The UK Telegraph published an article yesterday making a very large generalization that the “Glock pistol has been the weapon of choice for spree killers.” This is a ridiculous statement. The killer in Aurora, CO apparently did have a Glock 40 in his possession and another in his car. The killer in Norway did use a Glock 17 for some of the murders he committed as well. You can read their article and look at the laundry list of mass murderers and the weapons they used. Still, this is ridiculous. Could you say, “Pepsi” is the soda of choice for spree killers? Could you say spree killers all own Levi Jeans? Glocks are an extremely popular, and reliable weapon brand. To make such a generalization is only meant to harm a Corporation and to push an anti-gun agenda.
A Glock is simple, reliable and you can train a monkey to use it in just a few minutes… that’s why so many cop shows and movies use them. I think they are a great gun—however, my first choice would NOT be a Glock. As a matter of fact, since I retired from police work, the department hired a new chief- who is afraid of and hates guns. They hired me to work on stuff nobody else can figure out- but when I have to wear a uniform, the new chief wanted me to carry a “forty cal” and not my 1911 .45 because he’s afraid of them. I’ve used a 1911 in police work in one version or another for over 10 years and prefer it. So I could carry a Glock- and puke or he allowed me to use a Sig 226.
A Sig is more coplicated and most badguys can’t take the time to figure out how to use them…I used one called the “M11” for the Army and it’s OK.
As far as the UK news, they don’ t know beans about guns- so I’d just ignore them .
Well shows how little research they did for the article Glocks are not any more likely to be the weapon of choice for a killer than any other brand of handgun.