If uncomfortable with Strikers, which CCW?

Used to be that way for me, though not as bad as some. Over time it becomes a non-issue and now it seems normal.

Lots of great pistols though, not just Glocks. I've owned dozens of pistols at this point. Really is harder to find a bad firearm than a good one. If you find something you like and stick with it you'll be fine.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
 
TunnelRat said:
Used to be that way for me, though not as bad as some. Over time it becomes a non-issue and now it seems normal.

Lots of great pistols though, not just Glocks. I've owned dozens of pistols at this point. Really is harder to find a bad firearm than a good one. If you find something you like and stick with it you'll be fine.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

^^^^THIS! Coming from other manufacturers, but especially offerings from Beretta and CZ, it took me a really long time to get used to a Glock, until I made a simple commitment to a few range sessions of shooting nothing but them. Now they’re just as natural as anything else to me, just took me devoting some time to them.
 
Have only carried for about three years: .380 Makarov, then somewhat recently the Sig P228, at times the CZ 'PCR'. I'm 64 years old.

My first striker-fired 'possible carry' gun is now shipping. Bought it only for carry and range variety, and my first Walther: the P99 AS, mostly because--for better safety-- you have the choice of a long first pull (AS mode), or decocking it for the DA mode.
 
Interestingly, the Walther manual advises against carry in AS mode; however, their PPQ has shorter takeup and the same SA trigger and it's ok for carry. ?????
 
I started a thread on another forum about this predicament. I will welcome any good advise about how to become comfortable with a striker for a CCW.
 
chemcal said:
I started a thread on another forum about this predicament. I will welcome any good advise about how to become comfortable with a striker for a CCW.
Click to expand...
How much of a difference is it? My guess is it concerns you to some level?

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
 
The only possible reason to be concerned about carrying a striker fired gun is that traditionally there is no thumb safety. But today there are several options for striker fired guns with a very well designed 1911 style thumb safety.

The only non striker fired semi's I own are 1911's. But in addition to my Glocks I have Sig, S&W, and Ruger striker fired guns with a safety that operates just like my 1911's.
 
chemcal said:
I started a thread on another forum about this predicament. I will welcome any good advise about how to become comfortable with a striker for a CCW.
Click to expand...
Shoot it a lot(?), have a good holster that protects the trigger well(?)...I use a holster where it isn’t possible to reholster without taking the holster off my belt(Raven Vanguard, IWB, 2-3 o’clock )... I see no advantage to being able to ‘quickly reholster’...maybe in some competitions, don’t know but in the wild, I see no reason for that ‘feature’...
 
USNRet93 said:
Shoot it a lot(?), have a good holster that protects the trigger well(?)...I use a holster where it isn’t possible to reholster without taking the holster off my belt(Raven Vanguard, IWB, 2-3 o’clock )... I see no advantage to being able to ‘quickly reholster’...maybe in some competitions, don’t know but in the wild, I see no reason for that ‘feature’...
Click to expand...
If I need to render aid to someone or reholster as police are arriving I don't want to have to take my holster off to go through thst. At the very least I like the option of being able to go straight to the holster. I can always choose to take my holster off if I want to.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
 
TunnelRat said:
If I need to render aid to someone or reholster as police are arriving I don't want to have to take my holster off to go through thst. At the very least I like the option of being able to go straight to the holster. I can always choose to take my holster off if I want to.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
10-4, ymmv and all that. Considering the ‘likelihood’ of needing to pull the gun out in the first place, let alone ‘rendering aid’ after said shootout....I’ll stick with my safe, small, very efficient(imho) holster that will never cause a ND when reholstering.

BTW, if after a shooting, as the police arrive, my gun goes on the ground with me standing with hands up....since they don’t really know who the bad or good guys are...

Imho
 
chemcal said:
Interestingly, the Walther manual advises against carry in AS mode; however, their PPQ has shorter takeup and the same SA trigger and it's ok for carry. ?????
Click to expand...
Might have something to do with the SA trigger pull on the P99 is lighter than the PPQ and the P99 has no trigger safety which the PPQ does.
 
USNRet93 said:
10-4, ymmv and all that. Considering the ‘likelihood’ of needing to pull the gun out in the first place, let alone ‘rendering aid’ after said shootout....I’ll stick with my safe, small, very efficient(imho) holster that will never cause a ND when reholstering.



BTW, if after a shooting, as the police arrive, my gun goes on the ground with me standing with hands up....since they don’t really know who the bad or good guys are...



Imho
Click to expand...

If you've discharged a firearm in a shooting and so has the other person the likelihood of rendering aid might be pretty high (the need to render aid in general, not even just for gunshots, is higher than actually shooting). It's not that the holster specifically will never cause an ND (a well designed holster won't cause an ND but it can't stop people being careless or hurried, that's very true). It's that you're removing the holster and you're convinced doing so and then holstering is dramatically safer. That's your call. I'm not convinced that holstering on the belt is a guarantee of a ND or that removing the holster is total prevention of a ND. You could also do the same practice with practically any holster assuming it removes pretty easily and again still have the option to holster. I have nothing against the Vanguard, Raven makes nice products.

I don't want a loose gun on a scene, I want full control of it until it may be removed by the police Also, living as I do with kids and pets putting firearms on the ground absent an order from an officer feels wrong to me. Others have different practices and living situations and I understand that.

This isn't me trying to convert anyone, just me responding to the points you made. I will add part of this is me training at a place where removing my holster every time to reholster is both impractical and probably would get an instructor asking why, for the reasons I mentioned above. Just because I've been "convinced" of one way of thinking doesn't mean I can't understand someone else's.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
I resisted but . . .

I resisted striker fired as the first few that I shot were not very reliable guns. In my quest for a carry gun I tried a springfield XDE with the hammer and DA/SA, but could not shoot it well. I have a Sig P238 and have become accustom to carrying it cocked and locked, when it is in a thumb release holster. Then I shot a friend's glock. Then I rented a sig 365. Now I carry a sig 356 with safety. Great gun with ten + 1 capacity and great trigger for a striker fired gun.

Life is good.
Prof Young
 
Last edited:
I have a Glock on which I have installed an aftermarket Cominolli thumb safety and a Tau's development group Striker Control Device.

The thumb safety acts like that on a 1911. It prevents the trigger from being depressed.
The Striker Control Device allows you to keep pressure down on the back plate while reholstering, like you would do on a DA hammer fired gun, to prevent anything which might snag on the trigger from actually depressing it.

But if you do not want to go with aftermarket modifications, then the only other pistol I feel comfortable carrying AIWB with one in the chamber is the EAA (Tanfoglio) Witness. I like the Polymer models. They are all CZ clones, and they allow you to lower the hammer (so the pistol is decocked) and then engage the safety, after which there would be absolutely no way under the laws of physics that the pistol could fire.... unless you disengage the safety, of course.
 
chemcal said:
I started a thread on another forum about this predicament. I will welcome any good advise about how to become comfortable with a striker for a CCW.
Click to expand...
In a previous post I explained how with an aftermarket thumb safety, and a Striker Control Device (a.k.a 'the gadget"), I feel completely comfortable carrying a Glock AIWB. I have been doing so for years no, and I carry everyday (working in a very "anti" environment).

I also included pictures, the post is here:
https://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=6756081#post6756081
 
If not carrying a revolver, my CCW choice would probably be considered untactikool, even archaic. More often than not, it is a S&W 3913 9MM.
 

Attachments

  • 3913 (800x600).jpg
    3913 (800x600).jpg
    109.2 KB · Views: 25
My EDC is a Springfield XDE 45. Was carrying a Ruger LC9S as my EDC but since I’ve become so accustomed to hammer guns from experience with my PX4 Berettas, the little Ruger wasn’t cutting it anymore. Never really cared for it being the non-Pro model meaning that it had the slide-mounted thumb safety but, I wouldn’t have a typical striker handgun any other way.

That’s why the best of both worlds for me is to just stay hammer-fired because I don’t have to safety to mess with. All three of my Storms don’t have a safety anymore as they’ve all been converted to type-G models and even though my new Springfield has a safety, it doesn’t get used. It actually gets treated like it doesn’t even have one as I carry it the same exact way I would the Storms which is safety off, hammer decocked.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top