So Now I Own Two Glocks

[JBP55]

I own "a few" and refuse to modify them in any way. I won't even put non-OEM springs in them.
It's about reliability in function to protect life and limb, not pizzazz.
Reliability, durability, longevity.

You should not change anything unless you know what you are doing.

 

[Jstudz220]

You should not change anything unless you know what you are doing.

Even if you know exactly what you’re doing the “upgraded” parts aren’t always upgrades. We’re talking about Glocks here. An orangutan could be taught the Glock Armors Course.

I have to agree with what others have said. I don’t touch the internals with anything not from Glock. The only thing I’ll change is the sights with a pair of Ameriglo or trijicon and maybe a magpul or oem Glock flared magwell.

 

[Bolt Head]

You should not change anything unless you know what you are doing.

Stellar advice, JBP!

 

[southerncanuck]

I think y'all might be oversimplifying the tinkering here.

There are a lot of good legal reasons not to dick around with the internals on a defensive gun.

But if you know for sure that you're going to use the Glonk as a dedicated range/competition gun (or if you don't care about the legal stuff), there's no good reason not to tinker with it if you want to. Glock bros are always gonna preach that you're gonna explode and die if you don't leave them bone stock, but that doesn't make them necessarily right. Most aftermarket parts from reputable manufacturers are going to work just fine. A stock Glock isn't a very refined instrument, and they benefit from a bit of work.

I like to tinker with my pistols -- a lot cuz it's my hobby -- so my approach has been to buy two of each gun I want to use defensively. I keep one bone stock internally, and I fool around with the other one and use the tinkered-with one for range days, classes and competitions.

 

[Jstudz220]

I think y'all might be oversimplifying the tinkering here.

There are a lot of good legal reasons not to dick around with the internals on a defensive gun.

But if you know for sure that you're going to use the Glonk as a dedicated range/competition gun (or if you don't care about the legal stuff), there's no good reason not to tinker with it if you want to. Glock bros are always gonna preach that you're gonna explode and die if you don't leave them bone stock, but that doesn't make them necessarily right. Most aftermarket parts from reputable manufacturers are going to work just fine. A stock Glock isn't a very refined instrument, and they benefit from a bit of work.

I like to tinker with my pistols -- a lot cuz it's my hobby -- so my approach has been to buy two of each gun I want to use defensively. I keep one bone stock internally, and I fool around with the other one and use the tinkered-with one for range days, classes and competitions.

But then the DA will say you’re a blood thirsty gun collector who had multiple copies of the same firearm. You fantasized about killing so much you went as far as to modify one of your guns to make it a more lethal killing machine. You used jhp so you were clearly trying to cause the most damage possible. Oh you used fmj? You were operating recklessly using the same ammunition as our United States Soldiers and Marines. You clearly didn’t think much into the value of a human life walking around with fmj loaded up that penetrates much more than the often recommended jhp.

Honestly you’re damned if you do, damed if you don’t. I understand completely where you’re coming from taking that stance though and I can’t say it’s a good or bad one honestly. I’ve went down the rabbit whole of trying to find an individual in the US who was convicted for a crime because of something like this. Following the law 100% but maybe the guy had an apex trigger instead of the oem it came with or maybe the guy was carrying his own reloads. I found a bunch of nothing really except opinions but no evidence of it ever actually happening.

 

[southerncanuck]

Honestly you’re damned if you do, damed if you don’t. I understand completely where you’re coming from taking that stance though and I can’t say it’s a good or bad one honestly. I’ve went down the rabbit whole of trying to find an individual in the US who was convicted for a crime because of something like this. Following the law 100% but maybe the guy had an apex trigger instead of the oem it came with or maybe the guy was carrying his own reloads. I found a bunch of nothing really except opinions but no evidence of it ever actually happening.

You're not damned if you don't. You're better off if you don't, your gun's just gonna suck a bit more is all LOL

There's an abundance of examples of modifications influencing court cases. People that do this stuff for a living almost universally recommend against modifying the trigger on your gun. Will it win or lose a case? Maybe, maybe not. Usually that's not a single-factor decision. Will it be a factor in the courtroom that you’re going to have to pay for a lawyer to defend against? 100% chance of that.

So it's less of a "damned if you do damned if you don't" binary and more like this: It's almost inevitable that every choice you make as far as hardware modification becomes billable hours for your attorney… some things will be quick and easy to defend (sights, optics, WML's, grip texture, factory JHP), others could be very laborious and expensive to defend (trigger modifications, handloads, backplates that say "die mothafuckaz" etc).

 

[Jstudz220]

You're not damned if you don't. You're better off if you don't, your gun's just gonna suck a bit more is all LOL

There's an abundance of examples of modifications influencing court cases. People that do this stuff for a living almost universally recommend against modifying the trigger on your gun. Will it win or lose a case? Maybe, maybe not. Usually that's not a single-factor decision. Will it be a factor in the courtroom that you’re going to have to pay for a lawyer to defend against? 100% chance of that.

So it's less of a "damned if you do damned if you don't" binary and more like this: It's almost inevitable that every choice you make as far as hardware modification becomes billable hours for your attorney… some things will be quick and easy to defend (sights, optics, WML's, grip texture, factory JHP), others could be very laborious and expensive to defend (trigger modifications, handloads, backplates that say "die mothafuckaz" etc).

You make fair points and for the most part I can’t say that I disagree with any of them. A defense attorney can and probably would use online conversations just like these against us in an instance where it’s applicable. Outside of things like binary triggers, FRT or anything of the like I just don’t think some guy throwing an apex trigger into his Glock is going to be a factor in getting him convicted. Like you said though maybe, maybe not.

Personally I’d rather not have to find out first handed and I don’t modify any gun that I carry. For a carry gun I typically don’t fool with anything internally and if I do it’s only for another option the original manufacturer may offer for sale. My edc is a gen 3 glock 17 that’s completely unmodified with the exception of the sights.

Also how far is too far? Who’s to say an attorney won’t try to argue the fact that someone modified the sights on the gun they carry? Using an example I’m sure most can recall the Kyle Rittenhouse trial where the DA tried to argue him using fmj in a negative light. I think realistically it’s a terrible situation to be in and sometimes even when doing everything right you may still find yourself in court explaining.

 

[Mitch Dufour]

Can some one kindly provide links to court cases showing a conviction because a guy used an 'altered' firearm in an other wise 'clean' use of a firearm for self defense? I hear the idea thrown out in forums all the time, but can't bring to mind any of the pile of cases that surely must exist to back it up.

 

[Jstudz220]

Can some one kindly provide links to court cases showing a conviction because a guy used an 'altered' firearm in an other wise 'clean' use of a firearm for self defense? I hear the idea thrown out in forums all the time, but can't bring to mind any of the pile of cases that surely must exist to back it up.

You won’t find one. If one exists I’d like to see it.

 

[SVT Bansheeman]

I also came here to ask for an example of a conviction based on a modified gun in a self defense case.

 

[Bolt Head]

I've heard many claims like these about the use of handloads in self defense, but I still pack my magazines with handloads.
I'll trust my ammunition that's assembled by hand one at a time with extreme care and precision over factory loads assembled on machinery.

 

[DBMJR1]

Y'all be hijacking my thread, and I approve.

I bought my 43X BECAUSE of the aftermarket Shield magazines. This required me to change the magazine release. So yea, I carry a Glock with non Glock parts in it.

I've even carried firearms with handloaded ammunition in it as well.
Never heard of a case where ammo type was brought up in trial.
All a myth perpetrated to sell books by Massad Ayoob.

If I were hiking and needed a personal firearm for protection against Bear and such I would have to get a large caliber revolver at least 357 magnum or better a 44 mag with 4 inch long barrel or more. I just don't think even the "Mighty 10MM" is as powerful. Just my .02 cents.

They say for bear you want 200 grains going 1000 fps or faster. To this end I load a pure linotype 215gr lead semi wad cutter up to 1050 fps in .357
This load is only 'safe' in two of my firearms. My Blackhawk, and my Dan Wesson 715.
It will singe all the hair off any bear I shoot.

So I've been loading up the Dan Wesson and carrying it on hikes.

It's a heavy option, with limited capacity.


The Glock will replace this. More capacity. Lighter. If anything happens to it, . . . , well it's just a Glock.

 

[Bolt Head]

It will singe all the hair off any bear I shoot.

 

[SVT Bansheeman]

I bought my 43X BECAUSE of the aftermarket Shield magazines. This required me to change the magazine release. So yea, I carry a Glock with non Glock parts in it.

How is your experience with those mags with the mag release? Are you still able to use oem 10rd mags as well? I have a 43x and absoltuly love it besides the 10rd capacity.

 

[DBMJR1]

How is your experience with those mags with the mag release? Are you still able to use oem 10rd mags as well? I have a 43x and absoltuly love it besides the 10rd capacity.

Everything works as it should. No issues.

 

[AdvancedLaser]

You won’t find one. If one exists I’d like to see it.

This. Correct. it doesnt. One of the points of origin of this line of thinking was Massad Ayoob and the LFI a very long time ago.

It was either a justifiable homicide or it wasn't, there isn't a solid determining factor on what you killed them with, only if it was justified. A modified Glock, a Barrett 82, a spork from an MRE. It matters more the justification not the means.

 

[AdvancedLaser]

I think y'all might be oversimplifying the tinkering here.

There are a lot of good legal reasons not to dick around with the internals on a defensive gun.

But if you know for sure that you're going to use the Glonk as a dedicated range/competition gun (or if you don't care about the legal stuff), there's no good reason not to tinker with it if you want to. Glock bros are always gonna preach that you're gonna explode and die if you don't leave them bone stock, but that doesn't make them necessarily right. Most aftermarket parts from reputable manufacturers are going to work just fine. A stock Glock isn't a very refined instrument, and they benefit from a bit of work.

I like to tinker with my pistols -- a lot cuz it's my hobby -- so my approach has been to buy two of each gun I want to use defensively. I keep one bone stock internally, and I fool around with the other one and use the tinkered-with one for range days, classes and competitions.

Agree with the canuck here.

BUT...I work on a lot of Glocks that people bring me and they range from bone stock to all kinds of weird $hit on them. I can tell you for certain that parts geometry is an issue. People mix and match parts from OEM to multiple aftermarket companies and they make the guns less reliable. Every part change away from the basis design by the OEM will have tolerance issues. Tolerance Stacking is a real issue in handguns with different parts.

As the man said, if its a range gun, go all out. If it fails on the range, well meh.
If its a defensive tool then make wise choices to OEM parts or a minimum of aftermarket parts to maintain reliability.

 

[SVT Bansheeman]

Tolerance Stacking is a real issue in handguns with different parts.

Exactly. I literally measure machined parts for a living. I see this every day. Then when you start adding cerakote to all sorts of stuff, you can make things far worse. Which is exactly why I built a p80 to scratch my gucci glock itch. It's just a range toy.

 

[Mitch Dufour]

....It's just a range toy.

99% of my handguns, and not a one of them is a Glock.

 

[geeck]

I'm a RSO at a public range if there's a bulged, or ruptured pistol case on the ground 99% chance it came out of a Glock. Glocks are the reason "Bulge Buster" dies were invented. I'm an old guy who's shot the 1911 for too long, I'll never get use to the grip angle, lopsided balance, squirt gun trigger, or Tupperware feel of a Glock.

I'm sure Glock devotees hate 40+ oz of steel, low capacity, and a 100+ year old design of the 1911. That's what great about America there's so many damn choices. Let's face it Glock, 1911, or any handgun, is there so you can fight your way to your main battle rifle.

As far as Bear Country goes, I'm packing a 44mag if not a rifle chambered in 7.62x51mm or better.