I get asked all the time what I think about whatever the new hotness gun is. But honestly, my answer is usually the same thing: I don't know, I don't care, find a good tool and stick with it.
Let me explain what I mean.
A Husky hammer looks nice but it’s a little rough around the edges. On the other hand, a Pittsburgh 16-ounce claw hammer with a fiberglass handle has superior ergonomics, feel, and craftsmanship. I mean, you could really drive a nail with that thing. But at the end of the day, both of them drive nails. They're tools. They're evaluated on one thing: how well they do the job.
That's how I think about guns.
Collectors vs. Protectors
There are two kinds of gun people. Collectors and protectors.
Collectors are out there collecting. They love the new features, they get excited about every new release, they've got a safe full of different platforms, and they're doing show-and-tell. There is not a single thing wrong with that. Guns are awesome, and tons of history can be felt holding an M1 Garand, a Henry 1860, or a M16A4. Way to go, America! Collect away! That's a legitimate pursuit!
It’s just not my main driver.
What I'm focused on is being a more effective protector and defender. And those two goals can and usually do lead to very different decisions about what you buy.
Choose a Tool, Not a Trend
When I think about a tool, I want a few things: reliability, a proven track record, and an ecosystem. That last one is what most people don't think about until it bites them later on.
Often guys buy some new gun, love the feel of it, love the look of it, and then immediately hit a wall. Where do I get a holster? Can't find one. Add a light? Now you definitely can't find a holster. Try to upgrade something? Parts are scarce and expensive. All because they chose a platform that doesn't have the infrastructure built around it.
You should have gone Glock. There I said it.
Or at the very least a Glock-based platform.
Now, I know what some of you are thinking. "I don't want a Glock just because everyone else has a Glock." And here's what I'd say to that: the fact that you're avoiding Glock specifically because everyone else runs one means you're denying the global credibility from countless military special operations, law enforcement, and countless civilians who have defended their lives with a Glock.
So seriously. Glock. It comes in at a good price point, has phenomenal reliability, and accessories are always built for Glock before anything else. Its simple design and manual of arms has earned its reputation. If I were leaving Glock tomorrow, I'd probably go with something based on Glock, and honestly, that’s what we did with our War Poet collaboration with Shadow Systems. It takes Glock magazines (which is my biggest requirement because I’ve got hundreds of them), and it fits Glock holsters (which is my second biggest requirement).
System Commonality Matters
Because here's the thing nobody talks about when they're chasing the new hotness: system commonality.
I don't want 12 different guns that each come with two magazines. I'd rather have a pile of magazines that work in all of my guns. I want the same caliber, same magazines, same holsters, same spare parts, same upgrades, and everything speaking the same language.
Also, the same grip angle matters more than people realize. It means the exact same presentation every time. Same draw. The mechanics are burned in, and they're consistent whether I'm dry firing, on the range, or under pressure.
My wife runs the same platform. So, we share everything: ammo, holsters, mags, accessories. If she picks up one of my guns in a bad situation, there's no fumbling, and no learning curve.
And it goes further than that. My airsoft guns fit my holsters. My blue guns fit my holsters. My UTM force-on-force stuff…you guessed it, fit my holsters. I just got a video simulator, and the compatible firearm system fits right into my Glock holsters while having the same grip angle, so every presentation I take in it transfers directly to what I'd run in the real world.
Every rep counts. Every rep should be the same rep. That's what platform commonality does for you.
Go Deep, Not Wide
So, the next time some new gun drops and everyone's talking about it, my question is the same: why not Glock? And more broadly, why not the thing that already works, that already has everything built around it, and that your whole system is already trained to?
You want to be a better shooter. You want to be a more capable protector. That doesn't come from buying more guns. It comes from buying the right tool, and then going deep on it. After that is achieved and you have the extra income and financial responsibility, knock yourself out collecting guns. I’ve got some cool stuff in my collection, but only because I first addressed the critical protector need.
So, find a good tool, stick with it, and build your defense system around it. Invest what you'd spend on the next gun into training instead.
Remember, Train Hard. Train Smart. And before you go buy something else, ask yourself whether you’ve met the objective protector requirements before you start collecting.
Comments (18)
Who says you can’t be both? I have a wide selection of historical firearms, most of which could still find a role to play in the modern world, but also a selection of AR’s in different configurations. I chose S&W’s M&P series over Glock; the M2.0 is simply a better gun and I will die on that hill, coming from someone who can shoot nearly any handgun well including Glocks. I abandoned the AK platform as a primary fighting option because of the safety; all things being equal, two people of equal training meeting in surprise close-range contact, the AR user will kill the AK user before the AK user gets their safety off. It’s a hard pill to swallow for some, but modern AR reliability makes the AK a non-viable platform as a point of contact weapon.
Couldn’t agree more, just not on the Glock part. The grip angle just doesn’t work for me. Learned on a rattly old 1911 in Grafenwöhr, and all my pistols have that (or close to that) grip angle. My preference is still a 1911, but I’ll also carry a Sig and a Walther. Holsters aren’t that expensive once you find the one that works, then just get one or two or… for each gun. Wish I’d have learned on a Glock, it would have been a lot cheaper come to think of it!
I’m both. I collect what I use(guns) to protect who I love(family) and what I own(property).
My wife bought a HELLCAT PRO several years ago but she can’t shoot it due to health issues. So I inherited her gun. I really like the Iron sights on it. Just drop the basket ball into the hoop! I bought a used Ruger .380 LCP Gen 1 a couple of years ago. It was a piece of fecal matter! Lousy sights, no slide/magazine lock, it had a 6 round mag and it took 2 men and a boy to rack the slide. I took it back to the gun shop and traded it in for a Ruger LCP MAX. I really liked it because the iron sights were almost identical to the HELLCAT iron sights. So I bought and really liked it. It was a real improvement over the crappy Gen 1. So one day on a lark I thought I would do a side by side comparison between the LCP MAX and the HELLCAT .380. I had no intentions of buying a HELLCAT .380 because I really liked the Ruger LCP MAX. But as soon as I put the HELLCAT in my hand I knew instantly that it was going to by my EDC. It was like love at first sight. It has Irons just like the HELLCAT PRO. It comes with a standard 13 round magazine compared to the 10 round for the Ruger. So I bought the HELLCAT .380 and sold the LCP MAX. I am a collector until I can find the right gun. Then I sell the others. BTW, I also have a bunch of GLOCKS but I’m keeping them!
Excellent column and good thoughts. Being “poor” (lol) makes it easy. I am 76 and still run my 50+ year-old 1911 with (custom) iron sights. I have a dozen quality mags and spare parts.
If I add another gun it will likely be a LE turn-in Glock ($300+) just to have a 9mm and a Glock.
Leave a Comment