As a child, every Sunday I sat in Sunday school absorbing the lessons of the Bible with practiced regularity. Each story was a duplicate of the previous year, with the same characters, the same circumstances and the same messages. I could repeat the stories back to the teacher verbatim and anticipate nearly every question.
Case in point was the story of Jonah: God gives Jonah a message to deliver. Jonah runs from his commitment. Running away doesn’t mean you get away from your problems. No matter how badly they feel about it, the people around you will throw you into the sea. There are some really big fish in the sea. You can beg and plead but fish vomit is nasty. God tells you to do something, you better do it!
And the lesson? If God wants you to do something, you’d best ‘get on board’ with the idea. Easy! What are we doing next week?
The story of Jonah is probably the most maligned of the Bible stories. Many doubt the existence of a fish big enough to swallow a man and allow him to live, however, poorly swimming in sea water and digesting fish, for three days. As it is not something that happens every day, and as even the National Enquirer hasn’t covered a similar story, the inclination is to say “that didn’t happen!”
Oh, how I missed the point of it all!
Jonah is unusual as compared to all of the other prophets of the Old Testament as it is not a record of prophecies, but the events in the life of the prophet. Little attention is given to what he actually said. And while the Lord sent most of the prophets to Israel and Judah, Jonah’s task was to go to Nineveh and prophesy to the Assyrians.
The Lord commanded Jonah to go to Nineveh, tell them of their sinfulness and call them to repentance. One might consider the events unique in the Old Testament as Jonah is commanded go to a nation outside of Israel. God’s Covenant with Abraham mentioned that through Abraham’s descendants God would bless the nations, but no Israelite is ever commanded to go to other nations and tell them about the Lord. The People of Israel were intended to promote their beliefs as passive witnesses. Others would recognize the difference between their society and Israel’s and be attracted to it.
Historians record that the Assyrian Empire existed in its many forms from 2400 BCE evolving from the Akkadian kingdom in the mountains of northeastern Iraq. Reported to be a tough and ruthless people, civil laws record harsh punishments such as beatings, mutilation, and death. More severe offenses allowed prosecutors to torture the accused during the trial to insure ‘truthful’ answers.
All free male citizens were obligated to service in the military. The Assyrians are celebrated as one of the first nations to support a standing combined arms army. Many of the rudiments of siege warfare are traced back to Assyrian Army doctrine as well as the use of supply trains and technological improvements in equipment
The barbarousness of the society was punctuated by the reputation of the army. Masters of Psychological warfare, captured enemies were burned alive before a city for all the populous to see or blinded so they could wander ahead of the army instilling fear in the invaded. Those who resisted could be promised horrible death, slavery or conscription in the army.
3 Then the word of the Lord came to Jonah(A) a second time: 2 “Go to the great city of Nineveh and proclaim to it the message I give you.”
It is clear from the Book of Jonah that the prophet hated the Assyrians with great passion. And if the Lord was to visit punishment on the Assyrians, Jonah thought, why should I stand in the way?
Despite Jonah’s refusal and his avoidance of his assignment, the Lord in his grace repeats his command to go to Nineveh following his experience with the great fish. This time Jonah obeys the Lord and delivers his message to the king of the most ruthless conquerors of the known world. The message is a simple one – “In forty days Ninevah will be destroyed!” Jonah didn’t try to put it nicely. There wasn’t any attempt at persuasion. I can imagine Jonah expecting to leave the city and console himself with something like, “Well, I told them. It’s their own fault now when God destroys them.”
5 The Ninevites believed God. A fast was proclaimed, and all of them, from the greatest to the least, put on sackcloth. 6 When Jonah’s warning reached the king of Nineveh, he rose from his throne, took off his royal robes, covered himself with sackcloth and sat down in the dust. 7 This is the proclamation he issued in Nineveh:
“By the decree of the king and his nobles: Do not let people or animals, herds or flocks, taste anything; do not let them eat or drink. 8 But let people and animals be covered with sackcloth. Let everyone call urgently on God. Let them give up their evil way and their violence. 9 Who knows? God may yet relent and with compassion turn from his fierce anger so that we will not perish.”
10 When God saw what they did and how they turned from their evil ways, he relented and did not bring on them the destruction he had threatened.
What does this 2,800 year old story mean for believers today? We know that through our Lord ‘all things are possible’. In our country where the news each day centers on depressingly high debt, terrorism at home and abroad and potential violations of our basic rights as citizens, we have cause for hope.
Jonah is not the tale of a big fish. It is the tale of one man, backed by God, who brought a message of repentance to the greatest nation of the time and they listened. In the coming year as you think of what needs to be changed in our country and the priorities we need to set, remember, that it takes only one, backed by God, to change the course of a nation.
I recently read a posting praising the decision by Dick’s Sporting Goods to remove semi-automatic rifles from their shelves. The move was praised as ‘enlightened’ as if the executives at Dick’s had suddenly recognized their sins, and in an act of repentance, adopted the decision to insure that they had no part in any future tragedy. Never do they consider that it is a business move reflective of current political pressures.
The response to the gleeful tone from those who support gun rights was predictable. Exhausted by the ‘it’s the gun’s fault’ hypothesis, gun owners question the sanity of someone who believes the inanimate object is the cause of the tragedy. However, I found myself sadly shaking my head. No one is won to your side by immediately assuming the other side is crazy.
In my experience, the vast majority of anti-gun voters hold similar attributes. Their decision making process is based on the emotional, “if the gun didn’t exist, then the violence would have never happened.” This is the convincing argument that all of us hold in mourning the victims of a tragedy. However, it is a myopic viewpoint that doesn’t stand up to thoughtful examination. I am always surprised by the reaction I receive by asking reasonable questions about the subject as it incites an intense anger and frustration that you don’t hold the same opinion.
Vague, myopic, strictly choice A or B arguments are the hallmark of liberal thinking. Opinions are based on verbiage that can be chanted at a protest movement, written on a bumper sticker or spouted by a celebrity whose success in their occupation is based on the ability to parrot words written by another. Examining the backgrounds of those celebrities whose opinions are being adopted often yields no significant life experience or even a high school education. To think how many follow every word celebrities utter as if they were passed down on a stone tablet from a God that they would contend doesn’t exist is a tragedy in itself.
Rarely does the anti-gun voter focus on the mental health of the tragedies perpetrator. They are unaware of the current qualification process for the purchase of a firearm, the difficulties in adjudicating an adult with a mental illness, the history of mass killing violence or the even the attributes of the “Assault Weapons” they are so eager to ban. This is the very definition of the new politically correct term of ‘Low Information Voter’.
Anti-gun advocates praise the advances of other countries who have banned firearms for the law abiding public. Misleading statistics are boldly cited. Case in point is the vast difference between the summary of police reports in Great Britain and the BCS reporting drawn from victim and witness accounts. The former is widely known as a resource for politicians who wish to appease a concerned public while the latter is used for the strategic planning of law enforcement in deciding where to apply resources. In 2009, the Daily Mail awarded Great Britain the title of ‘Europe’s Most Violent Country’.
Neither is anti-gun crowd aware of the increased violence in these countries since disarming the public. In Australia, weapons flow through a porous coastline far too vast to stop the flow. Criminal activity skyrockets. Desperate to create a successful political policy, the government invests incredible time and effort in confiscating any remaining firearms held by the citizenry.
And despite thousands of years of experience in human nature, the cry is always that ‘it will be different here’ and that ‘we won’t make the same mistakes as in the past.’ How foolish is man.
The NRA is correct that the only answer for a Bad Man with a gun is a Good Man with a gun. The experience last weekend at Clackamas Mall speaks volumes of the character of murderers. When faced with the prospect of someone who can shoot back, the murderer either runs or kills themselves. A lesson lost on those who believe in the concept of a universal myopic argument. Unfortunately, a lesson rarely discussed by our advocates.
The most difficult aspect for most of to understand is the benefit that the anti-gun voter receives from supporting the anti-gun lobby. An imagined utopia of non-violence is unrealistic to the nature of man and those at the lowest levels suffer the most from their ill-considered support. It is ironic to find politicians decrying ‘gun violence’ while being guarded by an armed security detail just off screen. It is unfortunate that through bad experience supporters one day wake to find that they are what those in the Clinton Administration famously referred to as ‘Useful Idiots’.
The path as supporters of the 2nd Amendment is clear. Our voice must be heard and the argument clearly stated in a manner with terms the low information voter identifies with.
I do not believe that the word ‘tragedy’ completely describes the feeling as I listened to the news from the Sandy Hook Massacre. Another disassociated, mental incompetent, angry at the world for an imagined slight takes his rage out on the weak, the helpless in a place of supposed safety. This morning the President called for greater restrictions on firearms in an emotional effort to prevent the next incident as if to say that someone without a gun would never do something so reprehensible.
The response to the first part of this article was incredibly enlightening as even those in the gun community are not exposed to the conditions that exist in other countries where firearms are outlawed. So I thought to tally the responses into cohesive themes to discover what ‘Violence in a Gun Free Land’ looks like.
The responses largely came from former resident of three countries where firearms had all but eliminated. These were Great Britain, Australia, Singapore and Israel. Here’s what they said:
Do government restrictions stop firearms from getting into the hands of those who should not have them?
Start of Chapter 10 from “A Pheasant for the Dinner, Two Pigeons for a Pie” :-The events that preceded the Dunblane massacre 13th of March 1996 were already well documented and Hamilton was well known to the Central Scotland Police. There were a number of investigations, reports filed and some of the information was made available to the general public, As far back as the summer camp in Loch Lomand in 1991, complaints were made and these were investigated by the Child Protection Agency. Hamilton was reported to the Procurator Fiscal for consideration of no less than 10 separate charges including assault, obstructing the Police and contravention of the Children and Young Persons (Scotland) act 1937.
NO ACTION WAS TAKEN. So, in my case, there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the authorities were to blame. Unfortunately, the victims and their families and ultimately my business and family were devastated as a result.
Following the tragedy, who led the campaign to ban guns?
Unfortunately where we were in Scotland the Dunblane tragedy quickly turned into a political issue. The pro gun Conservative government under John Major had been in power for many years and in an effort to change this, the anti-gun Labour government under Tony Blair said simply, vote us in and we will ban all handguns. That’s what they did, but it didn’t stop the people who still wanted them from getting them. Today, to obtain any type of hunting rifle in the UK you need permission to shoot from a landowner. If that landowner then sells the land, any hunting rifle must be turned into the authorities until written permission is granted by the new owner.
This was a sentiment echoed over and over again. The liberal media led the call for greater gun restrictions that was then picked up by politicians. There was little to no opposing voice on the other side as these organizations felt they could not combat the emotional outcry over they situation.
What is the situation today?
More than twelve years following the outlawing of guns, violence has increased with the addition of a new category on police reports for incidents with knives and other sharp objects.
The government keeps more than one database for reporting crime. One uses police reports and is often cited in government reports. The other (BCS) examines witness accounts of crimes and is more often used when police agencies discuss violent crime trending. The BCS identified Great Britain as the most violent country in Europe in 2009.
One respondent confirms the above by citing his experience as a police veteran of 21 years. In his two books, he details the genesis of the anti-gun movement and the reasons that prompted him to move his family to the United States.
Respondents repeatedly echoed the same pattern of a massacre of children being used to enact anti-gun legislation. Interesting corollaries to their comments included how:
The government spends its energy disarming the public. Agencies proactively search the homes of law abiding citizens looking for illegal arms.
Violent crime has skyrocketed. Criminals use the vastness of the Australia’s massive coastline to smuggle in arms for criminal activities.
Outlawing guns does not stop horrific crime.
The law makers and others should evaluate the person behind the killing and not the tools he used. IF guns were not available the killer simply changes to whatever they have on hand. In china there was a recent incident where 20 + kids were stabbed. No one is going to ban sharp metal pointy things, i.e kitchen knives. “There were six similar attacks in just seven months in 2010 that killed nearly 20 people and wounded more than 50.”
Singapore has some of the toughest gun laws and murder laws around the planet and yet people are still killed in ghastly fashions. i.e.
http://infopedia.nl.sg/articles/SIP_1793_2011-03-17.html (Note: Here the murderer is tried, convicted and hung in 28 ½ months).
The tools they use are inanimate objects and cannot influence the end result, only the method of operation. It is the mind of the killer that decides to complete the task of killing and what tools to use to do it. People use cars to kill other people and even crash them through playgrounds filled with children, but you will never hear the politicians say that cars must be banned.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/story/2012/10/25/edmonton-st-paul-school-crash.html (Note: In this article, it is unclear at this point in the investigation whether the perpetrator was drunk, mentally ill or both).
Are Israeli teachers really armed? Who guards the children while they are at school?
Israeli teachers are unarmed, and Israeli kids get murdered (So do Palestinian kids by the way). The Israeli society has quite strict gun laws actually, but a lot of armed off duty soldiers. So then murderers change the method of attack, bombs being the norm.
Respondents speak to the security of both Israeli and Palestinian schools where entrances are guarded by iron gates and armed guards. Identities are verified, entrants searched and questioned. Children on outings are escorted by armed security guards or members of the military. Incidents are low as most murders don’t want anyone shooting back at them. Bombs became the preferred method of the cowardly terrorist.
Would the American people support staffing schools with armed guards to prevent or diffuse this kind of incident? After all, there is a large body of evidence demonstrating that in states where an armed civilian populace exist, a significant reduction of violent crimes occurs.
This morning’s news was once again filled with another awful tragedy. A person described as ‘deranged’, ‘unbalanced’ and ‘angry’, who felt wronged by a society who judged him poorly for his own misdeeds, took out his vitriol on those who neither knew of his plight nor were expected to defend themselves. It is right and appropriate that we mourn for our fellow citizens and are saddened the cowardly and self centered choice of this individual to seek retribution in this manner. It is not the way that we as Americans are taught to handle our grievances.
Certainly, we understand the power and the destructive capability of the firearm they possess. It would be preaching to the choir in a land of gun ownership, concealed carry permits and the nonsensical ‘gun free zones’, to point out this heinous act was committed by an individual who bears responsibility for his actions and the manner is defined only by the tool he used.
I began to wonder, what’s in like in countries where firearms are all but absent – Great Britain came to mind.
In response to the 1996 Dunblane School Massacre, where Thomas Hamilton, an unemployed former shopkeeper and former Scout Leader (fired from his position five years previously when Scouting became “suspicious of his moral intentions toward boys”), took hostage and murdered sixteen children and one teacher. Legislation was hurriedly enacted and passed by the British Parliament in the form of Firearms (Amendment) Act 1997 and Firearms (Amendment) Act (No.2) 1997. These Acts promoted by a massive Media-driven debate in the public forum effectively made it illegal to own a handgun in the United Kingdom. Limited possession of, and strict regulation was defined for, rifles and shotguns as allowed for sporting purposes.
However, the investigation into the incident identified weaknesses in the data shared by government agencies tasked with gun regulation previous to the massacre. Critics point out that officers from the Police Licensing Firearms Office were unaware of Hamilton’s expulsion from Scouting as well as his allegations of his ‘unsavory’ behavior at Scout Summer Camps and on outings. They contend that had this information not been compartmentalized, it would have exposed Hamilton’s poor character. (It is similar to the argument decrying the use of ‘Chinese Walls’ by law enforcement agencies in the US prior to 9/11. However, I would question whether the actions of a private organization would have been sufficient reason to deny a handgun purchase unless a conviction had been obtained in a court either in the UK or the US.)
All in all, a terrible tragedy committed by an out of work pedophile angry at the world.
In July of 2009, the Daily Mail described Great Britain as the most violent country in the Europe Union.
“Official crime figures show the UK also has a worse rate for all types of violence than the U.S. and even South Africa – widely considered one of the world’s most dangerous countries.”
How dangerous is dangerous? Since 1997 the percentage of recorded attacks has soared by 77% to 1.158 million. Or to put it simply, a violent crime is committed once every 30 seconds. There are 2,034 violent acts committed per 100,000 residents earning Great Britain the rank of number one. (Compare that to 466 violent acts committed per 100,000 residents in the same year in the US.) And of those violent crimes tallied, Great Britain comes in 13th, well past France, Italy and Spain for homicides at 1.49 per 100,000 residents.
A well documented Wikipedia article claims an overall reduction in violence since the enactment of the laws banning and restricting firearms. That is until you look at how the crime statistics are calculated.
In Great Britain, two types of crime statistics exist. The first is called Recorded Crime and is a reflection of the crime categories recorded in police reports. Despite the limitation of attempting to fit a crime into specific boxes on a report, this is the data used for reporting on community trends.
By comparison is the British Crime Survey (BCS) which examines victim interviews. This is considered a more realistic indicator of crime trends as it includes data when a police report is not filed and a crime is just reported. Proponents also use this data as it is unaffected by changes to police reporting procedures.
Using the BCS report for 2010/2011, we find that “there was no statistically significant change in the number of violent crimes estimated by the 2010/11 as compared to the 2009/10 survey (the apparent 6% increase was not statistically significant).”
Yes, you read that correctly, a 6% increase was not considered ‘statistically significant’. Neither does the reporting office believe that a year by year comparison of percentages is ‘statistically significant’. Reaching the trend line back to 1995, the office gleefully reports overall BCS violence falling by 44 % over this period as a whole including a 19% reduction in homicides. The report goes on to identify an ‘as anticipated’ overall decline in crimes involving guns and knives.
‘Knives’, it is a telling categorical description. While one may find the details of the report interesting or the dichotomy of confusing concepts that seemingly prevail to the ungovernmentalized, one take away is clear. Violent crimes are not limited by the tool involved. If the perpetrator doesn’t have a gun, he gets a knife and by some reporting in the GB, can be just as deadly.
Since the absence of a firearm doesn’t stop violent crime, perhaps we should focus on the person?
Several weeks ago I wrote an article describing the history, development and advantages of the .40 S&W cartridge. Each day I receive updates emphasizing the passion that gun owners have for their favorite firearm. The discussion has been intense and words have flown in every direction offering an incredible insight into the buying process.
While I have enjoyed the exchange of ideas, it is hard to escape what is truly important when considering which firearm to buy. And as it bears on the struggle to identify the perfect handgun caliber, I thought it would be worthwhile to write down what was learned and identify, oddly enough, what was not discussed.
Here were the main themes supporting the readers choice of caliber:
1. Recommendations are incredibly impactful to the new buyer who often describes their need to purchase a firearm, or for that matter, the reason they chose a particular firearm, to be based entirely on what a friend or Seller said to them. They look for expertise they do not possess and are willing to put money on the table when they find a degree of expertise.
2. Fit, feel and finish came in second as buyers will admit to choosing the higher priced model simply based on their perception of how the handgun fits in their hand. Oh, and they want to look good while holding it!
a. One interesting point is that in the hundreds of responses across a dozen forums, not one response mentions that the seller changed out the back strap to seal the deal from a buyer who was 90% on why he liked the handgun offered.
3. Experience they say is the best teacher and that teacher creates a relationship, whether positive or negative, in the mind of the buyer. Those with service in the military or the law enforcement will give greater consideration to the calibers they know best. Other buyers will relate experiences like “Once my dad let me shoot …” or “I got the chance to hold my friend’s …”.
a. I am often disappointed to observe Sellers who ignore the opportunity to capitalize of these positive experiences. A few qualifying questions would allow the Seller learn more about the customer’s intention for his or her purchase. Instead, Sellers launch straight into their own sales pitch for the ‘Hot Deal of the Day’. The tendency to discount the customer’s experience leads to many a disappointing sales interaction as money walks out the door.
4. Tactical use is noted as one qualifying question Sellers do occasionally ask. The popular open ended question, “Whatcha gunna do wit it?” allows the Seller to rule out full sized handguns for concealed carry buyers and .25s for personal protection against bears.
a. I suspect that in almost none of the cases did it reveal the Buyers intention to bring harm to or threaten another human being. However, just as soon as you imagine that something is ‘Idiot Proof’, someone comes along a builds a bigger, better Idiot. I, for one, would be thankful to witness an ethical gun dealer tell the ‘Idiot’ to leave their place of business and never come back.
The lesson here for gun sellers is straightforward as to the major reasons why the gun buyer purchases a particular firearm. Note that cost wasn’t high on the list of repsonses. My observation is that high $300s to low $600s is the typical expected price range for the new firearm purchase. More is often considered extravagant and less equates to the perception of poor materials quality or poor workmanship.
The takeaway that may seem the most perplexing to die hard enthusiasts is the inverse relationship between technical information and the customer’s enthusiasm for a particular firearm or caliber. Eyes glaze over once you get past general descriptions of the ballistics of each caliber. i.e. ‘.45ACP knocks people down!’, ‘9mm puts holes in things!’, ‘.22LR is cheap and only good for plinking!’
These general perceptions have value in the minds of the buyer who wants simple, easy to understand and easy to relate descriptions that they can impress their friends at the gun range with. Often the better the relatable ‘quip’, whether it is derived from personal experience, manufacturer statistics or is a tagline borrowed from an ad in a magazine, the more buyer enthusiasm is generated.
Still more confounding is the missing idea that the handgun is simply a platform for ammunition carried. Discussions of more technical ballistic data such as muzzle velocity, stopping power and penetration are confusing to the new buyer who doesn’t initially make the connection to the concept that different brands of ammunition have different ballistic expectations. Can you find similar performances between 9mm, .38 Special and .40 S&W? Yes, and while the idea offends whichever team you are on, someone will eventually answer the question on this blog with ammunition ballistic comparisons.
I believe that the reason this concept is not discussed is that many Sellers are afraid to upsell the customer after they agree to the significant purchase of a firearm. Stand in a gun store and watch the interactions. Invest the time in talking to the Buyer! I suspect your average items sold will go up and you will develop a happier more educated returning customer.
You see the results where people are buying incredible merchandise for practically nothing in a penny auction and you think to yourself that ‘I’d like to get in on that!’. So you register and venture out to spend the free bids the website gave you and another person bids one more much to your disappointment.
The truth is that nothing in life is free and Penny Auction Aficionados (PAA) understand that to win, they must invest in their success – to create a bank of bids to devote to their favorite items and outbid the next guy.
“But bids cost money!” I can hear you say. “And I want a good, … no, I want a GREAT DEAL!” Let’s take a look at how investing in your WIN works and how with some strategy, patience and luck, you can get that GREAT DEAL!
Look at the website’s bid packages. Immediately you notice that the greater the quantity of bids that you purchase, the lower the price you pay for each bid. PAA look for the best deal that their wallet can afford and buys in. After all, it hard to bid on an auction when you don’t have bids in your bank!
Smart PAA look for new websites where the number of other bidders is likely to be lower (thus reducing the competition). Then they look carefully at what is being offered and makes a list of what they would like to have and the interest they imagine that others would have in the item.
Many bidders new to the Penny Auction shoot straight for the top without realizing that there may be deeper pockets out there willing to invest in their win. Take some time to study the auctions. Putting some thought into how and where you place your bids, especially if you are on a budget, is essential.
Once the auction is in play, the PAA will choose one of two ways to stay in the auction. The first is to place you bids manually by hitting the ‘BID’ button. The advantage is that you have greater control over where your bids are placed. Seasoned PAA understand the downside, especially in auctions with heavy participation, you are likely to be sitting at the computer for some time. But paying pennies on the dollar is the outcome they are investing their time in!
The second method is automated. Most Penny Auction websites offer a feature that allows the bidder to specify at what price to get into the auction and how many bids from their bank to devote to the auction. The feature may have more than one strategy, so the PAA will want to read and select the bidding option that works best for them.
Winners enjoy incredible savings! However, let’s take a look at an example auction for a $350 widget. The auction ends with a winning bid of $6.25 and the winner accounts for $1.25 of the total.
Who makes money? The website collects 625 bids (625 times each bid denominated as $0.01). At an average price per bid of $0.65, the website collects $406.25. A nice return in this example, but remember that auctions can just as easily go the other way resulting in a loss for the website. So they are definitely taking a risk.
The winner, on the other hand has spent 125 bids to win the auction or $81.25 (125 times $0.65 per bid). They then pay the final auction price, $6.25, and a shipping and handling fee, let’s say $19.99, and the total cost of the auction win for the winner is $107.49. That is a 70% savings on the widget! Not many people would say that isn’t a GREAT DEAL!
But what if you don’t win? Most sites allow you to use the value of your bids toward purchasing the widget at the retail price plus shipping and handling. There may be a time limitation after the auction has ended so check the rules, but the investment you put into your bids isn’t lost unless you want it to be.
Just like when you are sitting in an auction, feeling the suspense from the crowd and staring down the opposition, the Penny Auction can be an exciting and fun way of getting your favorite stuff. Remember, to be recognized by the Auctioneer as the ‘Winner!’ means you have to strategize, plan and invest if your name is to be called.
Not everyone has what it takes to win. It takes nerves of steel and a focused resolve to be successful. So if you think you have what it takes, Go get ‘em Tiger!
Glock continues to improve their already wildly popular model 21 with the introduction of the SF (Striker Fire). Recall that the Striker Fire system reduces muzzle climb and channels recoil allowing the shooter to keep the target in their sights. And one of the reasons why Glock is so popular with law enforcement.
The first of three major additions leading the Generation 4 weapon is the change in the grip design. Thinner, with a more comfortable feel, most are struck by better grip that is achieved. And since grip and feel play a role in placing ‘rounds on target’, this one gets high marks.
The second is the addition of a easier, or I should say, more reasonable, magazine release. The reengineering required Glock to update their magazine design, but the good news it that the SFs will function well in both designs. All without losing round capacity.
A full MIL-SPEC Picatinny rail to mounts your favorite laser or flashlight satisfying the needs of most shooters to personalize their firearms.
Take a look at the Glock 21SF at .com