IDPA rules question- holsters

[RM]

I was hoping someone knowledgeable on IDPA rules can answer a question for me. What is the problem with seeing daylight thru the belt slots of your holster? What is the logic for making illegal all holsters that show "daylight"? Thank you.

[Hoser]

The rationale is that the holster is sticking out too far to be concealable. And that makes it easier to draw from in a match. Too gamey.

[dragongoddess]

Makes no sense to me and on top of that it sounds down right stupid.

[Jim Watson]

As Commodore Grimes said: Growl you may but go you must.

That's the rule. Follow it or shoot Something Else.

[dragongoddess]

Its still a silly rule and how can you tell if the weapon is concealed.

[Jim Watson]

I think it is silly to complain about something you can't change. It was a major struggle getting the 2005 rules out and they are not going to move any time in the forseeable future.

[Billy Sparks]

If I wear a long enough coat that is baggy enough I can conceal a thigh holster but does that make it alright? No. I may not 100% like the rule but I understand it.

[dragongoddess]

We are not talking about thigh holsters thats another subject. I'm only pointing out the problem with the orginal question. To say that if you can see light between the belt and the holster makes it illegal is simply silly. It's just plain stupid. To see that light the entire holster must be exposed therefore not concealed and that makes seeing the light between belt and holster moot..

To defend such a rule is also silly. No wonder people who don't own weapons think we are crazy. The proof is right there.

[strambo]

I don't understand how you could not see daylight through the belt slot in a Kydex holster...including the ones specifically (or formerly?) approved for IDPA. The hard material doesn't conform around the belt like leather. Maybe I'm missing something? (like IDPA competition obviously;) )

[jmorris]

Jim is 100% correct; there is no reason to complain about the rules. The solution to the daylight rule is to don’t game as much or purchase one of the “instructor” belts like wilderness tactical or uncle mikes. They are no thicker than some leather belts; however, they use Velcro to secure e the belt. The correct length is when the belt doubles under the holster, no thicker than ordinary but doubled over.

[Jim Watson]

There are Kydex holsters all over the place that fit a Wilderness or other substantial belt without daylight gap. The belt thickness matters, and there are things the Kydex benders do with the contour of the belt loop.
Cowboy up.

[jmorris]

If you are still interested in why Bill Wilson came to use such “silly” rules take a look at the following link. I would use mine if he would let me, as they are very fast, not very practical but fast.

http://www.ghostholster.com/ghost.htm

[dragongoddess]

Well outlaw the holster. I mean how diffcult is it to have a list of approved holsters. The rule is silly. I'm even more convinced now that I've seen the reason for the rule.

[DragonFire]

They used to have a list of approved holsters. It didn't work very well. Do you know how many holster manufacturers there are, or how many different models and styles there are? Lots of pefectly good holsters couldn't be used just because they weren't on the list. Plus, supposedly IDPA was spending lots and lots of time looking at all the different holsters people wanted to use to see if they should be put on the list.

The point is not trying to see light between the holster and the wearer while concealed (of course you'd never see light if it was concealed), but the intent to come up with a general rule of thumb that would differentiate between "practical" holsters and gaming holsters. And it's not if you can see ANY light, but it really means if there is a significant gap between the holster and the wearer.

Yes, according to the letter of the rule, many non-gaming holsters were also made illegal, but it did stop the use of some of the most non-practical ones. Even at the S&W IDPA Winter Chamionship they didn't try to literally enforce this rule. As long as the holster is not obviously a competition-specific model, noone will complain.


IDPA is full of "silly" rules, but it's their game and if you want to play you have to follow them.

[jmorris]

At least you can choose among the many “legal” holsters. HQ could have just as easily made you choose from the following list.
http://www.wilsoncombat.com/index_leather.htm

[DrKyle1]

What was that line in Saving Private Ryan ... "... ours is not to question why, but to do or die ..." Many of the rules of IDPA don't make complete sense nor are they all tactically sound. It seems that some are just so as to be NOT IPSC related. It is a game, it is fun, I like to shoot so I follow the rules -I run a monthly IDPA shoot in my town.

The rule of the no light in the belt loop and the 3/4" space between gun and body rules are due to the "competition only" holsters that cant the gun away from the body to have a more rapid draw. I run a STI race gun in IPSC and my holster cants the gun away from my body along with a slight rotation (all adjustable) so I can set my gun exactly where my hand comes down to from a surrender position. The BOD of IDPA supposedly wants to hinder the equipment race type of thing.

The best kydex type of holster that I have found is the Comp-tac ones. I personally use the locking paddle one. http://comp-tac.com/index.html

[robertbank]

To me the holster rule made much more sense than some of the other changes Mr. Wilson made with the new rules. But hey, it is his game and he sets the rules. Personally I would hate to see IDPA go down the same road as IPSC where Production Division seems to be the only division that is loosely followed in the spirit of the division. I enjoy the game of IDPA and the rules are the rules follow them or play something else.

Now if you want to talk about dumb rules where does the three strikes and you are out come from in basball? Why not four like it used to be?

Take Care Eh

Bob

[dragongoddess]

SO what happens if you don't have 3/4's of an inch of open space between the body and the weapon. Are you disqualified for being a little heavy.

[robertbank]

"SO what happens if you don't have 3/4's of an inch of open space between the body and the weapon. Are you disqualified for being a little heavy."

First, you are reading the rule wrong. The rule states, "Must hold the firearm positioned on the body so an object of "3/4" width cannot pass between the shooter's body and the inside of the firearm when the shooter is standing straight and upright"

Going back to your statement the gap between your body and your weapon must be less than 3/4", tight is OK; a gap wider than 3/4" would not be legal.

THe only penalty you will incur if you are overwieght is a slightly shorter lifespan and a higher risk of dieing from a heart attack. I guess the latter is ok given the last thing you want to do is lie on your death bed dieing of nothing.

Take Care

Bob

[dragongoddess]

well that takes care of that.

[Tim Burke]

You mean we get punished for being thin?

[robertbank]

"You mean we get punished for being thin?"

For most of us it is a very short term problem that age cures, quickly.:D That and a good wife's cooking.

Take Care

Bob