Weapon Of Choice

Status
Not open for further replies.
The best analogy I've heard for a Glock, specifically the Glock 19, is that it's the Toyota Camry of handguns. It's basic transportation, it does everything adequately but nothing really exceptionally. That's really all I need out of a $500 gun.

There's a Firearms Forum called pistolforum.com. its clientele consists of notable instructors, gun magazine writers, quite a few cops and various other people who carry guns professionally and quite a few that have actually had to defend themselves with a handgun.

Every year one of the members does a survey who's carrying what and and the number of respondents who choose to carry a 9 mm Glock consistently is about 85%. There's probably another 5% that carry Glocks in some other caliber and the remaining 10% account for all other guns and calibers combined. This indicates to me that I did not make the wrong choice.

I don't have a large collection of guns. Between us my wife and I own less than 10 guns and four of them are Glocks.

I shoot Glocks better than any handgun I own because I train (and I mean actually attending professional training not plinking at the range and calling it training) with my Glocks more than any handgun I own. Actually I train with my Glocks to the exclusion of every other handgun I own.

What amazes me about this discussion is the absolute unreasoning hatred some of you display towards an inanimate object. One of the reasons I carry Glocks exclusively is because I have no emotional attachment to them.

If God forbid my gun ends up in an Evidence Locker somewhere, so what? It's a Glock 19 there's a million more just like it. Having said that, the fact that Glocks exist in the universe should have no measurable effect on your life. The fact that I choose to carry a Glock (usually a 26) exclusively doesn't diminish your choice at all or it shouldn't.

FB-IMG-1548167966628.jpg
 
Last edited:
Jeb Stuart said:
Read the book years ago. The one thing that I found interesting is how the Government bid process actually works. Glocks, Smocks. It was never about the product. Glocks are as good or bad as most products in the same class. And this was not just not from this book alone. There are many sources out there. One, I remember was "Buying a President" which dealt with GOV. bids. Also found it interesting that a lot of bid winning went to Glocks because of their lack of a safety. To train masses of new shooters, it was just to expensive and time consuming to train them with a safety.
Glock used that to his advantage.
What I take away from Glock, was nothing about the firearm, the quality etc. But how he mastered the Bid. In that respect, he knew how to be successful.Good or Bad, honest, dishonest. If theGOV now have more watch dog groups on bids I could not tell you.
I laugh when folks are so naive to believe that just because a branch of service or Police in any country,city etc carry brand X, means anything more than that agency just found a low bid or bought a bid.

Ole Gaston knew how to play the bid game. And he won. You have to give him points for that. I sure many other companies learned the game along the way, gun products to every product made.
Click to expand...

I won’t argue Glock knows how to win government contracts, that is clear.

But I don’t believe that point equals the fact that Glock is an inferior product. If it were, they wouldn’t keep winning bids...government doesn’t just go by “lowest price “, there are minimum requirements and best value considerations too. I’ve seen low bids get thrown out on several occasions simply due to the vendors product or service was known for poor or insufficient quality.

Glock didn’t hold 60+% of the LEO market just because they had the lowest price.
 
Buzznrose said:
I won’t argue Glock knows how to win government contracts, that is clear.

But I don’t believe that point equals the fact that Glock is an inferior product. If it were, they wouldn’t keep winning bids...government doesn’t just go by “lowest price “, there are minimum requirements and best value considerations too. I’ve seen low bids get thrown out on several occasions simply due to the vendors product or service was known for poor or insufficient quality.

Glock didn’t hold 60+% of the LEO market just because they had the lowest price.
Click to expand...

I never once said, or inferred that Glock was a inferior product. On the contrary, I find them to be great guns, also like the Beretta and the Sig. Only that they do qualify in any bid or most bids. And Glock has a history of successfully winning a bid, and I do believe money plays a big role. In one way or the other. It always comes down to the MONEY. It could be availability of parts, production, distribution, bribes, Lobbyist and on and on.

And Personally could care less what the Military Police, Navy Seals etc. carry in the US, or some country I never even heard of. Fortunately I do not have to go through a bidding process to carry my choice of firearm.

Actually I thought the whole thread was about Gaston Glock and NOT the pros and cons of the Product. Gaston was into Plastics and I would bet he won other bids with other products as well. It would be interesting to find that out.

Ps by the way. I like your quote:"Now remember, things look bad and it looks like you're not gonna make it, then you gotta get mean. I mean plumb, mad-dog mean. 'Cause if you lose your head and you give up then you neither live nor win. That's just the way it is." Clint Eastwood in "The Outlaw Josey Wales".
 
Last edited:
Trunk Monkey said:
Prior to making guns I think Gaston made silverware trays, shower curtain rods and curtain rods
Click to expand...

And I bet they were the best silverware trays and shower curtains money can buy. Just like "the best Judge money can buy."

When I think of Glock, I think of Polymer rather than the gun. And I find the history of Gaston Glock to be very interesting. Making knife sheaves in his garage as as start. Also his use of Polymers in the camera industry. Now look at all the products that use this lightweight strong, durable plastic. I find it fascinating.
 
Last edited:
Holy zombie thread, Batman!

I'm not a GLOCK fan by any measure, but imI surprised by some of the rabid hatred some seem to have for the pistol.

IMO, it's actually a mediocre pistol built around an excellent magazine. My only real issue with it is the lack of any real safety. Since most NDs seem to occur during administrative handling, I consider a manual safety to be a pretty critical feature for a handgun. I also like being able to block a hammer with my thumb as someone noted previously, though I don't consider it as critical as a safety.
 
Jeb Stuart said:
I never once said, or inferred that Glock was a inferior product. On the contrary, I find them to be great guns, also like the Beretta and the Sig. Only that they do qualify in any bid or most bids. And Glock has a history of successfully winning a bid, and I do believe money plays a big role. In one way or the other. It always comes down to the MONEY. It could be availability of parts, production, distribution, bribes, Lobbyist and on and on.

And Personally could care less what the Military Police, Navy Seals etc. carry in the US, or some country I never even heard of. Fortunately I do not have to go through a bidding process to carry my choice of firearm.

Actually I thought the whole thread was about Gaston Glock and NOT the pros and cons of the Product. Gaston was into Plastics and I would bet he won other bids with other products as well. It would be interesting to find that out.

Ps by the way. I like your quote:"Now remember, things look bad and it looks like you're not gonna make it, then you gotta get mean. I mean plumb, mad-dog mean. 'Cause if you lose your head and you give up then you neither live nor win. That's just the way it is." Clint Eastwood in "The Outlaw Josey Wales".
Click to expand...

Jeb Stuart,

Sorry if I misinterpreted your post.

It is true that Glock was in the plastics business prior to winning the Austrian Army pistol bid. Glock was the supplier of field knives to the Austrian armed forces and was asked to consider designing a handgun. Here is a pic of a Glock field knife (bayonet) on a Styer AUG:

http://worldbayonets.com/Bayonet_Identification_Guide/Austria/feldmesser78_aug.pdf

He actually designed the original G17 pretty much in his head after taking apart many other pistols available.

When Glock was test firing his new prototypes, he would fire them with his left hand, because he was right handed and didn't want to take the chance of any type of catastrophic failure causing permanent damage to his primary hand.

Another interesting fact...Glock makes almost every part of their firearms, including the plastic cases, in house. They outsource very few parts

This is a very interesting 60 minute podcast (Center Mass) from firearms and self defense writer and instructor Fred Masterson where he goes into Glock in pretty cool detail. Interesting listen:

https://toppodcast.com/show-detail/?showId=3518287
 
Thanks for the Post, he was a very interesting man. Obviously Brilliant. Since Glock makes all their parts and on top of production all the time, Parts that are meet all the OEM specs of that particular firearm, then of course it would be a bonus in a bid. Availability of all parts would be very advantageous for large organizations. Most especially in war time.
 
Last edited:
Ramone said:
Holy zombie thread, Batman!

I'm not a GLOCK fan by any measure, but imI surprised by some of the rabid hatred some seem to have for the pistol.

IMO, it's actually a mediocre pistol built around an excellent magazine. My only real issue with it is the lack of any real safety. Since most NDs seem to occur during administrative handling, I consider a manual safety to be a pretty critical feature for a handgun. I also like being able to block a hammer with my thumb as someone noted previously, though I don't consider it as critical as a safety.
Click to expand...

This thread is 3 days old

 
Good Ol' Boy said:
There have been a couple of half decent replies but really nothing specific to the OP.

If you haven't seen the documentary there's really no reason to reply.

This isn't a "What do you think about Glock?" thread.
Click to expand...
I get what you're saying, but you had to know, or at least suspect, that this was the way it was going to go. You can't start a thread on a gun forum about anything related to Glock's or AR's without it turning at least partially into a debate. That's one of the unbreakable laws of the universe. It's like gravity. ;)
 
Last edited:
Wisco said:
The holster is the safety. Don’t want to shoot? Don’t draw the gun and press the trigger. Easy.
Click to expand...

So, if you want a safety, you have to buy it separately, and it's not even installed on the gun. It just keeps getting thicker and deeper.
 
I haven't seen the documentary, and am not a fan of the ergonomics, but as a duty weapon issued to a large number of people, most who see a gun the same way they see a flashlight, handcuffs, or a baton, it does as designed. It's cheap, reliable, easy to fix, and tough. The same thing could have been said of the Ford Crown Vic Interceptor...not the fastest, not the sportiest, but it just worked well and did what it was designed to do.

I carry a 1911 on duty and there are times I wished I had the plastic fantastic, particularly on cold, snowy or rainy days. My 1911 is more accurate than a stock Glock, but costs double the amount and I still had to put time and care to get it where I wanted. Do you like a 1970's muscle car to tune or a good running Toyota that keeps running for 250,000 miles?
 
Dibbs said:
So, if you want a safety, you have to buy it separately, and it's not even installed on the gun. It just keeps getting thicker and deeper.
Click to expand...

What is getting thicker and deeper? Glock’s sales?
 
Good Ol' Boy said:
There have been a couple of half decent replies but really nothing specific to the OP.

If you haven't seen the documentary there's really no reason to reply.

This isn't a "What do you think about Glock?" thread.
Click to expand...

I’ll bring it back. I watched the documentary, and to me, it was nothing more than the AR15 argument that a Glock is a “weapon designed for war and you stupid civilians have no reason to own such a thing”. The documentary supposedly was about Glock’s, but it was really about gun violence and how the gun lobby caused it all.

That whole Chicago piece was about guns, but it should have been about the failed city leadership.

This thread doesn’t wander much more than that documentary did...
 
OK, Mr Glock has a reputation for not being a nice guy. Most of the accusations come from his ex-wife and I've learned from experience the accusations of an ex-spouse are to be taken with a grain of salt roughly the size of Mount Rainier. Dig into personal life and Einstein wasn't all that great a guy either, we still use his equations. Werner Von Braun was given a pass from committing war crimes for using slave labor but we still use many of his rocket designs. I won't even mention Bill Clinton...

Bottom line, Mr Glock has a product that works. It works well enough that people literally bet their lives on it's functioning. Whether or not he cheated his ex-wife out of half the corporation is a matter for the courts to decide not some tulala in Indiana. Quite frankly, as long as my husband's Glock brings him back home should he have a social problem I really don't care if Gaston and his nurse have parties featuring great Danes and the high school football team. At 2 in the morning on a lonely highway all that matters is the Glock will do the work that's needed to be done to preserve life and limb.
 
The true weapon of choice may be the bully pulpit that entertainment/media companies use to drive wedges wherever possible to Balkanize the shooting community.
 
I don't think we need to blame the media for that. There are plenty of people in the shooting community who are in the wedge driving business full time. I'm not saying the shooting community is unique in this aspect; it's a very human trait to want to divide into "tribes" and to strive to prove that one's own tribe is the best of the bunch. You see it throughout history and in every facet of human interaction.

As you browse THR, look at the posts and see which ones celebrate firearms ownership, share useful information, help other firearm owners with problems, inspire and assist other firearm owners and which ones are focused on dividing the shooting community, on rationalizing/justifying those artificial divisions, on elevating the person posting, on denigrating choices different from those of the person posting, on justifying the preferences and actions of the person posting.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

O
  • Locked
"Gun Crazy" the 1949 movie
Replies
15
Views
887
oae
O
D
  • Locked
Questions About Researching Guns In Films & Product Placement
Replies
0
Views
307
damien
D
P
  • Locked
Slight Possibility: Technical Consultant to Screen Writer (w00t!)
Replies
6
Views
715
Rawlings
R
C
  • Locked
"American Gun" in the works
Replies
8
Views
1K
jefnvk
J
N
  • Locked
Blank Firing Guns?
Replies
12
Views
1K
Justin
Justin
Back
Top