Nope. I don't understand Glock people. I just don't get it.
I'm a DA/SA guy. I like pistols that have hammers that you can see. More flexible. Safer.
Perhaps we shooters who are wedded to DA/SA weapon systems are people who were raised on revolvers.
Here's my take on it. First, there was the single-action revolver. Along came Smith & Wesson, and they invented a revolver that could be cocked and fired with the movement of the trigger only, the double-action.
John Moses Browning's 1911 and his other semi-auto pistols made the semi-auto ubiquitous. However, you had to rack the slide or cock the hammer to fire it. Many of us revolver shooters thought, wouldn't it be great to have a semi-auto pistol that we could fire like we do our double-action revolver?
There's some argument about who made the first DA/SA, but the Walther P-38 often gets the nod. With a DA/SA, all you need to do is pull the trigger.
To me, the DA/SA is kind of like the double-action revolver. I get to use it in single action mode, I get to use it in double action mode. Best of all, after I fire the first shot, it has a wonderfully light and crisp trigger pull.
I can load a round in the chamber and lower the hammer, so it's not possible for the pistol to accidentally fire.
Some people tell me that the DA/SA is too complicated. Of the people I've met that say that, the vast majority were not raised shooting revolvers. To me, it couldn't be simpler. I point the gun at the target, flick the safety, and squeeze the trigger until it goes bang.
People tell me that they are concerned that a safety is an extra step and that in the heat of combat they might forget what to do. I tell them that all of my semi-auto pistols have safeties, and that I always have to disengage the safety, so I do it. I have practiced the manual of arms sufficiently so that instinctively I do what it needed.
I want to interject here that I'm not a fan of the concept of "carry gun rotation" or changing one's carry weapon as though it is a fashion accessory or a clothing choice. For the most part, I prefer to carry one pistol all the time. It is the one with which I am most proficient. If I cannot carry it, I have a smaller pistol that is smaller, more concealable and therefore has more conceal options.
Therefore, I do not have to remember, "Oh is this how it works?" All my pistols work the same.
I'm sorry that S&W discontinued their DA/SA semi-auto pistols (39/59 Series). I think they could have become awesome.
I really don't understand why would anyone put a loaded pistol in their pants that doesn't have a safety on it. If you think that the trigger safety on a Glock is good enough, read some of the accident recounts of Glock people who shot themselves in the leg. One of them was a Top Shot TV series finalist and a former Federal Air Marshal.
Read the report of the US Air pilot accident, an FAA "Flight Deck Officer," with a special Glock chosen by the FAA exclusively for the armed pilot program. His Glock trigger became caught on the seatbelt and discharged in the cockpit.
Why do Glock people like the grip? It's a European slant, like a Luger. Maybe Europeans have different wrists. I like the grip angle of 1911-s, HiPower-s, Beretta 92 series (Vertec), CZ-75, etc. The grip angle on S&W striker pistols is also the same angle, around 18°, unlike the Glock 22° slant.
Striker-fired pistol triggers seem like staple guns to me. A 1911 trigger, in contrast, is about as good as it gets. The only striker exception for me, surprisingly, is my new S&W Bodyguard 2.0. I purchased it because it is just about the most concealable, yet practical, pistol that I can find (and it has a safety). But my S&W J-frame Model 60 gives me more confidence.
By the way, S&W makes a really nice 1911. I noticed that they now make some of their striker-fired pistols in metal. Seems like, let's "Make S&W Great Again!"
on the seatbelt"...?
