Glock vs XD

[bountyhunter]

Originally Posted by Puppy

Good post but I have one disagreement. You stated that Law Enforcement personnel are trained to higher standards.

Read the latest FBI crime/violence report and you will find that they aren't even as well trained as the dirt bags they get in gunfights with.

They are trained to higher standards but most LE's don't practice enough to maintain high level skills.

[bountyhunter]

Originally Posted by Puppy

Seems to me like Semantics, AD vs ND is meaningless. A gun goes bang when it shouldn't. Who cares what it is called? Then to say a Glock is safe because while it is prone to ND it is not prone to AD is about as meaningless as any statement I can think of. Forget AD or ND, Is it safe if it goes off and kills or injures someone when you don't want it to do so?

For a new thread how about' "How many Angels can dance on the head of a pin?"

I agree. AD and ND are identical terms in my book.... they are cases where a gun fired unintentionally.

[Breadfan]

Originally Posted by MGD 45

Couldn't agree with you more on this point!

I hope you never have to pull your gun in a life threatening situation when seconds count....because trust me on this, you won't even THINK about racking your slide. You'll be stuck pulling on a useless trigger.

There's a reason why us LEO's never go to work toting guns without a "round in the pipe".....in these types of situations, you can only react, not have time to remember if the gun is loaded & then trying to make it so.

Not meaning to bust your balls at all......

Not at all! I completely understand your point of view! I believe the whole issue of (not) having one in the chamber is pretty much complex and hardly black & white kinda thing.

In Croatia for example, police is not allowed to have round in the chamber. This is a safety measure, I know for most of you this may sound ridicoulous but then again, our mentality is different then yours and we've much more you know, well, respect (is this the right word, don't mean to offend anyone here) towards firearms (well, you can even call it discomfort, whatever).

This and the fact that armed crimes especially ones in which police is the target are pretty rare unlike our security guards who are THE main target and all of them DO in fact bypass the law and carry one in the chamber due to the specifically dangerous nature of their job (I know I would do the same thing if I was in their shoes!).

Then again, I saw some Live Leak videos of guy entering a supermarket (USA) with his gun and the clerk reacting quickly, pulling the gun out (ready to fire) didn't have to rack it which really made a difference and saved his life.

Every once in a while when I read these topics I think about it for a while and to be honest, IMO, it all comes to personal choice.

[robinsre]

Originally Posted by Puppy

Seems to me like Semantics, AD vs ND is meaningless. A gun goes bang when it shouldn't. Who cares what it is called? Then to say a Glock is safe because while it is prone to ND it is not prone to AD is about as meaningless as any statement I can think of. Forget AD or ND, Is it safe if it goes off and kills or injures someone when you don't want it to do so?

For a new thread how about' "How many Angels can dance on the head of a pin?"

It's NOT semantics.

A gun that goes BANG when you just set it down, or perform a normal function with nothing depressing the trigger is an AD. That is an UNSAFE gun, the gun has failed, the gun manufacturer or whomever modified the gun resulting in the potential for such a a failure is at for that failure and it's resulting effects. Granted a portion of the blame MAY rest on the owner for failing to properly inspect and test his or her firearm before use.

A gun that goes BANG when you "accidentally" have your finger on the trigger is a ND. The gun is perfectly safe, the SHOOTER is not. The gun manufacturer is not at fault for this discharge, the shooter placed his finger, or hand, or palm, or stick on the trigger and the gun functioned 100% in the method it was intended to. The SHOOTER is at fault in this scenario and should be held liable for all of the resultant consequences.

[bountyhunter]

Originally Posted by MGD 45

I hope you never have to pull your gun in a life threatening situation when seconds count....because trust me on this, you won't even THINK about racking your slide. You'll be stuck pulling on a useless trigger.

No, I certainly won't. I'll be pulling the trigger on a SW66 .357 revolver armed with 130 grain expanding p+ hollowpoints. And if the first round is a dud from sitting in the nightstand too long, the second pull will go bang.... unlike any autoloader on earth which requires manually cycling the slide to remove a dud from the tube and get to a live round.

[bountyhunter]

Originally Posted by Kgeren

I'm sorry, but Glocks can not go full auto. If you carefully look at the design and the sequence of events that must occur in order to fire, you will agree eventually. If you've ever experience a quick double tap -- you pulled the trigger twice.

I apologize in advance if that sounded blunt.

OK, I'll be blunt: YES, they could very easily go full auto if the sear face of the trigger bar is buggered to change the angle enough that the striker tab can slip past it when the slide bangs the frame as it goes into battery.

The striker tab on a Glock stays behind the sear as the slide comes forward, so it is "cocked". If you release the trigger, the striker tab (and striker spring) will push the trigger forward into the "uncocked" position... but if your finger is still back (as it always is when the gun fires and the slide cycles) the striker will be redy to fire when the slide hits battery. If that striker foot slips past the sear tab, you have full auto.

FYI: the Glock triggerd design uses two main springs: the "trigger spring" at the rear of the trigger bar (which actually helps to pull the tigger) and the striker spring which pulls the trigger forward. If the striker tab did NOT engage the sear tab, the trigger would not come back to the front as there would be no spring force to pull the trigger against the other (rear) spring.

Glocks return to battery fully cocked, loaded, and with the striker tab resting on a shelf about .020" wide which keeps the striker from falling and firing the gun.

If you don't see how easily I could turn that into full auto... take a gunsmithing class. And the real problem is, kitchen table gunsmiths filing the sear face to get a lighter trigger will find it by accident.

Full auto conversion [Archive] - THR
I'm fairly sure that a Glock could be made full auto with just a paper clip. .... was shown by a smith who did it accidentally.
www.thehighroad.org/archive/index.php/t-169742.html - 41k

the gun can be quickly converted to full automatic mode for as little as $10 with homemade parts. It is a well-documented danger known to law enforcement.

"In some regions of California, police are treating any Glock they encounter as a machine gun until proven otherwise," states an advisory on the Association of Forensic Firearm and Toolmark Examiners Web site that lists dangerous or defective guns.

"The conversion from standard to fully automatic is fast and simple, requiring no technical expertise. The conversion is accomplished merely by swapping one piece for the other. A "real pro" can make the switch in 15 seconds."

http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/i...p/t-56616.html

[bountyhunter]

Another documented case of Glock going into multiple fire mode:

event took place as the officer was preparing for his late duty shift. Alone in his home, he removed his unloaded service issue Model 19 Glock from its safe-keeping location, inserted a magazine, and attempted to chamber a round in the conventional method. As he released the slide, the handgun discharged inside his bedroom.

Although the Firearms Training Section personnel immediately concluded that the officer had disobeyed Firearms Safety Rule #3 (and Glock Commandment #1: "off-target, off-trigger!"), the man was adamant that all safety procedures had been observed during the loading sequence, and that he was not going to go on duty without his Model 19 having been thoroughly checked.

The Section Sergeant authorized an hour's overtime for one of the armorers to stay on station to inspect the Model 19. When the MOS arrived the armorer was so certain that the errant discharge had been "operator error," that when he test-fired the pistol, he didn't even go onto the range, choosing instead to step outside the range HQ building and perform an administrative arming of the Model 19. Reminding the officer of the "keep a straight finger" dictum, the armorer inserted a magazine, and racked the slide.

The Glock discharged, sending a 124-grain +P JHP into the ground behind the building.

Quickly moving to the range proper, the validated officer watched as the armorer thrice more attempted to arm the Glock. Twice more it "slam-fired."

On the third and final attempt, it lapsed into a three-shot burst.

http://www.thegunzone.com/glock/upgrade-faq.html

[MGD 45]

Originally Posted by Puppy

Good post but I have one disagreement. You stated that Law Enforcement personnel are trained to higher standards.

Read the latest FBI crime/violence report and you will find that they aren't even as well trained as the dirt bags they get in gunfights with.

The report said the average gang Banger goes shooting 23 times a year while the average LEO is required to have no more than 14 hours annually.

In gun fights between the two the LEO's averaged 0 for 7 and the dirt bags 3 for 12.

This dismal picture no doubt has multiple causes, but I would bet that one is the Police agencies not spending enough money on ammunition.

I read the same article about this, & I have to give you my take on the article & what it means. As Far as LEO's getting better "training" on firearms than the average citizen, that's absolutely true. The average citizen buys a gun & may take one or two courses in how to use/ fire it, then that's all until they go out in the woods or range to shoot it. Now this doesn't pertain to those of ya'll who actively enjoy shooting & constantly train and study, BUT RATHER the "average citizen".

Us LEO's on the other hand have to go through much more classroom time on firearms/civil & criminal liability courses, plus qualifing than the "average citizen". As far as the criminal's who have a better record than the police when it involves shootouts......here goes:

The article stated that these scumbags go shooting 23 times a year compared to a Cops 2 or 3. Shooting cans in the woods and at trees & logs isn't firearms "training"....but it is rather fun & can make you aim better! Let's not forget that in most shootouts the bad guys don't give a dang if they miss the cop & hit a innocent civilian, or worry about Policy/Procedures and civil lawsuits that might follow! A cop is very aware of his environment & backdrop & is held accountable to every single bullet he fires from his gun. Bad guys just don't care....

It has been pounded in my head during my career in LE, how serious it is when you discharge your gun....so I believe some cops get caught up in the fear of actually pulling & shooting & probably freeze at the crucial moment. Let's not forget that in most the shootings, the bad guys initiate the shooting, which leaves the cop always REACTING to a shooting....it is always faster to ACT than REACT. I learned this important lesson myself in shooting, where I had my gun in front of my body aimed at a suspect, & he still shot me. Why, because he knew what he was going to do & I didn't.... That's why I think they have a "better record" than the average cop.

Lastly, I firmly believe that if you took 50% of the cops on a particular Dept. and let them compete with a random 50% of the civilian population in the same town.....The cops win hands down as it relate to firearm training.

I will concede that there are an awful lot of LEO's who SUCK at firearm skills & shooting....I'm one of my Dept. Firearms Instructors, so unfortunately I know this all too well.....

[bountyhunter]

Originally Posted by MGD 45

It has been pounded in my head during my career in LE, how serious it is when you discharge your gun....so I believe some cops get caught up in the fear of actually pulling & shooting & probably freeze at the crucial moment.

That used to be called "lag time".

Don't know what they call it now, but it sure will get you killed.

[bountyhunter]

Originally Posted by MGD 45

Lastly, I firmly believe that if you took 50% of the cops on a particular Dept. and let them compete with a random 50% of the civilian population in the same town.....The cops win hands down as it relate to firearm training.

No question about it. I think the cops would even beat most of the "shooters" out there if competeing in tactical scenarios.

Originally Posted by MGD 45

I will concede that there are an awful lot of LEO's who SUCK at firearm skills & shooting....I'm one of my Dept. Firearms Instructors, so unfortunately I know this all too well.....

What scares me: cops are people, and they are usually like the people in the state where they live. In kali, most people hate guns.... and a lot of kali cops hate guns. They don't like them, they don't like shooting them, and they think civilians should not be able to own them. Not liking guns means they are not too motivated to practice with them, since it's a pain rather than a pleasure.

In the san Jose PD a few years back, that dichotomy was made very clear: Chief Mcnamara and Sen Feinswine made some media ads pumping more gun control (heavy anti gun message). Some members of the department made a rebuttal ad and the chief threatened them if they went public with it... the ACLU got involved and the officer's free speech was enforced.

Point is: the majority message is clear.... they hate guns.