How accurate would you say a Glock is compared to...

[JohnKSa]

As far as (accuracy) Just saying from my experience (I) would put the glock in the same catagory and say the sigma, P95, or hi point.

I haven't shot a Hi-Point or a Sigma but I do own several P95 pistols. Based on my experience, Glocks are significantly more accurate than P95s.

Say a Sig or a 1911 in the same caliber? I hear about how great everyone who owns a Glock says they are, but I'm just curious about how they really compare to other alloy or SS frame pistols)

I haven't found the frame material to be a major factor in how accurate a semi-auto pistol is.
I've got a few polymer frame pistols that beat the Glocks and some that don't.
I've got some aluminum frame pistols that beat the Glocks and some that don't.
I don't have many steel frame pistols, but even so, I've got at least one that's more accurate than the Glocks I have experience with and at least one that's less accurate.

 

[Girodin]

By the above standard, any assertion posted here is pretty worthless.

Exactly! But sadly very few people seem to realize that, particularly those making the assertions.

One doesn't see too many Glocks killing "combatants" either. Suspects? Sure. Innocent bystanders? A few no doubt. Probably more than a few suicides too.

Combatants? Another matter entirely. Glocks aren't on the front line in huge numbers in the hands of any army which shoots enemy combatants.

Wow, just wow.

 

[Ian111]

Wow, just wow.

Exactly, hence my earlier display of disbelief and frustration. For some its all about "talkin' trash" and one up-manship. Not meaningful discourse.

If that is indeed the case I hope every time they see a Glock in the hands of a cop or a spec ops operator it continues to annoy them. Cause these and other "cheap" plastic black guns ain't goin anywhere anytime soon. They're gonna keep multiplying. LOL

 

[Pizzagunner]

Annoyed? Hardly. A few G-thangs in the hands of a small slice of the US Army, qualifies those as about the only ones in the world being fired in anger at a force opposed by an actual military.

That was the only point. No matter how many Glocks Austria or Norway fields, those fine folks haven't actually fought anyone in forever. Cops don't fight "combatants" BTW, that term has a legal meaning.

Compared to SIG, Beretta, and various makes of the 1911A1, the presence of Glocks in the holsters of world class military forces who actually have fought in the last thirty years is next to nothing.

That fact apparently annoys some of you.

 

[keen one]

Once I figured the trigger squeeze on the Glock, it can rival my single action pistols all day long. (Woodsman, Challenger, 1911, Mk I,II, III...)

It's no beauty, it's a Glock...but they are now my go to carry guns.

 

[Girodin]

What do the dutch use down in Hemland? Not that many people are probably firing side arms. To the best of my knowledge they have G17s and Sigs.

You realize the Iraqi national army uses glocks. Last time I checked they had been involved in some fighting.

The ANP uses glocks and last time I checked they were fighting "combatants" too, although I suppose one could make a convoluted argument to the contrary.

Sri Lanka uses them, but maybe the Tamil Tigers aren't "combatants". They've been fighting a civil war for over a decade and used more suicide bombings than any other group though.

Various special forces units sidearms may in fact differ from what the official sidearm of that nations military is and glocks see some use there.

How about the Indians don't they have some fighting going on in Kashmir.

How about contractors who have had pretty active roles in various recent conflicts.

No matter how many Glocks Austria or Norway fields, those fine folks haven't actually fought anyone in forever.

Why don't you got tell Tor Arne Lau-Henriksen ( a Norwegian special forces soldier) that no Norwegians do ANY fighting, actually you'll need to tell his widow and his fatherless child. I have my own opinions on NATO contributions or lack there of(I also have many a former colleague in the ranks of our NATO allies) to the efforts in Astan but the fact is Norwegians have been killed in their efforts there and your comments are disrespectful of that fact

Having some experience in military procurement I can tell you that a military selecting a particular piece of equipment is often more politically motivated than anything else.

Compared to SIG, Beretta, and various makes of the 1911A1, the presence of Glocks in the holsters of world class military forces who actually have fought in the last thirty years is next to nothing.

That fact apparently annoys some of you.

Now you are trying to change your statement since you got called on it. Saying there are not as many is not saying the same thing as there are not any at all.

None of this is really that important in terms of the measure of a handgun. Handguns are typically last ditch backups.

 

[MythBuster]

Glocks are carried in almost every combat zone on this Earth by anyone who can get them. Good guys and bad guys.

Anyone claiming that have not seen combat is WRONG.

Glocks do better in such environments than a lot of other guns that is why they are so popular in such areas.

 

[Full Metal Jacket]

The theme of this thread is the difference in accuracy between two pistols, not between applications in the field. Since you are unable to see it, I had to use an analogy. Of course there is a difference between a pistol and a rifle. The similarity between a sniper rifle and a bullseye pistol is that both are built with accuracy as priority #1

*facepalm*

 

[Pizzagunner]

Now you are trying to change your statement since you got called on it. Saying there are not as many is not saying the same thing as there are not any at all.

My original statement on the matter:

Combatants? Another matter entirely. Glocks aren't on the front line in huge numbers in the hands of any army which shoots enemy combatants.

What changed? I never said "none," just that the numbers are tiny. And they are in fact tiny when you're dragging up individual Norwegians and some elements of Delta.

 

[Zerodefect]

A metric ton of troops wish they had Glocks. Getting tired of the googly eyes form the .mil guys every time I go to the range.

 

[Ian111]

Annoyed? Hardly. A few G-thangs in the hands of a small slice of the US Army, qualifies those as about the only ones in the world being fired in anger at a force opposed by an actual military.

That was the only point. No matter how many Glocks Austria or Norway fields, those fine folks haven't actually fought anyone in forever. Cops don't fight "combatants" BTW, that term has a legal meaning.

Compared to SIG, Beretta, and various makes of the 1911A1, the presence of Glocks in the holsters of world class military forces who actually have fought in the last thirty years is next to nothing.

That fact apparently annoys some of you.

Uh, no I'm not annoyed by the facts but the incessant negative spin about Glocks some including yourself keep harping about.

I respect service pistols like the Beretta M9, SIG M11, SIG P226, and the 1911A1. I've got no problem with them nor with Glocks. I think they are all serviceable pistols for todays military and there is enough evidence to bear that out. But by your same logic a 1911 fanboi could argue the M9 is "next to nothing" compared to the venerable 1911. The M14 could be considered "next to nothing" compared to the M1 Garand or the M16. Neither worthy of respect merely because of "numbers" you think are important instead of trying to look at the guns more objectively and without an agenda. I would be the last to disparage the M9 or the M14 as fit for military service. Are there be better choices? Well, someone always argues that there are don't they?

The problem is you're looking for a winner and a loser. I don't think there is because the evidence, if you can hold back your prejudices for a moment, doesn't bear that out.

Oh, and that "small slice of the US Army" you talk about probably puts more rounds through their pistols in a year than most serviceman or woman in the Army will throughout their whole career.

 

[Girodin]

What changed? I never said "none," just that the numbers are tiny. And they are in fact tiny when you're dragging up individual Norwegians and some elements of Delta.

There is a clear difference between saying their aren't a lot of glocks versus there aren't a lot compared to Berettas. Given that the Iraqis have glocks I'm not even sure if that is true anyways.

My point about bringing up an individual Norwegian is that it takes a really [not high road adjectives] person to sit behind a computer and say guys that are dying aren't involved in war.

 

[Full Metal Jacket]

Cops don't fight "combatants" BTW, that term has a legal meaning

huh??

 

[Pizzagunner]

A metric ton of troops wish they had Glocks.

A metric ton of troops would be about 12-13 soldiers in a weight range of 160-180 pounds per man. First accurate thing you've said in this thread.

 

[Pizzagunner]

"Combatant" which is shorthand for "enemy combatant," is a term defined in the various treaties that govern armed conflict amongst nation-states.

Expanding the settled definition to include civilian cop and self-defense shootings is nonsense.

 

[Pizzagunner]

Uh, no I'm not annoyed by the facts but the incessant negative spin about Glocks some including yourself keep harping about.

Why would you be annoyed by that? You can't be a stockholder in privately held Glock.

People trash my favorite--Beretta--all the time. Getting annoyed by it would be a waste of energy and time. The company doesn't need me or anyone else to defend it on the internet.

 

[Full Metal Jacket]

"Combatant" which is shorthand for "enemy combatant," is a term defined in the various treaties that govern armed conflict amongst nation-states.

Expanding the settled definition to include civilian cop and self-defense shootings is nonsense.

suspects, or perpetrators that fight the police are referred to as "combatants" everyday in US courts by lawyers & judges.

 

[Pizzagunner]

"Combatant" is not a legal term of art in US criminal proceedings held in civilian courts. It is a term of art in military courts, tribunals and in that parallel justice system due to the term being defined in the Hague and Geneva Conventions and reflected in the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

Just admit to trying to expand the legal definition so that you can shoehorn your favorite cop gun into a "combat" context.

 

[Full Metal Jacket]

^^and your proof to back up this claim?


by the way, court tv isn't a "shoehorn cop show". it's an actual trial.

 

[Pizzagunner]

Google "combatant" & "legal definition"

All of your top hits will be war or military related. The reason for that is international treaties were where the term combatant was legally laid down for a common understanding.

Now of course individual lawyers and judges who are former JAGs might be responsible for some civilian imprecision spilling into the "Court TV" world, but the standard criminal procedure terms for your wished for civilian "combatants" are suspect or defendant. If two fellows were engaged in "mutual combat" and are both being prosecuted, they are still defendants.

Now its your turn: Prove how common the legal use of the term "combatant" is in US civilian courts state or federal in cases not referring to the detainees in US military custody.

 

[Full Metal Jacket]

so that's a "no".

 

[REAPER4206969]

com·bat·ant

com·bat·ant [kəm bátt’nt]
(plural com·bat·ants)
n
1. somebody taking part in war: a person or group taking part in a war

2. somebody involved in argument: somebody who is involved in a struggle or argument

Encarta ® World English Dictionary © & (P) 1998-2004 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

 

[Bovice]

This is so gay. Why does it matter if a particular model of pistol is used by the military or police agencies? YOUR handgun has probably never seen combat. Hold your horses, you desk jockeys.

 

[Girodin]

Blacks Law Dictionary 8th edition defines combatant as: Int'l law. A person who participates directly in hostilities.

It then lists definitions for "legitimate combatant": Legitimate combatants are members of the armed forces or uniformed members of a militia or volunteer corps, under military command and subject to the laws of war.

Enemy combatant: A combatant captured and detained while serving in a hostile force during open warfare.

It is customary if you are using a term of art or a particular definition of a word that could have other definitions to define it.

Non of this is really here nor there in terms of the OPs question.

 

[Pizzagunner]

so that's a "no".

I guess we'll go with your authoritative TrueTV definition and ignore international law.