Originally Posted By: JDM396
Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: JDM396
What you're confusing for being "upset" is a fascination of tying your ego to the marketing capacity of Glock for validation. That's understandable though, confusion seems commonplace for you.
I'm not "tying my ego" to anything. I like Glocks. I have half a dozen of them. I also like 1911's. I have an even dozen of them. I can't even give you an accurate estimate of how many revolvers I have, both single and double action. I won't even get into long guns. So do yourself a big favor. And in the process you'll stop looking so foolish. Stop calling anyone and everyone a, "fanboy" who gives credit where credit is due, to a successful firearms manufacturer. Whomever they happen to be. There are many others besides Glock. They just happen to be the most profound at it in the last 3 decades. It's your problem if you can't deal with the facts, which you've more than proven you cannot. It's why you're so bothered by it all.
Sure you are....
Let's go through the progression of the goalpost movement...
You: post an article that read like an advertisement
Me: Meh
You: Talk about Magazine interchangeability and essentially modularity
Me: Explain that several manufacturers have caught on, cite the P320
You: State that Glock doesn't change and wonders if Sig's contract will work out for them.
Me: Cite the Military contract Sig just won, that Glock has never been able to get.
You: Bring up Colt?
Me: Good idea, Colt stayed the same and went in the tank, due to not catering to it's civilian public, after the slowing or loss of military contracts.
You: Talk about how Glock appeals to the public wants.
Me: Not really or they would've brought in the SS 9mms and a carbine 10years ago.
Me: Post current sales numbers showing that the SS 9mm is apparently king right now, proving my point. I also post some numbers that show the success of other companies.
You: Complete fly off base and talk about Glock being a private company and post his plane? LOL
Me: Posting a response to another poster in terms of M&P vs Glock, gave my opinion in terms of sights, ergos, and trigger... but posted some pics of Glocks KBs.
You: Post pics of a .40 shield, in which I admit they've had problems. (keep in mind the shield vs glock argument isn't mine)
Me: Post pics of unsupported barrels from Glock vs M&P and XD.
You: Post an article in which you didn't read touting your 10 to 1 theory of Glocks vs M&P (as if this means anything significant) but like I said... you didn't read it LOL. In the title it was shields only, which is impressive. Further adding to my point that Glock should've made a SS 9mm sooner.
Me: I point out your error in not reading your own link.
You: Start demanding that I come up with total M&P model sales?
This went on for awhile.... then I state that I don't believe in putting a .40 in a gun designed for 9mm.
You: Lose your mind and the whole "No manufacturer has built a handgun around the .40 S&W" tirade came soon after.
Me: Provide several models where this has happened. (common knowledge)
You: Cite SAAMI Pressure as a reason why 9mm is equal to .40 so why would a manufacturer build out components of a handgun.
Me: Provide that it has little to do with wear and tear, or rather is just an aspect of such. (common knowledge)
You: Relay that no .40 guns are spec'ed differently.
Me: Yes they are, and here's a few examples.
I let the stupidity go from there... but... there were some comments comparing Browning to Glock.
Me: Comparing Glock to Browning or believing that there's not been a successful firearms innovator since Browning is honestly just hilariously ignorant. Cite several examples.
You: But he's the best firearms marketer ever!!!
So in a nutshell, I've stated my opinion on glocks, still own one, don't own an M&P, wasn't my argument. What I don't care about is someone that relays misinformation. You seem to be a lightning rod because you mix opinion with facts. So like anyone else on this forum, especially if the subject were pertaining to oil, when someone relays [censored], then they are called out on it. Seems the more you called out on it, the more you shovel it out.
Good Lord, as the commercial say's, ask your doctor of Paxil is right for you. As I said, the sheer amount of time you've spent putting all of this together, proves how much all of this bothers you to no end. I've told you time and time again, just how much I love jerking your chain. It would appear now I've managed to break it off. For that I apologize. After you get it welded, come on back, and we'll play some more. Until then..... Have a [censored] of a day!
Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: JDM396
What you're confusing for being "upset" is a fascination of tying your ego to the marketing capacity of Glock for validation. That's understandable though, confusion seems commonplace for you.
I'm not "tying my ego" to anything. I like Glocks. I have half a dozen of them. I also like 1911's. I have an even dozen of them. I can't even give you an accurate estimate of how many revolvers I have, both single and double action. I won't even get into long guns. So do yourself a big favor. And in the process you'll stop looking so foolish. Stop calling anyone and everyone a, "fanboy" who gives credit where credit is due, to a successful firearms manufacturer. Whomever they happen to be. There are many others besides Glock. They just happen to be the most profound at it in the last 3 decades. It's your problem if you can't deal with the facts, which you've more than proven you cannot. It's why you're so bothered by it all.
Sure you are....
Let's go through the progression of the goalpost movement...
You: post an article that read like an advertisement
Me: Meh
You: Talk about Magazine interchangeability and essentially modularity
Me: Explain that several manufacturers have caught on, cite the P320
You: State that Glock doesn't change and wonders if Sig's contract will work out for them.
Me: Cite the Military contract Sig just won, that Glock has never been able to get.
You: Bring up Colt?
Me: Good idea, Colt stayed the same and went in the tank, due to not catering to it's civilian public, after the slowing or loss of military contracts.
You: Talk about how Glock appeals to the public wants.
Me: Not really or they would've brought in the SS 9mms and a carbine 10years ago.
Me: Post current sales numbers showing that the SS 9mm is apparently king right now, proving my point. I also post some numbers that show the success of other companies.
You: Complete fly off base and talk about Glock being a private company and post his plane? LOL
Me: Posting a response to another poster in terms of M&P vs Glock, gave my opinion in terms of sights, ergos, and trigger... but posted some pics of Glocks KBs.
You: Post pics of a .40 shield, in which I admit they've had problems. (keep in mind the shield vs glock argument isn't mine)
Me: Post pics of unsupported barrels from Glock vs M&P and XD.
You: Post an article in which you didn't read touting your 10 to 1 theory of Glocks vs M&P (as if this means anything significant) but like I said... you didn't read it LOL. In the title it was shields only, which is impressive. Further adding to my point that Glock should've made a SS 9mm sooner.
Me: I point out your error in not reading your own link.
You: Start demanding that I come up with total M&P model sales?
This went on for awhile.... then I state that I don't believe in putting a .40 in a gun designed for 9mm.
You: Lose your mind and the whole "No manufacturer has built a handgun around the .40 S&W" tirade came soon after.
Me: Provide several models where this has happened. (common knowledge)
You: Cite SAAMI Pressure as a reason why 9mm is equal to .40 so why would a manufacturer build out components of a handgun.
Me: Provide that it has little to do with wear and tear, or rather is just an aspect of such. (common knowledge)
You: Relay that no .40 guns are spec'ed differently.
Me: Yes they are, and here's a few examples.
I let the stupidity go from there... but... there were some comments comparing Browning to Glock.
Me: Comparing Glock to Browning or believing that there's not been a successful firearms innovator since Browning is honestly just hilariously ignorant. Cite several examples.
You: But he's the best firearms marketer ever!!!
So in a nutshell, I've stated my opinion on glocks, still own one, don't own an M&P, wasn't my argument. What I don't care about is someone that relays misinformation. You seem to be a lightning rod because you mix opinion with facts. So like anyone else on this forum, especially if the subject were pertaining to oil, when someone relays [censored], then they are called out on it. Seems the more you called out on it, the more you shovel it out.
Good Lord, as the commercial say's, ask your doctor of Paxil is right for you. As I said, the sheer amount of time you've spent putting all of this together, proves how much all of this bothers you to no end. I've told you time and time again, just how much I love jerking your chain. It would appear now I've managed to break it off. For that I apologize. After you get it welded, come on back, and we'll play some more. Until then..... Have a [censored] of a day!
Last edited by a moderator:
