I guess I don’t consider a Glock 19 and a kydex holster on a leather gun belt and one spare magazine to be a lot of gear.
The 140 plus rounds are carried by the police officer in the link I posted.
thanks for the info on the light Greg
I agree your honor. You and I have been through a few night training and I’ve shot a few night matches. Most of my night shooting were done using lights in the 60-65 lumens range, yes Virginia, old school incandescent Surefire 6P, in total darkness and outside. That’s plenty for 10 yards and less. Now transfer that inside a house with white painted walls, you’ll blind your own self. Unless you frequent places with dark walls or your home have those 1960s wood paneling walls, anything more than 60 lumens is more than plenty.
The J frame just is the best in my opinion for truly easy conceal carry. I can carry my J frame ANYWHERE in a pocket holster. I like Desantis nemesis - and I don’t even feel it. It’s like a smart phone in the pocket. The trade off for capacity with a G 19 etc just does not trump carrying a handgun that u will n can actually carry all the time. N the revolver is so much safer than one in the chamber of a pistol…
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
And I think we can all agree that there is no reason to get rid of all your autoloaders. I mean, if you need to go pick up your friend in a seedy area of town, or whatever I am not arguing that you shouldn’t toss your VP9/G17 in the glove compartment (or better yet your 870 or AR in the back seat)–but by all means, keep the J-frame in your pocket.
Yep I like to have many options that I am proficient with also… My M4 n Mossberg 500 Flex , Sig P320 or Ruger super Blackhawks aren’t going anywhere nor are my SKSs. Lol
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Disclaimer: I own a 642 and carry it often. In fact, I really love it…one of my all time favorite pistols.
However, the very nature/purpose of this thread is a bit muddy. I would have no issue if the topic was simply “I really like carrying a 642 due to its comfort and convenience. Thoughts?” We all start or contribute to threads in order to get some confidence and justifcation from others that what we are doing is the right/best thing, even though there really is no “best.” My post here is nothing different, but is still just an opinion.
The problem I have here is that saying “Is there a reason to even keep a Glock 19 if there is a gun that can do everything the 19 can sans the capacity?” is wrong on so many levels in so many ways. DWood already covered many of them, and for the members of this site no further explanation is needed…most here are educated gun handlers…hopefully. Certainly we realize that there are MANY things a 642 cannot do precisely because it lacks in capacity and accuracy at distance due to barrel length and sight radius.
Another thing that I take issue with is the logic for choosing the 642 over the G19. If you don’t like the frame due to sore knuckles, cramped fingers, etc, that’s fine. Nobody knows better than you, and that is very applicable when talking about shooting thousands of rounds on the range. But when talking about your choice of primary CCW, that logic is weak. If you can conceal the 19 (or 17 for that matter), then carry it, along with another mag if able. Train with it enough to maintain proficiency and leave the high round count to your comfortable pistols.
In addition, to say that the 642 is the only type of pistol that can be carried in all conditions/situations is also flawed logic. Of course it CAN, but doesn’t mean it SHOULD. In fact, in most cases it should merely be carried as a back up gun, weather/clothing permitting of course. I certainly wouldn’t carry it for any duty or tactical entry situation. So pretty much the only reasons one should carry a 642 by itself is in hot conditions with minimal clothing or where there is a requirement for deep cover/concealment in places where you aren’t allowed to be armed. In any other situation, you might be asking for trouble by hoping/assuming 5-10 rds from a J-frame will be enough to handle the threat, potentially with multiple attackers/suspects. Yeah, debate over statistics all you want. Also flawed logic - the probability of you having a violent encounter is a memoriless property - it doesn’t matter what has or hasn’t happened to other people. The fact is it doesn’t happen to you until IT HAPPENS. None of us want to be a statistic.
And any assertion that the 642 with a light is the only pistol you need (shotgun is a different story) sitting by your bed at night is just ridiculous. Neither concealment nor comfort is a factor, so grab the most reliable/highest capacity pistol that you shoot the best with AT NIGHT and have it ready for crying out loud.
To sum it up:
- ANY gun is better than NO gun.
- We should not be comfortable/complacent enough to have a “favorite” weapon.
- A 642, or any pistol for that matter, is only my secondary/tertiary weapon until it becomes my primary. Then it’s my primary. Train accordingly.
- 642s are awesome, but G19s might even be more awesome for 80% of CCW situations/conditions. 8 out of 10 ain’t bad.
So I really put a lot of thought into my little rant about the J-frame vs G19 debate in hopes that it would promote some healthy thoughts and discussion. You just can’t put a premium on the education and peer feedback based learning environment that this forum provides. But then I just looked up and saw the “safer than one in the chamber” post from M4Eagle, and alas, all hope is lost. I sincerely hope you are joking.
Perhaps there is no reason to even continue the conversation after that…
Hold on here … Let’s talk fact here… I’m sure many have heard of a little kid grabbing a pistol with one in the chamber n accidentally shooting his mother… One. In the chamber of a light trigger pistol is not as safe as a revolver w a 10plus lb pull… If that defies your logic just don’t dismiss it as if the case is closed … I too know something about firearms n have shot my share of handguns dating back to the first Glocks, Colt Pythons and Ruger single action…
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
The problem I have here is that saying “Is there a reason to even keep a Glock 19 if there is a gun that can do everything the 19 can sans the capacity?” is wrong on so many levels in so many ways.
I think everyone agrees there are reasons to keep the G19 around.
In addition, to say that the 642 is the only type of pistol that can be carried in all conditions/situations is also flawed logic. Of course it CAN, but doesn’t mean it SHOULD. In fact, in most cases it should merely be carried as a back up gun, weather/clothing permitting of course. I certainly wouldn’t carry it for any duty or tactical entry situation
.
Sure. But I don’t think he was talking about doing SWAT raids with it. I surely hope not. I wouldn’t fast rope into Black Hawk down with it either.
So pretty much the only reasons one should carry a 642 by itself is in hot conditions with minimal clothing or where there is a requirement for deep cover/concealment in places where you aren’t allowed to be armed.
Or just everyday walking around at the mall, going to the mailbox, strolling with the dog, visiting grandma, etc. Normal everyday stuff.
In any other situation, you might be asking for trouble by hoping/assuming 5-10 rds from a J-frame will be enough to handle the threat, potentially with multiple attackers/suspects. Yeah, debate over statistics all you want. Also flawed logic - the probability of you having a violent encounter is a memoriless property - it doesn’t matter what has or hasn’t happened to other people. The fact is it doesn’t happen to you until IT HAPPENS. None of us want to be a statistic.
This is some fairly cloudy logic too. We are all talking probabilities. The question is, where on the spectrum do we draw the line? Obviously, carrying an AR with a bunch of mags, armor, etc is what you want…and if that seems ridiculous …[“Yeah, debate over statistics all you want. Also flawed logic - the probability of you having a violent encounter is a memoriless property - it doesn’t matter what has or hasn’t happened to other people. The fact is it doesn’t happen to you until IT HAPPENS.”]. On the other end of the spectrum is the “I am sure there will be a rock on the ground.” We are all pretty close here, we are just figuring out our individual comfort level/need.
And any assertion that the 642 with a light is the only pistol you need (shotgun is a different story) sitting by your bed at night is just ridiculous.
Some of us feel like a safe and handy gun shooting a suitable round is sufficient. Some feel the need for much, much more. It depends on a lot of factors. I have, for example these two guns around…
Untitled by stoiclawyer, on Flickr
Yeah, I could set the suppressed FNX .45 with 15 rounds, flashlight, laser, etc beside the bed. But I don’t feel the need. Everybody has a different comfort level, if that is ridiculous to you I don’t know what to say.
A little kid grabbing my pistol off my belt will never happen and that is pretty much a retarded analogy to choose a 5 shot revolver over a 16 shot pistol and spare 15 round magazine. If you have kids, you need to secure your gun when you’re not carrying it. WTF.
I was not talking about experienced firearms users, the incident I referred to happened recently in an Idaho grocery store- the mother was experienced in shooting etc but had the gun in her open purse when the two year old reached in n fired it…
now for me a revolver or pistol are going to be equally safe carry or at home etc… As I’m sure for u… But there are a world of incompetent or strange circumstances out there that render a chambered pistol less safe for some people than a revolver…
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
BlackWatch:
The question is; Is there a need to keep the Glock 19 if the 642 does everything I need it to do sans capacity.
I carry and will continue to carry a Glock 17 IWB with a spare mag. The 642 is meant to be used as a general purpose, easy to use, easy to conceal type firearm that can be thrown into a pocket/waistband.
By no means am I trying to reinvent the proverbial wheel here. I have a pretty good understanding of what is needed in regards to mindset/will to carry.
davidjinks,
If you already have a G17 that you are comfortable carrying that I think you have a pretty solid reason for flushing the G19. It is barely smaller than the 17, they tend to be a bit less reliable, keeping it will mean you have two different types of mags, some of which which will not work in your 17. On the other hand, if it is reliable and has good consistent ejection you might want to keep it in case you change your mind.
-
A 642 may do everything you need it to do, but it does not do everything a Glock 19 does. You probably should rephrase your original question.
-
A G19 is not less reliable than a G17.
What you decide is up to you.
I recently came to a good compromise for me on concealability, longer accuracy and ok capacity… That is an in between option now for me to a G17 n J frame… The Smith n Wesson shield gives me better accuracy than a J frame belly gun n I can easily carry two mags n I have discovered it can be a very nice size pocket gun… With loose fitting type or related fits pants it’s very easy to pocket carry.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
a mother who leaves her gun exposd in a purse and accessible to a two year old is not an experienced or responsible gun handler. Your point is irrelevant about a discussion on choosing a gun for CCW.
Dwood,
A G19 is not less reliable than a G17.
Well, according to Vickers, Hackathorn and Langdon they are. But hey, the G17 is a pretty high bar.
Greg,
Thank you for your insight.
In regards to my 17s; they are the most reliable Glocks I have owned. Both are older models in the H and L prefix era. Ejection is solid and in the right direction, away from my face. Doesn’t matter the ammo I use, they just run.
I don’t want anyone to think I’m being naive in regards to my question. I understand the limitations on the gear I use. I also understand that everything has its place.
I appreciate all the response thus far. Thank you!
I recently came to a good compromise for me on concealability, longer accuracy and ok capacity… That is an in between option now for me to a G17 n J frame… The Smith n Wesson shield gives me better accuracy than a J frame belly gun n I can easily carry two mags n I have discovered it can be a very nice size pocket gun… With loose fitting type or related fits pants it’s very easy to pocket carry.
Certainly nothing wrong with that (or any other choice). They seem to be getting more reliable all the time. They don’t offer the flexibility of the J, but they are easier to shoot with less training and they can be reloaded faster. I spent a good number of years carrying the Kahr PM9 before the Shield and the G42/43 and it was very easy to pocket carry. Mine was pretty reliable but It still wasn’t as reliable as a J-frame–and there was no great way to put a laser on it–and no way at all to put a light on it. Again, that is my experience, but other folk value other attributes.
In regards to my 17s; they are the most reliable Glocks I have owned. Both are older models in the H and L prefix era. Ejection is solid and in the right direction, away from my face. Doesn’t matter the ammo I use, they just run.
Absolutely, I TOTALLY regret selling my old G17s. I had two mid 00s 3rd gens that were unstoppable beasts. Steel, brass, reloads, weirdo rounds. It did not care. I sold them to finance something way back when. Big mistake.