Hacker News Reader

Comment by hga | Hacker News Reader

And that's been seriously proposed in California, which is pushing through another wave of gun control legislation, one bill of which would effectively shut down all gun stores in the state, and certainly favorably talked about elsewhere ... maybe Maryland?

Just skimmed it (too much going on right now to look at it in depth), but I'm seriously impressed they did so much work to get in things like the classic "shoulder thing that goes up". In their defense, New Jersey's law is, as I recall, much older.

I'll mention one other bottom line: we wouldn't even consider it prior to all law enforcement officers in the nation being required to use them, and only them.

View on HN

Part of the push for smart guns for law enforcement would come from law enforcement's negligent inability to keep track of their own weapons. A local news channel covered the story of one Bay Area city's police department releasing a report on an inventory of the weapons used by police officers. They were literally missing hundreds of them. Often, the weapon would be lost when an officer left it in an unlocked car, either a police car or their own and the thief simply opened the door/trunk and took it.

I suppose so, but it's not like that would make any difference in the number of illicit guns on the street, and I've never heard of smart guns being designed for that much harder use case, where an adversary had lots of time to modify them. The most common one is limiting who can fire it, e.g. preventing the all too common tragedy when a criminal snatches a cop's gun and kills him with it.

> all too common tragedy

Any murder is too much murder, but I certainly wouldn't describe it as common. Cops are nearly as likely to die of a car accident as they are of getting shot. A cop friend of mine was going on about how the recent media focus on them has made things so dangerous - officer murders were up by 15%! I asked him if that translated to an increase of 5 or 6 a year, and if that was actually above the noise floor - he responded with a blank stare - "15%."

Well, you're got a point, especially with modern retention holsters, but it's still a major issue, and those holsters also slow down the draw speed of officers (but one defeated the Boston bombers' after they murdered the MIT Campus Policeman, that murder was for naught).

I stopped having to carry daily around the time that serpa holsters got popular. All the combat vets accurately predicted that the release mechanism would lead to a lot of negligent discharges - many training courses wouldn't let you on the range with one. I'm surprised to see that they are still being sold, I'd have thought they went the way of the lawn dart.

The Serpa holster is by no means the only retention holster out there! Nor would have one stopped the Boston bombers from what I understand of them, it's hard to expresses just how bad an idea they are in every way.

For those who don't know, you have to press a button about over where the trigger is, inside the holster. If you keep pressing into your draw, you may as many have found out continue and press the trigger while it's pointed in a unfortunate direction.

I'm going to have to disagree with you, I think thumb break retention holsters (that have been the standard forever) are just fine. The usability problem for holsters comes from the loss of fine motor control following an adrenaline dump, you go all thumbs. Of course nothing beats boring old training - where even very complex behavior can be ingrained. I blacked out my first fire fight, but I was later told that I effectively performed three magazine changes, manipulated the radio, called in a SALUTE and fired a signal flare. I'm confident that if I spent several years training to not shoot myself in the leg with a serpa holster, I could, but it would be a waste of time as better holsters long predate that silly design.

I'm actually not sure we're disagreeing, but I'll defer to you, seeing as how I've avoided firefights up to now, and probably will in the future, and carry concealed with a Summer Special, friction the only retention besides, of course, having it covered.

Ah, also a Safepacker in winter weather, which is not even clearly a hostler: http://www.thewilderness.com/safepacker-concealment-holster/

Oh yeah, we are talking about different use cases. I'd never advocate anything that would make an IWB draw any slower than it already is :) For the more block inclined, MIC trigger guards are nice for winter jackets.

I worship at the alter of John Moses Browning, so no MIC holsters for me any time soon.... But I have many many others to choose from, they've been insanely, amazingly even for me popular with civilians for a long time.

And, yeah, slow is a good word to use there ^_^.

(#1 one overriding reason is that since I was a teen the M1911 fits my hand like a glove, and I can shoot it very well. And 8 round magazines weren't a big forfeit when I started buying handguns after leaving Massachusetts and the Federal AW ban was in effect.)

For a long time I felt the exact same way (also big mitted), but I got challenged to leave the Springfield at home and use a borrowed G17 for a week long course. I still prefer the M1911 for sport, and satisfying my need to constantly tinker (yes my feedramp is polished and ejection port flared). But if I were pressed - I'd begrudgingly go with the utilitarian choice offered by Glock. But everybody has their reasons for developing preferences in their tools: I will give up my modal text editor when they peel my cold dead fingers from around it.

And I'll give up my non-modal EMACS when....

Although the grip angle of Glocks is just plain wrong for me, I've read that I ought to try the Springfield XD if I wanted to go in that direction. Which I don't, for concealed carry I believe an external hammer is essential for holstering safety (put your thumb on it and either stop the drop if SA or feel it rising if SA/DA or DAO).

And, yeah, given that I can shoot most guns well/very well (a couple of years of JROTC rifle team with Winchester 52s, after informal starting in 1st grade or so, made a big difference, but don't ask me to wingshoot), yeah, I should give something different a serious try just to see. I'll put it on my list.

If you keep pressing into your draw, WITH YOUR FINGERTIP. That's not how the release button is intended to be used. When someone NDs with a non-Serpa nobody blames the holster -- they blame the idiot user for doing it wrong.

The Serpa has a secondary retention feature -- the button is blocked when there's upward pressure on the gun. It is not easy to snatch a gun out of a Serpa.

> That's not how the release button is intended to be used.

Stress does funny things, also "Just avoid holding it that way" isn't good advice for things like guns.

> ...with a non-Serpa nobody blames the holster...

That is the point. Normally the user would be blamed, but the design is bad enough that the equipment is being blamed, IDPA even banned it.

But "Avoid jamming your finger in the trigger area" is very solid advice for guns. That has got to be the leading cause of NDs while drawing a firearm but someone does it with a Serpa and everyone is blaming the holster. Had my Serpa for years and it never even occurred to me to jab my fingertip at the button until Grebner's video.

IDPA never banned the Serpa. Some ranges / organizers have.

The problem isn't the advice, it is the reliance on the advice being followed without fail for a product that leaves very little safety margin in normal operation. It is like putting a factory reset button right next to the power button and expecting that the instruction to never accidentally press the reset button provides sufficient safety. Do you make the same allowance for guns that discharge when dropped? Surely the users know to not drop their guns, and yet recalls still happen. Foolproofing can look really silly when everybody is well rested and calm, but you might be grateful for the raised "Front Toward Enemy" when things get hairy.

You are correct about the IDPA ban, my mistake. It makes me wonder though, I can't think of a similar case of a safety rule being so charged. Green tip 5.56 is the closest thing that comes to mind, but that is more to do with property damage than safety.

> Cops are nearly as likely to die of a car accident as they are of getting shot.

Unless cops die of car accidents significantly less than the base rate, that is not reassuring.

I'm not sure what you'd expect to be reassured of, that cops are less likely to die of car accidents and gunshots than the average person? My point isn't that they have no increased risk, my point is that the level of risk in reality isn't nearly as high as people seem to think - and warrants no special deference. Law enforcement isn't even in the top 10 dangerous professions, they fall well behind loggers, garbage men, truck drivers, roofers... have you thanked your garbage man for risking his life to collect your refuse today?

I don't have any particular preconceptions about how dangerous it is to be a cop. But I do know that car accidents are one of the most common ways to die. So when you tell me that cops are more likely to get shot than to die in a car accident, my perception of the danger goes up.

I used the word "nearly" for a reason, the numbers are very close and the method of categorization is not known to me (folks like to lump suicide with homicide when it furthers their argument). So "more" isn't an order of magnitude and the absolute number is so low that a use of it in justification for any endeavor would be a disguised appeal to emotion.

I never really thought about that aspect- smart guns only really prevent someone from picking up your gun and shooting you with it. I mean that's basically it, it's safety for the gun owner and nobody else.

I used to shoot at an indoor range north of Atlanta. Once a sheepish customer came in asking the clerks what they knew about the rifle laying in the parking lot. Apparently the federal agent who had just left the range with his issued M4-style automatic carbine leaned it against his car while loading up his range bag. Then he forgot about it and drove off.

I hated shooting next to law enforcement in general, they were bad shots and had poor gun handling skills. I think because they were paid to carry guns they thought they were "professionals" and didn't put the same effort into training and cultivating a mindfulness around firearms.

It makes sense... People who are into something for fun are more likely to out effor into getting good at that thing. Only some of the law enforcement community are also into guns for fun, whereas all of the people who are shooting at a gun range who AREN'T law enforcement are there for fun.

Indeed, another example of this is how NBA basketball players are worse than all the amateurs on the streets!

And lets not forget how the cousin of your boss that enthusiastically read some tutorials on the net is a much better programmer than you.

Or maybe the argument magically only applies in the realm of gun use?

Police very seldom, and sometimes never have to use their guns, except maybe to threaten. They're paid to keep the peace and all that, the gun is merely one of many tools, although the one that all others ultimately rest on.

> Indeed, another example of this is how NBA basketball players are worse than all the amateurs on the streets!

Hours of training are hours of training.

The GP argued that "People who are into something for fun are more likely to out effor into getting good at that thing." (emphasis mine).

> And lets not forget how the cousin of your boss that enthusiastically read some tutorials on the net is a much better programmer than you.

If you're in it just for the money then quite possibly. I can quite easily tell for whom programming is not just a job but also a hobby, and for whom it's just a way to make a living - coding skills tend to be much stronger in former.

Playing basketball is an NBA player's entire job, shooting guns is a small part of a police officer's job.

Enthusiasticly reading some tutorials on the Internet isn't really what I'd consider "into" something, but there are absolutely amateur programmers that are far better at programming than a 9-5 enterprise "code monkey" level programmer with no interest in the job apart from the paycheck.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com