It has been alleged . . .
- Thread starter rednichols
- Start date
OP
rednichols
Member
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2012
- Messages
- 2,745
- Reaction score
- 8,505
Here's the 'holstory' answer that summarises what I've been trying to work out with you all, via this thread:
"Striker fired guns require no input from the user, but (also) do not offer any feedback if the trigger is obstructed. In *most* cases you can look at your holster and see it's clear and then keep your fingers out of the trigger guard. Sometimes in the real world you have to transition from lethal to non-lethal quickly and without looking away from your target, though."
Perhaps you've heard the tale of how a frog came to be boiled to death when it started out in lukewarm water. All it took was the water temperature being raised by a single degree over time, and in the end no creature was more surprised than he! Similarly, pistol users now find themselves 'boiled' by their modern striker-fired pistols, and their holsters.
Holster history is only about 150 years old. Single shot pistols were left on the horse because, once fired, they became clubs. Colt's revolvers gave us a reason to carry them along, and then metallic cartridges made the semi-auto pistol possible.
Holsters, then, started out for single action revolvers and it was common to equip them with safety straps. These secured the pistol and some had the side benefit of holding the hammer down, too. Trigger guards were generally uncovered as that was the marketplace at the time: who then wouldn't want ready access to the trigger? Single actions of the day were ideally carried with the hammer down on an empty chamber: cocking the hammer brought a loaded chamber into position.
Double action revolvers followed soon after and gun designers then were no dummies: they were designed so that the firing pin didn't rest on the primer while the trigger was forward (so no more empty chamber under the hammer. Then autos, first with striker fired pistols such as the Luger and the Colt Vest Pocket that had one and even two external safeties, and were carried uncocked on an empty chamber: obvious minimum standards at the time (around 1900). Hammered pistols, such as the 1911, followed suit in the same vein: grip safety, thumb safety, and always carried hammer-down on an empty chamber. The earliest safety holster appeared, called the Audley -- and the 'water' temperature increased.
Thereafter, the auto pistol was sophisticated, from single action to double action as on revolvers. Noteworthy was the Walther P38 which later was emulated by S&W with its M39: double action trigger, thumb safety that also acted as a decocking lever – whilst positively locking the firing pin. Obvious attention to safety.
We holster makers accommodated all these pistols and more. In the late 1950s a chap named Bucheimer patented the thumb snap for revolvers and it worked a treat: it held the hammer down so the trigger couldn't lift it, shielded clothing from the very sharp hammer spurs of the era, and yet allowed a very quick release of the pistol. The water warmed a bit: holster makers had begun to take on even more of the responsibility for pistol safety.
Late 1960s and, with WWII ended for 20 years, the M1911 auto came of age for civilians: following the now-passé craze of fast-draw with single action Colts firing blanks, came Big Bear CA and 'combat shoots' using cocked-and-locked 1911s with live .45 ammo. Even the same holster makers, Anderson and Alfonso. "Cover the trigger guards", someone said, and so it was done, and the water got warmer: now shooters could shoot themselves without covered guards, and because of them, too.
The 1970s and the notion of the 'riot proof holster' was an effort by many makers to keep the pistol in the holster during an assault on it. Worked quite well with revolvers, and the water got warmer. We struggled a bit doing this with autos, too, but clever people became involved and discovered that kydex was the ideal support medium. And with combat shooters always looking to be faster, and being happy to 'outsmart' the rule makers on the way, their holsters drifted back to the way fast draw shooters had done it: suspended muzzle forward, roughly at the appendix area on right handers.
The first striker fired pistols to lack external safeties appeared in the 1980s: the Glock. An Army colonel I knew then said he wished it had been available during the Army trials that selected the Beretta M92. But Glock's was the only one, right? The water got warmer still.
A perfect storm formed by the end of the 20th century: Glock's competitors followed suit with their own striker fired pistols, holsters drifted past 'appendix' and over the belly, and tactical lights were added to pistols even for concealment. I was 'retired' during the first decade of the 21st century and unaware.
Holster makers, notably Safariland, continued their perceived role of providing for the security of these pistols – striker-fired with lights – and suddenly it was the users who found themselves in hot water: the lights being larger around than the trigger guard of these striker pistols, anything and everything could, and did, get into the gap in the holster that was formed near the trigger. Today, we have documented events in which the wearer's clothing, bad guys' fingers, good guys' keys, even a curious child's finger got into these guards and -- bang! Officer down, and the frog was boiled.
Holsters have a single purpose: "to provide for the portability of hand-held weapons". Otherwise they'd have to stay in the hand, wouldn't they? Sure, we'll put up our hand to keep these weapons inside the holster against gravity. And we'll agree that these weapons should come out of their sheaths when summoned. We'll even agree that our holsters "will do no harm".
But it is not our role, to add back the safety, that the pistol maker left out. Ruger found that out the hard way with their original single action revolvers and the company reinvented them in the early 1970s accordingly.
Since writing this, I'm told that there is an accessory for the Glock to provide the 'feedback' of the striker moving when holstering
"Striker fired guns require no input from the user, but (also) do not offer any feedback if the trigger is obstructed. In *most* cases you can look at your holster and see it's clear and then keep your fingers out of the trigger guard. Sometimes in the real world you have to transition from lethal to non-lethal quickly and without looking away from your target, though."
Perhaps you've heard the tale of how a frog came to be boiled to death when it started out in lukewarm water. All it took was the water temperature being raised by a single degree over time, and in the end no creature was more surprised than he! Similarly, pistol users now find themselves 'boiled' by their modern striker-fired pistols, and their holsters.
Holster history is only about 150 years old. Single shot pistols were left on the horse because, once fired, they became clubs. Colt's revolvers gave us a reason to carry them along, and then metallic cartridges made the semi-auto pistol possible.
Holsters, then, started out for single action revolvers and it was common to equip them with safety straps. These secured the pistol and some had the side benefit of holding the hammer down, too. Trigger guards were generally uncovered as that was the marketplace at the time: who then wouldn't want ready access to the trigger? Single actions of the day were ideally carried with the hammer down on an empty chamber: cocking the hammer brought a loaded chamber into position.
Double action revolvers followed soon after and gun designers then were no dummies: they were designed so that the firing pin didn't rest on the primer while the trigger was forward (so no more empty chamber under the hammer. Then autos, first with striker fired pistols such as the Luger and the Colt Vest Pocket that had one and even two external safeties, and were carried uncocked on an empty chamber: obvious minimum standards at the time (around 1900). Hammered pistols, such as the 1911, followed suit in the same vein: grip safety, thumb safety, and always carried hammer-down on an empty chamber. The earliest safety holster appeared, called the Audley -- and the 'water' temperature increased.
Thereafter, the auto pistol was sophisticated, from single action to double action as on revolvers. Noteworthy was the Walther P38 which later was emulated by S&W with its M39: double action trigger, thumb safety that also acted as a decocking lever – whilst positively locking the firing pin. Obvious attention to safety.
We holster makers accommodated all these pistols and more. In the late 1950s a chap named Bucheimer patented the thumb snap for revolvers and it worked a treat: it held the hammer down so the trigger couldn't lift it, shielded clothing from the very sharp hammer spurs of the era, and yet allowed a very quick release of the pistol. The water warmed a bit: holster makers had begun to take on even more of the responsibility for pistol safety.
Late 1960s and, with WWII ended for 20 years, the M1911 auto came of age for civilians: following the now-passé craze of fast-draw with single action Colts firing blanks, came Big Bear CA and 'combat shoots' using cocked-and-locked 1911s with live .45 ammo. Even the same holster makers, Anderson and Alfonso. "Cover the trigger guards", someone said, and so it was done, and the water got warmer: now shooters could shoot themselves without covered guards, and because of them, too.
The 1970s and the notion of the 'riot proof holster' was an effort by many makers to keep the pistol in the holster during an assault on it. Worked quite well with revolvers, and the water got warmer. We struggled a bit doing this with autos, too, but clever people became involved and discovered that kydex was the ideal support medium. And with combat shooters always looking to be faster, and being happy to 'outsmart' the rule makers on the way, their holsters drifted back to the way fast draw shooters had done it: suspended muzzle forward, roughly at the appendix area on right handers.
The first striker fired pistols to lack external safeties appeared in the 1980s: the Glock. An Army colonel I knew then said he wished it had been available during the Army trials that selected the Beretta M92. But Glock's was the only one, right? The water got warmer still.
A perfect storm formed by the end of the 20th century: Glock's competitors followed suit with their own striker fired pistols, holsters drifted past 'appendix' and over the belly, and tactical lights were added to pistols even for concealment. I was 'retired' during the first decade of the 21st century and unaware.
Holster makers, notably Safariland, continued their perceived role of providing for the security of these pistols – striker-fired with lights – and suddenly it was the users who found themselves in hot water: the lights being larger around than the trigger guard of these striker pistols, anything and everything could, and did, get into the gap in the holster that was formed near the trigger. Today, we have documented events in which the wearer's clothing, bad guys' fingers, good guys' keys, even a curious child's finger got into these guards and -- bang! Officer down, and the frog was boiled.
Holsters have a single purpose: "to provide for the portability of hand-held weapons". Otherwise they'd have to stay in the hand, wouldn't they? Sure, we'll put up our hand to keep these weapons inside the holster against gravity. And we'll agree that these weapons should come out of their sheaths when summoned. We'll even agree that our holsters "will do no harm".
But it is not our role, to add back the safety, that the pistol maker left out. Ruger found that out the hard way with their original single action revolvers and the company reinvented them in the early 1970s accordingly.
Since writing this, I'm told that there is an accessory for the Glock to provide the 'feedback' of the striker moving when holstering
It's called the GADGET and for 80 bucks I'd rather just not put my finger near the trigger. Much easier.
However not all holsters are made the same so instead of targeting the striker fired issue, let's call it what it is. Holster makers constructing improper holsters for these firearms that allow for issues such as this.
So if you plan on carrying AIWB then buy a proper appendix holster from a proper holster maker.
Such as but not limited to:
JM Custom Kydex
Dale Fricke
Mastermind Tactics
Bladetech
V Development Group
Just to name a few proper AIWB manufacturers off the top of my head
oh and wedges work for both concealement, function, and comfort....
And dont worry about all that junk when your striker fired is pointed near your junk.
However not all holsters are made the same so instead of targeting the striker fired issue, let's call it what it is. Holster makers constructing improper holsters for these firearms that allow for issues such as this.
So if you plan on carrying AIWB then buy a proper appendix holster from a proper holster maker.
Such as but not limited to:
JM Custom Kydex
Dale Fricke
Mastermind Tactics
Bladetech
V Development Group
Just to name a few proper AIWB manufacturers off the top of my head
oh and wedges work for both concealement, function, and comfort....
And dont worry about all that junk when your striker fired is pointed near your junk.
Last edited:
Walkingwolf
Member
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2017
- Messages
- 1,624
- Reaction score
- 1,655
If you blow off your junk, it is your fault.
A vest pocket is starting to sound pretty good!
Steve W
Steve W
ChattanoogaPhil
Member
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2009
- Messages
- 14,601
- Reaction score
- 20,622
Speaking of "pistols – striker-fired with lights"...
The shifting sands of weapon lights is changing the paradigm. Couldn't help myself...
Until recently, weapon lights mounted on handguns were monsters significantly wider than the handgun and trigger guard with activation paddles suitable for a rowboat (pics plucked off the Net). These Surefire and Streamlight examples are/were widely used. I can imagine holster makers struggled with this and would not be surprised if the duty holster involved in the accidental discharge (linked vid in the other thread) was designed to accommodate a large light like these.
-- Enter the Surefire XC1 on my G19 truck gun.
------
The difference is significant. The older Surefire and Streamlight above show to be 1.43 and 1.47 inches wide. I put the calipers on my XC1 and it's reading 1.07 inches. HUGE difference in closing that "gap".
Cheers
The shifting sands of weapon lights is changing the paradigm. Couldn't help myself...
Until recently, weapon lights mounted on handguns were monsters significantly wider than the handgun and trigger guard with activation paddles suitable for a rowboat (pics plucked off the Net). These Surefire and Streamlight examples are/were widely used. I can imagine holster makers struggled with this and would not be surprised if the duty holster involved in the accidental discharge (linked vid in the other thread) was designed to accommodate a large light like these.
-- Enter the Surefire XC1 on my G19 truck gun.
------
The difference is significant. The older Surefire and Streamlight above show to be 1.43 and 1.47 inches wide. I put the calipers on my XC1 and it's reading 1.07 inches. HUGE difference in closing that "gap".
Cheers
Last edited:
OP
rednichols
Member
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2012
- Messages
- 2,745
- Reaction score
- 8,505
Excellent, from Chattanooga. Now we have 'gotten down to brass tacks'.
The very strength, literally, of Kydex is its rigidity. So: if leather were used on such holsters -- for pistols with a bulky or slim light mounted on the rail -- the holster mouth could have, and hopefully would have, been moulded smaller at the lips of it and would have then moved out of the way as the pistol was holstered and drawn.
Kydex simply won't allow this in the thicknesses used in police uniform holsters sold as safety equipment. So the maximum dimension of the light was left for it to enter and exit freely; and this left a sizeable gap.
Safariland then, when noticing the problem at the outset, could have fitted a flexible lip to the rigid Kydex mount, to block entry. I would argue that instead they used the old paradigm -- the trigger was covered like all the pistols before it -- and so that 'counted' as being a complete 'industry standard' build. On the other hand, someone there may have simply looked at the situation and decided 'we HAVE to make this (we can't turn the business away) but it's not our fault (the bed was on fire when I lay down on it).
And so it was with these two views in mind, that I brought up the 'new paradigm since 1985' in the first place. To someone there, it 'looked' like the old problem, but it was a new problem that had simply gone unnoticed since the Glock's introduction; exacerbated by there subsequently having been so many competing pistol designs but no significant holster companies to compete for Kydex holster contracts -- which lack of competition Safariland actually worked hard to create via their technology and related patents (nowadays to the gadgets fitted inside and outside, the leather-lined Kydex 'method' patent having long ago expired).
The very strength, literally, of Kydex is its rigidity. So: if leather were used on such holsters -- for pistols with a bulky or slim light mounted on the rail -- the holster mouth could have, and hopefully would have, been moulded smaller at the lips of it and would have then moved out of the way as the pistol was holstered and drawn.
Kydex simply won't allow this in the thicknesses used in police uniform holsters sold as safety equipment. So the maximum dimension of the light was left for it to enter and exit freely; and this left a sizeable gap.
Safariland then, when noticing the problem at the outset, could have fitted a flexible lip to the rigid Kydex mount, to block entry. I would argue that instead they used the old paradigm -- the trigger was covered like all the pistols before it -- and so that 'counted' as being a complete 'industry standard' build. On the other hand, someone there may have simply looked at the situation and decided 'we HAVE to make this (we can't turn the business away) but it's not our fault (the bed was on fire when I lay down on it).
And so it was with these two views in mind, that I brought up the 'new paradigm since 1985' in the first place. To someone there, it 'looked' like the old problem, but it was a new problem that had simply gone unnoticed since the Glock's introduction; exacerbated by there subsequently having been so many competing pistol designs but no significant holster companies to compete for Kydex holster contracts -- which lack of competition Safariland actually worked hard to create via their technology and related patents (nowadays to the gadgets fitted inside and outside, the leather-lined Kydex 'method' patent having long ago expired).
Last edited:
ChattanoogaPhil
Member
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2009
- Messages
- 14,601
- Reaction score
- 20,622
With lights like the Surefire XC1 mounted on a standard Glock the maximum width dimension entering the holster is the frame, not the light. According to my calipers 1.14in vs 1.07in.
Maybe a RedNichols XC1/Glock holster is in the future.
Cheers.
OP
rednichols
Member
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2012
- Messages
- 2,745
- Reaction score
- 8,505
With lights like the Surefire XC1 mounted on a standard Glock the maximum width dimension entering the holster is the frame, not the light. According to my calipers 1.14in vs 1.07in.
Maybe a RedNichols XC1/Glock holster is in the future.
Cheers.
No, its not. The light itself has only magnified the flaw in the pistol, so no holsters from me for pistols that are not always equipped with external safety features. Not the holster makers job to compensate for the pistols failings.
ChattanoogaPhil
Member
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2009
- Messages
- 14,601
- Reaction score
- 20,622
Ok, so you're not just talking just about striker-fired, but all pistols absent external safeties?
Last edited:
OP
rednichols
Member
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2012
- Messages
- 2,745
- Reaction score
- 8,505
So we don't either one of us, or anyone else, fall victim to a case of reductio ad absurdum, I'll just say pistols that are within the paradigm represented by the Glock are not on my build list
. If there are any pistols that I have mistakenly identified as fitting into that, then I am sure I will learn of them in the meantime. If I weren't already in strife with the forum for linking to my essay on the topic I would refer you to that, where it is a longer piece and almost as clear
Last edited:
ChattanoogaPhil
Member
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2009
- Messages
- 14,601
- Reaction score
- 20,622
S
If I weren't already in strife with the forum for linking to my essay on the topic I would refer you to that, where it is a longer piece and almost as clear
Hey Red,
I visited the website with the new build list page.
"But no striker pistol holsters (presently I'm unaware of any that are only available with external safeties)."
Here's a candidate for the list. I got one here on my desk. Never available without a thumb safety.
Last edited:
Similar threads
