TexasCHLforum.com

Texas Dan Mosby wrote:Comedy is watching SEASONED "point and press" shooters transitioning to the 1911 platform and inducing stoppages during competition because of "Glock thumb", "M&P grip", and "Whoops, I forgot about the safety." That wouldn't be funny, on the other hand, in a defensive scenario.

That got a chuckle out of me. I would point out though that my particular M&P has a thumb safety on it. I deliberately bought it that way because two of my other carry guns are 1911s, and I wanted the manual of arms to be similar.

That said, I've had the gun for a while now, and these days I tend to use the safety only for unholstering and manipulating the gun until it is unloaded, locked back, chamber empty. When I reload the pistol, the safety goes on until the pistol is reholstered. Once holstered, I switch it off. The safety switch makes a handy thumb rest when shooting, but it isn't actually needed to safely draw and shoot the gun. I believe they were added as a requirement to meet a military contract bid, and I note that most M&Ps sold don't seem to have it.

I don't shoot competitively, and I'm only a competent but not great shot with a pistol (rifles are my meat), but I figure that if you own and carry any gun, you have a sort of moral obligation to be competent with its manual of arms. Furthermore, if you own and carry more than one platform of pistol, with more than one manual of arms, then you have a sort of moral obligation to A) be competent with all of them, and B) remember which one you strapped on that morning.

All the same, I'll bet that you're right about competition comedy.

I posted the same thing as I'm posting here, in another thread that someone else had started, unaware that this one was already underway...

Wow.

I clicked on the link to the holster's page on the Galco site:


Here's what happened to that holster:


Notice how the gun is carried in that style of holster. I suspect that, since the wrinkle in the holster was located on the body side, not the outside of the holster, a regular belt slide or other holster that carries OWB and outside the belt would not have done that. Similarly, I doubt that a proper IWB holster would have done that. Just my gut reaction...

So in retrospect, I can even guess the probable cause...

If you notice that the belt passes around the outside of the holster, and the "flat" part of the holster faces outward, you'll then realize that there would have to be softer areas of leather on the inside aspect of the holster when the pistol is sitting in it - for instance the gaps between the trigger itself and the trigger guard and frame.

Now, lots of people (myself included) often mount their holsters with a belt loop between the two belt slots on the holster, as an aid in keeping the holster from shifting around front to back along the belt. Well, the top half of that belt loop, pushing against the "soft" part of the inner aspect of the holster (easily conceivable if the wearer has even a hint of "love handles"), could well have been the wedge that pushed the leather into the space between the trigger and trigger guard. This is generally not a risk with IWB or standard OWB holsters (including outward facing belt slides) because of A) holster construction materials like Kydex and harder horsehide leathers; and B) pressure against the holster tends to be over its entire surface rather than concentrated at a single pressure point like a belt loop.

Anyway, that's kind of what jumps out at me. I've been thinking of buying a belt slide and keeping it in my vehicle as a "backup" holster, but I likely wouldn't buy this particular pattern of holster given the pictures shown here.