- Messages
- 9,533
- Reactions
- 5,069
yeah, but it'll still be a glock...
I have many handguns and tend to be a cocked n locked kinda guy but I feel perfectly fine and well served carrying a Glock :woot:
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
yeah, but it'll still be a glock...
And lots of $$$$$$$$$$$, probably more than the gun is worth!All it takes is a good lawyer.......
Glocks are pretty tough and make a good carry gun that will likely survive the time in an evidence locker
Not so sure about that, did you see the pictures the NRA published of the firearms confiscated during Katrina and stored for several years in a leaky storage trailer?
Going back to the original question, a relative of mine was recently pulled over in St Helens by a local cop. He had a pistol in his vehicle in full view, however did not have a CCW. The police officer said that because it was concealed in a holster and loaded, he charged him with illegal possesion of a firearm and confiscated his pistol. Now Oregon state law clearly states that being in a holster is not concealed. It also makes no restrictions on a loaded firearm. My relative got in contact with a lawyer through the OFF, and during a pre-trial hearing a judge walked in and told the D.A. that it would not stick. The case was dropped. The lawyer said that was the first time in his career he'd seen that happen. So, with a bogus charge and a judge saying to drop it the police department in St Helens refused to release the pistol and wanted to hold it for another 3 months, for what I can figure to be only out of spite. It took a few more phone calls from a mutual friend of my relative and the police chief, but he got it back a little sooner. Guess it's all a matter of having a good attorney, where the law stands, or having a mutual friend of yourself and a crooked police department
You have to define "crappy". Makarovs don't jam. That is all I care about
So, the Glock is a magic weapon and leaves bigger, more ragged holes than say a Kahr in the same caliber?Overheard between to sheriff's deputies at the crime scene:
"What the heck happened to this guy?"
"Tried to rob John Citizen over there."
"John was armed?"
"Yep, put two in the perp's center."
"Jeez, really messed him up. Those are some ugly, crappy holes."
"Yeah, well it WAS a Glock."
Just so we all remember what it's really about.
So, the Glock is a magic weapon and leaves bigger, more ragged holes than say a Kahr in the same caliber?
I feel like in the event of a "situation" regarding a firearm, not only will the police seize the weapon, but you're likely going to need an attorney anyway (especially if it was a shooting/justified homicide) for your defense. This attorney will cost far more than even a really expensive pistol so you just have to chalk it up to having a weapon you enjoyed and were proficient enough with to defend yours or others lives, and if you never see it again, then it was a disposable tool and you purchase a new weapon, if you get it back- so much the better. If you're dropping 5-10g's on an attorney to defend yourself for justifiably capping some scumbag, losing a $600-$1000ish pistol isn't that big a deal. Not to me anyway. There's always another pistol at the gun shop
What are you basing this on?
I'm not aware of a rash of self-defense shootings that were in any way justified where the shooter was charged, much less convicted. The only case of which I'm aware recently was the case where the guy waited for suspected burglars and shot one of the unarmed suspects in the back as he was running away. Ya, if you do something that blatantly illegal, you're going to need a lawyer.