Can you elaborate on this ? I was not aware of any problem with the glocks going off accidentally. Ciurrently in the market for a new 45, I would be interested in learning more about this.
How did S&W lose the LE market?
- Thread starter Silversmok3
- Start date
Can you elaborate on this ? I was not aware of any problem with the glocks going off accidentally. Ciurrently in the market for a new 45, I would be interested in learning more about this.
mawguy
Member
The Wichita Police Department is making a change from Glock, but the interesting thing is that they are stepping down from the .40 to 9mm. Seems some of our female officers are having accuracy problems with the .40's.
I believe what he is referring to is the issue that with Glocks you must pull the trigger before you can pull down on the take down levers to remove the slide.....common for striker fired pistols but not hammer ones....this resulted (for a number of different reasons....inadequate training, inattention, etc...) in a generally higher number of negligent discharges with Glocks when departments transitioned to them.
I'm with a fairly small agency (about 400 agents). About 4 or 5 years ago we switched from 228s (there were getting old) to a mix of 229s and G23s and G27s. Two years or so ago we began buying .40 off an FBI contract (I think) with Winchester/Olin (180 g Ranger bonded), we knew it was a little hot but the Glocks started to break last summer, trigger pins mostly I think. Anyway, last fall Glock agreed to rebuild all of them, we shipped them all back to GA in batches of a dozen or so at a time. Last week we had another G23 go down and it's looking like the same thing......it's making some of us wonder if we shouldn't just go with all 229s.
M2MikeGolf
US Veteran
I think you must mean the average gun owner, but I'm not sure. My guess it that all members of the S&W forum are gun owners, and do not stick their guns in sock drawers. I'm not referring to them, I'm referring to LEOs and perhaps soldiers and experienced gun owners that take firearms seriously. I've seen soldiers, NCO's and officers commit negligent discharges with a variety of weapons. These are (supposed) experienced, trained personnel. They were negligent; it was not the fault of the weapon in any way shape or form.
The Glock is a simple weapon, it's an easy concept with a Glock. You pull the trigger it fires, just like a revolver. No complicated safety switches or levers. If you clear it correctly, like you have been trained, it will not fire. I will make no opinionated comment about an organization that allows negligent discharges and then blames them on the weapon, I think it's pretty obvious what's wrong with that. People have preferences of what weapon they use, or, if they belong to an organization that issues a weapon, they recieve training and they become proficient with it, or not. In the military, where you use what you are issued whether you like it or not (and do not ever have an option of personally owned weapons), we punished soldiers that failed in that area, particularly in combat zones. The reason? That's how you kill innocent people, to include your peers. Unless the weapon malfunctions (which is rare), you cannot blame it on the weapon. By punishing those that commit such acts, you send the message to the sock drawer crowd to pay attention.
One of the amazing thing about Glocks are the amount of quality they possess vs. the price, it's no wonder an organization chooses them. I carried one in Iraq and found it to be the equal to the P 228 that I owned and wished I could have carried while there. I think it's superior to the issue M9, equal at worst. The M9 is subject to lots of negligent discharges, but no one in the Army suggests it's the fault of the weapon or it's design. I would have to see the actual case event of a negligent discharge with the Glock before I would believe that it has anything to do with it's design. The clearing procedures are the same. The Glock is not a complicated weapon, in fact, it is simpler than the SIG (at least the one I own). Complacency, and irresponsibilty are the only reasons for negligent discharges, there are no allowable "reasons". I would like to hear why the design of the Glock "causes" more negligent discharges than other weapons of similar type. "Operator headspace and timing" is the phrase we used to use to explain such phenomena. We also used to say "the maximum effective range of an excuse is 0 meters". Silly little slang terms, but actually pretty close to truth. S&W and SIG would love for you to believe that Glock makes unsafe weapons, just like Ford would love for you to think Chevrolet makes unsafe automobiles.
I have never had a negligent discharge with weapon, and I have fired, qualifed and used a lot of different systems in a lot of different environments. The only people I ever saw have negligent discharges were what I considered to be substandard members of my organization, I never saw what I considered to be a professional soldier commit such an act. Maybe those who have had negligent discharges are not the ones to listen to on how not to have them, no matter what the weapon type.
If car makers gave away their cars in exchange for old ones, we would all be driving new cars.
Glock is buying the LE market for the publicity it brings so everyone feels they have to own a Glock. I own several of them and had to carry Glocks for a few years. I almost never shoot any of them now. They are bulky, ugly, are not ergonomically correct and they are not at all accurate. Their barrels are such that ballistics are difficult to prove which gun fired what shot.
Take away the freebie of Glocks and the market will shift back faster than it is now.
Glock is buying the LE market for the publicity it brings so everyone feels they have to own a Glock. I own several of them and had to carry Glocks for a few years. I almost never shoot any of them now. They are bulky, ugly, are not ergonomically correct and they are not at all accurate. Their barrels are such that ballistics are difficult to prove which gun fired what shot.
Take away the freebie of Glocks and the market will shift back faster than it is now.
117
Member
sigma
I have to agree the Sigma really hurt S&W in the LE community and general public. I remember back in the mid to late 90's Tennessee Highway Patrol switched from 5906 to the Sigma and had nothing but trouble out of them after about a year or so they went to glock. I also had bought a new Sigma 40F at that time and it was the worste gun I have ever bought and sold it shortly after. Even to this day I will not consider anything polymer from S&W including the MP or the bodyguard. Just look at the problems the bodyguard folks have been having. Only metal S&W 3gens and revolvers for me,if I feel i need anything plastic I would go with the glock as I have had several and all went boom everytime you pulled the trigger just like the S&W 3 gen
I have to agree the Sigma really hurt S&W in the LE community and general public. I remember back in the mid to late 90's Tennessee Highway Patrol switched from 5906 to the Sigma and had nothing but trouble out of them after about a year or so they went to glock. I also had bought a new Sigma 40F at that time and it was the worste gun I have ever bought and sold it shortly after. Even to this day I will not consider anything polymer from S&W including the MP or the bodyguard. Just look at the problems the bodyguard folks have been having. Only metal S&W 3gens and revolvers for me,if I feel i need anything plastic I would go with the glock as I have had several and all went boom everytime you pulled the trigger just like the S&W 3 gen
Last edited:
One word.
Marketing.
You can listen to the story while you surf:
How The Glock Became America's Weapon Of Choice : NPR
Thank you.
I just bought a beautiful NIB `71 S&W Model 41 and have a lot of reading to do here.
kbm6893
Member
About the only thing a Glock has in common with a revolver is they both fire a bullet. Unless you wanna compare a Glock to a revolver with it's hammer cocked, or a 1911 with the hammer back and safety off.
M2MikeGolf
US Veteran
Exactly my point.
Joe in SC
US Veteran
All the discussion in the world doesn't change the facts. The Glock is a great pistol at a real good price even if you pay gunshop prices. It will go down in history as one of the great designs.
It is no more difficult to learn to hit with than any other pistol. In fact, it's easier than some. The take down procedure is not difficult and if a person doesn't have enough smarts to safely handle this gun while disassembling, he/she has no business handling a gun.
Make no mistake, it is not a good looking handgun as in 1911 or Python. It could be made into a much better looking gun, but that would drive the price higher and would do nothing to improve on function.
Glocks work when called on. They are dead nuts reliable.
If I hear something out of ordinary during the night, the Glock 19 on my nightstand gets the call.
Glocks work for the military, law enforcement and the common gun owner. Say what you will, the numbers speak for themselves.
It is no more difficult to learn to hit with than any other pistol. In fact, it's easier than some. The take down procedure is not difficult and if a person doesn't have enough smarts to safely handle this gun while disassembling, he/she has no business handling a gun.
Make no mistake, it is not a good looking handgun as in 1911 or Python. It could be made into a much better looking gun, but that would drive the price higher and would do nothing to improve on function.
Glocks work when called on. They are dead nuts reliable.
If I hear something out of ordinary during the night, the Glock 19 on my nightstand gets the call.
Glocks work for the military, law enforcement and the common gun owner. Say what you will, the numbers speak for themselves.
Somebody said that in general civilian gun owners shoot less and thus implied they were less competent than their police-force counterparts.
That may be true in your neck of the woods but not in mine.
I used to participate in a joint police/civilian shoot in which the civilians routinely shot as just as well as the cops. Some did much better than the cops.
People don't buy Dillon reloaders for guns they 'seldom carry and never shoot.'
That may be true in your neck of the woods but not in mine.
I used to participate in a joint police/civilian shoot in which the civilians routinely shot as just as well as the cops. Some did much better than the cops.
People don't buy Dillon reloaders for guns they 'seldom carry and never shoot.'
VTHokiesDuckHunter
Member
"People don't buy Dillon reloaders for guns they 'seldom carry and never shoot.'"
+1
Best Comment/Post of the Day for sure!
Well see, there's yer problem right there...yer thinking all logical-like and using stuff like "facts". Heck, you can use facts to prove most anything.
JamesArthur60
US Veteran
Are there any police range officers on this forum who can answer this question? Officers who determine with research and know the amount of dollars that can be spent for the purchase of any quality sidearm. That's who can answer the OP'ers question. The ordinary street cop (in a metro department) has no say or wishes whether it's S&W, Glock, Sig, Beretta, etc. When guns are issued you stand in line and one is handed to you. The range staff then train you on that particular firearm. Ofc. Jones knows nothing about the bidding process, the cut deals. It appears to me police sidearms come from numerous makers for numerous reasons.
elm_creek_smith
US Veteran
I am actively working to get my boss to let me carry a revolver instead of the issued Glock 22. He said I had to qualify with it before I could carry it. That's not going to be a problem. Now, all I have to do is wait for the next qualification.
ECS
ECS
Same experience with my agency. Glock 22's breaking down with some regularity. A recruit was on the line with a replacement G22 when the frame rail sheared off with less than 100 rounds fired. I don't think we have a single G22 left that has its original striker assembly or extractor. About half are on frame No. 2. Fortunately the boss has seen the light and we are phasing them out for M&Ps.
I have been a Glock armorer since the early 1990's and as far as I am concerned a Glock 9mm / .45acp are good guns. The Glock .40 is worthless.
GaCop
Member
+1! Our department had three 5906s that went bad, were sent back to Smith& Wesson twice and they couldn't fix the problems. The department dumped their Smiths and went with (ugh) Glock.
Tom
Similar threads
