TexasCHLforum.com

I recently read an article where Gunnery Sgt. R. Lee Ermey, USMC (Ret.) commented on why he supports the Military taking up the Glock as their service weapon, I thought it was good enough to para-phrase here:

"There are 2 reasons why I support the Glock for Military service use. The first is economy of motion. What is the first role of a handgun in Combat? Jeff Cooper answered this when he said "To fight your way to a rifle!" If it is down to using a handgun in Combat, things have degraded to the point where a soldier should have to do the least amount of motion to make it function--the same goes for the Police Officer or Concealed Handgun Permit Holder. The second reason is the Glock has only 29 parts. Simply--you decrease the amount of parts-you increase reliability. Field repair is a snap with Glocks and can be taught in mass very easily."

"In my opinion, those that use the lack of a manual safety as a negative on the Glock fail to understand the Glock Pistol design and that the need for a manual safety on a pistol is to compensate for a lack of training typically. The fact that 70% of LE use Glocks is a testament to the ability to train a raw recruit to use practical gun safety (finger off trigger until ready to shoot). "

Stay Safe.

What Gunny says is absolutely true. There is only one flaw in it. I am in the military and Negligent Discharges happen too often with empty weapons equipped with manual safeties.

For well trained and highly disciplined units the Glock makes a lot of sense. The other reality is that in our current conflict everyone has a long gun. The pistol is a backup and quite useful for close quarters/room to room fighting.

I am a chl holder and would consider a Glock because I know that I will be vigilant in the way that I handle it. They are a fine pistol and when used in the manner in which they were designed, they are as safe as any. The problem with their use as a general issue weapon is that there are too many opportunities for NDs. The constant cycle of unholstering, loading, making ready, holstering, unhlostering, clearing and reholstering (repeat, repeat, repeat) is far more handling than the average CHLer will have in a lifetime. The safety and long DA trigger provide another level of prevention.

Ranger+P+ wrote:to compensate for a lack of training typically.

The kind of lack in training most soldiers have with pistols? Consider this - even WITH a manual safety, officers in theater (those most commonly issued pistols) account for the largest percentage of negligent discharges. Lots of clearing barrels with 9mm holes in them out here. They usually come in pairs as well - boom, rack, boom.

My daughter just completed Army basic in Ft Leonard Wood, Mo. and to my surprise, unless your MOS is Military Police, they dont even qualify with the pistol any more.

Good thing I bought her up right and taught her how to shoot a long time ago.

My niece is an MP and she got the pistol evolution at the same base 2 years ago.

Ranger+P+ wrote:I recently read an article where Gunnery Sgt. R. Lee Ermey, USMC (Ret.) commented on why he supports the Military taking up the Glock as their service weapon, I thought it was good enough to para-phrase here:

"There are 2 reasons why I support the Glock for Military service use. The first is economy of motion. What is the first role of a handgun in Combat? Jeff Cooper answered this when he said "To fight your way to a rifle!" If it is down to using a handgun in Combat, things have degraded to the point where a soldier should have to do the least amount of motion to make it function--the same goes for the Police Officer or Concealed Handgun Permit Holder. The second reason is the Glock has only 29 parts. Simply--you decrease the amount of parts-you increase reliability. Field repair is a snap with Glocks and can be taught in mass very easily."

and I thought the reason that he supports Glock is because he gets paid to support them.

http://www.gunshowreview.com/GLOCK/index.php
http://www.rleeermey.com/glock.php
http://www.popguns.com/glock_accessories/gunnyhats.htm

I am sure he really believes that Glock is a fine gun and Spingfield Arms and Kimber offered him just as sweet of a deal.

Liberty wrote:and I thought the reason that he supports Glock is because he gets paid to support them.

Lumberjack98 wrote:

Liberty wrote:and I thought the reason that he supports Glock is because he gets paid to support them.

This would be my guess too.

The kind of lack in training most soldiers have with pistols? Consider this - even WITH a manual safety, officers in theater (those most commonly issued pistols) account for the largest percentage of negligent discharges. Lots of clearing barrels with 9mm holes in them out here. They usually come in pairs as well - boom, rack, boom.

What Gunny says is absolutely true. There is only one flaw in it. I am in the military and Negligent Discharges happen too often with empty weapons equipped with manual safeties.

The constant cycle of unholstering, loading, making ready, holstering, unhlostering, clearing and reholstering (repeat, repeat, repeat) is far more handling than the average CHLer will have in a lifetime...The safety and long DA trigger {I assume you are talking of the M-9} provide another level of prevention.

I believe manual safeties (which I take to mean the thumb-actuated gizmo on the left side) add nothing to the safety of a pistol while it is in your hand. It is intended to lock the firing mechanism when a pistol with a light trigger (such as many 1911s) is in its holster. As ably demonstrated by the above quotes, they certainly don't prevent NDs, any more than "empty" guns do. About the first thing you do when properly drawing a manual-safety-equipped pistol is take off the safety. It has to be off to move the slide, which means it has to be off to fire it, to load it, to unload it, to show clear, etc. THAT's when you get NDs -- when it is in the same configuration as a Glock. If you screw up the procedure and pull the trigger before actually clearing the weapon, I can't see the 10 or 12 lb pull being much different than the 5 lb trigger -- you're going to pull the trigger because you are used to pulling a long trigger, and badly (and hopefully ONLY) embarrass yourself at the clearing barrel.

Mixing guns and poorly trained or disciplined people is going to result in problems, and a manual safety is not going to save you. Whether Gunny gets paid to say it or not, Glocks are superb pistols. Reliable, rugged, combat accurate, simple to use, no extraneous stuff on them. Great military handguns, which of course is what they were designed to be.

In other words, it is not a Glock problem. It is a training and discipline problem, and it exists regardless of the gun type.

John Farnam has developed a philosophy and a set of procedures to deal with this issue, and he teaches it to law enforcement, private citizens, and a fair amount of Marines headed to Iraq. He taught it to me, and it makes perfect sense; my interpretation of the philosophy follows (focused on pistols). To get the real thing, go buy his book at defense-training .com, or take one of his classes.

- All guns are to be treated as if they are loaded.
- Since they are to be treated as if they are loaded, then go ahead and keep them loaded at all times when you are using them. They are useless if they are not loaded, so put ammo in them. If you going to store them in the safe, then if you wish unload them, or if you are going to clean them, by all means load them, but the rest of the time they are loaded. Then you never have to worry about whether it is loaded or not. Of course it is.
- Your (quality) holster is made to carry your pistol on your body safely, so use it. Eat, work, move, drive, whatever -- your pistol is safest when it is in your holster, where you can control it, keep it safe from others, and have it handy when it is needed.
- Any time you handle your pistol, you give yourself a chance to have an ND (and John notes the most likely time to have an ND is within 2 seconds of the last ND). So handle it only when necessary, i.e. when you need to fight, practice, or clean it, or put it away for storage. Therefore, get rid of all clearing barrels -- the situation is much safer with the pistol in your holster, without you or anyone else fiddling with it. Think about it -- REQUIRING everyone to handle, unload, and reload their weapons EVERY time they move into and out of certain areas provides an equal number of opportunities to ND. If you just walk in, do your business, and walk out, while keeping your pistol in your holster the whole time, everyone is that much safer.

John and Vickie (his wife) run hot ranges when they instruct. We always keep our pistols loaded and magazines topped up (which you can do without unholstering) between drills, at lunch on the range, going to the portopotty, whatever. He notes this is quite novel and eyebrow-raising when they teach at a Marine base. Generally the official range staff is banished, everybody is instructed in handling procedures, they load up, and drive on. He reports the Marines are much happier this way.

As an officer, I had military training in the M-9, and I had Vickie Farnam's training. I always knew the military training was weak tea -- Vickie showed me more in one morning than all the M-9 classes I had in my career.

There ND problem with not with Glocks or M-9s -- the problem is with training and discipline. Choosing one pistol over the other because of a widget is not going to save anyone.

No disagreement at all, I just find it curious when ease of training is brought up as a positive. I've personally never met a firearm that was difficult to understand, but I've never met a .mil training course that was worth the time spent either. The basic rules of firearm safety never cease to apply, and if one adheres to those fundamentals it is absolutely impossible - and kept so by the laws of physics - for one to negligently shoot anything. Even still, if you're following the basic principles of firearm safety, and some catastrophic mechanical failure occurs inducing an accidental discharge, it is still very near impossible to shoot anything you didn't plan on shooting anyway.

I've said in numerous threads that it is the responsibility of the NCO corps to ensure all soldiers are trained, and as much as officers tend to fight it, that means them too. Unfortunately, I see far more of my fellow NCOs compelled to get off work early and pass the buck than I see motivated to put in the effort required to be certain their element is appropriately trained. Until that changes (and with continually lowered standards for promotion, I'm not sure it ever will), what weapons we issue soldiers is of no concern.

Personally, I have no problem with other people shooting Glocks. The lack of a safety is of no concern to me, as I keep my finger off the trigger until I'm ready to discharge that weapon. Most of the time, I carry a DAO pistol anyway, I don't even have the "safe action trigger." As an individual, I've been met with far less than impressive reliability in every Glock I have ever fired. That considered, I can not approve of ones carry for myself - but if your example works for you, by all means proceed to carry. Better to have and not need, than need and not have.

ELB wrote:

The kind of lack in training most soldiers have with pistols? Consider this - even WITH a manual safety, officers in theater (those most commonly issued pistols) account for the largest percentage of negligent discharges. Lots of clearing barrels with 9mm holes in them out here. They usually come in pairs as well - boom, rack, boom.

What Gunny says is absolutely true. There is only one flaw in it. I am in the military and Negligent Discharges happen too often with empty weapons equipped with manual safeties.

The constant cycle of unholstering, loading, making ready, holstering, unhlostering, clearing and reholstering (repeat, repeat, repeat) is far more handling than the average CHLer will have in a lifetime...The safety and long DA trigger {I assume you are talking of the M-9} provide another level of prevention.

I believe manual safeties (which I take to mean the thumb-actuated gizmo on the left side) add nothing to the safety of a pistol while it is in your hand. It is intended to lock the firing mechanism when a pistol with a light trigger (such as many 1911s) is in its holster. As ably demonstrated by the above quotes, they certainly don't prevent NDs, any more than "empty" guns do. About the first thing you do when properly drawing a manual-safety-equipped pistol is take off the safety. It has to be off to move the slide, which means it has to be off to fire it, to load it, to unload it, to show clear, etc. THAT's when you get NDs -- when it is in the same configuration as a Glock. If you screw up the procedure and pull the trigger before actually clearing the weapon, I can't see the 10 or 12 lb pull being much different than the 5 lb trigger -- you're going to pull the trigger because you are used to pulling a long trigger, and badly (and hopefully ONLY) embarrass yourself at the clearing barrel.

Mixing guns and poorly trained or disciplined people is going to result in problems, and a manual safety is not going to save you. Whether Gunny gets paid to say it or not, Glocks are superb pistols. Reliable, rugged, combat accurate, simple to use, no extraneous stuff on them. Great military handguns, which of course is what they were designed to be.

In other words, it is not a Glock problem. It is a training and discipline problem, and it exists regardless of the gun type.

John Farnam has developed a philosophy and a set of procedures to deal with this issue, and he teaches it to law enforcement, private citizens, and a fair amount of Marines headed to Iraq. He taught it to me, and it makes perfect sense; my interpretation of the philosophy follows (focused on pistols). To get the real thing, go buy his book at defense-training .com, or take one of his classes.

- All guns are to be treated as if they are loaded.
- Since they are to be treated as if they are loaded, then go ahead and keep them loaded at all times when you are using them. They are useless if they are not loaded, so put ammo in them. If you going to store them in the safe, then if you wish unload them, or if you are going to clean them, by all means load them, but the rest of the time they are loaded. Then you never have to worry about whether it is loaded or not. Of course it is.
- Your (quality) holster is made to carry your pistol on your body safely, so use it. Eat, work, move, drive, whatever -- your pistol is safest when it is in your holster, where you can control it, keep it safe from others, and have it handy when it is needed.
- Any time you handle your pistol, you give yourself a chance to have an ND (and John notes the most likely time to have an ND is within 2 seconds of the last ND). So handle it only when necessary, i.e. when you need to fight, practice, or clean it, or put it away for storage. Therefore, get rid of all clearing barrels -- the situation is much safer with the pistol in your holster, without you or anyone else fiddling with it. Think about it -- REQUIRING everyone to handle, unload, and reload their weapons EVERY time they move into and out of certain areas provides an equal number of opportunities to ND. If you just walk in, do your business, and walk out, while keeping your pistol in your holster the whole time, everyone is that much safer.

John and Vickie (his wife) run hot ranges when they instruct. We always keep our pistols loaded and magazines topped up (which you can do without unholstering) between drills, at lunch on the range, going to the portopotty, whatever. He notes this is quite novel and eyebrow-raising when they teach at a Marine base. Generally the official range staff is banished, everybody is instructed in handling procedures, they load up, and drive on. He reports the Marines are much happier this way.

As an officer, I had military training in the M-9, and I had Vickie Farnam's training. I always knew the military training was weak tea -- Vickie showed me more in one morning than all the M-9 classes I had in my career.

There ND problem with not with Glocks or M-9s -- the problem is with training and discipline. Choosing one pistol over the other because of a widget is not going to save anyone.

+1 on your thoughts above ELB. Spot on. Of course everybody has their own opinion on Glocks and what is the best handgun for military or Personal use--it is akin to the age old debate of Ford vs Chevy. That will be going on when our grandkids are arguing this same debate-God Willing. One can only go on what they have witnessed themselves or experienced. The purpose of the post was to validate the Glock pistol as a safe pistol and one suitable for Mil Service. As pointed out, opinions otherwise are mostly the lack of knowledge of the weapon & training combined. I personally feel if the fundamentals of gun safety are applied and drilled on regularly, then any weapon is a safe weapon, external safety or not. The anti-gunner's have managed over time, to plant a nasty stigma in the fabric of America that it is "unsafe guns" that kill people. Again, this can be countered by the very basic Fundamentals of Gun Safety and Training. As pointed out in Gunny's post, and being a Marine, I can tell you I heard this more than once: "A pistol is to fight your way to, or back to, a rifle, a rifle is to fight your way to something belt-fed!" Whether you are talking about a Military application or a Self-Defense Situation, a Critical Incident aka Life or Death scenario produces in the Human body enough stress to limit ones congnitive/motor skill abilities severely--we need to work with what our body does naturally and avoid the need for fine motor skill--ie the operation of levers, buttons, etc. The Glock accomplishes this and does it by not violating any safety protocol whatsoever.


Semper Fi.

ELB wrote:Mixing guns and poorly trained or disciplined people is going to result in problems, and a manual safety is not going to save you. Whether Gunny gets paid to say it or not, Glocks are superb pistols. Reliable, rugged, combat accurate, simple to use, no extraneous stuff on them. Great military handguns, which of course is what they were designed to be.

In other words, it is not a Glock problem. It is a training and discipline problem, and it exists regardless of the gun type.

For many years, I carried a revolver (S&W Model 10). When we switched to the 9mm's, suddenly everyone started to get obsessed with safeties. The fact that a Glock does not have an external one is the primary reason that I carry one. It's a point and shoot weapon, which is exactly what I want.

Short story...I love to tell them. I don't smoke these days and do not encourage it, but feel this is a parallel to the safety issue. When I first started flying in the Army, virtually every pilot and crew chief smoked like a fiend. Every Army helicopter had ash trays in the cockpit. As soon as you were airborne the pilot and crew would light up. Then in the mid-80's or so the Army began to discourage smoking in a big way for health reasons. New and younger soldiers who had never seen a person smoke in an aircraft began to arrive at units. They would freak out if somebody lit up...OMG, the aircraft is going to explode!!! When you pointed to the factory installed ashtray, they would get the "deer in the headlights" look.

smoking on a bird? Man, they didn't even let me turn on my I-pod. Well, I guess that is the price of 'progress.' Speaking of birds, if you get a chance to ride and Osprey, take it. It isn't exactly comfortable, but man, does it go. And as for NDs, I've seen them happen with a Mk19. And does it count as an ND if someone took the pin out and couldn't get it back in, so ended up having to throw it into an empty room?

frreed wrote:What Gunny says is absolutely true. There is only one flaw in it. I am in the military and Negligent Discharges happen too often with empty weapons equipped with manual safeties.
.

might have something to do with how most recruits have never even fired a weapon, much less understand any mechanics of a firearm.

I can reholster one handed and without looking, without worrying about my shirt, vest, coat, holster, etc., getting caught in the trigger, by simply thumbing the thumb safety on.

Dan

I can re-holster my Glock one handed and without looking, without worrying about my shirt, vest, coat, holster, etc., getting caught in the trigger, by simply knowing my equipment and practicing with it.