The Speed Re-Holster

[azant]

Todd, your point is extremely valid ref the incident with the guy with the hammer. As we had discussed briefly in College Station, I think that sometimes officers (like me) get themselves into situations that make reholstering quickly necesary. A little less testosterone and adrenaline induced stupidity ("Oh, that looks like fun....watch this!") can allow officers to stand off and holster most often in the manner you mentioned. As I said before, there is a lot more info to go with that scenario.

I think what we cops have experienced is that we are pointing guns at people and need to get the gun secured immediately so we can go hands on because we CANNOT shoot the person. I honestly can't tell you how many times I've pointed a gun at someone and it doesn't even phase them. .

Dr No's last post above hits on what has happened to me most often. Suspect's who are unarmed, uncompliant, and unimpressed with your blaster. I have had to explain in court to a jury of their peers that the muzzle strike is not "pistol whipping". Sometimes it wouldn't be a big deal, in other situations it would. The calculated risk of holstering without looking is just that. "Do I want to get hit first in this fight or do I want to maybe shoot myself in the leg. Well, I've done this holstering thing a lot of times and I haven't shot myself in the leg yet, but I have been hit a few times........"

I also think that different approaches to police work can often negate the need for the reholstering quickly. However, I don't think those different approaches are better, nor are they necessarily worse.

If I take this guy down now, will that keep the crowd from joining in? If I back up will that embolden him? If I go forward will he think twice? Usually one of those kind of choices leads to that other choice.

Mr Armstrong also has a lot of experience and has a contrasting viewpoint. That means the need is not absolute.

Ideally, we should never reholster without looking. Jamming the gun in the holster quickly and without looking is unsafe. Realistically, in my opinion we should train for it safely (sims, red guns, dry, etc) because it may be necessary on the street.

Because it is good for me on the street should it be good for the range? Uh, no. We also don't have backstops on the street, but I don't think we should pick a convenient parking lot to blast a few practice and qualification rounds downrange into the neighborhood. We train as close to how we fight as we safely can.

"Hard break" and "holster reluctantly" are good training.


Best

[ford.304]

I'm not a police officer nor a firearms instructor, but just from a logical standpoint Azant's opinion seems about right to me. Making quick reholstering a practiced movement that *can* be done sounds like it could be useful to an officer. Making it an unconscious movement that is done regularly on the range sounds like a horrible idea. Even when you need to do it quickly, it should be a movement that you chose deliberately to do, knowing the risks.

In the situations mentioned, the issue is not "oh no I need to have my gun holstered *now*", it's "once I have decided to holster, I need to finish the action quickly without taking my eyes off of my opponent."

There are not a lot of situations where your stress reaction needs to be "holster quickly."

[TAZ]

IMO, as much as we hate to admit it the need for a uniformed officer to quickly holster a weapon is there. To say that you will never need to do so is akin to saying that you will never need to defend yourself. Just not realistic. With that said the act of reholstering for a uniformed cop must be safe and quick. In that order. If you're about to go hands on with a threat, doing so with a hole in your leg or ass is going to put you at a severe disadvantage, so get it done safe and quick so you can deal with the threat in one piece. This means practice till you're blue in the face and can do it in your sleep. This does NOT mean that it should be routine to do so if time and distance allow for a safer way to do it. If the reason for accepting a higher level or risk (gotta get it holstered or this guy is gonna kick my ass so I'm willing to take the risk of an ND) is not there (partner has threat under control, I'm on the range...) why would one choose to accept the higher risk?

For the guys carrying concealed speed reholstering is just a bad idea. There are way too many things that can get into a trigger guard than fingers and slamming a SFP home is asking for trouble. I have had the zipper pull of my coat get into the trigger of my Glock and had I not been going retarded slow on the reholster I never would have had time to react to the gun feeling different.