Magnum314

Sig 226 in 9mm.

I had some training over the weekend (Cop stuff). My FTO walked in the classroom in his street clothes and took off his light windbreaker jacket exposing his sidearm underneath. Guess what he had his Sig holstered in? A kydex paddle with a freakin light tunnel gap I could drive a Mac truck through. I started to chuckle when he asked what was so funny, I explained the new rule changes that IDPA had made and the statement that those types of holsters are NOT suitable for concealed carry (remember, I've just said this to a 15 year veteran of a large metro police department.) I can't repeat everything he said, but it was something along the lines of, "What retard came up with that idea?"

The only scenario I remember was one that went like this: You're passing by a lawyers office when you hear cries for distress coming from inside. When you open the door you find 4 thugs holding a lawyer at gun point. The next thing that I remember was my buddy waiting for the beep when he burst through the door, fills the no-shoot (lawyer) with a full magazine. After all the howling and laughing finally stopped, the directions were changed.

Question: Is it ok to shoot over the barrel if the COF does not state otherwise? I know for the classifier it specifically states not to, but I shot a string with no such wording and was told I couldn't do that. When I asked why, I was told it was not proper. I was very polite and asked for further explanation and was told that it is not tactically acceptable to shoot over the barrel because you are exposing your head. I asked what then was I exposing when I shot around the barrel and got a dumb look and then the, because that's how we do it here answer. I let it go as one of those unwritten rules and pursued it no further. But then I see an IDPA training video and they're shooting over the barrel every time even when there are multiple targets! So what is it, or am I the victim of a range Nazi?

How do you plan on getting that holster past the daylight rule? Wilderness belt?

One from Indiana.

This came from another board, so I can’t take credit. Took me 4-5 tries to get the shape I needed. The basic premise is this: Boil a pan of water and hold the portion of the holster you need to modify in the water for 15-20 seconds, remove and bend the plastic into the shape you need. Some have used a pair of tongs to hold the piece in the hot water and others have said that you can hold the piece bare handed if you just turn the burner off to stop the steam from burning your hand. Some have used gloves while others used a towel to protect their hands. For belt loop holsters, use a piece of metal, wood, or whatever that is the same width and thickness as your belt and mold the holster around it to get the shape and thickness you need. Paddle holsters, remove the back piece (paddle) and after heating it up, press out on a flat surface. You only get about 5-10 seconds before the plastic sets up and you have to start the process over again, but it does work if you take your time and keep working with it. I modified two Uncle Mike’s paddle holsters this way. No more daylight and I still have my “Gamer” holster!

I have not owned a Pro, but many Sig's. Can't crow enough about the reliability, accuracy and performance of Sig products. Looks like the Pro series is the answer to the lightness of a Glock with the functionality of a Sig. Nothing against Glocks either, I carry a G19 everyday, but when I get serious about shooting, I reach for my Sig.

This is an excerpt from a post I put on the IDPA forum. ***** The crux of the whole problem is Berryville’s refusal to understand the protocol or etiquette required for a rulebook of this caliber. Without being to critical, an international organization needs to have WORLD CLASS definitions and use appropriate language that would hold up in a court of law. We all understand the “intent” or “spirit” of what they want this sport to be, and perhaps that would be fine if it were just for 100 people to go shoot a local match. But on a national scale, it would have done everyone concerned justice to have a professionally written rulebook that would make a lawyer blush (sorry folks, that’s the world we live in). There are a lot of improvements in the format and clarifications of many rules and debates from the previous LGB. However, many seem to think that just because a document is well written that it’s a good job. I would argue that a well written document in good format is the bare minimum requirement of a rule book. To say that because something has improved tremendously is warrant enough for its acceptance is like saying that a product with a major safety recall that is resolved is now an excellent product. No, it’s now on par with what it should have been in the first place. I applaud the efforts of the powers that be for the corrections and improvements, but I’m not getting excited about it. The true issue that anyone with an analytical eye should have seen is that the content of the book is still lacking. It’s still chocked full of opinion, self proclaimed definitions and jargon. It’s not so much a rulebook as it is someone’s definition of what they want in a game while all the time discrediting those who would play it as a game! Incredible irony! I’m not discrediting the fact that writing a rulebook and managing a national club is difficult. Being a parent is difficult, but that doesn’t mean I can use that as an excuse to be a poor parent. Neither can HQ use it as an excuse to put out a product for it’s customers that is still mediocre at best. I’ve said my peace. I can either play by the rules or take my marbles and go home. Or I can start my own game… hmmm… Joe IDPA# A18887 Edited: Removed statement from original quote so that the entire message would be within the forum guidelines.

Actually they are still legal until 2006. Enjoy while you can.

... is up on their site.

Been lurking here for several months, but thought that this subject was very pertinent and agree with the consensus here. I sent off my letter to HQ a couple of hours ago.

<<Lurk off>> So what's the difference between a RWR and a Tactical Reload? If there are bullets in the mag, as I understand it, you must hold on to (retain) the mag. Thus, a tactical reload is a RWR. Am I missing something? <<Lurk on>>