Another one bailing from the Glock bandwagon

[Rob377]

When "government work" includes confronting armed bad guys on a regular basis, and needing to be equipped with an effective tool for the job, I'm more than happy to choose what's "good enough."

I suppose we'll skip over the fact that the 1911 was only "good enough for government work" for the last few decades, and now isn't even good enough for that.

ORLY?

 

[Rambler]

ORLY?

I was making light of your "good enough for government work" silliness.

If you don't get the gist of my comments, I can't really help you. The internet is like that sometimes.

 

[LPMan59]

Glock fanboy? I had no idea that Glock made my M&P 45. No wonder that thing is so damn good.

A 1911 fanboy complaining about someone being condescending. Now THAT is rich!

I guess you missed the part about me owning glocks and m&ps and not selling them. And you must have missed the part why I carried glocks (all those things you touted early) I never said 1911s were the end all be all of handguns- only that I was able to shoot one better.....I would hardly call that fanboyism. On the contrary I see the usefulness of the olmer guns, which is why I own a couple.

Am I a mediocre shooter? Probably. But I don't have time or the funds to burn 1000 rounds a month. I didn't start this thread to pick a fight about glocks or 1911s. It was mostly about the humor in that I seemingly forgot how to shoot after takeing several months off.

 

[EvilBlackGun]

A few-dozen dis-satisfied customers, so ...

... only 6,999,021 to go. How much are you asking for the "unacceptable" GLOCK? Humor noted. Still "One Of Us."
"

I was out at WW this morning for some early morning shooting- the first time I've been in quite a while. It was as if I couldn't remember how to shoot my Glock 17 or my M&P 45. It was a sad affair.

I put them away and put a mag in my 1911. And shazam! i had my mojo back. I have always loved the 1911, but I preferred to carry a Glock because of capacity and the lack of manual safety (one less thing to worry about yada yada).

 

[thompal]

Here a quick thought I would like to throw into this discussion. Since we live in a free-market country (sort of) where we let the market (the aggregate of all sellers and buyers) make the decisions about what tools are in demand, why not look at the people/organizations that have the most usage for handguns and see what they carry? I would say this group is composed of the police and other related/semi-related professions such as defense contractors who work in war-zones. I cannot vouch for what the majority of police carry (although Glock seems popular in this circle) but an article I read about defense contractors (written by a defense contractor) said that he and his buddies carried Glock 17's. Conclusion: Glocks seem popular in law enforcement type fields, and no doubt there is a reason for this.

If you will look at the government procurement system, and the bribe-money that freely flows in it, you will see that looking at what the government uses does not equate to what is best quality, or even the best tool for the job.

If you send enough politicians, DoD decision-makers, and department heads (and their wives) on enough Bermuda vacations, and promise enough lucrative lobbying positions after their retirement, decisions will be swayed.

 

[thompal]

When "government work" includes confronting armed bad guys on a regular basis, and needing to be equipped with an effective tool for the job, I'm more than happy to choose what's "good enough."

As opposed to "what is best?"

 

[rugertoter]

I was out at WW this morning for some early morning shooting- the first time I've been in quite a while. It was as if I couldn't remember how to shoot my Glock 17 or my M&P 45. It was a sad affair.

I put them away and put a mag in my 1911. And shazam! i had my mojo back. I have always loved the 1911, but I preferred to carry a Glock because of capacity and the lack of manual safety (one less thing to worry about yada yada).

But I suppose that if one should carry what he shoots best, then a 1911 is the carry piece for me. Time to start retraining the muscles......

Nothing wrong with that choice.

 

[LFD102]

I was making light of your "good enough for government work" silliness.

If you don't get the gist of my comments, I can't really help you. The internet is like that sometimes.

Good enough for government equals cheapest bidder Just saying

 

[45-70]

When "government work" includes confronting armed bad guys on a regular basis, and needing to be equipped with an effective tool for the job, I'm more than happy to choose what's "good enough."

I suppose we'll skip over the fact that the 1911 was only "good enough for government work" for the last few decades, and now isn't even good enough for that.

 

[Rambler]

As opposed to "what is best?"

Alright, either this isn't translating well into text, or some people are hard-headed. I was (quite obviously, I thought) mocking the suggestion that "good enough for government work" is somehow less than the best tool for the job. Most agencies or groups that use firearms and depend on them for a living do not choose sub-par weaponry. They choose what they think is the best tool for the job. If procurement costs were the deciding factor, every government agency in the US would have a Hi-Point in their holster. Many agencies choose Sig, and a few use HK. Not exactly el cheapo weaponry.

For my purposes, Glocks and M&Ps are the best available handgun technology. Period. Better than the 1911, better than the Browning HP, better than any metal frame pistol....period. They are reliable, low maintenance, high capacity, served well by the aftermarket, lightweight, corrosion resistance, and once again, reliable. If I was shooting tiny groups for money, yes, I'd probably go with a heavier pistol with a single action trigger. I'm not into gun games, though, and my pistols are for serious use.

At the end of the day, they are all just lead slinging tools, and if one produces groups within a fraction of an inch of another, it really doesn't matter how much you paid for it or whether it makes you feel like Audie Murphy. Shooting paper zombies isn't the same as utilizing a handgun in a defensive encounter. I can ring steel very quickly and regularly with either of my polymer frame platforms.

It is easy to blame the tool as not being the "best" though, isn't it?

 

[LEaSH]

I don't like your posts.

 

[Rob377]

...Most agencies or groups that use firearms and depend on them for a living do not choose sub-par weaponry. They choose what they think is the best tool for the job. I...

With all the beat to crap POS gear I was issued in the Corps, this makes me laugh hysterically.

I'm not into gun games, though, and my pistols are for serious use.

...

Oh, so we have a serious "operator" here that puts his guns to "serious use"

 

[Cerberus]

With all the beat to crap POS gear I was issued in the Corps, this makes me laugh hysterically.

The key word here is BEAT TO CRAP. If it was anything like the "beat to crap" gear I've recieved from the Corps and Army over the past 2 decades it was still working even though "beat to crap". The first 1911 I ever fired was at SOI in Camp Gieger, NC. It rattled when I shook it side to side, but it still fired, and I qualed with it even if I had to aim 2 targets over @11 o'clock to get on paper. Carried many an M16A2 that had been used and abused but they still function flawlessly and put the bullets where they were aimed. The first 4 years I was in I even had gear that was left over from Vietnam, but it was still functioning properly. I had to wait until 2005 to ever get any weapon or equipment that was new.

I have loved both 1911s that I've owned and loved all 4 of the Glocks that I've owned. I even like the S&W M15 I have as well, I even shoot it the best. Guns ain't like women, they really don't care if you enjoy others also.

 

[Rambler]

With all the beat to crap POS gear I was issued in the Corps, this makes me laugh hysterically.

Yeah, they issued me a POS 1911 back in '87 that promptly suffered a major failure at the range one day at Ft. Campbell. That was back when the M9's were first coming into service, and that old thing had definitely seen better days. But I do realize that it was a piece of crap because of it's age and condition, not because it was a 1911. Are you saying that everything the military has ever issued is crap, including the M1, M4, 1911 and M9? (Ok, I might agree with the M9. )

When I said "government agency," I really wasn't addressing the military, as their mission is not remotely related to a civilian police/investigative agency. Glad you are easily amused, though.

And serious use, to me, is the defense of myself and my family. I've also been issued firearms in an official capacity, both military and civilian, so I don't really fit your little internet poser assumption. Cute picture you posted, though. I've only seen it posted about 1000 times on various forums and websites. Did you come up with that all by yourself? Clever little devil dog, aren't ya?

 

[Rambler]

I don't like your posts.

I don't like your lipstick.

 

[Caleb]

Alright, either this isn't translating well into text, or some people are hard-headed. I was (quite obviously, I thought) mocking the suggestion that "good enough for government work" is somehow less than the best tool for the job. Most agencies or groups that use firearms and depend on them for a living do not choose sub-par weaponry. They choose what they think is the best tool for the job. If procurement costs were the deciding factor, every government agency in the US would have a Hi-Point in their holster. Many agencies choose Sig, and a few use HK. Not exactly el cheapo weaponry.

For my purposes, Glocks and M&Ps are the best available handgun technology. Period. Better than the 1911, better than the Browning HP, better than any metal frame pistol....period. They are reliable, low maintenance, high capacity, served well by the aftermarket, lightweight, corrosion resistance, and once again, reliable. If I was shooting tiny groups for money, yes, I'd probably go with a heavier pistol with a single action trigger. I'm not into gun games, though, and my pistols are for serious use.

At the end of the day, they are all just lead slinging tools, and if one produces groups within a fraction of an inch of another, it really doesn't matter how much you paid for it or whether it makes you feel like Audie Murphy. Shooting paper zombies isn't the same as utilizing a handgun in a defensive encounter. I can ring steel very quickly and regularly with either of my polymer frame platforms.

It is easy to blame the tool as not being the "best" though, isn't it?

All I got out of this is glock is only worthy of serious business and any non-glock firearms are for games...

 

[thompal]

All I got out of this is glock is only worthy of serious business and any non-glock firearms are for games...

That does seem to be the gist of it, doesn't it?

 

[IndianaResident]

I skipped a few pages of material (okay 5), and things seem to have degenerated from humorous to hostile quite swifty....

This is why we can't have nice things.




I'm taking away everyone's carry guns for a week.

 

[ATM]

meh.

 

[Zoub]

To the OP, I live by the creedo "out of sight out of mind." Yeah sure, we can say we will write letters or call every year at Xmas blah blah blah...

Lets be honest here, you are dead to me. Ho much for the Glock? I will go $350 sight unseen. You can keep all but 1 mag.

offer up'd to $375. Final offer. It's not like you need it.