TexasCHLforum.com

Unless ones carries a mousegun, most handguns aren't totally imperceptible. It's a matter of degree.

That being said, I wonder how many of us print FAR more than we think we do?

I know while in a standing posture my Glock 19 isn't very observable, but different postures offer different perspectives, some of which may print to varying degrees.

Any here who doubt that about themselves may want to get a second opinion.

age_ranger wrote:Turns out he's local PD.......my wife talked to his girlfriend the other day and when my wife stated that he was printing pretty badly, she stated "Yeah, he knows....he doesn't care". Sorry, but that's not the attitude I like to hear from someone who's supposed to be setting an example. Oh, well.........

Very unprofessional and a real strategic mistake. He obviously doesn't take his job seriously.

Photoman wrote:

age_ranger wrote:Turns out he's local PD.......my wife talked to his girlfriend the other day and when my wife stated that he was printing pretty badly, she stated "Yeah, he knows....he doesn't care". Sorry, but that's not the attitude I like to hear from someone who's supposed to be setting an example. Oh, well.........

Very unprofessional and a real strategic mistake. He obviously doesn't take his job seriously.

Unprofessional is a maybe. Strategic error is also a jump based on opinion. As for the take the job seriously, it may be exactly why he has this attitude. If he takes the job seriously, he is ready to take action when he sees a need and he knows that the more he conceals the harder it is to take action. It is one reason I do not worry about concealment nearly as much as I worry about accessibility.

srothstein wrote:

Photoman wrote:

age_ranger wrote:Turns out he's local PD.......my wife talked to his girlfriend the other day and when my wife stated that he was printing pretty badly, she stated "Yeah, he knows....he doesn't care". Sorry, but that's not the attitude I like to hear from someone who's supposed to be setting an example. Oh, well.........

Very unprofessional and a real strategic mistake. He obviously doesn't take his job seriously.

Unprofessional is a maybe. Strategic error is also a jump based on opinion. As for the take the job seriously, it may be exactly why he has this attitude. If he takes the job seriously, he is ready to take action when he sees a need and he knows that the more he conceals the harder it is to take action. It is one reason I do not worry about concealment nearly as much as I worry about accessibility.

He may be wearing his duty rig, and is under no legal duty to conceal at all. Personally I don't worry about a bit of printing. I carry a big ole Ruger, and its got a few bulges and lumps, I trust it, and it shoots good for me. Those lil baby guns are too squirrelly for me.

Liberty wrote: Personally I don't worry about a bit of printing. I carry a big ole Ruger, and its got a few bulges and lumps, I trust it, and it shoots good for me.

I carried a SP101 for years in a professional environment and no one ever suspected that I was packing. I know this because up in the Northeast, anyone who did have such suspicions would have freaked out and gone straight to HR. (Note: The company manual made no mention of a weapons policy, and I never asked.)

I think we CHL's sometimes obsess about printing while the people (sheeple?) around us wouldn't notice we were carrying unless we accidently dropped it on their foot.

The way I had it explained to me was, "It must be concealed from observation by reasonable means. Cops and fellow CHL'ers are NOT reasonable."

Someone mentioned the fanny pack, I assume that one is carrying when I see one too. However they do not print in the least and I have never had anyone except for a couple of LEO types notice and/or give me a nod.

BTW, I use a Merlin pack and love the way it hangs, deploys and conceals the size of the weapon. I have used and occasionally still use a waist ban under my arm in a cross-draw. Everyhting else I have tried was not, IMHO, a good and accesible concealed carry.

Kyle

I carried my SP101 for years in a Galco IWB rig in the 3 o'clock position, and no one ever suspected. I would wear an untucked shirt or leather vest as a cover garment. This worked summer and winter.

frankie_the_yankee wrote:I carried a SP101 for years in a professional environment and no one ever suspected that I was packing. I know this because up in the Northeast, anyone who did have such suspicions would have freaked out and gone straight to HR.

Or they figured you were mobbed up and connected to Cianci's insiders, and were afraid to bring it up.

KBCraig wrote:

frankie_the_yankee wrote:I carried a SP101 for years in a professional environment and no one ever suspected that I was packing. I know this because up in the Northeast, anyone who did have such suspicions would have freaked out and gone straight to HR.

Or they figured you were mobbed up and connected to Cianci's insiders, and were afraid to bring it up.

srothstein wrote:As for the take the job seriously, it may be exactly why he has this attitude. If he takes the job seriously, he is ready to take action when he sees a need and he knows that the more he conceals the harder it is to take action. It is one reason I do not worry about concealment nearly as much as I worry about accessibility.

Open front concealment with a vest or shirt is much faster than what this person is using and is true concealment (legal definitions notwithstanding).

I dunno...That response was made by his girlfriend, not him...

So I figure if they've encountered this type of question before, I can see where she might be jaded and have some sort of attitude about the issue...

But since he did not spout off in this "unprofessional" manner, I leave the issue to my original opinion...

"None muh bidness"

I think if he's gonna conceal it, he should do it right. Then again, maybe he likes the attention, but I see it as unprofessional and It's my opinion that it makes him a target for anti-gun soccer moms and gun grabbing thugs alike.

DoubleActionCHL wrote:

KRM45 wrote:

DoubleActionCHL wrote:My question is more of a practical one. Why bother to conceal if you don't have to? Concealing is inconvenient and often uncomfortable compared to open carry. If he's an officer and can open carry, why conceal... or better yet, why may a half-whatever attempt at concealing?

I know I wouldn't. Concealing is a pain, but you've gotta do what you've gotta do.

Many departments have a policy that requires off duty carry be concealed.

I personally think most people wouldn't look, or even care.

That's news. I guess seeing off-duty officers carrying in the open all the time, I never considered that they're required to conceal. Interesting.

Then I suppose this begs the question... If he's required to conceal, are his concealment guidelines the same as ours?

Just because you see an officer in plain clothes doesn't mean they are off duty...

Every department is different and has their own guidelines.