So I bought an early Glock 23 with integrated laser

[Jakemedic]

Hello!
I was at a gun auction over the weekend and purchased this early Glock with a integrated laser. They stated that “laser may or may not work”. I got all the associated paperwork, Tupperware box and two magazines. What was amazing about this Glock is that it appears to be brand new. I got it at a decent price as nobody seems to want .40 cal anymore (something for another thread). I also bought all the .40 cal ammo they had at exceptional prices too.

Got the 23 home and they were correct, the laser did not work. I tested the batteries and while they aren’t dead, they definitely don’t have the correct voltage that a new battery would have. Went to Walmart and of course they didn’t have them in stock. So I will order 4 new batteries online and have them delivered. In the meantime, I took the Glock apart and seen that there was a bit of corrosion on the bottom of the battery well. Took a pencil and cleaned it up, reinstalled the batteries and well the laser lit at least, even though it was quite dim.

With all this said, I am trying to figure out what to do with the Glock. The slide and barrel is brand new, the frame has been defaced running the internal wires, and mounting the laser in front of the trigger guard. The magazines don’t appear to have ever been loaded. I read somewhere that I could send it to Glock and they will replace the receiver with a different one for $100.00. I have also seen aftermarket frames that are available (of course in a variety of colors).

The company who did the integrated laser is long out of business. It can not be carried as is in anything resembling a holster that I would consider using. Oh yea, and I have a brand new 4th Generation 23 in the safe with factory night sights. So this auction gun is an extra (is there such a thing as an extra Glock?).

SO my questions to this group are:
1. Should I not change this Glock because it is a significant piece of early Glock history that needs to be preserved for some unknown reason?
2. Should I keep it as a “front door gun” with the laser attached with new batteries?
3. Should I remove the laser, pull out the wires and shoot the heck out of it?
4. Should I send it to Glock for a new frame (knowing that the serial numbers are not going to match)
5. Should I have some fun with it, put a aftermarket frame under the slide and add night sights to it?
Last but not least,
6. Should I add batteries to it and sell it off?

Sorry for the Hemingway novel, but I wanted to see what words of wisdom this group can provide.
Thanks in advance for your advice!

 

[silvermane_1]

Yeah that Glock looks like it "bubba'd" laser job on it, and not very good "bubba'd" job at that.

 

[tarosean]

Personally I'd rip all that crap off it and fill the holes with epoxy.

 

[Jakemedic]

Thanks, not a bad idea. Didn’t think of epoxy although it does look like they did drill holes in the frame to run the wires and filled them with something, possibly epoxy.

 

[rpenmanparker]

I say use it as a donor gun to build an 80% project gun. Solves all the problems for little money. To heck with caring about history. And you will have something you built to be proud of.

 

[Wisco]

I’d sell it. As is. Make some money hopefully.

If you want to keep it, strip it and fill the holes. Shoot it.

Don’t change the frame unless you have to for structural reasons. Glock will give a Gen3 frame, and like you said, it won’t match numbers. Even a jacked up Gen2 frame is preferable to some over a mismatched Gen3 frame.

I love Gen2 Glocks, but now that Gen5 has what I want for grip...let the collectors collect them. My Gen2 guns are gone now. I miss them, but got good money for them.

 

[huntsman]

#3

I really like my G23 gen 2 and if they ever make a gen 5 I’m buying, no love for finger grooves.

 

[Charlie Horse]

I remember when these first appeared. A good friend of mine and I were in the LGS that we frequented, and the owner welcomed us with the "Afternoon boys, you've got to see this..." which let us know he had something new he was trying to convince us was the next big thing. He showed us a G19, back in ~1993 or so it was a G2, and told us that this was THE way to get a laser on one. Now, it was fun to play with, and keep in mind that it was before everyone and his brother was putting lights and\or lasers on guns. In those days, tritium night sights were still a novelty. We payed with it for a little bit, and when he told us that he could send it off to be converted, for the nominal sum or $500, I politely handed it back to him and asked to look at something else in the case.

Assuming that it is structurally sound, it could make a good nightstand gun, especially if you can get the laser up and running. Being a G2, there is no way to hang a light off of it of course, but we used to hold a 2-3 D cell maglite in the off hand before we started putting weapon lights on guns. I see no collector value in it, at least none I would pay to own. It IS interesting to look at it as a dead end in firearms gee whizery...

If you don't have too much into it vs the cost of a new one, I'd look at sending it for a new frame, maybe a set of the Glock OEM (Meprolight) night sights, and hang a TLR-1 HL or maybe some flavor of TLR-2 off of it an call it a day.

And thanks for the look back.

 

[Jakemedic]

Thanks for the post Charlie! I went to a “tactical flashlight” course a few years ago. The instructor had no time for a gun mounted flashlight. He taught that having a weapon mounted flashlight simply provided the “bad guy” with a target. He went on to advise using a flashlight sparingly and never hold it close to the body for the same reason.

Still think I will get 4 new batteries for it and see what it does. I did get it at a really good price and it doesn’t appear to have ever been shot. If the laser works, I got a front door Glock. If the laser doesn’t get any brighter, I may put a frame under it and with new night sights get the desert tan or OD green Glock I always wanted. Even with the upgrades and a new frame, it still would be at least 100.00 less than I paid for my 23 nearly 3 years ago. One gentleman suggested pulling the unit, filling with epoxy and shoot it. May try that too.......I shoot Glocks just fine although my true passion gun is a sig 229, also in .40.

 

[Trey Veston]

Thanks for the post Charlie! I went to a “tactical flashlight” course a few years ago. The instructor had no time for a gun mounted flashlight. He taught that having a weapon mounted flashlight simply provided the “bad guy” with a target. He went on to advise using a flashlight sparingly and never hold it close to the body for the same reason.

LOL

Anyone with an IQ above room temp can see how that makes zero sense if thought about for more than a few seconds...

 

[Riomouse911]

In 28 years I can recall one time where a suspect fired at the light from a hand-held flashlight and missed the officer...because it was being held out at arms length as the officer was searching for an armed suspect. In this one case that axiom may have held true, and I have also used this technique but luckily wasn't ever shot at while doing this to see if it works myself, but for all intents and purposes it's just a tale.

I think weapon-mounted lights are a great tool, and they certainly have their place. My ONLY problem with flashlights on handguns is guys get lazy and start using their handgun-mounted lights as their primary flashlight at night. I've seen it lots of times, and using a drawn firearm as a searching tool when it isn't warranted can become a serious issue (beyond the possibility of shooting someone unintentionally.) In a building or area search after a possibly armed or unknown felony suspect, using a weapon light is no problemo. But on routine car stops, area checks, and other scenes where there is no known or implied threat and guys are "lasering" the people they contact with their weapon lights, it's a nightmare waiting to happen.

Seeing as several Federal Court Districts have ruled time and time again that the mere pointing of a gun at someone can be a "use of force" and can unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment depending on circumstances, things can get pricy for agencies and for the individuals themselves if their troops have started to rely on their weapon-mounted lights for their nighttime searching.

Same goes for civilians; weapon-mounted lights should be seen as an auxiliary, not a primary, source of light unless one can articulate to a jury the reason for the pointing of a gun while using the light. If you can (like confronting a robber or a burglar in your home) all is golden.

Just a few of the cases where police merely pointing a gun at someone isn't kosher based on the circumstances:

Baird v. Renbarger, 576 F. 3d 340 (7th Cir. 2009).
Robinson v. Solano County, 278 F.3d 1007 (9th Cir. 2002).
Baker v. Monroe Township, 50 F.3d 1186, 1193-94 (3d Cir. 1995).

Stay safe!

 

[Jakemedic]

Thanks for everyone’s opinion! I got to a city over the weekend and bought 4 batteries for the laser. It works amazingly well. Will have to take it to the range to ensure it’s accurate, but I think I got a good “front door deterrent” that I don’t have to feed. I still may get a receiver for it and build a lower, but that would come next winter.