First handgun!

[Musketeer]

I said Germanic, not German. Perhaps I should have said Teutonic? I know Glocks are from Austria, designed by Gaston Glock. My statement was meant to illustrate that they are designed around a culture that is much more "dedicated" (obsessive, ****, etc...) about following exact procedure. I work for a Swiss company and see this to a large extent with the German Swiss I deal with. "This is the procedure, why would anyone do it the wrong way?" is something that comes up often when discussing quality systems...

Americans, for good or ill, are not as obsessive about "procedural accuracy" as the German influenced cultures (into which I include Austria, not to say they are German but that they share some general cultural traits). Mix the American attitude with something designed around unflinching compliance to procedure and you have a match made for the emergency room.

As Buddy Lee said, every Glock needs to have the trigger pulled on an empty chamber in order to be dissasembled. Find one that doesn't and it is a fairly good indicator that your Glock is broken. This is a common trait for every striker fired handgun design that I know of.

Mind you, I am not saying they are no good, but you need to know the animal you are handling and even more need to know if it is beyond your abilities.

 

[Kurtz]

Every Glock I have ever seen DOES require you to pull the trigger to disassemble... including my cousins 17.

Germans make better guns than Austrians anyway.

I know I have said it before, but Glocks are POS craptastic guns... DA only pistols are garbage imo. The trigger pull is so bad, it is worse than my $100.00 10/22 trigger. My first pistol was a H&K USP .40, it cost me $649.99 back in 2000 + Gov.Taxes, and other fees.

I would suggest a nice S&W Revolver, H&K, or maybe a good 1911.

You can't stand double action, yet you recommend a revolver? The long double action pull of a revolver is a lot harder for most people to learn, even if the trigger is smooth.

Glock just barely counts as DA since the striker spring is almost entirely compressed before you pull the trigger. The trigger pull is better than nearly any other double action only combat gun.

 

[Musketeer]

You can't stand double action, yet you recommend a revolver? The long double action pull of a revolver is a lot harder for most people to learn, even if the trigger is smooth.

Glock just barely counts as DA since the striker spring is almost entirely compressed before you pull the trigger. The trigger pull is better than nearly any other double action only combat gun.

Although not really targetter at me I would say exactly right, but slightly out of context.

I think for the new, inexperienced, or casual shooter the DA pull of the Glock is a liabilty. Calling it DA gives the warm and fuzzy feeling one has with a revolver yet the Glock DA is a relatively light and short distance pull compared to the revolver. The marketing hype of DAO is a great myth of the 90s and sold many a police chief on the Glock as the end all be all solution to LEO firearms. The Glock is too easy to fire inadvertantly though in my opinion for those who have not masterred the finer handling skills already.

I have a beautiful High Standard target pistol in 22LR. It is a real tac driver but aside from the anemic caliber I would never ever reccomend it for personal defense because the trigger will go off if breathed on hard. I used it and my Python to train my wife. She certainly likes shooting the 22 more but has masterred the ability to use the Python. At night though when I am on the road it is the Python that she depends on than my 1911. The Glock may not be that light but when adrenaline dumps into the system that light Glock pull is going to seem like nothing. A bump, trip or surprise will reflexively cause a persons hand to contract, again the light and short GLock trigger is more likely to go off if proper handling techniques are not ALWAYS used.

I prefer 1911 style Single Action handguns. At the same time the first handgun I bought was a 4" Taurus 357 revolver that I put many 38s and 357s throguh before getting an auto. This was in 1991 when there were plenty of Glocks to buy and they were the new fad. I practiced what I preach though and even at the young and stupid age of 21 knew enough to know better than to dive straight into an auto.

New Shooters trust me... get a solid used 38/357 revolver and you will never go wrong. You can get one for under $200 used, shoot it cheaply with 38s, and build up your important skill sets. What is more it will always be there for you in the future and is the BEST thing to train a new shooter one.

 

[mat69]

As Buddy Lee said, every Glock needs to have the trigger pulled on an empty chamber in order to be dissasembled. Find one that doesn't and it is a fairly good indicator that your Glock is broken. This is a common trait for every striker fired handgun design that I know of.

I guess I misunderstood you then. For me pulling the trigger has nothing to do with it's dissasemblenece but rather with they way it should be stored. And people having problems with bullets in the chamber, well they should be checking it before (again, exerciseing is usefull and not for your senior's amusement).
But well I have no clue about other pistols beside the Glock 17 so maybe that's why I'm thinking that way.

 

[BuddyLee]

You can't stand double action, yet you recommend a revolver? The long double action pull of a revolver is a lot harder for most people to learn, even if the trigger is smooth.

Glock just barely counts as DA since the striker spring is almost entirely compressed before you pull the trigger. The trigger pull is better than nearly any other double action only combat gun.

Every DA Revolver I have ever shot has a better trigger than Glock. S&W makes a nice hammerless 5 shot revolver that is smooth as ice... in a whole other league than Glock. Also, most revolvers nowadays are DA/SA. Their single action trigger pull is usually crisp and light, and if you can't find time to cock the hammer, maybe you should have bought an AK.

Wheel guns are way better as a starter pistol than Glocks. Newb friendly, and cleaning is a snap. Glocks are for peeps that listen to Gangsta Rap, and shoot innocent bystanders more often than rival gangsters.

 

[Kurtz]

Every DA Revolver I have ever shot has a better trigger than Glock. S&W makes a nice hammerless 5 shot revolver that is smooth as ice... in a whole other league than Glock. Also, most revolvers nowadays are DA/SA. Their single action trigger pull is usually crisp and light, and if you can't find time to cock the hammer, maybe you should have bought an AK.

Wheel guns are way better as a starter pistol than Glocks. Newb friendly, and cleaning is a snap. Glocks are for peeps that listen to Gangsta Rap, and shoot innocent bystanders more often than rival gangsters.

Smoother yes, but I haven't met any (new) shooters who found controlling a long DA pull like a revolver's easier to learn than a glock's crunchy-mushy yet much shorter pull.

If a person can't shoot double action well then they really should not have a DA revolver except as a dedicated target gun, not a sd gun like a glock. Cocking for each shot sounds easy but most self-defense confrontations are at point blank range; you might not have a free hand to cock it and cocking and firing it one-handed with all that adrenaline, wet hands, etc. does not sound like a good idea.

I fail to see how a glock isn't as newb friendly cleaning wise as a revolver, besides for the whole pull-the-trigger-to-decock issue, but I did say it was newb friendly, not complete moron friendly.

 

[Musketeer]

I fail to see how a glock isn't as newb friendly cleaning wise as a revolver, besides for the whole pull-the-trigger-to-decock issue, but I did say it was newb friendly, not complete moron friendly.

Equate it to having the cleaning procedure for a Ferrari include leaving it in gear with the parking brake off... That works fine unless you forget are on a hill or other incline... Of course in this case you could SEE the hill.

With the Glock you can't see the round though and it is the new shooter who is most at risk. There is a reason the vast majority of NDs I see on the shooting boards involve Glocks.

 

[{YBBS}Sage]

To back Musketeer, I know of two fairly well-known NDs that came about from the Glock's disassembly procedure and a lapse in procedure. One is the famous "..I'm the only one in this room professional enough to..." video where the DEA agent blows a hole in his foot. Another is a seasoned shooter who got home from a competition, put his Glock away for a while, came back to clean it, pulled the trigger to disassemble and found out there was still a round of .45 ACP in the chamber. Did a real nasty number on his hand, the muzzle blast did most of the damage.

For the carnage of the second story, he tells it like it is and has the (very painful-looking) photos of the damage. http://www.thegunzone.com/nd.html

Cleaning a revolver is soooo easy. Open the cylinder, make sure the thing is empty (nothing easier to check), then start a-cleaning. No need to disassemble or anything, even if you want to get it REALLY clean.

I'd rather give a new shooter a longer DA revolver trigger so they can get the hang of a smooth PULL. You can really tell on a revolver when someone's yanking on the trigger, and it can sometimes show you when they're flinching, as they'll do it before they get to the end of the pull once in a while (oh, the anticipation!). Everybody I teach to shoot, I tell them to gently apply pressure to the trigger and when the gun fires, the only reason it shouldn't be a complete surprise is because you knew you were pulling on the trigger.

Personally, in autos, I'm a bit of a fan of SAO with exposed hammer. Having the hammer down is at least somewhat safer, even if you don't check the weapon. Getting it there, though.... That's a different story.

And I agree with not needing a speedloader for HD shotgun. Work on those tactical reloads. Keep one in the chamber, so that if you need to get your shottie back in action fast, you'll at least have two ready to go. Not that I'd expect someone to need to reload a shotgun in a HD situation... If you're facing more people than your shotgun holds, you've got more than an ammo problem and running might be a better move than fighting.

 

[Kurtz]

Anyone who isn't responsible enough to operate a glock isn't responsible enough to own firearms. These guys who shoot themselves with glocks and sigmas are violating rule 1 and 2. It is this carelessness and complacency that is dangerous, not the design. An ND with a glock is no different than any other firearm, you pulled the trigger on a gun you assumed was empty when you should have checked it.

NDs happen with glocks because they're relatively cheap for a well known and reliable weapon... the kind of buyers its reputation may attract as well as the sheer number of them guarantee that there are going to be more ND's with glocks.

 

[WickedPenguin]

Mmm... CZ82. Nice choice of a pistol. I have a Bulgarian Makarov which I adore, and have been wanting to get a CZ82 since it seems like a natural progression. The 4 extra rounds in the magazine and the white-dot sights seem like quite a nice improvement.

Does it have a "bite" to it like the Makarov? The first few times I shot the Mak for extended periods the skin between my index finger and thumb was raw. My wife was in so much pain from it she tearing up.

The first time I took it out was with my dad. He brought his Glock along and we did a "contrast and compare". With the Glock, we were lucky to hit paper. Nasty trigger pull. With the Makarov, my first-ever shot with it was a dead-on bullseye. I remember squeezing off that shot, seeing the smack-center hole, and my dad and I looking at each other with a "Whoa...I'm impressed" look. Pretty sweet.

Another thing I love about the Mak is just how damn simple to clean and maintain it is. I'd say it's about as easy as a revolver - just two parts! Lock the slide back, pull down the trigger guard, and - *presto* - the slide moves forward and comes off. Everything you need to clean is present. So different from my wife's Taurus, which is a pain in the ass to disassemble.

 

[Musketeer]

NDs happen with glocks because they're relatively cheap for a well known and reliable weapon... the kind of buyers its reputation may attract as well as the sheer number of them guarantee that there are going to be more ND's with glocks.

Glocks have certainly been made "popular" by the media by NDs do not happen simply because they are relatively "cheap." There are far more cheap 38s out there from almost 100 years of production yet the occurence of NDs with them is fewer. When referring to "the types of buyers its reputation may attract" you make a statement much like the one used to malign 2" revolvers as "Saturday Night Specials."

I think everyone here would agree with Kurtz that for a ND to occur with a Glock the user must have broken at least one of the rules. It is undoubtably the SHOOTER"S FAULT. The great thing about following the rules is even if someone blows one and a ND results, if the others have been followed then there is no significant damage. Blow two rules though and you wind up with a photo like in the previous post's link.

Now that being said I would still feel pretty horrible if the woman I loved and was teaching to shoot put a bullet through something she values. Stating "You Broke The Rules!" is going to ring rather hollow. I'll fall back on the car analogy again. The RULES state not to drive faster than it is safe to do. You know you have told your 16 year old son "The Rule" but do you let him loose with a Ferrari?

If you want to really prove just how much more idiot proof the revolver is over the Glock then put two side by side UNLOADED (meaning no rounds in it, a magazine or even in the same damn room) and ask a person with no or very minimal firearms experience to show how they check if the weapon is loaded.

When training a new person in ANYTHING you want to do so with the most idiot proof tools possible. The new student who cannot admit that the are ignorant right at the get go is already half way to trouble. One should always endeaver to stack the deck as much in your favor as possible.

As far as teaching with the revolver, it is a breeze. I don't expect everyone to teach with a Colt Python, like I taught my wife. That thing has a DA pull like glass, but any revolver with a servicable pull will work. You can do something with a revolver you cannot do with an auto... load a couple rounds in random chambers. If you are teaching try that. You will be amazed how well it shows if a student is anticipating shots. I do it to myself on occasion just to make certain I am still doing it all right.

 

[Musketeer]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/local/longterm/dcpolice/deadlyforce/police4page1.htm

D.C. police officials repeatedly studied the phenomenon of accidental discharges, invariably concluding that there was no fundamental problem with the Glock itself

 

[Kurtz]

Glocks have certainly been made "popular" by the media by NDs do not happen simply because they are relatively "cheap." There are far more cheap 38s out there from almost 100 years of production yet the occurence of NDs with them is fewer. When referring to "the types of buyers its reputation may attract" you make a statement much like the one used to malign 2" revolvers as "Saturday Night Specials."

I think everyone here would agree with Kurtz that for a ND to occur with a Glock the user must have broken at least one of the rules. It is undoubtably the SHOOTER"S FAULT. The great thing about following the rules is even if someone blows one and a ND results, if the others have been followed then there is no significant damage. Blow two rules though and you wind up with a photo like in the previous post's link.

Now that being said I would still feel pretty horrible if the woman I loved and was teaching to shoot put a bullet through something she values. Stating "You Broke The Rules!" is going to ring rather hollow. I'll fall back on the car analogy again. The RULES state not to drive faster than it is safe to do. You know you have told your 16 year old son "The Rule" but do you let him loose with a Ferrari?

If you want to really prove just how much more idiot proof the revolver is over the Glock then put two side by side UNLOADED (meaning no rounds in it, a magazine or even in the same damn room) and ask a person with no or very minimal firearms experience to show how they check if the weapon is loaded.

When training a new person in ANYTHING you want to do so with the most idiot proof tools possible. The new student who cannot admit that the are ignorant right at the get go is already half way to trouble. One should always endeaver to stack the deck as much in your favor as possible.

As far as teaching with the revolver, it is a breeze. I don't expect everyone to teach with a Colt Python, like I taught my wife. That thing has a DA pull like glass, but any revolver with a servicable pull will work. You can do something with a revolver you cannot do with an auto... load a couple rounds in random chambers. If you are teaching try that. You will be amazed how well it shows if a student is anticipating shots. I do it to myself on occasion just to make certain I am still doing it all right.

I certainly didn't mean that glocks have NDs through any fault in design or materials, just that the relatively low price for a brand name product may attract inexperienced users. Another fact is that glocks are popularized in movies and music and those that want that image want to buy glocks, and many of those will be poorly trained. It's not a fault of the gun, merely an explanation of why they may have more NDs associated with them than other guns.

You can always buy snap caps if you think they are anticipating recoil. I don't necessarily agree with you that people have an inherent knowledge of how to use revolvers either. I have tried EXACTLY what you said about seeing whether an untrained person can clear a revolver easier than a semi, and they didn't know how to manipulate the cylinder latch. They need to learn, train, and practice to become competent. While I agree that a DA revolver tops all with ease of use (load, aim, squeeze, no safeties or round in the chamber to forget about, etc.), I still think that someone who can't be trusted to learn how an auto works is already irresponsible, and shouldn't have any guns until they improve that flaw.

 

[Musketeer]

Kurtz, I agree with much of what you are saying. The "celebrity" factor of Glocks has driven many to buy them who shouldn't buy any gun. That alone will account for plenty of NDs.

At the same time it is irrefutable that the Washington DC police saw an immediate 50% increase in Negligent Discharges (I do not generally accept "accidental Discharge" as the proper description unles the weapon fired due to a mechanical failure) after going from the revolver to the Glock.

Training, Training, Training. Sadly the average big city police department does not spend nearly enough on it and many officers are simply not interested in it.

The average officer though has more training than the average person walking in off the street to buy a gun. If the police seem to have so many problems maintaining proper discipline then perhaps the Glock should be marketted towards a more professional market. I do not fault Glock for building the gun but for touting it as a great weapon for new shooters I think they are behaving irresponsibly.

The bottom line is that humans are fallible and make mistakes. I don't think I will ever have an ND, but neither did any of theose officers in the news story I posted. Perhaps it might make a little sense to design our tools (be they cars, guns or blenders) with that point in mind. It might also be worthwhile to accept that there are some products less forgiving of human error than others and select accordingly based on experience and competence.

 

[Explosioneer]

Fantastic points brought up already. Revolvers are, in my opinion, the hands down greatest pistol to start on. You have a simple system that is generally affordable, and it is more forgiving of technique errors. I have spent a lot of time shooting, and being around other shooters - be it rifle, pistol, or shotgun. When those new to pistols have an automatic to start with, there is always more of a curve to the process. There are slide locks, external safety bars, decocking levers, magazine releases, etc etc - all kinds of 'stuff' going on on the outside of the pistol. Then you have issues of grip and limp wristing. When its all said and done, there is far more room for error with an automatic than there is with a revolver and its simple interface. A Ruger revolver is my go to pistol, and I imagine something of its design always will be. It is accurate, I have the option of using .38 or .357, and it is supremely simple to operate. I have fired most all of the latest and not so latest fad pistols out there, and there are not many I would take over a revolver.

I find Glocks to be, personally, very uncomfortable to shoot. That could be in some way tainted since I was ingrained early on with the "anti-glock" mentality by many around me (you shooters know what I'm talking about). I have yet to hold one that felt good in my hand, and I have yet to fire one that made my jaw drop at its accuracy. The trigger pull is mediocre at best. However, due to the fact that its the big movie gun, the rappers gun, and the video game gun, it will always have its place.

Its amazing how many great guns there are that never get the credit due because they are off the beaten path of books, movies, and games. But I digress...

 

[mat69]

@Musketeer I have to admit I did not read your article - I'll do it maybe t'morrow - but well I doubt that training is so "expensive". If there is the legislative to "make your weapon safe" after duty every day, how much does that cost? It's some kind of meeting between your coleagues. Damn I allways was surprised by the accidents with Glocks that happen here. I guess it has to do with everyday life. You get used to your weapon. And there I guess - even without knowledge! - I have to agree with you. Cleaning a revolver has nothing to do with pulling the trigger while - even if I misunderstood you there first because of lack of experience with other handguns - pulling the trigger on the Glock is nescesary.
Some time the gun is nothing new to you, you become careless, and carlessness can be dangerous on some weapons while it won't be that dangerous on other weapons. And I guess that is what you try to explain - in a very good way btw.

 

[Reise]

I just wanna throw out that I've fired handguns many, many times before. I've just never bought my own. It wouldn't be like someone who's totally unexperienced is going out to get the thing. Like I said, price and availability are big points in getting a Glock for me, and it's not like it's the only handgun I'll ever own.

 

[KH Reese]

You'll shoot your eye out, kid.

 

[Musketeer]

mat69, all training is not created equally. The larger departments, like NYC, LA, Washington DC have a harder time funding training for 2,00 - 10,000 officers than local municipalities doing it for 20 - 100 officers. Many large cities like NYC just require the officer to undergo initial training and then come back to qualify once or twice a year at most. That qualification is simply "can you hit the target" and doesn't closely follow the complete handling of the weapon.

The Washington DC article was truly frightenning because several officers who were issued Glocks (actually it is bad with ANY firearm) stated they were never trained to keep their finger off the triggger!!! That should be something coverred in the first five minutes of training. Even if they were told to keep their fingers off the trigger the fact that several officers have no recollection of being told so is a pretty clear indicator of a problem with the effectiveness of the training. NYC's answer was to make a 10 pound Glock trigger. That is NOT the answer, that is like using a tissue when you have a cold. You treated a symptom but not the disease. Training is the key and I know the NYCPD is lacking in what they need there from friends and family on the force. If my cousin, who shot herself in the foot (shoe atually, just missed he toe) while holding the gun between her legs in the squad car during a chase can be considerred a trained officer then there is a REAL PROBLEM present.

Real training will involve plenty of repetative action and observation to ingrain the proper way to draw and hold the weapon ready. This must be done over and over to ingrain it into your motor reflexes. If not done that way the odds are that an officer who doesn't regulalry stay on top of his skills with a gun will fall back on his natural reflex to put his finger on the trigger (actually this applies to everyone.)

When I practice simply drawing or handling the weapon at any time I have for years done so with my finger just abouve the trigger on the frame and resting against the protruding bump of the slide release on my 1911 or Firestar and over the sideplate screw on my S&W J frame. Even at the range when picking the weapon up from the table pointing downrange I do so with my finger off the trigger until I am actually going to pull it. If I reach into my top dresser draw in the dark and grab my gun without even looking I know exactly where my trigger finger is resting. You can get to that point through intensive proffesional training or through dedicated personal training. There are many officers who do instill that proper behaviour in themselves without additional department required training. There are many more though who do not.

The fact is most officers look at that gun as 2 pounds of metal they must carry around. They do not practice with it, often do not think about it until an emergency. Cities cannot depend on the individual officer to conduct his own training routine and imbed proper motor reflexes in himself. There needs to be standardized training for the officer's safety and the safety of those around them (to say nothing of the associated liability). Training is expensive and it is a never ending cost. Washington DC lokoed good by racing through the approval for $1,000,000 to buy Glocks for the whole force. The politicians and union leaders can all point to them and say "Look what we did for officer safety!" It is a single cost, with only minimal later costs as new officers are brought onto the force. Training though goes on and on. It should be repeated yearly and is should involve more than just hitting a target at 15 yards. Training should be conducted by proffesionals, not hacks. Proffesionals cost money and since nobody can really SEE the training it is an easy thing to overlook. After all, most officers never fire their weapons...

 

[mat69]

Thank you for your long post and the link to that interesting article. I have to admit I'm some kind of shocked. "Trigger finger long" (so not touching the trigger unless you want to fire) was one of the first things I learned during basic training. It became a second nature so to speak.

A few months ago I talked to a police inductee I know a little bit about the Glock - here in Austria the army and the Police is using the Glock 17. That I don't like the feeling that police officers run around with a loaded gun without manual safety all the time. She said that, that way they do not have to think about turning the saftey off if they need the gun.

I'd prefere the police having guns with a manual safety, but I guess for many police Departments (at least D.C. according to that article) the Glock's safety was one of the reasons to acquiere it. All those saftey systems (like the moveable barrel that makes shooting impossible if it is touched) sound nice on the paper but do not really work in reality, especially when the weapons are older imo.