It’s recently been fashionable to fill content needs on blogs, etc. by finding other material and reacting to it. The false dichotomy is a long held tradition in the gun-writing racket (see all the “revolver vs. auto,” “38 vs. 45,” “DA vs SA” types of detritus), it tends to be long on words without adding value to the discussion.
Most recently, it’s been a feature of electronic discourse with the same results – and now, having called that out, I have to actually provide some relevant information to make the effort of use to readers.
While the gear features under examination came in response to a series of columns that had to do with concealed carry, it also rears its ugly head in video.
It was a video on a YouTube channel that started this particular issue for me. It was a range surveillance video that showed a guy shooting himself. It appeared he was trying to reholster a double action/single action pistol into a flimsy holster that was in his waistband at 3 o’clock or just further back – or he had the gun inside the collapsible holster, trying to put the whole mess into his waistband. In either event, he pointed the gun in at himself and pressed the trigger, creating a gunshot injury. Was the gun ‘decocked’ or was it still hammer-back? Couldn’t tell from the video, but the safety was clearly not on as it’s not just a decocker, but a manual safety lever.
I saw that the holster was alleged to be a Remora – though similar holsters to that type are out there. Is it a legitimate “I ain’t digging the rig” moment – as the “common taters” (h/t, Claude Werner) piled on to indicate -- or can we actually learn something from the event?
There are lots of holsters out there meant to fit a lot of different needs. Wearing a collapsing holster inside the waist band – it closes when the gun is drawn – is clearly problematic if you seek to reholster the gun. Does that mean that this particular type of holster is useless – or is it more a case that it can fill some needs, but not all needs?
Similarly, the pocket holster – meant for pocket guns – comes under fire as a regular carry method. And it has plenty of disadvantages with very few real advantages. It depends on how you seek to use it. It also depends on the user being smarter than the gear, as real a problem now as it has always been.
None of this is new. When I started, the suede clip-on inside the waist holster was commonly and cheaply made by holster manufactures large and small. The advantage, an ability to remove gun and holster at the same time to lock in your desk before you went into the interview room with a suspect, was also its major disadvantage. With many of them, drawing the gun meant drawing the holster too – not ideal.
Like the detective’s paddle holster that later came into popular use, you could end up with the holstered gun in your hand when you needed to shoot. With the suede rig, reholstering one-handed by feel (something not widely understood as desirable these days) was impossible. Did I ever use the suede ‘special?’
You bet I did. As a young off-duty cop in t-shirt and blue jeans, the S&W Model 60 rode right in front – you’d call it ‘appendix’ these days – in 1978. Everything that was old is new again. I also realized that if I drew the gun, I’d have to remove the holster to replace the gun; it’s the cost of doing business.
We now have the advantage of modern materials and manufacture. An analog to the old suede special is the BLACKHAWK TecGrip, the Remora, the Sticky Holster , each in use by some ‘real-deal’ types who prefer it for backup guns worn (mostly it seems) in front of the waist.
Is this what you want to take a high volume shooting class with? No. Is it relevant for walking the dog in your neighborhood, wearing the gun around your house when you’re armed at home . . . which, I trust, you always are or for a small second gun? How about for a trip to the gym or to yoga or cardiac rehab? Put the pouched gun in a suitable container that you keep within reach – while keeping the trigger guard covered and other junk away from the gun – then put the ‘non-digged rig’ on to wear the gun home. That could be a plan.
It’s not an everyday-everywhere rig. It’s a ‘special needs’ rig that creates some problems you need to be aware of.
It’s one thing to explain why you “don’t dig the rig” if you’re trying to help a rookie learn the rules of the road. Be willing to explain the relevant use of nonstandard equipment for people who – at one time or another, like it or not – will need to use a nonstandard method for carrying the gun(s).
- - Rich Grassi