What I don't get is all the hate for the m&p. it's much more comfortable in the hand than any glock, anyone that says otherwise is kidding themselves, it's more ergonomic. Period. It has a large beaver tail, which helps control recoil better, even if you have a gen 4 glock with a rediculous beaver tail backstrap that isn't as good as m&p still. The m&p is cheaper. It fires underwater just as well ( actually better in just about every torture video I've seen, and not like I'd ever do that to one but it dismisses all those sand in the barrel and fire underwater bull$h@t arguements the glock mall ninjas always bring up). M&p has proven to be just as reliable, if not more reliable than gen 4 g17s. I constantly hear about g17 recoil spring issues, even with the factory replaced ones under warranty that are supposed to fix the problem. G17s have also been known to routinely throw brass back in your face due to the nature of the extractor. All this, combined with the higher price tag and god awful looks and ergonomics, begs the question- why even think about getting a glock?