Another Glock vs M&P thread!!
- Thread starter NorthernPF
- Start date
And - to all you children who have been ruining this thread with completely unrelated argument and tasteless personal attacks - please stop; instead, communicate with each other, in future, by Personal Message.
That way, you see, only concerned parties will be affected. The thread will survive.
That way, you see, only concerned parties will be affected. The thread will survive.
go cry somewhere else nancy... this is a discussion board and that is what is happening here, and all the idpa/ipsc comments are germaine to this discussion as they will probably be the end use for said firearm.
+1, Glock. Reliable. Proven. Approx. 34 parts that are available throughout Canada. Dozens of modifications available. Varied product line. Here is a Torture Test if you haven't already seen it:
http://www.theprepared.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=90
http://www.theprepared.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=90
No where did I indicate that reloading behind cover was a poor tactic. Concerning oneself with keeping the muzzle pointed at the next target is both impractical and impossible.
The benefit to cover is its ability to prevent you from being shot(and offer some doubt as to your location). Leaving any body part exposed is not effective use of cover. Naturally if the cover you use isn't sufficient to cover your entire body then you work with what you have. Remaining exposed as an advantage when "gaming" is a poor tactic and has no place in defensive shooting. IDPA being the DEFENSIVE PISTOL association should be promoting sound tactics. making "fair calls" without "needlessly penalizing" a competitor is nothing more than feel good ego stroking for those who attend. If a rule or procedure is violated the shooter is to be penalized. Isn't that the point to having rules? To force all who compete to improve their skills/ability within the guidelines set out? Warning a shooter of an exposed appendage is neither fair to those who did not get a warning nor is it a realistic representation as no one will call for cover during a defensive shoot.
As has ben posted IDPA is a "sport". It has little if anything to do with defensive use of a firearm. Due to this change and the many ignorant rules IDPA has become nothing more than IPSC without the race guns and whining.
TDC
NorthernPF
Regular
- Location
- Ramore, Ontario
Okay, I set up this thread to try and get information about two pistols that I'm interested in buying. I don't see anywhere where this has to do with the topic. Go off and start another thread about IPSC techniques. No offence but I don't shoot IPSC so I couldn't care any less about your little bickering war about taking cover and reloading your pistol of all things. Take it elsewhere.
On the other hand if you have anything that would be helpful to the thread, please contribute.
wow hard to imagine putting a pistol through that much! I don't own the S&W nor a Glock, but if the Glock feels comfortable in your hand and you can shoot it, I'd say go Glock.
what your suggesting would give way to lazy or unsafe muzzle control. Its a sport and nobody wants to get shot or hit by a ND by some guy who thinks the 1 way range is about to go south...
You seem fixated on tactical shooting, to what end? You may criticize IPSC and IDPA shooters as being untactical but im willing to bet they are better shooters than yourself and possess a higher level of skill.
Your argument on cover is also wrong. I recall the FBI said the majority of gun fights were 1-2 rounds at 7 yards in the open. Think about it.
Last edited:
Why is it that, whenever someone around here admits that they don't pray at the altar of the almighty Glock, someone jumps all over them with cleats on? Jebus, guys. If there was one true pistol that was perfect for every shooter, the market would be completely moribund. And just imagine how dull things would be around here in that case.
- Location
- BC, In a Van down by the river!
I'm not suggesting poor muzzle control, quite the opposite. I don't understand how pointing the muzzle at the target(visible or not) is relevant to loading. Loading the pistol is the immediate issue. maintaing a good sight picture only applies to loaded firearms that are directed towards the desired target after the operator has made the conscious decision to fire.
The logic behind tactical shooting, or more appropriately defensive shooting is as follows. The intended role for duty pistols is in the capacity of duty, MIL or LE. Firearms are often used in the defense of life, be it from other humans or animals. Duty guns or personal defense guns need only meet two criteria. Ease of operation and reliability. Keeping your system simple promotes reliability. That being said, mastering the basics on a simple and reliable system is the foundation of marksmanship. The skills learned on a simple "virgin" system are transferable to all firearms regardless of make/model or level of modification. The very same skills are viable regardless of target/discipline and situation as well.
Mastering the fundamentals with a simple system designed for duty serves a double purpose. Your skill is a direct result of your ability to master the fundamentals(not your gear). Your gear is capable of recreational/sport shooting as well as personal defense. The same can be said regarding tactics. Mastering and applying sound tactics in a recreational capacity also translates into sound tactics in less than enjoyable circumstances. Squaring off in a door way to engage three cardboard targets with a compensated pistol sporting a reddot fails at all levels. The gear is not simple, its not reliable, the fundamentals are not being reinforced and the tactic is poor. The above setup is great for gaming but it is completely inappropriate for defensive work.
As far as skill goes. Skill is only part of the equation. Without tactics and foremost a proper mindset, skill is useless. The fastest most accurate shooter(IPSC or IDPA) doesn't stand a chance if they fail to use cover. Engaging a threat with only two rounds as a rule is a poor tactic. Remaining stationary is a poor tactic. Reloading in the open is a poor tactic. Choosing not to defend oneself with the tools and skills they have is a lack of mindset. For gaming, the skills are viable, the gear is viable. However both the skills and gear used for gaming are for the most part specialized for that role and that role only. Defensive gear and training works for both sport and practical applications. Winning a match is lots of fun. Surviving an armed confrontation is the experience of a lifetime.
Here's the bottom line. Defensive gear and training can be applied to sport shooting. Changing the target/discipline doesn't affect reliability nor the tactics employed. Gear and tactics optimized for sport/gaming cannot be applied in a defensive capacity where simplicity and reliability are key.
The statistics provided by the FBI are statistics. The majority of armed confrontations occur within 7 yards(I believe most of those are within 10 feet) and over in less than five rounds. The stats show a distinct trend. The important word in the above statistic is MAJORITY. Your training shouldn't focus on the majority while neglecting the minority. The stats indicate most encounters are at close range. The stats don't indicate what level of training was involved. The stats don't indicate if cover was available. Using stats as a justification for not learning or practicing sound tactics is a sure way of becoming one.
TDC
