If you gave me one I'd sell it.I shot one in 1988 and thought it sucked,and think less of the company itself after hearing about their arrogant attitude and tactics.I shot one a few years later and it didn't change my mind any.
As Steve said,the ergos suck,the sights suck,and I think the swelling mags is a touch dumb.What I find really dumb is where they put the safety,even an inbred retart would question the logic of putting the safety in the damn trigger itself.What that tells me is the gun was designed for idiots that aren't bright enough to operate a normal safety or stay off the mag release-my God,is opperating a rifle way over their head?
I've never heard of Colt or HK leg either.Seems Glock wins the prize for idiots booting one in their leg, or their hand field stripping it-anothe bright freakin' idea there!
I never verified it but I heard reports in the early years some departments got a spiel about Glock' innovative polymer frame and polygonal bore-beep,wrong answer considering HK beat them by a decade.Like I said,I don't know for sure but considering some lawsuit threats for I've run across it wouldn't shock me.
I don't like them obviously but for the money they are a decent gun,the "Church of Glock" I just don't get.I think the intended design of KISS makes them dangerous and counterproductive to the goal,You don't hand someone unproficient in handling arms a gun with a fairly light trigger and for all intensive purposes has no safety.Brilliant.
I will only own one polymer gun,HK.The USP is a much stronger and better gun to me,and failures are slim compared to Glocks.
Just my opinion but you asked.If you like the gun,great,you need to have confidence in your gun,I just have no use for them.