Depending on the military in question? Yes.

Because they're simple, durable, and cheap.

@karlboll, kick Him in the dick for me, if you find Him before I do

@xvarnah
From what I've found? It was too comply with a military contract. I don't understand either, because that height is not near elevated enough to peek over any suppressor or compensator that it can't already see over

@happy_frog
Granted, I'm not the biggest fan of Glocks in the first place. Though cheap and durable, I've found their factory trigger to be squishy even for a striker fired pistol vs a hammer fired one, I find the shape of the weapon awkward to carry, the weight settles strangely while aiming, the grip angle is too far deviated from other handguns, and the sights have a propensity to cover most of the target even at 20 feet. Nevermind that the shape of the grip is simply too bulky for people with smaller hands to comfortably wrap around it. Which isn't great for ergonomics.
Granted, I understand their popularity. Reliable, low maintenance, few controls, no manual safety, and cinematic saturation does make them a good pistol for home defense or military service, and a great handgun for new enthusiasts. Especially taking into account the vast aftermarket it has accrued. Funny to imagine that the "Glock" was the company's first foray into firearms?

@happy_frog
If you think I should say more, I'm ecstatic to oblige. I recently found out that the 5th Generation Glock 19 has stock sight posts that are about 200ths of an inch higher than typical. Though I haven't been able to get hands on conduct my own tests, I've heard that this difference of a fraction of an inch is having a profound effect on some pistoleers. A couple I know personally to be capable of extraordinary feats of accuracy with their older model Glocks are maintaining their high precision, but the shots are grouping low. This can of course be mitigated by aftermarket sights, or even electronic optics. But I don't like that Glock allowed that kind of change to pass unannounced or compensated for.

Fair points across, Xvarnah.

"Fascism is a nativist, nationalist, and imperialistic system of government that totes military action and conquest of lesser peoples as their foundational doctrines."
Are you describing Castro? Che? The Soviets? CCP? This holds true for literally all communists and fascists.

And all tyrants hate competition.
Totalitarian statists that aggregate power for themselves and regard the people as resources and state property, while ultimately claiming every bit of value, labor, and blood, as theirs alone.
The issue of race is a product of the Era, not any government. As every nation with any system hated certain races. Imperial Japs, Democrat Americans, Nazis, British, Indians. It's a non-point to try and attribute racism to any political system.
If the Nazis were commie, and the Soviets were fascist, what would be different from how they were?

For once, I'm not being hyperbolic. The Chinese people are slaves. A self-replenishing resource leased by the state for cheap labor to the likes of Iran, North Korea, USA, several African nations. Nevermind that Chinese people are being held in concentration camps to supply the organ trade. And none of that is capitalistic, there is no free trade or open market. Maybe some industrialists can avoid the plight of the other slaves by advancing the Party agenda, being too smart to waste, or well-connected enough to not have to play by rules. But they still serve at the pleasure and for the benefit of the State. They can't assemble for protest or prayer, have no privacy, no freedom of movement or information. They are slaves.
Don't look at me with a straight face and tell me communist party members don't live better lives with "defacto" property based on connections or race.
And of course fascist writings hated commies. They were the same, headed by the same kinds of tyrants.

I won't presume to know more about Canada than you, but I am thankful that you're willing to educate us and shine light on the issues. And I really to hope that many more people are willing to follow the example set by your truckers.

Nationalism is just as prevalent in fascist systems as it is communist ones.
As for your description of fascism, are you sure you're not projecting Nazism over fascism? Actual fascists I've talked to have taken great offense to the idea that anybody is "elite" or "undesirable". They're very practical, insisting that there are those who benefit the state, and those that have earned state benefits.
Private property does not truly exist in a fascist nation, as fascism is just the state. Nothing except, against, or outside, the state. Ultimately there is no private property to either of them. "Defacto" land ownership is not land ownership anymore than a nation is democratic while still having a dictator.
And I'll argue too that China is not capitalist, as their government is selling the people as slave labor for state benefit. If anything, China is closer to your given definition of Fascism, which I would be willing to concede is "Fascism with Chinese characters". As Nazism was European.

Is there even a word for that kind of read?

Say what you mean.

Repressing? Really? I know you can do better than that, karl.

I am more than happy not to fight. But I will be goddamned before I keep my mouth shut while self-righteous fucks who are glad to harrass me and my friends but are so weak they have to censor my name, run rampant and shit on everything I have sworn my life and honor to.
Those people are not our lords, and they are not right, and I'm sick of them thinking they get to say whatever they want and nobody gets to say anything back! Have you seen the shit happy_frog has been saying!? General failure? Karbol?
To me? To xvarnah who carries this site on her back? To adam44 when he tries to call out their harassment? To anybody who dares to respond to their insults and attacks? Just look at their comment and post histories, and then try to tell me that I'm the problem.

I'm just trying to balance things out, and bring to light lies and corruption that has stolen two years from us.
More than that, I'm sick and tired of keeping my head down while others treat me and mine like a disease, like sub-humans. Acting as though we're wrong to maintain ownership over our own damned bodies and want to hold on the freedoms that are being stolen from us.
Do you even realize that I'm not provoking anything? This is a reaction. To a world gone mad and a people that would treat me as anybody's property.

You can't even type my username? Is it a curse? Does my online alias actually cause you harm? Amazing. I have never had this much power over someone.
Of course funk has more strength and character than you, he's good people. But give him more credit, being better than someone who feels the need to censor a profanity-free online alias is a bar so low that most corpses could clear it with ease.

Lol, what? You think they're mutually exclusive? The ven diagram of commies and fascists is a circle.