• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What is the point of a modern combat handgun? Why not glocks?

ReverendHellh0und said:
You said it. "much cheaper".


Here's the problem with the glock. The trigger safety creates way too many opportunities for accidental discharges. It's a poor choice..


If you were in the military, you would know, your equipment is designed by the lowest bidder.


The glock is a marginal improvement over the m9 which was and always will be a piece of crap.,
Click to expand...
The fact that you think that the unit within the US military that buys their operaters NVDs that cost nearly 4 times as much as any other NVD used buy the US military goes cheap on their pistols shows just how far out of touch with reality you are. That’s the same unit that their primary rifle costs 3 times as much as a regular Army M4. Give me a break.

Your more then welcome to your opinion but you have already proved you are clueless on this topic so that’s about how much your opinion is worth.

Yes our equipment is provided to us by the lowest bidder. The lowest bidder who’s product meets the very detailed and exacting parameters of the contract. I suppose you would prefer we pay the most expensive bidder who meets those same specifications.

Sorry but you have done nothing more then demonstrate the fact that you are clueless on this topic.
 
braindrain said:
The fact that you think that the unit within the US military that buys their operaters NVDs that cost nearly 4 times as much as any other NVD used buy the US military goes cheap on their pistols shows just how far out of touch with reality you are. That’s the same unit that their primary rifle costs 3 times as much as a regular Army M4. Give me a break.

Your more then welcome to your opinion but you have already proved you are clueless on this topic so that’s about how much your opinion is worth.

Yes our equipment is provided to us by the lowest bidder. The lowest bidder who’s product meets the very detailed and exacting parameters of the contract. I suppose you would prefer we pay the most expensive bidder who meets those same specifications.

Sorry but you have done nothing more then demonstrate the fact that you are clueless on this topic.
Click to expand...





I would prefer something other than a glock. which are prone to AD/ND's.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
yes, I disagree.



there are more negligent discharges with glocks than any other pistol.

Rise in accidental gunshots by L.A. County deputies follows new firearm - LA Times



The weapons are more prone to AD/ND than any other system, the glock fanboys will always retort with "impossible, only user error." etc, but the statistics don't lie.
Click to expand...

Let’s see your prove of your claim. Because your link sure doesn’t prove it. In fact all it proves is that the LAPD needs a ton more training. If your finger is on the trigger while you are clearing a cabinet or drawing your pistol then you have no business being around a weapon.

Furthermore you think it would be a surprise that the most commonly issued pistol in the US has the most ADs. How exactly do you think it would be different.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
I would prefer something other than a glock. which are prone to AD/ND's.
Click to expand...

Please continue proving how clueless you are. It’s good for a laugh.

And the fact that you had to ignore the vast majority of my post which demonstrated clearly just how clueless you are on this topic is not helping your credibility at all. But please continue its making me laugh.
 
braindrain said:
Let’s see your prove of your claim. Because your link sure doesn’t prove it. In fact all it proves is that the LAPD needs a ton more training. If your finger is on the trigger while you are clearing a cabinet or drawing your pistol then you have no business being around a weapon.

Furthermore you think it would be a surprise that the most commonly issued pistol in the US has the most ADs. How exactly do you think it would be different.
Click to expand...




Typical glock apologist. a rise in AD/ND's when switching to the trigger saftey gun, can't possibly be the gun.


Why the police shouldn't use Glocks - LA Times




yes better training would help with this, but the fact remains, the trigger safety is less safe than a normal safety.
 
braindrain said:
Please continue proving how clueless you are. It’s good for a laugh.

And the fact that you had to ignore the vast majority of my post which demonstrated clearly just how clueless you are on this topic is not helping your credibility at all. But please continue its making me laugh.
Click to expand...



I'm ignoring much of your posts because you are getting all mouthy with me over a trivial matter. I'm sure you are very good at hitting paper with your little glock.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
I'm ignoring much of your posts because you are getting all mouthy with me over a trivial matter. I'm sure you are very good at hitting paper with your little glock.
Click to expand...

No you are ignoring it because it proves just how clueless you really are.
You know it. I know it. Everyone who reads this thread knows it.

Tell me again what SOF unit is still using 1911s.
 
braindrain said:
No you are ignoring it because it proves just how clueless you really are.
You know it. I know it. Everyone who reads this thread knows it.

Tell me again what SOF unit is still using 1911s.
Click to expand...




See what I mean? you are far too emotional here to have a rational discussion. You can make an argument to move away from the .45. but the choice to go to the glock was not a smart one given it's poor trigger saftey design.
 
braindrain said:
I couldn't disagree more. Glocks have proven their reliability and ruggedness over and over again. Both by numerous foreign militarism as well as by numerous units within the US military.
Click to expand...

OK. I am sure you are right. It was just my opinion.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
See what I mean? you are far too emotional here to have a rational discussion. You can make an argument to move away from the .45. but the choice to go to the glock was not a smart one given it's poor trigger saftey design.
Click to expand...

Ahh poor reverend trying to use some silliness of pretending I am emotional to try and distract from the fact that you have zero idea what you are talking about. And that has been demonstrated over and over in this thread.

Yes reverend I am sure you know more then all of US SOF, numerous foreign militaries and thousands of police forces across the nation.
You are simply clueless.
 
Turtle where are you.................Don't make others do your light work:lol:
 
I carried a Glock for years and never had an issue. The only failure to fire issue I ever had was when we had bad "practice ammo." Never had an AD, never broke a magazine despite always dropping mags during reloads. The trigger pull was always consistent and it was accurate enough to save your life in a shootout.

Glocks are fine duty weapons.
 
I will add that I picked up a little Taurus sub-compact .40 cal, just for concealed carry when we go out. It feel very much like a Glock, has a trigger safety, and thumb safety, and a loaded chamber indicator that raises up on the top of the back section of the slide. I've only put a few hundred rounds through it, and I don't put it up as a top shelf handgun, but it's great for point shooting at close range and eats about any ammo I shove into it.

Having the thumb safety does make it "seem" a little more safe, and doesn't slow me down very much when I'm drawing and putting into action. The only reason I bring this up is that a thumb safety is a very reasonable feature to have on a striker gun like the Glock, and wouldn't jeopardize reaction times for a trained shooter.
 
And it would help if I addressed the OP...

While I was in the military police we carried M9's. We almost never, ever drew them from our holsters because we always M-16's or M4's. Quite honestly I didn't like carrying the M9 because I had a long rifle with me at all times (I never worked police duty on a post...we were always doing POW related exercises or force protection/convoy work.) The M9 was an extra piece of gear, more weight, more accountability, with almost no chance of ever being a necessary to perform my duties.

If you are pulling law enforcement duty on a Fort or other installation, sure a handgun makes sense. But that's about it in my opinion.
 
Glock's aren't bad. They're great and fulfill the roll marvelously.

What you have are two types of opposition. The ignorant and the haters.

Any accidental discharge is due to the fault of the operator.

If the gun doesn't fire, it's due to the ammunition.

99.9% of the time.

Some people just can't wrap their minds around easy. They need to make it complicated.
 
CMPancake said:
There's a myriad list of reasons the Army hasn't switched to glocks, namely price. But during beatings between glock and sig handguns, the Sig XM17 and XM18 performed better in almost every category.
Click to expand...

Love sigs myself.
 
blackjack50 said:
Had another one of these discussions. And I still can’t understand why a Glock is bad. So maybe we can boil this down. What is the purpose of a military issued combat handgun? What does it need to do? How will it be used?
Click to expand...

The military combat handgun is issued to certain jobs such as medics, tank drivers, certain infantry, special forces, psd team and ofcourse officers cuz carrying an m16 is hard and all. To put it simply the handgun is issued to those who need it in situations where tight space is a factor, or carrying a full infantry rifle a burder(this happens sometimes with medics)

In my opinion the glock modular system was superior, but the armies decision was purely off costs, as the cut short all standard testing and never made it to extreme condition testing. Glock has had it's issues but so far when it comes to striker fire glocks are the most tested and proven. Glocks 2 stage trigger cheaply and reliably fixed the striker fire issue of the gun firing from being dropped or bumped, so effective most manufacturors copied it.
 
CMPancake said:
There's a myriad list of reasons the Army hasn't switched to glocks, namely price. But during beatings between glock and sig handguns, the Sig XM17 and XM18 performed better in almost every category.
Click to expand...

That is incorrect, the testing for the initial phase was cut in half, and the sig actually performed worse in every category than glock as well as most other competitors, the only thing sig beat glock at was price.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Trigger "safeties" suck. Glocks are ****.
Click to expand...

Trigger safeties exist due to a flaw in striker fired pistols where bumping them can cause the action to move as well as the trigger, the trigger safety effectively eliminated that, so well that the base gun for the armies new modular design is prone to firing from bumping or dropping it, this gun is the p320.

Sig re invented the wheel by trying to over engineer a complicated fix for a problem with a simple solution, glock had the same issue decades ago, and the trigger safety fixed it, so well that almost all other manufacturors copied it. If you are against a trigger safety, buy a gun with a hammer.
 
beerftw said:
Trigger safeties exist due to a flaw in striker fired pistols where bumping them can cause the action to move as well as the trigger, the trigger safety effectively eliminated that, so well that the base gun for the armies new modular design is prone to firing from bumping or dropping it, this gun is the p320.

Sig re invented the wheel by trying to over engineer a complicated fix for a problem with a simple solution, glock had the same issue decades ago, and the trigger safety fixed it, so well that almost all other manufacturors copied it. If you are against a trigger safety, buy a gun with a hammer.
Click to expand...

I'll take my Glock 17 over any of these any day!


 
I don't see why the abrasiveness in this thread is necessary? I love guns! I have many and some I don't like, if you like them better thats awesome man... 1911 is a great gun but palm safeties to me suck, also its heavy as F.

I like my Glock because of its simplicity I can break it down in the dark or blind folded in 4 pieces and put it back together. I actually prefer Revolvers for CCW so chew on that!
 
blackjack50 said:
Accidental and negligent discharged ARE user error. Nobody wants to admit they are a dumbass.
Click to expand...



sure but if the design makes a dumbass more likely to be a dumbass, who somehow managed a whole career with out one, then you need to look at the design.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom