View Single Post
 
Old 08-19-2017, 12:49 AM
rednichols's Avatar
rednichols rednichols is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,497
Likes: 1,858
Liked 7,731 Times in 2,125 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Muss Muggins View Post
Isn't any IWB holster ultimately pointing a muzzle at a body part, regardless of clock position? I see from your website that you make IWB holsters which when worn at 4 o'clock point the muzzle at the fleshy part of most people's sitting place. You also make horizontal shoulder holsters that point the muzzle of the pistol at the person behind you in line, arguably a more egregious safety violation. Please stop complaining. You really have no standing with this unless you don't make holsters that don't point at a body part or an innocent third party. All carry methods involve risk. It's how we manage the risk that makes us successful . . .
It's not up to you :-). And raising awareness is not 'complaining'. Muss, I hope you don't make holsters, because if you do, then according to my challenge, you have intentionally earned a 'fail'.

No, safety is NOT about managing risk. Especially with firearms, it is about eliminating UNNECESSARY risks. I made that point very early on (OK, maybe in the other thread): some risks are absolutely necessary and cannot be 'managed'.

Back on point, this thread is about my view -- I've not seen any compelling evidence otherwise here -- that striker fired pistols represent a different, higher risk when holstered than condition 3 1911s; than DA revolvers; than SA revolvers. And therefore an unnecessary risk.

But I did let it drift onto other folks' agendas, and for that 'mea culpa'. Yours included. Thousands of views of the thread suggest that perhaps someone will 'get the point'.
__________________
Red Nichols The Holstorian

Last edited by rednichols; 08-19-2017 at 12:59 AM.
Reply With Quote