Handgun Holster, what are they used for? (in canada)

Status
Not open for further replies.
J_Scott said:
You're entitled to your opinion, but teaching everyone to clear their firearms during a ceasefire isn't a bad practice in my books, and hardly breeds unsafe handling practices. Remember, not EVERYONE has holsters, so we use the same rules for everyone during a ceasefire: Clear your firearm, put them on the bench or in your holster, then you're good to check your targets. Also, I never said the guys aren't comfortable with a loaded and holstered firearm in their presence, just they prefer all firearms to be cleared during a ceasefire. Damn, you need reading lessons.

Also, I don't know why you guys are arguing with me. I'm not the one advocating that only "qualified" users should have holsters.
Click to expand...

There is no such thing as an unloaded firearm, to think otherwise is what creates the double standard/thinking regarding firearm safety. If your people feel more comfortable with an "unloaded" firearm then they're not comfortable with firearms. An "unloaded" firearm is useless.

Tdc
 
TDC said:
There is no such thing as an unloaded firearm, to think otherwise is what creates the double standard/thinking regarding firearm safety. If your people feel more comfortable with an "unloaded" firearm then they're not comfortable with firearms. An "unloaded" firearm is useless.

Tdc
Click to expand...

So the practice of clearing a firearm before a ceasefire is considered unsafe? Tough crowd.

TDC, If you didn't have 8000 posts I'd think you were trolling. I never once even mentioned the word unloaded in a single one of my posts, I also never said the guys were uncomfortable with loaded firearms, just we clear them at a ceasefire. I swear you're just making stuff up to pick on here.
 
J_Scott said:
So the practice of clearing a firearm before a ceasefire is considered unsafe? Tough crowd.

TDC, If you didn't have 8000 posts I'd think you were trolling. I never once even mentioned the word unloaded in a single one of my posts, I also never said the guys were uncomfortable with loaded firearms, just we clear them at a ceasefire. I swear you're just making stuff up to pick on here.
Click to expand...

Mr Scott. You are very close. This thread has followed a very common pattern. Don't take it personally. If you take it seriously, it's time for a mental health checkup.
 
J_Scott said:
So the practice of clearing a firearm before a ceasefire is considered unsafe? Tough crowd.

TDC, If you didn't have 8000 posts I'd think you were trolling. I never once even mentioned the word unloaded in a single one of my posts, I also never said the guys were uncomfortable with loaded firearms, just we clear them at a ceasefire. I swear you're just making stuff up to pick on here.
Click to expand...

Please explain what "clearing" a firearm means to you? You're right you never said your guys weren't uncomfortable with loaded firearms, I did. There is zero reason to unload your firearm to check/change targets. This rabid mantra of unloading/checking firearms the instant you aren't engaged in their use is based on paranoia and square range ignorance. All of which makes the less intelligent "feel" safer while effectively achieving the opposite.

Tdc
 
TDC said:
Please explain what "clearing" a firearm means to you? You're right you never said your guys weren't uncomfortable with loaded firearms, I did. There is zero reason to unload your firearm to check/change targets. This rabid mantra of unloading/checking firearms the instant you aren't engaged in their use is based on paranoia and square range ignorance. All of which makes the less intelligent "feel" safer while effectively achieving the opposite.

Tdc
Click to expand...

I think part of the problem is that not all gun owners are created equal. Reminds me of driving, the only reason we realistically have such restrictive speed limits on most roads is because for every good driver that can actually drive a car properly, there are 100 people that can't drive worth sht, and another 100 that shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a car. Unfortunately it is because of those bad drivers why we need rules.

I've seen guys at the range have AD's and it blows my mind. These aren't the guys with all the training, or the guys that new to guns... It's always the know everything forum commandos. Reminds me of the sportbike scene; oh, this 1000cc Gixxer is your first bike, you didn't take the course, and you're wearing shorts and a wife beater going 100+ in residential areas.. You know, the guys that always wind up dead, and drive up our insurance..
 
Jim Guns said:
I think part of the problem is that not all gun owners are created equal. Reminds me of driving, the only reason we realistically have such restrictive speed limits on most roads is because for every good driver that can actually drive a car properly, there are 100 people that can't drive worth sht, and another 100 that shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a car. Unfortunately it is because of those bad drivers why we need rules.

I've seen guys at the range have AD's and it blows my mind. These aren't the guys with all the training, or the guys that new to guns... It's always the know everything forum commandos. Reminds me of the sportbike scene; oh, this 1000cc Gixxer is your first bike, you didn't take the course, and you're wearing shorts and a wife beater going 100+ in residential areas.. You know, the guys that always wind up dead, and drive up our insurance..
Click to expand...

We have speed limits and other rules/laws because the testing criteria are pathetic and the enforcement just as bad. The common belief in North America is that driving is a right not a privilege. Take a look at our lame a$$ attempts at curbing drunk driving, the penalties(if they're given) are trivial and nothing more than a nuisance, but I digress.

The guys you see at the range having ND's, as AD's don't exist are the same ones you see on sport bikes doing dumb sh*t. The common denominator there is poor attitude and a lack of consequence for their actions. Heavy penalties for being dumb are the solution, not penalizing the masses. The masses don't need rules, dumb people need rules. Both shooting and driving a vehicle are privileges, and should be treated as such. Failure to comply in a safe manner should carry severe penalties. If someone chooses to use a holster without seeking any training, so be it. The penalties for misconduct are the same. That being said, training isn't necessary for the safe use of either a firearm or a vehicle, but it certainly helps. Having received training does not mean one adheres to it or has grasped the concepts.



TDC
 
Unbelievable that so many people here think that because they have been trained on basic firearm safety (ACTS and PROVE) that it means they have been trained on ALL proper and safe usage techniques including holster usage. That logic is akin to saying any 16 year old with a driver's license should be able to drive like a long haul trucker or any kid who learns to skate should be allowed to play for the NHL.

Whatever, you keep believing that BS. But you better accept that you for damn sure are doing something wrong and likely dangerous and sooner or later someone will pay the price for this ignorance.
 
This guy keeps saying the actual holster is what's dangerous. ''It will pull the trigger for you''

Actually he says it once and he's right as poor finger management could have the holster guide the finger onto the trigger. For those that haven't trained their trigger finger to stay straight, those cool and inexpensive Blackhawks and clones thereof can get that digit pointed into the trigger guard. Just ask ole Tex Grebner. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYvAxLX6OzE

That marrying of the weak hand at the belly technique isn't intuitive. I wonder if some might learn that with training? Nahhhhhhh
 
Blackhawk...I've seen their boots decompose faster than Magnums (and that is saying something) so we won't get into how inadequate their other gear is.

Anyways... Yeah, I'm going to go ahead and sorta disagree with you on that. He isn't right. It isn't the inanimate object's fault if he places his finger in the wrong location. The holster didn't grow little holster fingers and didn't pull the trigger for him. Matriarchal society... gotta love it.
 
yohann160 said:
Blackhawk...I've seen their boots decompose faster than Magnums (and that is saying something) so we won't get into how inadequate their other gear is.

Anyways... Yeah, I'm going to go ahead and sorta disagree with you on that. He isn't right. It isn't the inanimate object's fault if he places his finger in the wrong location. The holster didn't grow little holster fingers and didn't pull the trigger for him. Matriarchal society... gotta love it.
Click to expand...

He was right. He was talking about a behavior not the holster per se. The idea of that clip is to help people learn. That's pretty much the whole idea of training. Too much of gun handling is not intuitive despite what some believe. Further more, I for one had a whole bunch of behaviors implanted from a life time of movies and TV. Some stuff has to be unlearned. This is nothing about "mothering" but rather about uncommon sense. Ego is a great barrier against learning.
 
maetsack said:
Unbelievable that so many people here think that because they have been trained on basic firearm safety (ACTS and PROVE) that it means they have been trained on ALL proper and safe usage techniques including holster usage. That logic is akin to saying any 16 year old with a driver's license should be able to drive like a long haul trucker or any kid who learns to skate should be allowed to play for the NHL.

Whatever, you keep believing that BS. But you better accept that you for damn sure are doing something wrong and likely dangerous and sooner or later someone will pay the price for this ignorance.
Click to expand...

Given that you don't know the level of training of many (most or all) of the people posting here, you're making a fairly broad assumption. You're assuming that some of us consider the CFSC to be training - personally I'm not sure what it is, part propaganda and part bureaucratic hurdle, which to me was a pretty pointless waste of the hour that it took me to challenge it (I started shooting at age 8 and had an FAC - which required exactly zero training as soon as I was old enough). That's why I've taken courses (real courses-ones taught by professionals), and spent hours upon hours practicing what I've learned on those courses. I think it's funny actually that the best trained people here (to my knowledge) are the ones pushing for less BS.
 
Last edited:
The problem is that there's a huge range of knowledge and skills. The places most of us have to shoot at have a steady stream of new people. Not too many think the basic courses for licensing have great value. If anything they reveal to conscientious people with a modicum of smarts what they don't know. So if the required course are deficient, what do we propose? I for one found the Black Badge great for where I was at the time. However many would not want to spend the time or money required. Many will not shoot 800 rounds in a year never mind during two days. To a great degree, more training and more competition in my case simply prove that I have a lot more to learn. There are dozens of $700 and 1000 round courses available. However we have to live with many people who never go beyond the essentials. There's no magic answer for everyone.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom