Ankle carry only?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Fantasy scenarios are off-topic for an "ankle carry" thread, but I would remind anyone considering ankle carry that there are 5 elements necessary to secure a self-defense justification for a shooting and one of them is avoidance. Many states have statutes imposing a "duty to retreat" and even those states where there are "stand your ground" laws, your legal defense is substantially eroded if you have a chance to avoid the confrontation and you opt for a clever tactic that ends with you shooting someone. Avoidance is a core principle not just legally, but also for our survival. Whenever you make a choice to stay and fight instead of leaving, you also erode another key element of self-defense justification: innocence. To have an air-tight self-defense defense, the attack has to be "unprovoked." Standing your ground to try out your IDPA-ninja skills seriously damages the argument that you were innocent and non-provocative. It also raises the chances of you dying well above zero. Leaving should be one of our most coveted options should it ever present itself. And as it has been pointed out, an ankle-gun is inaccessible when you're running away. That doesn't render an ankle gun useless, but it does mean you would do well to have another option in addition to an ankle gun.
As I was taught in CCL class, in Texas the defense of property is sufficient reason for exercising deadly force at least at night So avoidance is not really required. If your car is being stolen, you may confront the perpetrators. If a thief is fleeing with your watch, you may legally shoot them.
 
Last edited:
What is legal is not always what wins in court. A prosecutor does not have to look at the circumstances of your case and just say, this guy was right. He can decide, "I want to try this." They could have all kinds of motivation for doing so. Career ambition, political motivations, pressure from the media, or even just a legal curiosity. If they decide to take it to trial, the more your case sucks, the farther from zero are your chances of going to prison. Even if you do win, your lawyer will have to work harder and will charge more hours. There are a lot of circumstances where avoidance is not legally required, but it is the best choice.
 
What is legal is not always what wins in court. A prosecutor does not have to look at the circumstances of your case and just say, this guy was right. He can decide, "I want to try this." They could have all kinds of motivation for doing so. Career ambition, political motivations, pressure from the media, or even just a legal curiosity. If they decide to take it to trial, the more your case sucks, the farther from zero are your chances of going to prison. Even if you do win, your lawyer will have to work harder and will charge more hours. There are a lot of circumstances where avoidance is not legally required, but it is the best choice.
Certainly , but in s pinch it is good to have the written law on your side.
 
As I was taught in CCL class, in Texas the defense of property is sufficient reason for exercising deadly force at least at night So avoidance is not really required. If your car is being stolen, you may confront the perpetrators. If a thief is fleeing with your watch, you may legally shoot them.

Take a look at Tennessee v. Garner, famous Federal case where a cop shot a fleeing burglar. Supreme Court ruled you cannot shoot a person fleeing, not shooting at you even if it's legal under state law. May be legal in Texas, but the Feds can file a case against you for depriving the criminal of his civil rights.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennessee_v._Garner
 
As I was taught in CCL class, in Texas the defense of property is sufficient reason for exercising deadly force at least at night So avoidance is not really required. If your car is being stolen, you may confront the perpetrators. If a thief is fleeing with your watch, you may legally shoot them.

I hope that's not true.
 
I know ankle carry for men and women wearing slacks is popular as a back up strategy but what about as the sole carry method? Sure, drawing from that location isn’t going to be smooth or fast, but is it reasonable? It wouldn’t protect one against all threats, but would it reduce your risk from attack enough make sense? Just to be clear, I don’t currently carry due to just not being willing to adapt my wardrobe to the task. Your thoughts?

It's a poor carry option in my opinion. It's hard to get to the gun, you don't have many options for getting to the gun in that position, and it's really inconvenient while you're moving. I've also seen a number of guns dropped this way over the years (an ankle is a part of the body that is often in motion). But, ankle carry is better than no carry, and in some situations it might be your best bet. If I knew I was walking into a gun fight right now, I'd be open carrying a pistol in a fast belt-mounted holster (wait, nevermind, I'd be carrying a rifle or shotgun in my hands in that situation). My point here is this: life is about compromises, and sometimes you have to choose a less-than-ideal carry option. Ankle carry is definitely less than ideal, but not having a gun when you need one is even more less than ideal ;)
 
I also went through CCW training in Texas and that was emphatically not the case (ie. you needed to be in threat of bodily harm or in your home to use deadly force). This was in the early '80's.
I believe you are wrong. Look it up to check. I did.

See Texas Penal Code 9.41 and 9.42. It is quite clearly stated as I did. These are readily found through Google.

You do not have to be in threat of bodily harm. You can use deadly force to prevent or terminate trespass on your property and to prevent removal of your property.
 
You do not have to be in threat of bodily harm. You can use deadly force to prevent or terminate trespass on your property and to prevent removal of your property.
I think you are correct, that is the law in some places. In Iowa, and many other places, there must be a threat of death or serious injury to justify the use deadly force. Either way there is a chance you face charges, pay a fortune to a lawyer and possibly go to jail. I'll risk it under the threat of death or injury but not for something stolen.
Back on the subject of the thread, I would never "ankle carry only" for the advantage it offers 2% of the time over belt carry.
 
Okay, here's another pair of scenarios for you.
1 - when you bend down to pick up your wallet, instead of drawing your ankle carry, lunge forward and head-butt them in the belly or groin and knock them on their butts. Then draw.
OR
2 - again, instead of drawing, either grab one or both legs and pull hard, causing them to fall backwards.

In either of these scenarios, you may be under the sightline of their gun meaning they would miss you if they fired when you do these. When they fall backwards, they are also likely to lose their grip on their weapon, giving you a chance to knock it out of reach.
I'm not saying these would work, just "might", giving you a possible opening to save your life by doing the unexpected.

With respect, this sounds like something from a TV movie. Is this something a trainer suggested? You might consider finding a Krav instructor to teach you disarms, since the opponent's gun is much more readily accessible at the distances you describe than something on the ankle.
 
I know ankle carry for men and women wearing slacks is popular as a back up strategy but what about as the sole carry method? Sure, drawing from that location isn’t going to be smooth or fast, but is it reasonable? It wouldn’t protect one against all threats, but would it reduce your risk from attack enough make sense? Just to be clear, I don’t currently carry due to just not being willing to adapt my wardrobe to the task. Your thoughts?
First rule of a 'gun fight' [ not that guns actually fight each other ] is to have a gun.

If you need a firearm to solve a problem,the ankle rig is "A" solution,not THE solution.

And since you stated that your not "willing" to dress to be armed ---- I question your devotion to bother with being armed ?.

Clint Smith is quoted as the one who stated that a gun is meant to be comforting,NOT comfortable.

I learned that a few decades back when I tried to dress in fashion,and found my CCW was not up to the task presented.

Trust me,that is a HORRIBLE feeling,that once I lived through it ,promised myself to not be there again.

I still wear an ankle rig,as a BUG ,UNLESS that is the only option .

And I avoid that being the case with extreme measures [ like not going where I need that deep a cover].

IF you truly believe that ankle carry is your only option,AND you will train from that position and SHOOT & TRAIN with it = go for it.
 
If I ever do find myself having to ankle-carry a primary gun, a backup will be in a pocket.

I've yet to wear a pair of dress pants or slacks that didn't have front pockets capable of hiding a PF9, let alone a TCP or similar piece.

But, I'm in jeans any time I'm dressed but not at work (maybe dress pants one or two evenings a year.) Jean pockets don't hide my PF9 very well, so it's belt-carry for me.

By the way, forum moderator bikerdoc introduced me to how easily a four-inch Ruger Police Service Six can be carried in a cowboy boot. :D
 
I’m of the school and opinion that ankle carry is okay if youre in a car a lot, as a back-up; I worked as an LEO on and off since 2006 and I can see a back-up in an ankle holster if youre in a car a lot. I found that the primary sidearm could be hard to get to in a seated, belted in position. That said retention can be an issue if your end up rolling around on the ground with someone. Also drawing from an ankle holster can be difficult if youre in a close quarters situation with someone and dont want to put yourself in a position of disadvantage. A backup in a body armor type holster or even in a magazine pouch secured thru other means can be better, I always liked having it so either hand can get to it...
Another issue is only the lightest gun can be ankle holster carried when you run without earthier really throwing off your gait or having it swing around, come loose, etc. So you’d want to not scrimp and get the best,most stable angle holster which will most likely be bulky and uncomfortable after a while.
One place I worked the narco detectives who were mostly undercover types, the lead guy carried a 442 in an ankle holster and that was it. He did most of his work from his car, and wasn’t going to go hands on with anybody for the most part- it was more intel gathering, the buy portion of buy and bust, etc...
 
One thing to keep in mind if you go full ankle carry - your gun will be exposed to much more dust and grit. Anyone who has served in the military can tell you about keeping your shoes and boots shined up. Wear spit shined low quarters for just one day and they'll be covered in grit. With ankle carry you will need to inspect and clean your gun regularly because that grit WILL get into the action when carried that close to the street. Trust me on this.
 
I suppose it depends a little on what you're driving. Modern cars are pretty compact on the inside; I know mine feels like the cockpit of a plane. Pretty short reach to my ankles. But I expect crossdraw works great, at least outside of winter months. The way my seat belts lay I don't think any belt carry would work in my car.
 
The holster has to ride fairly high on your waist for it to work some belts. The nice thing is you can slide the holster towards your buckle when seated and strapped in and still draw the gun easily from under any jacket. Tuck the seat belt under the holster. The bad guy cannot see what you're doing with your gun hand if it's just inside your jacket. Even if he reaches in and grabs your left arm you can still draw your gun.
 
I carried that way for many years when I was a young, off duty court officer.
Mainly for concealment.
I carried on the inside of my left ankle which allowed for a smooth right hand draw.
Living in NYC and using public transportation at all hours forced me to draw it a few times when making off duty arrests.
Quite often if I felt that I was being followed, or get that funny feeling, I would drop to one knee and pretend to tie my shoe while as discretely as possible placing the .38 snub in my pocket before proceeding.
Other times I was able to draw while lifting up my left foot.
But an incident that happened in 1991–where I was accosted by a panhandler who got in my face and was being very aggressive— made me realize that some other type of carry was called for.
I am retired now but still work armed security in a variety of assignments.
Right now I work as an extra gun in armored trucks where my backup is now a LCP in the pocket.
 
One thing to keep in mind if you go full ankle carry - your gun will be exposed to much more dust and grit. Anyone who has served in the military can tell you about keeping your shoes and boots shined up. Wear spit shined low quarters for just one day and they'll be covered in grit. With ankle carry you will need to inspect and clean your gun regularly because that grit WILL get into the action when carried that close to the street. Trust me on this.

Interesting. Have you experimented with closed bottom holsters for ankle carry?
 
No. I have never had any desire whatsoever to ankle carry. But I have had a number of L.E. customers who were required to carry any backup gun on their ankle. Their guns were pretty gritty inside. It probably depends how close fitting your cuffs are and they're going to have to be pretty loose to access your gun. I have always used a belt or shoulder rig and no back up gun. But I am crazy. Ask anybody, they'll tell you.........
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top