A noted expert in the field of supermarket loyalty cards asks “So, if the Glock really is so good, then why does no other army want them”, which aside from being totally untrue is kind of a silly way to measure the worth of a service pistol. The problem with asking why the military doesn’t carry pistol X is that the primary service weapon of a military soldier is a rifle, and the pistol is sort of an afterthought.
A much better judge of the worth of a pistol is the number of agencies that use a pistol who have selected the Glock as their issue sidearm – which in the United States would take months and a lot of space to list all the agencies that issue Glock’s to their employees. FBI, DEA, countless local law enforcement agencies issue Glock’s to their employees; it’s so great because it’s essentially a revolver. It’s simple to learn, easy to use, and for most users fits their hand pretty well.
Had a 22 SAS guy in the store some time ago that I had some very interesting conversations about gear and guns with. When asked if he liked the Hi Power the SAS is so famous for running, he just kind of chuckled and said “We used it because that’s what was standard issue at the time.” Whether an Army uses or does not use a particular gun has little to do with whether it is a great gun or not.
Y’know, I sold all my Glocks because they just don’t make me feel all warm and snuggly the way a crazy-expensive hand-built custom pistol does.
But I don’t understand the rabid hate. I mean, say what you want about the drastic plastic, but they do work. Even if they are all full of toaster parts.