# what I learned in MI CPL class (USCCA)



## Runs With Fire (Mar 12, 2018)

A couple things.
First: I learned that my Remington R51 isn't trusted by many gun experts.

Second, I learned that the m&p shield is more popular than I realized( four of twelve participants had identical  shields)

I, familiar as I am with firearms but lacking any formal training, learned a lot about grip and pistol control.  

My wife has little experience with firearms, especially my R51. The two didn't jive.  I never thought much about it but nearly all her shooting experience (2,000-3,000 rnds plinking) was with a single action .22 revolver.  Aside from not knowing how to control recoil during drills, she had a failure to feed do to not fully seating the magazine.  She also had an issue with the grip safety.  She wouldn't completely depress it and a failure to fire resulted.  Then continue to fumble with clearing the action until an instructor stepped in. Happened a few times They let her know she was probably not fully engaging the safety. 
 I kinda blew that one, sorry Honey.

I had a dud round but no other trouble with the R51.   I did realize that I dislike the grip safety after my wife's dismal familiarity.  I have had trouble with it a time or two myself. Got me thinking, how many times have I drawn a bead on rabbits or ducks only to pull the trigger three or four times before realizing I forgot to hit the safety?  I see an external safetey-less compact handgun in the near future.


----------



## wab25 (Mar 12, 2018)

Runs With Fire said:


> she had a failure to feed do to not fully seating the magazine. She also had an issue with the grip safety. She wouldn't completely depress it and a failure to fire resulted. Then continue to fumble with clearing the action until an instructor stepped in. Happened a few times They let her know she was probably not fully engaging the safety.
> I kinda blew that one, sorry Honey.
> 
> I had a dud round but no other trouble with the R51. I did realize that I dislike the grip safety after my wife's dismal familiarity. I have had trouble with it a time or two myself. Got me thinking, how many times have I drawn a bead on rabbits or ducks only to pull the trigger three or four times before realizing I forgot to hit the safety? I see an external safetey-less compact handgun in the near future.


Sounds like a great advertisement for double action revolver...


----------



## Runs With Fire (Mar 12, 2018)

wab25 said:


> Sounds like a great advertisement for double action revolver...


Perhaps,  I do like all the pros to a double action revolver. Though looking at the capacity of the 9mm compact Ruger American at 17+1  vs 5 or 6 +0 it's a piont of conflict.


----------



## Runs With Fire (Mar 12, 2018)

Then again,  a double stack isn't really something my wife fits all that well.  I like my glock 20.  She might try out a few more revolvers the next time we go to the fancy range.


----------



## Runs With Fire (Mar 12, 2018)

Btw, although the grip safety throws me for a loop at times just because it's so different, the R51 is the most accurate pistol I have shot to date. 
*note that I have not shot any specialty marksmanship type pistols or any pistol marketed as a competitive marksmanship pistol


----------



## CB Jones (Mar 12, 2018)

Not a big fan of revolvers.  Matter of fact...I hate revolvers for self defense purposes.

For CC its hard to beat Glock.

A Glock 19 or Glock 23 they are just good all around guns.  I worked undercover carrying a Glock 23 IWB for years.  Loved it. 

Also the Glock 43 is great small concealable 9mm.


----------



## Runs With Fire (Mar 13, 2018)

I agree completely. 


CB Jones said:


> Not a big fan of revolvers.  Matter of fact...I hate revolvers for self defense purposes.
> 
> For CC its hard to beat Glock.
> 
> ...


----------



## wab25 (Mar 13, 2018)

CB Jones said:


> I hate revolvers for self defense purposes.


Just curious... what specifically do you not like about revolvers for self defense?


----------



## CB Jones (Mar 13, 2018)

wab25 said:


> Just curious... what specifically do you not like about revolvers for self defense?



If you like or enjoy shooting revolvers was that’s fine.

What I cringe at is when people suggest revolvers for solely self defense.

Semi-Automatics are just better for self defense.  Choosing a revolver over a semi auto for solely self defense puts you at a disadvantage.


----------



## Runs With Fire (Mar 13, 2018)

Capacity


wab25 said:


> Just curious... what specifically do you not like about revolvers for self defense?


----------



## wab25 (Mar 13, 2018)

CB Jones said:


> What I cringe at is when people suggest revolvers for solely self defense.
> 
> Semi-Automatics are just better for self defense. Choosing a revolver over a semi auto for solely self defense puts you at a disadvantage.


Why? What are the specific disadvantages you are referring to? 



Runs With Fire said:


> Capacity


 This is a disadvantage, sort of... Depending on which study you read most defensive gun uses do not involve shooting at all. Most studies put that number well above 50% some near 90% of the defensive gun uses never involve firing the gun. With practice, and a speed loader, you can reload your revolver fairly quickly. It should take less time than it takes to clear a misfire from an automatic... except you know when it will happen. If you are really in a situation where you need to fire all 18 rounds as fast as your finger can go, I don't think you will make it to 18... (I know I won't, unless they are worse shots than me, in which case I can reload.)

The advantage I see is reliability. There are fewer things to fail. The grip safety won't fail, the trigger safety won't fail, my thumb won't slip and put the safety on, it doesn't matter if I limp wrist a shot, it won't fail to feed the next round, it won't jam, I don't need to worry if I forgot to clean and lube it right, if I have a bad round of ammo I just pull the thingy again.


----------



## CB Jones (Mar 13, 2018)

wab25 said:


> Why? What are the specific disadvantages you are referring to?



Auto loaders:

Higher capacity
Lower recoil with better ballistics
Faster reloads with higher capacity mags
Conceal better inside and outside of waistband
Allows more rounds on target at a faster pace
autos now are just as accurate as revolvers
autos are now just as reliable as revolvers

All in all in a gunfight the person with an autoloader has an advantage over the revolver


----------



## Runs With Fire (Mar 13, 2018)

wab25 said:


> Why? What are the specific disadvantages you are referring to?
> 
> This is a disadvantage, sort of... Depending on which study you read most defensive gun uses do not involve shooting at all. Most studies put that number well above 50% some near 90% of the defensive gun uses never involve firing the gun. With practice, and a speed loader, you can reload your revolver fairly quickly. It should take less time than it takes to clear a misfire from an automatic... except you know when it will happen. If you are really in a situation where you need to fire all 18 rounds as fast as your finger can go, I don't think you will make it to 18... (I know I won't, unless they are worse shots than me, in which case I can reload.)
> 
> The advantage I see is reliability. There are fewer things to fail. The grip safety won't fail, the trigger safety won't fail, my thumb won't slip and put the safety on, it doesn't matter if I limp wrist a shot, it won't fail to feed the next round, it won't jam, I don't need to worry if I forgot to clean and lube it right, if I have a bad round of ammo I just pull the thingy again.


My purpose of carrying a pistol is to kill things. It might be chipmunks, bears, deer, and people.  A revolver works fine in the woods of southern Michigan.  When I hunt up north in bear country, I prefer fifteen 10mm rounds in my glock 20.  In close quarters, more rounds equates to a better tool for killing quickly.   When my life is on the line, the minimum doesn't cut it.   Simple math, 15>6.  Edit: Jones types faster than me


----------



## Runs With Fire (Mar 13, 2018)

It's the same reason a bolt action rifle doesn't fit as a standard battle rifle these days.  They are still just as deadly as they were, but the battlefield got more deadly.


----------



## wab25 (Mar 13, 2018)

CB Jones said:


> Auto loaders:
> 
> Higher capacity
> Lower recoil with better ballistics
> ...


I appreciate the reply and specifics.


----------



## CB Jones (Mar 13, 2018)

wab25 said:


> I appreciate the reply and specifics.



In the end....it’s the carriers choice to make....just in my opinion the autoloader is a better gun for gun fighting.


----------



## wab25 (Mar 13, 2018)

Runs With Fire said:


> It's the same reason a bolt action rifle doesn't fit as a standard battle rifle these days. They are still just as deadly as they were, but the battlefield got more deadly.


This might be where we differ. In a self defense, civilian usage... my goal is not to kill people, nor win a battlefield. My goal is to defend myself and family. If the goal were to kill people and or win a battlefield then I agree a lot with what CB is saying.

Here is one study done of 482 civilian shootings: The Thinking Gunfighter: Self Defense Findings

Some interesting conclusions:

The average and median number of shots fired was 2.
Reloading was required in only 3 of 482 incidents.

there are no apparent cases of drivers or lookouts acting as reinforcements for the criminal actor(s) once shooting starts. Immediate flight is the most common response for drivers and lookouts at the sound of gunfire.
It is a rare event when a civilian needs to use a gun to defend himself. Most of the time, simply showing the gun is enough. So the times that I as a civilian would need to shoot, is very rare. In that event, the average number of shots fired is 2. (I have read other reports and seen other averages 2, 3, and 5 are common depending on which study you look at) The most common reaction by the bad guy, in all the studies I am aware of is flight.

My reality, is that I don't get to the range to practice as often as I would like. I don't get to maintain my gun as often as I would like. (I might not even have cleaned it yet after the last time I took it shooting.) What I need is something I can get to, and get of 2 to 5 shots. Given that as a civilian, I don't get all the practice I want/need, if I am in a situation where they don't run, but open fire... I expect that will happen before I get to shots 6 and 7.

One study showed it takes 5 shots to get a hit. (I am going with the high count for this exercise...) Suppose there are 3 armed bad guys. This means that the minimum number of rounds that I need is 15, to take down all 3, if they don't run. So, it takes 5 rounds on the first guy... that means his two buddies fired 5 times at me, plus the guy I am shooting at most likely got off a few more at me. So, statistically, I am already shot twice by the time I shoot the first guy once. I now need another 5 shots to hit the second guy... but that means the third guy has 5 more shots on me... and a third hit on me. The point here is, as an average citizen, even if I need 15 rounds, I probably don't really have the training and skill to get them all out and on the multiple targets anyway.

However, thats ok. Most of the time, showing the gun is enough. If I have to fire the gun, 2 shots will handle most of the other cases. The cases where I would need to reload are very rare. From the report above: "Incidents rarely occurred in reaction time (i.e., ¼ second increments)." I should have the time to reload.

As a civilian, I feel I need a gun that will work absolutely every time I pull the trigger, regardless of how well maintained it is at the time. I feel I need something simple to operate, the simpler the better. By the time I get to shots 5 or 6, the bad guys are running or I am about done anyway.

To your point, killing people or winning battles is a different thing. If that is the goal, then my choice of tool would be different. (I think the snipers still use bolt action rifles on the battlefield... but I could be wrong here)


----------



## Runs With Fire (Mar 13, 2018)

wab25 said:


> This might be where we differ. In a self defense, civilian usage... my goal is not to kill people, nor win a battlefield. My goal is to defend myself and family. If the goal were to kill people and or win a battlefield then I agree a lot with what CB is saying.
> 
> Here is one study done of 482 civilian shootings: The Thinking Gunfighter: Self Defense Findings
> 
> ...


If for no other point, less time reloading at the range, more time shooting ( quite significant when shooting 500 rnds).  Now, about military snipers, I think the m24 is a bolt action .308. The m2010 is a bolt action. .300 mag. And the m107 is semi auto( all of a loose memory).    My Ruger American .308 bolt action with a Vortex Viper is my favorite firearm and my primary for shtf, backed up by my glock 20.  I love the accuracy and it would be my go to in a shootout in a minimum 100 yards. Mabey closer to 200


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 13, 2018)

Runs With Fire said:


> I did realize that I dislike the grip safety after my wife's dismal familiarity.


I have always seen issues like this as a good reason to have a grip safety. I've never had a single issue using one (a firm, deep grip seems to always work), but I've seen others have a problem. That decreases the chance (even if only slightly) of it being used against me. My dad had a gun stolen and the thief tried to use it against him. It had a grip-cocking mechanism, and the thief didn't grip hard enough (again, not a problem I ever had with that gun) leading to a FTF. Probably saved my dad's life.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 13, 2018)

Runs With Fire said:


> Capacity


That depends what you compare to. A officer-size 1911, IRCC, only carries 6 in the mag. There are a number of small pistols that don't carry more. Granted a difference of 1 is a significant % here, but not a big number. To me, a snubnose 38 without an exposed hammer is not worse than a .380 with 6 rounds.

Of course, if we compare to a double-stack or full-size (even single-stack 1911), that's another matter, but the small pistols don't compare well, either.


----------



## Runs With Fire (Mar 14, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> That depends what you compare to. A officer-size 1911, IRCC, only carries 6 in the mag. There are a number of small pistols that don't carry more. Granted a difference of 1 is a significant % here, but not a big number. To me, a snubnose 38 without an exposed hammer is not worse than a .380 with 6 rounds.
> 
> Of course, if we compare to a double-stack or full-size (even single-stack 1911), that's another matter, but the small pistols don't compare well, either.


All very true.   my r51 only holds 7+1  9mm and I don't carry +1.  But it is slimmer than a revolver.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Mar 14, 2018)

CB Jones said:


> Not a big fan of revolvers.  Matter of fact...I hate revolvers for self defense purposes.
> 
> For CC its hard to beat Glock.
> 
> ...



The Glock 19 & 23 are almost the ideal concealed carry handgun's.  Decent capacity, slim and that Glock functionality and dependability!


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Mar 14, 2018)

In regards to revolver vs. semi auto handguns.  

Folks, this is 2018 and you only need to look around the world and see what violence professionals are carrying.  They carry almost exclusively semi auto's.  Whether they are LEO's, Military, Security, etc.  They do this for all the reasons CB indicated earlier.  Semi Auto handguns are the superior technology at this time.  Now, that does not mean that a revolver cannot fit your needs but it is hard to argue that it is a better tool than the modern semi auto.


----------



## Brian King (Mar 14, 2018)

In regards to revolver vs. semi auto handguns.
I have a student that has arthritis in both hands and wrists, when she carries it is a j-frame. It fits her hands and she shoots well with it. She has a very difficult time racking slides on most semi-auto's but has no problem pulling hammer or using DA.

Individual weapon choices can based on many conditions, experiences, and situations. If we think about it, even carrying a semi auto is a compromise as a battle rifle is better technology for hunting and self defense, yet for most, we daily carry handguns not long guns.

Find what works best for you, practice with it and do not worry so much what others are carrying or not carrying.

Regards
Brian King


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 14, 2018)

Brian King said:


> In regards to revolver vs. semi auto handguns.
> I have a student that has arthritis in both hands and wrists, when she carries it is a j-frame. It fits her hands and she shoots well with it. She has a very difficult time racking slides on most semi-auto's but has no problem pulling hammer or using DA.
> 
> Individual weapon choices can based on many conditions, experiences, and situations. If we think about it, even carrying a semi auto is a compromise as a battle rifle is better technology for hunting and self defense, yet for most, we daily carry handguns not long guns.
> ...


When I had problems with my dominant thumb (dislocated during a friend's black belt testing), I found J-frames easier to handle than my Glock.


----------



## Runs With Fire (Mar 15, 2018)

My mother is taking some basic handgun, marksman, and defensive pistol courses in preparation for her cpl.  You go Mom!  Her 56 year old arthritic thumbs can't compress a magazine spring after a couple rounds.  If she uses a wheelgun for training, I advise her to carry the same.  Familiarity is much more a factor than capacity alone.


----------



## Danny T (Mar 15, 2018)

Training and Practice! It really comes down to training and practice, practice, practice.
Proficiency with a semi auto takes more training and practice. 
If one isn't going to get good training and spend time with dedicated practice a revolver is a better choice. Lower capacity and longer reloads but overall an easier tool to use. In my experience there are far more people who do not practice to become proficient under high stress and with clearing malfunctions than those who do and even less continue to practice to maintain such proficiency. 
Doesn't mean they can't fire the weapon but doing so when relaxed and at paper targets only keeps one familiar. Recognizing the different malfunctions and being able to address them properly under high stress is a high level skill that only comes with good practice. If one isn't going to put in the practice then a revolver is my recommendation.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Mar 15, 2018)

*If a revolver fits your needs then use it.*  It is older technology but that does not mean that it is not still useful.  Personally, I almost exclusively carry a Glock 19 for concealed carry.  It is almost perfect in that I can hide it on my frame and it does not print and it has a capacity of 10 + 1 and I can reload with another magazine quickly.  However, there are times when I need to carry a pocket pistol and I almost always fall back to one of my revolvers at that point.  I find that the revolver in the pocket hides well.  Beyond that I usually utilize a revolver as a backup on my ankle.  So I am certainly not anti-revolver.  Yet, I recognize that it is older technology and that the modern semi-auto is superior for all the reasons CB mentioned above!


----------



## lklawson (Mar 19, 2018)

Runs With Fire said:


> A couple things.
> First: I learned that my Remington R51 isn't trusted by many gun experts.


To be honest, there's a ton of snobbery and "intellectual incest" among "gun experts."  Most of their training material is good, but often they can be unaccepting and tend to look at things from a mindset which does not match their clients.

Here's a great discussion about the problem from two training experts I trust:

Dear Instructors, Get a Real Job (Podcast – Season 5, Ballistic Radio Episode 241, February 11th, 2018)



> Second, I learned that the m&p shield is more popular than I realized( four of twelve participants had identical  shields)


They're very popular.



> My wife has little experience with firearms, especially my R51. The two didn't jive.  I never thought much about it but nearly all her shooting experience (2,000-3,000 rnds plinking) was with a single action .22 revolver.  Aside from not knowing how to control recoil during drills, she had a failure to feed do to not fully seating the magazine.  She also had an issue with the grip safety.  She wouldn't completely depress it and a failure to fire resulted.  Then continue to fumble with clearing the action until an instructor stepped in. Happened a few times They let her know she was probably not fully engaging the safety.
> I kinda blew that one, sorry Honey.


No, you didn't blow that one.  The instructor did.  The instructor needs to teach a firm grip and should have taught and verified it before the range.  I own an R51, it's actually my favorite CC.  The grip safety isn't that hard to depress.  If she isn't gripping it hard enough to depress the grip safety, then she doesn't have a solid grip on the gun and, in fact, her grip is so loose that it is dangerous to her.  Not your fail, the instructor's fail.



> I had a dud round but no other trouble with the R51.   I did realize that I dislike the grip safety after my wife's dismal familiarity.  I have had trouble with it a time or two myself. Got me thinking, how many times have I drawn a bead on rabbits or ducks only to pull the trigger three or four times before realizing I forgot to hit the safety?  I see an external safetey-less compact handgun in the near future.


This is a known training issue with manual safety pistols.  It happens more than you might think.  Much like other martial arts, drawing and employing a gun needs to be trained.  "Forgetting" to sweep the safety off is pretty similar to someone throwing a punch with their elbows and leading with their pinky.  It's an incorrect habit which can be easily resolved with proper training and sufficient practice.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Mar 19, 2018)

wab25 said:


> The advantage I see is reliability. There are fewer things to fail. The grip safety won't fail, the trigger safety won't fail, my thumb won't slip and put the safety on, it doesn't matter if I limp wrist a shot, it won't fail to feed the next round, it won't jam, I don't need to worry if I forgot to clean and lube it right, if I have a bad round of ammo I just pull the thingy again.


Nope.  Revolvers are actually more complex machines.  Often they are 20-40% more complex.  I've had wheelies go down and "jam" on me.  When a wheelie jams, you can't tap-rack-bang them.  They're just DOWN.  Just like the old black-and-white Superman TV serial, just throw the gun at the target because you're not going to be getting it back into the fight.  Better off with a New York Reload.

Revolvers Are More Reliable

That said, I like revolvers.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Mar 19, 2018)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> The Glock 19 & 23 are almost the ideal concealed carry handgun's.


For you maybe.  For others they may not fit their hands, their clothing, or other aspects of their life.  Glocks are fine, but they're not the only thing nor is the 19 necessarily the perfect size.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Mar 19, 2018)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> In regards to revolver vs. semi auto handguns.
> 
> Folks, this is 2018 and you only need to look around the world and see what violence professionals are carrying.  They carry almost exclusively semi auto's.  Whether they are LEO's, Military, Security, etc.  They do this for all the reasons CB indicated earlier.  Semi Auto handguns are the superior technology at this time.  Now, that does not mean that a revolver cannot fit your needs but it is hard to argue that it is a better tool than the modern semi auto.


Still plenty of pros carrying wheelies.  Turns out that a snubby is easier to CC than many semi-auto guys give them credit for.  The round-ish design gives them an organic look which hides pretty well.

One revolver expert I was listening to said something interesting: "Revolvers are the easiest guns to shoot but the hardest guns to shoot well."

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Mar 19, 2018)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> Glock 19 [...] 10 + 1


You meant to type 15+1.  

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 19, 2018)

lklawson said:


> New York Reload


I had to look that one up - hadn't heard it before.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Mar 19, 2018)

Actually no, Lklawson,

The Glock 19 is a 10 cartridge magazine with a +1 in the chamber.

The glock is so well received and with the newer generations allowing you to modify the grip it will work well for pretty much anyone.  Fantastic design with fantastic reliability.


----------



## Tames D (Mar 19, 2018)

My choice of conceal carry is my Glock 27. I have a Glock19 but the 27 is a better it for me.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 20, 2018)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> Actually no, Lklawson,
> 
> The Glock 19 is a 10 cartridge magazine with a +1 in the chamber.
> 
> The glock is so well received and with the newer generations allowing you to modify the grip it will work well for pretty much anyone.  Fantastic design with fantastic reliability.


There are 10-round and 15-round magazines available from Glock for the G19. 10 and 13 for the 23. I think they both currently ship with 10-round mags, but I may be mistaken.


----------



## lklawson (Mar 20, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> I had to look that one up - hadn't heard it before.


I believe it comes from Jim Cirillo of the famous New York Stakeout Squad.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## CB Jones (Mar 20, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> There are 10-round and 15-round magazines available from Glock for the G19. 10 and 13 for the 23. I think they both currently ship with 10-round mags, but I may be mistaken.



They will accept any double stack Glock 9 mm magazine that hold 10 rounds or more but they come with 10 round mags.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 20, 2018)

CB Jones said:


> They will accept any double stack Glock 9 mm magazine that hold 10 rounds or more but they come with 10 round mags.


I knew they'd take any for their caliber - Glock actually makes a 15-round specifically for it. The 10-round is a single stack in a double-stack mag. The 15-round was the original mag (pre Clinton-era legislation), and used to ship with the 19.


----------



## lklawson (Mar 20, 2018)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> Actually no, Lklawson,
> 
> The Glock 19 is a 10 cartridge magazine with a +1 in the chamber.


Your mags are neutered.

My G19 has 3 factory 15 round mags and Glock's website (and just about everywhere else) lists them at 15.  I don't know why.  Nevada doesn't have a 10-round limit last time I checked.

Glock 19 | G19 | 9x19mm | GLOCK USA

Are you sure you mean the 19 and not the 26?  The 26 used to be the "concealable" Glock, with its stubby grip and short double-stack mag. 

Either your mags are neutered to comply with some other state's 10-round mag limit (or maybe you got some of the Clinton gun ban mags), or you're thinking of the 26.  If you really do have neutered mags, you owe it to yourself to get some 15-rounders. 

https://www.brownells.com/magazines...gazines/model-19-9mm-magazines-prod71417.aspx
Glock Mag Gen 4 Glock 19 9mm Luger Polymer Black



> The glock is so well received and with the newer generations allowing you to modify the grip it will work well for pretty much anyone.  Fantastic design with fantastic reliability.


It's an OK design with an OK trigger.  Reliability has always been the big selling point but it's a machine just like any other and I know of any number of stories of people reporting reliability issues.  Still, I agree that, as far as semi-auto pistols go, Glocks are among the more reliable but there are plenty of others which are just as reliable.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 20, 2018)

lklawson said:


> It's an OK design with an OK trigger. Reliability has always been the big selling point but it's a machine just like any other and I know of any number of stories of people reporting reliability issues. Still, I agree that, as far as semi-auto pistols go, Glocks are among the more reliable but there are plenty of others which are just as reliable.


I've always kind of liked Glocks. They're good. They don't feel great in my hand - I don't like th grip much. A 1911 feels better, and more secure. But I shoot much better with a Glock, so I went back to a Glock. Back when I got my first one, they were quite different from most pistols. Now, a lot of companies have learned from what worked well, and there are a lot of pistols with similar features and reliability - probably even some with better reliability, though none I'm aware of with the same reputation for it.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Mar 21, 2018)

Glock 19 sitting on my waistband 10 + 1 factory low capacity mag.  So yes, I am carrying a lower capacity magazine.  Checking my magazines I have four 10 rounds mags and 4 15 rounds.  My mistake.  When I quoted that I just looked at the gun and magazine on my waist at that time.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Mar 21, 2018)

As for the trigger design.  I actually prefer the Glock trigger design over other models.  However, if someone were to have learned on another model they might not enjoy it as much.  Fortunately in 1991 when going through my first police academy I decided to train with a Glock and haven't looked back since.  When I pick up a Glock I'm confident it will fire.  I cannot say the same thing about other hand guns.


----------



## lklawson (Mar 21, 2018)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> As for the trigger design.  I actually prefer the Glock trigger design over other models.


I'm not saying it's a bad trigger, just that it's not a "great" trigger.

On one hand, after a certain point of usability, triggers are kinda a personal preference thing.  And then there's the fact that some triggers are optimized for certain tasks which reduces their utility for others.  A 2 lb. short and crisp 1911 trigger is the bees knees for bullseye shooting but may not be the best plan for a SD pistol.  OTOH, a Kel Tec P11 DAO trigger is heavy and long and makes pinpoint accuracy a challenge but is fine for 5 yards on a gun with no manual safety.

Are Glock triggers bad?  No.  But I'm not all that impressed with them either.  If a person practices with it and gets unconsciously competent with it, then it's the "right" trigger for them.  <shrug>

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Runs With Fire (Apr 24, 2018)

I got my cpl in the mail yesterday.  Now to order that ailien gear holster and find a good way to secure a handgun in my car.


----------



## Danny T (Apr 24, 2018)

Today I carry a Glock 19...15 rd mags.
I prefer my 1911. Why? I can't really say, I just do. However, I carry the 19 (which I have come to like)
Had the trigger worked and is much better feel.
I carry the Glock because my wife carries a clock as well. 
So our mag and ammo interchange, if I pick up my weapon or hers it is the same. 
And at my age under high stress that is reassuring in I don't have to think about which weapon I am holding.
The grips are very similar, the trigger pulls are almost identical, I like the redundancy.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Apr 24, 2018)

Love the Glock trigger!


----------



## Runs With Fire (Apr 25, 2018)

Danny T said:


> I carry the Glock because my wife carries a clock as well.


Is that so you can time your shooting, or do the two just make a nice pair?  Who sells holsters for a timepiece?


----------



## Danny T (Apr 25, 2018)

Runs With Fire said:


> Is that so you can time your shooting, or do the two just make a nice pair?  Who sells holsters for a timepiece?


Yeah, that should have been a (g) rather (c).
Pocket time pieces are still available and several companies make belt mounted holsters for them available directly from the manufacturer as well as EBay and amazon.


----------

