Is it worth the additional money?

[Fawkes]

I've owned a Taurus, and a Glock. I sold the Taurus many years ago. I still own the Glock G19.

My "G" once belonged to a Snohomish County (in the great north"wet") sherriff's deputy. She used it as a back up to her G17 (before they switched to the .40). My dad bought it from her and used it as his back up when he was working on armored cars. By the time that I got a hold of it, we estimate there had been around 15k rounds through it (Kate and my dad were ALWAYS at the range).

I've put a few thousand through it myself over the last ten years (I don't get to the range near as often as they did). I have fed it just about everything, from hand loads to factory loads, FMJ ball to truncated lead (I know, I always follow up with a few rounds of FMJ to help clean the grooves), and various hollow points. I pull the trigger, and it goes bang. It reminds me a lot of gravity: it just works.

How safe is the G-Lock with it's puny little trigger safety? Hoot in Blackhawk Down put it best, "[holding up his index finger] Well, this is my safety, sir."

[BrianSW99]

I have a Taurus Millenium PT111, not the Pro. It's a great size for carrying, but I just don't trust it enough to carry. I've had more FTE's and FTF's with that gun than any other I own. I should probably send it to Taurus for them to look at, but that's a hassle and I just haven't got around to it.

On the other hand, I do trust my life to the Glock 19 that I use for my every day carry gun. I've put alot of rounds through it and never a single problem.

Brian

[ericlw]

i dont like glocks because i dont like plastic guns.

i prefer a 1911 or somthing made out of metal.

[74novaman]

I have a Taurus PT145. Its been a good gun to me.

That said, Glock has a tremendous reputation for reliability.

The reason I still don't own a glock is they do NOT fit my hand right.

I recommend shooting or at least fondling both weapons before you make a decision. If it doesn't feel right in your hand, you won't get comfortable with it, you won't carry it and it won't be a good buy.

[glbedd53]

I have owned Glocks for about 20 years. I have only one left now. It's the one that rides in the console of my truck. Partly because it holds 13 + 1 and it's a .45 , partly because if one of my guns get stolen I hope it's that one. I've been around handguns for about 45 years and I still don't feel good about a chambered auto with no safety. And no that little thing on the trigger is not a safety. There is a difference between a revolver and a Glock trigger. The trigger on a revolver has to go a long way before it fires. As far as the Taurus, I don't own one but I wouldn't hesitate to from what I hear and read. I've heard their quality is much improved.

[bdickens]

Well, no, the little thing you to pull it with is a safety and if you don't put it on the trigger you can't fire the gun in the first place.

[glbedd53]

OK so I guess it would be OK to carry a revolver with the hammer back.

[bdickens]

Not the same thing and you know that.

People have been carrying Glocks since the day they came out and no one has had an ND with one without violating rule #3.

[glbedd53]

I understand that. You go ahead and I'll just keep doing what I've always done. But I'll say it again. It's not really any different that carrying a revolver with the hammer back, it's still not gonna fire unless you pull the trigger. A 1911 with a safety or a Sig with a decocker will always feel safer to me.

[driver8]

I have a Glock and I won't carry it chambered. There have been accidental discharge of Glocks without violating rule 3. I remember at least one that was well documented by a police officer. His departments armorer was so skeptical he didn't even bother to go to the range with it. He just took it out into the parking lot and promptly shot a round into the pavement. A 5.5 lb trigger is a little to light for a gun with no safety. It seems like I remember when Glocks first came out most gun experts were saying Glocks required more training than guns with safeties. I believed it then and I believe it now. If it didn't hold so many rounds and it wasn't so accurate I would get rid of mine.

[bdickens]

[The Annoyed Man]

I understand that. You go ahead and I'll just keep doing what I've always done. But I'll say it again. It's not really any different that carrying a revolver with the hammer back, it's still not gonna fire unless you pull the trigger. A 1911 with a safety or a Sig with a decocker will always feel safer to me.

You're ignoring the design of the trigger itself. I'm a cocked and locked 1911 guy too, but even I know that. And your 1911 isn't going to fire, safety on or off, unless a hand is also gripping and depressing the grip safety. So technically, you can carry your 1911 cocked and unlocked perfectly safely, as long as it stays in the holster. In fact, that has actually happened to me on several occasions. I've unholstered my 1911 at the end of the day, to discover that somewhere along the line, the thumb safety got switch off. Trigger discipline is the difference. Ditto the Glock. As long as it stays in the holster, nothing is going to pull the trigger.

I have an M&P 45 I also carry, and while it also has a frame mounted thumb safety (not all the M&P models do), it also has a "sort of Glock-like" trigger safety system too. If the trigger is simply pushed back, it will not fire. I requires the slightly upward and back pressure of a finger tip to articulate the trigger safety and disengage the mechanism. And this is in addition to the firing pin block which requires the trigger to be pulled all the way to its break to fire the gun. I've gotten comfortable enough with it, that were I on the market for the same pistol today, I would be perfectly comfortable getting one without the thumb safety. And this is coming from a guy who is a 1911 nut to the core. As I recall, JMB's original design did not include the thumb safety; only the grip safety. It was the military trials board that made him add the thumb safety.

To me, the main value of the M&P thumb safety (which, although it is frame mounted like a 1911's, does not impede the slide travel) is to be able to cycle the slide to eject a live round, or to reload the pistol and chamber a round, without the pistol negligently discharging due to a CPU-to-boogerhook disconnect — and even your 1911 can't do that.

[pbwalker]

I have a Glock and I won't carry it chambered. There have been accidental discharge of Glocks without violating rule 3. I remember at least one that was well documented by a police officer. His departments armorer was so skeptical he didn't even bother to go to the range with it. He just took it out into the parking lot and promptly shot a round into the pavement. A 5.5 lb trigger is a little to light for a gun with no safety. It seems like I remember when Glocks first came out most gun experts were saying Glocks required more training than guns with safeties. I believed it then and I believe it now. If it didn't hold so many rounds and it wasn't so accurate I would get rid of mine.

That LEO was negligent. That's not the fault of the Glock. Are you saying the gun 'just went off'?

Glocks do have safeties. 1) the trigger safety, 2) the firing pin safety, and c) the drop safety.

There is also keeping your booger picker off of the bang switch. The officer obviously didn't do this. Again, not the fault of the Glock...only the LEO.

Lastly, what is your plan when some goblin comes at you and smashes your weak side arm with a tire iron?

[A-R]

It's not really any different that carrying a revolver with the hammer back, it's still not gonna fire unless you pull the trigger.

The trigger travel distance of a Glock in Safe Action "semi-cocked" state is a LOT longer than the trigger travel distance of a cocked revolver or a 1911 cocked and unlocked. Plus even improved Glock 4.5-pound trigger pull is significantly heavier than the single-action pull of a cocked revolver or 1911. And if it really bothers you, Glocks can be set up with 8-pound or even 11-pound trigger pulls.

But I think you already know that and are just omitting in a futile attempt to make your unfounded point.

[bdickens]

From the Glock Owner's Manual:

SAFETY DEVICES
The weapon has no externally located safety devices which need to be actuated separately. All the
safety or safety release devices function automatically.
1. TRIGGER SAFETY
This is incorporated into the trigger (26) in the form of a lever, and in the untouched state blocks the
trigger from being moved backwards. If the weapon is allowed to drop, or if the trigger is subject to
an off centre, lateral pressure, it is still impossible for a shot to be fired. This safety can only be
released by the trigger being pulled by the trigger finger. This situation offers maximum possible
firing readiness combined with maximum safety for the user.
2. FIRING PIN SAFETY
In the secured position a spring-loaded pin (9) projects into the firing pin cut-out, and blocks it. This
safety is only released when the trigger is pulled back.
3. SAFETY FUNCTION OF THE TRIGGER MECHANISM HOUSING
The firing pin (5) pushes the trigger bar onto the safety ramp under the influence of the firing pin
spring (7). There is no possibility in this position of the firing pin being released.
http://guns.wolfcrews.com/glock/pdf/glockmanual.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Emphasis mine.