You ever been shot back at???
Range accuracy better not be expected in a gun fight, and if you already know from experience that you'll get that type of accuracy in a gun fight, then you might as well carry a .22... properly placed, it's a killing round too... like I've already said, make mine a .45.

Troy

Shot at...... as a matter of fact yes I have....twice .

Luckily only small fragments hit.......but they still burn like a S...O...B...

(That brings back memories......stepped on a booby trap too, I don't know which hurts more steel spike vs metal frags.)

And yes I am thankful I had my PFK with me. In those days I packed First Aid Kit in an old metal box that "Band-AIDS came in.

Huh. OK, I should have said, as far as I know, there has only been one documented case that I know of the Glock had looked into.

BUT, I think any attempt to blame the design of the firearm is looking in the wrong direction. Proper examination of these cases, and a "gun writer" usually lacks the technical means to carry out in the metalurgical and mechanical sense, would most likely point to the ammunition. Manufacturers develop thier firearms for a specific pressure range. Exceed that at your own risk- it's like putting av gas into your car.

One fast note about "gun writers"" their job is sell copy, just like any other writer. They are experinced shooters, but how many of them understand what is actually happening when a trigger is squeezed? There are lots of automotive writers out there, and they are usually pretty good at saying what failed when a car breaks, becuase they are often trained as mechanics. But how many of them are qualified to design a subsystem of a car or determine the exact nature of a failure? How many of them understand the physics and chemistry of combustion? Gun writers are the same way. Most of them just know that A + B = C. They don't know what the + and = means, it just happens automagcially. Anyone who describes a catstrophic failure as a "kaboom", or shortens it to the cutesy "kB" is loosing credability in my eyes. <rant off>

As I stated elsewhere, there are thousands of .40 caliber Glocks in federal service in the US, and tens of thousands in state, county and local law enforcement and private service in this country. If there was a problem inherient with the design, it would have recieved a much wider publication. These agencies understand that all bets are off with the manufacturers if you run +P+ (and in many cases, +P) loads through thier fire arms. Not only are the firearms not designed to handle the materials stress of these loads, they are not mechanically designed to handle them. I've seen plenty of non-catastrophic failures with auto loaders with higher than standard pressure loads, that don't repeat when the firearm is switched to standard pressure ammunition.

Add in the quality control issues inherient with personally developed handloads, particularly too much powder and/or air within the cartidge, or using to hot a powder. I AM a little suprised by the number of catastrophic failures, in all honesty, but given the numbers of Glocks sold, it isn't that big. But I've seen just as many catastrophic failures from the Beretta and some other 9mms, and with a 1911, with +P and +P+ ammo, usually from reloaders, in terms of either there when it blew or handled the remains.

Other than barrel obstructions, I can not think of how the catfail with the G34 mentioned in the document you sent a link to could have happened with standard pressure ammo, unless there was a mechanical failure, most likely a failure to go fully into battery. Thats a wear and tear related issue. Competitive shooters go through more than a thousand rounds a week between compition and training. Guns do wear out, but the average shooter isn't going to put that much wear on the gun.

The point that Mr. Spier raises about feed ramps was the source, IIRC, about the upgrade about 10-15 years ago. Not upgrading that would be like not noticing if your car had something similiat to it. Reading the article reminded me about that. At this point, I can't think of a reason why a Glock would be in service that had that problem unless the metal itself had just erroded away from usage, and it shouldn't happen AT ALL with any Glock manufactured from around that date, which would include all but the first run or two of .40 S&W models, the distributors of which were notified, and the message passed on to the purchasers at the address on the 4473. Failure to pass it on would just be unprofessional.

Again, so long as the firearms are being properly maintained, there is no statistically significant chance of a inherient mechanical fault for a modern production Glock, or any other firearm from a reputable manufacturer, to suffer a catastrophic failure other than barrel obstruction or an ammunition failure. And bad ammo is possible from the factory. In the case of the G34 that blew with factory practice ammo, I would suspect that is where the fault lies.

Moral of the story- don't try to make your cartridge something it isn't, and stay up to date on the data on your firearm from the manufacturer. Have a GUNSMITH, not just the guy at the gun store, check it out ever few thousand rounds. Don't mess with the ammo, or try the cute and tricky ammo. Don't pull and swap parts unless you know what you are doing and are willing to take the risk. Abuse you gear, and it will fail. When it fails, it won't be happy. If it is really unhappy, it might try to go out laughing by taking you with it.

I think you missed my point. If you can hit a necco wafer the first time every time, you can hit something important the first time every time. Which means you walk away, no matter what you are using, so long as it has enough oomph to get through the skull. I'd rather see someone using a .32 ACP and be able to do that than someone using a .45 ACP and break a clay at the same range half the time.

Shot placement counts a lot more than the size of the lead you are throwing.

Sorry did miss your point....and you are right there is a lot to be said about accuracy. "Spray and Pray" comes to mind.

This debate brings to mind three historical events that changed policy with Military and LE.

The first was the ineffectiveness of 38 cal (9mm) ball ammo on stopping Moro warriors, hence the development of the 45 auto shooting ball ammo.

The second was the miserable performance of half a dozen FBI agents shooting high capacity 9mm autos with JHP ammo into two thugs in Florida (shot placement notwithstanding the scrutiny). Said firefight ending when one of the LEs pumped a few 12 gauge slugs in the uncooperative crooks. Shortly thereafter LEs were packing 45 autos.

Army decision to go to 9mm Baretta shortly thereafter instead of the tried and true 45 auto because the 9 was a more manageable sidearm in the less skilled, less trained hands of the new infantry and certain non-combatants. Hmm, less than 80 years after learning their lesson in the PI, they take the giant step backwards once again using 38 cal ball ammo.

The 10mm was a pretty good compromise. It had the down range trajectory and energy retention of the 357 mag full throttle loads, but the mass and smack more approaching the 45. It would certainly slap you around, though. I think it was women LE who made the case for the 40 S&W, as the 10mm was just too much for them.

History has proven, time and again, that unless you get the 38 cals up to 357 magnum velocities, they just don't work as manstoppers, all things being equal. A torso shot from a 9mm just won't have the same effect as a similarly placed heavier 40. That's been proven and generally accepted as gospel amongst the professionals. Most of the LE departments I've worked with switched from 9 to 40 a long time ago and none have gone back as far as I know. Sure 9 is gonna be cheaper than 40 for practice, but I prefer to do most of my handgun range time with a 22 anyways, the skills are pretty much the same. As far as handloading goes, that is about the least important argument to be brought up in a self defense case. Either your shooting was justified or it wasn't, and those little nuances are trivial and won't be changing anyone's mind on the bench or in the box. They're gonna look at you and the only thing they will think is whether this person needed to be shot or not. You could've used a shotgun shooting slugs on him and that would've been far worse than any handgun. Whatever "pre-meditation" claim some dufus attorney is gonna throw out there evaporates when I say that I handload for economy, which is a verifiable fact, and not some legalese conjecture. Juries and judges prefer facts to assertions.

The only seal I know much prefered a hush puppie 45 as his sidearm. 9mms don't do nearly as well at subsonic loadings.

True, but it can also be said that a chest hit, anywhere in the chest, is going to stop the bad guy... with a .45. Can the same be said with a 9MM??? The body trunk is a lot bigger target than the head, and as to first shot accuracy, again, I'd like to point out that necco wafers don't cause the stress that WILL effect your first shot the way a target that's shooting back at you... not to mention that the necco wafer's not moving like the bad guy may be... now if you can hit a necco wafer in the air with a pistol... <img src="/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Troy

Just to add fuel to the fire:
Several years back, a web site, (now lost to memory but I'll look again), kept track of "stops" in shootings. Interestingly enough, the highest percentage, i.e. greatest stopping power, were the 357 Magnum w/ 125 gr JHP and the .40 S&W auto. They surpassed even the 45 ACP and .44 Magnum. As everyone seems to agree, the 9X19 was not particularly impressive.
One other reason given for the US military's conversion to 9mm was to comply with NATO standards.
Opinions are nice, but numbers count.

"There is nothing so frightening as ignorance in action."

Whoa...thanks for all the feedback!

-There is a shooting range just over the state line I mean to check out ASAP. 'Try before you buy' sounds like a good idea to me.

-Hearing so much about how reliable and durable Glocks are pointed me in that direction for a new auto when the 'gun bug' bit me again. That and the end of the high-capacity magazine ban...for now!

Actually for reliability and simplicity I was at first considering a hammerless snub .38. But I already own a Bersa Thunder .380, so the 'pocket pistol' niche should be covered. With a mid-size Glock I figure to have something more 'substantial' for defense and concealment.

Like I said, I was leaning to the .40, but after reading here, the 9 sounds like a better choice overall. Ammo availability hit me later on. And the 3 extra rounds can't hurt!

But I can hopefully get a chance to try some different ones, just to make sure.

If I may paraphrase famed former L.A. D.A. Hamilton Burger " Both defense and prosecution have a moral duty to determine the truth. In the end both work together." This was stated after resolving a murder case involving the forged portrait of a woman . The defense lawyer retired to a vineyard.