Like others have said it's an HK P7 (you can see the front strap cocker and the spot on the grips where P7's are labeled)... which is a shame. That's such a nice gun to be in those crap nylon ones. We don't know other circumstances that might make that the best way for him to carry it then, but I'd sure love to see it in decent leather or kydex.
Worst Carry Rig Ever?
- Thread starter green5594
- Start date
- Status
Like others have said it's an HK P7 (you can see the front strap cocker and the spot on the grips where P7's are labeled)... which is a shame. That's such a nice gun to be in those crap nylon ones. We don't know other circumstances that might make that the best way for him to carry it then, but I'd sure love to see it in decent leather or kydex.
David E
Member
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2008
- Messages
- 7,459
I wondered if it was a P7, but the holster isn't anywhere close to fitting it so suspected HiPoint.
The picture looks like he's at some pro-gun rally showing support, so good for him.
I'm struck by how some people react to certain verbiage being used to describe a faceless, nameless, unknown man shown in a picture on the internet who is doing a very stupid thing.
The picture looks like he's at some pro-gun rally showing support, so good for him.
I'm struck by how some people react to certain verbiage being used to describe a faceless, nameless, unknown man shown in a picture on the internet who is doing a very stupid thing.
silicosys4
Member
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2012
- Messages
- 3,692
it would be extremely easy to disarm this guy, even in mid draw. It's just the worst position to try and maintain or regain control of your sidearm.
In addition to health risks, it seems counterintuitive to open carry a handgun where you are least able to keep track of it, or people approaching it....i dont open carry often, but when i do, i keep aware of whos on my right side and how close they are. Body mechanics being what they are, he would be able to do almost nothing if someone wanted to approach and disarm him from behind.
In addition to health risks, it seems counterintuitive to open carry a handgun where you are least able to keep track of it, or people approaching it....i dont open carry often, but when i do, i keep aware of whos on my right side and how close they are. Body mechanics being what they are, he would be able to do almost nothing if someone wanted to approach and disarm him from behind.
I suspect that that is the most comfortable way he can carry. He is a large man. I suspect was a weightlifter at some point in his life. Not extremely flexible. IWB holster are pretty much an impossibility for him. OWB would not be much better as his size and flexibility would also hinder him. Shoulder rig, might work. Truthfully I'm not sure even a good SOB holster would work. He is obviously carrying there for comfort. Tactically sound? No. I think maybe a better idea would be a smaller pistol in the pocket.
Potatohead
Member
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2013
- Messages
- 5,375
You right. Fair enough.
Potatohead
Member
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2013
- Messages
- 5,375
Maybe this mission calls for him to carry his teammates gun on his rear, who stays right behind him to draw it at a moments notice. Pretty tricky.
The issue is that the name callers have no interest in contributing, it's just an opportunity to show how smart they are because they assume the carrier is an easy target for criticism.
Goes to a lot of carry methods - right now the internet standard seems to be "IWB or don't get off the porch." How nice, it has nothing to do with reality. If you need to deep carry, IWB will get you fired at your job if their is policy against any carry at all. As adults, we should all reserve the right to make our own decision about our safety, weighing all the risks, including unemployment.
Nobody is much defending the holster or method - but again, in the reality of life, all the forms of carry exist because somebody found that was a successful method for them at that time. Taking one picture out of the context of the event, it's easy to criticize - it's like a cop finding you next to a shooting victim with the perp's gun laying next to them. Oops, you will be in handcuffs until it's sorted out. Hopefully circumstances don't work against you, but it has happened, an innocent person serves time.
That view of life as being uncertain isn't demonstrated by the "dumb cluck" view. From that perspective, it's black and white, judged guilty by one fact, and condemned. Sounds like that is the way someone has been treated in the past - no consideration, no mercy. Adopting the attitude may not be the best thing to do. Playing locker room measuring contest on the internet, however, is the standard juvenile game on a lot of forums that lack adult perspective and experience.
So, should we all give up shoulder holsters never to return? Au contraire, it's the method used by a lot of people who need to deep carry with high demands about clothing and uniform wear. Thunderwear is another answer, highly derided on the internet, works well for those who can't print at their job or they lose it. Again, the black and white "I'm right and the world is wrong" attitude is too restrictive for reality. It's just reacting to how they were treated or posturing for social standing. "I sure told those dweebs."
Nobody is praising this guys carry - but I did remark that LEO's have used SOB carry, with two .38's in a double holster. Are two gun shooters currently a new target of derision, yeah, it's a recent post on a web site. Do you give a dumb cluck when you are armed with a revolver and need the 7th, 8th, and 9th round? It's called a NY reload for a reason in it's day.
What happens when you fall flat on your back, could you be injured, can it happen? Sure. When's the last time you did that? The average adult would have to be caught very unaware. We would attempt to regain our balance, and if you train in retention techniques properly, would you not try to fall in a manner to allow you to either access the firearm or prevent it entirely? Yes, it does go to a gun grab being a difficult situation, but with SOB in a confrontation, it's also a lot more concealed. Let's not forget that stand off is all part of training, too.
For every black and white "That's stupid and wrong!" there are circumstances where it works. What some "trainers" lack is experience and perspective about it, and trying to apply LEO or Range Rules to the difficult issue of daily carry. It might be something that appears to support the rules of safety, but it's not always applicable on the street. It's like saying "No carry into a Post Office." Yeah, that's the letter of the law, but it happens. Adults make their own choices, it's not about being a criminal, it's about not being the problem to begin with. It's what martial arts masters know - you can break the rules, it's experience and judgment that tells you when.
If someone feels prompted to take up an analysis point by point, they are missing the message. There are better ways to do things, sometimes you just pass by. You are not the sensei master to the public at large, and you are not an authority on all things in life. Trying to demonstrate it on a forum is the #1 "poker tell" you have a lot more to learn. One of those lessons is that sometimes you have to let others just make mistakes. It is, after all, why we are a nation - no other living person is your master, you need to learn and assess what is right in life and make your own decisions. While ethics and morals can and are black and white, methods of carry are far from it, and blanket condemnation isn't an example so much of expertise but a lack of it.
Like children, they eventually will grow up and you won't have to tie their shoelaces any more.
Goes to a lot of carry methods - right now the internet standard seems to be "IWB or don't get off the porch." How nice, it has nothing to do with reality. If you need to deep carry, IWB will get you fired at your job if their is policy against any carry at all. As adults, we should all reserve the right to make our own decision about our safety, weighing all the risks, including unemployment.
Nobody is much defending the holster or method - but again, in the reality of life, all the forms of carry exist because somebody found that was a successful method for them at that time. Taking one picture out of the context of the event, it's easy to criticize - it's like a cop finding you next to a shooting victim with the perp's gun laying next to them. Oops, you will be in handcuffs until it's sorted out. Hopefully circumstances don't work against you, but it has happened, an innocent person serves time.
That view of life as being uncertain isn't demonstrated by the "dumb cluck" view. From that perspective, it's black and white, judged guilty by one fact, and condemned. Sounds like that is the way someone has been treated in the past - no consideration, no mercy. Adopting the attitude may not be the best thing to do. Playing locker room measuring contest on the internet, however, is the standard juvenile game on a lot of forums that lack adult perspective and experience.
So, should we all give up shoulder holsters never to return? Au contraire, it's the method used by a lot of people who need to deep carry with high demands about clothing and uniform wear. Thunderwear is another answer, highly derided on the internet, works well for those who can't print at their job or they lose it. Again, the black and white "I'm right and the world is wrong" attitude is too restrictive for reality. It's just reacting to how they were treated or posturing for social standing. "I sure told those dweebs."
Nobody is praising this guys carry - but I did remark that LEO's have used SOB carry, with two .38's in a double holster. Are two gun shooters currently a new target of derision, yeah, it's a recent post on a web site. Do you give a dumb cluck when you are armed with a revolver and need the 7th, 8th, and 9th round? It's called a NY reload for a reason in it's day.
What happens when you fall flat on your back, could you be injured, can it happen? Sure. When's the last time you did that? The average adult would have to be caught very unaware. We would attempt to regain our balance, and if you train in retention techniques properly, would you not try to fall in a manner to allow you to either access the firearm or prevent it entirely? Yes, it does go to a gun grab being a difficult situation, but with SOB in a confrontation, it's also a lot more concealed. Let's not forget that stand off is all part of training, too.
For every black and white "That's stupid and wrong!" there are circumstances where it works. What some "trainers" lack is experience and perspective about it, and trying to apply LEO or Range Rules to the difficult issue of daily carry. It might be something that appears to support the rules of safety, but it's not always applicable on the street. It's like saying "No carry into a Post Office." Yeah, that's the letter of the law, but it happens. Adults make their own choices, it's not about being a criminal, it's about not being the problem to begin with. It's what martial arts masters know - you can break the rules, it's experience and judgment that tells you when.
If someone feels prompted to take up an analysis point by point, they are missing the message. There are better ways to do things, sometimes you just pass by. You are not the sensei master to the public at large, and you are not an authority on all things in life. Trying to demonstrate it on a forum is the #1 "poker tell" you have a lot more to learn. One of those lessons is that sometimes you have to let others just make mistakes. It is, after all, why we are a nation - no other living person is your master, you need to learn and assess what is right in life and make your own decisions. While ethics and morals can and are black and white, methods of carry are far from it, and blanket condemnation isn't an example so much of expertise but a lack of it.
Like children, they eventually will grow up and you won't have to tie their shoelaces any more.
Bartholomew Roberts
Member
Tirod said:
. That's the funniest thing I've heard from you in some time!
AK103K
member
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2002
- Messages
- 7,610
Not sure how you come up with the above.
Reality is, at least mine anyway, IWB works, and works very well, especially where you arent supposed to be carrying. I did so every day, most of my adult life, and never once was found out. I would have lost my job(s) and/or been arrested if I had, depending where I was.
I think at some point (for most, early on) in our carry progression, many of us have been "that guy". Life has its learning curves, and if youre lucky, you learn and move on without to much harm or foul in your lessons. Nylon wasnt around when I started to carry a gun, but I will admit, I had some pretty cheesy/funky leather holsters when I started out, that would likely draw the same criticism from the "experts". It didnt take long to figure out, good gear is the only way to go, and even good gear, isnt always the right gear.
Ive tried pretty much every possible way of carrying a gun you can think of, and figured out early on, that IWB is really about the only way to go if you want to hide a full sized handgun on a daily basis. My next favorite holsters, are the Smart Carry, and a "good" ankle holster. Beyond them, for constant, all day, every day use, Ive not found anything that actually works better. But thats me. We all have different situations and needs.
Hey, even for us old farts, its never to late to learn how to tie them properly.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zAFcV7zuUDA
That looks downright stupid to me.
FWIW I carried a Glock 19 IWB at work for 2 years. I don't know what their policy was and didn't care to find out. It was never an issue. Now, that wouldn't work for all clothing options, I suppose, I might have to downsize to a Glock 26 in some situations. Or go all the way down to a 642. And/or an ankle or pocket or Smartcarry.
But SOB (small of back)? Nope. That's just silly. Especially like in the OP.
FWIW I carried a Glock 19 IWB at work for 2 years. I don't know what their policy was and didn't care to find out. It was never an issue. Now, that wouldn't work for all clothing options, I suppose, I might have to downsize to a Glock 26 in some situations. Or go all the way down to a 642. And/or an ankle or pocket or Smartcarry.
But SOB (small of back)? Nope. That's just silly. Especially like in the OP.
Old Dog
Member
Tirod's tirade notwithstanding, I will stand by my remarks in this thread.
It is NOT about locker-room "measuring contests." I have absolutely zero to prove to anyone on this, or any other internet forum.
Sometimes, a spectacularly unsafe, ill-considered, unwise, unworkable or otherwise just plain stupid action must be roundly and soundly condemned by a number of folks just to get through to the perpetrator.
Injecting the politically correct notion of "sometimes you've just got to let it pass by" is in large part how our country evolved to its current state of tolerating so many things that are so morally wrong. No, sometimes the children don't grow up and figure out that they've been doing it all wrong ...
The subject of the photo appears to be a man, possibly in middle-age. The subject is not attempting concealment, so why Tirod starts talking about IWB is meaningless. Yes, he appears to be a rather wide-bodied person -- the type for whom OWB carry, with a proper holster, works exceptionally well. Hell, even a tactical drop-leg thigh rig might be cozy enough for open-carry for him.
I'm no one's "sensei" nor do I pretend to be. I don't need to have people on the internet confirming that I have balls of steel (I'm quite comfortable already about that) or seem to be the all-time Jedi Master in the realm of carrying firearms.
It is NOT about locker-room "measuring contests." I have absolutely zero to prove to anyone on this, or any other internet forum.
Sometimes, a spectacularly unsafe, ill-considered, unwise, unworkable or otherwise just plain stupid action must be roundly and soundly condemned by a number of folks just to get through to the perpetrator.
Injecting the politically correct notion of "sometimes you've just got to let it pass by" is in large part how our country evolved to its current state of tolerating so many things that are so morally wrong. No, sometimes the children don't grow up and figure out that they've been doing it all wrong ...
The subject of the photo appears to be a man, possibly in middle-age. The subject is not attempting concealment, so why Tirod starts talking about IWB is meaningless. Yes, he appears to be a rather wide-bodied person -- the type for whom OWB carry, with a proper holster, works exceptionally well. Hell, even a tactical drop-leg thigh rig might be cozy enough for open-carry for him.
Sigh.
I'm no one's "sensei" nor do I pretend to be. I don't need to have people on the internet confirming that I have balls of steel (I'm quite comfortable already about that) or seem to be the all-time Jedi Master in the realm of carrying firearms.
Sorry, bub, but no -- not when those mistakes can maim or kill.
Mega Ditto!
Wow that is a real product? Oh myHey, this will keep everyone safe carry condition -10
Google FFDO holster
JoePfeiffer
Member
He isn't using it as it's meant to be used. I've got a very similar holster in the drawer (sigh); it's meant to have the belt go through the metal clip so the pistol is vertical. The one I have is ambidextrous; it has a nylon loop on both sides and the clip is transferred to the side you're going to put the belt on.
Blame the manufacturer for a cheap nylon holster, but not for how it's deployed here.
RetiredUSNChief
Member
Hey, this will keep everyone safe carry condition -10
Google FFDO holster
Yes, this appears to be a real holster. It's a DeSantis Flight Deck Officer Leather Holster with Lock Hole:
http://www.lapolicegear.com/desantis-fdo-holster-wlock.html
And the lock in this image looks like a Master Lock 175, which I can pop open in about three seconds (not bragging here...I've got a few of these locks and it takes me about three seconds from the time I touch the lock to the time I pop it open with a pick). The DeSantis website says it comes with a brass lock, and this image is from their site.
I suppose no padlock is truly secure, especially if it's on something so eminently portable as a 3-4 pound gun/holster combination. But then, all it's probably really intended to do is prevent kids from fiddling with the loaded gun while it's in the holster.
Sadly, no. It was meant to make the pilots' possession of a pistol as cumbersome as possible (not to mention having to pay for their training themselves). They can unlock it only when in the flight deck and must relock it before leaving. Since the purpose of a holster is to cover the trigger, only by government logic can it make sense to require sticking a piece of metal into the trigger guard of the holstered pistol.
http://www.abcactionnews.com/dpp/ne...about-guns-accidentally-triggered-in-cockpits
are you talking about the holster in the first post? I believe that metal clip is for IWB carry. I don't think you put the belt through it, your belt goes on the opposite side as the clip. Makes the holster both IWB/OWB.
Kind of like this one. The metal clip is on the outside when wearing it on the belt outside the waistband. I don't own or use this kind of holster, so I am no expert.
Still a cheap holster, not really suitable for conceal carry
Last edited:
David E
Member
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2008
- Messages
- 7,459
I'm not as politically correct as most, but let me ask you....
Which is more likely:
1) the guy has thoroughly thought thru this mode of carry, and only after trying dozens of different carry methods (and has a trunk full of holsters he tried but just didn't cut it for him) UNTIL he found the ideal combo of a $1000 gun in a $7.00 holster being worn in a manner never foreseen by the maker, creating a carry method that, despite the numerous faults, flaws and foibles, works for him.
OR
2) the guy is simply an idiot.
Yeah, I'm still going with #2
It's unsecure and unsafe for him and those around him.
Which is more likely:
1) the guy has thoroughly thought thru this mode of carry, and only after trying dozens of different carry methods (and has a trunk full of holsters he tried but just didn't cut it for him) UNTIL he found the ideal combo of a $1000 gun in a $7.00 holster being worn in a manner never foreseen by the maker, creating a carry method that, despite the numerous faults, flaws and foibles, works for him.
OR
2) the guy is simply an idiot.
Yeah, I'm still going with #2
It's unsecure and unsafe for him and those around him.
RetiredUSNChief
Member
Quite frankly, the concern of those pilots with guns that might get "accidentally triggered" while in cockpits (and honestly..."accidentally triggered"? who comes up with this stuff?) is totally misplaced.
They need to put their holstered weapon on BEFORE getting aboard and then they need to LEAVE IT ALONE until they disembark at their destination.
Ironically, it's the locking holster that's caused the ND that have happened, apparently. Which should be a clue...
In demonstrations, Huebl said the reason the weapon goes off is related to how the trigger is touched by a special padlock that pilots are required to use every time they enter or exit the cockpit.
"The more they handle it," said Huebl, "The more likely there is going to be an accident."
Duh. Put it on and LEAVE IT ALONE.
"You have to ask the question," said Capt. Sevier, "why is a flight deck officer being required to take this weapon off his person -- multiple times a day -- when every other law enforcement officer in the country straps it on in the morning and doesn't fiddle with it until he gets back home at night."
Meanwhile, in Congress, House Bill 2200 would make significant changes in the Federal Flight Deck Officer program that pilots say would improve the program's effectiveness, but no action has been taken on the bill since 2002.
Good question...with the answer in the very next paragraph: it happens because CONGRESS is making decisions which are beyond their professional purview. (Like so many other things, apparently.)
David E
Member
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2008
- Messages
- 7,459
Bingo!
I missed this the first time, but it's spot-on!
Sometimes .......you just have to call something (sometimes someone) "Stupid" when the person and/or the act endangers others. This is one of those times.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
