Glock Curiosity

Status
Not open for further replies.
bad_dad_brad:

Thanks for pointing out the raised extractor feature. This is on most western European pistols designed since the German Poleizi Pistole trials of, what, 25 years ago now? Funny how the Germans consider this a "loaded chamber indicator" but noone can convince HUD lawsuit goons/MA & MD state gun nazis of this fact. SIGS, H&K's, Glocks, Berettas, Walthers etc. ad nauseum sport this feature, yet for some reason the anti's keep clamoring for something that already exists. Makes you wonder what color the sky is in their world, don't it?

------------------
"..but never ever Fear. Fear is for the enemy. Fear and Bullets."
10mm: It's not the size of the Dawg in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog!
 
In response kind of to what Rainbow Six wrote, I was reading a few gun manuals. We all know that Rule #1 of guns is to treat them as if they were loaded.

I think we have to change that if we are going to be the ultra-responsible gun owners we are. I teach my girlfriend this: Rule #1 of guns is "EVERY GUN IS LOADED AND HOT." I think that is a much better Rule #1. When my friend hands me a gun and says that he just checked the chamber and it's empty. Even though I saw him check the chamber and eject the mag, when he hands it to me, I check it again. He is never insulted by that action, and nobody else should either. If you get offended because you feel that your friend doesn't "trust" that you did a complete job in checking if the chamber is clean, then you are stupid. Safety I'd have to say is a bit higher in priority than your ego. Safety is what saves friendships.

So Glocks are safe, as safe as a revolver. Finger on trigger, gun=hot, finger off trigger, gun = safe. And yes, I do consider EVERY gun to be loaded. It's IMHO the only way to think about a gun. The day you lose respect for the powr of a firearm is the day someone is going to get hurt because of you.

Agreements, disagreements?
Albert
 
G33,

I personally consider the Glocks to be a Single Action. Therefore, it's NOTHING like a double action revolver. DA revolvers have a much heavier trigger and can strike a second cartrige if it fails to go bang. All it rquires is a second pull of the trigger. The thing that makes a gun "double action" is the fact that the hammer or striker is cycled every time the trigger is pulled. That's the definition of DA. Now that I think about it, the Glock has nothing in common with a DA pistol or revolver. Don't lynch me, I still love Glocks.

I can almost hear the cavalry riding my way,
Ben

------------------
Almost Online IM: BenK911
ICQ # 53788523
"Gun Control Is Being Able To Hit Your Target"

[This message has been edited by Ben (edited April 29, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by Ben (edited April 29, 2000).]
 
Why is a Glock such a bad gun for a beginner? It is the easiest pistol to not have an AD with, all you have to do to not fire it is not pull the trigger. Which begs the question, if you didn't want to fire the pistol, why would you pull the trigger? I like the quote above, "you gotta be smarter than the shovel."
 
It seems that some of you guys just keep repeating the same thing over and over.

"Just keep your finger off the trigger." Well DUH!!! :rolleyes: ;)

But I wonder if there are a few more well thought out responses. It's easy to jump on board the side that has all the numbers, but how about a pro's and con's type of comparison.

How are Glocks like a DA Pistol? (like some may say)
How are Glocks like a DA Revolver? (like others may say)

There are tons of benefits FOR the Glock that I like such as the looks (I know I'm wierd). I like the finish; I like the consistent trigger. I like how simple they are. I like that they are priced reasonably. I like that they are light. But I'll continue recommending a DA revolver or DAO or DA/SA pistol over an SA Glock. Shovel THAT :p

I think I'm having too much fun.
Ben

------------------
Almost Online IM: BenK911
ICQ # 53788523
"Gun Control Is Being Able To Hit Your Target"

[This message has been edited by Ben (edited April 29, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by Ben (edited April 29, 2000).]
 
When I was choosing my first handgun, it came down between a Glock or the HK USP (in .40auto). The decision to get the HK fell to the external (read: manual) safety and the wide range of carry condition options. More complicated? Absolutely. More likely to fumble and screw the pooch in a combat situation? Probably. Did I feel safer with the manual safety on? Yes. False sense of security? Maybe, maybe not.

The reality (imho) is that with the manual safety on, the HK is safer than the Glock. Clearly. Did this lead me to develop poor gun-handling/safety habits? No. I had good teachers. The manual safety put me at ease, and my wife at ease (more at ease, I should say).

My second handgun? It'll be a Glock 29 with Ashley Express sights...no doubt about it :)

Looking back, if defense was the primary purpose, I think the Glock up front probably would have been a better choice. Only for the fact that the increased 'nervousness' of the beginner is an acceptable trade-off for the simple action of the Glock when the sh*t hits the fan.

But that first handgun was not purchased with defense as the primary criteria. I liked shooting and I wanted a gun, so I liked the manual safety there. Now I know how to shoot (safe and responsible), and I want a weapon.


- gabe

PS: Looks like I really cleared that up ;) Could I make less sense? I don't even know what side I'm on anymore :)
 
Ben,

I don't consider Glock actions to be DA anything. I consider Glock actions far superior to a DA. :D

Although everyone has preferences as to what they consider to be a benefit and/or necessity, second strike capability is not even a consideration to me. If a round doesn't fire when hit the first time it might be defective. If you restrike it, as a DA auto or revolver might, you may just send a squibb to it's final resting place in your barrel. In the right situation, that might send you to your final resting place. Not an option for me.

A quick (practiced) rack & resume fire techinque eliminates my concerns of the possible second strike/squibb scenario mentioned above in the case of a fail to fire on first strike. This technique boosts my confidence in the next trigger pull resulting in a bang instead of a "Pfffffffft".

Anyone who has never had a squibb wouldn't understand how heart breaking it feels and sounds, and I was only punching paper when I had one. I can't even begin to imagine how sickening it would feel and sound if this were to occur in a self defense sitiuation. Just thinking about it makes me feel sick.

Man, this thread is great. Good topic. :)



------------------
***************************
Georgia TFL'ers get together:
May 20, 2000-From 3pm to 6pm
http://www.wolfcreek-gun.com
***************************

R6...aka...Chris
 
Because it works and like said before...keep the finger out of the trigger area unless you want it to go BANG

[This message has been edited by Ariel 1 (edited April 29, 2000).]
 
"what is the problem with having an optional external safety on the Glock? If you don't want to use the safety, just keep it off. The Glock isn't a revolver and it doesn't allow for a quick inspection as to whether it's loaded or not. "

First of all, Glocks are not "DA", they are "Safe Action" and have earned that name. They are safer than revolvers for a variety of reasons, including that they DO have something to stop the trigger from being pulled. Revolvers have no semblance of any kind of trigger safety.

It think that Gaston is doing us a favor in not introducing the thumb safety Glock. Once he introduces it, it will become a liabilty to own or use one without a thumb safety, and soon enough a law would be passed.
AND, the real life FACT is, there are very very few ND's with Glocks. IN FACT, POLICE AGENCIES REPORT FAR FEWER ND'S WHEN THEY SWITCH TO GLOCKS. The FACT is, the Glock is the safest pistol on the market because it is so simple.

Also, having a manual safety that you expect (ASSUME!) to be off when you need it is a liability to your life!

Lastly, is is easy to tell if a Glock is loaded. If the trigger is forward when you pick it up, there is a round in the chamber. The trigger IS the loaded chamber indicator. ALWAYS ALWAYS assume the pistol is loaded. Who needs an external indicator to tell you something you already assume?

Not only that, but with the littlest of practice you can look at the extractor of a Glock and tell if it is loaded or not. But, either way, who needs to know if it is not loaded: we always assume they ARE loaded until we clear them, correct???

The FACT is, with all the neysayers that have been balking for years about the Glock, it has been PROVEN to be the safest gun on the market. It is so simple it is almost idiot-proof: just follow the basic rules of gun safety. This has been proven to work, no arguing necessary.

All you do with an external safety is ADD another rule for people to remember. And, you add a false sense of confidence that the gun is "safe". No one has ever been accidentally shot with a "loaded" gun. Same goes for safeties.

Most accidental shootings involve a person thinking the safety is on or the gun is unloaed. Without a safety, you know it is not on, so you keep your damn finger off the trigger. People misread safeties and chamber indicators ("I thought the chamber indicator showed that it was empty, so I...."). These things are for idiots and only serve to make them more confused.

Once again, the Glock is PROVEN to be extremely safe in the real world, so why are we even discussing this? There is no arguing with results.


Ps- I can't imagine anyone carrying a 1911 "mexican style". Those blasted thumb safety and slide release levers dig into my side.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top