Metalhead47
Regular Member
Ok, mind telling me where I can find a retention holster for a Tanfoglio? Or a HiPoint? Or a Bersa for that matter?
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Anyone encounter this situation
- Thread starter sigrscu
- Start date
Ok, mind telling me where I can find a retention holster for a Tanfoglio? Or a HiPoint? Or a Bersa for that matter?
boyscout399
Regular Member
you could use a universal Uncle Mike's with a clipping retention strap. I'm on your side, but Universal Retention holsters do exist...
Gunslinger
Regular Member
How do you require it across all 50 states? Only Federal Law can do that and there is no provision in any existing law for the Feds to prescribe how you dress, which in essence, is what you wear on your belt. They also can't regulate OC as it doesn't exist in a Federally regulated state with the exception of the 2A which is theoretical as to means of carry. Interesting idea, but a non-starter. "Reasonable firearm regulations" makes my skin crawl.
Assault and battery of a juvenile (or senior citizen) in many states is considered "special circumstances" and your right to use reasonable force is much less than against an adult and may in fact be a felony. Not saying the OP did the wrong thing, but there could have been unpleasant consequences for him. Glad it worked out.
utbagpiper
Banned
Those professional organizations routinely engage in conduct that is generally discouraged for the lawfully armed citizen. How often are we counseled to "be a good witness" rather than getting physically involved? Lawfully armed citizens are not routinely attempting to take a suspect into custody, make arrests, nor deliberately interjecting themselves into fights, quarrels, domestic disputes. We are merely attempting to protect ourselves and our families when all other options have failed.
How often does the lawfully armed citizen step out of an armored car with a bag full of cash for an ATM machine? Or stand as visible guard over some item or location of value? And as I've noted previously, police departments require retention holsters as a matter of employment policy. Violators are not subjected to criminal penalties.
That police departments and others use retention holsters lends strong evidence that such holsters are effective. That such organizations often require their use under policy suggests that someone, somewhere, believes that such policies are warranted given the kind of situations in which their members are often engaged. It does not logically follow that the use of such holsters should be legally mandated--with criminal penalties for violation--for law abiding citizens exercising their rights under vastly different situations.
I believe, retention holsters are effective and beneficial to the OCer. To require them under criminal penalty most certainly is an infringement of rights. That it might pass court muster under the ill- and mis-accepted guise of "reasonable firearms regulations" is what some of us might call "damming with faint praise." Certainly on this site, at least, we should have a slightly higher standard than that before imposing any limits, costs, or regulations onto a natural, God-given, and constitutionally enumerated right.
Charles
"The Armed pilot program DOES require a padlock on the holster hahaha. That holster has caused a bunch of NDs on airplanes too because the lock triggers the firearm. "
Wow, boyscout399 just lost all credibility making that statement.
Wow, boyscout399 just lost all credibility making that statement.
Metalhead47
Regular Member
Well when I hear the phrase "retention" I think SERPA, thumb lever, etc. Don't see a strap as much good beyond keeping the gun from falling out in normal activity. Anyone with enough brain cells to try and steal a weapon in the first place could easily undo a simple, and obvious, snap.
boyscout399
Regular Member
why do you say I lost all credibility making that statement? The Federal Flight Deck Officer Program authorized Commercial Airline Pilots to receive training from the Air Marshals and carry the H&K USP .40 in a holster that requires a padlock that goes through the trigger guard behind the trigger. Here's a CNN story detailing the accidental discharge possibility of the holster.
Again I ask how my credibility was ruined???
boyscout399
Regular Member
A thumb broken snap is the retention style that a large portion of LEO holsters use... The buckles on the Uncle Mikes are even more cumbersome to remove than a thumb break...
Last edited:
Once does not = "a bunch of NDs on airplanes" and CNN is not a good source for facts, only possibilities. CNN is clueless when it comes to non-sensationalized facts. The story that you reference states that the firearms must be MISHANDLED for the problem to surface and that only ONE discharge has occurred.
Last edited:
Metalhead47
Regular Member
Well I'll betcha a box of ammo ol' Hank was referring to the active retention type
boyscout399
Regular Member
I thought there were more incidents. I may have been wrong, that doesn't mean ALL my credibility is suddenly gone...
boyscout399
Regular Member
Well I'll betcha a box of ammo ol' Hank was referring to the active retention type
A button, snap, or buckle is active retention... Friction is passive retention. The Uncle Mike's holsters I'm referring to have a strap with a buckle that goes behind the grip and over the hammer. If properly adjusted it's definitely active retention.
Last edited:
ixtow
Founder's Club Member
I'm going to ignore the retention requirement bit, ol' hankie poo.
You seem to be at odds with yourself. What IS, in your mind, the right thing to do to the hand grabbing at your gun?
Hitting the kid was not a bad mistake. Someone, anyone, grabbing at my gun (in it's non-retention holster) is getting a whole lot more than a slap.
Dad probably wouldn't have his nose in People Magazine, would he? Grabby Grabberstein would not likely have been grabbing if the Dad was around instead of the sow...
Cross-draw IS retention.
Blame the gun-owner, the gun, the holster, but not the crappy parent? For shame Mr. Brady T, for shame. I'm not dismissing the absence of Situational Awareness. Simply that keeping one's hands to one's self is the sole responsibility of the one who possesses those hands.
It's not my job to keep YOUR kid under control for you. Should you fail, I will smack that little turd. Yes, I damn well will. Stood he but a few inches taller, it would be much worse.
sigrscu
Regular Member
After some thought
I think if I had it to do over I probably simply would have simply put my arm out, pushed him back and while holding on to him, requested that the officer on duty (that location has a WVC officer assigned to most nights) be called over. I think the fear from having the police involved would have a much bigger effect on mom and offspring.
As a former member of our armed forces and a current cadet in the police academy I feel that I handled myself poorly. Those two titles require a few things. 1: a better sense of awareness. 2: A moral responsibility to do the ultimate right thing regardless of emotion and or training. Was smacking him the right thing to do? No, was it completely wrong of me? No. Simply there was a better way that I could, and should have dealt with it.
I spoke to some of my trainers in the academy and they all say similar things, be more aware and try and use a clearer head instead of knee jerk reactions.
However, if the person grabbing for my gun was older or a full grown man, my reaction may be different.
I think if I had it to do over I probably simply would have simply put my arm out, pushed him back and while holding on to him, requested that the officer on duty (that location has a WVC officer assigned to most nights) be called over. I think the fear from having the police involved would have a much bigger effect on mom and offspring.
As a former member of our armed forces and a current cadet in the police academy I feel that I handled myself poorly. Those two titles require a few things. 1: a better sense of awareness. 2: A moral responsibility to do the ultimate right thing regardless of emotion and or training. Was smacking him the right thing to do? No, was it completely wrong of me? No. Simply there was a better way that I could, and should have dealt with it.
I spoke to some of my trainers in the academy and they all say similar things, be more aware and try and use a clearer head instead of knee jerk reactions.
However, if the person grabbing for my gun was older or a full grown man, my reaction may be different.
YoZUpZ
Regular Member
Question: what would a cop have done?
For everyone who said he didn't handle it correctly, let me ask you one simple question... What would a police officer have done if he/she were standing there, and all of a sudden, some teenager grabbed his/her gun from behind and started trying to tug it out of the holster?
I'm dang sure, the teen would be on the ground... maybe pinned, tazed, or bleeding out... Is it any less important for him to protect his weapon?
For everyone who said he didn't handle it correctly, let me ask you one simple question... What would a police officer have done if he/she were standing there, and all of a sudden, some teenager grabbed his/her gun from behind and started trying to tug it out of the holster?
I'm dang sure, the teen would be on the ground... maybe pinned, tazed, or bleeding out... Is it any less important for him to protect his weapon?
Last edited:
HankT
State Researcher
Your willingness to keep reviewing your performance in the incident is very impressive. I compliment you on your diligence and honesty.
Situational awareness was the causal factor to the sequence of events that followed your "zoning out." You were behind the curve from the beginning, and that is what "started" the incident. Sure, the 13-14 year old (any chance he could have been 11-12?) acted inappropriately. But we know for a fact that he was no threat. The morally right thing to do to a person is who is no threat is: no harm.
Your conclusion is that you were wrong in hitting the kid. But not completely wrong. That seems like a good way to look at it. You were both. This not really contradictory conclusion is immensely better than the view (expressed above ad nauseum, that you did nothing wrong, handled it perfectly, were totally within your rights, etc,
Luckily, you employed an effective piece of safety equipment - the retention Serpa holster - that drastically reduces the danger of gun grabs (and in the instant case, eliminates it). The lack of retention holster would probably have significantly changed your incident, making it more severe. Even with a no-threat 13 year old kid.
I surely can agree that had the incident involved an older person, it would have been different--much different. And I'm glad some of your trainers have helped you to better understand the dynamics of your incident--and the lessons it provides. I know that I've learned from your reporting. So I have to thank you for sharing your story. It's been interesting.
Again, your post-incident reflection and analysis are exemplary. This is very hard work to do.
It's also one of the crucial functions of OCDO discussion forum. If only we'd use it more as you have done...
Venator
Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
Wow, well done on your assessment, there is hope for the future LEOs in this country. Keep thinking, keep learning, keep the constitution in mind, and keep safe....
utbagpiper
Banned
I too compliment the OP for continued reflection and introspection on how to best handle a situation like this.
I'm concerned about two assertions Hank makes here, however.
1-That lack of SA was the "causal factor" to the incident". No, lack of SA was a contributing factor that allowed touching of the firearm to take place. The proximate cause of the incident was that a third party engaged in battery (unwanted touching) involving a deadly weapon. I don't know if others recall the short-lived and very unpopular PSAs from a few decades ago encouraging people to lock their cars so as to avoid "helping a good boy go bad." I do not blame law abiding citizens for the illegal conduct of others. I do encourage decent people to do what they can to avoid being victimized. And so locking your car door, having good SA, and using a retention holster are good ideas. They are to be encouraged. But at the end of the day, a criminal does not get a pass just because a victim didn't make it really difficult to commit a crime.
Indeed, in the final analysis, I resent the fact that I am practically compelled to lock my home and car, to keep everything of possible value out of sight lest some punk smash a window to grab what turns out to be an empty book bag off the seat, to be on constant alert for those who would harm me, even to carry a firearm to help assure my and my family's safety. We live in an imperfect world, no doubt. And we must deal with that reality. But let's never place blame on the innocent, law-abiding, decent, or civil. Lack of SA, lack of being armed, lack of locks, etc, etc, may allow the criminals, scum, deviants, and ill-mannered to operate more easily. But it never justifies or excuses their conduct. While it can be a fine line, it is a crucial line to remember always the difference between encouraging people to protect themselves from criminal conduct and actually blaming them for the conduct of those criminals.
2-That we "know for a fact" the young person was "harmless". While it is true that all information at this time indicates the young person was not a serious threat, was that obvious at the time of the incident? As others have pointed out, 12 year olds are hardly immune to gang activity and the commission of serious crimes. To judge the OP on his initial reaction based on what did or did not happen much later is to require him to be prescient. A slap n the hand for unwanted, illegal touching is not an infliction of "harm". Whether it is the best way to handle any given case of unwanted touching is a question to be answered on a case by case basis. In this case it seems to have worked out well and had the desired and necessary effect.
That some other course may have been even better does not change that fact. No doubt, the best course is to avoid the problem entirely with good SA and keeping the firearm physically out of reach, using verbal commands to end any attempt to touch before contact is made, etc. But it is good to consider how best to respond if a momentary lapse does allow someone to touch or even grab for a firearm.
Charles
Last edited:
sultan62
Regular Member
Well said.
sigrscu
Regular Member
Again I just want to thank everyone that commented on this.
I always appreciate and respect criticism as it helps me to be a better person and a more responsible gun owner/operator.
I want to share something that has helped me become better at whatever it is I do, so I hope you don't mind.
But basically it's a simple realization that, your failures do not shape who you are, but rather, how you react uppon those failures.
So once again, hope I didn't open up a big can of worms with this topic but I have certainly learned from it and I hope that some of you have well.
Thanks again to all.
I always appreciate and respect criticism as it helps me to be a better person and a more responsible gun owner/operator.
I want to share something that has helped me become better at whatever it is I do, so I hope you don't mind.
But basically it's a simple realization that, your failures do not shape who you are, but rather, how you react uppon those failures.
So once again, hope I didn't open up a big can of worms with this topic but I have certainly learned from it and I hope that some of you have well.
Thanks again to all.