Leave Glock Alone!
The other day Derek, The Packing Rat mentioned that he’d gotten his Glock specifically because some cops of his acquaintance had opined that no civilians should own Glocks — or any non-double-actions for that matter — because they’re too dangerous. These cops would get all hinky if they saw a civilian with a Glock. “Only Ones,” anyone?

Well, that night Derek permitted me to inspect his Glock. My Glock experience is limited to say the least — I’d previously shot a .45 Glock more than fifteen years ago, and it was okay, but nothing special. But at SHOT Show 2010 I really really liked the Gen 4 9mm Glock I shot at Media Day. Easy to shoot, fit my hand very well, ridiculously accurate offhand. So I wanted to see what the earlier-generation Glock felt like, and Derek’s Glock 19 felt very compact in my hand. I was quite surprised — I’ve been assuming for years that Glocks were about as thick in the grip as a Beretta 92, which is really too thick of a shooting handle for my wife.
See, I’ve been musing about standardizing on something other than the Beretta 92/Bersa Thunder 380 platforms for our home
defense guns. (Those work well together because the controls are virtually identical.) Glocks came to mind. I like the way you can use the 17’s magazines in all three sizes in exigent circumstances. And the grip would fit her hand quite well, I think. But I mentioned this to the wife, and she said “ooh, too thuggish.” Which is of course a completely irrational, biased opinion, just like the cops above.
We don’t have any gun-rental places nearby, so (sigh) I suppose I’ll just have to buy one so she can try it out.
Any Glock owners want to answer this question for me: if you hold your Glock with your finger off the trigger, and you were severely startled, do you think your natural hand-clenching motion would be enough to fire a round unintentionally?

