No More Glock Butt

[DavidH1]

Glock Manual Safety Kit by Cominolli Custom | USA Carry

Cominolli Custom come up with an external safety for Glock Pistols

[Links2k]

Not for me or my Glocks.

[Murgatroy]

Not for me or my Glocks.

Ditto.

Kinda defeats the purpose of a Glock IMO.

[Erik88]

no thanks. I like my glocks without a manual safety.

[Glock30]

I had enough faith in the Glock safeties when I bought mine, that I feel no need to change anything. Otherwise, I wouldn't have bought a Glock in the first place.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

[Guest colombianito1021]

One more thing to think about when SHTF. No thanks.

[Guest cheez]

Glock is the perfect weapon. When you alter it it is no longer perfect. That said if you put one of these "safeties" on don't be surprised if you start having feed and function issues.

[TN-popo]

Cominolli Custom come up with an external safety for Glock Pistols

Over 10 years ago...

Also, from the article you linked, "Two articles by Massad Ayoob stated that this pistol should not be CCW carried without the MSK installed..."

1. I read the same two articles. Unless I missed something, I didn't see a quote anywhere close to this.

Not sure where Mr. Kirkpatrick got this.

2. It's a stupid thing to say.

Edited March 18, 2011 by TN-popo

[Guest TnValleyBulletman]

Not for me.

[Guest rebeldrummer]

this is a def NO GO for me and my Glocks.....

[crossfire]

No thanks, not for me.

[Steelharp]

Yet another solution where there is no problem.

[JPS]

Ain't gonna happen.

[hipower]

One question......Why????

[Reservoir Dog]

No way in Hell I would do this to my Glocks!

[mikegideon]

The way to avoid Glock butt is by NOT pulling the trigger when it's pointed at your butt. If that is too difficult, you'll probably be better off carrying something less lethal... like a stick.

[Guest 10mm4me]

If you are not competent enough to safely handle a stryker fired pistol w/out a safety, you do not need to handling guns. The only guns that require a safety are 1911's and long guns.

[Guest BungieCord]

That's be like adding a chastity belt to Angelina Jolie.

[Guest BenderBendingRodriguez]

Maybe we should direct this to the attention of the guy who did the amazing Glock review discussed here http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/handguns/54893-worst-gun-review-ever-funny.html

His Glock can finally be safe, and he will finally know why he bought the thing!

[DUXBUSTER]

I liked the video on how to Detail Strip The Glock. Answered the question on the trigger connector.

[Guest DanE479]

I wish I could swear on this forum to fully express my opinion of this product and the guy that came up with it.

He's a retard.

[I_Like_Pie]

I wouldn't retrofit my revolvers to have a manual safety. Considering the glock is the functional replacement of the revolver and the user input is intentionally the same...there is no real need for a manual safety.

However it isn't a "stupid" device or one that has been Shunned by glock because they are already "perfect" in their words. I do recall Glock actually supplying their guns at one time with a similar setup to certain departments (mainly overseas). Even had a product number for them if I recall correctly. Thus there was a need for such a device where police deparments required a manual select safety

[Mark A]

I don't know, maybe this is a good thing. Think how many more DEA officers we would have if this had been in place so they wouldn't shoot themselves in a class room...

[daddyo]

I've never understood why someone would think they need an external safety on a DAO weapon. Maybe I'm just stupid...

[Guest DanE479]

People keep wanting a hardware solution to a mindset problem.

It's retarded, stupid, and modifying a pistol by cutting a channel in it is the height of stupidity for a problem that can be solved by one simple sentance:

Keep your booger hook off the trigger.