There are more than a few brands and styles of outdoor style pants that have drawstrings inside the waistband. Ex Oficio is an example.Originally Posted by Mark D
There are more than a few brands and styles of outdoor style pants that have drawstrings inside the waistband. Ex Oficio is an example.
The drawstring makes more sense to me than something coming up from the bottom.
Any idea what kind of pants he's wearing? The big grey patches below his knees: motorcycle pants of some sort?
David S.
Don't know about the NYPD Glocks but if they did fire after the operator reciprocated the slide it was still manual intervention that caused the discharge.
As stated earlier a modified Glock is no longer a Glock it is a <your name here> gun. I am specifically referring to the modification of the Glock's internal mechanisms. Changing the Glock factory "Sight Hole Protectors" with aftermarket sights does not change the internal operations of the gun. Changing or modifying the internal mechanisms of the Glock invalidate the design parameters of the pistol and make it into a <your name here> gun.
So, take any factory specification Glock, load it with a full magazine and a live round in the chamber, place it on a table with the muzzle pointing in a relatively "Safe Direction" and wait for it to spontaneously fire the chambered cartridge. It may be a long wait though.
I still have doubts about the validity of this video.
One thing it has revealed is how divided we are as serious operators and every day carriers of firearms and weapons. Many comments condemn the AIWB carry method of carry, the carrying of semi auto pistols, the carrying of pistols that have no external manual safety, the carrying of Glocks and more. Because we all must fit our firearms into our lives somehow and because our lives have many variables to manage, it is probable that one universal solution to carrying a gun is just a unicorn - looks cute but doesn't exist in nature. There are best practices for each carry method and by mastering these best practices and diligently incorporating them into our everyday operations we make carrying firearms as "Safe" as possible. Perhaps we should all focus on mastering these best practices and championing those who choose to go forth armed and prepared. We would also serve ourselves well to discourage bad practices through education and example. We will not serve ourselves well by perpetuating the media hysteria of "A gun can go off at any time" or that "The Glock is an inherently unsafe pistol"... we all know the media's standard BS rhetoric. Let's not play into it.
Lastly, let's not let one sketchy video purportedly showing how dangerous Glocks and AIWB carry is become our guiding principle. AIWB is a valid carry method and properly performed is as safe as any other valid carry method. The processes and procedures for firearms carry are all written in blood. We violate them at our own peril. Putting you gun in a waistband without a holster, in a pocket without any protection for the trigger, in a purse not designed for carry and without any protection for the trigger are all examples of bad carry practices. Let's address all bad practices and, as best as we can, educate those who are receptive to knowledge. A person who already knows everything cannot receive any further education. QED.
Getting back to the video, if the gun involved is a factory spec Glock, and if the holster is a proper AIWB holster, and if the operator did everything correctly, and if the Glock spontaneously discharged for no reason, all gun owners are in immanent danger. I have watched this low quality video in slow motion 20 times looking for the telltale event that one could point to and say "ah ha!" but have been unable to find any explanation for the events supposedly represented in the video. Every time I have watched this video my BS warning indicator has illuminated brightly along with its associated audible alert. It is interesting that since this video initially surfaced we have not received any further details about the events. Fascinating, Captain!
C4OQ anyone? ( C omments, C oncerns, Cr iticisms, Complaints, O bjections, or Questions)
I started looking at some of the comments posted under the video on the Truth About Guns website and ran across this. http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2...red-holstered/.
Thank you for pointing this out. His whole response to the ND bothers me.
There is a frayed hole in the back of that holster, no idea if it is pulling the trigger though.
I disagree. It's still a GLOCK. Just because I put Trijicon Night Sights on a GLOCK 19, doesn't change it to a Bucky 19. (Which is unfortunately, 'cause I'd like to cash in on the royalties).
Uncle Pat used to talk about "looking, without seeing". If that is the case than Pat's commentary may be dead nuts on.
I still have no problem with AIWB, with my 1911, my glock, or my issue M&P. A great confidence builder was ECQC, where we AIWB'd sim guns mexican carry, doing retention, draws, and whatnot. Another was watching TLG running his Gen 4 Glocks at AFHF when he was carrying exclusively AIWB. What I have done, is gone back and checked my carry guns with my holsters in fit around the trigger guard, especially my Gen 4 G17 which has a Suarez Patrol Trigger and ignition parts. All my guns pass, and the glock passes the armorer's visual check for engagement (75+%), and an eyeglass screwdriver inserted onto the cruciform plate and pushed down will not allow the striker to release. To be fair, even when running a 1911 in an SME holster, every time I holstered I hooked my strong thumb onto the face of the hammer, not enough to pull the hammer hooks away from the sear, but enough to block the forward travel of the hammer in the event everything else went wrong. And I am an "Off Target, On Safe" kinda guy. It would be a lie to say that I always have looked my gun into the holster, but I do have to occasionally holster without looking, and I am confident that I can do it. On the square range, I always look the gun in, and when dry firing I reholster without looking the gun in.
Your mileage may vary.
pat
Last edited by UNM1136; 06-12-2018 at 12:40 PM.
That looks like a T-Rex Sidecar holster.
Jesus paid a debt he did not owe,
Because I owed a debt I could not pay.
As stated earlier a modified Glock is no longer a Glock it is a <your name here> gun. I am specifically referring to the modification of the Glock's internal mechanisms. Changing the Glock factory "Sight Hole Protectors" with aftermarket sights does not change the internal operations of the gun. Changing or modifying the internal mechanisms of the Glock invalidate the design parameters of the pistol and make it into a <your name here> gun.
I did clarify this in my post that changing sights does not make your gun "modified". Changing the internals does however change the gun and once done you can expect the manufacturer to distance themselves from any potential liability or exposure resulting form a user modified gun. Again, this does not pertain to changing the sights. Royalties would be great! I wish we could all get a share of the pie.
Reply With Quote