IMPD selling G3 glocks in favor of G4?

[DRob]

Nothing new here.

When IPD switched from S&W .357 revolvers to the relatively anemic Beretta 9MM pistols, I bought the S&W 686-3 I had carried for several years. Officially, I bought it from Kiesler's. It's a great gun and I'll be keeping it. The department went through two versions of the Beretta before switching to Glock. Far as I know, nobody wanted one of the Berettas. Not too long after that change we were allowed to buy a Glock (any model IIRC) through the department at the City contract price. I retired in 1993 and that Model 23 is still my daily carry gun and a real pleasure to shoot.

 

[vitamink]

Yes, yes, I saw this movie once, what if a Wing Chun trained Godzilla attacks, or, of course, 9/11.

When is the last time IMPD officer has thrown a mag to another officer after he shot to empty?

As far as the armourer, why not just give vouchers? One more officer on the street, or eliminate the positions and save money on salary and benefits?

There have been a few times Kirk. The last that I can remember was the officer kermon shooting where the bad guy shot his gun and it blew up in his hand. His back up officer handed him another glock .40 so he could stay in the fight. If he handed him a Kimber or Sig it might have changed the outcome.

 

[phylodog]

As is normal with Glock, it appears there are several versions of the Gen 4 being sold: early, mid and recent production with changes made with little or no notice as is also normal from Glock.

Were these pistols sent with the Milled or MIM extractors?

Which recoil spring was installed?

Any issues with switching backstraps or concerns with officers switching them out as reports are they are fragile.

What style of ejector?

I ask as I have a duty weapon that is 11 years old and has excess of 10,000 rounds through it. I may be asking for a new weapon soon and with all of Glock's issues it is hard to be confident in their weapons systems. It is hard to decide to either keep my current one, look for another original Gen III, go new or request to change manufactures.

Just for everyone's info, here is a comparison of three G22's purchased a few years apart just to show how changes are made over a short time even with in the same generation. This is why I ask the above questions as big changes can occur from one serial number group to another with Glock, but they claim them all to the same generation, which causes one serial number group of Glocks to run great and another group to fail.

I can tell you that the gen4 pistols we received have the latest rsa in them and the ejector has a twist to it that I have not seen in our earlier models. I don't know if they have mim extractors but they are running just fine. I have 2K rounds through mine.

 

[j706]

We just went from Gen 3 22's to gen 4 22's. As our agency armorer we have had no issues with our gen 4's. We did get the new RSA's a few months ago. The only problem with the old gen 4 RSA's I noticed was they would not stay seated on the barrel assy. It would not cause a malfunction just a PITA during assembly and dis assembly. The new ones are GTG. If you think about it we got new guns for around 125.00 per with trade in. Not a bad deal for a better gun IMO.

Back straps? We do not have one single guy that has one attached. In other words all of our guys run them with the smallest (None) back straps.

Our Gen 3 22's were another problem. All of ours would malfunction with any light other than a Glock light attached. It really ticked me off that Glock knew they had a problem and did NOT do a recall. As far as I know we were never even warned of the problem.

We traded ours in at Keislers. I purchased my Gen 3 for 350.00 I think. Not bad for a two year old gun with NS and 2k rounds through it and that was issued to me new. We did not do any paper work on our purchases.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

His back up officer handed him another glock .40 so he could stay in the fight.

So, the back up officer was carrying two Glock .40s?

 

[Gabriel]

We just went from Gen 3 22's to gen 4 22's. As our agency armorer we have had no issues with our gen 4's. We did get the new RSA's a few months ago. The only problem with the old gen 4 RSA's I noticed was they would not stay seated on the barrel assy. It would not cause a malfunction just a PITA during assembly and dis assembly. The new ones are GTG. If you think about it we got new guns for around 125.00 per with trade in. Not a bad deal for a better gun IMO.

Back straps? We do not have one single guy that has one attached. In other words all of our guys run them with the smallest (None) back straps.

Our Gen 3 22's were another problem. All of ours would malfunction with any light other than a Glock light attached. It really ticked me off that Glock knew they had a problem and did NOT do a recall. As far as I know we were never even warned of the problem.

We traded ours in at Keislers. I purchased my Gen 3 for 350.00 I think. Not bad for a two year old gun with NS and 2k rounds through it and that was issued to me new. We did not do any paper work on our purchases.

I'm one of our armorers also. Most officers here have a larger backstap put on. I don't, and like the smaller grip.

We had no issues with our gen 3 Glock 22s with lights attached (about 100 of them). I can't imagine why you would have. We've used the crappy Insight M3 and the TLR-1s and neither has produced any problems.

I purchased my gen 3 from Kieslers also, just picked it up today.

 

[Stainer]

So, the back up officer was carrying two Glock .40s?

Yes, the other officer on scene had a G27 on him and gave it to Officer Kermon. Because the similar weapon platform, Officer Kermon knew exactly how to operate the weapon and, if needed, could use his duty magazines to reload the gun.

It may not happen often, but when it does, it is nice to know the equipment that someone tosses you in a gun fight.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

How many rounds were found? The Indy Star did not say.

Does IMPD allow the selection of different back up guns like pdog said.

If so then what happened with Officer Kermon was fortunate not the result of policy as the back up officer could have selected a different back up gun.

 

[kludge]

Reading is fundamental. IMPD isn't selling any firearms. They are being traded to Kiesler's. What Kiesler's does with them is Kiesler's business and since Kiesler's is in the business of selling guns I'd expect they will be selling them.

Tomato, tomahto.

Guns seized by IMPD are turned over to the Sheriff for disposal. What the Sheriff does with them is between the Sheriff and the courts.

Regardless, the citizens are getting a net tax benefit from the one and not from the other.

 

[phylodog]

Tomato, tomahto.



Regardless, the citizens are getting a net tax benefit from the one and not from the other.

Ok, let me edit my earlier statement and say that not only is reading fundamental but comprehension is as well.

I apologize. I tend to forget that IMPD is supposed to shoulder the blame for what the Sheriff (or any other LEO in the country for that matter) does or doesn't do. How silly of me.

 

[vitamink]

How many rounds were found? The Indy Star did not say.

Does IMPD allow the selection of different back up guns like pdog said.

If so then what happened with Officer Kermon was fortunate not the result of policy as the back up officer could have selected a different back up gun.

he just hit him in the leg. The guy crawled behind the trash container and chose to end his own life after reloading his revolver. The back up officer could have selected a different backup gun platform (sig, glock, whatever). In that scenario you would then give your duty weapon to the individual and use your own back up gun.

Imagine watching your gun blow up in your hand and now not having a gun in the middle of a gun fight. Your back up hands you another to continue the fight. I can't imagine a more reassuring feeling than that coupled with the fact that i now have 2 more mags full of the same ammo.

 

[kludge]

Ok, let me edit my earlier statement and say that not only is reading fundamental but comprehension is as well.

I apologize. I tend to forget that IMPD is supposed to shoulder the blame for what the Sheriff (or any other LEO in the country for that matter) does or doesn't do. How silly of me.

The taxpayers could care less who in Marion County government is making the decisions. It is money (or to be clear, something that can be traded for money or other valuable things) that is being thrown away in the name of politics.

That you would immediately resort to a personal attack (not once, but twice) about my intelligence over such a small innaccuracy of fact regarding the disposition of siezed firearms, a tidbit of information unknown to the general populace, makes me wonder...

If the IMPD, in whole or in part, were in fact against the practice of detroying siezed weapons, and would rather the guns be sold to gun dealers, and the proceedes used to help reduce the tax burden, wouldn't they stand up and say something?

But no, the response you gave is one of deflection.

So I wonder, do you think that siezed guns should be sold and the proceeds used for the department? Or do you agree with the current practice of destoying the guns, and why?

 

[phylodog]

The taxpayers could care less who in Marion County government is making the decisions. It is money (or to be clear, something that can be traded for money or other valuable things) that is being thrown away in the name of politics.

That you would immediately resort to a personal attack (not once, but twice) about my intelligence over such a small innaccuracy of fact regarding the disposition of siezed firearms, a tidbit of information unknown to the general populace, makes me wonder...

If the IMPD, in whole or in part, were in fact against the practice of detroying siezed weapons, and would rather the guns be sold to gun dealers, and the proceedes used to help reduce the tax burden, wouldn't they stand up and say something?

But no, the response you gave is one of deflection.

So I wonder, do you think that siezed guns should be sold and the proceeds used for the department? Or do you agree with the current practice of destoying the guns, and why?

I'm sorry you don't appreciate being corrected on your "small innacuracy of fact". Let me ask you this, how do you feel about your tax dollars being spent to bailout the banks who wrote bad loans and to cover the bankruptcies of people who spent themselves into the ground? The fact that you didn't do those things could also be considered a small inaccuracy of fact. I'm a conservative, I believe people should be held responsible for their actions so when someone is blamed for something they didn't do I feel compelled to correct it. I know we all have badges and for many that makes us all the same but there is a difference.

I didn't give an answer of deflection, I pointed you toward the appropriate person to seek out the answer to your question. If you belive the Sheriff gives a flying crap how IMPD officers feel about his policy of destroying seized weapons you're kidding yourself. If the citizens of Marion County had a big problem with what the Sheriff was doing, wouldn't they stand up and say something? Why is the Sheriff's policy the fault or responsibility of IMPD? I promise you the Sheriff would care more about a group of citizens complaining about one of his policies much more than a bunch of IMPD officers.

My opinion is that any firearms seized and ordered by a judge to not be returned to their previous owner should be auctioned off. I'll admit that I could care less about the junk guns but anything of value I hate seeing destroyed. If the policy were changed tomorrow, it wouldn't take a month before we'd see a thread about how "some cop seized my gun so he could sell it and make money". Just imagine the mouth frothing hate fest which would immediately ensue.

The Sheriff of Marion County used to sell the seized firearms. The wonderful media that many here believe prints nothing but the truth when it comes to things LE related, did a complete hack job on the then Sheriff Jack Cottey and that was the end of that. I don't blame Sheriff Layton for sticking with the policy of destroying guns put in place by Cottey. Perhaps if enough people spoke to him about it he would change his policy on the matter.

 

[Gabriel]

If the policy were changed tomorrow, it wouldn't take a month before we'd see a thread about how "some cop seized my gun so he could sell it and make money".

Just one thread?

 

[Culpepper]

Perhaps if enough people spoke to him about it he would change his policy on the matter.

Oh no, it is far more productive to complain on the Internet where you don't have to talk to real people.

 

[sparkyfender]

Kiesler's?
I like to look around in their shop, but as a private citizen, I don't think I've ever seen a screaming "deal" there. Not that a great deal to me has the same definition as it has to everyone else......... They seem to do quite well.