Suggested new medic alert commercial "OOOPS I just shot myself"

http://www.itstactical.com/warcom/f...her-holsters-can-cause-accidental-discharges/

It continues to amaze me the people who cannot admit they screwed up but have to blame everything from holsters to the kitchen sink for pulling the trigger. In the above case a Galco holster is blamed, where by the person's own pictures it can be clearly seen the trigger is NOT depressed by the holster, even though the leather has clearly been shoved in. How do I know it has been shoved in? Because the trigger guard is wider than the trigger, it had to be out for the gun to go in, and if the leather is that sloppy it would not have gone in without pressure.

Come on people take personal responsibility!

So.....

even though we have photos of the holster in question,
even though those photos show the leather to be worn and having a crease,
even though that crease is shown contacting the trigger of the firearm that discharged,
even though though the report makes no mention of the user holstering his firearm at the time,
even though the photos make it obvious that the firearm would only barely be in the holster if a finger was trapped between the outer leather of the holster and the trigger to cause a discharge,
even though the location of the torn fabric supports the idea that the muzzle of the pistol was quite deeply inserted into the holster,

... you know what Really Happened(™)?


Sorry.... facts not in evidence to support your 'theory of the case.'

Going by the fact that it's legal to carry a concealed pistol in Texas (and illegal to openly carry one in most circumstances) there is no reason why the poster would had to unholster to eat and then have had to holster again upon entering his vehicle.

Further, judging by the time it takes to crease leather to that extent (and the wear is apparent in the photos), it had been going in and out of that holster for some time before events caught up with the poster and the discharge happened. It didn't 'just go off' and the poster never said it did. I'd suspect that it went off because the act of the poster twisting to his left to put on his seatbelt caused the pistol to shift in the holster which allowed the now fastened seatbelt to depress the trigger sufficiently and cause it to function when he again faced to the front.

Fallschirmjäger said:

So.....

even though we have photos of the holster in question,
even though those photos show the leather to be worn and having a crease,
even though that crease is shown contacting the trigger of the firearm that discharged,
even though though the report makes no mention of the user holstering his firearm at the time,
even though the photos make it obvious that the firearm would only barely be in the holster if a finger was trapped between the outer leather of the holster and the trigger to cause a discharge,
even though the location of the torn fabric supports the idea that the muzzle of the pistol was quite deeply inserted into the holster,

... you know what Really Happened(™)?


Sorry.... facts not in evidence to support your 'theory of the case.'

Click to expand...

We have photos not submitted by a investigator, but by the individual who shot himself. We do have his own photo that clearly shows the Glock fully inserted and the trigger NOT in a position to fire the gun. We can also see the Glock has a fully functional trigger guard. To me it is clear he shot himself, and wants to blame the holster. You believe whatever fantasy you want.

WalkingWolf said:

We have photos not submitted by a investigator.

Click to expand...

We do?
Who? From what department? Investigating what?
Where did you read "investigator" on that page?

Fallschirmjäger said:

We do?
Who? From what department? Investigating what?
Where did you read "investigator" on that page?

Click to expand...

I didn't the photos are submitted by the person who shot himself. There is no proof in any of those photos the holster fired the gun. In fact the photos show the trigger is no where near that position when the gun is inserted. The gun also has a trigger guard, which I'm no expert in physics but it seems pretty clear to someone with a brain that the trigger guard cannot get into the holster with the leather folded in. So if the claim is he was inserting the gun and it fired from the holster that is bogus. If he is claiming the holster folded in while he was wearing it and pulled the trigger he is crazy.

Damn those evil holsters... :lol:

WalkingWolf said:

I didn't the photos are submitted by the person who shot himself. There is no proof in any of those photos the holster fired the gun. In fact the photos show the trigger is no where near that position when the gun is inserted. The gun also has a trigger guard, which I'm no expert in physics but it seems pretty clear to someone with a brain that the trigger guard cannot get into the holster with the leather folded in. So if the claim is he was inserting the gun and it fired from the holster that is bogus. If he is claiming the holster folded in while he was wearing it and pulled the trigger he is crazy.

Damn those evil holsters... :lol:

Click to expand...

And dang my substandard reading skills, you did indeed say "NOT taken by an investigator."

So if the claim is he was inserting the gun and it fired from the holster that is bogus.

Click to expand...

He did not claim he was inserting the gun in the holster. "Me being the passenger, I rotated my torso to the left to fasten my seatbelt like I always do. When I straightened again, my Glock 19 discharged"

If he is claiming the holster folded in while he was wearing it and pulled the trigger he is crazy.

Click to expand...

The trusty, comfortable, leather holster I had been using for a year and two weeks had done what a baseball glove does after lots of use; It got soft."
The wearer isn't claiming it spontaneously folded in like the immaculate conception and it's obvious from the stains and creases depicted that the crease developed over time. Things that fail slowly usually don't manifest themselves until there is a sudden occurrence. Tires wear out slowly over the period of thousands of miles but a tire blow out or failure only takes a moment. It takes years to develop heart disease but heart attacks usually strike by surprise. The crease developed over a number of months and it wasn't until the right combination of wear and pressure occurred that the trigger was depressed enough.


I can easily see a scenario where the pistol was holstered as the wearer was standing while at home and the front of the trigger guard easily passed the leather (which likely had different pressure on it when the wearer was in a standing position than when sitting). I can also easily believe that sitting caused the holster to become creased from pressure, as my holster shifts when I sit in my car and the seat bolster presses against the grip and my ample girthage places pressure on the the holster.


To believe that the wearer shot himself with a finger on the trigger, I would need to believe...
That someone wearing a concealed weapon decided to disarm himself where he was not legally required to do so, and then waited until he was seated in his vehicle to holster his weapon while in an awkward position. As he had no need to disarm, why should I presume he did so?


Sherlock Holmes, the great fictional detective once said "... when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth..." Going along those lines, I'm just eliminating the improbable.

I have been working with leather all my life, and most of my life dealing with liars. Now he may have actually convinced himself that the holster pulled the trigger, but IMO he is a liar. I have heard a lot of people say "I didn't do it" for various reasons.

Leather does not easily crease, we use tools and moisture to crease it. I have a tool for cutting leather to form creases. I use bones and steels to form leather creases where they will show. Leather does not have an inclination to pull into a trigger guard if it is not pushed in. And even worse he claims it is worn leather which unless the weapon had a hair trigger it would have move out of the way, but then it would have moved out of the way of the substantial trigger guard of the Glock. Even furniture grade leather does not crease in that fashion. Galco used heavy veg tanned leather, that leather got that way because he intentionally worked to fit his lie. You can tell by the leather wrinkles(stressing), which would have pulled the leather away from the trigger. Besides the fact that the Glock trigger is nothing like a 1911 trigger, it has travel before it is fully depressed and cannot fire until it is fully depressed. And the photo shows clearly the gun is fully inserted, by the form marks on the holster matching the gun, that it is not depressed. The only way this leather got to the position in the photo, is because the person responsible pushed that leather in. Which indicates to me he knows it is a lie.

You can believe what you want, but I go by what I see, and the evidence is clear that he is lying. You can disregard that if you wish and continue to believe the nasty leather holster pulled the trigger, but I don't and I won't. It is as simple as that. BTW is there any evidence that Galco paid a settlement? Or accepted responsibility? Did he even file a suit against the nasty leather company?

A lot of depts had trouble with this holster http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f104/1954mike/DSCF0195.jpg

It is the Jaypee scabbard holster, as can be seen it has a fully covered trigger guard and reinforced. Yet police officers still had ND with the holster, through no fault to the holster, but a common practice that has taken years to train out. Holstering with the trigger finger in the trigger guard. It is one of the reasons that many police dept including the US Air Force went to this holster.

http://www.gunblast.com/images/WBell_PoliceHolsterHist/Police-Holster-History-115.jpg

IMO he holstered with his finger in the trigger guard, and fired the weapon without realizing what he did. But then to make matters worse he went on a campaign to convince himself and others it was the nasty holsters fault.

WalkingWolf said:

You can tell by the leather wrinkles(stressing), which would have pulled the leather away from the trigger. Besides the fact that the Glock trigger is nothing like a 1911 trigger, it has travel before it is fully depressed and cannot fire until it is fully depressed. And the photo shows clearly the gun is fully inserted, by the form marks on the holster matching the gun, that it is not depressed.

Click to expand...

That's actually pretty convincing, but I'd really have to have the pair in my hands to be sure either way.

Well, I don't work with leather on a daily basis and I don't have any tools to do hand boning with, but I do own several pairs of shoes and boots. And ya know what? After less than a year I can see creases across the vamp where my foot flexes.

So, I kinda believe that a year of wearing a leather holster might put a crease in non-reinforced leather.

Fallschirmjäger said:

Well, I don't work with leather on a daily basis and I don't have any tools to do hand boning with, but I do own several pairs of shoes and boots. And ya know what? After less than a year I can see creases across the vamp where my foot flexes.

So, I kinda believe that a year of wearing a leather holster might put a crease in non-reinforced leather.

Click to expand...

You think he uses his holster for a shoe to walk with?:uhoh:

well, the claim is rubbish .. we all know who is to blame .... the WIFE !

WalkingWolf said:

You think he uses his holster for a shoe to walk with?:uhoh:

Click to expand...

No, I think leather creases when flexed repeatedly over long periods of time. Sorry if that caused you confusion.

Fallschirmjäger said:

No, I think leather creases when flexed repeatedly over long periods of time. Sorry if that caused you confusion.

Click to expand...

And how would it have creased from repeated flexing, now are you claiming the gun flexed the holster so the holster fired the gun? This is getting more ridicules by the minute. First the holster fired the gun, then the holster is a shoe, now the gun flexed the holster so the holster could fire the gun.

WalkingWolf said:

And how would it have creased from repeated flexing, now are you claiming the gun flexed the holster so the holster fired the gun? This is getting more ridicules by the minute. First the holster fired the gun, then the holster is a shoe, now the gun flexed the holster so the holster could fire the gun.

Click to expand...

I'm fairly certain you meant ridiculous rather than ridicules as the second is an action and the first is a descriptive adjective.

Why is the idea of a bit of leather causing the trigger to function that fantastic? Aren't all hunters warned to unload their firearms when crossing fences or climbing trees so that a branch may not accidentally catch the trigger and cause an unintended discharge? And wasn't it mentioned in the original thread where a jacket's zipper pull had lodged in a trigger guard and caused a discharge when a pistol was holstered?

You're the only one I know who confused guns and shoes.

Are you being deliberately obtuse?

Are you an anti? Inanimate objects do not cause NDs period. This bozo is responsible for his ND, it is just that his story is sooooo friggin stupid it is almost funny, but pathetic. The leather did get worked into the trigger guard because HE DID IT! The gun didn't do it, it is not capable. And the gun had a stout trigger guard, that trigger guard had to go into the holster before the trigger, and then to claim the holster material folded unnaturally back into the guard is insane. I can't believe anybody would buy it, but you did.

Is there any evidence of another, even just one failure of a Galco holster? He posted the so called evidence, he made the so called evidence, he is/was bias. Like most careless people they will not admit they pulled the trigger, every single ND except for Tex the person claims they didn't pull the trigger. The Glock is not a shotgun, it has three safeties and it will not fire unless all those safeties have been disengaged by pulling the trigger.

Again you can believe if you want, trying to argue with me about is being obtuse. I don't care what you believe, the tooth fairy and Santa Claus do not exist.

You want to convince me bring me some actual facts not put up by the shooter.

Fallschirmjäger said:

And dang my substandard reading skills, you did indeed say "NOT taken by an investigator."




He did not claim he was inserting the gun in the holster. "Me being the passenger, I rotated my torso to the left to fasten my seatbelt like I always do. When I straightened again, my Glock 19 discharged"


The trusty, comfortable, leather holster I had been using for a year and two weeks had done what a baseball glove does after lots of use; It got soft."
The wearer isn't claiming it spontaneously folded in like the immaculate conception and it's obvious from the stains and creases depicted that the crease developed over time. Things that fail slowly usually don't manifest themselves until there is a sudden occurrence. Tires wear out slowly over the period of thousands of miles but a tire blow out or failure only takes a moment. It takes years to develop heart disease but heart attacks usually strike by surprise. The crease developed over a number of months and it wasn't until the right combination of wear and pressure occurred that the trigger was depressed enough.


I can easily see a scenario where the pistol was holstered as the wearer was standing while at home and the front of the trigger guard easily passed the leather (which likely had different pressure on it when the wearer was in a standing position than when sitting). I can also easily believe that sitting caused the holster to become creased from pressure, as my holster shifts when I sit in my car and the seat bolster presses against the grip and my ample girthage places pressure on the the holster.


To believe that the wearer shot himself with a finger on the trigger, I would need to believe...
That someone wearing a concealed weapon decided to disarm himself where he was not legally required to do so, and then waited until he was seated in his vehicle to holster his weapon while in an awkward position. As he had no need to disarm, why should I presume he did so?


Sherlock Holmes, the great fictional detective once said "... when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth..." Going along those lines, I'm just eliminating the improbable.

Click to expand...

i totally agree with what you are saying. the guy clearly states his gun was in his holster so it didnt happen during the holstering process. how ever it is his fault for not checking and makeing sure his equiptment was in proper working order and he could have prevened his ND by doing so. leather CAN bend and plastics CAN break. your getting bashed cause you compaired leather shoes and leather holsters when the same person bashed me comapiring plastics in cars to plastic holsters. well i dont leave my holsters or guns sit in the blistering sun all day to crack. not on that they arnt sitting underneath a windshield where it can be even hotter then outside temp. actually its is hotter then outside temp. it can get up to 130 degrees or hotter in cars when the outside temp is 90 or 100. besides they are different plastics anyway.

matt2636 said:

i totally agree with what you are saying. the guy clearly states his gun was in his holster so it didn't happen during the holstering process. However it is his fault for not checking and making sure his equipment was in proper working order and he could have prevented his ND by doing so....

Click to expand...

Agreed, he even notes his culpability in the article, "I can’t say I didn’t know the crease had been formed in the holster. I trained myself to be sure that when holstering, ... This truly brings home the importance of taking care of your equipment and ensuring it’s in proper working order...".

I'm not sure where anyone if getting the idea that he was holstering up while in the vehicle since he had no reason to not be armed previously. Maybe some people have overactive imaginations?

On the one hand you have someone who holstered his weapon in the morning, went to eat with a holstered weapon and when he got back in the car twisted in such a way that pressure was put on the leather of a well-worn holster that caused the creased leather to move.
On the other hand you have someone that holstered a weapon, then unholstered it to eat when he was not required to be disarmed, and then holstered his weapon again whilst sitting in an awkward position.

To paraphrase Occam's Razor, ""when you have two competing theories that make exactly the same predictions, the simpler one is the better."