# WRONG GUN: Why The Most Popular Gun For Law Enforcement Is A Mistake



## Urinal Cake (Oct 19, 2013)

The Los Angeles Times has published an editorial this morning that is sure to cause some uncomfortable conversations (and more than a little denial) in law enforcement agencies around the country:

In terms of mechanical design, there are few flaws with Glock pistols. If a law enforcement officer, soldier or citizen does exactly what they are supposed to do all of the time with cyborg certainty, there will be no problems with the Glock or other popular pistols mimicking its basic design. Unfortunately, "RoboCop" is only a movie, and humans are liable to make similar mistakes over and over again.

The underlying problem with these pistols is a short trigger pull and the lack of an external safety. In real-world encounters, a short trigger pull can be lethal, in part because a significant percentage of law enforcement officers - some experts say as high as 20% - put their finger on the trigger of their weapons when under stress. According to firearms trainers, most officers are completely unaware of their tendency to do this and have a hard time believing it, even when they're shown video evidence from training exercises.

For more than 35 years, officer-involved accidental discharges with Glocks and Glock-like weapons have been blamed on a lack of training or negligence on the part of the individual cops. What critics should be addressing instead is the brutal reality that short trigger pulls and natural human reflexes are a deadly combination.
As the comments to the article clearly show, people are getting spun-up about the article, without really understanding it&#8230; or maybe they are simply in denial.

Mechanically, Glocks and similar pistols are incredibly solid and reliable designs. What they aren't is forgiving.

read more here:
https://bearingarms.com/bob-o/2015/05/08/wrong-gun-popular-gun-law-enforcement-mistake/


----------



## bigwheel (Sep 22, 2014)

Thats why all smart cops should be carrying DA Sigs. No safety needed. Same set of issues as a DA wheel gun but the trigger pull gets much easier after round one. Which is sorta like gravy.


----------



## SOCOM42 (Nov 9, 2012)

I will go along @bigwheel on this one.

I have carried a handgun for well over 50 years.

Most of those were/are Smith & Wesson or Colt, preferred the S&W revolvers or a 1911.

Today the threats have changed and the firepower had to evolve with it.

I carry a Sig 228 from fall to summer, then shift to a S&W 3913 LS, both are double action.

I have a Glock 17 and a 23 and I did not buy either,

I consider the Glock trigger dangerous and the trigger safety component useless.

I remember a officer from another department had an AD while holding a prisoner against a wall,

he blew out a kidney on the perp for a drunk and disorderly charge.

The guy got around a half a mill for it and was lucky to be alive, officer got fired.

The two I have sit with a loaded mag in but not chambered, if brought to action the trigger is the least concern.

I have others as go too's first in line.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

Glock has had a list of issues. They seems to get a pass on it for some reason. They are a very small percentage of the market. They made their name by selling to LE under cost then advertising how many LEO carried them. Glock is not the the holy grail of hand guns.


----------



## Annie (Dec 5, 2015)

They're not toys. Just keep the trigger finger where it belongs and it's not going to be a problem.


----------



## Camel923 (Aug 13, 2014)

I like Glocks. I also like 1911's and High Powers. I am not crazy about DA triggers unless a good smith has really worked them to my liking. Just my personal preference. @Annie is correct in that you do not engage the trigger until your ready to fire. Safety 101. You also do not point the barrel at anything your not willing to destroy.


----------



## jim-henscheli (May 4, 2015)

I generally carry a DA/SA auto, it was a sig 226, but I just started carrying an FNX9, and I like it a lot better. I just prefer Da/SA, but if I need something small, I might go with an XDS, because the striker fire has a lower bore axis AND less weight to absorb recoil.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

Camel923 said:


> I like Glocks. I also like 1911's and High Powers. I am not crazy about DA triggers unless a good smith has really worked them to my liking. Just my personal preference. @Annie is correct in that you do not engage the trigger until your ready to fire. Safety 101. You also do not point the barrel at anything your not willing to destroy.


Those rules are fine and well.
But when you are under stress and the adrenaline is really pumping, things may be different.


----------



## Hemi45 (May 5, 2014)

Sig's are awfully nice pistols, awfully nice. However the simplicity, reliability and ubiquitous nature of Glocks makes them a great choice for the zombie apocalypse


----------



## LunaticFringeInc (Nov 20, 2012)

No "real" external safety on a Glock has been my biggest sticking point, which is why I still carry 1911's...Gotta have a proper grip, gotta have a round chambered, gotta pull the trigger and you have to have the thumb safety off, things that give me a precious second or two to counter should someone wrestle my duty weapon from me or try to. Several cops here have put a crease down thier leg or spaced their toes further apart holstering thier duty Glocks. I just look at them and say "See, I told you so"! Oh the hateful looks I get when I say that to them...

When I was working security or took my CC class, no one in the group out shot me on the course of fire unless it was the instructor using a custom 1911...just sayin'


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

Until someone makes a 15 round revolver, I'll stick with my Glock.
Draw. Point. Shoot.
Just like a revolver, with a 6lb trigger pull.

We know officers already don't get enough training and range time, so how they screw up with a gun is hardly any justification for calling any gun's safety into question.

There is this idea among the "manual safety" crowd that the safety doesn't add any additional time to the shot. To this I say, "THAT'S BECAUSE YOU TRAINED WITH IT".
To the untrained, it can be a huge detriment, and even lead to the shooter taking rounds while trying to figure out why their gun won't fire. Remember, this is all under stress, just like these officers.
It's the exact same reason that people have negligent discharges with guns with no manual safety. Lack of training.

In the end, carry what YOU feel comfortable with.
And for the sake of all that is dear to you, TRAIN WITH IT OFTEN!!!


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

rice paddy daddy said:


> Those rules are fine and well.
> But when you are under stress and the adrenaline is really pumping, things may be different.


Indeed, and that thumb switch and proper grip might be a bit hard to find.


----------



## NotTooProudToHide (Nov 3, 2013)

As much as I'd like to dog pile on Glock I can't do it. They are solid pistols that are well designed and good shooters. In my opinion the problems listed in the article are training issues or crappy cops issues.


----------



## A Watchman (Sep 14, 2015)

Friends don't let friends shoot Glocks.


----------



## Chiefster23 (Feb 5, 2016)

I have taken formal training from a retired PA state cop. This gentleman also taught pistol shooting to state police trainees. He told us that some of the most unsafe gun handling he has seen is from police officers. Many (most) do not receive enough training. Many become so used to handling their guns that eventually they get stupid and start ignoring the basic rules. If you routinely wave your pistol around in an unsafe manor everyday, then of course you are going to do so again when under extreme stress.

Saying Glocks are unsafe because of a lack of a safety lever is like saying a Corvette is unsafe because it can go 150 mph.


----------



## dwight55 (Nov 9, 2012)

I would not carry a Glock for just about any amount of money offered if I had to carry it with one in the pipe.

I have long said it is an ignorantly designed piece of plastic crap, . . . that is inherently and demonstrably dangerous. 

A simple thumb safety could stop many of the "accidents" people have with them.

And to blame the departments for "lack of training" is (pardon the pun) nothing short of a cop-out. The proof is that the vast majority of said department DOES handle their weapon with safety, knowledge, and care. If not, . . . there would be daily shootings in the locker rooms and during arrests.

AND, . . . yes, . . . the Corvette is designed to go 150+ mph, . . . but it has a braking system that is split front and back, . . . if one fails, the other is still there, . . . and push come shove, there is still the "emergency brake". 

Were I asked by gun banners what I think is the single most dangerous gun on the market, . . . Glock would have first place, . . . hands down, no questions asked, . . . just plain junk.

May God bless,
Dwight


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

dwight55 said:


> I would not carry a Glock for just about any amount of money offered if I had to carry it with one in the pipe.
> 
> I have long said it is an ignorantly designed piece of plastic crap, . . . that is inherently and demonstrably dangerous.
> 
> ...


 Every weapon the Military ever gave me had a safety we trained to use it correctly never an issue.


----------



## tango (Apr 12, 2013)

Glocks are junk? Bullflop!!

Ya gotta be smarter than the gear you use


----------



## RUSH25 (Nov 20, 2015)

bunch of grandpas clinging to their blunderbuss'


----------



## RUSH25 (Nov 20, 2015)

Annie said:


> They're not toys. Just keep the trigger finger where it belongs and it's not going to be a problem.


exactly! nothing wrong with a Glock...


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

RUSH25 said:


> exactly! nothing wrong with a Glock...


 Well there is they have had a many trigger and function issues. They are a good firearm that is way over hyped.


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

I love my Glock 17 and it sleeps with me every night.


----------



## sideKahr (Oct 15, 2014)

For better or worse, I have never owned a Glock. The few times I fired one, I just didn't like the thickness of the grip. 

The complaint that a Glock is just a box fed revolver doesn't put me off at all, because I love revolvers and carry one. But the complaint that a Glock is a 1911 with the grip safety taped down, the thumb safety off, with a long hard trigger, might have some truth to it.


----------



## dwight55 (Nov 9, 2012)

sideKahr said:


> For better or worse, I have never owned a Glock. The few times I fired one, I just didn't like the thickness of the grip.
> 
> The complaint that a Glock is just a box fed revolver doesn't put me off at all, because I love revolvers and carry one. But the complaint that a Glock is a 1911 with the grip safety taped down, the thumb safety off, with a long hard trigger, might have some truth to it.


You need to be churched there sideKahr, . . . mentioning 1911 and glock in the same sentence is doggoned near sacreligious, . . . :vs_laugh:

And anyone who thinks a glock is a perfectly safe weapon, . . . well their ND or AD is coming, . . . we can just all hope and pray that at worst, . . . it is the big screen TV that gets shot.

May God bless,
Dwight


----------



## Chiefster23 (Feb 5, 2016)

Gentlemen! Please reread my post. I said A RETIRED STATE COP said that about cops. “Most cops” are his words, not mine. I figure he should know because; 1. He was a cop. 2. He trained state police. 3. He trained local cops. If you don’t like Glocks, fine. Don’t buy one. 
This thread was started by a posting of an article where the author didn’t like Glocks. Fine! That was that authors opinion. My retired state cop friend has his opinions too. They are both opinions. If Glocks were so unsafe, they would have been sued into oblivion long ago. I happen to like Glocks and I don’t have a problem with the lack of a safety. Apparently about half the police departments in the USA don’t either.


----------



## RUSH25 (Nov 20, 2015)

dwight55 said:


> You need to be churched there sideKahr, . . . mentioning 1911 and glock in the same sentence is doggoned near sacreligious, . . . :vs_laugh:
> 
> And anyone who thinks a glock is a perfectly safe weapon, . . . well their ND or AD is coming, . . . we can just all hope and pray that at worst, . . . it is the big screen TV that gets shot.
> 
> ...


Do you walk around trying to pull the trigger of an external safety gun? I don't get your angle... no weapon is perfectly safe if used incorrectly.


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

RUSH25 said:


> Do you walk around trying to pull the trigger of an external safety gun? I don't get your angle... no weapon is perfectly safe if used incorrectly.


True. Glocks sold today are a safe as any other firearm. If you do not know how to safely handle a particular firearm, then do not own it. I guess some folks do actually need multiple safties.


----------



## Steve40th (Aug 17, 2016)

Sigs are pretty damn nice. Why people dont like them is price only, IMHO. Glocks are cheaper, but work too. Sig P5/P,P228/6/9/7 or 239, for example just work, and work well.


----------



## Chiefster23 (Feb 5, 2016)

All manufacturers have their share of lemons. I had one sig that had numerous failure to fire malfunctions. After one trip back to the Sig service department and many calls to factory service reps, I traded it on a new Glock. Every bullet that went ‘click’ in that Sig, went ‘bang’ in my Glocks.


----------



## Steve40th (Aug 17, 2016)

Chiefster23 said:


> All manufacturers have their share of lemons. I had one sig that had numerous failure to fire malfunctions. After one trip back to the Sig service department and many calls to factory service reps, I traded it on a new Glock. Every bullet that went 'click' in that Sig, went 'bang' in my Glocks.


Which Sig? 938/238? Year made? Did they ever tell you what was actually wrong?


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

RUSH25 said:


> Do you walk around trying to pull the trigger of an external safety gun? I don't get your angle... no weapon is perfectly safe if used incorrectly.


 Seen a lot of things happen with firearms in my life. Stood in a motor pool and watched a SAW 249 fire 3 rounds with no one on the gun. Why ? Next question the SAW is full auto only why did it stop. Having a safety on a weapon does not mean you must use it at all times . It is there as a tool. Seen weapon go off when they hit the ground , when so many gun guru's will tell you it can't happen. Some of us have spent a lot of time armed and in rough conditions we are going to have a different view point . The 1911 45 was designed the way it was for a reason and it worked very well for many years , really still does.
My view on Glock has nothing to do with a safety or not . It is more on the hype. LEO in most place carry what they are told to carry not what they want. Glock sold to LE below cost to create a market . So saying how many LE carry a weapon is meaningless.
Just talked with the person that acquires the weapons for a local police department. He is given a list of what they think it must do options they would like and a budget. Guess witch one carries all the weight on what he purchases. Some of what we talked about was there are some of us that will donate generously to insure they have better.


----------



## modfan (Feb 18, 2016)

Just to stir it up a little. My hammer fired P95 is heavy as hell but, no matter how dirty or how many rounds in a row I've fed threw it. It always fires no matter how crappy the ammo and it's always as accurate as I am.


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

This article is pretty much spot on about Glocks.



> Glocks afford the operator much less of a psycho-physical barrier when pulling the trigger. Civilians and law enforcement alike seem to have more incidents with Glocks than other firearms. This is not primarily due to some danger inherent to the Glock's design. Rather, it's a function of probability. The sheer numbers of Glocks sold mean that there are many Glocks out there. Their low price, high availability, and iconic status mean that many new shooters acquire them, often as a first gun. If they don't know what they're doing and don't keep their fingers off of the triggers, the guns will fire. This is not the fault of the gun, which is doing what it was designed to do. This is the fault of the inexperienced operators.





> Despite all of this, Glocks are not unsafe. They don't go off when in proper condition unless the trigger is pulled. Hence, the first four rules of gun safety again are being ignored. Keep your finger off of the trigger!





> The biggest safety problem inherent to any Glock is the Glock user.


https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/gun-safety-glock-unsafe/


----------



## dwight55 (Nov 9, 2012)

RUSH25 said:


> Do you walk around trying to pull the trigger of an external safety gun? I don't get your angle... no weapon is perfectly safe if used incorrectly.


No I don't, . . .

But I do drive a Jeep with a split braking system, . . . as well as an emergency brake, . . . and unless your mount is related to Trigger, . . . you do the same.

My furnace has multiple safeties, . . . so, . . . yes, . . . if something is out of time, . . . out of place, . . . out of sequence, . . . it will not go boom and burn down the house.

Actually, . . . in all probability, . . . 95% of the appliances and accouterments in YOUR household also have multiple layers of safety, . . . to keep YOU safe from accidents and other things that occur.

The sure fire exception in your house probably is the Glock.

But tell me, . . . why have so many police depts gotten rid of them, . . . in favor of weapons having safety's or decockers or both???? Yeah, . . . especially when the new arms cost 2 or 3 hundred more, . . . y'know, . . . maybe, . . . just maybe, . . . might have something to do with the ND's and AD's and all the 9mm holes found in the metal lockers.

But, . . . to each his own, . . .

May God bless,
Dwight


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

Smitty901 said:


> Seen a lot of things happen with firearms in my life. Stood in a motor pool and watched a SAW 249 fire 3 rounds with no one on the gun. Why ? Next question the SAW is full auto only why did it stop. Having a safety on a weapon does not mean you must use it at all times . It is there as a tool. Seen weapon go off when they hit the ground , when so many gun guru's will tell you it can't happen. Some of us have spent a lot of time armed and in rough conditions we are going to have a different view point . The 1911 45 was designed the way it was for a reason and it worked very well for many years , really still does.
> My view on Glock has nothing to do with a safety or not . It is more on the hype. LEO in most place carry what they are told to carry not what they want. Glock sold to LE below cost to create a market . So saying how many LE carry a weapon is meaningless.
> Just talked with the person that acquires the weapons for a local police department. He is given a list of what they think it must do options they would like and a budget. Guess witch one carries all the weight on what he purchases. Some of what we talked about was there are some of us that will donate generously to insure they have better.


Amen, my brother.
Well said.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

dwight55 said:


> perfectly safe weapon


I think I've just read the absolute pinnacle of an oxymoron. Nobody should ever search for a safe weapon. It's a weapon.

Anyone who fears a Glock or finds them unsafe needs more training. Period.
All of the stupid analogies that keep getting thrown around about what things have safety mechanisms in them is pointless.
Appliances and cars have safety mechanisms because ignorant people(all of us) aren't experts with every piece of electronics and machinery we operate.
When it comes to carrying a gun, you damn well better be an expert, or you better not be carrying one until you are. It is *designed* to be a DEADLY WEAPON.
Be an expert or keep training until you are. And for the love of Pete, keep your deadly weapons AWAY from non-experts. That is YOUR responsibility, not theirs, and not the gun's.
End. Of. Story.


----------



## Steve40th (Aug 17, 2016)

Glocks as well as XDS didnt shoot or feel well in hand. Glock was pinching middle finger. It just didnt work for me.
I have used SIG 226, and that works well for me, so I train with it.


----------



## AquaHull (Jun 10, 2012)

I'm liking the XDm45 compact this month even though I was slinging lead with the Springer MilSpec yesterday. During the middle of firearm deer

I was using the G-Lock 19.4 for guard duty while reading "The Final Day" in front of the electric heater in the barn last night


----------



## Chiefster23 (Feb 5, 2016)

The Sig I was refering to was a P290R purchased maybe 4 or 5 years ago. Many failure to fire and some failures to eject. Sig claimed nothing was wrong with the weapon but I must use ‘premium’ ammo. I’m not rich enough to train firing 100 rounds of premium ammo each week. I practice with reloads and sometimes Blazer. The Sig did seem to run fine with the 100 or so rounds of Hornady Critical Defense I ran thru it but it was not reliable in practice sessions. I had no faith in the gun for everyday carry. Before you jump on me for my reloads, I must again state that EVERY failure to fire in the Sig went bang in the Glocks. I told the Sig customer service rep this and he hung up on me. Same day I traded the gun. The 290 never seemed to have caught on. Seems it was a problem child. The the phone hangup sealed the deal for me. I will never buy another Sig. My Glocks eat any crappy or premium bullets I feed them. They shoot clean, dirty, wet, dry, hot or cold. Doesn’t matter. They go bang. They are not pretty or expensive. THEY ARE DEADLY!


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

I am also a Springfield XD fan and have a long slide XD .45, green with a stainless slide. I also know that Sig makes an excellent product as well.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

RUSH25 said:


> bunch of grandpas clinging to their blunderbuss'


Yep! You betcha!
My M1 Garand and my 70 Series Colt Government Model will still get the job done.
Speaking of still getting the job done, the Colt Model 1903 I inherited from my Dad was made in 1918. 
Any 99 year old Glocks around? My Colt still works fine.

Heck, my 100 year old Mauser 98 is a fine example of firearm workmanship, and still accurate after two World Wars.
I will admit it was re-barreled sometime in the 1930's judging by the Nazi Waffenampt mark on the barrel.
I wonder if my old M16A1 from 1969 is still in working order?


----------



## MisterMills357 (Apr 15, 2015)

Cops are notorious for not familiarizing themselves with a gun, any gun: now, they may not be notorious with you, but they are to me. 
A lot of cops are nin-com-poops about guns. Jesus, all they have to do is take it home and practice with an empty gun.

I am self-taught in pistol craft, and I can use a bunch of different models of gun. I can load, and reload--- a .357 PDQ--- and I can do the same thing with a 1911.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

rice paddy daddy said:


> Yep! You betcha!
> My M1 Garand and my 70 Series Colt Government Model will still get the job done.
> Speaking of still getting the job done, the Colt Model 1903 I inherited from my Dad was made in 1918.
> Any 99 year old Glocks around? My Colt still works fine.
> ...


Considering that Glock didn't produce a gun until 1982, it would be quite difficult to find one even 50 years old... Not sure that's a fair point of discussion.
Beretta's been around for almost 500 years. Any 500 year old Colts around? :vs_laugh:
Steel rusts, wood decays, glass infused polymer lasts forever. LOL!

In the vein of full disclosure, my first handgun was a polymer-bodied Beretta with an exposed hammer and manual safety. ;-)
I trained on that. Became an expert in safely handling firearms, started carrying it for self-defense, and then upgraded.
At least I'm consistent.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

Ever see the picture of the Glock that got chewed up by a dog?
:vs_lol:


----------



## AquaHull (Jun 10, 2012)

I have a XD45 Service with 4" barrel 13 + 1 grip


----------



## AquaHull (Jun 10, 2012)

rice paddy daddy said:


> Ever see the picture of the Glock that got chewed up by a dog?
> :vs_lol:


How am I supposed to get my G-Lock out of my holster


----------



## tango (Apr 12, 2013)

Lets all check in in 100 years and talk about our Glocks, OK?


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

rice paddy daddy said:


> Ever see the picture of the Glock that got chewed up by a dog?
> :vs_lol:


I hadn't, but did a Google search, and the first image that popped up was a chewed up polymer Beretta, just like mine. HAHAHA!!!


----------



## AquaHull (Jun 10, 2012)

tango said:


> Lets all check in in 100 years and talk about our Glocks, OK?


Gladly


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

In many comparisons, and side by side testing the Beretta m9,92F was preferred over the glock for a full size 9mm. I am one that sided with the Beretta.


----------



## bigwheel (Sep 22, 2014)

From what I heard Sig won but the Eyetalian guns was cheaper. Know our old firearms guy said they were pieces of sheet. Enough to make me not want one.


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

Smitty901 said:


> In many comparisons, and side by side testing the Beretta m9,92F was preferred over the glock for a full size 9mm. I am one that sided with the Beretta.


Berettas are decent and I have shot quite a bit. With that said, I would prefer my Glock 17 any day for versatility alone. You can find plentiful inexpensive Berettas to buy for a reason.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

Here's Why the U.S. Army Won't Be Using Glocks | The National Interest Blog


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

rice paddy daddy said:


> Here's Why the U.S. Army Won't Be Using Glocks | The National Interest Blog


Sig under-bid and offered a manual safety. Pretty straight forward. Considering that most soldiers that will be carrying and using the sidearm will be support related MOS officers and otherwise inexperienced in shooting handguns, it makes sense to have a manual safety.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

RedLion said:


> Sig under-bid and offered a manual safety. Pretty straight forward. Considering that most soldiers that will be carrying and using the sidearm will be support related MOS officers and otherwise inexperienced in shooting handguns, it makes sense to have a manual safety.


Unless things have changed in the last 50 years, machine gunners carry sidearms.

Of course, back then they were real Fightin' Arms, the 1911A1 in 45 caliber. Not some wimpy NATO abomination. :vs_lol:


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

You guys realize I'm just foolin' with ya, right?


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

rice paddy daddy said:


> Unless things have changed in the last 50 years, machine gunners carry sidearms.
> 
> Of course, back then they were real Fightin' Arms, the 1911A1 in 45 caliber. Not some wimpy NATO abomination. :vs_lol:


Tankers do for sure. I carried a 1911 for a while and a Berreta as well. I preferred the Berreta hands down, but that was mostly as the Remington Rand 1911 that I had was WWII vintage and you could not hit crap with it outside of 10 yards. Completely worn out.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

RedLion said:


> Tankers do for sure. I carried a 1911 for a while and a Berreta as well. I preferred the Berreta hands down, but that was mostly as the Remington Rand 1911 that I had was WWII vintage and you could not hit crap with it outside of 10 yards. Completely worn out.


No more M3 submachine guns for tankers?
Man, I'm getting old.


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

rice paddy daddy said:


> No more M3 submachine guns for tankers?
> Man, I'm getting old.


Each crew member had a sidearm and the tank had one M16 as well.


----------

