New safety for Glock 17. Is it possible for perfection to be improved?

die_hardgunnut

This invention has been talked about before AKA Magna-ring but it is for a modern-stryker-fired polymer gun and there is no ring to be worn. I find it interesting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_g07Zx3_6E&t=4s

die_hardgunnut

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSXWArzJiQ0

JKP

Where's the spam police?

die_hardgunnut

Do you think that this is spam?

HappySquid

Glock 17 already have a perfectly  good safety . Only idiots need an extra (shouldnt have a gun in the first place)

Wambli Ska

die_hardgunnut said:

Do you think that this is spam?

Is that you on the video?

bullsi1911

die_hardgunnut said:

Do you think that this is spam?

Yeah, I sure do. I was List leaving this for the regulars here to play with. 

Is this your invention?

die_hardgunnut

HappySquid said:

Glock 17 already have a perfectly  good safety . Only idiots need an extra (shouldnt have a gun in the first place)

I agree. Again, it is not for a civilian markets. It is not a "smart gun" device. IMHO a "smart gun" is a gun that resembles Judge Dread's gun to put it loosely. Something that is unique and only answers to you by imputing a pin code, unique radio wave, or fingerprint. We are not at this stage yet because every gun that is on the market with such features has flaws. America is about the freedom of choice, if this device is tested extensively and it holds true, why not allow it ? I understand the stigma and the fear. Even if it can save one life is enough for me. Those guys (police officers) literally put their lives on the line every day.

die_hardgunnut

Wambli Ska said:

die_hardgunnut said:

Do you think that this is spam?

Is that you on the video?

Yes, it is me. I love to invent things but sadly got no time. I have come to this stage of my life that I said to my self: "**** it, enough procrastinating, do what you love to do, life is slipping away and is short" I got many more. Some will be fun to build...

Wambli Ska

die_hardgunnut said:

Wambli Ska said:

die_hardgunnut said:

Do you think that this is spam?

Is that you on the video?

Yes, it is me. I love to invent things but sadly got no time. I have come to this stage of my life that I said to my self: "**** it, enough procrastinating, do what you love to do, life is slipping away and is short" I got many more. Some will be fun to build...

Well if you're trying to do this for a profit then it's SPAM and prohibited by the Forum rules which are posted here.  Not that we're trying to be bad guys, we are all in here just enjoying the place and talking guns and welcome anyone that wants to do the same and we all have that privilege for free courtesy of Guns and Ammo Magazine.  

BUT the Forum that is hosting us is sponsored by G&A, a company that needs to stay alive and make profits.  Their profits come from advertisement mostly.  So when someone uses the Forum to promote (advertise) their own ventures to try to profit it goes against their stated policy.

die_hardgunnut

Wambli Ska said:

die_hardgunnut said:

Wambli Ska said:

die_hardgunnut said:

Do you think that this is spam?

Is that you on the video?

Yes, it is me. I love to invent things but sadly got no time. I have come to this stage of my life that I said to my self: "**** it, enough procrastinating, do what you love to do, life is slipping away and is short" I got many more. Some will be fun to build...

Well if you're trying to do this for a profit then it's SPAM and prohibited by the Forum rules which are posted here.  Not that we're trying to be bad guys, we are all in here just enjoying the place and talking guns and welcome anyone that wants to do the same and we all have that privilege for free courtesy of Guns and Ammo Magazine.  

BUT the Forum that is hosting us is sponsored by G&A, a company that needs to stay alive and make profits.  Their profits come from advertisement mostly.  So when someone uses the Forum to promote (advertise) their own ventures to try to profit it goes against their stated policy.

Got it, I wish a did make even a dollar from this...lol If I make ANY profit it might be years from now but I see what you mean. I will not post anything more on my progress, the device is completed btw was just releasing what I have taped during my work.

Wambli Ska

die_hardgunnut said:

Wambli Ska said:

die_hardgunnut said:

Wambli Ska said:

die_hardgunnut said:

Do you think that this is spam?

Is that you on the video?

Yes, it is me. I love to invent things but sadly got no time. I have come to this stage of my life that I said to my self: "**** it, enough procrastinating, do what you love to do, life is slipping away and is short" I got many more. Some will be fun to build...

Well if you're trying to do this for a profit then it's SPAM and prohibited by the Forum rules which are posted here.  Not that we're trying to be bad guys, we are all in here just enjoying the place and talking guns and welcome anyone that wants to do the same and we all have that privilege for free courtesy of Guns and Ammo Magazine.  

BUT the Forum that is hosting us is sponsored by G&A, a company that needs to stay alive and make profits.  Their profits come from advertisement mostly.  So when someone uses the Forum to promote (advertise) their own ventures to try to profit it goes against their stated policy.

Got it, I wish a did make even a dollar from this...lol If I make ANY profit it might be years from now but I see what you mean. I will not post anything more on my progress, the device is completed btw was just releasing what I have taped during my work.

It's Ok to share your work, just not with the intent of making money off it.  I will tell you, as a crowd we don't take well to Glock "improvements" 

die_hardgunnut

bullsi1911 said:

die_hardgunnut said:

Do you think that this is spam?

Yeah, I sure do. I was List leaving this for the regulars here to play with. 

Is this your invention?

Yes Sir, it is.

Bigslug

Well, there are some philosophical points - indeed, philosophical differences - that will come into play with something like this.

First and foremost in my mind is "If you wanted a safe job, maybe you shouldn't have become a police officer".  Not only can you be shot with your own gun, you can be shot by someone else's gun, stabbed, beaten, run over by vehicles, fall out of a tree rescuing a kitten, suffer cardiac arrest from the strain of odd-hour shift work, etc...  The fact is, your job is to run TO danger, and introducing even a perfectly-functioning release-disable firearm only takes a tiny drop out of the ocean of things that can do one in.

Second in my mind is that once having decided to become a police officer, you need to be adopting a mindset of "you will die from my teeth in your throat before you gain control of my sidearm".  If that's not a frame of mind you are comfortable getting into, see my first point.

Third in my mind is that the most important attribute of any combat arm is that IT MUST WORK.  These magnetic devices are much like the magazine disconnects on certain pistols in that they are deliberately put there to create a state of affairs where the weapon DOES NOT WORK.  Mr. Murphy LOVES devices like that.

Which brings my to my fourth concern:  having skimmed your videos, I BELIEVE the direction you're going with this is that the police officer must be wearing a pair of gloves with magnets in the webs of the hands.  That officer will be taking these gloves off to:

* sit down and eat lunch. . .
* use the toilet and wash their hands after. . .
* work a plainclothes assignment where the "tactical" look won't fly. . .
* perform any task where maximum dexterity is needed. . .
* not suffer heatstroke on a hot day. . .
* Additionally, these gloves and their weapon interface hardware will require some modicum of cleaning and maintenance to ensure reliability.  Guess what cops aren't great at?
* Finally, no equipment innovation remains static.  Criminals can learn of these things and take steps to defeat them.

In short, I see such devices having great potential to introduce MORE scenarios in which a police officer could be killed because their sidearm has been rendered non-functional in an attempt to remove ONE scenario in which they could be killed.

While I truly do appreciate where you're attempting to go, I think you've not fully considered the whole spectrum of the problem.

Elk creek

Bigslug summed it up beautifully! I’m personally in the Glocks are just fine camp without cluttering them up. I’m even thinking the trigger safety tap is a bit far, but that’s me. Your invention is fine for a range toy or for someone that will never actually use it for defense. That modification is frankly dangerous in the fact that the firearm will not function as it is designed. Sure you redesigned the system to work with a magnet in the web of you hand, but that’s not common to Glocks. Have your shot that Pistol much? Have you ran, say, 500 rounds through it every day for a week? My guess is the web of you hand would be destroyed having that magnet there after a a thousand rounds or so. Anything less than that is not a defensive gun but a range toy. Would never use that pistol modification for any defensive gun I use. Period. 

All that said it cool you came up with that. 

Bigslug

One other problem with the magnet gloves that just occurred to me - they'll also be coming off any time the officer needs to put on nitrile or latex gloves for handling evidence, administering medical aid, or contacting an individual that might have - to use the all-encompassing term - 'cooties".

Elk creek

Bigslug said:

One other problem with the magnet gloves that just occurred to me - they'll also be coming off any time the officer needs to put on nitrile or latex gloves for handling evidence, administering medical aid, or contacting an individual that might have - to use the all-encompassing term - 'cooties".

As one of the instructors in a bio hazard class said in the academy “if it’s sticky, it’s icky.” 🤣

Wambli Ska

I’m not adding a potential failure point to a perfectly good design.

I’m also not wearing gloves all year while concealed carrying.

Zee

Spk

Zee said:

And that's not even his 'Shootin' hand. 🙄

Diver43

Wambli Ska said:

I’m not adding a potential failure point to a perfectly good design.

I’m also not wearing gloves all year while concealed carrying.

But wearing a pair of operator gloves while grocery shopping would be so tacticool  
For real, I think the OPs heart is in the right place,  just did not think outside the thought box of saving an officer from being shot with his own gun.

Wambli Ska

Diver43 said:

Wambli Ska said:

I’m not adding a potential failure point to a perfectly good design.

I’m also not wearing gloves all year while concealed carrying.

But wearing a pair of operator gloves while grocery shopping would be so tacticool  
For real, I think the OPs heart is in the right place,  just did not think outside the thought box of saving an officer from being shot with his own gun.

I agree.  But it’s an idea that has been done and largely rejected by everyone, even the benefiting parties.  Will never really become a reality unless it becomes a government mandate.

Diver43

Wambli Ska said:

Diver43 said:

Wambli Ska said:

I’m not adding a potential failure point to a perfectly good design.

I’m also not wearing gloves all year while concealed carrying.

But wearing a pair of operator gloves while grocery shopping would be so tacticool  
For real, I think the OPs heart is in the right place,  just did not think outside the thought box of saving an officer from being shot with his own gun.

I agree.  But it’s an idea that has been done and largely rejected by everyone, even the benefiting parties.  Will never really become a reality unless it becomes a government mandate.

Shhhhhh don't give them any ideas

Elk creek

When that mandate rolls down we won’t have Glocks as a legal option…..

die_hardgunnut

Bigslug said:

Well, there are some philosophical points - indeed, philosophical differences - that will come into play with something like this.

First and foremost in my mind is "If you wanted a safe job, maybe you shouldn't have become a police officer".  Not only can you be shot with your own gun, you can be shot by someone else's gun, stabbed, beaten, run over by vehicles, fall out of a tree rescuing a kitten, suffer cardiac arrest from the strain of odd-hour shift work, etc...  The fact is, your job is to run TO danger, and introducing even a perfectly-functioning release-disable firearm only takes a tiny drop out of the ocean of things that can do one in.

Second in my mind is that once having decided to become a police officer, you need to be adopting a mindset of "you will die from my teeth in your throat before you gain control of my sidearm".  If that's not a frame of mind you are comfortable getting into, see my first point.

Third in my mind is that the most important attribute of any combat arm is that IT MUST WORK.  These magnetic devices are much like the magazine disconnects on certain pistols in that they are deliberately put there to create a state of affairs where the weapon DOES NOT WORK.  Mr. Murphy LOVES devices like that.

Which brings my to my fourth concern:  having skimmed your videos, I BELIEVE the direction you're going with this is that the police officer must be wearing a pair of gloves with magnets in the webs of the hands.  That officer will be taking these gloves off to:

* sit down and eat lunch. . .
* use the toilet and wash their hands after. . .
* work a plainclothes assignment where the "tactical" look won't fly. . .
* perform any task where maximum dexterity is needed. . .
* not suffer heatstroke on a hot day. . .
* Additionally, these gloves and their weapon interface hardware will require some modicum of cleaning and maintenance to ensure reliability.  Guess what cops aren't great at?
* Finally, no equipment innovation remains static.  Criminals can learn of these things and take steps to defeat them.

In short, I see such devices having great potential to introduce MORE scenarios in which a police officer could be killed because their sidearm has been rendered non-functional in an attempt to remove ONE scenario in which they could be killed.

While I truly do appreciate where you're attempting to go, I think you've not fully considered the whole spectrum of the problem.

Very well thought out points! I agree, the device MUST work at all times every time! I will be open with you too. I am at the stage that theoretically it should work but have not put it trough practice. Why? Because I am living in Canada. Some times I am so pissed at my dad that he did not emigrate to the US, actually constantly, because some of my inventions are connected with guns and will never see the light of day! We just got our handgun ban "freeze" implemented. Basically is a prolonged handgun ban. The red tape of testing something on a hand gun is immense. At the moment I am waiting on a friend who luckily bought a Glock before the freeze so we can go and test it hard. But there is a problem.

.

He has to get a permit to transport the handgun from home to the range, but on the range there cannot be any guns with modifications. You can't take your handgun and shoot it in the forest, this is strictly illegal. We are becoming like Australia or GB. The elites know that possession of guns by the regular working class is a problem. US gun owners, do not give an inch to the gun grabbers because see they are going the way our LIbtards went. Lucky you got the 2A but there are ways around that. First AR-15, then handguns, then all guns.

Sorry for the rant...So basically I haven't tested the device yet on the range. I don't know what a LEO should do when he is with bare hands. Keep in mind that (as I have shown) even a tiny magnet on the back of the gun will keep it in "ready to fire" position. He can simply put a magnet there while he is with no gloves? If he does not forget that is. Anyway, you got some good points.

Bigslug

die_hardgunnut said:

 I don't know what a LEO should do when he is with bare hands. Keep in mind that (as I have shown) even a tiny magnet on the back of the gun will keep it in "ready to fire" position. He can simply put a magnet there while he is with no gloves? If he does not forget that is. Anyway, you got some good points.

The issue then becomes one of readiness.  At the point the magnet is affixed to the pistol, it becomes a fully functioning Glock, and having it stuck on the back of the pistol at all times defeats your whole purpose.

Police contacts with the public can range from the totally harmless to clear cut cases of "you're about to go into combat".  In between those two extremes are "looks harmless, but becomes violent", and also "you just got ambushed".  This is a job of Forrest Gump's box of chocolates - you never know what you're going to get - and as such, the pistol needs to be ready to fire the instant it clears the holster without any special prep.  The officer simply does not have the time and the available brain capacity to take a magnet off his dashboard and snap it to his handgun while Chaos reigns supreme around him.

The answer to your quest (partial, at least) already exists in the form of the various retention holsters common in U.S. law enforcement.  These holsters require at least one, usually two, and in some instances, even three separate special motions to unlock the holster's grip on the pistol.  When properly trained up on them, the draw is not significantly slowed. This has the effect of making the handgun very difficult to draw if (A.) you don't know the steps, or (B.) if the officer is resisting your attempts to acquire the gun from their holster.  At that point, some commonly accepted answers (in the U.S., anyway), are that the officer draws a concealed backup handgun from the opposite side of their body and shoots the criminal off them, or presents a one-hand opening knife in much the same fashion.  The TASER is often carried on the opposite side of the body from the handgun to prevent accidental shootings with the wrong device under stress, but it can similarly come into play in defense of the primary sidearm, and is good for about 20 feet.

At the point the handgun is drawn against an aggressor determined to gain control of it, the best option is for that aggressor to first receive the bullets contained in that handgun.  If an officer is incapacitated and not in control of their firearm, there are plenty of ways for the aggressor to finish off the officer whether the firearm is working or not.  The "in between" scenario you are engineering for is largely addressed by the above retention holsters, backup weapons, Kevlar vests, and training in unarmed fighting techniques - none of which present the potential hazard of rendering their Number One piece of lifesaving equipment (their pistol) useless.

I hope my two posts help point out why there is a highly skeptical, "not on my gun EVER!" lack of enthusiasm about your device.  It's not a bad concept - provided all the above problems are considered and addressed.  At this point in time, officer awareness and training is, and probably will continue to be, the number one form of gun retention and safety.

Diver43

Whatever happened to the ring that did basically the same thing? No ring, the gun does not fire.

Wambli Ska

Diver43 said:

Whatever happened to the ring that did basically the same thing? No ring, the gun does not fire.

It went nowhere because this issue is basically a statistically insignificant problem.  When you take the number of “LEOs shot with their own gun” on any given year and then subtract the number of “I shot myself while holstering my gun with my finger still inside my trigger guard” and then further subtract self inflicted wounds because of negligent discharges because of poor gun handling during “administrative actions” (load, clear, holster and draw) you end up with single digit numbers (or zero) of actual instances in any given year when an officer actually loses his gun to a BG and gets shot with it.  

LE officers and their organizations know this so they are unwilling to take on the expense of extra equipment or gun mods and training on their use, to deal with a situation that should have been addressed with better retention and general safe gun handling training.

Diver43

Yea knew that just kind of pointing out it's been attempted before and disappeared

Wambli Ska

Diver43 said:

Yea knew that just kind of pointing out it's been attempted before and disappeared

I know you know.  A lot of times I answer for the benefit of the “guests” that lurk in this place…

die_hardgunnut

I am hoping very soon to go and drop it into a real Glock and dry-fire test it to work out any "kinks" and after that go to the range and put it through at least a few hundred rounds to see how it will react to foiling and how comfortable is going to be on the hand.