How does this pertain to NJ.....

. Holster requirements For purposes of this section, “holster” means a device or sheath that securely retains a handgun which, at a minimum, conceals and protects the main body of the firearm, maintains the firearm in a consistent and accessible position, and renders the trigger covered and inaccessible while the handgun is fully seated in the holster. (cf: P.L.2018, c.37, s.1)

 

Most leather holster for revolvers some of which we still carry do not have the trigger covered...ie. high-ride / pancake .....so where doe this fall in.

30 minutes ago, xXxplosive said:

and renders the trigger covered and inaccessible while the handgun is fully seated in the holster

...is pretty self explanatory. The revolver holsters that do not cover the trigger are not sufficient under NJ statute.

I’m having a hard time envisioning a holster that does not cover the trigger…  Can you give me an example?

The idea alone seems silly…

They have clips that screw on to slide and act like a money clip but hold gun on your pants.  Also it's meant so people aren't carrying a gun lose  in their pocket or purse

5 hours ago, Vdep217 said:

They have clips that screw on to slide and act like a money clip but hold gun on your pants.  Also it's meant so people aren't carrying a gun lose  in their pocket or purse

Yea, No.  Not gunna do it, not going to jam a handgun with an unguarded trigger into my pants.  Didn't need the state statute to tell me it's a bad idea.

 

35 minutes ago, High Exposure said:

I’m having a hard time envisioning a holster that does not cover the trigger…  Can you give me an example?

The idea alone seems silly…

They are out there.

...and made famous on TV...

They are all examples of revolver holsters. The 1st pic show a hidden hammer and simply pulling the trigger in that holster will fire it! The other 2 examples are at least somewhat safer in that the hammers are restrained from movement thus making it much harder to pull the trigger and dislodge the snap.

I for one, would absolutely NEVER use such a holster for CCW! 

54 minutes ago, High Exposure said:

I’m having a hard time envisioning a holster that does not cover the trigger…  Can you give me an example?

The idea alone seems silly…

i was watching some old detective mystery movie.....and all the cops in that movie...plain clothes that is......had revolvers holstered with triggers exposed......

 

9 minutes ago, JohnnyB said:

They are all examples of revolver holsters. The 1st pic show a hidden hammer and simply pulling the trigger in that holster will fire it! The other 2 examples are at least somewhat safer in that the hammers are restrained from movement thus making it much harder to pull the trigger and dislodge the snap.

I for one, would absolutely NEVER use such a holster for CCW! 

Revolver holsters were exactly what the OP was asking about.

I don't think they are quite as unsafe as some might expect. Remember that a double action trigger on a revolver is in the region of 10lb. Add to that the resistance created by the friction of trying to rotate the cylinder while it is in the holster, it would be pretty difficult to fire the gun by accident - not impossible, but also not very likely.

Re: the Clip Draw - I didn’t think anyone actually used them. I’m all about AIWB, but there is no way in hell I’m carrying a gun at appendix without the trigger being covered.

As to the leather - I don’t think I’ve ever seen holsters like that with the trigger exposed. Seems counter-intuitive to me.

 

35 minutes ago, Mr.Stu said:

They are out there.

...and made famous on TV...

center pic of the pancake OWB.....for instance.....most of you here are novices.....not sayin' but I was carrying a revolver since the 70's and my first Model 36.....all these holster types are used every day by CCW folks around the country......all these restriction are _ _ _ _ _ _  _ just seems to me who ever concocted this was only considering autos and not double action revolvers......omo.

33 minutes ago, Mr.Stu said:

Revolver holsters were exactly what the OP was asking about.

I don't think they are quite as unsafe as some might expect. Remember that a double action trigger on a revolver is in the region of 10lb. Add to that the resistance created by the friction of trying to rotate the cylinder while it is in the holster, it would be pretty difficult to fire the gun by accident - not impossible, but also not very likely.

But what is the claimed point or advantage of such a holster, given that every guide to gun handling good practice that I have ever seen dictates that no finger is to be placed on the trigger until the target is acquired? The first pictured example also appears to me to present an unacceptable risk of losing the firearm in strenuous activity.

28 minutes ago, Grima Squeakersen said:

But what is the claimed point or advantage of such a holster, given that every guide to gun handling good practice that I have ever seen dictates that no finger is to be placed on the trigger until the target is acquired? The first pictured example also appears to me to present an unacceptable risk of losing the firearm in strenuous activity.

Rule 3 as we know it didn’t become universal until 1976 when Cooper started teaching it.

Before then, trigger finger disciple as a universal rule was non existent. The common belief was the faster you could touch the trigger, the better.

A lot of the holster designs are “classic” and made more for looks than utility - in my opinion.

Personally, if you are carrying in a holster that doesn’t cover the trigger, you are behind the power curve. You have either not kept up with modern TTPs or you care more about appearance than function. Either way - that’s a no-go in my book.

In today’s world what would be the reason to carry a pistol in a holster that doesn’t cover and protect the trigger? Makes no sense to use a holster IWB or OWB without the trigger covered and protected. There is nothing lost with a holster that covers the trigger and plenty to lose with one that does not

3 hours ago, JohnnyB said:

They are all examples of revolver holsters. The 1st pic show a hidden hammer and simply pulling the trigger in that holster will fire it! The other 2 examples are at least somewhat safer in that the hammers are restrained from movement thus making it much harder to pull the trigger and dislodge the snap.

I for one, would absolutely NEVER use such a holster for CCW! 

Yeah, I value my man bits too much to use a holster like that. 

1 hour ago, Displaced Texan said:

Yeah, I value my man bits too much to use a holster like that. 

Me too!

https://versacarry.com/zerobulk-iwb-holster/

Nope.

Living through a different era than most of the younger fellas on here, it's funny how I can see the evolution of the modern holster (although these are still made, sold and used world wide) into the Kydex and mind altering reality of the present.....no one had to tell my buddies to keep their finger off the trigger while drawing a gun....but I guess today we need to be told everything........omo.

PS......a concealed holster, and that's what carrying a pancake style today would be, would not be for fashion purposes as someone here suggested....ya probably never tried one with a Model 19-4 in one under your jacket.

On 4/4/2024 at 7:03 PM, High Exposure said:

Rule 3 as we know it didn’t become universal until 1976 when Cooper started teaching it.

Before then, trigger finger disciple as a universal rule was non existent. The common belief was the faster you could touch the trigger, the better.

A lot of the holster designs are “classic” and made more for looks than utility - in my opinion.

Personally, if you are carrying in a holster that doesn’t cover the trigger, you are behind the power curve. You have either not kept up with modern TTPs or you care more about appearance than function. Either way - that’s a no-go in my book.

Thanks. I have Col. Cooper's rules permanently taped to the front of my gun safe, but I wasn't aware that he was solely responsible for the that trigger discipline.

Wouldn’t say he was solely responsible in developing that as a rule. Or that he was the only one teaching it. I mean, on its face, Rule Three seems to be a pretty self evident rule - until you become a firearms instructor and see how dumb people get when they pick up a gun. Also, if you watch any of the old training videos for Military or LE (WWII and Korea era) you will see some pretty disturbing gun handling being taught - or at any rate, not corrected.

But, he was the one to condense the rules down to only four (I have seen accounts of instructors having over a dozen “safety” rules) and to push them to be a universal standard. He is also responsible for the creation of the 4 conditions of readiness, the color code of situational awareness, and is the primary creator of the modern technique of handgun shooting as we currently know it.

Well, as some have pointed out, most old timers remember that pretty much every holster you could buy from the 1950's through the 1990's  for revolvers, and most for autos, had exposed triggers.  My first CCW job as a civilian security industry employee (1986) required double action revolvers to start, with qualifying on semi-autos coming after you were seasoned on the job.  The Smith model 28 (and 19) holsters pretty much all were leather pancake style with exposed triggers.  I even had a Bianchi shoulder holster for the Smiths (for winter under heavy coats) with an exposed trigger.  After 40 years of working with doble action revolvers, and then autos, I have no way to overcome the muscle memory to even TRY to insert my trigger finger into the gun until it is on target.