quote:

Originally posted by Strambo:

quote:

Originally posted by highroundcount:
I'm not Le or Military.
Iv'e heard all the anti Serpa arguments.
I noticed a lot of troops wearing the Serpa on a vest or belt during the desert wars.

Did they shoot themselves and why was the .gov issuing then if they sucked so bad?

Again. Not arguing, just asking,

Full disclosure......g_26 Gen 3 in a Serpa. No issues.

At least in the Army, I have never seen an officially wide-spread "issued" holster other than the 80's Bianchi canvas flap one.

When a unit deploys it gets a hit of discretional funds and sometimes units (brigade or BN level) will buy holsters with that. I got an annoying thigh rig issued to me that way once.

The Serpas you see are individually purchased in many cases, mine were. Why Serpa? Because it is inexpensive for a holster for a gun you don't own and easy to slap on your gear. I got mine before the issues with them became known. It worked fine for me for 2 tours, but now I would go different route, since I bend my own Kydex now, I'd just make myself one.

I see no reason to buy and use one now especially in a civilian setting (any, really).

Ah, Bianchi. Good memories. My first gun was a Taurus PT99 (92 with adjustable sights) and I put together a holster rig with a black version of the Bianchi canvas flap holster because that was what the military was using. Had the thigh drop attachment and everything

Buddy of mine worked armed security in the early to mid 90's in SoCal. Whenever he bought a new gun to carry at work I would go up to Bianchi with him when they were in Temecula (?) so he could get a new basket weave holster for it. He wanted to make sure his gun would fit in the retention ok and they let him bring it in and test it out. Then buy it if he wanted.

Different times for sure.

jljones has referenced this already, but the US military has a very risk-averse, lowest-common-denominator attitude towards firearms training.

In TC 3-23.35, the Army's Training Circular on "Pistol," covering the M9, and M11, they do specifically discuss the positioning of the safety, and how to "defeat the safety."

On page 1-4, the circular discusses Weapon Safety Status. In RED status, the weapon's magazine is inserted, a round is in the chamber, the slide is forward and locked, and the decocking or safety lever is on SAFE. The M9 service pistol can be carried in the holster with the safety/decocking lever in the up (off) position. If the Soldier chooses to carry the pistol with the safety/decocking lever down (on), the Soldier can defeat the safety at various points during the draw. Leadership will decide on the safety/decocking status in the holster based on SOP. (emphasis mine)

On page 5-11 of the same training circular, Figure 5-2 illustrates methods for defeating the safety. Listed from left to right are: defeating the safety during presentation to the target, defeating the safety during rotation towards the target, and defeating the safety right after defeating the holster retention device.



If the United States Army, of all safety cultures - a safety culture so strong they demanded Glock add a manual safety to their MHS entry - is sufficiently OK with flipping the safety off while the weapon is still holstered that they wrote it down in their own doctrinal training publication, I have a hard time considering that an unsafe act in and of itself.

My personal opinion is that a firing grip should be established with the strong hand on before the draw stroke even begins, and this should not change until the weapon is returned to the holster or the weapon must be manipulated in some way that requires the shooter to break that firing grip.

Before my last deployment I spent a lot of time doing reaction drills with a personally-owned M9 and my deployment setup. I found that defeating the safety before I started the draw stroke, while the weapon was still holstered, gave me a solid firing grip that resulted in both greater speed and greater accuracy.

Taking the safety off at any point thereafter required me to change my grip (either with strong or weak hand), disengage the safety (with some repeatability issues), get my grip back, and get back to shooting. This was slower and less consistent (WAY slower if I missed the safety), I found I had a tendency to shift the weapon around in my grip, and my fliers increased from rushing and/or winding up with a goofy grip on the weapon post-draw.

The safety came off very consistently while the weapon was still anchored in the holster, leaving me free to firm up a firing grip before I drew. I considered this to be the safest and most consistent method, based on my own experimentation in dry and live practice, with and without time stress.

While shooting an M17 or manual safety P320, I ride the thumb safety, much like I have seen shooters do with a 1911. I have found, as have some other shooters, that this really locks my hand up high and tight on the backstrap under the beavertail, and the difference in felt recoil is noticeable.

This means for a firing grip, the safety comes off while the gun is in the holster - literally as soon as my hand closes on the grip in a firing grip - and doesn't come back on until the threat has ended (or the drill is completed) and I am preparing to return the weapon to the holster. If this is unsafe, then each and every one of the hundreds of thousands of P320s that have been manufactured without the manual safety are inherently unsafe.

Updated page 1