I don't understand the "Glock Advantage"...
- Thread starter mini15
- Start date
- Status
- Glock nothing else
- you need to learn the Fundamentals before touching it
- you need to understand the basics
- 1911 are crap and obsolet, don't ever thing about it
- Beretta 92fs do not suit your needs, forget it
- Forget all other kind/brand of guns, not worthed, Glock nothing else
GGG
Glock God of Guns ............
My God !!!! we do not know nothing if we don't know Glock !!!!
- you need to learn the Fundamentals before touching it
- you need to understand the basics
- 1911 are crap and obsolet, don't ever thing about it
- Beretta 92fs do not suit your needs, forget it
- Forget all other kind/brand of guns, not worthed, Glock nothing else
GGG
Glock God of Guns ............
My God !!!! we do not know nothing if we don't know Glock !!!!
I think of my Glock as kinda like a base Honda civic. Its not the fastest, smoothest or ergonomic. It is cheap and it almost always runs. In many ways its everything I need. My HKs, to me, feel more like a Mercedes. Not necessarily better at their core function, but they sure make me smile. I have to say I like having an external safety, but then again nobody is shooting at me.
Last edited:
And I'm pretty sure I and many others have said that but like anything #### happens and a positive safety is designed with that in mind. A positive safety is so that even after your drop safety and whatever safety is on, if something somehow sticks itself in the trigger guard and actuates the guns trigger, the gun won't go off. S&W have their own line of Glock flavored pistols and they do offer a manual safety version, which is very popular at that.
What Glock created with the "Glock Advantage" campaign is an era of handgun shooting where safeties are thought of as another inconvenience. The whole "you'll forget about it under stress" is a flawed argument as some here have highlighted because if you can't count on disengaging a safety under stress what the hell else can you not count on. Maybe you'll forget to aim or how to pull a trigger.
While your at it, here's the H&K "advantage" or the Colt advantage. When your out drinking beer, shooting at rocks and practicing waistband draws without a holster you might forget about your finger in the trigger guard. There you go, positive safety prevented an ND.
As stupid as that sounds that's basically the same argument but in reverse. A positive safety can just as easily screw you over in real life as the lack of one.
Does that mean I'm going to install a positive safety on my Glock? No I won't because I don't need one.
Does that mean I'm going to dismiss their usage at all and be a Glock fan boy and #### on every other pistol with a positive safety and say it's a disadvantage all while licking Gaston Glocks balls propagating the Glock marketing campaign saying that the lack of a feature is an "advantage". Nope either.
lol
- Glock nothing else
- you need to learn the Fundamentals before touching it
- you need to understand the basics
- 1911 are crap and obsolet, don't ever thing about it
- Beretta 92fs do not suit your needs, forget it
- Forget all other kind/brand of guns, not worthed, Glock nothing else
GGG
Glock God of Guns ............
My God !!!! we do not know nothing if we don't know Glock !!!!
If you are incompetent enough for a negligent discharge that is on you, not the gun. And before you label me as a glock fanboy, I don't currently nor have I ever owned a glock pistol. Just calling it as it is. My P30L is LEM, with no manual safety, if I kept my usp I would have done a safetiless LEM conversion for that as well. Manual safeties on guns with obscenely light triggers and no passive safety system that prevents accidental discharge, it has no place in a modern pistol, it is an equal concept to carrying with an empty chamber. If you are incompetent enough kindly hand in your gun and take up popping bubblewrap.
Glock 17 was designed for the military. They had to meet certain specs to win a contract.
The after marketing of Glock Advantage was probably thought up by their marketing wizards when they started making glocks for civilians.
IMO i like the way it works. But I also do like physical safetys too.
The after marketing of Glock Advantage was probably thought up by their marketing wizards when they started making glocks for civilians.
IMO i like the way it works. But I also do like physical safetys too.
Last edited:
Fun to read all the comments. Personally for me, I own Glocks and 1911. Both have their advantages and disadvantages. But in the end of the day, I favor Glock due to its simplicity (from cleaning to detail take down). One thing this no one have ever commented is that never rely on external safety as they can fail. This is one point where I prefer Glock (as I have mentioned) where I am very aware that I am the safety. Buy the gun that you like, but don trash other people for guns that they like.
Last edited:
Punisher-One
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
This argument is funny. As far as I am concerned you should shoot the gun you like and don't worry about those that shoot a gun you don't like.
I own a Glock. I find it shoots reliably, fits my hand, and is simple for me to clean and maintain myself. In the future I will be purchasing a 1911 because they are awesome. You can't hate a big all metal american made 45!
Both guns go bang and both guns make different sized holes in the paper.
I own a Glock. I find it shoots reliably, fits my hand, and is simple for me to clean and maintain myself. In the future I will be purchasing a 1911 because they are awesome. You can't hate a big all metal american made 45!
Both guns go bang and both guns make different sized holes in the paper.
Glock's "advantage" came from the time it was the only tuperware gun - it has no external safety and was much more familiar in that matter for departments that where getting out of wheel guns - also the then $200 unit price was a lot more palatable than the Smith 3rd gen guns, also drop in parts got rid of the armorer requirements of handfitting etc.
Its a solid gun - and while not my first choice, you can't argue with its successes.
For the 1911 guys -- I have one left, my LAV gun. It's a great platform but maintenance intensive on both the armorer and user side - and really has no place anymore in the LE/MIl work but is a great enthusiast's piece.
Its a solid gun - and while not my first choice, you can't argue with its successes.
For the 1911 guys -- I have one left, my LAV gun. It's a great platform but maintenance intensive on both the armorer and user side - and really has no place anymore in the LE/MIl work but is a great enthusiast's piece.
Although I consider myself a 1911 guy, I totally agree. Issuing 1911s is like issuing 1966 GTOs as patrol cars or '42 GMC 2 1/2-tons as troop transports. Are they beautiful? Absolutely. Would that be a sound basis for selecting fighting gear? If the answer isn't obvious...please AIWB a Glock, in a Serpa, while drunk.
For a duty or defensively gun, sure, Glock wins. For high speed practical pistol competition, a modern, correctly fitted 19/2011wins hands down. I know you Glocksters are going to disagree and slam my comment. But match results don't lie.
My 2011's don't malfunction by the way. Ever, so far. But they are currently fitted here a lot of 1911's aren't.
My 2011's don't malfunction by the way. Ever, so far. But they are currently fitted here a lot of 1911's aren't.
- Status
