|
|
Post by CXM on Sept 16, 2017 9:35:20 GMT -5
I'm not sure I'd say Glock altered history... I would say it is a very successful pistol, sold by a company that is the master of marketing... People forget that Glock was sold dirt cheap when it hit the U.S. market... and they basically bought market share in the beginning. That isn't to say the Glock was/is not a decent workable gun... but comparing it to a BHP or a S&W is like comparing a Yugo to a Jaguar... both work, and the Yugo is easy to maintain... but the Yugo is not in any elegant or something that produces pride in ownership. To me at least, the BHP with 15 round Mec-Gar magazines is as good as or better than a Glock 19. The only area the Glock has an advantage (and it is not an advantage to many) is weight... and then only a few ounces. Of course Glock has a much broader line than Browning/FN. Now I have some Glocks... and in fact I carry some of them from time to time. One advantage of a Glock is if something happens to it, I won't suffer any anxiety over the loss... they can be readily replaced by a like Glock... not like an old S&W or Colt for example... or a classic BHP.. plus the cost of a Glock is about half that of a BHP> If you want a Glock, you can usually get a really good deal on police trade-in guns from Summit Gun Broker. ( www.summitgunbroker.com ) The owner of Summit, Mark is a first class guy and is easy to do business with... I highly recommend him... FWIW Chuck Being a student of history, I am quite drawn to firearms with historic significance. It is quite difficult to find a firearm with a more interesting and significant history than the Hi Power. The rest, as they say, is history. Howard Would this be a good time for me to mention my interest in buying a Glock, a weapon that some might say altered the course of history?  |
|
|
|
Post by gt40doc on Sept 16, 2017 13:24:57 GMT -5
I am sorry, but the Glocks have no soul!!! Yes, I own a Mod. 27, and actually carried it for a while after I fitted a Bar-Sto ported 357 Sig bbl. to it. I actually shoot it pretty good, but it gives me no pride of ownership.......kind of like owning a hammer.  |
|
|
|
Post by jaypee on Sept 16, 2017 14:53:34 GMT -5
the big agencies almost uniformly rejected the single action auto out of hand, ... they outlawed single action autos for even off duty use. They were scared to death of them. As a mere civilian, I don't get this. I would think that LE professionals could deal with a weapon — let's say the 1911 — that was designed for horse soldiers. But maybe I'm missing the political nuances here. I'll see if I can explain it, MC. First, there is a radical difference in the way law enforcement uses its pistols and the way the military uses them. In military combat, the soldier knows who the enemy is and where he is. He almost never has to make a quick draw and fire movement in the midst of a battle. His pistol is drawn and he’s fully prepared going in. That's entirely different in law enforcement. In police work, the officer often doesn’t know who the enemy is until the enemy makes his move, at which time the officer, in stark terror and surprise, and in mortal fear for his life, has to draw the weapon, release the safety and fire. It’s incredibly difficult to overcome the badguy’s time advantage, and great haste is the key to survival. This brings us to the root cause of police officials’ fears about single action guns. Police officials have been uncomfortable with the need to release a safety under such circumstances, because of fear that the officer will die because he forgot to release the safety when placed under such stress. Having been a police firearms instructor for some years, I personally believe this to be a very justifiable fear. As a result of this fear, they have traditionally gravitated to pistols that can be drawn and fired without having to release the safety. Bear in mind that large police agencies can number anywhere from 5,000 officers to 40,000 officers. Another fear is that officers will cover captured suspects with cocked pistols and, again due to stress and the short single action trigger pull, inadvertently shoot a suspect. In the military, this only amounts to shooting one more enemy soldier and there is no fault in that. In police work, this can lead to manslaughter charges against the officer and massive civil suits against the agency. So, whereas this is a “no sweat” deal in the military, it is a bigger-than-huge deal in police work. (Back in the revolver days it was not uncommon to see police agencies modify their revolvers so they could only be fired double action.) It is an unfortunate fact that a great many policemen are not shooters but “users," the selection process being geared much more to finding people with good judgement than finding those who are good with guns. Getting a huge force of “users” accustomed to all of the nuances of a single action pistol used under these circumstances is frightening, at least to me. So, like it or not, I think the single action auto pistol in law enforcement will be, as it currently is, restricted to small agencies, small units within a larger agency, and individual officers under special circumstances. By gravitating to DA/SA and striker-fired trigger systems, police agencies are merely adopting the equipment the greatest number of their officers can be successful with. Hope this helps explain it. JayPee PS. What's a "mere" civilian? They're what it's all about. |
|
|
|
Post by CXM on Sept 16, 2017 14:53:37 GMT -5
I've often wondered how police bosses are afraid of single action autos with a manual safety but not about a Glock etc with no safety. Curiouser and curiouser said Alice... V/r Chuck Quoted wrong post. Deleted by JayPee |
|
|
|
Post by jaypee on Sept 16, 2017 15:00:12 GMT -5
If the average officer isn't a shooter, the average police boss REALLY isn't a shooter, and prolly wouldn't know a striker fired trigger system from a '79 Yugo.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mister Coffee on Sept 16, 2017 22:52:23 GMT -5
As a mere civilian, I don't get this. I would think that LE professionals could deal with a weapon — let's say the 1911 — that was designed for horse soldiers. But maybe I'm missing the political nuances here. I'll see if I can explain it, MC. ... Hope this helps explain it. JayPee PS. What's a "mere" civilian? They're what it's all about. Great explanation, jaypee. Much obliged. |
|
|
|
Post by Mister Coffee on Sept 16, 2017 23:05:48 GMT -5
I'm not sure I'd say Glock altered history... I would say it is a very successful pistol, sold by a company that is the master of marketing... People forget that Glock was sold dirt cheap when it hit the U.S. market... and they basically bought market share in the beginning. That isn't to say the Glock was/is not a decent workable gun... but comparing it to a BHP or a S&W is like comparing a Yugo to a Jaguar... both work, and the Yugo is easy to maintain... but the Yugo is not in any elegant or something that produces pride in ownership. To me at least, the BHP with 15 round Mec-Gar magazines is as good as or better than a Glock 19. The only area the Glock has an advantage (and it is not an advantage to many) is weight... and then only a few ounces. Of course Glock has a much broader line than Browning/FN. Now I have some Glocks... and in fact I carry some of them from time to time. One advantage of a Glock is if something happens to it, I won't suffer any anxiety over the loss... they can be readily replaced by a like Glock... not like an old S&W or Colt for example... or a classic BHP.. plus the cost of a Glock is about half that of a BHP> If you want a Glock, you can usually get a really good deal on police trade-in guns from Summit Gun Broker. ( www.summitgunbroker.com ) The owner of Summit, Mark is a first class guy and is easy to do business with... I highly recommend him... FWIW Chuck Chuck, I was thinking of the Glock the way one might think of the AK-47. Simple, but effective. One has to marvel at it because, in fact, it is not a Yugo. Yugos didn't run. (Jaguars didn't run either if you had Lucas electrics.  ) Glocks are reliable, accurate and durable. Some aver that they set the standard for out-of-the-box reliability, accuracy and durability. And, as you have noted, they are cheap. I think that John M. Browning would have recognized Gaston Glock as a kindred spirit. |
|
|
|
Post by CXM on Sept 17, 2017 10:27:15 GMT -5
The last Jaguar I saw had Bosch electronics... German quality... Jag probably went to German electronics when they were bought by a German company... BMW I think... Lucas electronics REALLY sucked. I had a TR4 that had Jager electronics... it worked fine... unlike MGs with Lucas. Back in the late 1970s I was stationed in Germany... British Layland (who was the government conglomerate that had nearly all the British car brands under it's control. Leyland used only Lucas electronics... they turned Triumph in to manure... Leyland was trying very hard to sell their cars in the military market in Europe... with not a lot of success after a few got sold in the military. The joke was the prices were so low ( The Jag was under $5k) because you had to buy them in pairs so you would have one to drive while the other was in the shop...  The Yugo was simply a Russian Lada (which in turn was a Russian license built Fiat) built in Yugoslavia. They required a lot of tinkering to keep it running... with a Yugo you didn't buy just a car... you bought a hobby you would have to work at every weekend... the good thing is they were very easy to maintain and for the most part could use Fiat parts. Anyway, I still maintain the HP yields little to a Glock 19 and is a much classier gun... FWIW Chuck I'm not sure I'd say Glock altered history... I would say it is a very successful pistol, sold by a company that is the master of marketing... People forget that Glock was sold dirt cheap when it hit the U.S. market... and they basically bought market share in the beginning. That isn't to say the Glock was/is not a decent workable gun... but comparing it to a BHP or a S&W is like comparing a Yugo to a Jaguar... both work, and the Yugo is easy to maintain... but the Yugo is not in any elegant or something that produces pride in ownership. To me at least, the BHP with 15 round Mec-Gar magazines is as good as or better than a Glock 19. The only area the Glock has an advantage (and it is not an advantage to many) is weight... and then only a few ounces. Of course Glock has a much broader line than Browning/FN. Now I have some Glocks... and in fact I carry some of them from time to time. One advantage of a Glock is if something happens to it, I won't suffer any anxiety over the loss... they can be readily replaced by a like Glock... not like an old S&W or Colt for example... or a classic BHP.. plus the cost of a Glock is about half that of a BHP> If you want a Glock, you can usually get a really good deal on police trade-in guns from Summit Gun Broker. ( www.summitgunbroker.com ) The owner of Summit, Mark is a first class guy and is easy to do business with... I highly recommend him... FWIW Chuck Chuck, I was thinking of the Glock the way one might think of the AK-47. Simple, but effective. One has to marvel at it because, in fact, it is not a Yugo. Yugos didn't run. (Jaguars didn't run either if you had Lucas electrics. ) Glocks are reliable, accurate and durable. Some aver that they set the standard for out-of-the-box reliability, accuracy and durability. And, as you have noted, they are cheap. I think that John M. Browning would have recognized Gaston Glock as a kindred spirit. |
|
Being a student of history, I am quite drawn to firearms with historic significance. It is quite difficult to find a firearm with a more interesting and significant history than the Hi Power. The rest, as they say, is history. 
) Glocks are reliable, accurate and durable. Some aver that they set the standard for out-of-the-box reliability, accuracy and durability. And, as you have noted, they are cheap. I think that John M. Browning would have recognized Gaston Glock as a kindred spirit.
