Race Holsters

[Flexmoney]

It's a shame we don't have some emperical data on dropped gun incidents.

We do, to a degree. They have been posted about on this forum for years now. And, I think everybody that has been on the range for a minute knows what holsters dump guns when bumped.

We call them race holsters because they are fast. They are fast because they have minimum retention.

The only real "practical" thing about them (other than speed) is that they often offer a wide range of adjustability.

My favorite race holster is practical shunned on this forum...due to it's minimal retention characteristics when it's not locked.

Hopefully, people will take a look at their gear a bit closer and maybe ask themselves how much reward they get for the risk.

[Mark K]

I know - how about the old holsters with a retention flap on them....They would certainly be secure............

Mark K

[JThompson]

I only have problems with people that don't train with their equipment.

They buy really nice gear and don't get to know how to use it porperly, dump their gun on the ground, and then complain about the holster not working.

I have a CR holster and I am not confident with it only because I don't use it enough and am not currently training with it. I can see how some users would be very unsafe with it if they never use it or train with it.

On the other hand...

I love watching people forget they have it locked.

Locked or not, if I draw it it comes out. Granted the rig jumps too, but with my rig it's set to be able to pull through should I have a brain fade. I also set it that way for certain starts... ala sitting down. I leave it locked and pull it through the lock to lessen the chance of dumping it from the unlocked position.

KNOW YOUR GEAR

[Lee King]

We do, to a degree. They have been posted about on this forum for years now. And, I think everybody that has been on the range for a minute knows what holsters dump guns when bumped.

"I saw" and "this happened" is hardly emperical. That someone takes the time to write about it on here means they have a reason for writing about it and it and therefore have some bias. Even this poll has obvious bias in the way in which the options were written.

The auto industry collects numbers on wrecks. I'm guessing the military and law enforcement have extensive reporting requirements when it comes to safety related incidents. We're running with guns. Seems reasonable to have unbiased data to spot obvious trends and take corrective action. For example, if one particular model of holster jumped to the top of the list of incidents you have a defensible position in which to possibly disallow that model. Further, there is another resource for shooters to review when looking at new purchases. If you step outside of the holster debate, perhaps data might even point to changes in procedures. Do certain props pose significat risk for incident? For example. Lastly, at some point or another I would expect our sport (USPSA/IDPA specifically) to come under scrutiny. We claim to be a perfectly safe activity to do with guns. It'd be great to be able to produce data to back it up. Or at least the perception of monitoring.

I spent a significant amount of time researching holsters before purchasing my current rig. I waded through a lot of opinions before making my choice. A significant number of those opinions were biased towards the holster that I had trouble with in the first place. The consistent theme was either "don't use a race rig cause their crap" or "use MY rig because I bought it and it's the best". Articles in the Front Sight show what's popular at say.. Nationals. I think we can agree "popular" doesn't mean "safest" or even "best".

Edited May 27, 2009 by Lee King

[larry cazes]

I vote for leaving them alone. The incident that spawned this poll ( I believe ) was not the holster or the competitor's fault. The RO knocked it out. Some things you just can't control.

Troy

I agree completely but I thought it was beaten to death in the other thread. Some here must have way too much time on their hands, maybe work is slow? Maybe we should outlaw all single stacks with sub 2 lb triggers? They are unsafe you know. Sounds like someones got an agenda to push.

Edited May 27, 2009 by larry cazes

[zhunter]

Even this poll has obvious bias in the way in which the options were written.

Please explain.

I certainly am against some of these "race holsters", but I don't think I worded it to be biased against them. I gave "Let it go" the first option, which is typically going to be the most often chosen by human nature

[lcs]

I only have problems with people that don't train with their equipment.

They buy really nice gear and don't get to know how to use it porperly, dump their gun on the ground, and then complain about the holster not working.

I have a CR holster and I am not confident with it only because I don't use it enough and am not currently training with it. I can see how some users would be very unsafe with it if they never use it or train with it.

On the other hand...

I love watching people forget they have it locked.

Locked or not, if I draw it it comes out. Granted the rig jumps too, but with my rig it's set to be able to pull through should I have a brain fade. I also set it that way for certain starts... ala sitting down. I leave it locked and pull it through the lock to lessen the chance of dumping it from the unlocked position.

KNOW YOUR GEAR

+1

and I'll add, KNOW YOUR LIMITATIONS and KNOW YOUR GEAR'S LIMITATIONS.

[ihatepickles]

Even this poll has obvious bias in the way in which the options were written.

Please explain.

I certainly am against some of these "race holsters", but I don't think I worded it to be biased against them. I gave "Let it go" the first option, which is typically going to be the most often chosen by human nature

You're kidding, right?

Yes, let it go

Passive aggressive. Your bias against this type of holster is obvious. This option might as well have said "Yes, let it go, even though I don't like them, grumble, grumble, grumble..."

If you want to feel like you're posting a poll with any real meaning, take your personal biases out of the topic. It's moot regardless, only 1% of the shooters I've shot with ever visit be.com's forums. Any rules related poll here is ineffective because all you capture is the opinion of the people that like to come here and mix it up. The other 99% aren't paying attention to the squabbles here.

[Lee King]

Even this poll has obvious bias in the way in which the options were written.

Please explain.

I certainly am against some of these "race holsters", but I don't think I worded it to be biased against them. I gave "Let it go" the first option, which is typically going to be the most often chosen by human nature

I don't really like them, and I refuse to use one

"don't like" and "refuse" to me imply bias and when compared to other available poll options seem redundant. The words themselves are also aggressive in nature. But that's just me.

My point behind the post was not to slam this poll. But to address the specific comment pertaining to information available on this forum. Even if you had professionals develop this poll, that it requires participation means people answer the questions with an agenda or they don't answer at all.

[Shawn Knight]

I only have problems with people that don't train with their equipment.

They buy really nice gear and don't get to know how to use it porperly, dump their gun on the ground, and then complain about the holster not working.

I have a CR holster and I am not confident with it only because I don't use it enough and am not currently training with it. I can see how some users would be very unsafe with it if they never use it or train with it.

On the other hand...

I love watching people forget they have it locked.

Locked or not, if I draw it it comes out. Granted the rig jumps too, but with my rig it's set to be able to pull through should I have a brain fade. I also set it that way for certain starts... ala sitting down. I leave it locked and pull it through the lock to lessen the chance of dumping it from the unlocked position.

KNOW YOUR GEAR

+1

and I'll add, KNOW YOUR LIMITATIONS and KNOW YOUR GEAR'S LIMITATIONS.

I saw several dropped guns at Doubletap this year and they were all unloaded and the shooter was not at the LAMR stage of the game. Most were on their way to taking the gun off or just taping or maybe just walking around. None were Blade-Tech or Production/Singlestack style rigs.

Seems like just plain ignorance of your own gear.

As far as RO's getting to close to a shooter when they are starting their run...

RO's fault...

Reshoot...

nuff said on this subject, Let's Move on!!!!!!!

[larry cazes]

"don't like" and "refuse" to me imply bias and when compared to other available poll options seem redundant. The words themselves are also aggressive in nature. But that's just me.

+1 Lee, it's not just you

[kgunz11]

If Z puts any faith in this poll, he will "let it go". That option is winning by an overwhelming margin. I have the feeling he's not going to tho.

[zhunter]

If Z puts any faith in this poll, he will "let it go". That option is winning by an overwhelming margin. I have the feeling he's not going to tho.

I started this tread because at one point in the "other thread" one of the Mods said to quit the holster talk or else. So I start this one to discuss holsters.

Then the Mods decided that the holster WAS part of the equation in the"other thread"

There was no bias intended, maybe a bit of tongue in cheek tho

[Shawn Knight]

There was no bias intended, maybe a bit of tongue in cheek tho

but there is bias.

You feel the other shooter was wronged in some way.

We can't change the outcome of that match but we can state the correct rules for future match directors or whatever the case maybe. I think we have done that in the other thread and this one.

Let's move on. You can't change the past but you can influence the future.

[Flexmoney]

We do, to a degree. They have been posted about on this forum for years now. And, I think everybody that has been on the range for a minute knows what holsters dump guns when bumped.

"I saw" and "this happened" is hardly empirical.

No?

empirical

1 : originating in or based on observation or experience <empirical data>

2 : relying on experience or observation alone often without due regard for system and theory <an empirical basis for the theory>

3 : capable of being verified or disproved by observation or experiment

I know what I have seen and experienced with my own two eyes...and I know what other have reported.

I do agree that people show a bias towards the "cool piece of gear that they happened to buy".

I have dumped guns out of my race holsters. I have seen guns dumped out of every race holster that I can think of. I can see where non-race holster can lose a gun (especially our "racey" non-race holsters), but I haven't personally seen that. I do believe those that have stated here on this forum that they have seen that. I also believe it when people report they have seen "race holster X" lose a gun.

People do tend to dog-pile when something goes wrong. But, I think we can get a pretty decent overall picture.

For example...you gave a pretty good reporting, here:

I didn't realize it initially, but the design of my current holster includes a "hook" that sticks out when the gun is seated that goes through the trigger guard. I wouldn't claim it is the safest design. But when compared to my "old" holster, I now see obvious weaknesses in the other holster. In actual use, I've been bumped, whacked, even had a car door smack the butt of my gun and it hasn't failed me. I hate to lump all holster types into the "unsafe" group because one design has weaknesses others do not.

[zhunter]

There was no bias intended, maybe a bit of tongue in cheek tho

but there is bias.

You feel the other shooter was wronged in some way.

We can't change the outcome of that match but we can state the correct rules for future match directors or whatever the case maybe. I think we have done that in the other thread and this one.

Let's move on. You can't change the past but you can influence the future.

Shawn

I don't think the guy should have been DQ'ed

I meant NO bias, the 3rd choice was placed there with humor intended. Personally I think choice 2 is the best choice, and I stated that in my original post, so the bias is certainly NOT there.

I am not trying to change the past, shape the future with safer rules and fewer dropped guns and AD's, absolutely, YES, I am guilty of that to the Nth degree

[Shawn Knight]

OK.

[Flexmoney]

Z...you poll was biased. Most are. Your's was, for sure. I don't think it was on purpose...that is just the nature of polls.

(and, I agree with the point you are raising...to some degree)

----------------------

We don't need to go on about that (poll) for a page or so. We don't need to argue either. And, we don't need to re-hash the call in the other thread.

----------------------

Hopefully we can use this thread for truth, justice, and the American way...!

Or, at least raise awareness...get people thinking about their gear and thinking about safety. Maybe they will take that thoughtfulness with them and spread it around to others.

[Shawn Knight]

at least raise awareness...get people thinking about their gear and thinking about safety. Maybe they will take that thoughtfulness with them and spread it around to others.

I know I will!!!

[Lee King]

We do, to a degree. They have been posted about on this forum for years now. And, I think everybody that has been on the range for a minute knows what holsters dump guns when bumped.

"I saw" and "this happened" is hardly empirical.

No?

empirical

1 : originating in or based on observation or experience <empirical data>

2 : relying on experience or observation alone often without due regard for system and theory <an empirical basis for the theory>

3 : capable of being verified or disproved by observation or experiment

I know what I have seen and experienced with my own two eyes...and I know what other have reported.

I do agree that people show a bias towards the "cool piece of gear that they happened to buy".

I have dumped guns out of my race holsters. I have seen guns dumped out of every race holster that I can think of. I can see where non-race holster can lose a gun (especially our "racey" non-race holsters), but I haven't personally seen that. I do believe those that have stated here on this forum that they have seen that. I also believe it when people report they have seen "race holster X" lose a gun.

People do tend to dog-pile when something goes wrong. But, I think we can get a pretty decent overall picture.

For example...you gave a pretty good reporting, here:

I didn't realize it initially, but the design of my current holster includes a "hook" that sticks out when the gun is seated that goes through the trigger guard. I wouldn't claim it is the safest design. But when compared to my "old" holster, I now see obvious weaknesses in the other holster. In actual use, I've been bumped, whacked, even had a car door smack the butt of my gun and it hasn't failed me. I hate to lump all holster types into the "unsafe" group because one design has weaknesses others do not.

Is collecting data not part of "observation"? Do you not use data to confirm what you observe?

What I reported is still my opinion based on my limited view of my world. Were you to show me a report of dropped guns and my holster topped the list, then my observation would be proved incorrect.

Edited May 27, 2009 by Lee King

[Seth]

I've not been shooting forever like many of you guys, however, the mistake that I have seen on multiple occasions is a ND launched during a reload.

Perhaps we should focus our energies on improving marksmanship and gun handling instead of worrying about perfect storm mistakes?

[Flexmoney]

I've not been shooting forever like many of you guys, however, the mistake that I have seen on multiple occasions is a ND launched during a reload.

Perhaps we should focus our energies on improving marksmanship and gun handling instead of worrying about perfect storm mistakes?

Perfect storm?

I don't know about that. I've seen quite a few dropped guns and heard of lots. I think there is a current thread on the forum right now about a dropped gun (besides the "RO bump" thread).

Marksmanship is cool, but I think we have room to raise awareness on safety issues...be it gun handling, shooter equipment, stage design, staffing, etc.

[Seth]

Flex,

I appreciate your point. I was specifically thinking of the RO bump, as I had just read that thread.

With the limited depth of experience that I have, I've seen a surprising number of NDs and very few holster problems.

[SLM]

It can happen to anybody with any gun and any holster. I've only been playing this game for a couple years and in that time I've seen one gun hit the ground. It was a Production gun out of an extremely popular (I'd say the most often touted brand here) Production holster. Fortunately for the "shooter" it happened when he was RO'ing another shooter. That brought up an interesting point. If your gun hits the ground, don't pick it up, get the RO. What do you do when the RO is the one that dropped the gun??? Well, we stood there looking at it and decided that while I wasn't the acting RO at the time the incident happened I was a certified RO so I should be the one to retrieve it. I did and we went on, no harm, no foul.

[boo radley]

Hmm...voted "let it go," but after this next match, I'm going to buy a Bladetech DOH for my 6" SVI limited gun. I don't like the grip of the Bladetechs's, and I regret what Kydex does to a blued finish, but I'm sick of worrying about the CR Speed. Even from a locked position, this Limited gun is heavy and long enough to pop out with a sharp tug; especially at certain angles.

The bottom line is, if stages actively tested holster retention, (thinking of that parachute stage from the Florida Open a few years back), you'd see a disproportionate number of DQ's from race holsters and a lot of worried and unhappy shooters. Fortunately(?) most stages do not have lots of gyrations and movements prior to the draw that would cause an issue.