The scene has a British ex-military guy working for a private security company on a short-term job to protect a mansion against burglary while its owners are away. The guy is carrying a company handgun in a holster. The gun is bog-standard company issue and not intended for hitting targets at distance.
What do you think is the most likely make and model?
Thanks,
AJ
If it's here in the U.S., you're probably looking at a Glock 17 or 19, in 9mm. They're pretty standard now because they're relatively inexpensive, and very forgiving for maintenance. The big thing with them is that you will NOT have a live round in the chamber - the safety is you didn't put your finger on the trigger. So you have to rack the slide first. But then you get put 15 rounds downrange with ease.
(I own a Glock 17 Gen 4.)
If he has his own ankle gun, a simple Sig Sauer P-239 would work well for a back-up. That way he has similar ammunition for both.
http://www.criminaljusticedegreehub.com/popular-guns-for-law-enforcement/
Choose one.
Going by best-selling (private purchase) it probably would be the Glock G19.
If he was able to choose and chose what he knew, used and was comfortable with it would be either the Glock (17), Sig Sauer 226 or the Browning High Power.
http://www.criminaljusticedegreehub.com/popular-guns-for-law-enforcement/
Thanks for the link. My protagonist in my current story is ex-military (American) so I gave him a Smith & Wesson. Now, if it comes up in the story, I can say it's an M&P 9.
Thanks for the link. My protagonist in my current story is ex-military (American) so I gave him a Smith & Wesson. Now, if it comes up in the story, I can say it's an M&P 9.
While many police forces use the S&W, the U.S. Military used 1911A1's, usually Colt, until 1985, when it switched to the Beretta 92 (M9). Many branches use different weapons now.
I agree with Oyster about the Browning Hi Power. Unless they've switched recently that's the gun the SAS troops carry. Thus it's quite familiar to ex-military who might be working for a British private security company (assuming it's a "high end" company). It's 9mm so access to ammo shouldn't be a problem. And, while it may not be the most accurate in the class it's accurate enough.
Thanks, all. I'm sure the information will help many of us. While I'm familiar with many firearms, they're primarily for hunting, rather than defensive purposes.
Many thanks to everyone who replied.
Although not explicitly stated in the story, it's pretty obvious the setting is in the UK. Private security guards aren't usually allowed to carry guns (cf the hullabaloo when US presidential bodyguards were spotted carrying guns), but I'm giving the character an out by being on private land.
From your replies, the Glock 17 seems the winner. Can you see any problems with my claiming it was kept in a shoulder holster and the handler had little chance hitting a target at, say, 75 yards?
AJ
Can you see any problems with my claiming it was kept in a shoulder holster and the handler had little chance hitting a target at, say, 75 yards?
From my experience making custom holsters, shoulder holsters are readily available for most handguns from many sources. Custom fitted ones are another story however those can be obtained as well.
Accuracy regardless of range would depend on the individual shooter's skills for any standard range, 75 yards would be outside the standard range settings for handguns. Requiring an almost expert level in marksmanship.
As for the actual shooting I am definitely an amateur however.
he handler had little chance hitting a target at, say, 75 yards?
that would depend on his military background. General Army, they tend to train for 25 yards as the basic for a handgun, but special forces train for longer distances.
Private security guards aren't usually allowed to carry guns (cf the hullabaloo when US presidential bodyguards were spotted carrying guns), but I'm giving the character an out by being on private land.
I believe automatic handguns are prohibited in Great Britain regardless, except in very rare exceptions, so the private land factor doesn't come into it. Revolvers may be licenced for use for those who may have to kill animals, but primarily that is for humane reasons, so is most likely to be a vet, not a gamekeeper, and certainly not a security guard.
Move it to N.I. and the rules change slightly, but you are still extremely restricted.
Is a Glock 17 automatic?
Is there a non-automatic version?
I'll go with an unrealistic version of the story since it's only a minor detail but it would be nice to use something plausible.
AJ
I think its one shot per trigger pull. Of course I could be wrong although I have read where Glocks can be converted to switch between 1 round and 3 rounds per trigger pull. But I don't have any first hand knowledge of it.
The Glock is considered a semi-automatic, there is no 'non-automatic' Glock. A true automatic would continue to fire while the trigger was depressed, until it ran out of ammo. A semi-auto requires a trigger pull for every shot.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semi-automatic_pistol
A pistol is different than a revolver, although many people don't know the difference. A pistol typically has a magazine, or clip, which holds the rounds, while a revolver has a revolving wheel that holds the rounds. That link might tell you more than you ever wanted to know, but I hope it helps.
pistol typically has a magazine, or clip
When I was researching the parts of a pistol I read that a magazine and clip are not the same thing and the term cannot be used interchangeably. Most people mean magazine when they say clip.
That's correct. I included it because it has become common usage, not because they are the same. A gun owner would know, but a layman might not.
Is a Glock 17 automatic?
now we come to modern usage terms.
Full-automatic weapons are illegal to own in most countries, they keep firing while you hold the trigger back and are usually military weapons only.
Semi-automatic fires one round for each pull of the trigger, but will automatically load the next round from the magazine into the breech ready for the next shoot. Some time in the late 20th century a lot of reporters and politicians started calling semi-automatic weapons automatic weapons - thus the major confusion among the general public now.
Technically, dual-action revolvers are semi-automatic weapons because they rotate the cylinder to bring the next round up ready to fire, but you never hear the media call them automatic weapons.
Is a Glock 17 automatic?
As Ernest and others have said the Glock 17 is semi-automatic - meaning it reloads automatically, a trigger pull is necessary to fire it.
The Glock 18 is fully automatic, hold the trigger back and it fires until the magazine is empty.
http://www.military-today.com/firearms/glock_18.htm
That said, unless the shooter is very familiar with the weapon, and has some strength, where it's pointing after the first few shots is questionable. I've seen one fired, the shooter did a fair job of keeping it "near" the target but the gun tends to rise quickly after multiple shots.
Private ownership in the US requires registration with the ATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives under the US Justice Department or Department of Homeland Security), that registration also requires a hefty transfer fee every time the gun changes hands. Individual state laws also apply. Bottom line, while not totally "illegal" they're hard to get, and expensive.
Because of media portrayal I doubt most people in the UK (apart from the criminals) would know that possession of any hand gun was extremely tightly regulated - to the extent that even potential Olympic contestants have to practice overseas - so unrealistic would work. Neither guns nor ammunition are legally available, so finding an explanation of the source may increase plausibility....ex special forces booty or similar. Inheritance from a relative wouldn't work due to it being modern.
I've just finished a VERY rough first draft of the relevant chapter. If you're interested, let me know your e-mail address and I'll send it to you. You might have some idea how to make it less implausible.
AJ
You might have some idea how to make it less implausible.
Sorry, but that's not the way that SOL works.
I don't see why not.
AJ stated it was a VERY rough draft, so has acknowledged it needs smoothing out and rewriting. All he is asking is for a reader to spot a potential glaring error before refining the chapter further.
That strikes me as being an extremely practical approach.
If plausibility was a watchword on SOL then few stories would ever be posted.
You wrote, "I don't see why not." @Crumbly Writer
CW just neglected the smiley again. His joke was NO STORIES on SOL are "plausible", not that authors don't help each other here.
I don't see why not.
AJ stated it was a VERY rough draft, so has acknowledged it needs smoothing out and rewriting. All he is asking is for a reader to spot a potential glaring error before refining the chapter further.
It was a joke, implying that making a story "less implausible" runs counter to the other stories on SOL (i.e. all the 12" cocks, size GG breasts, people winning the lottery and fighting dinosaurs with a caravan of guns and ammunition). Guess I forgot my classical hard-to-comprehend smiley. :( Hint: That's why I highlighted the prefix, so you wouldn't miss it.
fighting dinosaurs with a caravan of guns and ammunition
A Long Time Until Now, by Michael Z Williamson.
Okay, it's not quite dinosaurs, but still a damn good read.
Yep, needs a smiley ;)
Personally I think that if you get the minutiae correct, it makes a really humdingingly implausible premise more disbelief suspensionable, and that's a good thing.
AJ
Personally I think that if you get the minutiae correct, it makes a really humdingingly implausible premise more disbelief suspensionable, and that's a good thing.
As we've discussed before, authors generally have a grace period of several chapters to establish the rules of their universe. If you establish that the story is largely implausible, readers will generally accept it. However, the key is to lock down the rules of your universe within the first three chapters, and NEVER violate those rules. Violating the laws of your own creation is more disturbing to readers than violating the laws of physics.
Sorry, but that's not the way that SOL works.
CW,
I know you refer to the many implausible stories on SoL - especially many of the heavy sex ones. However, I know of two stories on SoL that are in reality true stories in the full meaning of the term with only a few names changed or deleted for legal or anonymity reasons. I know the real status of the stories because I posted them.
I know you refer to the many implausible stories on SoL - especially many of the heavy sex ones. However, I know of two stories on SoL that are in reality true stories in the full meaning of the term with only a few names changed or deleted for legal or anonymity reasons. I know the real status of the stories because I posted them.
Understood. You always get a few delightful authors among the many fumbling amateurs (myself included in the second category). However, my objection to the "true" tag (in another thread) was because "truth" has earned a bad reputation on SOL due to people painting completely fictional stories as "true stories" in order to make then seem more authentic (rather than truthful or realistic). Note: they usually involve teen boys screwing every member of their family (save their father).
painting completely fictional stories as "true stories" in order to make then seem more authentic (rather than truthful or realistic)
yeah, and some of them have titles and blurbs that make it clear they're fiction - maybe we should tell Lazeez about the mis-tag when we find them.
You mean 'THE TRUE STORY OF KARA & KAL', tagged as 'true story', isn't literally true? Next you'll be telling me Father Christmas doesn't exist. :)
AJ
Private security guards aren't usually allowed to carry guns
Thinking back on this thread after I made my earlier post, I remember reading somewhere the main reason the security guards on large estates carry shotguns of the shortest legal length is because they don't need to get any special licenses for them, due to old laws on estate staff and ground keepers.
the handler had little chance hitting a target at, say, 75 yards?
If it's a stock (non-modified) weapon, then yeah, pretty much. If you're being forced to engage a target at 75 yards with a pistol, you're doing it wrong.
Heck, 25 yards is a long shot with a pistol, realistically. Most of the time you're engaging targets between 10 and 30 feet. Could you HIT a target at 50 yards? Yeah. But WHERE on the target is the key - because it's almost certainly no where near the bullseye.
Don't get me wrong - I can get my first round fired dead center or very close nearly all the time with my Glock. (Definitely with my Sig.) But after that? If you're on a range with lots of time, maybe. In a real life situation, no way.
Sure there is and it is called pure dumb luck. :)
There is another way. It's call spray and pray. Put enough rounds down range and one of them will hit something important.
Yeah, with a bit of pure dumb luck.
No, not pure dumb luck, dumb luck * volume of fire.
Increasing volume of fire greatly increases the odds that at least one round will hit the target. Put enough lead down range and the probability of hitting the target at least once approaches unity(100%).
That's true if you are controlling your point of aim.
However, Spray and Pray is just point it in the general direction of the target and wave it around hoping you get a hit (i.e., little to no aiming).
edit to add: also keep in mind we are talking about a semi-automatic handgun not an automatic rifle.
Sure there is and it is called pure dumb luck.
Hey, that's what most of us here depend on. Without literary and composition training, we're all winging it. However, most of the time, readers don't shoot back. If they do, it's likely to be from considerably more than 75 yards!
Although not explicitly stated in the story, it's pretty obvious the setting is in the UK. Private security guards aren't usually allowed to carry guns (cf the hullabaloo when US presidential bodyguards were spotted carrying guns), but I'm giving the character an out by being on private land.
The ownership and carrying of handguns in the UK is 100% totally banned. Our Olympic competitors have to train abroad if they are not in the armed forces.
You write that he is British ex-military but then
Since my protagonist is a former Army Ranger and did a lot of covert stuff,
SAS or SBS perhaps but never Army Ranger - that in itself would be close to illegal.
(I write "close to" because a UK citizen could not take the US army oath of service unless he was forcibly conscripted as happened during Vietnam)
The ownership and carrying of handguns in the UK is 100% totally banned. Our Olympic competitors have to train abroad if they are not in the armed forces.
What about ex-military? I've been watching the old episodes of Sherlock, and John Watson seems to carry a gun from time to time - not that tv is any reflection of real life.
As an aside, I do enjoy British TV, like Utopia and Humans and the aforementioned Sherlock. I don't know if that's because of the BBC, or in spite of them. Alas, I am not a fan of Dr. Who, which I'm led to believe makes me a Philistine.
Oh well, nobody's perfect.
No exceptions for ex military or ex police.
Apart from the strictly controlled restriction relating to a revolver for putting down an animal (which is usually done by shotgun anyway) handguns are only available to criminals.
What about ex-military? I've been watching the old episodes of Sherlock, and John Watson seems to carry a gun from time to time - not that tv is any reflection of real life.
Even in the military they cannot OWN handguns - they can be issued to military personnel whilst in the military. Even the police don't have handguns - they carry sub machine guns openly.
There might be a very few exceptions but they would have to have exceptional reasons like Royal Family bodyguards
Even the police don't have handguns - they carry sub machine guns openly.
Handguns have been standard issue to certain units for many years as they are easier to carry and access from the armed response vehicles. Though the carbines are more publicly visible, he Walther 9mm semi automatic pistol is issued to armed response teams - there may be others issued in different counties, but that is the one I know of - and obviously groups like the parliamentary & diplomatic protection group and royalty & specialist protection (PM & Ministers) are armed even though the hand gun may not be visible.
With the response teams they are required to obtain permission from a higher level before arms are used even though they are carried, but those with visible armament have different rules of engagement.
The ex army ranger was Switch discussing his character, not the initial one AJ was referring to.
a UK citizen could not take the US army oath of service
He could if he had dual citizenship.
I don't think dual citizenship is necessarily required.
The US army employs a fair number of mercenaries (non-citizens) in all parts of it's military, and there is no oath required for birth citizenship in the UK.
Anyone applying for US citizenship has to swear an oath to the US, and unless they have been in the UK forces or civil service they will never have sworn any oath of allegiance to the Queen. Many UK citizens do that each year. Going into the US military is just a short way to obtain citizenship for any alien, and is actually 'promoted' as part of enlistment.
I don't think dual citizenship is necessarily required.
sejintenej comment was:
(I write "close to" because a UK citizen could not take the US army oath of service unless he was forcibly conscripted as happened during Vietnam)
It seemed to me he was saying a person with UK citizen could not "voluntarily" take the oath because he wasn't a US citizen. Dual citizenship through your parents means the UK citizen could in take the oath for they would also be a US citizen.
Sorry, we are talking at slight cross purposes having taken different angles on it.
I don't believe that there can be any restriction - other than moral - on a UK citizen voluntarily joining the US military.
Dual citizenship would probably enable conscription, but since the US army openly welcomes aliens and promotes that as a path to citizenship I can't see there being a restriction on voluntary recruitment at the US end, and whilst a UK citizen may not be welcomed home if still only a UK citizen, I am not aware of any legal restriction unless it was recent.
Oddly enough, there appears to be no US restriction on serving in foreign forces either, as I seem to recall Rahm Emanuel served with the Israeli forces, but not the US ones, though is a US citizen by birth.
Yes, we do seem to have our wires crossed.
In order to join the US Military, you must be a U.S. citizen or resident alien. Thus a person who is solely a UK citizen cannot join the service, unless they are also a resident alien.
In order to join the US Military, you must be a U.S. citizen or resident alien. Thus a person who is solely a UK citizen cannot join the service, unless they are also a resident alien
That is what I was referring to - by being resident in the USA they don't lose UK nationality and normally would not be allowed to take a foreign military oath. However for Vietnam they were forced into service .....
Although not explicitly stated in the story, it's pretty obvious the setting is in the UK.
Can you change the setting? Perhaps you could have whoever the security guards are working for being on holiday or a business trip?
The story may be easier to write if set in the land which enshrines the right to commit suicide and accidental homicides in its Constitution.
Glock 17
Just in case readers want yet more of the story, what sort of forensics are likely to be available after the firing of a Glock 17?
From various fictional CSI progs, I've heard terms like 'gunshot residue', 'shell casings' and 'spent bullet'. Are they relevant in this case?
Thanks for your help,
AJ
what sort of forensics are likely to be available after the firing of a Glock 17?
There's a shell casing for each round fired. In a revolver they stay in the cylinder until dumped out for reloading, in a semi-automatic and automatic they get kicked out as part of the automatic reloading - depending on the weapons and round they can kick a fair distance.
(NB: some special weapons use a caseless round, then there is no casing or gunpowder residue)
Gunpowder residue happens with most hand guns, more common with pistols as more of the residue is blown out the side between the cylinder and the barrel. However, with most semi-automatics and automatics a little is blown out the side with the ejected casing. The residue will settle on anything near it, such as hands and clothing. That's one reason why a lot of professionals put on gloves, so it doesn't get on their hands.
edit to add: some goes out the end of the barrel with or just after the bullet. If the target is close enough to the weapons when fired some of this will be embedded in the surface of the target - this is how they tell is the person was shot at very close range.
The third item is the bullet will end up somewhere, usually by hitting something or just falling to the ground after running out of energy (but that's going to be a long way away. In most cases the bullet will end up stuck in something in the direction the gun was fired - eg wall, tree, car, ground, etc. It's common for a round to miss and end up very far away, often so far away they don't find it.
typo edit
in a semi-automatic and automatic they get kicked out as part of the automatic reloading
So with a Glock 17, which I understand is semi-automatic, there'd be a couple of shell casings on the ground if two shots were fired.
Thank you,
AJ
So with a Glock 17, which I understand is semi-automatic, there'd be a couple of shell casings on the ground if two shots were fired.
There would be, unless the shooter policed his/her brass.
unless the shooter policed his/her brass.
Then there is that handy-dandy little bag accessory that catches the casing when it is ejected. :)
I know you thanked everyone for their input before I came across the thread. However, I would say the make/model selected would be the cheapest on the market, unless of course the owner/senior management needed to carry a weapon and had to use the one the company selected.
Well, this thread caused me to change the pistol in my story. I wanted it to be an American made pistol, but I just read the Navy Seals use the Glock 19 9mm. Since my protagonist is a former Army Ranger and did a lot of covert stuff, I'm switching to the Glock 19.
http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/the-navy-seals-may-have-selected-a-new-pistol-of-choice-1749620057
