Removing "Shoulder or Belt" holster from SB17

[AJSully421]

What bothers me is that some are going nuts over this requirement. How in the heck else are you going to comfortably and reliably OC a handgun if not in a belt or shoulder holster?

It has already been discussed about the fact that dropleg holsters are designed to be attached to a belt, and good luck to any prosecutor who tries to refute that. Similarly, I could see wearing a holster that attaches to the MOLLE on tactical vest or a chest rig as being a difficult refute as well. Imagine trying to sell a jury on the fact that a quarter inch leather or nylon strap over the shoulder constitutes a shoulder holster, but that a full nylon vest is not in compliance with the law. Not going to happen. Also, I have heard about how this will affect women who use something similar to the "flash bang" bra holster who might want to OC with it, like on a sports bra or a bikini. Aside from the obvious issues, same thing... a leather or nylon strap is good to go, but a brassiere is not good enough? Seems to me it does a good job of providing support and keeping things in their right place.

So then, what options are left that we are all fighting about? Ankle holster?

Are you seriously going to OC in an ankle holster? How about those ladies "high thigh" type holsters? Put it in a belt holster and go to town. If you are really all bent out of shape about it, then next session, contact your reps about adding "or an ankle holster" to the law. Happy now?

There is just no need for all of this consternation.

[mr1337]

What bothers me is that some are going nuts over this requirement. How in the heck else are you going to comfortably and reliably OC a handgun if not in a belt or shoulder holster?

As stated in my last reply, in a very secure Grassburr vehicle-mounted holster with thumb snap retention. Secured with 4 machine screws to the high-impact plastic of my center console/gear shift. Heck, it's probably safer for me to carry it in there anyways. If I get in an accident carrying like I normally do (appendix carry) I could be injured more than normal due to the limited contact points of my seat belt to my body. In my Grassburr holster, however, it's off my body and safer, as well as more accessible. If I did carry at 4 o'clock, I could see how it would be very hard to get to as well. However, not the case in a vehicle-mounted holster.

Some people don't realize that there are other ways to carry other than a belt or shoulder holster that are still just as safe, and sometimes safer. I guess I will have to modify my Grassburr holster to add some belt loops to satisfy this law.

[AJSully421]

What bothers me is that some are going nuts over this requirement. How in the heck else are you going to comfortably and reliably OC a handgun if not in a belt or shoulder holster?

As stated in my last reply, in a very secure Grassburr vehicle-mounted holster with thumb snap retention. Secured with 4 machine screws to the high-impact plastic of my center console/gear shift. Heck, it's probably safer for me to carry it in there anyways. If I get in an accident carrying like I normally do (appendix carry) I could be injured more than normal due to the limited contact points of my seat belt to my body. In my Grassburr holster, however, it's off my body and safer, as well as more accessible. If I did carry at 4 o'clock, I could see how it would be very hard to get to as well. However, not the case in a vehicle-mounted holster.

Some people don't realize that there are other ways to carry other than a belt or shoulder holster that are still just as safe, and sometimes safer. I guess I will have to modify my Grassburr holster to add some belt loops to satisfy this law.

I have a Safariland QLS mount under my dash with a G17 in a Safariland ALS. Same basic idea... but mine is concealed.

[mr1337]

What bothers me is that some are going nuts over this requirement. How in the heck else are you going to comfortably and reliably OC a handgun if not in a belt or shoulder holster?

As stated in my last reply, in a very secure Grassburr vehicle-mounted holster with thumb snap retention. Secured with 4 machine screws to the high-impact plastic of my center console/gear shift. Heck, it's probably safer for me to carry it in there anyways. If I get in an accident carrying like I normally do (appendix carry) I could be injured more than normal due to the limited contact points of my seat belt to my body. In my Grassburr holster, however, it's off my body and safer, as well as more accessible. If I did carry at 4 o'clock, I could see how it would be very hard to get to as well. However, not the case in a vehicle-mounted holster.

Some people don't realize that there are other ways to carry other than a belt or shoulder holster that are still just as safe, and sometimes safer. I guess I will have to modify my Grassburr holster to add some belt loops to satisfy this law.

I have a Safariland QLS mount under my dash with a G17 in a Safariland ALS. Same basic idea... but mine is concealed.

I have a zippered concealment cover for my Grassburr, but it adds complication and time needed to access my gun. Being unconcealed is always faster than having to remove concealment before drawing.

[mojo84]

What bothers me is that some are going nuts over this requirement. How in the heck else are you going to comfortably and reliably OC a handgun if not in a belt or shoulder holster?

As stated in my last reply, in a very secure Grassburr vehicle-mounted holster with thumb snap retention. Secured with 4 machine screws to the high-impact plastic of my center console/gear shift. Heck, it's probably safer for me to carry it in there anyways. If I get in an accident carrying like I normally do (appendix carry) I could be injured more than normal due to the limited contact points of my seat belt to my body. In my Grassburr holster, however, it's off my body and safer, as well as more accessible. If I did carry at 4 o'clock, I could see how it would be very hard to get to as well. However, not the case in a vehicle-mounted holster.

Some people don't realize that there are other ways to carry other than a belt or shoulder holster that are still just as safe, and sometimes safer. I guess I will have to modify my Grassburr holster to add some belt loops to satisfy this law.

Just how visible from the outside of the vehicle is your gun in the Grassbur Holster when you are sitting in the vehicle? Isn't it hidden in between your leg and console? If an officer asks you to exit the vehicle and the gun becomes exposed, you will not be violating the law. It works the same as when it's in the door map pocket. Of it works for you now, it will work for you once open carry becomes law. Nothing will change.

If you are worried about leaving it exposed and visible from the outside when you are not in the vehicle, that's a whole different issue and problem.

[mr1337]

What bothers me is that some are going nuts over this requirement. How in the heck else are you going to comfortably and reliably OC a handgun if not in a belt or shoulder holster?

As stated in my last reply, in a very secure Grassburr vehicle-mounted holster with thumb snap retention. Secured with 4 machine screws to the high-impact plastic of my center console/gear shift. Heck, it's probably safer for me to carry it in there anyways. If I get in an accident carrying like I normally do (appendix carry) I could be injured more than normal due to the limited contact points of my seat belt to my body. In my Grassburr holster, however, it's off my body and safer, as well as more accessible. If I did carry at 4 o'clock, I could see how it would be very hard to get to as well. However, not the case in a vehicle-mounted holster.

Some people don't realize that there are other ways to carry other than a belt or shoulder holster that are still just as safe, and sometimes safer. I guess I will have to modify my Grassburr holster to add some belt loops to satisfy this law.

Just how visible from the outside of the vehicle is your gun in the Grassbur Holster when you are sitting in the vehicle? Isn't it hidden in between your leg and console? If an officer asks you to exit the vehicle and the gun becomes exposed, you will not be violating the law. It works the same as when it's in the door map pocket. Of it works for you now, it will work for you once open carry becomes law. Nothing will change.

If you are worried about leaving it exposed and visible from the outside when you are not in the vehicle, that's a whole different issue and problem.

I think the grip may be visible from the passenger side, with my legs almost completely obscuring it from the driver side. The way it's written now (and the way it will be written if SB17/HB910 passes), I believe it would be a violation. I wouldn't want to be a test case.

[mojo84]

I don't think the passage of this law has anything to do with your situation. If it's illegally exposed now, it will be with the new law as well.

This isn't the open storage law. It's open carry.

[mr1337]

I don't think the passage of this law has anything to do with your situation. If it's illegally exposed now, it will be with the new law as well.

This isn't the open storage law. It's open carry.

Carrying is "on or about your person" so I would argue that readily accessible right next to my leg would be considered carry, not storage.

[mojo84]

I don't think the passage of this law has anything to do with your situation. If it's illegally exposed now, it will be with the new law as well.

This isn't the open storage law. It's open carry.

Carrying is "on or about your person" so I would argue that readily accessible right next to my leg would be considered carry, not storage.

You can argue that but I do not think the intent of the bill is to make it so you can store your gun in open view near you. Apparently, since they are saying belt or shoulder holster, is for us to be able to open carry on our body.

[mr1337]

I don't think the passage of this law has anything to do with your situation. If it's illegally exposed now, it will be with the new law as well.

This isn't the open storage law. It's open carry.

Carrying is "on or about your person" so I would argue that readily accessible right next to my leg would be considered carry, not storage.

You can argue that but I do not think the intent of the bill is to make it so you can store your gun in open view near you. Apparently, since they are saying belt or shoulder holster, is for us to be able to open carry on our body.

It's not storage, it's carrying. Storage would be in a locked case out of reach. Carrying has always been "on or about your person." I know the bill wouldn't allow me to carry in my vehicle in a Grassburr holster (without making it into a belt or shoulder holster) but I do believe it can be CARRIED in your car in a belt or shoulder holster in plain view, even if it's not on your body. The bill doesn't say anything about the need for the holster to be attached to you.

[Jason K]

I don't think the passage of this law has anything to do with your situation. If it's illegally exposed now, it will be with the new law as well.

This isn't the open storage law. It's open carry.

Carrying is "on or about your person" so I would argue that readily accessible right next to my leg would be considered carry, not storage.

You can argue that but I do not think the intent of the bill is to make it so you can store your gun in open view near you. Apparently, since they are saying belt or shoulder holster, is for us to be able to open carry on our body.

It's not storage, it's carrying. Storage would be in a locked case out of reach. Carrying has always been "on or about your person." I know the bill wouldn't allow me to carry in my vehicle in a Grassburr holster (without making it into a belt or shoulder holster) but I do believe it can be CARRIED in your car in a belt or shoulder holster in plain view, even if it's not on your body. The bill doesn't say anything about the need for the holster to be attached to you.

This could open up a new industry......I wonder if the Beltman could make a belt that would fit around a steering column of a Ford F-150....

[mojo84]

I don't think the passage of this law has anything to do with your situation. If it's illegally exposed now, it will be with the new law as well.

This isn't the open storage law. It's open carry.

Carrying is "on or about your person" so I would argue that readily accessible right next to my leg would be considered carry, not storage.

You can argue that but I do not think the intent of the bill is to make it so you can store your gun in open view near you. Apparently, since they are saying belt or shoulder holster, is for us to be able to open carry on our body.

It's not storage, it's carrying. Storage would be in a locked case out of reach. Carrying has always been "on or about your person." I know the bill wouldn't allow me to carry in my vehicle in a Grassburr holster (without making it into a belt or shoulder holster) but I do believe it can be CARRIED in your car in a belt or shoulder holster in plain view, even if it's not on your body. The bill doesn't say anything about the need for the holster to be attached to you.

Since you are so adamant about getting your way, why not contact the author of the bill and see if he intended to legalize your preferred method of "carry"? Maybe you are hanging your hopes on the wrong bill.

[steveincowtown]

Since you are so adamant about getting your way, why not contact the author of the bill and see if he intended to legalize your preferred method of "carry"? Maybe you are hanging your hopes on the wrong bill.

Unfortunately the author's intent and what happens in the real world are 2 very different things. If laws lived up to the author's intent we wouldn't have cities posting non enforceable 30.06 signs and people (ok person...) getting arrested for carrying past a "no guns" sign.

Earlier in this thread two long term forum moderators, one a former LEO and the other Mr. Cotton posted two different interpretations of the law in regards to drop leg holsters. If we as a community see the law differently, I can guarantee you the holster requirement is going to be interpreted differently from police department to police department.

Hopefully the AG or the Governor will issue a statement after the law is passed (much like the Governor of OK did after they passed open carry).

[mr1337]

Since you are so adamant about getting your way, why not contact the author of the bill and see if he intended to legalize your preferred method of "carry"? Maybe you are hanging your hopes on the wrong bill.

I didn't say anything about getting my way. I was discussing the topic of this thread. I know that carrying in a car mounted holster is considered carrying and not storage. See TPC 46.02 and 46.035

(a) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries on or about his or her person

I was simply adding to the discussion after AJSully421 asked:

How in the heck else are you going to comfortably and reliably OC a handgun if not in a belt or shoulder holster?

To which I responded with the fact that I have a vehicle mounted holster that might be considered Open Carry, but was definitely not a belt or shoulder holster, at least not in its current form.

If you read back a few replies from me:

I understand the reasoning for the "belt or shoulder" holster requirement, and I know it's not going to be changed before the bill passes the House. However, I do hope they fix it in future legislative sessions.

...

However, with all this said, I'm okay with the current legislation because it's a great step in the right direction as far as OC is concerned. Instead of getting those fixed this session, I agree that HB308 (removing off-limits locations) should be much higher priority now that Campus Carry and Open Carry are all but guaranteed.

The notion that I'm trying to "get my own way" is insulting, even, and I find your posts increasingly aggressive instead of calm and respectful as I feel mine have been towards you. The main point I am trying to discuss with you is that a gun that is accessible and within your reach would be considered "about your person" and therefore would be classified as "carrying." If you wish to discuss that point further, please feel free to do so without insinuating that I'm simply trying to get my own way. I'm here to discuss the facts. If you don't believe that a firearm that is readily accessible in the immediate control of a person is considered "about" that person, that's fine. I would like to discuss that with you in a respectful manner.

[mojo84]

I am not getting "increasingly aggressive" or "insulting". I am challenging your argument that this bill should or does make it legal to store your gun in a car mounted holster in open view.

All I'm saying is you are arguing for something outside what the intent of the bill is. I guess this comment of yours led me to believe you want your method of "carry" to be legal.

I specifically would like it changed so that I could open carry in my car-mounted holster during long trips. Since it's not a belt or shoulder holster, I wouldn't be able to carry in the car holster without it being concealed, which adds to the time I need to get to it.

If you are already using this method of " carry", what about this bill changes anything for you. My contention is that is changes nothing. If you are doing it legally now, you should be able to continue to do so.

I apologize for "insulting" you. It was not my intent to do so.


Edit: I went back and reread the thread and saw that you have a zippered cover on your grassbur.