Why are law enforcement agencies issuing Glocks?
- Thread starter Doc Hollywood
- Start date
Comparing apples to Glocks
Apple early in their existence practically gave computers to schools. The kids grew up with them and bought them when older.
Glock offered very deep discounts to police officers from their inception. Not only did other dept. follow suit, everybody wants one because that's what the police use. Smart.
Besides the fact that Glocks are super reliable. (Ugly as home made sin, though)
Apple early in their existence practically gave computers to schools. The kids grew up with them and bought them when older.
Glock offered very deep discounts to police officers from their inception. Not only did other dept. follow suit, everybody wants one because that's what the police use. Smart.
Besides the fact that Glocks are super reliable. (Ugly as home made sin, though)
Want to know why there are so many anecdotal stories about idjits shooting themselves with Glocks?
Because there are a lot of idjits with Glocks.
Want to know why there less anecdotal stories about idjits shooting themselves with [insert your favorite brand or action here]?
Because there are less idjits that have one.
It doesn't matter what the action is--if you want to be an idiot, you can shoot yourself with them. DA/SAs, revolvers, strikers, SAs, whatever.
*sigh* I keep hearing that logic.
Fine, then. Let's put 12# triggers on Glocks. No, that's not enough--what kind of rubes are we that we equate poundage to poundage? Let's put 18# triggers on them, to make up for the Glock having a shorter trigger pull than a DA revolver.
What's that? You say none of our officers can hit a bloody schoolbus with them? Well, that's not our problem. We made it idiot-proof, not useful.
If you wanted a competent defensive pistol, then you should have learned to keep your finger off the trigger.
Or you could just issue a holster that provides actual retention. It's not like they don't make any.
Because there are a lot of idjits with Glocks.
Want to know why there less anecdotal stories about idjits shooting themselves with [insert your favorite brand or action here]?
Because there are less idjits that have one.
It doesn't matter what the action is--if you want to be an idiot, you can shoot yourself with them. DA/SAs, revolvers, strikers, SAs, whatever.
JohnSW said:
*sigh* I keep hearing that logic.
Fine, then. Let's put 12# triggers on Glocks. No, that's not enough--what kind of rubes are we that we equate poundage to poundage? Let's put 18# triggers on them, to make up for the Glock having a shorter trigger pull than a DA revolver.
What's that? You say none of our officers can hit a bloody schoolbus with them? Well, that's not our problem. We made it idiot-proof, not useful.
If you wanted a competent defensive pistol, then you should have learned to keep your finger off the trigger.
Squarebutt said:
Or you could just issue a holster that provides actual retention. It's not like they don't make any.
I haven't tried it but I'll bet.......
......that it's really hard to climb stairs while being surrounded by dogs, while carrying a gun. We have three good sized dogs and sometime I can't get across a flat floor to turn the house alarm off. I'm waist deep in the big doggies. I'll bet that isn't covered in anybody's training. The 'keep your finger off the trigger part' is, though.
PS: I'll bet that was EMBARRASSING! I think that I would stick to the 'The perp shot me!" story until proven otherwise.
......that it's really hard to climb stairs while being surrounded by dogs, while carrying a gun. We have three good sized dogs and sometime I can't get across a flat floor to turn the house alarm off. I'm waist deep in the big doggies. I'll bet that isn't covered in anybody's training. The 'keep your finger off the trigger part' is, though.
PS: I'll bet that was EMBARRASSING! I think that I would stick to the 'The perp shot me!" story until proven otherwise.
Last edited:
OP
Doc Hollywood
US Veteran
Btw we recovered the bullet. It is an sxt so likely ranger t ammo. Seems to me it performed flawlessly. Entered at the 1st intercostal space at extreme downward angle, breaking the clavicle puncturing lung and liver before skipping off the 4th rib where it attaches to the spine shattering the rib before exit and stoppage by the inside of the rear panel of his vest. I didn't have dial calipers at work but strongly suspect the bullet is a 180 grain .40 S&W.
Arik
Member
Actually a PA state trooper shot AND killed another PA state trooper with a Sig 227. The DA/SA gun with the 10# trigger. It was accidental. The trooper didn't mean to pull the trigger. Probably we should go with 20# triggers!
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
Whats with all the talk of additional training? It's so simple a 10 year old could understand, "don't touch trigger and gun won't go off". I guess it sounds simple in theory but is much more difficult and involved in real world gun handling situations. I always thought a gun like a Glock, XD, or M&P would be the ideal defensive weapon with a 5lb trigger and a manual thumb safety. The training to remember to flip the safety off wouldn't be that hard to learn and might take less time than worrying about gripping the trigger when falling down or clothing hitting the trigger on re-holstering. I hear so many people say they wouldn't even consider owning a handgun with a manual safety. It kinda makes worry about them when they're out hunting, do they leave the manual safety off on their rifle or shotgun when they're around other hunters?
cmort666
Member
I'm not saying they've NEVER existed, but off the top of my head, I've never heard of a "safe action" or even a double action RIFLE. The only double action shotguns I can recall were experimental pieces like the multi-barrel guns made for local defense forces during the Vietnam War.
There is a UNIVERSE of difference between a Glock 19 without a finger pulling the trigger, and a Remington 700 with the striker cocked. Depending upon how the trigger is set (or whether it's been replaced), that Remington takes only a minimal (minute, if it has a single set trigger like my Savage 112BVSS) pressure to fire.
The two are utterly different.
Beemer-mark
Member
I'm Root Cause qualified for accident investigation (industrial failures) and one failure mechanism is human performance. So most people on this board would agree that an AD is a human performance issue.
However, in this case, when one brand has a preponderance of AD compared to other brands of the same type it becomes a human factor issue - i.e. design.
No matter how highly trained, or skilled, under high stress conditions if human factors aren't considered something bad is going to happen.
At the turn of the 20th century (maybe before) S&W promoted their revolvers in advertising as safe because a child couldn't accidentally pull the trigger - the trigger pull was too heavy. I think a 5 year old could discharge a Glock. Pro-gunners need to stop making an excuse for poorly designed firearms that get people accidentally shot.
However, in this case, when one brand has a preponderance of AD compared to other brands of the same type it becomes a human factor issue - i.e. design.
No matter how highly trained, or skilled, under high stress conditions if human factors aren't considered something bad is going to happen.
At the turn of the 20th century (maybe before) S&W promoted their revolvers in advertising as safe because a child couldn't accidentally pull the trigger - the trigger pull was too heavy. I think a 5 year old could discharge a Glock. Pro-gunners need to stop making an excuse for poorly designed firearms that get people accidentally shot.
okiegtrider
Member
Hmmm. This could get entertaining. Just before the lock.
cmort666
Member
It depends upon what your PRIMARY goal is.
If it's to prevent negligent discharges, a 20lb. trigger and manual safety would accomplish that... except when they didn't.
Or you could require someone to enter a code on a numeric keypad before every shot.
Those things are only marginally sillier than the "New York trigger".
Of course Michael Bloomberg and people even more extreme than him have the obvious solution: Just don't have a firearm at all.
As someone else pointed out, you have to look at the percentage of Glocks in police hands when you consider the percentage of Glocks involved in negligent discharges.
If you failed to do that, you would likely conclude that the Mauser Kar98k was a horrendously dangerous rifle... if you only looked at negligent discharges in the German Wehrmacht by percentage of firearm types involved. Of course that begs the question of what kind of firearm a German service member was likely to HAVE, and to carry loaded. I'll bet the percentage of accidents with Mausers was VASTLY greater than with Winchester 92s.
Like Mauser 98s in the German military, Glocks are ubiquitous in domestic police service in the United States. Using raw percentage of NDs is profoundly misleading.
Last edited:
The Glock may have a fancy name like "safe-action" but you apply 5lbs of pressure and move the trigger a half inch and it fires just like any other gun. The flipper on the trigger may prevent the gun going off when it's dropped but that's about the only thing that I see it accomplishes. A whole lot of people I know, many in law enforcement, put the special, light disconnector in which gives it a 3lb trigger pull.
blues7
Member
If folks don't have enough confidence in their ability to maintain proper trigger discipline perhaps they should do themselves and the public a service by not carrying firearms.
Keep your finger off the trigger unless you intend to shoot.
When reholstering, keep an eye out for any objects, (drawstrings etc.), or obstructions which may create a potential safety hazard.
It's not rocket science folks. It's basic discipline.
Keep your finger off the trigger unless you intend to shoot.
When reholstering, keep an eye out for any objects, (drawstrings etc.), or obstructions which may create a potential safety hazard.
It's not rocket science folks. It's basic discipline.
Comrad
Member
For me, a DA revolver trigger pull takes a little more effort than a Glock. So with that in mind it might just be a little more idiot proof and explain why there's a condition called Glock leg and no condition called revolver leg.
cmort666
Member
Isn't that what it's intended to accomplish? A properly maintained Glock in proper working order is not going to fire unless and until somebody or something fully engages the trigger and pulls it sufficiently far to the rear to fully cock the striker and release it.
In virtually EVERY case of which I've heard, that's been somebody's FINGER. No finger on the trigger = no discharge.
I'm totally unaware of a totally foolproof firearm. As a famous science fiction writer once wrote, "Only a fool would want to use it."
I have 3.5lb. Ghost connectors in both of my Glocks. They NEVER go off without me pulling the trigger.
And correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it standard hunting safety to carry the rifle or shotgun unloaded (or at least with an empty chamber), where possible, until one is at their stand/blind/whatever?
Arik said:
DA/SAs are weird beasts. On the one hand, they offer stupendous advantages--double-strike capability and double-stack capacity in a pistol that can be carried with the safety off.
On the other hand, a lot of them have safeties that are placed a little awkwardly, and I feel that they're the most difficult trigger to master.
Compounding that last bit is the fact that most shooters never practice the DA first shot or the DA-to-SA transition--they simply start empty, load, chamber, and fire SA. On occasion, I've RSO'd blowhards who loudly touted the superiority of their chosen DA/SA brand. At which point, during practice, I smile and ask them to de-cock their pistols for the first shot.
Usually, that first shot misses the target completely--a target which is actually taller and wider than I am!
Beemer-mark said:
Your premise is incorrect.
If there were, say, exactly 1m of each brand in service, and Brand G had twice the accident rate of other brands, that would raise concern.
However, there are many times more of Brand G in service than anything else.
Comrad said:
See above explanation of statistics, and then add idiots with keyboards to the mix.
What you are also failing to understand--along with whoever made that stupid policy for the NYPD--is that the poundage of the trigger frankly doesn't make a lick of difference.
What causes NDs? Basically, mis-handling. Re-holstering too quickly is a good example. Now, if you take your finger and leave it on the trigger, and then proceed to shove your pistol into your holster, does it really matter whether the trigger weighs 5, 10, or 15 pounds?
Not really. You're moving too fast for your brain to realize that you're doing something dumb and stop.
That's why little things like, "Draw quickly, re-holster slowly" are so critical despite being so under-emphasized.
Farmer17 said:
Actually, that's not what the flipper is for.
When a (modern) gun is dropped, two things can make it discharge--I'll talk about 1911s since that's what I'm most familiar with internally, and the innards are pretty standard. One is the sear disengaging from the hammer from the impact or the inertia. This is actually really uncommon, and guns like the 1911 actually have a half-cock notch designed to break the hammer's fall. So even if it falls all the way to the firing pin, it doesn't have enough striking force to overcome the resistance of the firing pin return spring and successfully discharge.
#2 is what you describe, and it's really hard to do. You'd honestly have to try to build a 1911 to do this. Essentially, when the gun hits the floor and stops, the trigger shoe-and-bow has enough momentum to overcome the pressure from the sear spring, and then apply enough force to release the sear.
In order for this to happen, you would need to have an incredibly light trigger (under 2#, honestly), and you'd also have to have a trigger shoe-and-bow that was incredibly heavy. The light trigger pull is easy to do (badly) with some amateurish tweaking. The latter, having a physically heavy trigger assembly, would be downright hard. Virtually every aftermarket trigger these days is either "light" or "stupidly light". Hell, I just got one for not much money that weighed about 85 grains.
So--the flipper!
The flipper is actually designed to prevent a holster, or a foreign object inside the holster (clothing, junk, etc) from pushing on the side of the trigger and discharging it when you go to holster the gun. It's possible to "defeat" this safety device through poor handling (finger on the trigger), poor carry (tossing your loaded Glock into a knapsack with a bunch of other stuff), or a really cheap nylon holster (one of the soft, loose ones).
Last edited:
cmort666
Member
I'm no Karamojo Bell, but on the two times I've hunted in the last thirty years, that's pretty much how we did it.
Originally Posted by Wise_A View Post
And correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it standard hunting safety to carry the rifle or shotgun unloaded (or at least with an empty chamber), where possible, until one is at their stand/blind/whatever?
Only with certain hunting types. Wouldn't get a rabbit quail or pheasant with an empty gun. It's called knowing where the muzzle is pointing when it IS loaded. Even still hunting deer is done with a loaded gun. And it doesn't matter how many of a certain type of are is in the hands of people. If more AD/NDs happen with one type of firearm percentage wise it is usually some type of problem with that firearm...even if it is with lack of training to solve that problem
And correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it standard hunting safety to carry the rifle or shotgun unloaded (or at least with an empty chamber), where possible, until one is at their stand/blind/whatever?
Only with certain hunting types. Wouldn't get a rabbit quail or pheasant with an empty gun. It's called knowing where the muzzle is pointing when it IS loaded. Even still hunting deer is done with a loaded gun. And it doesn't matter how many of a certain type of are is in the hands of people. If more AD/NDs happen with one type of firearm percentage wise it is usually some type of problem with that firearm...even if it is with lack of training to solve that problem
cmort666
Member
So what you're saying is that if of a total population
of handguns in daily use, if there are are 75 of type (a) and 25 of type (b), and there are more negligent discharges in type (a) than type (b), that means that there's something wrong with type (a)?A lack of training isn't a problem with the firearm. It's a problem with the entity which provides or mandates that firearm.
When jet fighters were first introduced, there were more accidents than with prop fighters. This was primarily because the flight characteristics, especially during takeoff and landing were radically different. Training had not been adequately modified to account for the differences. Does that mean that the USAF should have still been flying P-47s and P-51s instead of P-80s, F-84s and F-86s?
Last edited:
