Question: Traffic stops and running the numbers

[WalkingWolf]

http://www.amazon.com/Desantis-Holster-Glock-Right-Black/dp/B0048KD0IW

Federal Flight Deck Officer is the tricky phrase

Remember?
http://www.cnn.com/2008/TRAVEL/12/02/tsa.holster/index.html?_s=PM:TRAVEL

Just don't insert the gun with the lock still in the holster. The hole is designed to be where the gun cannot be pushed any further in, and depress the trigger. I am still trying to figure out how that pilot did it. The front of the trigger guard, which is what it is there for, would have prevented the insertion of the firearm. I suspect the pilot had his finger on the trigger when he tried putting it in the holster. It used to be a common mistake LEO's made when they carried revolvers. They would pull the gun, and put their finger on the trigger and not take it off when inserting it back.

But we all know that no longer happens with Glock's safe action trigger and the high level of firearms training.

ETA any holster that has a full trigger cover can be modified into a pilot's holster. Leather put a piece of wood in the trigger area of the holster, and use a large enough hole punch. On a kydex simply drill a hole for the lock.

But be prepared for the tantrum when you refuse to unlock the holster for the nice man/woman. If you are offended by foul language using a pilot's holster, or small cabled safe might not be a good idea.

 

[WalkingWolf]

Personally, I don't think it would be a very good idea if you wanted to use your gun for self defense, either.

But why would you need your gun for self defense when there is a police officer there to protect you?

 

[peter nap]

Personally, I don't think it would be a very good idea if you wanted to use your gun for self defense, either.

The idea is to reach over and lock it before pulling over.

 

[utbagpiper]

Just don't insert the gun with the lock still in the holster. The hole is designed to be where the gun cannot be pushed any further in, and depress the trigger. I am still trying to figure out how that pilot did it. The front of the trigger guard, which is what it is there for, would have prevented the insertion of the firearm. I suspect the pilot had his finger on the trigger when he tried putting it in the holster.

I had assumed he inserted the gun without the lock in place, but failed to set the gun firmly in the holster. He then inserted the shank of the lack through the holster and the trigger guard, but instead of the shank going behind the trigger, it ended up in front of the trigger. Then, when the gun is shoved deeper into the holster, the lock shank depresses the trigger. Just my theory.

But if the idea is to make the gun serial numbers hard to read, a better, safer option might be a small lock box. If one can safely unholster and put the gun into the lock box and then lock the box before stopping, wouldn't the officer need a warrant to force it open to search it? "Officer safety" in such a case might include removing the driver and passengers from the car. But short of a warrant or PC to force the lockbox open without a warrant, the cop wouldn't even know there was a gun in it.

Charles

 

[WalkingWolf]

I had assumed he inserted the gun without the lock in place, but failed to set the gun firmly in the holster. He then inserted the shank of the lack through the holster and the trigger guard, but instead of the shank going behind the trigger, it ended up in front of the trigger. Then, when the gun is shoved deeper into the holster, the lock shank depresses the trigger. Just my theory.

But if the idea is to make the gun serial numbers hard to read, a better, safer option might be a small lock box. If one can safely unholster and put the gun into the lock box and then lock the box before stopping, wouldn't the officer need a warrant to force it open to search it? "Officer safety" in such a case might include removing the driver and passengers from the car. But short of a warrant or PC to force the lockbox open without a warrant, the cop wouldn't even know there was a gun in it.

Charles

The shank is supposed to be in front of the trigger, that is why it is designed that way. When the gun is fully inserted the gun can go no further in the holster, so the trigger never gets close to the shank. But when the holster is pulled up with the lock in the gun cannot move because it contacts the front of the trigger guard. I highly suspect his finger was in the trigger, but it is rare that people who have ND's admit they screwed up. NYPD dropped the scabbard holster for that very reason, and it is the reason that revolver holsters had open or a semi open trigger guard. Before the Threepersons, Jordan, border patrol holster cops had a habit of ND while holstering their revolver. Even USAF adopted the border patrol holster with a semi open trigger guard.

USAF holster

NYPD scabbard holster

 

[utbagpiper]

The shank is supposed to be in front of the trigger, that is why it is designed that way. When the gun is fully inserted the gun can go no further in the holster, so the trigger never gets close to the shank. But when the holster is pulled up with the lock in the gun cannot move because it contacts the front of the trigger guard.

Hard it figure how the shank could cause an ND then. Thanks for the details on these things work.

Still seems rather foolish to require the crew to be handling their firearms so much. I get the concerns about a gun being stolen. But I think on-body carry would be as effective at preventing that as is a lock on holster that is then carried in a book bag. OC might have a nice deterrent effect, but even CC would still be on body.

I highly suspect his finger was in the trigger, but it is rare that people who have ND's admit they screwed up.

True of most areas of life, isn't it? "It wasn't my fault that light turned red and I didn't notice it....."

Charles

 

[user]

So then nobody in Virginia could be compelled to answer when an officer asks if there are weapons when carrying concealed with a permit due to 5th Amendment protection.

Exactly right. KYBMS. You are required to produce two physical objects when the cop demands to see your CHP; that doesn't require any discussion. In Virginia, no one can be compelled to talk to anyone he doesn't wish to speak with, including cops. And it doesn't require 5th Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. "I prefer not to.", in the immortal words of Bartleby the Scrivener will be sufficient. "Thank you, Officer, but I prefer not to chat." Or hand them my "letter to law enforcement".

 

[peter nap]

Exactly right. KYBMS. You are required to produce two physical objects when the cop demands to see your CHP; that doesn't require any discussion. In Virginia, no one can be compelled to talk to anyone he doesn't wish to speak with, including cops. And it doesn't require 5th Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. "I prefer not to.", in the immortal words of Bartleby the Scrivener will be sufficient. "Thank you, Officer, but I prefer not to chat." Or hand them my "letter to law enforcement".

I have used the letter and it is a powerful weapon. There were no questions after he read it.

 

[TFred]

Has there been any resolution to the debate on whether covering a S/N with tape rises to violation of Federal law regarding defacement?

Opinions seem to be split on that.

TFred

ETA: Referenced law:

27 CFR 478.34 - Removed, obliterated, or altered serial number.

§ 478.34 Removed, obliterated, or altered serial number.
No person shall knowingly transport, ship, or receive in interstate or foreign commerce any firearm which has had the importer's or manufacturer's serial number removed, obliterated, or altered, or possess or receive any firearm which has had the importer's or manufacturer's serial number removed, obliterated, or altered and has, at any time, been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.

[T.D. ATF-313, 56 FR 32508, July 17, 1991]

 

[WalkingWolf]

Has there been any resolution to the debate on whether covering a S/N with tape rises to violation of Federal law regarding defacement?

Opinions seem to be split on that.

TFred

ETA: Referenced law:

27 CFR 478.34 - Removed, obliterated, or altered serial number.

§ 478.34 Removed, obliterated, or altered serial number.
No person shall knowingly transport, ship, or receive in interstate or foreign commerce any firearm which has had the importer's or manufacturer's serial number removed, obliterated, or altered, or possess or receive any firearm which has had the importer's or manufacturer's serial number removed, obliterated, or altered and has, at any time, been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.

[T.D. ATF-313, 56 FR 32508, July 17, 1991]

Covering the serial number does not alter, remove, or obliterate. S&W 19 came new with the ser number covered by the target grips.

 

[Grapeshot]

--snipped- S&W 19 came new with the ser number covered by the target grips.

I think that would be true of any of the earlier S&W revolvers with grips that covered the base of the grip frame where the ser. # is located.
http://www.amazon.com/Pachmayr-Grips-Frame-Round-Butt/dp/B0002INPFW

Newer/later models have the serial number under the yoke.
http://www.northeastshooters.com/vbulletin/threads/68254-How-to-Identify-Date-a-S-amp-W

 

[Marco]

http://www.defensedevices.com/lifejacket-gun-locks.html


or something like this

http://www.officedepot.com/a/products/180394/Sentry-Safe-Compact-Safe-005/

^ it's less $$ @ Walmart



heck, a simple cash box would work as well

 

[Maverick9]

Just don't insert the gun with the lock still in the holster. The hole is designed to be where the gun cannot be pushed any further in, and depress the trigger. I am still trying to figure out how that pilot did it. The front of the trigger guard, which is what it is there for, would have prevented the insertion of the firearm. I suspect the pilot had his finger on the trigger when he tried putting it in the holster.

There's a YT video which suggests he snagged the snap on his elbow, and that caused the gun to come unseated a bit, then he went to the bathroom and removed the hasp. When he returned he put the hasp back in but having unseated the firearm, it went in front of the trigger. Then he noticed the unseated condition and pushed the gun in to resnap the flap and it discharged.

Seems like a lot of coincidence but that's one take.

 

[WalkingWolf]

There's a YT video which suggests he snagged the snap on his elbow, and that caused the gun to come unseated a bit, then he went to the bathroom and removed the hasp. When he returned he put the hasp back in but having unseated the firearm, it went in front of the trigger. Then he noticed the unseated condition and pushed the gun in to resnap the flap and it discharged.

Seems like a lot of coincidence but that's one take.

The hasp goes in front of the trigger, just like the release on a Serpa holster. The gun can only go so far in the holster, the lock is directly behind the FRONT of the trigger guard. That is why holsters with locks on the trigger, or retention devices it is placed to be where it is no where near the trigger. Look at a Fobus holster, the indentation is not behind the trigger, it is in front, right behind the front of the trigger guard. There is no way it can snag the trigger. I am confident the pilot fingered his bang switch, and afterwards he tried to figure is screw up, and blaming the holster to him seemed logical.

Notice the relationship of the trigger guard to the indentation of the holster, compare it to the image of the glock. The manufacturers are not idiots, this is pretty common knowledge where the safest place to put a trigger guard retention device.

I stand corrected, I have looked at the flight deck holster and it is improperly designed. I don't know who the idiot was who accepted this design. It is the only holster I have seen where the device is behind the trigger.

It is still on the carrier though, he should have made sure the gun was seated before installing the lock.

Very poor design:banghead:

 

[skidmark]

....

I stand corrected, I have looked at the flight deck holster and it is improperly designed. I don't know who the idiot was who accepted this design. It is the only holster I have seen where the device is behind the trigger.

It is still on the carrier though, he should have made sure the gun was seated before installing the lock.

Very poor design:banghead:

So you are saying that a device designed to prevent the trigger from moving completely rearward is poorly designed?

Or are you presuming that Flight Deck Officer Holsters are worn on the body even when the padlock is inserted? (Especially when the FAA regs were cited that require it to remain in the flight case except under very specified conditions.)

The Flight Deck Officer Holster is not a device for holding a handgun at the ready - it is an anti-scratch device that under certain very specified conditions is placed on the belt (with the handgun remaining in the holster!) where it holds the handgun at the ready.

I will agree that the regulation that requires the handgun to remain in the holster while it is threaded onto the belt is rediculous.

stay safe.

 

[WalkingWolf]

So you are saying that a device designed to prevent the trigger from moving completely rearward is poorly designed?

Or are you presuming that Flight Deck Officer Holsters are worn on the body even when the padlock is inserted? (Especially when the FAA regs were cited that require it to remain in the flight case except under very specified conditions.)

The Flight Deck Officer Holster is not a device for holding a handgun at the ready - it is an anti-scratch device that under certain very specified conditions is placed on the belt (with the handgun remaining in the holster!) where it holds the handgun at the ready.

I will agree that the regulation that requires the handgun to remain in the holster while it is threaded onto the belt is rediculous.

stay safe.

How would the trigger move rearward if it is covered, isn't that why most of us use holsters with a covered trigger. If it had been designed properly the accident would have been less likely to happen in the claimed circumstance. In the case of this holster the lock did not prevent the trigger from being pulled, IT PULLED THE TRIGGER! It is a horrible design, and I am surprised that a respected company did not know better, unless they were following federal mandates. And the feds are idiots when it comes to gun safety.

 

[utbagpiper]

I stand corrected, I have looked at the flight deck holster and it is improperly designed. I don't know who the idiot was who accepted this design. It is the only holster I have seen where the device is behind the trigger.

Ok. So that explains how one has an ND without getting a finger on the trigger. Failure to fully seat the firearm in the holster before inserting the shank can easily lead to an ND.

That said, I can see some rationale for this design. With the shank behind the trigger the lock serves a dual purpose of keeping the gun in the holster and also serving as a trigger block should the holster be cut away. If the shank were in front of the trigger, the gun could still be fired if the holster were cut away.

The real problem is the rules requiring the crew to keep guns locked up. We can trust these guys to safely fly the aircraft with dozens of controls, but can't/don't trust them to maintain positive control of a gun? A local cop, flying on official business in the cabin (such as transporting a prisoner) is allowed far greater access to his firearm than these rules allow the flight crew. :banghead:

It is still on the carrier though, he should have made sure the gun was seated before installing the lock.

I'm mixed on this. A bad design is a bad design and bears some responsibility.

I recall an epiphany I had some years ago. For years I had believed that people who couldn't properly install a car seat were just idiots. Then someone wrote something to the effect of, "If 75% of your target market cannot properly use your product as designed, then your design is poor." I still think a lot of people are idiots for not being able to properly install a car seat. But I realized that those who are smart enough to be engineers, need to accommodate the idiocy among their target audience through proper design practices.

Put into another context, crazy folks will do dangerous stuff. But cops need to be trained to deal with the mentally ill so as to minimize the chance of injury to the officers, to the general public, and to the mentally ill as well.

Charles

 

[utbagpiper]

How would the trigger move rearward if it is covered

I wonder if the goal isn't to prevent the trigger moving rearward even if someone has time to cut off the leather holster leaving just the gun and the padlock.

Of course, like so much of airport "security" theater, this is like putting a vault door on a tent. Probably a lot easier to get your own gun (or other weapon) onto a plane than it is to steal one from a flight crew member.

And even then, how much benefit is a gun in the very close confines of an airplane cabin? I'd guess that in this day and age, post 9/11, a guy with a gun only gets off 3 rounds before he is at the bottom of a very nasty and potentially fatal dog pile. Of that, 1 victim dies, 1 lives with lifetime disability, and 1 recovers fully. Sucks for the victims, but not a real risk for aviation or the nation as a whole.

Charles

 

[WalkingWolf]

I wonder if the goal isn't to prevent the trigger moving rearward even if someone has time to cut off the leather holster leaving just the gun and the padlock.

Of course, like so much of airport "security" theater, this is like putting a vault door on a tent. Probably a lot easier to get your own gun (or other weapon) onto a plane than it is to steal one from a flight crew member.

And even then, how much benefit is a gun in the very close confines of an airplane cabin? I'd guess that in this day and age, post 9/11, a guy with a gun only gets off 3 rounds before he is at the bottom of a very nasty and potentially fatal dog pile. Of that, 1 victim dies, 1 lives with lifetime disability, and 1 recovers fully. Sucks for the victims, but not a real risk for aviation or the nation as a whole.

Charles

The whole purpose of the gun is too keep them from getting access to the flight crew. If they overpower the flight crew the passengers are pretty much screwed whether they get the guns or not.

Nothing wrong with a padlock behind a trigger, OUTSIDE THE HOLSTER. With revolvers this was the way we were taught to secure our guns at home. IMO the answer is for the pilot to wear the holster, then have the gun secured in a case with a padlock if they want to do it that way. Then when needed the pilot holsters the gun, but then we are talking about the feds. Best option is let the pilots carry in a retention holster ALL the time. Then they only touch the gun when needed. Probably a retention shoulder holster would be best since they are seated most of the time, and if they go to the restroom they do not have to mess with the gun.

 

[OC for ME]

...

I recall an epiphany I had some years ago. For years I had believed that people who couldn't properly install a car seat were just idiots. Then someone wrote something to the effect of, "If 75% of your target market cannot properly use your product as designed, then your design is poor." I still think a lot of people are idiots for not being able to properly install a car seat. But I realized that those who are smart enough to be engineers, need to accommodate the idiocy among their target audience through proper design practices. ...

Charles

The bold is a deflection, a excuse provided to those, by who knows, who refuse to follow the "pictures" that come with the car seat that show how to properly install the car seat.

If the number of misoperations by consumers (incorrectly installed car seats) of a particular gizmo is the benchmark, then guns don't really need holsters to be carried safely. If the car seat design was such as to reverse that 75% number most folks would buy the cheap Chicom knockoff, the one difficult to install properly, due to the cost of the well designed, easy to install, gizmo and take their chances...it's the American way.