View Single Post
Old 02-25-2013, 11:25   #405
Senior Member
PhotoFeller's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Midwest and SW Florida
Posts: 3,741
Blog Entries: 2
Originally Posted by vandros View Post
Not sure how I feel about this, bro. I'm personally very disinclined to mess with the internals of my firearm (be it custom triggers, firing pins, connectors, barrels, etc.). I feel if gun was made and tested in certain specific configuration, then when we, non-experts (which includes many gunsmiths), start messing with this configuration bad and unexpected things are likely to happen with gun functioning. I'd err on the side of leaving it stock internally.

But, your desire to put an external safety on a glock is very understandable. Perhaps, we can appeal to glock to add this feature to some of its guns, given the # of unintentional discharges you quoted in your recent posts? That should appeal to glock's bottomline imho, given how many new shooters opt for glocks, then have unintentional discharges, and then forever switch to another weapon system...
I understand your point of view, and I'm still stewing about the decision to have a manual safety added. I dunno, I may not give in to changing something that has served me well for years (C3).

The gentleman who installs these kits is a well known custom gunsmith who guarantees the work for life. Glock's warranty doesn't cover the parts or his installation, but adding the safety is acceptable to Glock as not interfering with the factory warranty. The only modification of my gun would be the safety.

The safety kit was designed by a former LEO who saw first hand the NDs police departments were experiencing with Glock pistols.

Testimonials I've read on other forums say the safety works and looks like a factory installed component.

I'll probably try it on one pistol and evaluate it for my other Glocks. Maybe.

Last edited by PhotoFeller; 02-27-2013 at 10:47..
PhotoFeller is offline