Full Version: Guns
Heheh. That's one lesson I already know, brohopcp. "The Academy doesn't get you ready to be a cop. It just gets you halfway ready to start learning how to be a cop."
| QUOTE (Adarael) |
| Sure thing. Let me dig around and pull up some hard facts - if I can't find any studies to support the number of news reports I've read, I'll admit my nervousness may be quite unfounded. Give me a bit to look for credible numbers, though. As to news reports, here's one just off the cuff. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/local...olice4page1.htm |
At the surface, that all looks pretty damning. But when you consider that the DCPD basically took their officer's revolvers away, gave them Glocks and said "go play", what do you expect? Look at those incidence reports. They say it all. When people are doing shit that ignorant, there's no question as to where the blame should fall. A) On them for doing the stupid shit, and B) in a distant second, on their department for not training them better to avoid negligent discharges.
| QUOTE |
| My issue is not with people owning Glocks. It never was. |
Of course it was. Your issue was with people using Glocks instead of other guns that you think are more appropriate for carry use. Your concern was that the lack of a manual safety appears to cause negligent discharges (while Arethusa's concern was with too light a trigger pull). You were suggesting that the solution to the problem is to use a different gun. Obviously, I disagree with that rationale. The solution is to train people better to avoid negligent discharges. What kind of gun is being used is irrelevant. Amazingly enough, the article in the link you posted appears to suggest that very same thing.
| QUOTE |
| But whatever, I'm done. Most of you are totally fixated on the machinery of the situation or calling me a sissy for my opinion, so screw it. |
No, I just think your rationale is fucked. You're picking out the Glock on the argument that its design contributes to higher incidences of NDs. I think that's bullshit. It doesn't matter how many safeties you put on them or how heavy you make the trigger pull, people who don't know better will do stupid shit with them, like stick their gun in the oven, turn it on and blow their kid's head off.
| QUOTE (Siege) | ||
This passage caught my eye - can anyone verify this?
You have to pull the trigger in order to remove the slide? |
Yes. The Glock trigger is not a true double action. When the slide is cycled, the striker (or firing pin) is put into a "half-cocked" position, which allows the Glock its relatively light trigger pull (compared to a DA revolver, for example). In order to remove the slide from the frame, the trigger mechanism has to release the striker from its half-cocked position first. This shouldn't make any difference, as any gun should be verified as being unloaded prior to disassembly.
As for "many other pistols" having a magazine safety, I can only think of a few. The Browning Hi-Power, the S&W auto pistols, and possibly the P99 (my P22 definitely has one). Anyway, it's a fucking stupid feature. What happens if you have to fire in the middle of a tactical reload? You're screwed. Just check the damn chamber before you start taking the thing apart. It's really not difficult.
| QUOTE (Ed_209a) |
| I have field-stripped a G19, and didn't have to touch the trigger. |
Someone must have done it for you, then. You can't take the thing apart without dropping the striker.
| QUOTE (Arethusa) |
| You're misunderstanding me. I am not saying the trigger design makes Glocks substantially more prone to negligent discharges. I am saying that there was a lot of myth out there about how amazingly safe the trigger was because it would only fire the weapon if depressed intentionally, and that is verfiably false. |
I don't remember hearing any of that, but it's possible that I was smart enough to read between the lines and dismiss it as bullshit. Any halfway intelligent person ought to be able to figure out that the gun can't tell a finger from anything else, and that if the trigger gets pulled while the gun is loaded, it's going to go off.
To be fair, when I first came across that, it was many years ago (probably back in the day when I thought the P90 was caseless, or something), and the explanation was that you would either need to be pulling the trigger intentionally or using something very similar (argued as unlikely if it's just, say, a holster catching on the weapon) to engage the safety mechanisms in the trigger in order to allow it to fire. May sound pretty absurd if you know what you're talking about, but...
This is rather like watching a Kung-Fu Master go through the guy who demands to be taught how to "trash bozos." Like watching zombies attack the bladey-end of a harvester.
Raygun, you're a god of death among us mortals. Thank you so much for being here. 
| QUOTE (Musashi Forever) |
| Raygun, you're a god of death among us mortals. Thank you so much for being here. |
Raygun is not the god of death. I know because the god of death was my CQB instructor.
| QUOTE (Musashi Forever) |
| Raygun, you're a god of death among us mortals. |
Poor groundhogs.
~J
Behold, the Grim Squeaker! 
-Siege
-Siege
Spermophilus richardsonii (gopher) actually, not marmota monax. Little bastards.
And odocoileus hemionus and odocoileus virginianus and cervus elaphus nelsoni and antilocapra americana and centrocercus urophasianus and phasianus colchicus and canis latrans... That's about it, I think (so far).
And odocoileus hemionus and odocoileus virginianus and cervus elaphus nelsoni and antilocapra americana and centrocercus urophasianus and phasianus colchicus and canis latrans... That's about it, I think (so far).
| QUOTE (Critias) | ||
|
Interesting... I remember doing every step in that list _except_ pulling the trigger...
<shrug> Oh well, I stand corrected. My bad.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.