1911 for everyday carry?

[ChattanoogaPhil]

We need not discuss weights.

If one likes Glocks, stay with them. Yet this is a S&W site with some good people and collectors here. I do not feel that S&W should be second place to any brand here.

Please do not misunderstand. My questions regarding your assertions were not to put any gun in first or second place, but rather to clarify what the heck you were talking about. "We need not discuss weights" pretty much clarifies all of your postings regarding weight in this thread.

 

[Animal_Mother556]

A 1911 is a point & shoot gun. A Glock is not. A S&W is pretty accurate out of the box. A Glock needs a little help in that area.

Did you know it is often impossible in shootings to determine which Glock fired a particular shot? Glock owners may have a difficult time proving their innocence with balistitics. S&W does not have that problem.

If one likes Glocks, stay with them. Yet this is a S&W site with some good people and collectors here. I do not feel that S&W should be second place to any brand here.

Any gun can become "point and shoot" with practice and muscle memory.

I don't know what help a Glock needs for accuracy. They are some of the best shooting guns that I own.

I won't be able to prove my innocence if I shoot someone with a Glock? I'll take my chances...that the other guy won't have a Glock...and if he does, it will be in a different caliber. Now you're just reaching for things, man.

You don't feel that S&W should be second place to any brand "here". What if a similar thread pops up on a Sig forum? Can S&W be second place there?


I feel a lot of hatred for Glocks from you. And that's okay, man...it really is. But, you are definitely in the minority.

 

[oldman45]

Ok folks.

I own a few Glocks. I said often on here in various threads that Glocks work. They shoot as they are designed to do.

They also are filled with problems. They injure shooters. I do not like that part. I carried Glocks for many years.

I also do not feel that S&W is the only gun company or that it is the best gun company. My dedication to S&W is due to: a.) It is an American company, employing American workers. b.) They are good guns.
3.) They build guns for many purposes, fitting many hands and they are safe.

I investigate accidents and crime scenes for a living and been doing so for years. I do not write speeding tickets, chase bank robbers or drive around with co-workers in the car. I do not get to talk about things with co-workers. I cannot discuss my work with family or friends due to possibly tainting a potential jurist.

When I see you, it will be due to you being dead, dying or severely injured. I find the cause of the incident and the facts of the incident. All of which brings me to Glock. Most of the accidental firearm injuries I see come from Glocks such as KaBooms. I am against a company that refuses to fix a problem but rather pay off lawsuits.

Would I shoot my Glocks, yes and I have and do. I would even buy another one if I found the desire.

Yet trying to get a Glock owner to understand that Glocks are not where they are today due to being a great gun is like trying to tell a Pinto owner that they need to fix their gas tanks. Glock bought their popularity and had it not been for the mindset that came with it, people would not be buying Glocks as they do today.

S&W made guns with the internal locks and people cannot get past that. S&W made auto loaders with external extractors and people cannot get over that. Glocks makes guns that blows up in their hands, along with other issues, and nobody cares or even wants to listen.

 

[APS]

oldman45 was there a common caliber in the Glock kabooms?

 

[kennyb]

People use many things as weapons. One man was shot by officers that tried to make them think a cell phone was a gun.

Yet, 40 yrs ago there were fewer missed rounds hitting unintended objects. Officers later traded accuracy for capacity and stopped counting rounds. why should they? They had almost a box of ammo on their belts.

We are seeing more shots per shooting, more rounds missing their mark and more innocents hit, as well as more lawsuits filed. For every action, there is a reaction.

oldman...you may be seeing all these stats that you are quoting in your jurisdiction but thats not so everywhere...there are many LEO'S here with a vast field of exp.you quote many things here with citation to nothing more than your own opinion or field of view

 

[kennyb]

It made the news(which I can attest to telling the story that gets viewers, not the one that happened), the number of shots fired kept changing, best count I heard/read was 5 hits 10 shots, which wasn't bad. I had a member of the department say 13 shots 3 hits to me. One of the news reports said they hit him twice. All in all it was a real charlie foxtrot. I wasn't there so I can't know for sure which story is the 100% accurate one. My point comes back to this: there was a time when you had to make 5 or 6 shots count, I think the hi capacity autos such as Glocks(which is what the West Lafayette police were using that day) are making people more prone to "draw,shoot, aim,shoot"

and there you have it my friend...you relied on something you read and...what?the facts and number of rounds kept changing...based on what you read you formed an opinion as to someone was wrong,untrained,have been issued the wrong sidearm etc.

 

[Animal_Mother556]

, I think the hi capacity autos such as Glocks(which is what the West Lafayette police were using that day) are making people more prone to "draw,shoot, aim,shoot"

I just can't believe that it has come to this....blaming the GUN (the tool) on bad shooting.

Hows abouts the training that these cops are getting? Most cops in my neck of the woods (midwest) don't even like guns. Especially not to the degree where they would go practice on their own. They shoot once a year...qual day.

It's sad. Granted, there are cops that enjoy shooting and take pride in their marksmanship abilities, but there aren't many that I know of...AND they have bad shooting habits because of where they learned to shoot (academy).

If these cops really are more prone to "draw, shoot, aim, shoot" than PLEASE don't blame the gun. It's a training issue. Remember when they try to blame guns for things on the news? And we all sit there and say "What about the little turds parents?! It's their fault not the gun!" That's what I feel like right now.

 

[oldman45]

oldman45 was there a common caliber in the Glock kabooms?

Mostly in .40 but there have been other calibers as well.

What cannot be narrowed down is the ammo. Many people reload their own and when something happens, the gun gets the blame. Would a metal gun be so effected by ammo issues? Likely not as bad but then Glock is the one seen blowing out the bottom of the gun.

Yet the KaBoom is only part of the problems.

And I still would shoot one and not afraid of doing so. The odds are against something bad happening.

 

[oldman45]

oldman...you may be seeing all these stats that you are quoting in your jurisdiction but thats not so everywhere...there are many LEO'S here with a vast field of exp.you quote many things here with citation to nothing more than your own opinion or field of view

I disagree. There are many articles being published, even in law enforcement journals about it. Please examine your department's last few years of shootings and see how many officer fired shots there were. Compare them to those in the revolver years. Some say the age of the officers is also a factor but I do not agree.

The younger officers are moreso the ones involved but several Chiefs and IAD officers are seeing it.

Also being seen is officers being terminated for various reasons. One officer terminated in the local area for crimes he has been charged with was hired by another smaller department. Thirty years ago, that officer would have not been in LE anymore.

LE has changed but many refuse to accept the fact. LE is an honorable profession and nobody goes into it to get rich. But the standards have been lowered over the years.

 

[ImprovedModel56Fan]

Yet the KaBoom is only part of the problems.

Are there problems besides the undersupported chamber and the inability to hold the hammer back? They look like they would be pretty nice guns if they made any that fit my hand.

 

[oldman45]

Are there problems besides the undersupported chamber and the inability to hold the hammer back? They look like they would be pretty nice guns if they made any that fit my hand.

There is always going to be issues with anything made.

I say again, Glock is a decent gun. It has problems that need correcting and they will correct them with time.

The gun made Mr Glock a multibillionnaire in a short period of time. He had an idea and acted on it. The better part was he had the best marketing that I ever heard of.

What has not been addressed here is that the gun is affordable to just about everyone. That helps make it popular.

It simply has drawbacks that need to be fixed.

 

[kennyb]

I disagree. There are many articles being published, even in law enforcement journals about it. Please examine your department's last few years of shootings and see how many officer fired shots there were. Compare them to those in the revolver years. Some say the age of the officers is also a factor but I do not agree.

The younger officers are moreso the ones involved but several Chiefs and IAD officers are seeing it.

Also being seen is officers being terminated for various reasons. One officer terminated in the local area for crimes he has been charged with was hired by another smaller department. Thirty years ago, that officer would have not been in LE anymore.

LE has changed but many refuse to accept the fact. LE is an honorable profession and nobody goes into it to get rich. But the standards have been lowered over the years.

LOLOL...of course you disagree oldman45...anyone that has a differant perspective then you...you disagree
you mention the articles in the "law enforcement journals" that support your statement...which articles in what journals? i'll give em a read i was in it during the revolver years...now you did mention one thing that i agree with you 100%...."LE has changed but many refuse to accept the fact" HMMMM

 

[cmort666]

Are there problems besides the undersupported chamber and the inability to hold the hammer back? They look like they would be pretty nice guns if they made any that fit my hand.

The reason why you can't "hold the hammer back" is because they don't HAVE a hammer. It's a striker fired firearm. The firing pin itself is retracted and released to fire a round.

 

[oldman45]

LOLOL...of course you disagree oldman45...anyone that has a differant perspective then you...you disagree
you mention the articles in the "law enforcement journals" that support your statement...which articles in what journals? i'll give em a read i was in it during the revolver years...now you did mention one thing that i agree with you 100%...."LE has changed but many refuse to accept the fact" HMMMM

Nope, I do not have a problem with those with differing opinions. Each person has opinions and they are entitled to them. I have been found in error before and will admit to it. There have been times a different opinion caused me to re-examine my work but not always changed my mind. I enjoy hearing other perspectives on cases.

Each court trial will have two sides. One blood spatter expert will say one thing and be 180 degrees from another. Firearms are no different. There will always be another view of things in every case. The trick is to go into each case with an open mind and think out of the box.

As with concealed carry, some say a certain thing cannot be done and others will question as to why not.

 

[oldman45]

LOLOL...of course you disagree oldman45...anyone that has a differant perspective then you...you disagree
you mention the articles in the "law enforcement journals" that support your statement...which articles in what journals? i'll give em a read i was in it during the revolver years...now you did mention one thing that i agree with you 100%...."LE has changed but many refuse to accept the fact" HMMMM

The Police Policy Studies Council

This is one article used in classes today. I will get some others as to number of rounds but this is an eye opener for some.

 

[Sprefix]

I seem to have lost my Glock........................

 

[kennyb]

The Police Policy Studies Council

This is one article used in classes today. I will get some others as to number of rounds but this is an eye opener for some.

that article relates to low light shooting and training for same.....i do not know of a single dept.in this area that does not train and in fact qualify in low to no light....

 

[kennyb]

I seem to have lost my Glock........................

LOLOL!!!!!!

 

[ImprovedModel56Fan]

The reason why you can't "hold the hammer back" is because they don't HAVE a hammer. It's a striker fired firearm. The firing pin itself is retracted and released to fire a round.

Exactly. So if the trigger (including the little thingy/safety in the trigger) gets caught by the holster, which HAS happened, the pistol discharges. If, however, I insert a 1911 into a holster and the trigger gets caught by the holster, the pistol will not discharge even if the thumb safety is not engaged, because my thumb is on the hammer, holding it back. If I insert a revolver into a holster and the trigger catches on the holster, it can't discharge because my thumb is holding the hammer down.

Centennials, particularly the new ones, are a little harder to handle (index finger behind the trigger). I have a Kahr that I don't carry, partly because, like the Glock, it has no hammer to hold back when holstering.

Most folks on this board already know why one can't hold back the hammer on a Glock.

 

[cmort666]

Exactly. So if the trigger (including the little thingy/safety in the trigger) gets caught by the holster, which HAS happened, the pistol discharges. If, however, I insert a 1911 into a holster and the trigger gets caught by the holster, the pistol will not discharge even if the thumb safety is not engaged, because my thumb is on the hammer, holding it back. If I insert a revolver into a holster and the trigger catches on the holster, it can't discharge because my thumb is holding the hammer down.

Centennials, particularly the new ones, are a little harder to handle (index finger behind the trigger). I have a Kahr that I don't carry, partly because, like the Glock, it has no hammer to hold back when holstering.

Most folks on this board already know why one can't hold back the hammer on a Glock.

The ONLY holster I've ever seen where I thought there was even the POSSIBILITY of the trigger on one of my Glocks getting pulled was the cheap Bianchi IWB that was my first IWB for my Glock 19.

EVERY other quality holster that I've ever seen, including the tuckable IWBs that I make myself won't do it.

 

[oldman45]

that article relates to low light shooting and training for same.....i do not know of a single dept.in this area that does not train and in fact qualify in low to no light....

Did you notice the percentage of unarmed civilians shot by officers? The shooting stats show lack of firearm training or lack of attention by the students ? cadets.

Officers have to protect themselves but also owe protection to those they serve.

 

[ImprovedModel56Fan]

The ONLY holster I've ever seen where I thought there was even the POSSIBILITY of the trigger on one of my Glocks getting pulled was the cheap Bianchi IWB that was my first IWB for my Glock 19.

EVERY other quality holster that I've ever seen, including the tuckable IWBs that I make myself won't do it.

You're right; a quality holster, practically by definition, will not help cause a Glock or a Kahr to discharge. Yet, such things have occurred, most likely with other holsters or without holsters. It is easier to avoid when there is a hammer to hold down or back.

 

[kennyb]

Did you notice the percentage of unarmed civilians shot by officers? The shooting stats show lack of firearm training or lack of attention by the students ? cadets.

Officers have to protect themselves but also owe protection to those they serve.

LOLOL...ok...nice try!

 

[cmort666]

You're right; a quality holster, practically by definition, will not help cause a Glock or a Kahr to discharge. Yet, such things have occurred, most likely with other holsters or without holsters. It is easier to avoid when there is a hammer to hold down or back.

I know how the Glock works (especially after having done the "$0.25 trigger job" on a couple of them) and am willing to deal with them in accordance with what safety requires.

The truth is that you can unintentionally shoot yourself or somebody else with just about anything if you're sufficiently negligent.

 

[Grayfox]

The pistol most often on my hip is a 1959 Colt Commander in .45acp.
You carry whatever you want. I know what works for me.

 

[kennyb]

hey grayfox...is anna's steakhouse still open in bartlett?

 

[Buckeye]

Here in TN you have "Carry Permits" Open or concealed.....

I carry a RIA GI 1911...at times ..in a Pancake "high and tight"

And At times I carry my G20 10mm, same type leather..

 

[Ironhand]

Here in TN I'm carrying my S&W 49 when my permit comes in. The only other handgun I own is a Beretta 92F, and I have a good holster for it. It's a big gun, though it holds 19 rounds of ammo. The only 1911 I've ever owned was a mid-70s Detonics Combat Master, an outstanding carry piece, now that I've sold it..... ****...

I'd like a full-size 1911 someday, right after I shoot up all the 9mm ammo I've got squirrelled-away for my 92F and Hi-Power.

 

[WIKD]

I don't think it's a matter of 1911 or Glock. My recommendation is having both, and as many more as you can afford.

 

[imjin138]

A long time ago I read a book titled ' The Last of the Untouchables' by Paul Robsky. He was the wire tap expert for Eliot Ness and in his book he stated that he carried a 1911 in a shoulder holster, his main complaint was the weight and after 1929 he switched to a Detective Special.

So this debate has been going on for a long time.