What's your pocket pistol history?

[Girodin]

I specified tapered fit Jeans to show they are fitting (Without bring some skin tight fag jeans)

If has as much to do with the cut of the pocket as anything. I don't wear Carhartt clothing so I cannot comment on that specifically. I'll also refrain from commenting about people that do. The jeans I had in mind are a mix of Ralph Lauren, Nautica, and the like.

To me pocket carry is a comprise to begin with. Only with certain clothing is it not significantly more difficult and slower to draw my gun and fire. Timers don't lie and the slide of my LCP has wear marks from all the practice draws. Force on force training also highlights certain weaknesses of pocket carry. Yes I have certain pants that I could stick my glock in but I wouldn't anyhow. IWB is superior. I also have pants that it would not fit in let alone would I be able to draw it from them. YMMV but yes I have pockets it would be hard to draw out of. I do not plan to start dressing like a construction worker so I can carry a gun in a less than ideal spot. I'll keep one of my pocket guns in my pocket and my primary on my hip.

As an aside, I'm not sure how using derogatory epithets is remotely high road.

 

[BADUNAME13]

If has as much to do with the cut of the pocket as anything. I agree. I looked for both pockets and placement of the beltloops when I was trying to find a brand of jeans I liked.I don't wear Carhartt clothing so I cannot comment on that specifically. I'll also refrain from commenting about people that do. The jeans I had in mind are a mix of Ralph Lauren, Nautica, and the like.Then I will also refrain from commenting on people who wear those brands

To me pocket carry is a comprise to begin with.I agree. Only with certain clothing is it not significantly more difficult and slower to draw my gun and fire. Timers don't lie and the slide of my LCP has wear marks from all the practice draws. Force on force training also highlights certain weaknesses of pocket carry. Yes I have certain pants that I could stick my glock in but I wouldn't anyhow. IWB is superior. I also have pants that it would not fit in let alone would I be able to draw it from them. YMMV but yes I have pockets it would be hard to draw out of. I do not plan to start dressing like a construction worker so I can carry a gun in a less than ideal spot. I'll keep one of my pocket guns in my pocket and my primary on my hip.Never said differently

As an aside, I'm not sure how using derogatory epithets is remotely high road.

You mean: 'Dressing like a construction worker"
And: "refrain from commenting about people that do."



I was using it(What I said) as a descriptive term. But... it seems that's not Ok, but yours are.

If I may observe.
Lota hypocrisy for a 'High road'

 

[MICHAEL T]

pocket carry Bauer, Beretta 950BS, S&W model 36 , cheap38spl derringer, Iver JohnsonTP-22,
PPK/S. S&WModel49 ,Colt Mustang ,KelTec 380, Been most of Pocketpistols.
Bersa380, Colt Commanders and Defender IWB

 

[HOWARD J]

Colt in 32 acp.
Smith 38 spl. airweight
Walther in .25 acp.
Walther in .380acp
Bauer in .25 acp.
Kel-Tec p3AT .380 acp
Sig in .380 acp

This is summertime carry--I use a heavier cal. in winter.

 

[Girodin]

First of all, is construction worker a derogatory or insulting term? No.

I quote Carhartt's website:

For 120 years, Carhartt has
created and manufactured premium
work clothing

It is work clothing. I said I'm not going to go out dressed like I am in work cloths which is, according to their manufacture, what they are.

Lets compare that to your choice of words, "fag". A blatantly derogatory and contemptuous term.

Random House Dictionary defines it as follows

-noun Slang: Disparaging and Offensive . a male homosexual.

I was using it(What I said) as a descriptive term.

You think that removes the character of the word or its derision towards a class of people.

Lota hypocrisy for a 'High road

If I had said lower class, uneducated, white trash or the like, you might have a point in making a comparison, I didn't. My point was work cloths make you look like you are going to work that is not how I like to dress. Just like wearing scrubs making you look like a Dr. and I don't want to look like I'm going to the hospital. Expressing that I have different mode of dress or even at worst that I find a brand to be un-stylish or that more generally I find it unfortunate that many Americans don't dress nicely to go out is not remotely similar to using a slur that a huge number of people find to be offensive by its very utterance. I don't know which is more incredible that you see them as being remotely the same or that you think "using it descriptively" makes it okay. Would you think that was a valid argument for using the N word or any number of other slurs. I suppose saying they were N word (or any other slur) jeans would have been fine too in your mind. Or do you only think it okay to deride homosexuals?

Had you said I don't like to wear emo jeans or skater jeans or the like (which would be more akin to saying work cloths) I would not take issue. The word Fag in the sense you used it is different entirely. How is it descriptive? I take it you didn't mean jeans that look like a cigarette. You meant jeans that look like what you think homosexual men wear. Which, by extension, is you calling homosexual men fags.

 

[BADUNAME13]

First of all, is construction worker a derogatory or insulting term? No.

No, but the way you phrased it was just as much as your 'perceived slight' on my part. -More on that later.

It is work clothing. I said I'm not going to go out dressed like I am in work cloths which is, according to their manufacture, what they are.

Depends... I'm wearing jeans, which unless you are a 'label chaser' I doubt you will notice the difference. I've dated a couple chicks who were, I 'gave in' a little and bought 'the expensive brands'... no thanks, didn't like em.
Bottom line, I'm not dissing you if you want to buy inferior clothing at a higher price... but I don't.

Lets compare that to your choice of words, "fag". A blatantly derogatory and contemptuous term.

Random House Dictionary defines it as follows

And

You think that removes the character of the word or its derision towards a class of people.

As I told (And was not even responded to by) the oversensative mod here.
I have know, and continue to know Several Homosexuals. (I refuse to use the term 'Gay' as that has been 'taken' by them.
The Male Homosexuals whom I have known (Friends of women I have dated) always seem graitful and shocked by the way I treat them like everyone else.
I don't care what people do, so long as I don't haveta see it.
That said, YES, it IS a fitting descriptive term and that is all.

Get over it.

Point being, I was able to use the english language to describe what I was talking about, and we all understood.
I have used the term in their presence, with no issues. Don't know why your so oversensative on the subject.

If I had said lower class, uneducated, white trash or the like, you might have a point in making a comparison, I didn't.

If you had just made the single comment I quoted, I might buy that.
But you did not.

"refrain from commenting about people that do."

The disdain is evident in your CONTINUED words and the cast to them.

You, like many here are VERY GOOD at 'skirting the line' and being 'politely insulting' AND managing to 'blow the whistle' on the person you are attempting to have the discussion with.

My point was work cloths make you look like you are going to work that is not how I like to dress.

Sorry, just jeans, not overalls, or dickies...

or even at worst that I find a brand to be un-stylish or that more generally I find it unfortunate that many Americans don't dress nicely to go out is not remotely similar to using a slur that a huge number of people find to be offensive by its very utterance.

The first part addresses yoru desire to be 'stylish' more than to be armed. That is your decisiona nd your perogiative.
The second has already (A couple times) been addressed.

I don't know which is more incredible that you see them as being remotely the same or that you think "using it descriptively" makes it okay.

Yasee, I'm just a broken down, simple Marine, and I speak directly. You'll KNOW when I mean to give offense.
Secondly, It IS a descriptive term.
Thirdly, It is a response to the CONTINUAL 'snide comments' I see here which permiates this forum. People believe thye can be as insulting as they want, so long as they 'say it in a polite way' (OR using 'allowed language')
That is why I don't come here much excepting in 'rare spurts' when I get really bored.
I think it's about time to take my leave again. I prefer people who speak plainly.

Would you think that was a valid argument for using the N word or any number of other slurs. I suppose saying they were N word (or any other slur) jeans would have been fine too in your mind. Or do you only think it okay to deride homosexuals?

THere are Wt Trash and there are "N*"
Some times no other term will suffice.
I am not particularely racist, and recall the first time I used the "n* word" (I was less than 10 and asked my dad what It ment.
Over 20 years later there have maby been a handful of times I have used it.

Language is intended for communication. It is only one of the indicators of what people are trying to communicate, this is why facial observation si actually MORE important in communication than the spoken word.
-Which is why I understand some initial confusion, but not following clairification. Then it reaches levels of absurdity and political correctness.

Had you said I don't like to wear emo jeans or skater jeans or the like (which would be more akin to saying work cloths) I would not take issue. The word Fag in the sense you used it is different entirely. How is it descriptive? I take it you didn't mean jeans that look like a cigarette. You meant jeans that look like what you think homosexual men wear. Which, by extension, is you calling homosexual men fags.

Ummm... THEY selected that descriptor.

I actually considered using 'Emo' as that was what was in my mind.
However, I believed it would not be effective communication as many of us may not be used to the term, so I selected a term for the most effective communication.

Enjoy.

 

[Girodin]

The first part addresses yoru desire to be 'stylish' more than to be armed. That is your decisiona nd your perogiative

Not really, I can be stylish and carry on my hip which is how I would prefer to carry anyways (see discussion infra). I also have a BUG in my pocket so I'm not sure how being able to carry two guns (and a reload for each and a knife if I like) leaves me unarmed.

so I selected a term for the most effective communication.

Hmmmm, I think the adjective "tight" might have been most effective, or tight fitting. Perhaps not everyone has the same stereo types as you.

I prefer people who speak plainly.

There is a difference between speaking plainly and deriding a class of people. Plainly would have been to say tight jeans.

THere are Wt Trash and there are "N*"
Some times no other term will suffice.

WOW

I am not particularely racist,

That's nice that you're not "particularly" racist.

The disdain is evident in your CONTINUED words and the cast to them.

I'm not really sure what the last half of that sentence means. I think my continue words clearly explained that I find a certain manner of dress to be unstylish an uncouth. No real disdain per se.

Then it reaches levels of absurdity and political correctness.

I refuse to use the term 'Gay' as that has been 'taken' by them.

Wow. Also ironic since you are happy to use the word fag which was also, according to you. "taken" by "them". "They" can steal your word for happy but not for sticks, or shrew, or cigarette (or the other meanings its had over time). Interesting line drawing there.

Ummm... THEY selected that descriptor.

The etymology is debatable at best but several of the suspected roots are pejorative in nature. More importantly the word today is consider to be a pejorative.

I have know, and continue to know Several Homosexuals.

Well homosexuals do make up about between 2-13% of the population depending on who you ask so the fact that you know several is impressive indeed and surely should overcome any protest to you using hateful words referencing them.

The Male Homosexuals whom I have known (Friends of women I have dated)

Good thing you made it perfectly clear they are not your friends or people you are associating with all on your own accord. We wouldn't want anyone to get the wrong idea.

At any rate this is enough off topic. I've said my piece which is that I don't think it was a highroad comment and I find it entirely different in kind from saying something is in one's own opinion not a la mode.

You have said your piece: You find no problem in the use of pejoratives in referencing homosexuals, your stereotype of how such people dress is so strong that you deem it to be the "most effective" way of describing something, and you find, at the least, the occasion use of racial slurs to be not only perfectly acceptable but indeed necessary.

I do not think we will reach a meeting of the minds on those points. Back to pocket pistols.

I have started with a Colt Mustang, went to an LCP and have a few snub nosed revolvers but never really carry them. I've often considered getting a PM9 but haven't yet. I carry a pocket pistol only as a BUG or in particular circumstances that prevent me from carrying a larger pistol.

 

[BADUNAME13]

Not really, I can be stylish and carry on my hip which is how I would prefer to carry anyways (see discussion infra). I also have a BUG in my pocket so I'm not sure how being able to carry two guns (and a reload for each and a knife if I like) leaves me unarmed.

Years ago, I CCW's a 1911 and a P32

One day was one of those rare instances when there was a good reason not to be wearing my 1911

I then realised I was unarmed except for a .32

I started carrying my S&W bodyguard the next day.

Hmmmm, I think the adjective "tight" might have been most effective, or tight fitting. Perhaps not everyone has the same stereo types as you.

Your opinion, and you are welcome to it.
Perhaps not everyone thinks as YOU do.
That's the great thing about America. The freedom to be different.

There is a difference between speaking plainly and deriding a class of people. Plainly would have been to say tight jeans.

I believe we have determined that I was NOT deriding a class of people.
You ether have a reading comprehention issue, ro you have an agenda.

WOW

What? Trash is trash. regardless of race, sex, creed etc. BUT, have you ever noticed how a news announcement about a criminal will oftentimes leave out race? It's an important descriptor. Nothing more or less.

That's nice that you're not "particularly" racist.

Everyone is racist to some degree. If you deny it you are ether lying or have an agenda. I can be honest. Currently I have 2 black friends who are welcome into my home at any time. There are also many people (White and black) who are not.
Again: Honesty.

I've dated women of all kinds of races. People are what matter.

I'm not really sure what the last half of that sentence means. I think my continue words clearly explained that I find a certain manner of dress to be unstylish an uncouth. No real disdain per se.

Cast= tone of your words. I hear WHAT you are saying, but your tone says something else.
(And don;t get me STARTED on the BS which is "Style")
As to uncouth... that would also depend on your location. Blends in quite well where I am.
Your disdain is apparent.

Wow. Also ironic since you are happy to use the word fag which was also, according to you. "taken" by "them". "They" can steal your word for happy but not for sticks, or shrew, or cigarette (or the other meanings its had over time). Interesting line drawing there.

I'm not british.

The etymology is debatable at best but several of the suspected roots are pejorative in nature. More importantly the word today is consider to be a pejorative.

Actually it's not debatable at all. The individuals I am refering to have chosen to use that particular word in my presence. Ergo, they have chosen it as I said.

I would agree that (Apparently by how tight your undies have gotten in a twist) "That word" is considered a 'rude word' by some. HOWEVER, it should be equally apparent by my statements that that does not apply to all subcultures as many people I know do not consider it to be anything more than a descriptive term.

if you will chastise me for not being aware of it's conentation in some circles, the SAME cirticism should at minimum apply to you for the same actions.

Well homosexuals do make up about between 2-13% of the population depending on who you ask so the fact that you know several is impressive indeed and surely should overcome any protest to you using hateful words referencing them.

Actually your numbers are on the high side. We're talking more 1- 1.5... approaching 2, but not so high (Their lobby is EXTREMELY effective, and gunowners should learn from them)
I went to High School 30 minutes from New Orleans, which has a statistically large Homosexual community, and have a couple relatives who have chosen that 'alternative lifestyle'... not so hard to do. (Know some)

Their just people...
And It should be VERY apparent that my words are not hateful. Again, are you unable to comprehend the written word or meerly pushing an agenda?

Good thing you made it perfectly clear they are not your friends or people you are associating with all on your own accord. We wouldn't want anyone to get the wrong idea.

Get whatever idea you want. I don't have too much in common with male homosexuals, so excepting one Cousin, all those I have known have been friends-of-friends, or of women I've dated. Lesbians I understand... we both appriciate a beautiful woman!

At any rate this is enough off topic. I've said my piece which is that I don't think it was a highroad comment and I find it entirely different in kind from saying something is in one's own opinion not a la mode.

So glad YOU have decided when a conversation should end... and who should have the last word

So, since I am going to try to avoid using language which will offend you... do you intend to do likewise and not speak insultingly of those of us who are not so 'fashion concerned' and mearly wear clothing.

You have said your piece: You find no problem in the use of pejoratives in referencing homosexuals, your stereotype of how such people dress is so strong that you deem it to be the "most effective" way of describing something, and you find, at the least, the occasion use of racial slurs to be not only perfectly acceptable but indeed necessary.

Not quite, but I see you are eather resistant to learning, unable to communicate clearly, or have an agenda and refuse to agree that language is to more clearly impart meaning and ideas from one person to another.

About the PM 9... I wouldn't, mine never worked 'out the box' and sending it back to the factory 3x proved useless (6 or 7 differing types of quality ammo, in the hands of several different knowledgable shooters)

It wasn't the lack of quality which disawaded me, but their TOTAL lack of customer service... etc.

I'll never have dealings with that company again.
-Conversely, if you get a godo one... it seems by all accounts to do great! (So never sell it.)

 

[Prosser]

I'm kind of out on this one.
"Habitually pocket carry."

Beretta 950 .22 short
Walther PPK/S. Too heavy to inaccurate, trigger sucked.
S&W 360PD: The pocket gun for me.
Kahr PM9 a bit heavy, but, in a pocket holster, with winter clothing, it does work.

 

[huntsman]

the Ruger LCP, came out and it really seems to be ideal for true everday jeans pocket carry. Small, flat, light, reliable, good quality and decent power. How about you?

I concur

 

[Girodin]

Not quite, but I see you are eather resistant to learning, unable to communicate clearly, . . .

Given your grammar and spelling, both of those are pretty funny accusations. I'll resist the urge to comment on the rest, but boy would I love to swing at some of those softballs you lobbed up there.

 

[rogertc1]

Late 1970's I carried a little Bauer stainless .25APC pistol and my Chief M60 stainless snubbie. Even wore the Bauer in my wedding.
Nowdays I have every small gun almost made and don't even carry anmore. just collect.

 

[jon86]

I've carried a smith 637, 638, Glock 30 ( on occasion, can't do it in all of my pants ) and glock 27.

638 was the most comfy.

 

[chupacabrah]

I carried a model 36, but it was heavy and the hammer would get caught. Not a huge issue but irritating.

Keltec P-11. this gun is the same size as the m36, but more blocky in shape. it was a tight-ish fit for the draw.

Just to add this to the fire from earlier. The Glock 26 is dimensionally the same size as a P-11 (fraction of an inch wider). My glock fits in my pocket....I just can't draw it very efficiently.

Now, I'd like a pocket carry gun, but just don't have one. So I just carry IWB or OWB with my glock or 1911.

 

[hardluk1]

Quit whinning you two children. It's timeout ,go stand in the corner. All this jeans cr*p is enough. If you can draw your firearm in your jeans that all you need to know, does not matter if fit is tight or lose designer or work. Geeesss

 

[The Bushmaster]

Well now...This sure has turned into a "food fight"...

 

[Bill B.]

Over 30 years ago I carried a pre 31 S&W I frame in 32 S&W Long. There have been numerous J frame S&W in 38 special over the years but currently I go with a S&W 649 .38 special & a Sig 230 .380 ACP.

 

[burley]

I bought an LCP and Armalaser for my pocket, liked it and got a S&W 642 also. Then, I started IWB a G 27 and quit pocket carry. That LCP is such a small gun and you'll only piss off a BG on angel dust or something with that small a caliber. Then, I saw a post about how Wild Bill Hickok's gun was very similar to the balistics of a 380 and well, that put things into a different perspective for me somehow. Guess I'll dig out that peened over Little Crappy Pistol, send it back to Ruger and see if I care to pocket the thing again.

Hey guys, the ignore feture on this site works fine.

 

[DasFriek]

I mainly only pocket carry for a place to put a bug.
I started off with a Sig P238 which i still dearly miss as im a 1911 guy and the gun is about as close as you can get to a mini 1911 as possible.
Then i picked up a 95% Mint CZ VZ 45 .25 which i only carried a couple times as i dont feel it could do much but scare a BG and not stop him. I sold it do to lack of usability as im not a collector, But man was it a quality made gun that was wonderful to hold and look at.
My latest is my biggest move into the pocket realm, I bought a Kahr MK9 that i rear pocket carry. High quality and great reliability and has alot of power for such a small gun and is easy to shoot. I put 175 rounds threw it yesterday and had no pain in my hand.
I went with the MK steel frame over the PM polymer frame for the fact this is my only 9mm and i wanted a gun that was at home at the range as it was in my pocket.
Not something that would make my hand hurt and cramp after 30 rounds like many small 9mm's on the market.
But they are close combat handguns and not made to be range toys so im not putting them down for that.

 

[1KPerDay]

S&W 37 for a year, LCP since then.

 

[makarovnik]

Raven .25acp, Jennings J22, Polish P64 and Kel-Tec P32.