Some friends and I went to our handgun range. We shot my "for-arthritics" customized Freedom Arms 45 Colt Model 97s and a Blackhawk 45 Colt. We fired some sort of Glock 10 mm that had a bazillion cartridge magazine that Chuck had just bought.
The 45s were shooting my 305-grain Saeco SWC-GCs 21.92 grains H110, and so on, that render my 97s and the Blackhawk into a "super" 44 Magnum. While the ammunition is beastly to shoot, the 97s are close to comfortable, very easy to shoot accurately, and very accurate.
The only semiautomatics I own are Ruger 10/22 and Mk. III target pistol. The last centerfire pistol I fired was my father's M1911A1 he brought home from the Philippines after World War II.
. . . And then I shot the Glock. Its trigger action was somewhat different from what I expect from a handgun. Trigger take-up was more than a quarter inch. Then came creep. Finally ignition. My dad's 45 was glass-like compared with the Glock's trigger. My being spoiled by using Model 97s is still an inadequate explanation. I asked whether this trigger action is normal. The answers were disheartening. "Yes," and "This is how it came."
What immediately came into my head were several versions of an adage I believe originated with the late Jeff Cooper: "You must plan on missing a lot." Then, I thought of how Glocks and Glock-like striker-fired semiautomatics are standard issue with police. And how little time many (most??) police invest in maintaining or improving their proficiency with their handgun. And how much more time and effort it would take to achieve and maintain a level of proficiency that would allow me to feel comfortable with that same handgun.
Does the one Glock I fired have a normal trigger action in your judgment?
If it is normal, is it routine for police department armorers to improve trigger actions of these pistols before their being issued?
Do larger police departments maintain a continuing regimen of practice to reduce the likelihood poorly aimed shooting?
Are my questions, or doubts, about these pistols valid, my having semiautomatic pistol experience with only a well-worn 1911A1 and the Glock 10 mm?
The 45s were shooting my 305-grain Saeco SWC-GCs 21.92 grains H110, and so on, that render my 97s and the Blackhawk into a "super" 44 Magnum. While the ammunition is beastly to shoot, the 97s are close to comfortable, very easy to shoot accurately, and very accurate.
The only semiautomatics I own are Ruger 10/22 and Mk. III target pistol. The last centerfire pistol I fired was my father's M1911A1 he brought home from the Philippines after World War II.
. . . And then I shot the Glock. Its trigger action was somewhat different from what I expect from a handgun. Trigger take-up was more than a quarter inch. Then came creep. Finally ignition. My dad's 45 was glass-like compared with the Glock's trigger. My being spoiled by using Model 97s is still an inadequate explanation. I asked whether this trigger action is normal. The answers were disheartening. "Yes," and "This is how it came."
What immediately came into my head were several versions of an adage I believe originated with the late Jeff Cooper: "You must plan on missing a lot." Then, I thought of how Glocks and Glock-like striker-fired semiautomatics are standard issue with police. And how little time many (most??) police invest in maintaining or improving their proficiency with their handgun. And how much more time and effort it would take to achieve and maintain a level of proficiency that would allow me to feel comfortable with that same handgun.
Does the one Glock I fired have a normal trigger action in your judgment?
If it is normal, is it routine for police department armorers to improve trigger actions of these pistols before their being issued?
Do larger police departments maintain a continuing regimen of practice to reduce the likelihood poorly aimed shooting?
Are my questions, or doubts, about these pistols valid, my having semiautomatic pistol experience with only a well-worn 1911A1 and the Glock 10 mm?
Last edited:
