agree, i call bs.
I don't understand the "Glock Advantage"...
- Thread starter mini15
- Start date
- Status
agree, i call bs.
What's so hard to understand? I was a police firearms instructor and EVERY session at the academy had at least one AD/ND from a Glock or put another way a LE with a Glock.
We never had a session of recruits OR a certified qualification CoF without an AD/ND from a Glock. Now, I agree it was operated by a human and not sitting by itself in the shade, but we had no other issues with any other handgun/officer combos.
So there is an overarching issue that is trumping everything being taught about safety/defensive handgun use.
We never had a session of recruits OR a certified qualification CoF without an AD/ND from a Glock. Now, I agree it was operated by a human and not sitting by itself in the shade, but we had no other issues with any other handgun/officer combos.
So there is an overarching issue that is trumping everything being taught about safety/defensive handgun use.
The Glock advantage could be described as simple manufacturing, low cost, low training and low chance of error. A 1911 would be mechanally complex, higher cost, and more training to acheive the same results as the Glock everytime.
So one could say that for someone who is dedicated to throughly training themselves, the nature of the single action trigger could be advantagous.
Is that why you are not anymore?
No. lol
Never saw a range course fire a gun but thanks for the feedback......but yes many things were tried. Many depts. eventually simply forbid them.
The problems eventually were resolved as Glock "recalled" or in their words "upgraded" them and AD/NDs slowly went away for the most part.
Last edited:
You can only do so much with some people. I've been course officer on a few BMQ's and DP1 infantry courses and the recruits aren't always the fondest with firearms. With the amount of people that are tossed into the system you're bound to find someoene that cannot successfully apply the drills we teach them. A course without a ND is a diamond in the rough.
I agree in that there's nothing wrong with an sa trigger. The designs associated with such require more parts more training and can result in more failures, that's not an advantage. The glock trigger is more than adequate for service pistol use as well as competition. Chasing a magical trigger is the gimmick of the untrained. Learn the fundamentals and the rest is trivial. But you already know that
Tdc
There's something seriously wrong when you can't even question function or in this case the company's marketing and the logic behind it without facing a ####storm of fanboy. I even stated in the first line before my criticism that I owned a Glock and I love it for everything else. I'm just not blind to the point where I can't try and criticize what I like. Like I love American muscle but that doesn't stop me from criticizing why they need 8L motors to make the same power as a 4 banger.
Its not all fanboy ####. Marketing is about sales, logic is about ignoring the bs and evaluating the product and its performance. the lack of a positive safety is a plus if you have even the slightest understanding of the fundamental four safety rules, service guns and how a handgun is employed.
Tdc
I agree in that there's nothing wrong with an sa trigger. The designs associated with such require more parts more training and can result in more failures, that's not an advantage. The glock trigger is more than adequate for service pistol use as well as competition. Chasing a magical trigger is the gimmick of the untrained. Learn the fundamentals and the rest is trivial. But you already know that
Tdc
I completely agree with you. I hate to admit it, but on my DA/SA P226, I had to spend more time getting used to the DA pull then the transition to SA. I could be reasonably accused of being lazy because I prefer SA all the time.
- Status
