testtest

Consideration Required

Bassbob

Hellcat
What Holster?
One that didn't cover the trigger and guard. And looking at that video the officers made a few more mistakes IMO. You have a combative suspect, 3 cops and a bystander in an elevator and you don't have complete control of the perp ? They didn't seem to be paying much attention to the bystander, who was wearing a shirt with a pot leaf on it. Certainly they need to rethink their equipment. No holster with an open trigger guard is acceptable for anything other than competition. They need to rethink their training protocols as well it seems.
 
Last edited:

KASHIRA-3

Elite
Where does it say that the holster has an open trigger? I seriously doubt that is the case. Just because he managed to get a finger in there doesnt mean that the holster had an open trigger.

There is simply not enough information to assume anything. Holsters are not magic and if a determined individual get a good hold of a weapon, all kinds of things can happen. Based on just a very superficial hypothisis (based on the video), this could be a training and method issue and not necessarily a holster issue. As far as the interrogation video goes, I find it odd that officer would be armed during an interrogation with a person under restraint. Of course, volatile situations often do not allow for perfect form or method. That said, if a cuffed offender gets a hold of your gun when you have adequate assistance to control the subject, that begs a few questions. I dont care if you have a level 3 or level 50 holster, there should be a robust effort to ensure that your weapon is not easily accessible to an offender you have in custody.

I wont say that this is not a holster issue, it very well could be. At this point with such limited information, all we are doing is offering rather loose speculation. My mind does not immediately go to the holster but it is certainly something to examine. I trust that these professionals can figure out how best to mitigate this issue in the future.
 

Bassbob

Hellcat
If a suspect can slide his finger into the trigger housing with the gun holstered, which is what the article stated, it is the wrong holster, period.

And unless they conduct interrogations in an elevator it wasn't an interrogation.
 

KASHIRA-3

Elite
Brother, I was talking about the other LV officer that had her gun taken during an interrogation. Its all over the news

My point is that I would not make too many hard assumptions ( such as an open trigger guard). As far as it being the wrong holster, it certainly could be but just about any holster has a point where its effectiveness can be challenged with physical force, to the point of failure.
 

Bassbob

Hellcat
Brother, I was talking about the other LV officer that had her gun taken during an interrogation. Its all over the news

My point is that I would not make too many hard assumptions ( such as an open trigger guard). As far as it being the wrong holster, it certainly could be but just about any holster has a point where its effectiveness can be challenged with physical force, to the point of failure.


Ah, my mistake.

As for the holster, the article stated that the suspect slid his finger into the holster and pulled the trigger on the officer's gun, while it was holstered. That alone indicates a breakdown in training or at least a breakdown in execution of training. It likely indicates a different set of criteria for holsters may be warranted as well. The Chief said as much in the article. We are taught in professional training classes that holsters that don't completely cover the trigger are dangerous. Particularly with striker fired weapons. And it's almost certain that officer was shot with a Glock of some kind.

I do agree that without the facts we shouldn't make any assumptions, however, this is just an informal group of us nitwits talking about gun related stuff so assumptions is pretty much what we do. :ROFLMAO:
 

ScottJ

Professional
Founding Member
Ah, my mistake.

As for the holster, the article stated that the suspect slid his finger into the holster and pulled the trigger on the officer's gun, while it was holstered. That alone indicates a breakdown in training or at least a breakdown in execution of training. It likely indicates a different set of criteria for holsters may be warranted as well. The Chief said as much in the article. We are taught in professional training classes that holsters that don't completely cover the trigger are dangerous. Particularly with striker fired weapons. And it's almost certain that officer was shot with a Glock of some kind.

I do agree that without the facts we shouldn't make any assumptions, however, this is just an informal group of us nitwits talking about gun related stuff so assumptions is pretty much what we do. :ROFLMAO:
"...I do agree that without the facts we shouldn't make any assumptions, however, this is just an informal group of us nitwits talking about gun related stuff so assumptions is pretty much what we do."

👍
 

KASHIRA-3

Elite
Where are all these duty holsters utilized by uniformed patrol that exhibit an open trigger guard? Can you give an example or an agency that uses them for patrol officers. I am just curious
 
Last edited:

Bassbob

Hellcat
Where are all these duty holsters utilized by uniform patrol that exhibit an open trigger guard? Can you give an example or an agency that uses them for patrol officers. I am just curious
Well you would have to ask a police officer. And no one said " All these". We are talking about a specific department here. And as I said, in that article, which is the topic of THIS thread, the chief of police stated that They needed to look at their holsters. Furthermore it doesn't even have to be fully open. If your finger can slip into the trigger housing it is a dangerous holster, period. And there is no doubt the perp slipped his finger in there so.....
 

HansGruber

Hellcat
Open trigger guard holsters have not been cleared for duty use for at least the last 25 years, by and large. Not buying that it was a holster that allowed direct access to the trigger.

More likely the pistol got torqued, opened up the holster mouth, allowing the finger to get access.
 

Bassbob

Hellcat
Open trigger guard holsters have not been cleared for duty use for at least the last 25 years, by and large. Not buying that it was a holster that allowed direct access to the trigger.

More likely the pistol got torqued, opened up the holster mouth, allowing the finger to get access.
Still a dangerous holster.
 

TSiWRX

Custom
In many cases, the use of today's most popular handgun-WMLs means a holster design that's somewhat compromised where it comes to the potential of something - be it an object or a finger - being able to interact with the trigger while the gun is still secured in the holster.

And these holsters are actually all of "modern," full-trigger-coverage design.

This is not a new or unknown issue...at least not for well over a decade ;) ....



For those of you who are in the Primary & Secondary and PHLster FB groups, you can use the FB search function to also bring up past discussions there, with respect to this concern.

And this is not with "crappy" gear. I've seen this with both what can be considered the de-facto "standard" where it comes to duty/service retention-holsters (like the Safariland holsters in the referenced thread above), as well as what are/were considered standard-bearers in the civilian (and professional as well) concealed-carry side of the equation, too (i.e. Raven Concealment Systems, PHLster, Dark Star Gear etc.).

The problem is what the holster can -and cannot- do when it has to also accept the underslung WML.

Is this an excuse?

No.

But it does point out, indeed as @iklwa noted, that further consideration should be given to even duty/service weapon carry, and powerfully echoes the Chief's sentiment that further training of the officers need to be addressed as well.
 

KASHIRA-3

Elite
Open trigger guard holsters have not been cleared for duty use for at least the last 25 years, by and large. Not buying that it was a holster that allowed direct access to the trigger.

More likely the pistol got torqued, opened up the holster mouth, allowing the finger to get access.
a very sensible statement

Still a dangerous holster.
As far as whether or not the holster is "dangerous" can depend on facts not yet in evidence. Holsters are not magic and just because a person may have been able to torque the gun and force a finger into the trigger guard does not automatically make it dangerous. How much force is required is important and the level of difficulty it would take to actually repeat this action in testing under controlled conditions would be rather important. Determining whether or not this weapon was properly secured to begin with is important, determining whether this offender is familiar with these type holsters is probably important. I would hold off on judgement until all the facts are in and reasonable test performed. Again, holsters are not imbued with magic pixy dust.
 

TSiWRX

Custom
^ Yup. Again, in many cases, the use of today's most popular handgun-WMLs means a holster design that's somewhat compromised where it comes to the potential of something - be it an object or a finger - being able to interact with the trigger while the gun is still secured in the holster. With the light physically being wider than the frame of the gun, there's some geometric issues.....


^ The above is from Reddit member FlyingDog14, and left-to-right are as-quoted verbatim "Glock 20/Safariland 6285, Sig M17/Safariland 7390, Glock 19/old school Bravo Concealment." I could show the same, with my XDms with either the old Insight M6/M3(x) or Surefire X300, with my old Safariland 5188 bucket, RCS Phantom Light Bearing, or my Glock 32/X300, with my Dark Star Gear. My current EDC IWB from KT Mech? Not so much, but that's because the gun is paired with a small and slim Surefire XC1, a holster and light combo which would be unsuitable for open-carry in a duty/service context.....

Also one has to keep in-mind that the interaction does not have to be intentional/purposeful. That someone's finger, be it a child's or a slim adult's (or even the pinky of a rather larger adult that was forced into that opening due to the two individuals' physical, entangled fight) many just slip/pop in there (in the OP's cited case, because the suspect was literally attempting a gun-grab...who knows what the physical forces involved in trying to keep that grab from being successful may have inadvertently produced?) and literally be dislocated, fractured, or even de-ring'ed on the way out has little to do with the simple fact that said appendage caused the unintentional discharge.

These aren't fly-by-night, third-job-to-support-a-case-a-day-of-beer-plus-child-support kydex benders. :)

Is it dangerous? I don't know: maybe the designs can be further refined (and they have: and if it is the case that the Department failed to keep pace with modernizing equipment, a case can definitely be made, there) to reduce this risk, but a not-insignificant portion of this also has to do with the light's design. Sadly, in several cases, the lights with the better form-factor falls behind in other areas that are arguably just as important (output, reliability, and durability).

Regardless, as @KASHIRA-3 noted above, the weapons-retention techniques -as well as simple administrative procedures- which allowed this incident to happen are really what is at the crux of this issue, and needs to be addressed in addition to reviewing the holster/gun/light combo for possible excessive vulnerabilities, on a technical basis.
 
Last edited:

BobM

Hellcat
^ Yup. Again, in many cases, the use of today's most popular handgun-WMLs means a holster design that's somewhat compromised where it comes to the potential of something - be it an object or a finger - being able to interact with the trigger while the gun is still secured in the holster. With the light physically being wider than the frame of the gun, there's some geometric issues.....


^ The above is from Reddit member FlyingDog14, and left-to-right are as-quoted verbatim "Glock 20/Safariland 6285, Sig M17/Safariland 7390, Glock 19/old school Bravo Concealment." I could show the same, with my XDms with either the old Insight M6/M3(x) or Surefire X300, with my old Safariland 5188 bucket, RCS Phantom Light Bearing, or my Glock 32/X300, with my Dark Star Gear. My current EDC IWB from KT Mech? Not so much, but that's because the gun is paired with a small and slim Surefire XC1, a holster and light combo which would be unsuitable for open-carry in a duty/service context.....

Also one has to keep in-mind that the interaction does not have to be intentional/purposeful. That someone's finger, be it a child's or a slim adult's (or even the pinky of a rather larger adult that was forced into that opening due to the two individuals' physical, entangled fight) many just slip/pop in there (in the OP's cited case, because the suspect was literally attempting a gun-grab...who knows what the physical forces involved in trying to keep that grab from being successful may have inadvertently produced?) and literally be dislocated, fractured, or even de-ring'ed on the way out has little to do with the simple fact that said appendage caused the unintentional discharge.

These aren't fly-by-night, third-job-to-support-a-case-a-day-of-beer-plus-child-support kydex benders. :)

Is it dangerous? I don't know: maybe the designs can be further refined (and they have: and if it is the case that the Department failed to keep pace with modernizing equipment, a case can definitely be made, there) to reduce this risk, but a not-insignificant portion of this also has to do with the light's design. Sadly, in several cases, the lights with the better form-factor falls behind in other areas that are arguably just as important (output, reliability, and durability).

Regardless, as @KASHIRA-3 noted above, the weapons-retention techniques -as well as simple administrative procedures- which allowed this incident to happen are really what is at the crux of this issue, and needs to be addressed in addition to reviewing the holster/gun/light combo for possible excessive vulnerabilities, on a technical basis.

When looking at three holsters shown, the middle is better as far as trigger coverage goes. But, would pass on all three. Likely nothing anyone want's to hear, but in some ways because of the WL's am surprised there's so many Kydex holster mfg's with possible liabilities in some ways just waiting to happen?
 

TSiWRX

Custom
^ So then the question follows - with your needs and preferences that "the juice is not worth the squeeze," where it comes to the compromise between having a pistol-mounted WML and the relative "open-ness" of the mouth of the holster around the trigger-guard area....

...but at what point does that equation flip the other way?

For many LE agencies, their UoF continuum treats a gun-grab as a potential lethal-force response - in this context, is the fact that a suspect is able to, through vigorous physical force literally force his/her way into the holster and cause an unintentional (to the officer) discharge an actual problem with the holster (which may continue to otherwise retain the weapon and prevent a successful gun-grab), or does this failure signal deeper considerations? Further, does this concern effectively negate the ability for officers to be able to employ WML-enabled handguns?

And lets also look again at the civilian side of the question, too. Currently, the de-facto Gold Standard for multi-gun/multi-light (the Modlite PL350 model will be released simultaneously with the light) capability IWB/OWB passive-retention-only WML-enabled is the PHLster Floodlight:

1626192755173.png

^Picture take from OPTactical.

Geared towards conceal-carry, it's gained a large following even among the "gear snob" crowd on the likes of P&S and similar. Yet, there's still an undeniable gap in that area....

I'm not suggesting that you're wrong, @BobM - just continuing the discussion, that's all. :)
 
Last edited:

iklwa

Master Class
As with so much in the firearms industry (and life) there are compromises to be made.
Every choice must be made by weighing cost, user friendliness, safety, and effectiveness.
This same weighing of benefits extends from caliber, ammunition, platform size, and cost(s) all the way down to the shoes one wears.
Being aware of the differences makes for a more educated, safe and effective armed populace.
 

xdman

Moderator
Staff member
One that didn't cover the trigger and guard. And looking at that video the officers made a few more mistakes IMO. You have a combative suspect, 3 cops and a bystander in an elevator and you don't have complete control of the perp ? They didn't seem to be paying much attention to the bystander, who was wearing a shirt with a pot leaf on it. Certainly they need to rethink their equipment. No holster with an open trigger guard is acceptable for anything other than competition. They need to rethink their training protocols as well it seems.
It’s Las Vegas, pot is legal, hard to walk down the strip without getting high.
 
Last edited:
Top