First Holster Ever

[Bronson]

To each his own. I've looked at the quality of products you have made.... very nice to say the least. It's all open to interpretation on the style / functionality of something being made by hand. Like I say, I am very new at this and appreciate your comments.

NoahL is right, cover the trigger.

Bronson

[Lobo]

Well, it has come time for everyone to express their opinions on trigger guard coverage.

I have carried a sidearm just about every day since the late 1960's, including two tours in Vietnam and 24 years as a cop. Holsters featuring covered trigger guards were very seldom seen until the 1980's, especially not holsters for double-action revolvers. Thousands of law enforcement officers carried double-action revolvers in holsters with open trigger guards for many decades, uniformed and plainclothes, on-duty and off-duty.

Starting in the mid-1980's there was a general movement in law enforcement away from revolvers and into semi-auto handguns. During the late-1980's the so-called "safe action" pistols (Glock, etc) started becoming very popular, and many agencies started issuing this type. These striker-fired pistols have a relatively short trigger travel and do not usually have any manual safety devices.

There were quite a number of accidental discharges reported. Officer accustomed to the 15-20 pound trigger pulls of double-action revolvers required quite a lot of training to handle the striker-fired semi-autos safely. Range training showed that there were a number of ways in which the newer semi-auto designs could go "bang", including foreign objects entering the trigger guard, as well as trying to holster the weapon with one's finger inside the guard.

To maximize safety with these pistols many departments began requiring holsters that completely covered the trigger guard. Many private ranges began requiring similar equipment for use on their properties.

Accidental discharges and unintentional discharges continue to occur. Occasionally these might be the result of equipment, such as holsters. More frequently the cause is human error due to insufficient training and/or attention.

The debate over covered vs. uncovered trigger guards seems to have come about largely because of changes in training and equipment needs due to the widespread use of semi-auto handguns that are striker-fired via very short and light trigger engagement. For such pistols there is a requirement for not only covered trigger guards, but also for a higher level of training in the use of the weapon.

The double-action revolvers, while not featuring manual safety devices, require much more force applied to the trigger, much longer trigger travel, and most (Colt, S&W, Dan Wesson, Charter Arms, Ruger) feature internal blocks to prevent discharge unless the trigger remains fully depressed during the hammer fall. A simple bump won't do it. Significant force must be applied and maintained to cause the weapon to discharge in double-action mode.

Covered trigger guards on holsters for modern double-action revolvers are more a matter of personal preference than an absolute safety requirement. Many law enforcement agencies and public-access shooting ranges have adopted policies requiring such holster features which, of course, those subject to the rules must comply with.

Don't run with scissors!

Edited October 4, 2010 by Lobo

[katsass]

Well, it has come time for everyone to express their opinions on trigger guard coverage.

I have carried a sidearm just about every day since the late 1960's, including two tours in Vietnam and 24 years as a cop. Holsters featuring covered trigger guards were very seldom seen until the 1980's, especially not holsters for double-action revolvers. Thousands of law enforcement officers carried double-action revolvers in holsters with open trigger guards for many decades, uniformed and plainclothes, on-duty and off-duty.

Starting in the mid-1980's there was a general movement in law enforcement away from revolvers and into semi-auto handguns. During the late-1980's the so-called "safe action" pistols (Glock, etc) started becoming very popular, and many agencies started issuing this type. These striker-fired pistols have a relatively short trigger travel and do not usually have any manual safety devices.

There were quite a number of accidental discharges reported. Officer accustomed to the 15-20 pound trigger pulls of double-action revolvers required quite a lot of training to handle the striker-fired semi-autos safely. Range training showed that there were a number of ways in which the newer semi-auto designs could go "bang", including foreign objects entering the trigger guard, as well as trying to holster the weapon with one's finger inside the guard.

To maximize safety with these pistols many departments began requiring holsters that completely covered the trigger guard. Many private ranges began requiring similar equipment for use on their properties.

Accidental discharges and unintentional discharges continue to occur. Occasionally these might be the result of equipment, such as holsters. More frequently the cause is human error due to insufficient training and/or attention.

The debate over covered vs. uncovered trigger guards seems to have come about largely because of changes in training and equipment needs due to the widespread use of semi-auto handguns that are striker-fired via very short and light trigger engagement. For such pistols there is a requirement for not only covered trigger guards, but also for a higher level of training in the use of the weapon.

The double-action revolvers, while not featuring manual safety devices, require much more force applied to the trigger, much longer trigger travel, and most (Colt, S&W, Dan Wesson, Charter Arms, Ruger) feature internal blocks to prevent discharge unless the trigger remains fully depressed during the hammer fall. A simple bump won't do it. Significant force must be applied and maintained to cause the weapon to discharge in double-action mode.

Covered trigger guards on holsters for modern double-action revolvers are more a matter of personal preference than an absolute safety requirement. Many law enforcement agencies and public-access shooting ranges have adopted policies requiring such holster features which, of course, those subject to the rules must comply with.

Don't run with scissors!

+1 for Lobo! I started my LEO career around the same time as Lobo, with an issued .38 Spl. Colt Police Positive......Then went through all of the 'upgrades' from S&W M-19's, on to S&W Auto's and my last duty gun was a G-21.The only thing I have to add is that I don't like the term 'accidental' discharge...........to me they, at best, are 'unintentional', most often they are just plain HUA. These are my opinions on the subject, and some consider them just the opinions of a grumpy old man. Mike

Edited October 4, 2010 by katsass

[Reaper]

I like the holster over all for sure. It makes me wonder though if one could do the tooling and then flip the leather, lightly wet the leather and then flip it again and wet form for the basic shape one half at a time?

Would that possibly help keep the tooling and allow basic boning (forming) so you could get a closer stitch line?

[Chevota]

That sounds like a possibility. Has anyone done that before?

[Deanimator]

It's a nice looking holster. You have far more talent and patience than I do to do the tooling. My holsters are all plain.

I'm not a fan of exposed trigger guards, but as was pointed out by others, they used to be EXTREMELY common. Look at the Stohlman book that Tandy sells. Your design is neither fully covered nor uncovered. I'd go one way or the other, with my preference being for covered.

[jrvinny]

Great first attempt. You will be surprised how much you improve with each holster. I know I was. I have no experience with tooling but it looks like you're on the right track. Thought I would chime in on the covered trigger issue. That's the first thing that jumped out at me when I saw the holster. While the chances of "unintentionally" discharging with a modern double action are slim, covering your trigger completely (not the trigger guard, but the trigger itself) will eliminate that possibility while it's in the holster. A small adjustment on your pattern to cover the trigger won't make your holster any less appealing. Why not take the opportunity to add a little safety, especially if it doesn't affect the aesthetics or functionality? A little safety never hurt anyone...