PDA

View Full Version : Carry Holster for USPSA?



RJ
06-22-2016, 04:21 PM
I recently spent a couple hours getting some shooting help from a local instructor. During the session, one of the issues I felt needed improvement most was my reholster. I just could not smoothly and slowly locate the gun to slide it in easily every time.

My ccw pistol is a Walther PPS M2 9mm, carried in a JMCK IWB left hand holster at 8 o'clock. I plan to resume my USPSA shooting (I am a 'U' shooter with all of one local match so far) in a month or so.

I guess the first option is to dry practice reholstering until it is second nature. But I got to thinking, in a match, there a so many holster / unholster actions that maybe, for competition, I should explore other options.

Do you think that is something that would be worth changing over holsters for a match? I am trying to 'shoot what I carry', but I'm not real happy about how hard it was to reholster, obviously. Any problems I am overlooking between using 'carry' holsters and 'game' holsters?

Or would it be ok to get an open top range holster owb for uspsa and just use that? I have a simple Bladetech for my VP9, it works well and I don't seem to have a problem smoothly reholstering.

Thoughts?

I just don't want to get kilt in the streetz. :cool:

Sal Picante
06-22-2016, 04:33 PM
Hey Rich!

I'm of the mind "quick to get it out, slow to put it away"... I tend to look the gun in regardless of which kinda holster I'm using, especially with my carry AIWB.

For competition, I think it is ok to change up gear sometimes... In production, I couldn't even carry what I do on the street, but I don't feel like it has made me ill-prepared.

RJ
06-22-2016, 04:39 PM
Hey Rich!

I'm of the mind "quick to get it out, slow to put it away"... I tend to look the gun in regardless of which kinda holster I'm using, especially with my carry AIWB.

For competition, I think it is ok to change up gear sometimes... In production, I couldn't even carry what I do on the street, but I don't feel like it has made me ill-prepared.

Hey Les. :) We're up in Canada visiting relatives, back in Tampa next month for a bit. Hope to start the weeklies at WAC.

Wat? Look the gun in? LOOK THE GUN IN?!

Sometimes I amaze myself, I am such a moron. Geebus, why am I not doing that. I will give that a try when I get home. Thanks boss.

breakingtime91
06-22-2016, 04:42 PM
Hey Les. :) We're up in Canada visiting relatives, back in Tampa next month for a bit. Hope to start the weeklies at WAC.

Wat? Look the gun in? LOOK THE GUN IN?!

Sometimes I amaze myself, I am such a moron. Geebus, why am I not doing that. I will give that a try when I get home. Thanks boss.

rich! yes look that gun in!!! I did the same thing until I started carrying appendix... now I do a hard break and stare the gun into the holster.

Mr_White
06-22-2016, 04:46 PM
Rich, I'd agree with pretty much everything already said.

Not a big deal to use a different holster for USPSA than for carry.

Holster work is not a large part of USPSA. You draw 0-1 times per stage.

Looking the gun into the holster is fine if it helps - probably helps less the further back you wear the holster.

Watch out you don't break the 180 with a far-back IWB.

If you do want to use your carry holster and it is a little time consuming to get the gun holstered, keep in mind that 'ULSC/if clear hammer down holster' is not timed.

nycnoob
06-23-2016, 05:44 AM
Wat? Look the gun in? LOOK THE GUN IN?!


Some old school instructors teach you to reholster without looking. That may be why you were doing it.

Also you might want to get a weighted blue gun for traveling. It feels like the real thing and you can
even take it to Canada there is lots you can practice with one (but no trigger pressing or slide manipulations)

olstyn
06-23-2016, 07:04 AM
Rich, generally I carry IWB, but for USPSA, I use an OWB holster. I kept it so that the basic position of the gun was the same; it's just *slightly* less tight to my body, *slightly* farther forward (maybe 3:15 vs 4:00), and more visible for the ROs. I do not feel that this is likely to get me "killed on the streets." :p

What others have said about looking the gun into the holster definitely applies, and Gabe's concern about the 180 can be easily mitigated by slightly turning your body such that the holster is effectively at 3:00 when you put the gun into the holster. Also, every time I meet a newbie at a USPSA match, I make sure to tell them it's not a race to get the gun into the holster; the only thing they can win by doing that quickly is a gunshot wound. I do it slowly and watch the gun all the way in, and I've been shooting USPSA for several years now. I simply do not care if people think I'm going too slowly there; there's just no reason to risk DQ or injury on that part of the process, even when I've just gone through unload & show clear. See Nyeti's discussions on the subject re: building bad habits/assuming guns are empty/etc.

JCS
06-23-2016, 07:55 AM
I am in a similar situation as a newer shooter. Expect I carry appendix. To be able to draw from appendix I would have to compete in limited. Since I shoot 9mm (what I carry) my gun is better suited in production. Mr white gave me similar advice, that you only draw a few times per match. I realized for now it's better for me just to get trigger time in competitions.

Also I don't know how you could reholster at 8 and not break 180. I would imagine it's hard to see the gun in at that position.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wendell
06-23-2016, 08:03 AM
...you might want to get a weighted blue gun for traveling. It feels like the real thing and you can even take it to Canada...

You can take it TO Canada; you might not be able to take it INTO Canada. CBSA considers them to be prohibited.

See this ruling:

D. MORGAN v. PRESIDENT OF THE CANADA BORDER SERVICES AGENCY
Appeal No. AP-2014-006
Decision and reasons issued Thursday, December 4, 2014 (http://www.citt.gc.ca/en/node/7100)

<http://www.citt.gc.ca/en/node/7100>



STATEMENT OF REASONS
1. This is an appeal filed with the Canadian International Trade Tribunal (the Tribunal) pursuant to subsection 67(1) of the Customs Act[1] from a decision made on April 28, 2014,[2] by the President of the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA), pursuant to subsection 60(4).
2. The subject of this appeal is the CBSA’s determination that three devices made of hard durable material, which the CBSA has described as resembling the Colt LE6920 SOCOM M4-A1 Carbine[3] (M4 Carbine) (the goods in issue), are replica firearms and thus prohibited devices under tariff item No. 9898.00.00 of the schedule to the Customs Tariff.[4]
3. On May 9, 2014, Mr. D. Morgan filed the present appeal. The Tribunal decided to hear the matter by way of written submissions in accordance with rules 25 and 25.1 of the Canadian International Trade Tribunal Rules.[5] The hearing was held on November 13, 2014.
4. The CBSA filed a report[6] (the CBSA report), prepared by Mr. Murray A. Smith of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, which made various observations concerning the goods in issue. The CBSA report described the goods in issue as inert rubber replicas of the M4 Carbine and incapable of discharging a projectile or being readily modified to do so. It identified two of the goods in issue as blue, and one as black, and concluded that the goods in issue of both colours resembled with near precision an M4 Carbine.
5. The Tribunal examined the goods in issue, as well as an M4 Carbine provided by the CBSA.
STATUTORY FRAMEWORK
1. Subsection 136(1) of the Customs Tariff provides as follows:
The importation of goods of tariff item No. 9897.00.00, 9898.00.00 or 9899.00.00 is prohibited.
L’importation des marchandises des nos tarifaires 9897.00.00, 9898.00.00 ou 9899.00.00 est interdite.
[Emphasis added]
1. Tariff item No. 9898.00.00 provides as follows:
Firearms, prohibited weapons, restricted weapons, prohibited devices, prohibited ammunition and components or parts designed exclusively for use in the manufacture of or assembly into automatic firearms, in this tariff item referred to as prohibited goods . . . .
Armes à feu, armes prohibées, armes à autorisation restreinte, dispositifs prohibés, munitions prohibées et éléments ou pièces conçus exclusivement pour être utilisés dans la fabrication ou l’assemblage d’armes automatiques, désignés comme « marchandises prohibées » au présent numéro tarifaire [...]
For the purposes of this tariff item:
Pour l’application du présent numéro tarifaire :
. . .
[...]
(b) ”automatic firearm”, “licence”, “prohibited ammunition”, “prohibited device”, “prohibited firearm”, prohibited weapon, restricted firearm and “restricted weapon” have the same meanings as in subsection 84(1) of the Criminal Code . . . .
b) « arme à autorisation restreinte », « arme à feu à autorisation restreinte », « arme à feu prohibée », « arme automatique », « arme prohibée », « dispositif prohibé », « munitions prohibées » et « permis » s’entendent au sens du paragraphe 84(1) du Code criminel [...].
[Emphasis added]
1. When dealing with the classification of goods under tariff item No. 9898.00.00, subsection 136(2) of the Customs Tariff provides that the General Rules for the Interpretation of the Harmonized System[7] do not apply. Furthermore, Note 1 to Chapter 98 provides that “[g]oods which are described in any provision of this Chapter are classifiable in said provision if the conditions and requirements thereof and of any applicable regulations are met.”
2. According to the Customs Tariff, a “prohibited device” includes a replica firearm, as defined in subsection 84(1) of the Criminal Code.[8]
3. Subsection 84(1) of the Criminal Code defines “replica firearm” as follows:
“replica firearm” means any device [requirement 1] that is designed or intended to exactly resemble, or to resemble with near precision, a firearm, and [requirement 2] that itself is not a firearm, [requirement 3] but does not include any such device that is designed or intended to exactly resemble, or to resemble with near precision, an antique firearm.
« réplique » Tout objet, [condition 2] qui n’est pas une arme à feu, [condition 1] conçu de façon à en avoir l’apparence exacte — ou à la reproduire le plus fidèlement possible — ou auquel on a voulu donner cette apparence. La présente définition [condition 3] exclut tout objet conçu de façon à avoir l’apparence exacte d’une arme à feu historique — ou à la reproduire le plus fidèlement possible — ou auquel on a voulu donner cette apparence.
1. The word “firearm”, for the purpose of this tariff item, has the same meaning as “firearm” found in section 2 of the Criminal Code, that is:
“firearm” means a barrelled weapon from which any shot, bullet or other projectile can be discharged and that is capable of causing serious bodily injury or death to a person, and includes any frame or receiver of such a barrelled weapon and anything that can be adapted for use as a firearm.
« arme à feu » Toute arme susceptible, grâce à un canon qui permet de tirer du plomb, des balles ou tout autre projectile, d’infliger des lésions corporelles graves ou la mort à une personne, y compris une carcasse ou une boîte de culasse d’une telle arme ainsi que toute chose pouvant être modifiée pour être utilisée comme telle.
1. Subsection 84(1) of the Criminal Code defines “antique firearm” as follows:
“antique firearm” means
(a) any firearm manufactured before 1898 that was not designed to discharge rim-fire or centre-fire ammunition and that has not been redesigned to discharge such ammunition, or
(b) any firearm that is prescribed to be an antique firearm.
« arme à feu historique » Toute arme à feu fabriquée avant 1898 qui n’a pas été conçue ni modifiée pour l’utilisation de munitions à percussion annulaire ou centrale ou toute arme à feu désignée comme telle par règlement.
1. Therefore, to be considered replica firearms, the goods in issue must fulfill three requirements: (1) they must be designed or intended to exactly resemble, or to resemble with near precision, a firearm; (2) they must not themselves be firearms; and (3) they must not be designed or intended to exactly resemble, or to resemble with near precision, an antique firearm.
ANALYSIS
Are the Goods in Issue Designed or Intended to Exactly Resemble, or to Resemble With Near Precision, a Firearm?
1. Mr. Morgan argued that, for goods to be classified as replicas, they must be exact copies of real firearms. He submitted that the goods in issue do not contain moving parts, are not constructed from the same material as real firearms, are blue in colour and, therefore, are not exact copies of real firearms.[9]
2. As the Tribunal has held in the past, the determination of whether goods resemble firearms is primarily a visual exercise, considering resemblance in size, shape and general appearance.[10] Furthermore, exact resemblance is not the only standard, but goods that resemble firearms with near precision are also to be classified as replica firearms.
3. According to Mr. Morgan’s own submission, the goods in issue are intended to be used “. . . in reality based scenarios . . .”[11] and, without the goods in issue, “. . . members of National Defence and Law Enforcement will not have the advantage of training scenarios to ready them for real life dangerous situations.”[12] The inference is clear that the goods in issue are valuable to Mr. Morgan’s purposes because of their resemblance to dangerous firearms. The Tribunal recognizes that Mr. Morgan made these arguments to support the reason for which he wants access to the goods in issue, as supported by his evidence in the form of a reference letter and purchase order from the Department of National Defence. However, by confirming how realistic they actually are, the Tribunal finds that Mr. Morgan’s position in fact supports a finding that the goods in issue do truly resemble firearms.
4. Upon its own visual examination, the Tribunal also found that the goods in issue resemble, with near precision, the M4 Carbine. As to the differences identified by Mr. Morgan and acknowledged by the CBSA, the difference in material is not so striking so as to prevent the goods in issue from being recognized as firearms; similarly, the lack of moving parts are not immediately obvious, and this feature merely serves to prove that the goods in issue are not themselves firearms, as required by the definition of “replica firearm”.
5. Regarding colour, two of the goods in issue are blue and, therefore, different from the black M4 Carbine that the Tribunal had available for inspection (the third device is black and, therefore, identical in that respect). In its report, the CBSA acknowledged that the colour blue is often used to denote use for training purposes, which might purportedly be a sign that they are inert.[13] However, the CBSA also presented evidence that authentic firearms are manufactured in a variety of non-traditional colours.[14] In the Tribunal’s view, the difference in colour does not prevent the goods in issue from resembling, with near precision, real firearms, since colour can easily be mistaken, particularly in poor lighting, and could obviously be altered after importation by repainting.
Are the Goods in Issue Themselves Firearms?
1. In order to meet the definition of a “replica firearm”, the goods in issue must not actually be firearms. As noted above, “firearm” is defined in section 2 of the Criminal Code. To paraphrase, a firearm must be able to, or be able to be adapted to, discharge projectiles capable of causing serious bodily harm or death. The Tribunal finds that the goods in issue are not firearms, as they contain no moving parts and cannot fire a projectile (as confirmed by Mr. Morgan[15]), nor could they be adapted to do so.[16]
Are the Goods in Issue Designed or Intended to Exactly Resemble, or to Resemble With Near Precision, an Antique Firearm?
1. An antique firearm is defined as a firearm manufactured before 1898. The evidence before the Tribunal shows that the M4 Carbine was developed by Colt starting in 1988 as the XM4 Carbine and adopted by the U.S. military in 1994, when it was designated the U.S. M4 Carbine (commonly referred to as the M4 Carbine).[17] Therefore, the goods in issue are not antique firearms.
Other Matters
1. The CBSA did not contest Mr. Morgan’s assertions that he is an instructor for military, law enforcement and security personnel,[18] nor did it specifically dispute that similar goods may be acquired in Canada. It was not necessary for the Tribunal to make findings on these matters, as they were not relevant to the determination of whether the goods in issue are prohibited devices. Similar arguments have previously been rejected by the Tribunal. For example, in KA Wong v. President of the Canada Border Services Agency,[19] the Tribunal confirmed that the availability of similar goods in Canada is not a relevant consideration and noted that, while “. . . replica firearms may lawfully be imported into Canada under certain conditions[,] [t]he onus rests with the importer to obtain the appropriate licence to do so.”[20]
2. There is no evidence on the record that Mr. Morgan has the appropriate licence for the importation of the goods in issue.
3. For the foregoing reasons, the Tribunal finds that the goods in issue are replica firearms of tariff item No. 9898.00.00 and are therefore prohibited devices.
DECISION
1. The appeal is dismissed.


<http://www.citt.gc.ca/en/node/7100>


Replica Firearms
This information sheet describes how the Firearms Act and Criminal Code apply to replica firearms.
A replica firearm is a device that is not a real firearm, but that was designed to look exactly or almost exactly like a real firearm.
Replica firearms are prohibited devices in Canada.
To be prohibited as a replica firearm, a device must closely resemble an existing make and model of firearm. If it is an antique firearm, as defined by the Criminal Code and corresponding regulations, it is not prohibited.
The Royal Canadian Mounted Police Canadian Firearms Program (CFP) receives many enquiries from people wondering whether an imitation firearm would be considered a replica if it resembles a real firearm in many ways, but is made of clear or brightly coloured plastic, or has significant dimensional differences. Many of these devices need to be assessed on a case-by-case basis. As a general rule, however, devices significantly smaller or larger than the real version are not classified as replica firearms.
Airsoft guns are devices that have a low muzzle velocity and muzzle energy, and usually discharge projectiles made out of a substance such as plastic or wax rather than metal. An airsoft gun, firing a .20g 6mm plastic pellet, with a muzzle velocity below 111.6 m/s (366 fps), and resembling with near precision an existing make and model of a firearm, other than an antique firearm, is a replica firearm and therefore a prohibited device.

<http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/fs-fd/replica-replique-eng.htm>


Importing and Exporting Firearms, Weapons and Devices
Memorandum D19-13-2
(http://www.cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/publications/dm-md/d19/d19-13-2-eng.html)Ottawa, January 23, 2013 (http://www.cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/publications/dm-md/d19/d19-13-2-eng.html)

<http://www.cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/publications/dm-md/d19/d19-13-2-eng.html>

nycnoob
06-23-2016, 09:47 AM
CBSA considers them to be [B]prohibited.


Wow! that's quite amazing. Canadian's can't even own Blue Guns.

Well I am sure there is a "common sense" reason for that!


I was only offering a suggestion based on a very old post of Todd's.
I remember he had a friend going on a trip and wanted to dry fire and Todd suggested bringing a blue gun.
I am positive that his suggestion was well before this ruling though.

You know, even living in NYC I do not think I would have believed you if you had not posted the text of the the ruling!

RJ
06-23-2016, 12:21 PM
Wow! that's quite amazing. Canadian's can't even own Blue Guns.

Well I am sure there is a "common sense" reason for that!


I was only offering a suggestion based on a very old post of Todd's.
I remember he had a friend going on a trip and wanted to dry fire and Todd suggested bringing a blue gun.
I am positive that his suggestion was well before this ruling though.

You know, even living in NYC I do not think I would have believed you if you had not posted the text of the the ruling!

What is interesting is strolling through Canadian Tire in London ON yesterday, I saw locked up multiple replica airsoft pistols; Beretta, Sig, 1911. I didn't want to cause an International Incident by asking to fondle one. :cool:

olstyn
06-23-2016, 10:15 PM
Also I don't know how you could reholster at 8 and not break 180. I would imagine it's hard to see the gun in at that position.

Why? It's just the lefty version of 4:00.

Luke
06-23-2016, 10:22 PM
It's possible, but it would be so easy to break the 180 doing that.

olstyn
06-23-2016, 11:49 PM
I shot USPSA from a hybrid IWB at about 4:00 for several years and I've still yet to receive my first DQ. I assure you, if you are cognizant of what you're doing, it's really not hard to avoid having a problem.

IronArcher
07-20-2016, 03:23 AM
Are you dry firing a lot? I would think after a few thousand reps drawing, that reholstering would become quite natural.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

RJ
07-20-2016, 06:21 AM
Are you dry firing a lot? I would think after a few thousand reps drawing, that reholstering would become quite natural.



Yeah, I do dry practice every day, but not so much with my carry rig. Having to unload daily, clear, practice, then reload the same gun is more of a PITA than I'd like. Plus I don't rechamber carry ammo more than once, so putting in a fresh Gold Dot daily would add up.

I'd also have to recognize I'd have negative reinforcement from carrying 6+1 but shooting games with 8+1.

So, final answer, I'll be shooting the VP9 in Production at my local summer matches, with my well-worn Blade Tech OWB.

Luke
07-20-2016, 06:36 AM
Good choice on the production and the VP9 Rich!

RJ
07-20-2016, 06:54 AM
Good choice on the production and the VP9 Rich!

10-4 :)

Looking to resume my local weekly matches soon.

As soon as it gets to something less than eleventy-billion degrees outside here in Florida, that is. :cool:

LittleLebowski
07-20-2016, 07:17 AM
While I personally enjoy competing from AIWB, I agree with Les and Mr White in that shooting is paramount and you really don't draw much in USPSA.