The Gadget: an additional safety device for Glock pistols

[lx1x]

Would you say the same to the manufacturer of a hammer fired gun?

The gadget is a "safety device". Now it's still require the user to push the back plate to work.

What mark is saying if a guy forgot to put his thumb in the back and has ND.

 

[Traveler]

This is becoming like golf.

 

[RationalGun]

The gadget is a "safety device". Now it's still require the user to push the back plate to work.

What mark is saying if a guy forgot to put his thumb in the back and has ND.

So how is that any different than a guy forgetting to engage the thumb safety on a 1911 or CZ or so-equipped M&P?

 

[BradMacc82]

This is becoming like golf.

Not really, I occasionally check back on this thread...

 

[RoadDawg]

If in close quarters, and someone grabs your J frame and apply pressure to the hammer (when not cocked), or gets their finger inside the hammer in any hammer fired weapon, they will have similarly disabled the firearm. This fact has not stopped LE and others from carrying revolvers and 1911s for many years.

For many years, many have learned to ride the hammer with their thumb when re holstering a firearm with a hammer, as a part of the safe re-holstering process, to prevent an AD/ND. This device simply allows the striker fired glocks to do the same.

If you are cool with your Glocks without it, awesome. If you think it could help you be a bit more sure when re holstering, also awesome.

Which is one of the reasons why I suggested the Glock to Major Pat Bradley when the BPD was considering the change to a 9MM pistol from the .38cal revolver. Other than forcing the slide out of battery, there is no external device to stop the Glock pistol from being fired. And in the case of a person pressing the slide out of battery in a CQB... simply pulling the pistol forcefully away from the combatant is normally enough to return it to battery as you pull it away. Thereby allowing you to regain use of the pistol.

As for your/their "gadget". I hold no animosity toward you, them or the device personally. However, the "soft roll out" on this forum, prior to announcing the sale date and the way the thread came off sounding scripted like a 3AM Infomercial was a bit much. And the Professional side of me sees the device as a huge liability in CQB and Self Defense scenarios. I question if the idea was even considered by the designers? And I wonder if it will be taken into consideration now?

I will stay with the system I know from years of training... And the concept that the most important SAFETY device on ALL firearms, is the gray matter between the ears of the person who holds that firearm.

 

[Traveler]

I will stay with the system I know from years of training... And the concept that the most important SAFETY device on ALL firearms, is the gray matter between the ears of the person who holds that firearm.

Well said sir. If a person can't operate one mechanical device according to instructions, how will adding another step make them more competent?

 

[mopar92]

Which is one of the reasons why I suggested the Glock to Major Pat Bradley when the BPD was considering the change to a 9MM pistol from the .38cal revolver. Other than forcing the slide out of battery, there is no external device to stop the Glock pistol from being fired. And in the case of a person pressing the slide out of battery in a CQB... simply pulling the pistol forcefully away from the combatant is normally enough to return it to battery as you pull it away. Thereby allowing you to regain use of the pistol.

As for your/their "gadget". I hold no animosity toward you, them or the device personally. However, the "soft roll out" on this forum, prior to announcing the sale date and the way the thread came off sounding scripted like a 3AM Infomercial was a bit much. And the Professional side of me sees the device as a huge liability in CQB and Self Defense scenarios. I question if the idea was even considered by the designers? And I wonder if it will be taken into consideration now?

I will stay with the system I know from years of training... And the concept that the most important SAFETY device on ALL firearms, is the gray matter between the ears of the person who holds that firearm.

Also a viable tactic with a Glock in CQB is if the slide is pressed out of battery and the assailant is on top of you is to press your thumb on the back of the slide to return it to battery and firing a shot.

It WILL cause a failure to eject but it gives you one more chance. This gadget would eliminate this chance.

What we have is another gadget that seeks to eliminate and supplant good training.

 

[RoadDawg]

It works exactly the same as a hammer fired gun with regards to your hypothetical scenarios. Do you feel that hammer fired guns are unsafe from your viewpoint as a CQB veteran?

As a matter of fact I do see the exposed hammer as a disadvantage to be exploited in the case of CQB. And I have used that disadvantage against another person when we were battling over his revolver. Gripping the cylinder and holding it so that the person could not pull the trigger stopped the revolver from being fired. We were actually trained to do that in tactical self defense course at work.

You want to challenge that concept? Fine... Prove to me that the external "STOP" of the Gadget will not be used to disable the pistol and allow a combatant to remove the pistol from the fight when the victim can least afford to lose that pistol as their means of defense.

Don't pose questions to me about old tech... Prove to me that the new tech is not a liability.

 

[RoadDawg]

Also a viable tactic with a Glock in CQB is if the slide is pressed out of battery and the assailant is on top of you is to press your thumb on the back of the slide to return it to battery and firing a shot.

It WILL cause a failure to eject but it gives you one more chance. This gadget would eliminate this chance.

What we have is another gadget that seeks to eliminate and supplant good training.

And that ONE shot... may be the ONLY one you need to save your life.

 

[RationalGun]

As a matter of fact I do see the exposed hammer as a disadvantage to be exploited in the case of CQB. And I have used that disadvantage against another person when we were battling over his revolver. Gripping the cylinder and holding it so that the person could not pull the trigger stopped the revolver from being fired. We were actually trained to do that in tactical self defense course at work.

You want to challenge that concept? Fine... Prove to me that the external "STOP" of the Gadget will not be used to disable the pistol and allow a combatant to remove the pistol from the fight when the victim can least afford to lose that pistol as their means of defense.

Don't pose questions to me about old tech... Prove to me that the new tech is not a liability.

Compare bios with Southnarc if you like. He posted the below at LightFighter. I strongly encourage you to stop by that thread there and debate with him if you don't believe him.

Todd gave me two gadgets a few years ago to put on two Glock 17 Sim guns to test this very issue. I ran them for a year and in that time had about 500 entangled gun fights with them in my coursework. I have yet to see the Gadget be the factor in a failure to fire. The vast majority of the time if it's a failure to fire it's the slide being pushed out of battery.

 

[Blaster229]

Tell me how you envision the Gadget making your thumb the "dominant digit on your shooting hand."

Because it is there, I bought it and feel the need to use it, when I don't really need to. Nobody needs an extra step to holster a pistol. Apparently it will keep me from shooting myself in the leg and Lord knows I don't want to do that. So, holstering with the thumb will become part of the ritual. Along with other shooting rituals. We all know keeping it simple makes no sense.

 

[RationalGun]

Well said sir. If a person can't operate one mechanical device according to instructions, how will adding another step make them more competent?

Using that rationale, we should eliminate all safeties on firearms.

 

[RationalGun]

So looking forward to everyone dismissing SouthNarc's words

 

[RationalGun]

Because it is there, I bought it and feel the need to use it, when I don't really need to. Nobody needs an extra step to holster a pistol. Apparently it will keep me from shooting myself in the leg and Lord knows I don't want to do that. So, holstering with the thumb will become part of the ritual. Along with other shooting rituals. We all know keeping it simple makes no sense.

It was pretty easy for me to learn and completely instinctive and I'm a dumbass jarhead with a gunshot and nerve damaged strong arm.

 

[Traveler]

Using that rationale, we should eliminate all safeties on firearms.

As an NRA instructor, I am told to remind people to NOT rely on manual safeties, as they are mechanical devices subject to failure.

Always keep the gun pointed in a safe direction.

Always keep your finger off the trigger until ready to shoot.

Always keep the gun unloaded until ready to use.

Any of this sounding familiar to you?

 

[RationalGun]

As an NRA instructor, I am told to remind people to NOT rely on manual safeties, as they are mechanical devices subject to failure.

Always keep the gun pointed in a safe direction.

Always keep your finger off the trigger until ready to shoot.

Always keep the gun unloaded until ready to use.

Any of this sounding familiar to you?

So that negates safeties and you don't use safeties?

 

[joppaj]

So that negates safeties and you don't use safeties?

I don't own a handgun with a manual safety...

 

[RoadDawg]

Compare bios with Southnarc if you like. He posted the below at LightFighter. I strongly encourage you to stop by that thread there and debate with him if you don't believe him.

Originally Posted by SouthNarc
Todd gave me two gadgets a few years ago to put on two Glock 17 Sim guns to test this very issue. I ran them for a year and in that time had about 500 entangled gun fights with them in my coursework. I have yet to see the Gadget be the factor in a failure to fire. The vast majority of the time if it's a failure to fire it's the slide being pushed out of battery.

.
FIVE HUNDRED GUN FIGHTS IN ONE YEAR??? WTF?

Okay... excuse me but I will be in my garage laughing my great great grandsons ass off for a while. At least he will still be laughing about that one long after I am dead and gone. So sorry but... I can't really see this as anything but BS.

500 gun fights in ONE YEAR Y'ALL!!! You go boy

ETA: I am so sorry... I seem to have forgotten "ENTANGLED".

(snicker... 5 HUNDRED... entangled GUN fights... )

 

[joppaj]

I think he's a trainer RD.

 

[RationalGun]

.
FIVE HUNDRED GUN FIGHTS IN ONE YEAR??? WTF?

Okay... excuse me but I will be in my garage laughing my great great grandsons ass off for a while. At least he will still be laughing about that one long after I am dead and gone. So sorry but... I can't really see this as anything but BS.

500 gun fights in ONE YEAR Y'ALL!!! You go boy

ETA: I am so sorry... I seem to have forgotten "ENTANGLED".

(snicker... 5 HUNDRED... entangled GUN fights... )

That was in training. Feel free to go tell him what for at LightFighter.net, it's quite LE friendly. You don't know who he is?