Why US Special Forces don't carry Glocks?

[Irfan]

I've seen only 1911's, HK's, Berettas and Sigs but what about Glocks? Also I heard that Glocks failed some US Navy SEAL tests. So is there anyone who can explain this?

[Stainless]

They don't look as kickass as Berettas 1911s, HKs and Sigs.

Actually, no idea.

[Tamara]

The U.S. military is not keen on issuing striker-fired weapons (whose cocked status cannot be verified visually) with no manual safeties. Heck, the reason the 1911 has a grip safety was because of the Army's demands; it was added over J.M. Browning's protests.

The Army was investigating DA autos long before the XM9 trials because in addition to the 1911's useage in several heroic situations, it also had the dubious distinction of inflicting more casualties on its operators than on the enemy in almost every war it was used in. Hand a bunch of 18-20 year-old kids, most of whom have never operated a handgun before, a pistol that can only be decocked by pulling the trigger, and you are going to see a lot of creased buttocks and holed feet.

[BigG]

From Tamara

...the dubious distinction of inflicting more casualties on its operators than on the enemy in almost every war it was used in. Hand a bunch of 18-20 year-old kids, most of whom have never operated a handgun before, a pistol that can only be decocked by pulling the trigger, and you are going to see a lot of creased buttocks and holed feet.

Ouch! I hurt myself laughing!

[Rovert]

LOL!

Tamara, that's hilarious, and I definitely see the irony. But I tend to disagree with the conclusion.

Of course we'd have more documented cases of self-inflicted injury, than we have of confirmed kills using a 1911. In wartime, on a battlefield, the enemy isn't going to stop what they're doing to perform an autopsy on fallen soldiers, so they can count how many .45ACP slugs are in a cadaver, and provide that data to an enemy. No pulse, dig a hole, cover it up, move on.

I strongly suspect that there are an enormous number of actual kills attributable to the 1911... more than we can conceive of... but because it's not the enemy's job to provide statistical information to us during armed conflict, we have only the documented cases of self-inflicted wounds to rely upon.

To use that information as a metric, would be like trying to count how many successful car trips are taken, by the number of accidents attributable to drunk drivers that crash.

In marketing parlance, this is referred to as 'sampling error', where we're looking in the wrong place for data, and on the back end, it necessarily obviates that there will be an interpretation error when deriving a conclusion.

Do you agree with me?

[Tamara]

... Rovert.

I have to agree with you that their methodology was suspect, although I do believe they arrived at the right conclusion.

I think DA/SA pistols with visible hammers and decockers are far more "idiot-resistant" (as nothing is truly "idiot-proof") than traditional SA designs or striker-fired types like the Glock.

[Rovert]

Tamara, if the goal was to find a gun that offered more safeties, and/or more ways to confirm weapon status, then I agree wholeheartedly. One of the reasons I bought the P99 instead of the Glock was that I didn't like the idea of not knowing what the status of the striker was.

I guess that makes me one of the idiots.

But, for the Army to conclude that there were more self inflicted wounds than intentional kills, based on absence of evidence, and a preponderance of internal documents, in an organization that has a penchant for paperwork and bureaucracy, is sheer stupidity. No wonder they need all the margin for error in a handgun they can get. It was so the idiots in the STATISTICAL office don't accidentally shoot themselves!!!

[Tamara]

I guess that makes me one of the idiots.

Hey, you're in good company: you're talking to someone so thoroughly conditioned that she won't touch the trigger on a Glock frame stripped for cleaning!

[Arizona Eric]

Rovert, you can tell the position of the Glock striker by observing the trigger position. Trigger back equals striker "non-cocked," trigger forward (in firing position) equals striker "cocked."

Maybe not as nifty as some little button sticking out, but it works.

[rock_jock]

AZ Eric,

That is exactly how I check my Glock, and it is easier than a visual indicator because I can touch the side of the trigger in the dark and tell if it cocked or not.

[Zundfolge]

Thats one of the little things I really like about my Steyr M40 over a Glock, the "Loaded Chamber Indicator" on the back of the gun is a feature that Glock should consider employing in their guns (for one thing you can't see the trigger if it's in a holster).



When that little nubbin is popped out you have one in the pipe.

[Tamara]

Like many European pistols (including the P-series SIGs, Berettas, HK P7's, etcetera), the Glock uses the raised position of the extractor as a visual and tactile loaded chamber indicator.

But you're right, this is not visible in most holsters...

[One]

Just curious............. If its in a holster and you're carrying it, why wouldn't it be chambered(trigger forward)? I've carried a G17 as a duty weapon for going on 7 years now, and never have a doubt of my weapons condition. Besides if you have a thumb break holster, that little indicator is useful. Kinda blows concealed carry, when you have to unsnap and check the status of your weapon. And in most cases ie the Walther, that little button is not a chamber loaded indicator, so you may assume that your weapon is cocked, but is it chambered?

Be Safe
Mike

[Will Beararms]

The 1911 still has a strong following in those crowds. The design can take a 1000 round shooting session and not result in stoppages common to those designs with the large block in the chamber as it expands and hangs on the hood in the front of the slide area. (Per a SEAL once romantically involved with a family member)

[Redlg155]

Loaded chamber indicators are a neat thing to have, but do we really need them?

Any person who uses a weapon should know the condition of the weapon on his person 100% of the time. He should know the loaded status and how many rounds he has available. Should an individual recieve a weapon from another person, a safety check should be performed immediately to confirm the status of the weapon. So a loaded chamber indicator might be nice to know when someone is handing you a weapon, but you are going to check anyway....or at least I hope so!

DA/SA vs SA type weapons... For years the U.S. Military used 1911 autos as the standard sidearm. Did we have any serious safety issues with the 1911's? No. Are our soldiers getting "Dumber" and they can't handle a 1911? I hope not. So why the sudden push for a DA/SA weapon? I can understand the military wanting to standardize calibers to 9mm to ease logistic problems, but I do not understand changing to an entirely different weapons system.

It is not secret that the Military is afraid of giving its soldiers ammo, so it doesn't surprise me that its afraid of arming them with the best weapons available. If they let the "ground pounders" choose the weapons they want to carry instead of Beauracrats and Generals that have their own agenda choose the weapons, our military would more than likely be armed with different weapons.

It's no wonder why many of our Special Forces Teams are armed with non standard weapons. It's beacause they know what works best.

Good Shooting
RED

[mikey357]

No offense meant to any of the "Tupperware Tribe", but...the Glock IS NOT as "Idiot-proof" as the Beretta, Sig-Sauer, etc....lack of an external hammer, lack of a manual safety/decocker, etc....remember, we are talking issue weapon for the Military, after all...and they have NEVER BEEN enamored of the handgun especially, and don't put in the "Traing Time" with it that it would require, for whatever reason...lowest common denominator, and all that....mikey357

[Rovert]

One, yes, you're right. If you know the condition of your weapon when you put it in a holster, unless you hear a loud BANG, all things being equal, it shouldn't change.

There seems to be some confusion on the Walther P99. I'll try to clarify. There are a few indicators that are both visual, as well as tactile. One is the condition of the striker, which you already know is visible from the rear of the gun, but protrudes, so that you can feel it in the dark. There is also a chambered round indicator on the right of the slide that depresses, which is also visible with a red box, and easily felt in the dark.

Because of the unique DA/SA trigger mechanism, trigger position can be fully forward, even if decocked, yet still fired by a long travel pull. Or, you can set it to SA by bringing the trigger back halfway.

HTH.

[Gunhead]

"The 1911 still has a strong following in those crowds. The design can take a 1000 round shooting session and not result in stoppages common to those designs with the large block in the chamber..."

Don't make me laugh, the 1911 as a more reliable design than the SIG-Browning locking types! In an 1000 round test!

[Covert Mission]

I vote with those here who think one should know the status of one's own weapon, and if it's someone elses (or even your own), you trust but verify. Press check, press check, press check.

I wouldn't mind if the Glock had a chamber-loaded indicator, but it doesn't bother me one bit that it doesn't. Whether the Glock is idiot-proof... well, no gun is, period. Engage brain first.

[Will Beararms]

Gunhead I will make you laugh. Per the SEAL I refered to earlier, he expressed a preference for a loose, rattlle-prone 1911 capable of no more than average accuracy (3-4" at 25 yards).

Again, per this guy who I have known for several years, the 1911 design does not heat up after 700-1000 rounds when you've dropped it in beach sand and salt water like other pistols with the large square block in the chamber area like Glocks and Sigs. This is just what he said not me.

I can assure you of one thing, if the rnak and file of the US Military had a choice between the Beretta 9mm and a 1911 .45, the 1911 would get the nod every time.

[Will Beararms]

The 1911 has proven it can be stuck up over the opening of a trench or foxhole and be shot one handed with a semi-stable grip. I have proven it for myself.

Would you do the same with a light-weight polymer frame? The Glock has proven it's worth and it is the most profound advance in pistol design since the 1911 imho but it does have one short-coming: limp wristing.

[Tamara]

For years the U.S. Military used 1911 autos as the standard sidearm. Did we have any serious safety issues with the 1911's? No.

Er, actually, yes.

If you had a dollar for every unintentional *bang!* from when GI John Doe's thumb slipped off that hammer while decocking it since 1911, you could retire wealthy. The U.S. Army started looking at DA pistols in the mid-'60s for just this reason.

A pistol that requires you to pull the trigger on a live round to decock it is an invitation to AD's. Remember, you and I know the way to carry a 1911 is cocked and locked, but 99% of GI's carried it hammer down on a loaded chamber when in the field in wartime. An incident occurs causing a soldier to draw and fire two rounds, be it an uninvited guest in his foxhole or a hostile rat in his tent. After the incident is over, he goes to lower the hammer on the pistol and... well, you fill in the rest.

[Wild Romanian]

The U.S. military is not keen on issuing striker-fired weapons (whose cocked status cannot be verified visually) with no manual safeties. Heck, the reason the 1911 has a grip safety was because of the Army's demands; it was added over J.M. Browning's protests.

You goofed big time Tamara.

In fact it was exactly the opposite.

John Browning put the grip safety on first and then the military demanded the manuel safely. See the Biography of John Browning available from Browning Arms Co.. See page 293. There is even a big picture of the very first 1911 showing , guess what no manuel safety. W.R.

[T.Stahl]

I shot a pistol for the first time when I joined the Bundeswehr in '91. It was a P1 (gun formerly known as P38), one of these oh-so highly sophisticated DA/SA pistols with a safety that doubles as a decocker.
But due to our instructors' lack of proficiency with handguns and lack of training, I felt rather insecure with this gun and its many conditions and functions. Cocked and safety off, decocked and safety on, decocked and safety off.
I'm grateful that I never had to draw a P1 when I've been on guard at the gate.
"Oops, I need my gun - Oh, I forgot the safety - Maybe I should cock the hammer?"
(In retrospect, I think I better had carried condition 3, safety off)

My point is, I think de-cockers are superfluous. When I have a SA handgun and want to add some safety, I put the safety "on". When I have a DA/SA weapon, it will still go BANG when I pull the trigger, so why not use a conventional safety lever in the first place. And do I really need two trigger profiles? I don't.

Now I own a Glock and I feel more secure with it than with any other gun. Chamber a round and it's ready to fire. Finger off the trigger and it's safe. The only thing I could understand would be if someone felt the need for an additional manual safety.
In my opinion a visible hammer does not add the least bit of safety. A manual safety? Maybe - but it also adds potential confusion.

[Wild Romanian]

I rather suspect that some in the military are aware that striker fired guns do have weaker firing pin energy.

Look at the fired primer of any ammo fired from a Glock. The firing pin strike is very light with slight cratering around the indentation.

Now look at the same ammo fired in a hard hammer fired gun like a high power and see the very deep crater it leaves.

It does not take a genius to see that a good hammer gun with the proper spring in it is way more the reliable weapon in rough combat conditions of cold mud and just plain powder residue left in the gun.

AS a matter of fact on this very forum several months ago a police officer wanted to know what they could do about their glocks constantly misfiring when they were on their practice range.

Of course the post was soon forgotten by the Glock lovers. And everyone that posts anything less than praise for these weapons is called a liar on this forum. W.R.