this post was submitted on 26 Mar 2024
0 points (50.0% liked)
guns
1240 readers
9 users here now
Keep it civil.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I think the argument being made is that IWB holsters are inherently more dangerous than OWB holsters. I understand your point, nothing should happen, however as we've seen with the sig p320 and a couple Taurus models, guns just go off sometimes. Accidents happen and adding one more degree of separation between the gun and your body isn't a terrible idea.
An IWB carried at the same position as an OWB has a barrel pointed the same direction. Both carried at appendix will be the same as both carried at 3-o-clock. The original comment (not you) has really clamped onto the gun-pointed-at-balls as if that is an insurmountable issue, when the holster’s manufacturer recommended it not to be carried that way.
Not sure what the difference of pant material being over or under makes for deflecting anything.
I know there's a video floating around of Massad Ayoob, a known fud, bemoaning iwb holsters. I personally use OWB because I'm a husky lad and don't feel like buying bigger pants. I think the holster you shared is neat, just not for me
Ayoob has done a lot, but yes sometimes his opinions should be regarded only as opinions. I haven’t seen what you’re talking about but I’ve seen him talk about other things where I was kind of pulling my hair out.
OWB is certainly viable if you’re willing to wear shirts to cover it. Comfort is a reasonable factor. I do think IWB limits the size of what is comfortable to carry. Even a Glock 19 I find too big for IWB for my own comfort. I have gone into carrying “pocket guns” IWB, and anything bigger OWB. “Pocket guns” IWB also eliminated having to size up pants for carry as much, because yes that’s annoying.
Totally fair and valid. At the end of the day, it's your call and I think personal comfort and safety should be the biggest factors to work within