Marswolf

Compared to a Glock, this is an experience in good engineering design.

One could do worse - trust me. BTW, without the white tail tip, the little black one looks a lot like my "Chihuahuasand" Ranger.

Or maybe a pound (more or probably much less) of flesh? Heh...heh...

If they did, they would find an inane way to debate it into nonsense.

Have owned a couple of Glocks. Don't have them no more.I was smart enough to trade them. I don't mind being jumped on. When you have a reasonable and cognitive position, you expect to be attacked by the weak-of-mind. I do appreciate your support though. I occasionally teach local SWAT teams in the noble art of house clearing, plus some interesting other stuff that we can't talk about. Of course you have to have weapon mounted lights and such. But I try to show why that is a really bad idea for many scenarios. It is not uncommon to see the guy who he thinks is the alpha zit-face try the "my testosterone is better than your testosterone" approach in discussion. After the "old guy" sits him on his ass, gasping for breath once, most of the other guys decide to listen. Attacks don't bother me. But if someone points out that I'm wrong, I always admit it.

You know, O. J.'s jury not withstanding, the criminal juries I've been on had a lot of common sense. Most have a friend of a cop who knows how they operate in real life. Most have a friend of a druggie or drunk who knows how that works. In short, most juries have a sense of reality and how cops support their case and sometimes lie about stuff in order to get a conviction. Generally, it comes down to the believability of the defendant. Boy, the O. J. jury was dumb.

That sounds correct. I've never watched Black Hawk Down, although I did copy the disc - err - I mean I can check a copy out of the library.

Any handgun, for proper use, requires that the user understand the limitations of the weapon as well as the positive aspects. Each weapon has it's positive aspects and it's negative aspects. If you are unable to understand those aspects, you shouldn't be packing. I just see some brand users as less able to understand the limitations and deal with reality as reality.

A valid point. But one I would have ignored as part of a jury.

That was a pleasant diversion....

OK, I read it. Yes the Arkansas Tech President is an idiot.

Must be a lot of interest in this.

Kidd, you aren't old or weird enough to know Zappa.

Actually, I don't disagree with you. I think Glocks are very good duty weapons for law enforcement. I just think there are better choices for the public to carry for protection and general shooting.

Here's an interesting story from about ten years ago about Leinad: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A05E5DB153BF93BA15750C0A96E958260 BTW, the company was owned by Wayne Daniel and his (ex?) wife. Leinad is Daniel spelled backward. They also made a five shot 410/45 Colt pistol that works like this .22. There is also a connection to Cobray for Mr. Daniel. Here is a legal proceeding that involves Cobray, SWD, and the Daniels: http://ca10.washburnlaw.edu/cases/1998/02/96-8120.htm Fascinating history. Here is a little writeup from the POS VPC. http://www.vpc.org/studies/smalrpb.htm

You have to remember that HP rounds, of any caliber, have a couple of functions. They expand to increase the size of the wound channel and that expansion also dissipates energy to prevent over penetration. In urban settings, you don't want the round to go through the BG and hit people behind him. Personally, I'd probably use the white box stuff for more moderately priced practice and buy something better for actual protective carry. After all, your life depends on the quality of the ammunition. Normally, unless someone else is buying the ammo, I use FMJ for practice that has the same recoil feel as the HP stuff I carry.

I bought two for very rational reasons. They were never-the-less poor choices. But I will still contend that most people buy them because they don't know an y better.

If they rule against us, we will ignore them.

I apologize. That was snotty. But I do know about them. Honestly, they are add-ons for faults in Glock design.

I know all about them. Just buy a better handgun and you won't have to worry about it.

I don't have a problem with them not having a safety. I think that is a very good protocol for people in professional law enforcement. My problem is with Glock groupies who think they have the best weapon just because "the cops" use it. From what I've seen, that is the basic reason people buy Glocks. There is a very good reason it is a good weapon for the cops. Unfortunately there is a very good reason why it is a very bad weapon for "the public" and that public is unable to comprehend that. I strongly suspect that most Glock owners buy them for status reasons rather than rational reasons, since there are virtually no rational reasons for them to own them. Glock is just a really dumb choice for most people to use for self-defense. There are other poor choices, but Glock tops the list of essentially decent guns on the list. The others are names like Lorcin, Ravin, etc.

One born every minute. : devil: Only real problems with a Glock are in using non-standard ammo (kaboom) and pretending that it is somehow safe when it isn't (with a lot of evidence to show that). Glocks just require more discipline. It should be marketed as a professional duty weapon rather than as a public carry weapon. It is a very good duty weapon. It is a very poor public carry weapon.

What's the other name? Baghdad on the Mississippi?

YOU MUST BE KIDDING!!!!! Just read the Extreme Shock website http://www.extremeshockusa.com/. It's The World's Most Advanced Ammunition!!!!!!! Just ask them!!!!! Hell, if you shoot someone in the chest with their FANGFACE 380, it will make their head explode.