The Gadget Striker Control Device is a drop-in part for striker-fired pistols designed to provide an added level of safety when holstering the weapon. The Gadget replaces the standard slide plate on the back of Glock pistols. When thumb pressure is applied to the Gadget it blocks the striker, blocking the trigger bar and preventing the trigger from being pulled.
The Gadget was inspired by the standard procedure of applying pressure on hammer-fired guns when holstering them. However, the Gadget is completely passive, and doesn’t interfere with the action of the pistol unless acted upon. Additionally, in the event Gadget becomes inoperable, the inner slide plate remains in place, which will allow the pistol to continue to function even if the Gadget doesn’t.
To see how the Gadget works, check out the video below:
www.indiegogo.com/projects/gadget-a-striker-control-device#/story
Tags: indiegogo
A solution to a problem that doesn’t exist.
Well, it does and doesn’t.
Problem does exist, especially if you carry apendix iwb
I’m glad to see this come to market as it definitely makes carrying a Glock style pistol safer in the AIWB configuration. I recently banned AIWB in open enrollment classes as I feel it is not a safe choice for a class environment. I see this device as a step in the right direction to making Glock AIWB safer not only in everyday carry but in classes as well.
This product was actually initially developed years ago but obviously my new policy opened the dialogue to get it pushed out for final development and fielding – if it saves one guy from shooting himself it’s worth it and I’m glad I had a part in helping bring it to the market no matter what the haters say
I figured I might as well jump in here and speak my mind and take the credit I deserve since the people behind this would never be man enough to do so- giving credit where credit is due is not their style
“I figured I might as well jump in here and speak my mind and take the credit I deserve”
Yet another reason I’m not a LAV fanatic. Too arrogant and self-centered for me.
“… take the credit I deserve since the people behind this would never be man enough to do so- giving credit where credit is due is not their style.”
Woooooow. Well, glad you have your credit… for being in the title line of an awesome thread at Pistol-Forum
LAV — That last paragraph aside, the AIWB kerfuffle from a while back was ABSOLUTELY the thing that spurred us on the final yard to get things done. It gave us an opportunity to strike while the iron was hot, so to speak. No question whatsoever.
While we don’t see it as an AIWB-specific thing, that’s obviously a crowd that we’re hoping to reach.
Both Tom Jones and I genuinely appreciate the comment that you’re glad to see it coming to market. That means a lot to us and apparently to many others, too, as we’ve already seen a jump in orders since you posted. Train hard & stay safe!
Wow. Is this really LV? I’m…disappointed in this.
Yes, it is. Those are his true colors.
I am hoping Larry was deep into Happy Hour when he wrote this because that is pretty jacked up. Regardless of how it was intended, it comes across badly.
interesting solution, terrible name
Product naming is actually surprisingly difficult I’ve found.
Given the specifics of this little guy, what could you name it? The only ideas that come to mind are either tasteless (the shaft saver?) or too technical (thumb actuated firing pin block.)
The Gadget is pretty good shorthand IMO.
Striker Control Device?
Safe plate, Safety Striker, Draw Safe, the horribly clumsy time adding for lvl 2+ retention holsters gadget…
I don’t think the product is bad by itself with a standard kydex holster, its a bad product when used in conjunction with other holsters that have some kind of thumb break/activation release like my IMI holster. Can’t see myself ever using this because of that, but if I never would use that holster and use level 1 only, it wouldn’t be a bad investment and actually work. Just depends what your company mandates or shooter prefers
I’m no LEO nor a rep for the Gadget, but doesn’t the thumb break stay open while the gun is out of the holster? If so, then you thumb the Gadget into the holster and once the gun is firmly in place, you remove your thumb from the Gadget and place the thumb break over the gun. The Gadget is completely passive without your interaction.
Hope that helps.
I’m not sure I understand your comment. The Gadget is compatible with ALL holsters as it doesn’t alter the external dimensions of the gun at all.
Are you perhaps thinking that the Gadget requires manipulation when drawing? It does not, it is only used when returning your gun to the holster.
Wait a minute…are the guys behind this the same guys who blasted anyone who would listen two weeks ago how the experts were wrong and AWIB was completely safe?
The “TA-DA” video with Gandoff showing us how to reholster AWIB?
Now two weeks later they dig up a product nobody has wanted for the past five years?
Please tell me I am mistaken..
If this is the case it’s the most moronic marketing campaign ever. Tell everyone they don’t need it and you’re dumb if you think you need it, THEN release the product for the fifth time.
The internet world of bloggers never ceases to amaze.
Bloggers aren’t behind it. I’m amazed indiegogo accepted it.
Melvin, you are severely uniformed across the board. TLG never stated that AIWB was completely safe- ever. In fact PT and PF discussions are mostly geared towards turning new shooters away from AIWB because it requires a matured set of pistol handling skills.
I assume that by “Gandoff” you meant Gandalf from LOTR. Todd Green’s appearance is due to his multiple battles with a very aggressive form of a cancer. As in more than 2 rounds of that mess. Oh yeah, he also has new elbows, as in bone saw and metal work. Rather callous on your part to make such a snide remark without any knowledge of the guy’s personal history.
Although the Gadget has been in development for roughly 5 years, it was nowhere near final cut ready. TLG’s personal health issues, Tom Jones’ wife’s health issues (she’s a cop in NM, caught a few rounds of 76.2×39 in a shooting a while back) and just the general slow pace of having real lives to lead and not be able to focus 100% on this project, plus 2ish years of Beta-testing by various legit shooters around the country, all contributed to the slow roll on getting to where the Gadget is now. This is the 1st release, not the 5th as you erroneously state.
Lastly, although TLG runs a blog, his claim to fame is certainly not derived from it. It merely documents his many experiences in and around the craft of pistol shooting. At which he is very solid to say the least.
So you should probably check yourself before you post garbage like that on the web. Being uniformed is what leads to most issues around the globe. The more you know.
Well said.
I’m fairly sure that the “Gandoff” he’s referring to is a YouTube poster who made a sarcastic video about how to re-holster AIWB safely, nothing to do with anyone’s appearance or making fun of anybody. The video was posted here last week or so.
I’m assuming this vid:
http://pistol-training.com/archives/9522
That is the only video I know of which A) matches your description and B) is recent.
So if that is the video you and Melvin are referencing, then my post still stands. That’s Todd Green.
That is the video I was referring to, but I assumed that the YouTube handle of the guy that posted it was Gandalf or something like that, leading to his comment. I have no idea what his motivation was to call him Gandalf now, but personally I think he guy looks perfectly normal in that video.
That said, I do find it funny that the guy that made that video is now involved in producing this Glock safety product.
The handle from youtube, or any other direct source from Todd Green, is pistoltraining, as that is his official site.
Again, TLG and his partner Tom Jones have been developing the Gadget for half a decade. It’s not some recent LAV/Anti-AIWB/whatever knee jerk production.
Generally, people across the board are still assuming a whole heckuva lot about TLG, AIWB, the Gadget and the like. If you visit pistol-training.com or the corresponding forum, pistol-forum.com, I think most of the fog would be cleared.
I would note that Larry Vickers and Ken Hackathorn were invited, and did, shoot the magic rounds through Todd’s HK45 testing gun a few years back. Todd has been on and around the block for a while. The recent sparks between TLG and LAV are just that, recent. Just because thousands of LAV’s fanboys are now aware of Appendix carry and the Gadget, and choose not to read more than a headline or summary, does not make them experts on either.
I am in no way implying that you are a fanboy for anyone, but a lot of this drama is being propelled by those in LAVs “corner”. The average shooter who contributes on PF or follows PT is far more versed and experienced in running a pistol than the average student who shells out for a LAV class.
My thoughts exactly, Melvin.
Or you could use a quality holster and give it a 1/4 second glance to make sure it’s clear before jamming your gun back into it.
They said that this is for all Striker.
How about the “Dickandnutkeeper”?
Because that is basically what it is for.
I wrote a more in depth article here, based upon my hands on experience over four years. http://goo.gl/X5x80b
Great article Shep. Thanks for addressing many of the concerns preemptively.
Great, now I can be super lazy when I re-holster, just throw it in there, and as long as I have my thumb on the back, I’m safe.
Hope no one who ever trained to put a thumb or a palm on the back of the slide for a last-ditch contact shot puts on one of these and forgets about it.
Two thumbs down.
My thoughts exactly. I am concerned about the potential for this stopping a shot during a contact encounter. Granted a pistol with a hammer would potentially fall into the same category but that isn’t an issue with a striker fired pistol.
I’m also fairly sure that my agency won’t allow these on their issued service pistols anyway, so it’s really a non-issue for me. I carry the same pistol, on and off-duty, all the time. I want it to feel the same, every time I draw, and even if I have to grab someone else’s pistol and fight. That’s why I don’t like modifications too much. Sure, if you’re a competition or fun day at the range guy, knock yourself out. I spend 99% of my time shooting four weapons: a full size Glock, a J Frame, an AR and a Rem 870. Those are my tools, set-up for me in a conservative manner, with nothing I don’t need. I don’t like to make changes to them, because I’ve done a ton of training with them.
I do have to admit, this is a decent idea. I like the fact that it’s only activated on demand, and that it’s not something that has to be taken OFF during a high-stress encounter. That said, it’s not for me. It’s generally not a race to re-holster, and the times that I’ve had to holster in a hurry, I’ve never had a problem getting it back into a SL ALS holster.
As for the AIWB controversy, in my opinion, if you aren’t confident that you can carry AIWB safely without making modifications to your pistol, you shouldn’t be carrying AIWB.
There are sooooo many stupid comments here it’s baffling. It’s a safety enhancement for the Glock plain and simple. It’s an added layer of security and if it sees wide spread use will probably save more people holstering traditional OWB and IWB from shooting themselves than any other carry method.
I can’t fathom why anyone would have a issue with this product.
Rock on Gadget inventors. I hope yall get supper stinking filthy rich.
“All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.”
– Arthur Schopenhauer
Every dude with serious creds who I trained with and who came out of units and agencies that used DA/SA guns taught to engage the hammer with your thumb during holstering. For more than one reason, regardless of holsters used and completely irrespective of holster’s positioning on the body and, even more so, off the body. In years listening to that teaching I haven’t heard as much as a blip of a logical or evidence based argument why this procedure would be wrong.
Now there’s a device that gives an option to do the same on a gun with a trigger pull half of a DA pull weight and trigger travel of a quarter of a DA pull, and suddenly it is at best unneeded and at worst bad.
Laughable.
Well said, YVK. When I first wrote my article, I didn’t add that in there, figuring the gun world was smarter than that. I was wrong.
First, I am not nor have ever been military or LE, I am a civilian shooting enthusiast, and I train very regularly with local training groups, and a defensive shooting type club. Now that being said, and my 2 cents, this seems to be a hardware solution to a software problem.
The golden rule as taught to me (and I agree with) is, keep your finger off the trigger and on the slide until you are indexed on your target and have made the decision to shoot. That alone should resolve most issues with a striker fired weapon (any weapon really).
And in regards to appendix carry, and obstructions potentially pulling the trigger upon re-holstering, you should never rush to re-holster, take the extra few seconds to be sure that the path to the holster, and holster itself is clear, and then simply re-holster.
These are all training points that have been hammered into me by countless repetition. Training , training, training. If you need an EXTRA level of safety on a striker fired weapon, again, a hardware solution to a software problem, maybe the real solution is just more training and familiarization of your tools (no pun intended).
My intention is not to knock this product, if you are simply more comfortable having it installed on your gun, super, go forth and install, but relying on a gadget (or the “Gadget”) to fix what seems to be a training issue seems sort of counterproductive.
Then why have safeties at all? Why have a safety ‘nub’ in the trigger of a Glock? Why have 4 rules when one would suffice: Don’t shoot something you don’t intend to?
Whereas I agree with your final paragraph, I don’t agree with the initial message. The Gadget, safety ‘nub’, thumb safety, 4 rules, training, etc are all layers of making an inherently unsafe activity safer. No different than ABS, seatbelts, airbags and traction control for driving.
I’m a fan of Tom/Todd’s Gadget (even though I don’t shoot an SFA on the regular) and I’m also a fan of LAV’s contributions to the shooting community.
However, I’d like to ask some of you to clarify some things:
1) How many of you thought this way about SFA pistols as they came out? Was that an unnecessary solution?
2) How many of you thought this way about an RDS, different types of night sights, lasers, grips, or removable back/side straps for pistols? Did you go out of your way to mock it? Or did you choose which was right for you in order to improve the safety and shootablity of your chosen platform?
3) How many stories do you know of people shooting themselves holstering AIWB? Even YouTube personalities.
4) How many cop stories can you rattle off where they’ve given themselves a racing stripe due to poor concentration during holstering? Just check the MSM.
5) How many agencies use SFA pistols? Wouldn’t they want to reduce NDs into their officers legs?
Lastly, I’m an American business owner who’s tried to invent something. I know it’s a damn hard road to hoe and rather than the shooting community eating its own like hunters vs carriers in the 2A debate, why don’t we all applaud the effort.
If you don’t like it, then don’t buy it, but don’t pretend like this is a solution to a problem that a) doesn’t exist or b) only exists for people who carry appendix.
No one’s that perfect or switched on all the time.
Well put.
You guys are crazy if you think that’s the real Larry Vickers. Besides, I’m the guy who invented the Gadget Striker. So the real credit belongs to me.
But… Are you the real Jerry?
So, Mr. Glock designs a gun from top to bottom. Has the best engineers in the field. But this is supposed to be better? Leave well enough alone.
That’s the worst mentality to have towards anything. “Eh it works so why bother improving?”, nothing in life would ever get better.
Well! There you go SSD another troll topic with so many parts.
Who knew?
Self fulfilling proficy? Pretty funny 🙂 My main complaint is clothing, not that I don’t think it’s usually worth it, more unhappiness of the imbalance of my account to my desire, my problem, lol. Champaign taste bubble gum budget. Maybe some edumicational stories on background of materials & manufacturing to inform readers some more. Have fun
Brad, I’m guessing you are/were an Illinois resident. Champaign is a city, “champagne” is the consumable (and a region of France).
Lol, my bad. I failed French
Some of our past PD firearms training required us to do close in contact shooting where we used our thumb or the heel of our off hand to keep the Glock from going out of battery while we fired that contact shot. This devise would not allow that. I have carried a Glock as a duty weapon for over 25 years and never had a ND. This devise would serve no purpose for me and be a hinderance.
During your career, which has occurred more frequently: A) Having to re-holster quickly and hastily to go hands-on with a suspect, or B) making a contact shot?
Reholstering, but like I said in 25 years I have never had a ND. Maybe this devise is a good thing for some shooters who have poor firearm handling skills, but I have no use for it.
At CSAT Paul Howe told me about a Deltaoperator who once had an ND during a press check and blew the tip of his finger off. Even the best of the best make mistakes. Don’t poo poo a product that has no down side, and some up side.
Currently I can safely do both, or pay $55 to REMOVE one of these options.
Thumb goes over the rear sight instead of the gadget/striker plate. You’ll still be able to put the frame back into battery.
Anything that is offered in the industry that enhances safety or performance is welcome. Since the advent of the ignernet, we have to have urination contest. For what it’s worth, I find using a “Sticky” or similar brand holster for AIWB safe as the compressible holster has to be removed to re holster. Just saying there are a lot of ways to skin a cat. H.U.A , Heard Understood and Acknowledged.
I’m a hammer looking for a nail…
I’m a hammer looking for a nail…
I’m an overly complicated doo dad looking for a nail…
I’m a guy who cooked a round off because I didn’t follow basic holstering safety…
We found each other!
Our hammers have found our nails!
Wow, some much hate and so much fail.
It is designed as an extra layer of safety. Nowhere has it been claimed to replace all prior safety rules. It’s not been declared as ending all UD’s from now to doomsday. Just one more layer for those who desire it.
Hardware problem for software solution? Well I guess we could all just start using tricked out 1911’s with 1/4 ounce triggers and no thumb or grip safeties. After all, we can use those without problems because we are able to handle everything so well with our software.
Never had a need in 25 yrs of shooting? Awesome! The person who’s got a perfect driving record for 50 years still has a chance of getting in an accident while driving home from work today.
Speaking of driving. I guess you folks who’ve never had a problem also have never had your right sided tires brush up against the white line while driving. Certainly also never typed a 7 when you wanted to type an 8. Never got up groggy and put your underwear on backwards or your shirt on inside out. You bat a perfect 1000 (a strike is just poor performance on your part). After all, your “software” is perfect.
Afraid it will malfunction and disable your gun? Check out the other threads and see what the failure rate is. Furthermore, it has been designed so that if/when it fails, it leaves the firearm fully functional. Only the safety aspect is lost.
Don’t want one? Fine, don’t get one and don’t get all huffy. The owners have never stated that you would be a knuckle dragging Cro-Magnon or such. your choice. But let those who do go about and not call them names, etc.
BTW, I have no connection with the developers, and no financial incentives for this product. I also only one one Glock, a 42, and there is no gadget for it.