I personally know 2 LEO’s who were in scuffle on the ground life/death fights that lead to the officer firing and killing the perp. One had to use a backup compact glock, the other was a glock 22. Luckily both prevailed, but one did fire a near contact shot to the head of the perp. My question is this, an automatic when pushed against a threat will be pushed out of battery and not fire. Does anyone know of a product that will mount low profile to the accessory rail and come up infront of the muzzle/slide to allow a contact shot or muzzle strike if needed that would prevent the slide from being pushed out of battery?
Said device could be removed easily for disassembly, maybe only be0.050-.075" thick, so it should not effect carry/use. Just something to come up and offer a standoff to the muzzle somewhat to allow a contact shot without inducing a malfunction. Does anyone think a device like this would be useful? It could also have a rail on the lower side, like some laser units, so that a light could be mounted below it.
I’m not sure if this is a viable answer/suggestion for your scenario but I find that a X300/X200/X400 works well when attached to a G19 or G17 in this capacity. While not designed for it, it does create standoff and prevents the pistol from being pushed out of battery at most contact angles. Sure an opponent could maneuver a body part to push the pistol out of battery from the muzzle end, but then again he could also do that by grabbing the slide, which would negate the effects of the assembly you described.
I’ve seen a device like the one you described a year or two ago on the cover of a gun magazine on a sig, when I get home I’ll see if I can dig up a picture.
I think the light may be the best option, providing additional utility. The option I think that would be the cheapest would involve a rail adapter and metal sides the create a “U”. The issue with said device would become apparent when you searched for a holster, and any issues with the employer. I will assume a WML is easier to get approved and holsters are made, including retention holsters, which I dont doubt are required.
I recall one being marketed a few years ago, that was as you described.
I don’t recall now if it was polymer or aluminum, but it did attach to the accessory rail and esentially placed a fixed and aggressively checkered (if I recall correctly) plate between the muzzle and the potential obstruction, thus preventing the slide from being pushed out of battery.
My initial concern with such a device would be the immediate availability of quality holsters and the possibility that it would prevent the attachment of a weapon light.
While I haven’t tried it, it seems that at least some people have used a weapon light to accomplish the same goal, while retaining the ability to effectively ID targets in low-light, and using the wide array of holsters already available for most duty weapon/white light combos.
There’s the Omega Options Combat Strike Plate, but I think it’s a hardware solution for a software problem. Retention shooting would seem to be a far better solution.
Even with the ‘strike plate’ on there, it’s worth considering that weird things can happen to an auto when the muzzle is up against something that has the potential to spew back matter. Hopefully someone can provide a link, but I can recall reading about at least one situation in which an officer’s weapon malfunctioned after getting fouled with soft tissue.
I think that a weapon mounted light on your duty pistol is about the best device for this. Massad Ayoob discusses this topic in the latest issue of American Handgunner in the Ayoob Files article about a Florida officer that ended a leg-bail, fight, with a shooting of the suspect at contact range to the head with a Glock-22 and TLR-1 weapon light. http://fmgpublications.ipaperus.com/FMGPublications/AmericanHandgunner/AHJA10/?page=20
My views have pretty much already been answered by the other members. However, I can add my experiences in having used similar devices in the past.
The first one I saw was on my mentor’s (Cmdr. Mario Martinez Jr/HCSO) Smith 4506. It was custom made out of titanium. He called it a “Battle Block.” I also saw one on Chris Carraci’s coonan 1911 in 357 magnum and on his 2nd Gen Glock 21. He called his “Alternative Force Block’s.” His were made by GG&G, I believe. GG&G made them for the 1911 and SIG and (I think) were made of aluminum.
ZM weapons also manufactured some of these for some pretty trick 1911’s, along with some other innovative items.
Mine were a custom job on a 1911 Commander and a production one for a Glock 3rd Gen. On the 1911 the frame was drilled and tapped for the device, and on the Glock it simply slide on the rail and was secured by an allen screw.
There were no issues with the one on the 1911, however, the one for the Glock was not a precision made instrument and there were tolerance issues with it. (The slide tended to impact the front of the device as it sat to close to the muzzle, and the bottom rails did not go all the way to rear of the rails on the frame.)
In theory the device makes sense. However, the very real issue (as has previously been stated) is that at contact range, there is an alarming issue of flesh and/or material being trapped in between the device and the muzzle causing a critical problem with lock up and further shots. A good solid light (Surefire X200/300/400) offers the advantage of said light and also can act as a standoff device in a pinch. It also serves very well in a less lethal sternum strike mode. It does not have the issue of foreign matter being trapped between it and the muzzle.
Having said that, with contact shots one runs the risk of foreign matter seizing the weapon up anyway, auto and revolver alike. There is no free lunch and sometimes contact shots can not always avoided. Carry a readily accessible secondary gun.
They are neat historical and conversation pieces, but I believe that they are of very limited use in certain situations. I would simply go with a stout light on the end of the gun.
As far as 1911s go, would this be one excuse to buy a full length guide rod? I’ve got 2 1911s but neither have a FLGR. Just what would happen with this set up under this scenario?
I have a 1911 with a FLGR. Everything works exactly like any other gun with a full length rod. It’s not as easy to push out of battery as a traditional plug setup, but I don’t think it’s something to be worried about. I certainly wouldn’t swap over my 1911’s for this reason alone.
My X300 accomplishes this for me. Training will always win out over gear but the mounted light assists. I don’t see the weapon going out of battery when being pressed against someones head. I see this being more of an issue with a shot to the abdomen of shooting out of an article of clothing.
I completely agree. Was just curious about an up close and personal situation and if a FLGR would offer any advantages. A weapon light does make much more sense though.
Sounds likes a hardware resolution to a software malfunction. The key to remember is that, when up close, you want to maintain a small amount of space between your muzzle and the suspect. If you find your gun jammed into someone’s body; you should have logged the training time to know that you need to retract the gun slightly and create a small amount of space.
I avoid making contact with a subject’s body with my weapon not only to reduce the chances of the gun coming out of battery, but to also limit the ability of the suspect to manuver around my weapon and attempt a disarm/avoid being shot.
not saying I have been in a muzzle contact fight ,but would think that considering the gravity of these situations the gun would be getting fired as soon as it is directed at the threat and before contact had been established?