP ran through it like a sewing machine. I later tried the same gun with some old reloads I put together when I first got into reloading back in 1969. The sizing die was off and I had to crimp the bullets just behind the case mouth with an old copper pipe tool. That Browning even fed that stuff.
BANG!
Its smarter than 99.9% of the users of same.
2 glocks, 1 Walther P-99 and 1 SW 642 in my stable.
Im very proud of my friend Phil Elmore..now he’s writing in Human Events of all places!
what are you lookin to trade for?
No sense in having it for defense if it isn't chambered IMO.
Personally, I am more comfortable "cocked and locked" with a Colt than I am with a trigger safety Glock, however that is just me.
Either are safe with a competent carrier and with me I am just as fast with a Colt with an external safety as many who tote a Glock with a trigger safety.
You know what, I think most people shouldn't own or carry glocks or any other guns as a matter of fact. People who are "scared" of carrying loaded guns, probably shouldn't.
As for me, I will carry my Glock or any other of my handguns with one in the chamber because otherwise, I might as well carry a brick.
Replying to the topic, not you personally.......
I agree that as long as you have the right holster and have trained properly to not put your finger on the trigger until your sights are on the target, there’s no problem whatsoever. But I can understand that some might feel more comfortable having a gun with a longer/heavier trigger pull or a slide safety.
Now, what about when you are at home relaxing? Assuming you’re not still wearing it on your person, where is the gun and how is it stored? Assuming there are no children in the house, etc., is the gun still loaded? Still kept in a holster? In the night stand? Kept in a safe or box that can be opened quickly? Just wondering for my own information - do you have an opinion. In my case, I usually keep it loaded, still in the holster, somewhat hidden, in a place I can probably get to easily if someone is breaking into the house. (Everyone living in the house is an adult.)
I have no children in the house, but it is usually on my hip, as it is now, otherwise, very close nearby always in a holster while loaded.
At night, it is on my nightstand, holstered, but loaded.
Another issue is re-chambering ammo over and over. This can cause an un-safe condition referred to as "set-back" resulting in over-pressuring a round. I prefer to keep my weapons loaded until it is time to go the range.
Here is a good site on concealed carry if you have not seen it.
http://concealedcarryforum.com/forum/
Lots of good information there.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.