How to carry? Strong side, weak side, small of back? All of the above

Holster choices and carry methods are many and varied but the main thing is to find something that's relatively comfortable and works for you. As Clint Smith says, a carry gun is not supposed to be comfortable, it's supposed to be comforting.

How do you carry? Paul Rackley of American Rifleman analyzes the various choices and chooses strong-side, whether inside the waistband or outside and waistband holsters.

Regardless of the type of holster, strong-side carry has some definite advantages over other methods. First and foremost, the handgun is easily accessible. There is no reaching across or around the body as the hand is already near the gun. Another strong-side advantage is that it allows the use of the weak arm for close-quarters defense without interfering with the draw. Most importantly, the strong-side draw can be simplified to its most basic motions, which, with practice, creates a very smooth, fast draw. And practice is more readily available since many gun ranges limit how shooters can train from retention (holster), if allowed at all, to strong side for safety.

Of course, every carry method has its disadvantages. Strong-side carry has three distinct problems for shooters, the most significant of which is that it is difficult, if not impossible, to start with a hand on the gun. Lifting the cover garment for the draw almost always reveals the gun to potential threats. The other issues with strong-side carry are “printing” and car carry. Care must be taken to not print (when the cover garment tightens and shows the imprint of the gun) when bending over or reaching for an item. This is especially a problem in summer months when light, airy shirts are the norm. Car carry is difficult because with the gun on the strong side, the cover garment and seatbelt combine to make drawing the gun nearly impossible, but it can be conducted with forethought and practice.

For carry at work, which is always open with a t-shirt in the gun shop, I alternate between shoulder holster and strongside waist holster for the main carry with a small-of-back holster for backup.

I'm a lefty but sorta ambiguous about it as my right hand is actually my "strong" hand, since I throw right-handed, so I'm also comfortable with a right-side holster. But after trying two waist holsters, I didn't like that as well as main carry on left waist and backup in small-of-back for right hand. I figure that way if my left arm is disabled or busy, I can still draw right-handed.

And when nothing else works well, I go to a left-side pocket holster for my Kel-Tec PF9.

'Guns in Saloons': Common-sense rule of law in 40 states, soon 41

North Carolina's concealed-carry law prohibits permit holders from carrying in an establishment that serves alcohol, even if they don't drink a drop. Virginia is about to join the 40 states which do not have such a silly restriction and the Washington Times urges the new governor to sign the legislation into law in an editorial titled "Guns in Saloons." I liked it so much I stole whole thing.

Someone who is drunk shouldn't be handling a gun, but that doesn't justify a ban on concealed carrying in all places that serve alcohol. On Tuesday, the Virginia House of Delegates joined the state Senate and voted 72-to-27 to overturn this ban. Gov. Robert F. McDonnell's signature is all that stands in the way of getting rid of this dangerous restriction.

Over the past two decades, a sweeping wave of freedom has allowed more citizens to carry concealed handguns. States have realized that there is little reason to restrict the carrying of concealed handguns by those who have received permits. Forty states currently allow concealed handguns to be carried in places that serve alcohol. None of the states that have allowed this freedom has cause to reverse the decision.

The facts are clear. Despite misleading claims to the contrary by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence and the Violence Policy Center, permit holders are law-abiding individuals who are extremely careful with their guns. This general rule applies in states that allow concealed handguns in bars. Permit holders simply haven't been getting liquored up and harming others through irresponsible conduct. Virginia hasn't had any problem with open carry in restaurants, so it's hard to understand why anyone thinks there could be a problem with concealed handguns.

Take Florida and Texas, two states that allow concealed handguns in bars. Between Oct. 1, 1987, and Jan. 31, 2010, Florida issued permits to more than 1.7 million people. Only 167 have had their permits revoked for any firearms-related violations. That is a minuscule 0.0098 percent revocation rate. The vast majority of those revocations were not for violence, but merely for accidentally carrying a gun into a gun-free zone. During the past 16 months, there was only one incident involving a firearms-related violation.

The numbers are similar in Texas. Over the five years from 2002 to 2006, the average rate at which permit holders were convicted of a misdemeanor or a felony was 0.04 percent. In 2006, the most frequent reason for revocation involved permit holders carrying a concealed handgun without keeping their licenses on them. The forthcoming third edition of "More Guns, Less Crime" shows that in other right-to-carry states, permit holders are just as law-abiding. That book finds no evidence that revocation rates are any higher in states that allow permitted handguns in taverns.

What gun prohibitions do is create dangerous gun-free zones - places where criminals intent on harming others feel confident they can commit crimes with impunity. A criminal who takes his gun into a gun-free zone knows that the good law-abiding citizens, his victims, are sitting ducks. A government that maintains laws like that is not looking after the interests of its citizens.

It's past time for the commonwealth to take aim at counterproductive laws that endanger Virginians. With a flick of his pen, Mr. McDonnell can correct this problem and modernize Virginia's right-to-carry law.

I hope common sense will break out in the N.C. Legislature to pass a similar repeal of our law. It's common sense that permit holders have a right to defend themselves anywhere, but particularly in a saloon where some drunk might get up the courage to shoot a few people, just for the hell of it. If the drunk knows the saloon is a gun-free zone, he's far more likely to shoot.

Just because I'm sitting in a restaurant that serves alcohol doesn't mean I'm drinking, and it does mean I want my right to be armed and ready if some fool decides to shoot a few people.

Might as well tell a joke on that topic while I'm here. Mrs. Smith was a gossip and she started blabbing in church one Sunday, "Do you know where I saw Deacon Jones' pickup truck? It was parked at that new restaurant in town that serves alcohol! I just know he was sitting at the bar getting drunk, but I wouldn't set foot in that place, so I didn't actually see him drinking."

Word quickly got to Deacon Jones about the slander, but he didn't say a word to Mrs. Smith. But that Monday when he got off work, he drove his pickup truck to Mrs. Smith's house down the street from where he lived, parked it her yard and walked home for the night.

Next Sunday, Mrs. Smith was strangely quiet with not a word of gossip to spread.

Chicago RTKBA decision will affect gun-rights in all 50 states

From the Heritage Foundation, Alan Gura, counsel in DC v Heller and now McDonald v Chicago discusses why the effect this latest case could have on the Second Amendment. Alan Gottlieb of the Second Amendment Foundation also weighs in.

Bottom line quote from Gottlieb: "this is going to affect the Second Amendment rights of the people in all 50 states."

If the Supremes (rock on!) give us the nod on this one, we'll only have seven more states to go! There are 57 states, right? That's what the President said and he's got to be right. Doesn't he?

When should you carry a concealed handgun?

What's the last thing you check before you go out the door as you leave home? Car keys? Wallet? Is the door locked? How about, "What am I going to carry today?"

I first got my concealed-carry permit in 2006 and did not carry at all for a while. Then I started carrying occasionally, just when I thought I needed to. Then I thought it through and eventually decided to apply a truth I learned as a Boy Scout. The Scout motto is "Be Prepared."

Since nobody knows what's going to happen when you leave home, how can you be ready to confront a deadly threat? Be prepared by never leaving your home or anywhere unarmed.

Here's a short answer to that question from a Sig Sauer Academy senior instructor.

"I only carry when I think I need to . . ."

Have you heard this before? I have, many times. Recently I was working with a large group of law enforcement personnel. We were having a casual conversation about what we carry "off duty" while out and about. I was surprised to hear the answers (no I wasn’t). Many of them stated they only carry when the think they'll need it. After about the third time I heard this I had to ask., "So, how do you know if you are going to need it?" The responses ranged from, "Well, if I'm going into a bad part of town", or, "If I'm going to be out with the family". The reality is that we will never be presented with a criminal intelligence update that tells us the day or time we may need our firearm. So how do we mitigate not being prepared for a deadly force encounter? We do it by carrying all of the time. Yes, this includes running out to the corner store on Sunday morning to pick up the paper or hitting the deli for a sandwich on your day off. Make the commitment to yourself right now. Never be accused of not being prepared. Especially when your life or the lives of others may depend on it. A wise NCO once said to a new paratrooper standing in the door of an airplane, "Son, you're about to become either a training success or a not too amusing anecdote."--Adam Painchaud, Senior Instructor

Here's the latest commercial from SIG SAUER Academy, "Training for Armed Professionals and Responsible Citizens." They have satellite classes in various locations around the country with the closest to me being Midland, Va. Maybe one day I'll be able to attend one of them.

Downsizing 'Baddest Tactical Pistols' to carry size

I got on a full-size "Tactical" pistol binge in late 2007 and bought the following handguns in reverse order:

Baddest Tactical Pistol No. 6: Glock 20 10mm Baddest Tactical Pistol No. 5: S&W M&P 357 Baddest Tactical Pistol No. 4: Steyr M9-A1 Baddest Tactical Pistol (Revolver) No. 3: S&W 21-4 .44 Special Baddest Tactical Pistol No 2: CZ75 SP01 Custom 9mm Baddest Tactical Pistol No. 1, Llama IX-C .45 ACP

The S&W Model 21 .44 Special was traded straight up for the Sig P226 when I acquired a S&W Model 29 .44 Magnum/.44 Special and the Model 21 became surplus.

And since I started work as a gun shop salesman in January, I've gone in the other direction, buying a S&W M&P Compact .357 Sig and a Charter Arms .327 Fed. Magnum snubnose revolver.

And now I've decided to take it a step further and divest myself of some of my full-size pistols and downsize for carry weapons.

The Sig Sauer P226 .357 Sig and the CZ 75 SP01 Custom 9mm are the first two up on the block and are now listed on Gunbroker. Though I love both pistols, neither is very concealable and both are fairly heavy so are not good carry candidates.


I'm thinking about replacing the Sig Sauer P226 with 4.4" barrel with a Sig P229 with a 3.9" barrel. Sig Sauer has a Sig Anti-Snag (SAS) carry model of the 229, which I want in .357 Sig with night sights and the Short-Reset Trigger. A set of those nice wood grips shown would be good, too.



And I'm thinking about a new 2009 model of Para Ordnance as the replacement for the CZ SP01 Custom. Para has a .45 ACP model called the Carry 12 which is a subcompact with 3.5" barrel and Para's Light Double Action trigger. The LDA trigger is IMHO the biggest improvement made to date to John Moses Browning's famed 1911 single-action .45 ACP pistol design.

But then there's also that S&W NightGuard model in 10mm. Six rounds of 10mm in a lightweight carry revolver sounds mighty attractive. And Smith has also brought back the incomparable classic Model 24 with a 3" barrel in .44 Special. So many choices and so little money to buy with.

But gotta sell what I got before I can buy something smaller, so I must learn to be patient.

What iz it? Plus, How You Can Make A Difference

Was reading stuff this morning online and saw this, which is identified only as a 9mm pistol in a gun shop in Sacramento, Calif. What the heck is it?

It got my attention because it has a thumb safety on the wrong side, so to speak, the right side, which is what us lefty shooters really appreciate.

I downloaded it and opened it up in Photoshop for a closer look but the writing on the slide it too pixelated to read. If anybody knows, speak up.

It was displayed with an interesting column on Townhall.com: College Students Seek to Use Concealed-Carry Permits by William Perry Pendley.

Quote:

One minute, Suzanne was eating lunch with her mother and father. The next, the happy hubbub of the restaurant was silenced when a pickup truck crashed through the brick, mortar, and glass. How could that happen? The driver emerged, but Suzanne noticed he wasn’t dazed or drunk; he was angry and purposeful. Then, she saw the guns. He stepped over the debris and began to shoot patrons. She must be dreaming. Her father leaped to his feet, charged the gunman, was shot, and fell to the floor. When the gunman turned his back to shoot others, she remembered: she had a gun! Where was it? She had to find her gun! Oh no, it was in her car. She crawled, then ran toward a window to escape, to get her gun, and to return to save her mother. Was it only a nightmare?

The scene is the infamous murders in Luby's Cafeteria in Killeen, Texas. Suzanne is Dr. Suzanna Gratia Hupp, a chiropractor who became one of the nation's most effective advocates of concealed-carry laws for civilians after that 1991 incident, leading to a "shall issue" carry law in Texas in 1995 and has since spread to almost all states, with a few exceptions.

Quote:

The massacre that killed Dr. Hupp’s parents was the deadliest shooting rampage in American history, that is, it was until the Virginia Tech Massacre of April 17, 2007, when 32 were killed and 17 wounded. Subsequently, on February 14, 2008, a gunman killed 6 and wounded 18 at Northern Illinois University. Little wonder, therefore, that students on CU’s campuses in Boulder, Denver, and Colorado Springs—who have a license to carry concealed weapons almost anywhere else in Colorado—wish to exercise that right in what, in their view, is one of the most dangerous settings they will encounter: “a gun-free zone.” Students for Concealed Carry on Campus (SCCC), a national advocacy group with over 30,000 members that supports the legalization of concealed carry by licensed individuals on college campuses, agrees. Last month, SCCC, two CU students and a recent CU graduate filed a lawsuit in Colorado state court seeking a ruling that CU’s policy is illegal and unconstitutional!

See what one determined person can do when they set their mind to it?

National Parks To Allow Right-To-Carry

Just received this notice from NRA-ILA:

The U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI), through the National Park Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, has announced the final amended version of its changes to rules on carrying of firearms in national parks and wildlife refuges. DOI's move will restore the rights of law-abiding gun owners who wish to transport and carry firearms for lawful purposes on most DOI lands, and will make federal law consistent with the state law in which these public lands are located. NRA led the effort to amend the existing policy regarding the carrying and transportation of firearms on these federal lands.

About time, but how long will it take the incoming Obama administration and whoever he picks for Interior Secretary to overturn this rules change? Not long, I'm betting. Enjoy your freedom while you can, gun owners and concealed-carry-permit holders. You are now free to move about armed in parks.

Time for national reciprocity law

When I travel from God's country here in North Carolina, my concealed carry permit is recognized without restriction in 30 states, so I can go from Florida to Pennsylvania (if I avoid Maryland where my wife's sister lives) and be legally armed. But when we cross the state line into New York, where my wife's family has a summer home, my pistols can't come with me.

As the King James Version saith, that sucketh. Isn't the right to keep and bear arms protected by the national constitution, the 2nd Amendment to our Bill of Rights? Yes, the Supremes just said by a razor-thin margin in the Heller vs. D.C. case. But. There's always a but. They didn't throw out all the state and local laws restricting RTKBA, just the D.C. monstrosity. So the fight goes on, city by city, state by state. Or maybe there's a better way to skin this particular cat.

A.W.R. Hawkins asks Is It Time for Federal Reciprocity of Concealed Carry Permits?

There are at least two strong justifications for national reciprocity. The first springs from the Second Amendment itself, where we read that the right to keep and bear arms “shall not be infringed.” With these words, our Founders were hedging in a natural right and thus placing it off limits from federal or state government interference. Moreover, as Justice Antonin Scalia rightly concluded in the Heller case, our Founders did not want a city government -- such as San Francisco, Chicago, or D.C. -- to infringe upon it either. No government constructed by man has the right to deny us the rights that are ours by way of birth.

In other words, laws or policies that infringe upon our natural rights are wrong whether those laws or policies emanate from the President, the Congress, the court system, a state government, or the San Francisco City Council. Our Founders gave no government a veto over natural rights. This is why Ted Nugent is quick and accurate in saying he “has a concealed carry permit called the Second Amendment.”

Government-issued laws that limit our right to keep and bear arms are infringements on natural law itself. Like the Supreme Court said in the Heller decision, natural rights are preserved by the Constitution, and the right to self-defense is a natural right. It’s our right as humans, not something the government granted us out of its good grace.

In other words, maybe us gun nuts shouldn't be using a pea-shooter to protect our rights. Let's break out the cannons and go for the biggest target of all, a federal reciprocity law. Great idea!