It's the water.Originally Posted by TGS
It's the water.
There's nothing civil about this war.
Slight derail, but since it is Border Patrol, that P2000 would be in .40, and is detested by every BP agent I've talked to. They don't hate it because it's a bad gun, they hate it because it is a small/light gun paired with the hot .40 Border Patrol load. It's just not even remotely enjoyable to shoot, and that is coming from guys who love shooting.
TY83544
So what happens when you are trying to reholster as fast as possible as you are kicking some dude who is fighting with your partner so you can go hands on ?
Not a theoretical question.
I was told that HK sponsored shooters can't say anything like that about any HK pistols.
Yes, I agree, I sold my .357 P2000 within 2 months of buying. But I thought it was because I am old and weak. Those quotes that TGS posted sounded like they came from men of steel.
Last edited by YVK; 05-16-2017 at 09:21 AM.
Doesn't read posts longer than two paragraphs.
I have to admit, when I saw the first post in this thread I thought it was about thumb-COCKING the hammer and I thought to myself "wait a minute...".
Especially now that I carry AIWB I always control the hammer on my 1911 while holstering even though I know the thumb safety is engaged.
Certainly a lot of logic errors in the quotes the OP cited. It is easy to dismiss this type of comment.
But I think it is fair to talk about how putting the thumb on the hammer or Gadget can help and how it can be useless. They do not make the gun safe. They can be used during the holster process to remove one way the gun can go off when it's not supposed to. That will work, if you make it a procedure and follow it. Put another way, is there a potential problem in saying, "Now that I have The Gadget I will switch and carry my Glock AIWB"?
Maybe.
Every time I hear that I wonder what safety procedures the person used with their pistol to avoid shooting themselves in the thigh, ass, pelvis, etc when carrying other than AIWB. Often I find the person using the TDA or DA pistol for the hammer or a Glock is functionally using the same, "Luck" as the person spitting out silly gun bravado as quoted by the OP. For that person I agree, the hammer or gadget is functionally useless.
For a person using a good safety procedure but feels the hammer or gadget can make them a bit more safe, they should buy it. As long as the Gadget doesn't change the function of the gun in a negative way, why not use it? When Is the G43 gadget coming out??? LOL!
We kind of merge the idea of the gadget and hammer for the safety discussion. There is a class of shooter that uses the hammer over the Glock for just that reason. For some of them they will freely admit that they shoot the Glock better but carry a hammer for safety. They've short changed their ability to perform during a gunfight for safety. For them we can all cheer, "Buy a Gadget! Buy a Gadget!"
What you do right before you know you're going to be in a use of force incident, often determines the outcome of that use of force.
Ask and it shall be delivered...
Well I can't give you an exact reason, but I can contextualize it.
I like thumb check, I have practiced it for awhile now. When I was down at Glynco and they taught a slightly different (better I think) technique, I had a moment of resistance. [thumb check with thumb on both hammer, and back of the slide to ensure slide is in battery as well as hammer is controlled/down]. Even knowing right off that it made more sense, I reacted negatively for some reason... and that was coming from a believer in the technique.
The other facet is that picking a post by a prominent figure condemning the gadget as pointless as a place to promote the thumb check is like going to a vegan market and setting up a stall to sell veal and bacon... they are not your target audience, and they are probably not going to spend a whole lot of time critically thinking about the value of the technique or the gadget necessary to make it work on a Glock.
I freely admit that I have not given as much critical thinking to some techniques advocated by Todd, even though I make an effort to approach gun related things with critical thinking and the like. Knowing that, I can't overly fault someone who likes another instructor and takes what they say without a huge amount of introspection.
I haven't seen that post. Does Pincus have any credibility? Training people to purposely flinch and raise their hands before shooting is the stupidest thing I have ever seen in firearms training.
“There is no growth in the comfort zone.”--Jocko Willink
"You can never have too many knives." --Joe Ambercrombie
We don't need to turn this into an attack thread on an individual.
Reply With Quote