TexasCHLforum.com

Saw a guy in a small central Texas store with his cover shirt hooked on his gun exposing it entirely. He had been out hunting and had it in a decent leather holster. Some of the folks I was with said they saw him also. There was no panic and no one said anything to him. I was a few people behind him in line and watched people closely to see their reactions. Several people noticed as I could see them looking at it but it wasn't a big deal.

I think if people act appropriately and don't try to draw attention to themselves, I don't think there will be a big panic and overreaction.

Your mag pouch needs some ostrich accent too.

Nice setup there TAM.

I'm not advocating for or against non-cops using a retention holster. I also do not think there are enough non-cop open carriers to rely solely on statistics to make one's decision. If we are going to base or decisin solely on statistics, would they justify the need to carry a gun at all. Statistics don't mean much if you are the statistic.

People need to make their own decisions based on what's best for them in their particular situation. If one thinks they may be better off if they utilize a retention holster then they probably should use one, especially if they are going to e around crowds.

From the article that was just a google away.

Authorities said the two suspects followed Tyler into the BP station and that Tyler’s gun was taken from his holster during a struggle, even though Tyler had not drawn his weapon on the assailants.

Edited in an effort to make my point in a softer gentler more acceptable manner.


It's an internet forum and a news report. It's not a trial court where something has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. There is nothing in the article that indicates a retention holster would NOT have helped him retain his gun. The article did indicate the gun was removed from the person body and it was not drawn by the carrier.

To assist those that were unable to find a story or report which was referenced by another poster, I posted the link to the story discussing the case in which someone had their gun removed from their holster by someone else. I googled and found the story as a service to fellow posters. Now the story is being challenged as to what actually happened even though there is no evidence to sorry the article being erroneous.

Retention holsters are designed to assist the carrier in retaining his or her weapon in instances where someone just grabs someone's gun or there is a hands on fight and the bad guy tries to take the carrier's gun from them. Retention holsters aren't full proof and do not guarantee the gun cannot be removed by a bad guy. They are designed to make it more difficult. Since we do not have access to video, eye witness accounts, investigation reports and other forensic evidence, it makes sense to rely on what information we have evaluable.

Found this in about 15 seconds with google.

http://m.timesdispatch.com/news/update- ... l?mode=jqm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Charlies.Contingency wrote:

mojo84 wrote:Charlies, Why not go ahead and wear your level III duty holster when off duty then?

I go level II when concealed, and I do wear my level III when I OC off duty too.

OK, so the difference in which one is whether it's concealed or open. Makes sense.

Charlies, Why not go ahead and wear your level III duty holster when off duty then?

Cedar Park Dad wrote:
No. They will think you're a cop.

Only if I have my CHL Badge on my belt next to my gun.

Cedar, So you don't believe that people seeing people properly wearing an exposed sidearm will help to desensitize many of the fearful over time?

It wasn't that long ago that Rob and Laura were sleeping in separate twin beds. Now look at what we see on TV.