My understanding is the FBI initially wanted to simply buy Gen 4 19s and 17s off the existing contract. They were already buying 9mm Glocks for agents who had difficulty with .40 caliber.Originally Posted by Sigfan26
Apparently this was protested as somehow violating Federal Acquisition Regulations, hence the requirement for an RFI and testing.
I've shot their COF before. The requirement to use the 10/12 round mags is just for the PQC. For reloads on the street on/off duty they can carry G17/19 mags and would be stupid not to IMO. They used to be allowed to reload baby Glocks with full size mags during the PQC but that was verboten several years back.
Also, every handgun their agents buy for duty use must have at least 4 mags. They can't send in a gun for PM without them.
They also wanted to have a contract in place. There hadn't been one in several years. It was also a great opportunity to force those changes and get a gun that has the newest, best technology and is configured how they want. To ask Glock to modify their design otherwise would have been a challenge. Now they have a duty gun that has the features they want and has been vetted with their new duty ammo.
Very good info. Thanks for straightening it out.
Last edited by Sigfan26; 07-07-2016 at 07:03 AM.
Thank you for correcting me. I was unaware.
While I'm a jaded government official myself, and have been terribly disappointed in the contracting process in some instances, I will have to say that, as procurements go, this one was pretty damned far from a "circle jerk." Having talked with some of the folks involved in the early stages, it seemed like their program was pretty logical and fair. At a certain point, it was a near certainty that the P320 was going to get the nod, but obviously Glock came back hard and fought to win it. Net result - those of us who HATE the finger grooves on G19s will soon have an option to get one without grooves from the factory.
So, the FBI will get new 9mms that fit into existing holsters and use existing mag pouches, at a fair and reasonable price. Other agencies that want to jump onto the contract will be able to piggy-back. I see it as a fairly "win" situation for everyone involved, and I am NOT a GLOCK fan...
FWIW, I think that the FBI failed in an important part of the process. Of all the minute details they specified, they should have specified a design that does not require that you pull the trigger to disassemble the pistol. There are way too many ND's from the field strip requirements inherent in the current Glock design. For a weapon you know you'll be issuing to non-gun people, it seems really short sighted.
- It's not the odds, it's the stakes.
- If you aren't dry practicing every week, you're not serious.....
- "Tache-Psyche Effect - a polite way of saying 'You suck.' " - GG
I agree to some extent, but, isn't this ultimately a training issue? What is the VERY FIRST STEP in disassembling ANY pistol? Clearing it. I don't know of any pistol in the world that recommends disassembling a loaded weapon. If we would train folks on the basics, this would become a major non-issue, but, again, most LE administrator types are only interested in what costs the least, and keeps the most officers/agents "qualified" with the least effort.
While I would have loved to see GLOCK come out with a reliable, credible method to release the tension on the striker without pulling the trigger, I don't know how they'd do it without a darned near complete re-do of their pistol.
And, again, of all the guns I use on a regular basis, my GLOCKs are the ones I love to hate the most, so, not a fanboi...
People are fallible, even the bestest most trained people ever remain fallible. Every damn one of us is one moment of inattention away from an oops, firearm, car, cook stove, what have you.
Equipment is designed with that in mind, or should be. It's a sliding scale, and reasonable mind can differ in where to draw it. We can't ignore the human side of the equation as "training issues" some, though.
If you are issuing a pistol to non-gun people, then don't issue a glock in the first place. It's safety-in-the-trigger action is not ideal for untrained people.
If they guys are properly trained (as it should be with a glock, anyway) then this is a non issue.
I never had any problem training people on the glock disassembly procedures, they all had it very clearly ingrained in a very short time. The problem is not new shooters or knowledgeable ones, but perhaps the people with training scars and not very well ingrained safety rules.
Reply With Quote