Glock 19X to be introduced in January

Status
Not open for further replies.
Possibility of black later on.
Sticking with 9mm for now, since that's the "military configuration" and Glock wanted to stay as close as possible to the pistol submitted.

Glock submitted a 23MHS in .40 S&W along with the 19MHS so a 23X is also in the "military configuration".
 
Homer,
I wasn't clear.
It was a joke.

People have been asking for a Glock thumb safety for over 30 years.
It genuinely surprises me that the company doesn't meet that market segment. :)
Denis
 
But you’re not telling us anything that you haven’t already told us.
Well you did tell us again about Glock owners shooting them selves and then give us a link to one about a M&P.
You know that you can only tell someone the same thing so many times before they get to the point of not caring what you have to say. Trust my when I say, we all know that you don’t like Glocks.
Give us some facts like, how many Glock owners have shot them selves compared to your favorite gun with a manual safety. Or maybe how many people you personally know that have shot them selves with a striker fire pistol vs a hammer fire pistol.
I only know one guy that shot his self with a Glock. I still pick on him every time I see him because it was his fault not the gun.

Now you're just nitpicking to defend your argument and you won't admit it. I said the same about all other striker fired guns with no manual safety. That little paddle on the trigger isn't a safety, which is why I own an M&P Shield and a Ruger LC9-S, both with safety, even though they come without one.

The M&P link is relevant, because the transistion from a hammer fired TDA (or even DAO) weapon resulted in a 40% increase in ND's. Now, that means that they training for the Beretta was adequate, but the same training for the striker fired M&P, no different than a Glock, was not.

As for actual expereince, the NYPD used to offer 3 weapons, the SIG 226, S&W 5946 (both DAO), and Glock 19. Roughly evenly chosen. At the time I retired, the Glock 19, which was carried by maybe 40% of the department, was the gun that resulted in 100% of repoprted ND's. So the same training for all three guns was sufficient for the other 2, but not the Glock.

Enjoy your Glock.
 
Plenty of people have shot themselves with 1911’s and revolvers as well. But glock-leg just has a better ring to it. Not to mention a lot of these glock leg incidents were during a transition phase to striker fired guns. If one can’t see it’s all about discipline when handling firearms then this debate is useless. I have guns with manual safeties and guns without manual safeties. If I have to be extra careful reholstering a gun with no manual safety then so be it. But to blame a gun for firing when something fouled the trigger guard or someone pulled the trigger on a chambered round while disassembling it is about as ridiculous as one could get. Have you ever cut yourself with a knife by accident? I guess we need more safety apparatus on knives for preventing people from accidentally cutting themselves because the knife is doing exactly what it is suppose to do, cut. I only need/want a safety on a sao handgun, although I have a Cz 75b that’s da/sa and a usp compact that has the safety decocker. I never use the safeties on these guns. If someone wants a safety then so be it if it gives you piece of mind. But don’t blame negligent discharges on a gun. For all the people who have negligent discharges with glocks I’m sure there are thousands upon thousands more that have not. Saying a weapon is responsible for someone getting injured from a negligent discharge isn’t far from saying AR’s kill people and high capacity magazines create mass shootings. Let’s not take the human responsibility away from this, just saying

Being careful while reholstering is fine on the range when not under stress. Try doing it after a foot pursuit and wresting with some guy, or while conducting a felony car stop. Little bit different.

And I never said a Glock caused a ND. Just that they are more likely to have one due to a very light trigger, so manual safety, and no hammer. And other striker gun with no safety occupies that same space.

But dress it up in tan and add an "X" to it, and it's the next best thing.
 
Last edited:
I guess we need more safety apparatus on knives for preventing people from accidentally cutting themselves because the knife is doing exactly what it is suppose to do, cut.
It’s called a hilt. Some have foregone the hilt and have built palm swells in, or a inset or outset portion where the index finger goes to aid in anti-slip. Oh, and grippy scale designs.
What’s your point again? I’m confused.

ETA handguards on various historical fighting blades such as a rapier or cutlass.
 
What’s your point again? I’m confused.
My point was you can’t blame the tool for someone’s negligence. I guess you couldn’t get that out of that or obviously you disagree. People have accidents every single day with knives, because more knives are being handled than guns. Yet your basic everyday knives haven’t changed much over the years.
 
Now you're just nitpicking to defend your argument and you won't admit it. I said the same about all other striker fired guns with no manual safety. That little paddle on the trigger isn't a safety, which is why I own an M&P Shield and a Ruger LC9-S, both with safety, even though they come without one.

The M&P link is relevant, because the transistion from a hammer fired TDA (or even DAO) weapon resulted in a 40% increase in ND's. Now, that means that they training for the Beretta was adequate, but the same training for the striker fired M&P, no different than a Glock, was not.

As for actual expereince, the NYPD used to offer 3 weapons, the SIG 226, S&W 5946 (both DAO), and Glock 19. Roughly evenly chosen. At the time I retired, the Glock 19, which was carried by maybe 40% of the department, was the gun that resulted in 100% of repoprted ND's. So the same training for all three guns was sufficient for the other 2, but not the Glock.

Enjoy your Glock.

Is it really too hard for you to understand that this is a thread about the Glock 19X? This is in no way a thread that was intended to be used by you to endlessly express your need for a gun with training wheels.

This is a forum where you are pretty much free to create your own thread on any subject related to guns, so even you can go start your own thread. Here are some suggestions for thread titles: "Glocks suck", "Guns without manual safeties are inherently unsafe" "Why I simply must continue to read about and offer off topic opinions in a thread about a gun I do not like, made by a company I don't like". "Why I am more gooder at thinking good than Glock owners"
 
Being careful while reholstering is fine on the range when not under stress. Try doing it after a foot pursuit and wresting with some guy, or while conducting a felony car stop. Little bit different.

And I never said a Glock caused a ND. Just that they are more likely to have one due to a very light trigger, so manual safety, and no hammer. And other striker gun with no safety occupies that same space.

But dress it up in tan and add an "X" to it, and it's the next best thing.
This is like beating a dead horse. Training and a good holster is the only way to prevent such things. With 65% of law enforcement in America alone carrying glocks at one point in time it’s a surprise we have any cops left that aren’t on disability from shooting themselves in the leg when reholstering. Who ever said the 19X is the next best thing. I said I picked one up and love it. I also love my ppq 5”, my Cz 75B, my usp compact, and my p320 compact. I also said it’s my favorite glock. Nobody said this was the best gun ever because that gun doesn’t exist. You guys need to really stop trolling glock threads, it’s getting a bit ridiculous. If you don’t like the 19X fine, just move on. Start your own Glock bashing thread please
 
My point was you can’t blame the tool for someone’s negligence. I guess you couldn’t get that out of that or obviously you disagree. People have accidents every single day with knives, because more knives are being handled than guns. Yet your basic everyday knives haven’t changed much over the years.
I got the message, but I was being a turd. The point I was trying to make is that a large portion of people who will kick and scream about one thing will kick and scream another way with the exact opposite logic. Your analogy just made a good case for me to make my point. Almost nobody will buy a knife that has a slick straight handle with no grip aids of any sort because everybody will moan and groan about cutting themself when the knife slips, but the same argument with a gun goes...well...everybody reading this thread sees how it goes.

This argument that comes up constantly only serves to segregate the crowd, stir up emotions, and create drama around the product which means it gets seen by more people waiting for the conversation to go haywire. It creates publicity which sells more of them. The sad thing is that the market is so overloaded with glocks and glock copies from every manufacturer which puts these guns into the hands of new inexperienced shooters so they don't ever get exposure to anything else to make an informed decision about what to like or what to dislike, which perpetuates the issue. So you have a gun with a minimal "safety" being handled by tons of users, many with little experience or little if any training handling any guns and some people get bent out of shape when others point out that there are other options which are in fact safer designs that are more suitable for new shooters to cut their teeth on. Once somebody is familiar with firearms then fine, have at it, if that's your thing then do it, but it is idiocy in truest form to ignore other designs or bash on others for having differing opinions because people don't take time to understand the product being discussed, no matter if it's a pistol, a golf ball, or a frying pan. There are ups and downs to everything, and without intelligent discussion of BOTH pros and cons we do nothing but chase our tails. New shooters immediately going to a glock or similar no-safety pistol is not too far away from buying a 16 year old a high end sports car and wondering why he wrecks it doing 140 in the Wal-Mart parking lot that very weekend. The personal questions behind the argument is where do you draw the line on safety, and from what angle do you form your conclusion. Do you focus on safer manipulation or faster reaction to a threat. If you pick threat reaction then do you really concern yourself with the reality that in almost all situations where you can legally draw your weapon you are already a few seconds behind the bad guy who "has the drop on you" and will drop you in your tracks when you reach for your gun. Do you consider that if you have time to produce a weapon without being shot yourself you probably have time to do something else like run, take cover, or flip a safety switch. If talking bump in the night defense are you considering a shotgun or carbine at all? Then there are guys like me who focus on things like hunting or target shooting who could care less about a quickdraw and we instead focus on safety while totally neglecting some of the positive attributes...which brings me back to my original post...I wish they would offer the gun they developed, and I would hope that it would expand to include a safety equipped MOS 10mm longslide hunting gun.

I digress from my rant... you ccan all continue the argument if you wish but I'm sick of it. Hard heads on both sides seem to outnumber the people who take time to truly evaluate the offering and base their opinion on anything other than emotional response.
 
Last edited:
Now you're just nitpicking to defend your argument and you won't admit it. I said the same about all other striker fired guns with no manual safety. That little paddle on the trigger isn't a safety, which is why I own an M&P Shield and a Ruger LC9-S, both with safety, even though they come without one.

The M&P link is relevant, because the transistion from a hammer fired TDA (or even DAO) weapon resulted in a 40% increase in ND's. Now, that means that they training for the Beretta was adequate, but the same training for the striker fired M&P, no different than a Glock, was not.

As for actual expereince, the NYPD used to offer 3 weapons, the SIG 226, S&W 5946 (both DAO), and Glock 19. Roughly evenly chosen. At the time I retired, the Glock 19, which was carried by maybe 40% of the department, was the gun that resulted in 100% of repoprted ND's. So the same training for all three guns was sufficient for the other 2, but not the Glock.

Enjoy your Glock.
Not nitpicking. You are posting in a topic about a new firearm offered by Glock, the 19X. This is not a topic about all the other Glock models on the market. You seem to have a hard time staying on topic.
You say that I am defending my argument. What argument?
I like Glocks, just as I like many other handguns. I said I like the The 19X and plan to buy one. You seem to have a problem with that.
You don’t like Glocks or any striker fire handgun without a manual safety. That is your personal choice and does not effect me in any way.
But it seems that you have a problem with others that like things that you don’t like. You have made it a point to disrupt this topic due to personal issues you have.
 
I don't understand why people get so hung up on striker fired pistols and safeties. If you are that worried about negligent discharges carry in Condition Three (loaded magazine, nothing in the chamber).
 
Is it really too hard for you to understand that this is a thread about the Glock 19X? This is in no way a thread that was intended to be used by you to endlessly express your need for a gun with training wheels.

This is a forum where you are pretty much free to create your own thread on any subject related to guns, so even you can go start your own thread. Here are some suggestions for thread titles: "Glocks suck", "Guns without manual safeties are inherently unsafe" "Why I simply must continue to read about and offer off topic opinions in a thread about a gun I do not like, made by a company I don't like". "Why I am more gooder at thinking good than Glock owners"

This started out as a thread on the 19X and turned into a thread about no safeties about 10 pages back because the 19X as it was introduced to the army had one and the civilian version does not. Immediately, those who prefer one were trounced in by others, equating a safety on a Glock to a blinker on a race car or a life jacket in a hot tub, among others.

As for 65% if cops carrying a Glock who don’t shoot themselves in the leg, first of all, depending on where they work the gun might never come out of the holster, and secondly, when they DO happen, they don’t always make the news so how can we know how often it does happen? The one link I provided since it DID make the news, about a 40% increase in them when transitioning from a TDA auto to a striker fired one, was immediately discounted because the gun was an M&P and not a Glock. So cops who had been carrying for years without ND’s suddenly were having issues when switching to a striker fired weapon. Anybody who can’t acknowledge that while striker fired no safety weapons aren’t “unsafe”, they are “less safe” and have a higher rate of ND’s, whether it be Ruger, S&W, or Glock, is delusional. Watch the hickock45 video on the SR9-C. He’s a huge Glock fan and doesn’t like safeties, but he commented that the trigger on that gun is so light that he wouldn’t carry it without one.

So yeah, this thread is about the 19X. It’s the tan 17/19 hybrid that failed to win the US Army trials. Glock is looking to recoup some of their investment by selling it to the public, just like Beretta is doing with the M9A3.

Go back to page one of this thread. Post #2 commented on no safety. Number 3 commented it’s hardly revolutionary to raid the parts bin to make a new gun, and several more. This thread stopped being about the new gun about 2 pages in.
 
Last edited:
I got the message, but I was being a turd. The point I was trying to make is that a large portion of people who will kick and scream about one thing will kick and scream another way with the exact opposite logic. Your analogy just made a good case for me to make my point. Almost nobody will buy a knife that has a slick straight handle with no grip aids of any sort because everybody will moan and groan about cutting themself when the knife slips, but the same argument with a gun goes...well...everybody reading this thread sees how it goes.

This argument that comes up constantly only serves to segregate the crowd, stir up emotions, and create drama around the product which means it gets seen by more people waiting for the conversation to go haywire. It creates publicity which sells more of them. The sad thing is that the market is so overloaded with glocks and glock copies from every manufacturer which puts these guns into the hands of new inexperienced shooters so they don't ever get exposure to anything else to make an informed decision about what to like or what to dislike, which perpetuates the issue. So you have a gun with a minimal "safety" being handled by tons of users, many with little experience or little if any training handling any guns and some people get bent out of shape when others point out that there are other options which are in fact safer designs that are more suitable for new shooters to cut their teeth on. Once somebody is familiar with firearms then fine, have at it, if that's your thing then do it, but it is idiocy in truest form to ignore other designs or bash on others for having differing opinions because people don't take time to understand the product being discussed, no matter if it's a pistol, a golf ball, or a frying pan. There are ups and downs to everything, and without intelligent discussion of BOTH pros and cons we do nothing but chase our tails. New shooters immediately going to a glock or similar no-safety pistol is not too far away from buying a 16 year old a high end sports car and wondering why he wrecks it doing 140 in the Wal-Mart parking lot that very weekend. The personal questions behind the argument is where do you draw the line on safety, and from what angle do you form your conclusion. Do you focus on safer manipulation or faster reaction to a threat. If you pick threat reaction then do you really concern yourself with the reality that in almost all situations where you can legally draw your weapon you are already a few seconds behind the bad guy who "has the drop on you" and will drop you in your tracks when you reach for your gun. Do you consider that if you have time to produce a weapon without being shot yourself you probably have time to do something else like run, take cover, or flip a safety switch. If talking bump in the night defense are you considering a shotgun or carbine at all? Then there are guys like me who focus on things like hunting or target shooting who could care less about a quickdraw and we instead focus on safety while totally neglecting some of the positive attributes...which brings me back to my original post...I wish they would offer the gun they developed, and I would hope that it would expand to include a safety equipped MOS 10mm longslide hunting gun.

I digress from my rant... you ccan all continue the argument if you wish but I'm sick of it. Hard heads on both sides seem to outnumber the people who take time to truly evaluate the offering and base their opinion on anything other than emotional response.
I actually agree with a lot you say here, especially if one has time to draw a gun he/she would have time to disengage the safety. That’s all about training. However you still fail to realize there are negligent discharges with more than just striker fired guns. There have been negligent discharges with revolvers and 1911’s alike. There’s a reason they are called negligent discharges. If and only if striker fired guns were all the cases of negligent discharges would your argument hold merit. Everybody is entitled to their opinion and if you think every handgun should have a manual safety then that’s ok. I’m on the other side of the fence. I’m done with this whole manual safety thing because obviously it’s a waste of time, and my next post will be about my G19X being shot today with a full range review. My daughter is going to shoot it today as well. I hope I can make it out the range without one of us shooting ourselves with this gun with no manual safety lol jk. Have a good day

As for 65% if cops carrying a Glock who don’t shoot themselves in the leg, first of all, depending on where they work the gun might never come out of the holster, and secondly, when they DO happen, they don’t always make the news so how can we know how often it does happen? The one link I provided since it DID make the news, about a 40% increase in them when transitioning from a TDA auto to a striker fired one, was immediately discounted because the gun was an M&P and not a Glock. So cops who had been carrying for years without ND’s suddenly were having issues when switching to a striker fired weapon. Anybody who can’t acknowledge that while striker fired no safety weapons aren’t “unsafe”, they are “less safe” and have a higher rate of ND’s, whether it be Ruger, S&W, or Glock, is delusional. Watch the hickock45 video on the SR9-C. He’s a huge Glock fan and doesn’t like safeties, but he commented that the trigger on that gun is so light that he wouldn’t carry it without one.
So your logic is that it’s probably always happening but not being reported? You say we don’t know when it does happen, so wouldn’t that also mean we don’t know how much it doesn’t happen as well? Probably cops whose guns don’t come out the holster much are the ones not shooting themselves when reholstering? Well yeah, you can’t shoot anything if you’re not handling a gun. Just saying you’re making a lot of speculation here based on emotion and not much hard data. So you post the m&p link which shows the transition from tda to striker fired guns produced higher rates of negligent discharges. If this doesn’t scream it’s a training issue I don’t know what does. It’s new equipment and new training must be implemented to use it safely and efficiently. Firearms are on a list of equipment that is very unforgiving so safety is a virtue here. I wouldn’t call striker pistols “less safe”, I would call them less forgiving. The reason being is that if you train, follow all the gun safety rules and fundamentals that go with it you will be just as safe with a Glock as with a dao S&W. Hickok45 has his opinion just like you have yours, that doesn’t make his word or yours about this subject law. Just like ours, it’s just all opinions here and nobody is wrong or right. It’s all about personal preference and piece of mind. If you feel you’re likely to shoot yourself because you have a gun with no safety then by all means only buy guns with manual safeties, but don’t expect everyone to feel the same as you. Different strokes for different folks is the old saying and that hold true on so many levels. Like I said above I’m done with this whole manual safety talk and my next post will be a post range review of the g19X, what this thread was intended to be about in the first place. If you guys wanna talk manual safeties on handguns please start another thread. If not I’ll start a new one on my g19x range review and let you guys have this one, therefore you can’t come over there and change the subject
 
I guess I'm one of those weirdos who doesn't give a flip if a gun I like has a safety. When I first got into handguns, my pistol was an SR9 and had a safety. I liked that. Truth be told, I was nervous enough about it, having not grown up with guns, that for the first week I kept it bedside, no magazine in it, and the muzzle pointed away from the bed in a locked safe...ya know, just in case it "went off" :D

As I have shot more and more over the last 10 years and carried constantly, obviously I am much more comfortable with a pistol. I have carried Glocks, Rugers, FNs, SIGs, 1911s of various flavors. With safeties and without.

My current preferred gun is the SIG P320. I find it in no way superior to a Glock. It's about the size of a G17, plastic fantastic wonder nine, no manual safety. The grip angle, grip circumference, and trigger simply fit me better than a Glock.

You know what's funny? Be it a Glock or SIG or any other "safe action" type of gun, I still "sweep off" the safety as I draw it just like my SR9, FNS, and 1911s. It takes no time and just exercises muscle memory to do so in case I ever find myself carrying a gun with a safety. No big deal.

Now, there is a place where I really like a manual safety. It's one of the reasons why I'm kinda glad the new Ruger EC9S has a manual safety for my intended purposes. I like having a manual on a gun that needs to be in and out of the holster in the car due to restrictions. I go into a lot of government building which means the pistol has to stay in the truck. Reaching down and flipping the safety on before I draw means that the pretty much unavoidable sweeping of myself is as safe as it can be. Especially when the gun has a sweet long and lightish trigger like the LC9S series.

Glocks, and guns like them, require a good holster and mindful training. It's the trade off for having a gun that is always at the ready when you need it most. You simply have to make sure you are paying attention. If that means keeping your shirt tail out of the way and taking your sweet time reholstering, you just have to so that. If you don't want to, then pick a gun with a manual safety.

Me liking a Glock more would not be increased by adding a safety. There are already great guns that fit my hands better that sport a manual safety. I think Glocks are great. I'm sure I'll own more of them. They aren't my favorite, but they are reliable and ubiquitous. I can see why many trust their lives to them, and I don't see where adding a manual safety would improve their concept.
 
I actually agree with a lot you say here, especially if one has time to draw a gun he/she would have time to disengage the safety. That’s all about training. However you still fail to realize there are negligent discharges with more than just striker fired guns. There have been negligent discharges with revolvers and 1911’s alike. There’s a reason they are called negligent discharges. If and only if striker fired guns were all the cases of negligent discharges would your argument hold merit. Everybody is entitled to their opinion and if you think every handgun should have a manual safety then that’s ok. I’m on the other side of the fence. I’m done with this whole manual safety thing because obviously it’s a waste of time, and my next post will be about my G19X being shot today with a full range review. My daughter is going to shoot it today as well. I hope I can make it out the range without one of us shooting ourselves with this gun with no manual safety lol jk. Have a good day

So your logic is that it’s probably always happening but not being reported? You say we don’t know when it does happen, so wouldn’t that also mean we don’t know how much it doesn’t happen as well? Probably cops whose guns don’t come out the holster much are the ones not shooting themselves when reholstering? Well yeah, you can’t shoot anything if you’re not handling a gun. Just saying you’re making a lot of speculation here based on emotion and not much hard data. So you post the m&p link which shows the transition from tda to striker fired guns produced higher rates of negligent discharges. If this doesn’t scream it’s a training issue I don’t know what does. It’s new equipment and new training must be implemented to use it safely and efficiently. Firearms are on a list of equipment that is very unforgiving so safety is a virtue here. I wouldn’t call striker pistols “less safe”, I would call them less forgiving. The reason being is that if you train, follow all the gun safety rules and fundamentals that go with it you will be just as safe with a Glock as with a dao S&W. Hickok45 has his opinion just like you have yours, that doesn’t make his word or yours about this subject law. Just like ours, it’s just all opinions here and nobody is wrong or right. It’s all about personal preference and piece of mind. If you feel you’re likely to shoot yourself because you have a gun with no safety then by all means only buy guns with manual safeties, but don’t expect everyone to feel the same as you. Different strokes for different folks is the old saying and that hold true on so many levels. Like I said above I’m done with this whole manual safety talk and my next post will be a post range review of the g19X, what this thread was intended to be about in the first place. If you guys wanna talk manual safeties on handguns please start another thread. If not I’ll start a new one on my g19x range review and let you guys have this one, therefore you can’t come over there and change the subject

You really don’t comprehend. Negligent discharges have been happening since guns were invented. Nobody ever said non striker fired weapons are immune to them. As has been said multiple times, the LACK of a manual safety increases the likelihood of one, and add in the lack of a hammer and a 5.5 pound trigger pull, and he likelihood goes up.

As for them not being reported, I can guarantee you that is the case. Nobody is calling the cops if they let a round go if nobody is hurt. Cops sure aren’t going to report one and lose vacation days or get a formal reprimand. I’ve seen enough bullet holes in range roofs and walls, and I’ve lersonally see 3 ND’s in a precinct locker room. If the LASD is going to publish a 40% increase in ND’s, there’s a problem. And I can guarantee you the number is higher, due to the reasons above. If nobody got hurt or a boss didn’t see it, it didn’t happen.

As for training, sure it can be better. But look at the LASD. Cops been carrying guns for decades, and when they introduce a striker fired no safety weapon, there’s a huge increase in ND’s and a new training regimen must be adopted.

Humans make mistakes. Navy SEALS do. You think you can’t or won’t? Your supreme confidence is your weakness. Bill Jordan killed another officer because he screwed up. Decorated Marine, survivor of many actual shootouts, professional shooter. And he made a mistake. 5.5 pound triggers and no safety make those more likely. If you’re comfortable carrying g one, go for it. But a few years ago in PA, a trooper screwed up while going to clean his Glock and shot his 20 week pregnant wife, killing her and unborn child. Troopers now carry SIGs. Less chance of things like happening. Not a guarantee. Just less chance.
 
You really don’t comprehend. Negligent discharges have been happening since guns were invented. Nobody ever said non striker fired weapons are immune to them. As has been said multiple times, the LACK of a manual safety increases the likelihood of one, and add in the lack of a hammer and a 5.5 pound trigger pull, and he likelihood goes up.

As for them not being reported, I can guarantee you that is the case. Nobody is calling the cops if they let a round go if nobody is hurt. Cops sure aren’t going to report one and lose vacation days or get a formal reprimand. I’ve seen enough bullet holes in range roofs and walls, and I’ve lersonally see 3 ND’s in a precinct locker room. If the LASD is going to publish a 40% increase in ND’s, there’s a problem. And I can guarantee you the number is higher, due to the reasons above. If nobody got hurt or a boss didn’t see it, it didn’t happen.

As for training, sure it can be better. But look at the LASD. Cops been carrying guns for decades, and when they introduce a striker fired no safety weapon, there’s a huge increase in ND’s and a new training regimen must be adopted.

Humans make mistakes. Navy SEALS do. You think you can’t or won’t? Your supreme confidence is your weakness. Bill Jordan killed another officer because he screwed up. Decorated Marine, survivor of many actual shootouts, professional shooter. And he made a mistake. 5.5 pound triggers and no safety make those more likely. If you’re comfortable carrying g one, go for it. But a few years ago in PA, a trooper screwed up while going to clean his Glock and shot his 20 week pregnant wife, killing her and unborn child. Troopers now carry SIGs. Less chance of things like happening. Not a guarantee. Just less chance.

Again, start your own thread. Why do you feel the need to repeat yourself incessantly? You are being a mega-troll, leave it alone and move on, like you said you would do in the first place! You proved you don’t even know what you are talking about back when you implied that 35% of cops with Glocks shoot themselves.
 
Took 11 pages for that one to show up. Now I'm waiting for the scene where Jamie Foxx can't operate the H&K .45 to shoot the glass in Collateral as proof a safety can get you killed.

Eric Bana is an English actor who probably never even touched a gun, and he was playing a soldier. Taking advice from him? Doesn't get you any points.

Gosh, I feel dumb now! I thought he was just as real as the SF NCOs who taught me to shoot!

(Eric Bana is Australian. Just for the sake of accuracy.)
 
Last edited:
Again, start your own thread. Why do you feel the need to repeat yourself incessantly? You are being a mega-troll, leave it alone and move on, like you said you would do in the first place! You proved you don’t even know what you are talking about back when you implied that 35% of cops with Glocks shoot themselves.

Go back to school and learn to read. I said at the time of my retirement, every recorded ND occurred with a Glock 19. I did NOT say that 35% of cops who carry Glocks shoot themselves. In the case of the NYPD, that would mean that of the roughly 10,000 cops who carried the Glock 19, hat 3,500 shot themselves. I never said that and you know it. I’m saying that of the ND’s that occurred the year I retired (maybe 25 recorded), every one of those was with the Glock, and none with the SIG or Smith

As for the troll comment, I’m not looking to stir it up. Just can’t resist commenting on the idiocy of some of the posters here. Go buy your tan Glock. When they introduce the same gun in flamingo pink, some here will buy them. A sucker is born every minute.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top