Another gun question

[ghostrider]

GR - you put that so very well. It's a sad state of affairs. The march on our freedoms, the USC and BOR has slowed significantly these last few years with the rise of the Republican Party to power ...

Hello Ken,
I'm not so sure I'd agree with you on this point. Seems it it the rise of the Republican party that has sped up the trampling of the BOR/USC. Many of the things the Republicans have eased along probably would have been halted during the Klinton era. The Homeland Security bill was a bill that Bill Clinton tried to get passed, and John Ashcroft stood up on the floor in opposition to it because of the assaults on the USC that it represented. And, it wasn't the Dems passed the recent Military Commissions Act (which many are saying has eviscerated the BOR with. Sure, a Dem sweep may well result in a speedier assault on the USC, but just because the Republicans are going to the same house at a slower speed doesn't mean they won't eventually get there.

Take notice of how gleeful the President is over Tuesdays elections. He's giddy over the prospect of getting his illegal amnesty passed now.


I also do agree with you on many of your other points. Like the one about the 10 Million gun owners against 600,000 military, but how many would stand up. I'm just of the belief that since it hasn't happened yet, it most likely won't.

[Hannibal Lecter]

Dear Friends,

As much as it pains me to agree with poodle, buy a Glock. They are the most reliable, trouble-free handguns available on the planet right now.

I worked for ten years as a gun shop - I know what brands come back defective out of the box, and I know what brands tend to break.

Were the decision solely mine, I would buy a Springfield or Kimber 1911-style pistol. However, *I* know how to detail strip and maintain them, and *I* am the one fixing it when it starts acting screwy. Unless you are planning on maintaining your own handguns down to component parts when they break down, I suggest Glock.

Don't even get me started on the 2nd Amendment... :mad:

Too late. :p

Scott, the Right to Keep and Bear Arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment is being purposefully mistranslated by the government. Essentially, they are saying that the right is a collective one ("A well-regulated militia...") belonging to only the military forces and NOT to the individual. We all know this is a bold-faced lie and was not what the founding fathers intended, but over the past ten years the public has been fed so many of the lies they are beginning to believe them.

--------
Hannibal

[Hannibal Lecter]

My Dear Friend,

Truly it would be better if every citizen should be required to carry a firearm, and be trained in its use.

Exactly! I myself am an NRA-Certified Pistol/Personal Protection Instructor, and you would just not believe the number of individuals I encounter who have NO CLUE about firearms safety and usage. I live in an area where there is probably AT LEAST one firearm in EVERY SINGLE HOUSEHOLD, an area with a long tradition of hunting and firearm-related pursuits. There are still hunting accidents every year, and there are still accidental dischanges inside of houses with alarming regularity.

These folks desperately need training, my friends...

--------
Hannibal

[catamount]

I'm also a 1911 fan. Nothing else feels as good in my hand. I've got a Kimber Pro Carry (Commander length barrel) chambered in 9mm, and I love it.

As far as gun laws, I'm glad I live in Vermont :D As long as you pass the background check (takes about 5 minutes), you can buy a gun and walk out with it. No registration, and no permit required to carry openly or concealed.

[ront]

I will also throw in my vote for a Glock. There are many fine handguns being made, I and I am certainly on expert on any of them. I used to badmouth Glock until I bought one. I will always have it. I can feed it anything, it will work dirty (although I keep it clean) and it just goes bang every time. It has very few parts and is just a very simple gun to use.
As to the whole gun control issue. Several years ago where I work there was a article clipping taped to one of the file cabinets. I wish I knew where it was now or could find the quote somewhere. I don't remember much of it anymore, but it was a quote of A. Hitler. It said something to the effect of, now that they (Hitler) had the peoples guns, they (Hitler) had complete control over the people. It was scary to read then and as time progresses and these issues arise, I think about that quote and it getting even scarier.

Ron

[kbuzbee]

I'm not so sure I'd agree with you on this point.... just because the Republicans are going to the same house at a slower speed doesn't mean they won't eventually get there.

Yeah, I hear ya. There's really no one out there championing the America our FF brought forth. It's a major pity and ONE of the reasons so many conservatives didn't vote for Republicans this go 'round. They (and I) are just fed up with the whole "progressive" agenda.

Take notice of how gleeful the President is over Tuesdays elections. He's giddy over the prospect of getting his illegal amnesty passed now.

I know. It's sickening, really. He's done many, many things along this line that are horrible. I'm to the point I think both parties should be disbanded. Let individual candidates run on their own platforms and limit campaign spending to some (SMALL) amount. No PAC ads. Nothing but what they want you to know. If they feel the most important thing for you to know is their opponent screwed up somewhere, fine, but they only get their $50K or whatever to say it. Then they're done. Good luck getting THAT approved!

I also do agree with you on many of your other points. Like the one about the 10 Million gun owners against 600,000 military, but how many would stand up. I'm just of the belief that since it hasn't happened yet, it most likely won't.

I hate to say this, but things here just aren't bad enough yet. I think MANY would stand up but right now (me included) we lead nice lives and people are unwilling to throw that away. I bet if the average North Korean were armed, Kim Jung Il wouldn't be running the place.

Ken

[kbuzbee]

These folks desperately need training, my friends...:

Amen brother! Amen!

Ken

(and yes, Glocks are nice reliable guns. Own one. Shoot it often. Never a misfire.)

[kbuzbee]

...but it was a quote of A. Hitler. It said something to the effect of, now that they (Hitler) had the peoples guns, they (Hitler) had complete control over the people. It was scary to read then and as time progresses and these issues arise, I think about that quote and it getting even scarier.

And that is only ONE (yes, it's a good one) example. It's happened over and over again. Once you disarm the population, you have free rein. It's really the only reason to do it. Anything else is a smoke screen.

Ken

[ghostrider]

Yeah, I hear ya. There's really no one out there championing the America our FF brought forth. It's a major pity and ONE of the reasons so many conservatives didn't vote for Republicans this go 'round. They (and I) are just fed up with the whole "progressive" agenda.

There are a handful of them who are championing the America our FF brought forth. However, most of the Repubs aren’t among that group. I wholeheartedly agree that that is one of the main reasons (if not the reason) that conservatives didn’t vote for Republlicans. I truly believe that this country is mostly conservative (at least as far as voters go), and that is why the Republicans lost.

I hate to say this, but things here just aren't bad enough yet. I think MANY would stand up but right now (me included) we lead nice lives and people are unwilling to throw that away. I bet if the average North Korean were armed, Kim Jung Il wouldn't be running the place.

Ken

You don’t think it’s “bad enough yet”? What do you think it would take to make it “bad enough”? (These aren’t rhetorical questions. I am interested in your opinion.)

From some of the things that have happened in the period of the last two administrations, I would say that it’s been “bad enough”. I personally think that the Amerikan people are to the point where they would rather cower under oppression than fight for their freedom, and liberties. Within the past six years, the encroachment upon our liberties has been more drastic than during the Klinton Administration, yet there seem to be more willingness to accept it. Granted it has all happened in a “Republican” era, but I’m not too sure that it would be different if the Dems had done it. Now that the Dems have these powers that the GOP has put in place (and will probably pick up even more power in 2008) when will it be “bad enough”. I personally believe we have already passed that point, and if any do or would stand up, they would do so alone, and therefore be ineffective.

It's kind of like people who say “From My Cold Dead Hands!” these days when it seems we are already past that point. Sure, they may not have come for the guns in Vermont yet, but by the time they get there what effect will and a man have when he is awoken in the middle of the night with a gun pointed at him have. And, I wouldn't put too much confidence in the military either since it was the NG who backed up the Sheriff in NO when they went door-to-door. It just seems like little more than “chest beating to me.

[yablanowitz]

Off topic: Bad news, guys. The Constitution was replaced by Big Government when we lost the Second Revolutionary War (the one they call the Civil War). The country our forefathers brought forth has been dead since then. We have no rights, only the privileges the wealthy ruling class have deemed necessary to prevent the third revolution.

If you don't believe me, get a translation of Hitler's Gun Control Act of 1938 and compare it to the US Gun Control Act of 1968. That will give you something to lose sleep over.

On topic: Another vote for Glock. I have several, and have never had a failure that was not the direct fault of the ammunition in use. I know a couple of guys who have a strict policy on spare magazines: when they buy a gun, they spend the same amount on spare magazines as they spent on the gun. I always thought it was a little extreme, but they have never run out of spare mags as far as I know. :D

[yablanowitz]

Shoot him first, this way he won't ban firearms (US law regulations prohibit deceased governors to have any legislative initiatives) !

Bad idea. Shooting him would lend support to his anti-gun policy. Beating him to death with a rock would be much better. :D

[Jimd]

I've owned various Glocks, HKs, S&Ws, Sigs......
People way HK is overpriced. However, you can find them used for reasonable prices in good condition. That's what I did.

I have an H&K USP and in my opinion, it's the best handgun I've ever owned. Certainly the most accurate.

But any of the above will serve you well. Glocks are excellent, so are Sigs and S&W, among others.

[Michael Cook]

:spyder: Glock 19 9mm. Versatile, hi-cap, small enough for concealed carry, large enough to mount a surefire,simple manual of arms,nearly indistructable, modular parts,proven reliability out of the box, it's a great gun! :spyder:

[Trihonda]

magnum research not that great - hk way over priced - glock by far the best- 357 sig costs to much, and would be allmost dead if it wasnt for gov contracts.

I have to disagree. Sigs are by far the better quality of the ones you mention. They do cost alot, but you get what you pay for. A HG is one of those things you absolutely have to have work, each time, every time. As far as them being almost dead, cept for gov contracts, I could say the exact same thing about Glocks.

Is Glock a better handgun? no.
Is it a bad handgun? no.
Is it cheaper (less expensive)? yes.

I could easily say the best thing about Glock, Inc. is their marketing strategies. Think about it, they offered great deals to LE agencies (rock bottom prices), and fed into the DA only (safety-less) bandwagon, right when LE agencies were having a string of unfortunate ADs (accidental discharges). Glocks are simpler than other guns, and that played into the market at the time. Agencies want cheap and simple. Now, they are everywhere. However, this doesn't mean they are a better gun (compared to Sigs).

You want a top-of-the-line, will last forever, function better than others handgun (since this will be your last purchase), then I'd go with a Sig (assuming you find one that fits you).

All that said, I'd still give each a try in your hand to see what actually works for you. I can sit here all day long and say get this gun or that, but it really boils down to what works best for you. A $200 handgun that fits you, will be a better gun than a $2000 handgun that doesn't fit you.

Best of luck and let us know what you decide on.
Peace-

[cll1226]

Glocks are good, hk is good. But take a look at the Springfield XD. More safety features, and they almost have all of the same calibers, and sizes as glock.

[bigkahunasix]

Gentle forumites, As I posted earlier in this thread, Test firing is the key to firearms happiness. Any new trainee or customer coming into my shop gets the once over about what the weapons primary use will be ( CCW, target, Hunting, plinking, camping security, etc...) Then their firearms background, any personal preferences ( revolver, auto, single shot, rifle, shougun). We then get out a selection of appropriate guns and off we go to the range out back for some tryouts. This is all provided gratis by me and the shop. From this approach every time I run a civilian class it is full with a waiting list. It also has prevented alot of trade backs from spur of the moment bad fit purchases. ****, we even invite the wives ( or husbands). This is not an advertisement for me or my shop, I am busy enough, but a roadmap to getting a firearm that fits your body and your needs. Like I said before find a shop with alot of used or rental models build a rapport with the guy at the counter, burn some ammo and buy what fits you not your buddies or your favorite magazine writers. Jim

[Zac]

As far as Maryland goes, Baltimore City Mayor Martin O'Malley (D) won the election over the current gov Robert Ehrlich (R). Maryland is a blue state but Ehrlich was quite moderate and won every damned county except the city which was enough to give O'Malley the win. O'Mally has made it clear he does not like firearms and most people are saying assault rifles will be the first to go, then high capacity magazines, and then handguns all together. This was just a few votes away from happening a few years ago in Maryland; now we have a governor who is strongly anti-gun. If I purchase a firearm now, under legislation it will likely work like this. No more guns come into Maryland; those currently in it will remain legal under what I believe is called the Grandfather Clause.

:spyder: Glock 19 9mm. Versatile, hi-cap, small enough for concealed carry, large enough to mount a surefire,simple manual of arms,nearly indistructable, modular parts,proven reliability out of the box, it's a great gun! :spyder:

I shot a Baby Eagle earlier today and while it was nice, it did not appease to me as much as a Glock and getting parts from IMI may suck. I found the Glock easiest to use, most durable finish, by far the easiest gun I have ever cleaned, and as ugly as it was it had a visual appeal to me as it fits like a glove in my relatively smaller hand. So I bought the Glock 19 today...the Mark III, brand new. Now I have to wait 8 damned days. For everyone saying mags can be bought for 20 bucks, I am guessing you are talking about the 10 capacity and not the 14 the G19 holds? Otherwise, I suck at research!

Tomorrow, me and my buddy are going to go play with a .44 magnum and a few Sigs to help pass the time.

I am also looking at buying a pair of Wiley X B2 glasses as my bud has the M Oklees or whatever they are called and my Walmart eye protection isnt doing justice. Any thoughts?

I am thrilled to see so many responses...I feel special inside now. Thanks everyone! :D

[poodle]

i would agree sigs are good guns i myself have abused a few , however they will not hold up as long as glocks in the long run or be as reliable overall. i would also point out there is a differance between a accidental discharge and a negligent discharge which i believe you confused about.

[kbuzbee]

There are a handful of them who are championing the America our FF brought forth.

Who (IYO) would be on that list??

You don’t think it’s “bad enough yet”? What do you think it would take to make it “bad enough”? (These aren’t rhetorical questions. I am interested in your opinion.)

I really think that, as long as folks can get out of bed in the morning, stop by Starbucks on the way into work, catch a football game on Sunday and take a trip to the beach without (serious) fear of dying to do it... As long as they can live their perception of a "normal life", they will be unwilling to put their life on the line. Your (and Y's) perception that 'the time is past' may well be right as far as a 'let's fix this while we still can' perspective but I doubt that is the common perception. There are always people who perceive the coming storm earlier than "the masses" do.

Subtlty is the Devil's ally. When things change slowly, people's expectations adapt. Then one day, you wake up in **** and wonder how you got there.

To your question, I think if people could not live the life they expect "something" would happen. What??? I suppose ideally there would be visionary leaders who would pull the country together (as in the American Revolution). More likely an "every man for himself (no gender implication)" attitude would prevail and chaos would ensue. Maybe I just made your point :eek: ?

From some of the things that have happened in the period of the last two administrations, I would say that it’s been “bad enough”.... It just seems like little more than “chest beating to me.

Sadly, you may well be right. I dearly hope not.

Ken

[Trihonda]

i would agree sigs are good guns i myself have abused a few , however they will not hold up as long as glocks in the long run or be as reliable overall. i would also point out there is a differance between a accidental discharge and a negligent discharge which i believe you confused about.

I'm not sure why you would think a Glock will outlast a Sig? Their longevity is one of their strengths. I read a G&A article around 6 years ago rating the best .45 cals. They tested 7 or 8 of the top manufacturers out there, and used brand new guns for all makes, except the Sig. Their test gun didn't arive on time, so they used another Sig they had previously used in a 10,000 rd firing test (that also ranked the Sig top). They bench fired all 8 .45s, with all kinds of ammo/loads/distances. The Sig beat them all, hands down. With tighter groupings and less FTFs (failure to fires) than any other manufacturer. The article discussed how most handguns have a frame & barrel life somewhere around 5000 rounds, when tolerences start to get larger with metal on metal wear (with noticeably diminushed accuracy). The fact the Sig won this test (with such tight groupings) AFTER having 10,000 rounds already fired through it was something that amazed the G&A editors. And me too. I've owned many different HGs, and keep coming back to the Sigs for my personal and prefessional carry.

Now, you said I'm confused about the AD issue. Well, I'm referring to the officers that had ADs, such as when cleaning or handling their weapons, thinking the safety was on (when it was not). I know several retired co-workers with ADs (long ago)... Having DA and no safety is one less thing the officers have to think about. Now, negligent handling, such as unintentional firing of your weeapon in the field (at someone) is a whole different story (that I wasn't talking about). This is more associated with the "New York" trigger discussion, designed to prevent NDs when drawing down on someone... . However, I am not a fan of the heavy trigger pull. I'd hate to have my partner unable to pull the trigger when it counts (and I'd like them to be accurate). Glocks may have had some impact on NDs, but thats not what I said in my earlier piost (this is a whole different discussion). I'm not confused. Please stop assuming such. Blah! :rolleyes: