IWB Holster Follow Up

I have had a few months now to come to some conclusions about the IWB holsters I have been using. I rotate carry guns, depending on weather, destination and whim. Whim usually wins out. So, the lineup is:

1. Ruger SR9c - IWB Holsters:

• N82 Tactical Pro
• Little Foxx
• Remora
• Crossbreed Supertuck
• Old Faithful

At this point, the only two left that I carry with the SR9c are the Little Foxx and the Remora.

2. Ruger LC9 - IWB Holsters:

• Little Foxx (see text below for more on this)
• pjholster
• Remora

The N82 Tactical Pro is without doubt the most comfortable IWB holster I have ever carried. I loved everything about it but one thing - the "locking" design. On the Pro model, the holster shell itself is made from relatively thick polycarbonate, which is very good. It is solid, almost indestructible, and rigid. However, lacking any flexibility, the shell is designed to "lock in" the gun by what I would term a small detent fitting inside the front of the trigger guard. This is a good design and holds the gun securely. However, the rigidity of the polycarbonate shell requires that the pistol be rotated a bit at the beginning of the draw in order for the trigger guard to clear the detent and free the pistol.

N82 specifies that you give the grip a slight inward twist as you begin the draw which will accomplish unlocking the pistol from the shell. Now, some people, most people judging from the success of this design, have no problems with this. Unfortunately, I did. It's a personal thing. I would not always remember to make this movement when I drew my weapon. Usually I did, but not always. None of my other holsters require me to give a slight twist on the draw, so I would quickly fall out of the habit when using other brands.

So, eventually, I stopped using the N82 Tactical Pro for that reason. It was difficult to surrender the comfort, especially in the summer. Once, I wore the holster and the SR9c all day while fly fishing the Arkansas River in summer. It was hot and sweaty, but the holster didn't bother me at all and held up fine. Stained, of course, but that's what happens when you wear holsters against your bod in the summer.

I suspect the standard N82 holster would have been better for me than the Pro model since it does not have a polycarbonate shell. It appears that the pistol is held to the backing by a formed piece of neoprene, with the clip, riding in a leather sleeve, sewn into that. In fact, the 'standard' version might be more comfortable than the Pro because it doesn't have the polycarbonate shell. The only down side I can see with this, for some folks, is it won't allow quick, one-hand re-holstering. But, my view is that if you are carrying concealed, you don't need to do any one-hand re-holstering anyway. If I pull my gun in public, it won't be for show and I won't need to quickly re-holster.

Recommendation: The N82 Tactical line of holsters are both unique and comfortable. I have no hesitation in recommending them to anyone who carries concealed. As Nate remarked to me: "If you don't love it, we buy it back!" Can't beat that.

Note: My inability to adapt to the Pro's retention system is an issue more with me than with the design. There are many, many satisfied N82 Tactical Pro users out there, so keep that in mind.

The Crossbreed SuperTuck is a well-regarded IWB holster, and probably the forerunner of the "hybrid leather-kydex" design. I used the model backed with horsehide for the SR9c for many months. It does conceal well, and is generally comfortable - nowhere near as comfy as the N82 Tactical Pro however. I spent a considerable amount of time moving the clips up and down to get a good cant and height position. I'm not sure I found any position I really liked though. The big negative for me was the hassle I had getting it on and off. Again, this comes down to personal preference. I know shooters who swear by this holster and have one for each concealed carry piece they own. I can't really give this holster any significant negatives, but I eventually stopped carrying in it and sold it.

The Old Faithful holster family. I had a couple of these. They are essentially a do it yourself Crossbreed super tuck design holster that costs considerably less. Because you, the owner, put it together. If I could do it, anyone could, so that's not an issue. But, with the bolts and rubber washers it seemed a bit more clunky than the Crossbreed. I passed it on to someone else to try.

The Little Foxx and the Remora.

I still use the Little Foxx. In fact, since the kydex is somewhat flexible, I find that it also works very well with the LC9 and the SR9c. One holster, two guns.... Not bad for unintended consequences. The only negatives are that although it is comfortable, it's not as drop dead comfy as the N82 Tactical, and I managed to break one of the kydex clips - they sent me two initially. I'm sure I'll be able to get another clip with a call or email. I've been too lazy to do that, but I should. So, I like having one clip and the Little Foxx is small enough so that one clip works effectively, and it's light and no bigger than it needs to be. It has an open grip area (don't like the term "combat" for this kind of feature) which is good for grip, not quite so good for comfort. But, all designs are compromises.

The Remora is in a class by itself. As you probably know, it's clipless and relies on the high friction coefficient of the material to keep it in place. This mostly works very well. My only issues with it so far have had to do with the holsters moving or changing position during the day. I think there are two key factors with this. One, I tend to wear the Remoras in a cross draw position. This works well if you don't do too much moving about during the day - sitting, standing, sitting, bending over, twisting around, sitting, standing.... you get the picture. Because a cross draw carry puts the holster and gun directly on what i'd call a 'hinge area' - the place where the upper body and hip area meet in front when you bend over or sit - the holster is then subject to a lot of forces during the day. These work to displace the holster and gun and you must check their position a number of times to be sure they haven't slipped up. I've had the holster and gun work up and be mostly out of the waistband area. It's easy to readjust though, even in public if you do it casually.

In Remora's defense, I think this tendency to become displaced is because of where I wear it, and if the gun/holster combination is quite small, like a regular Remora and my LCP. I have recently begun to use the Remora in a strong side position and suspect this might cure the displacement issue. 

One big benefit with Remoras is that they can be worn practically in any position and they are easy to put on and take off.

I really like them and recommend them, but I'm still working through my preferences for how they will keep my gun secure and in the same place, and how they will hold up over time.

The pjholster. Paul Giannaula makes what I consider to be the most beautiful kydex holsters on the market. He makes them himself, not wanting to compromise the quality. They are smooth, thin and well engineered. It's a case of form following function. I know that a quality leather holster from a craftsman master is considered more aesthetic than kydex, but Paul's designs are beautiful in their own right. And, surprisingly comfortable seeing as they are made from plain old kydex. Seriously. The photos on his site don't do them justice. Even so, kydex is hard. It's not leather. Still, given the thinness of Pauls holsters, and the positive retention, which is adjustable, I would venture they are as comfortable as a well made leather IWB holster. Good leather tends to be thicker than kydex, especially the thin kydex Paul favors. Thick leather adds to bulk, along with the extra leather necessary for sewing the thing together. At least, I'd say comfort between the two would be a toss up.

The only IWB holster I have from Paul is a straight drop for my LC9, which I tend to carry cross draw. Nothing, except some OWB holsters, is comfortable when carried cross draw, so that's not a real test for Paul's IWB designs. I'd like to try one of his IWB strong side designs with a radical cant, which I believe really helps to hide the gun in the strong side position. His website (pjholster.com) links to a very good video review which you might find interesting.

I would recommend one of Paul's holsters to anyone, especially if you like thin, beautifully made kydex.

The IWB Wish List

I'd like to have a small IWB holster like the Little Foxx but with the backing of an N82 Tactical only smaller. That would combine a somewhat flexible kydex shell (with no need for the twisting move on the draw), would fit similarly sized guns (like the SR9c and LC9) and have the comfortable backing of the N82 Tactical but not the big footprint.

And, I'd like to try a couple of Paul's IWB strong side holsters for the LC9 and the LCP. I think the LCP would essentially disappear with one of his designs.

Like most of you, I'm still looking for the perfect holster. And, remember, what might be perfect for me, may not suit your needs at all.

Stay safe.

Lasers: no light at the end of the tunnel

As I posted here earlier, I am trying to get a detailed comparison going with the major laser sight manufacturers. I'm a normal guy, or so some people have said. (Don't ask my kids.) I want to do a "normal" evaluation conducted over time by a representative civilian legal concealed carry person. That would be me.

Crimson Trace was the first to respond. They were quick and effective, sending me a unit for my Ruger LCP. Nice. LaserMax responded, and then the long, long saga began. Some of that is detailed here. Unfortunately, it is still going on. I've had numerous communications with LaserMax, both via email and phone. They are very nice and accommodating, but have somehow run into continuing difficulties in getting their promised units to me for evaluation.

I understand how issues come up in business. After all, I spent fifteen years in a giant corporation dealing with issues resolution on a daily basis. However, I was usually able to get the issues resolved, and to keep the effected people in touch with what progress was, or was not, being made. LaserMax is, I think, trying to resolve the issue with supporting my evaluation and review of their sights, but getting information from them is like the proverbial water from a stone. Not happening.

If I get no action this week, I will have to call off the laser sight review and evaluations. I'll do more postings about Crimson Trace, the sight and the company, but I may not be able to compare the plusses and minuses with LaserMax's products.

Oh, and Laserlyte.... they said, sure, we'd be glad to participate. Then I never heard another word.

A Few Facts About Carrying a Gun for Self Defense

There is a source available on the internet for facts concerning many important topics and issues. Gun Control is one of these. The source is Just Facts. This is a valuable and important source for all gun owners and self-defense carry people to know about and be familiar with because, in the current gun debate, facts are the best tools you can have.

What distinguishes this resource from many other internet "fact sources" is the site's care to be unbiased and to avoid skewed and inaccurate data.

In JustFacts introductory note they say:

"This research is based upon the most recent available data in 2010. Facts from earlier years are cited based upon availability and relevance, not to slant results by singling out specific years that are different from others. Likewise, data associated with the effects of gun control laws in various geographical areas represent random, demographically diverse places in which such data is available.

Many aspects of the gun control issue are best measured and sometimes can only be measured through surveys, but the accuracy of such surveys depends upon respondents providing truthful answers to questions that are sometimes controversial and potentially incriminating. Thus, Just Facts uses such data critically, citing the best-designed surveys we find, detailing their inner workings in our footnotes, and using the most cautious plausible interpretations of the results.

Particularly, when statistics are involved, the determination of what constitutes a credible fact (and what does not) can contain elements of personal subjectivity. It is our mission to minimize subjective information and to provide highly factual content. Therefore, we are taking the additional step of providing readers with four examples to illustrate the type of material that was excluded because it did not meet Just Facts'Standards of Credibility."

Justfacts.com is one research source I can rely upon to provide fact-based information from which I can draw my own conclusions. To that end, I present some interesting facts gleaned from their site relevant to those who carry for self defense, and also to those who oppose self-defense carry out of ignorance, or because they don't understand the, well... facts.

Number of gun owners in the US

According to private firearms manufacturers data in 2010, there are between 40 and 45 million adults who own handguns.

A 2005 Gallup poll indicates there are 100 million adults who own guns of different types. In the same poll, 67% said they owned guns for self protection.

Why is having a gun for self protection necessary?

Some facts (from the Justfacts.com website. See the site for additional references and support for the information listed below.):

1. A 1993 nationwide survey of 4,977 households found that over the previous five years, at least 0.5% of households had members who had used a gun for defense during a situation in which they thought someone "almost certainly would have been killed" if they "had not used a gun for protection." Applied to the U.S. population, this amounts to 162,000 such incidents per year. This figure excludes all "military service, police work, or work as a security guard." 
2. Based on survey data from the U.S. Department of Justice, roughly 5,340,000 violent crimes were committed in the United States during 2008. These include simple/aggravated assaults, robberies, sexual assaults, rapes, and murders. Of these, about 436,000 or 8% were committed by offenders visibly armed with a gun.
3. Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology, U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.
4. A 1993 nationwide survey of 4,977 households found that over the previous five years, at least 3.5% of households had members who had used a gun "for self-protection or for the protection of property at home, work, or elsewhere." Applied to the U.S. population, this amounts to 1,029,615 such incidents per year. This figure excludes all "military service, police work, or work as a security guard."
5. A 1994 survey conducted by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that Americans use guns to frighten away intruders who are breaking into their homes about 498,000 times per year.
6. A 1982 survey of male felons in 11 state prisons dispersed across the U.S. found:

• • 34% had been "scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim"
• • 40% had decided not to commit a crime because they "knew or believed that the victim was carrying a gun"
• • 69% personally knew other criminals who had been "scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim"

The last, number 6, should be especially relevant to those who support self-defense carry.

Those are some facts pertaining to the usefulness of a gun in preventing violent crime. How vulnerable are we? Consider this:

 At the current homicide rate, roughly one in every 240 Americans will be murdered.

A U.S. Justice Department study based on crime data from 1974-1985 found:

• 42% of Americans will be the victim of a completed violent crime (assault, robbery, rape) in the course of their lives

• 83% of Americans will be the victim of an attempted or completed violent crime

• 52% of Americans will be the victim of an attempted or completed violent crime more than once

A 1997 survey of more than 18,000 prison inmates found that among those serving time for a violent crime, "30% of State offenders and 35% of Federal offenders carried a firearm when committing the crime."

Justfacts goes on to show interesting charts describing the effects of various anti-handgun legislation passed in different locations. You can see these yourself on their site, but the summary is that where anti-handgun legislation is passed that inhibits the citizens from owning and carrying a gun for self protection, the incident of violent crime increases. When those restrictions are struck down, not surprisingly, the incidents of violent crime perpetrated against citizens goes down. Not a big surprise to most of us.

Why this information is important.

In the continuing national debate over gun control, which I think should be about violence control, it is important to have a good grasp of the facts. Every time I have argued this issue with someone opposed to guns, I have found that they do not know the basic facts about guns and self protection. They are working from rhetoric, falsehoods and, in many cases, just plain fear of guns. 

My response is usually to point out that it is a free country, that they don't have to own or carry a gun, but in fact, they depend upon someone for their protection who does carry a gun when thing go bad. As they frequently do, facts tell us. And, given this, all law-abiding citizens of the United States have the right to keep and bear arms in self defense in order to assist us in our constitutional rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And, conversely, no one has the right to prevent me from exercising those freedoms.

When the criminals and crazies can no longer have guns, or knives, or baseball bats, or screwdrivers, cars, explosives, ice picks, poisons or any other implement that can be turned into a deadly weapon, I might consider giving up my guns.

Not likely....

The Endless Carry Argument: which gun? what caliber? what self defense round? which holster?

Uncle George's Wallet Holster

From my experience on a couple of decent firearms forums which primarily serve citizens interested in pistols for both shooting and self defense, this argument seems never to die. I think it is important to address because of the increasing numbers of people who are new to handguns and new to legal carry for self defense. These long-running discussions, which can unfortunately turn dictatorial and nasty when the so-called experts get involved, do more to confuse the issue than offer clarity. So, I'm attempting to interject a bit of basic information, and, hopefully, clarity into the topic of handguns meant for self defense carry.

I've illustrated this post with a photo of one of Uncle George's wallet holsters made for the Ruger LCP because carrying a handgun for self defense is a simple and basic act, and this is about as simple as it gets. Anyone - male, female, big, tiny, it doesn't matter - can carry one of these setups almost anywhere without being noticed or uncomfortable. The Ruger LCP weighs 9.4 ounces, 10.0 with a Crimson Trace laser sight installed (as above). It's a little over five inches long and less than an inch wide. It is built for concealment and for carrying. It, and other similar 'pocket pistols' usually are chambered for the .380 caliber round (also called the 9mm short). With a good factory load, designed for self-defense, such as the Hornady CD or perhaps the Speer Gold Dot (and similar ammunition), it is an effective self defense weapon.

So, what we have here is a lightweight (Light), small (Compact) Pistol designed to be carried for self defense by practically anyone. This, evidently, drives some self-styled 'gun experts' crazy.

They can't so much complain about the polymer frame, since many of the handguns they prefer incorporate that in their builds, but seemingly everything else is fair game to them: caliber (too small), bullets (not heavy enough, not designed right), sights (poor iron sights that aren't adjustable), small capacity (seven rounds is not enough), not durable enough (will suffer problems if it's shot too much), and so on. To further disparage these kinds of self defense weapons, they have labeled them "mouse guns". Must mean that they are only good for plinking mice, or that mousy people use them. Not sure on that. And, they probably aren't either.

A few examples of the "experts" recommendations for self defense carry:

• If the caliber of your pistol doesn't start with a "4" it isn't big enough.
• Double-stack magazines are required so you can carry enough ammo without having to frequently reload.
• Your self defense gun must be 100% reliable under all conditions.

There are more, but those will do for illustration purposes.

In my opinion, basically all of those arguments are bogus when it comes to self defense. The two critical factors are, 1. carry a gun. All of the time. It is a true statement that you better have one when you need one.

2. hit only what you intend to hit when you have to shoot.

If the caliber of your pistol doesn't start with a "4" it isn't big enough.

It is obvious that if you pull a gun and fire off a round (or twelve, even) and don't hit the threat, you've done yourself no good and possibly have injured, or worse, an innocent person. No matter what the caliber of the gun, velocity or impact of the bullet, your self defense gun is useless unless you can hit something with it. Reliably, accurately and repeatedly if necessary.

Unless one is a practiced, experienced shooter, shooting a large caliber handgun is harder than shooting a handgun of smaller caliber and power. Most people who carry for self defense are not practiced, experienced shooters and are not going to become one either. They, hopefully, practice enough to be comfortable with their weapon and to be accurate enough for the ranges and target sizes that would be appropriate for most self defense situations. Most of these people shoot a reasonably sized handgun - .38 special, 9mm, .380 calibers. They are big enough to do the job, but not so heavy, noisy and recoil producing to be hard to shoot.

Double-stack magazines are required so you can carry enough ammo without having to frequently reload.

Double stack magazine handguns are bigger and heavier than single stack guns. As a consequence, they are more uncomfortable and heavy to carry and more difficult to conceal. Hence, they tend to not get carried as a regular thing. Your double-stack .40 caliber pistol is doing you no good as a self defense weapon while it's in your car or home in the safe. Besides, when are you going to really need a fifteen, sixteen or seventeen round capacity in the self defense world? I supposed if you were attacked by a gang and were forted up behind a car, then, maybe. You'd likely be outgunned anyway so things wouldn't be turning out well for you.

I think the notion of being in an extended shoot out is common because that is what TV and the movies show us. But, that's really the rare exception when citizens are forced into self defense shooting. Read up on it. Most scenarios involve one or two rounds being fired. It's rare that more than five or six are expended in these situations. They start quickly and end quickly with people running away or stopping their aggressive behavior because they are suddenly dealing with a bullet wound or two.

You can easily carry a spare single-stack magazine along with your smaller self defense weapon so you'll have a reload in the unlikely event you will need one.

Your self defense gun must be 100% reliable under all conditions.

That would be nice, but face it, no machine is 100% reliable even under good conditions. It's the nature of the beast. It's the world of Murphy's Law. I know shooters who have fired thousands of rounds from their handguns and think this is a guarantee of reliability, that the gun is going to go bang the next time they pull the trigger. Think about it. Just because the machine has not experienced a failure before does not mean it's never going to fail.

Check your self defense gun by shooting regularly, but don't burn through hundreds and hundreds of rounds. Shoot it enough to be sure it's running well, like it should, then carry it. Maybe go out and practice once a month to keep your proficiency and to exercise the gun. You will soon know if it has an endemic or recurring problem. Send it back to the maker and have them fix it. Use another self defense gun in the interim.

The reliability factor is one of two that mitigate for carrying a backup gun. In the unlikely event that your pistol malfunctions at exactly the wrong time, you may have the opportunity to go to your backup. Odds are that the two guns won't fail at the same time. The second reason is that you may not be able to get to your primary weapon due to being injured, having the gun taken away, dropped, or perhaps your assailant in on top of you wrestling with your gun, or preventing you from getting to it. You may have the option of going for the backup.

In the real world, it is impossible to prepare for all contingencies, just as it is impossible to carry a gun that is 100% reliable. You can narrow the odds and put survival more in your favor by understanding that a reasonable and rational level of preparedness is attainable and sustainable if you only do a few things.

1. Find a handgun that suits you and which you will carry at all times where legally allowed.

2. Keep that gun in good condition.

3. Practice regularly so that you can access it and shoot it accurately under self defense conditions. Practice at short ranges, say, the distance between two walls in a regular room in your house. Become good at hitting an area the size of the human torso.

That's it. Shooting an assailant a number of times in the torso will definitely put the odds of survival in your favor. Of course there are true stories of men being shot multiple times with decent caliber handguns, mostly by law enforcement officers, who still fight back and don't seem to know they are shot. This is the exception however. And, when you think about it, if you should encounter one of those people, it doesn't much matter if you are toting a Model 1911 .45 automatic or a .380 LCP. But one thing for sure, I'd rather reach for and use my .380 in a circumstance like that and hope my accuracy was enough to stop the threat, than to be throwing rocks, glasses or chairs as my self defense weapons.

If you think the circumstances may demand it, you can always carry a larger gun along with your primary self defense weapon, but you don't have to make it a regular thing.

Realistic self defense carry will keep your armed and prepared in all situations. You probably won't be ready for the zombie apocalypse, but you will be ready to deal more effectively if you are seriously threatened.