Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.
Separate names with a comma.
If you consider yourself a beginner or an avid shooter, the Glock Talk community is your place to discuss self defense, concealed carry, reloading, target shooting, and all things Glock.
Discussion in 'General Glocking' started by rich47, Oct 18, 2013.
I'm not sure which is worse.
What's odd to me is that I'm sure that most if not all here have no problem with a manual safety on pistols that come with them (1911 example), but think the idea of a Glock with the same type of safety is rediculous. To me, it comes down to the quality/durability of the product, and not some strange bias against Glocks with manual safeties. If one shoots 1911's almost exclusively (example), and likes and is used to this type of safety and then gets turned onto Glocks, this seems to me to be a viable, legitimate option, despite the ridicule of some GT members.
No he didn't. If you READ his post he asks if any members had done that. I don't have one of those nor do I have any interest in one but I have no problem with someone else installing an item that was not blessed by "Saint Gaston" on his or her own personal property.
Nice, I just want to thank all of you who responded to my message.
I have no plans on putting this safety on my Glock, I just wanted to know if anyone has done this.
It is nice to know that everyone has an opinion about this manner.
Ive put a manual Thumb Safety on all 12 of my Glock Pistols. Ill post pictures later, most of me holding them, fondling them, etc... Heres a Link to have them install on all of your Glocks http://tenring.com/glock-pistol-work-2/
Cost is $135 including shipping and all the hate mail youre already received.
Screw them all. Most of them voted for Obama,
I carry a 1911 most of the time, do I'm no stranger to manual safeties. Glocks DO NOT have manual safeties. By adding a stupid and flimsy aftermarket part and ruining the frame, you're compromising that durability you just spoke of.
Glocks are not the only pistols without a manual safety. I think the notion of adding an aftermarket safety to any pistol is totally asinine.
it wasnt a 30s...it was a 30sf
That's great. Over $1600 to ruin 12 Glocks, real smart.
Hope you don't plan to try to resell them anytime soon.
I think you guys are nuts, but to each their own...
I think your the one that voted for Obama!!! Obama and all his liberal friends want every gun in America to have manual safeties and locks on them.
You were doing well in your response, right up until you won the "Insert Nonesensical Political Reference To The President, In A Thread That Has NOTHING To Do With The President Award." Congratulations!
To the OP, I never have. I'm of the mind to carry a gun the way it was enginneered, so yes my Glocks don't have a manual, safety, when I carry 1911's the hammer is cocked back, thumb safety engaged, (condition 1), and I fire double action revolvers in double action. That's just me. As others have said, it's your money, your property, do what you like.
I agree and it's a complete waste of money. I'm used to 1911s, but there are plenty of other guns out there with and without manual safeties. Adding one to a Glock is just not needed, especially since it's closer to a DAO pull.
You people need to read the OP. He didn't ask for opinions. He asked for information about the product. If you don't like the safety option or have experience with it, there is no reason for you to beat the OP up over his interest.
I don't have a Cominolli safety, but wouldn't object to one either. I can think of several reasons why someone would add one to their Glock, rather than buy a different brand. There is also at least 1 gunsmith offering a much improved version of the original Cominolli safety. I've seen pix on the net, but don't know who it is.
So, it's better to sacrifice the integrity of the design and the frame, because a person is afraid to use the gun as it was intended? Sounds great.
I just don't understand the logic at all. In my opinion, one of the dumbest mods in the gun industry.
I think the siderlock safety is just a little dumber. At least it doesn't alter the frame.
I think it is important to have a safety on a Glock. Good ones typically cost over $50. They are made of sturdy kydex, form fitted to the shape of the gun, completly cover the trigger guard, and the gun is pulled free from them with a firm "snap" sound.
I joined the NRA, have you yet?
Yeah, that one is pretty dumb as well. I actually saw a person at the range with one of those.
It's not doing harm to the gun, at least.
Who would make such a product?
I am as a matter of fact! Its so easy to bait these fools.
You spend $1500+ to put manual safeties on TWELVE Glocks, thereby ruining both integrity and value and you call us fools?
What planet are you from?