Eh, Dits has plenty of criminals who already know who/where he is as well as the government. Nothing really has changed as he has more to worry about from local clients than people on here
H&K is not something to sneeze at, they were repurposed at every opportunity back in the day. Get as many as you can. They work.
Today we learned the USP. Tomorrow we'll go over the LEM trigger. After I was finally able to name the parts and learn their functions, the weapon isn't as hard to put together as I thought. H&K does a damn good job with their instructions on how to assemble, disassemble, and trouble shoot. Funny thing is, they are designed so well that there's not much opportunity to actually fix them. We've had a couple of sear pins fall out, but that's because people have dry fired them with the slide off, or just monkey pawed them too much. And I don't think we've had any issues with our MP5's taking a dump.
Buddy is a ranger and worked in the armory. He gave me an mp5 and I cannot believe how it shots. The first time I fired it I almost dropped it hit a soup can way further than I ought to have, gave me real meaning to the terms driving nails. Same with a safari arm. 45 s&w
USP in a .40. Sadly, it's just ok for me for comfort reasons. Great gun, just doesn't fit my hand well......& I have big enough hands that my Glock 20 fit perfectly. Not to spark a debate, as I feel both companies make great weapons, but for me the Glocks fit better, generally cost less, & the simplicity and reliability is extremely high. These traits all exist with an H&K, but they just have an odd shape. No experience with their rifles.
The consensus has been that it's rare to experience problems at the range, or in other no-stress/low-stress situations. The gun fails when you don't grip it exactly right, which is more likely in a stress situation. I've seen them fail to fire in matches, during induced-stress training, and the like. The NJ State Police had standardized on them, bought hundreds, and then abandoned them after a few years because they found that their personnel did fine with them on the range, but there were too many "in the field" failures in stressful situations.