CCW while riding

Any daily comuters Carry a weapon while riding? If so, how are you carrying? Any issues?

I sometimes carry a handgun in my tank-bag....usually if I'm headed into an unknown area alone, deep in the forest. I also carry a fire starter, compass, ass wipes, extra fuel and water.

I'd think twice about actually having it on your person. I've seen pictures of some nasty hip bruises from some pretty small get offs.

Always........

I often carry my Ruger LC9 in a zippered jacket pocket.

WeAkSaUzE wrote:

I often carry my Ruger LC9 in a zippered jacket pocket.

I just picked an LC9 up myself. Great little gun isn't it? Did you ever get or look at getting a sidemount laser for it?

Wieb27 wrote:

I just picked an LC9 up myself. Great little gun isn't it? Did you ever get or look at getting a sidemount laser for it?

Most people don't care for the LC9's DAO trigger and the magazine safety... neither of those things bother me, mine has been 100% reliable with all kinds of ammo, I don't regret buying it one bit. No..on the laser, I would probably put a laser on one of my other pistols that have a rail, like my Beretta 96A1 before I would add one to the LC9...but that's just me

I suggest that this be moved to Off Topic.

Wieb27 wrote:

WeAkSaUzE wrote:

I often carry my Ruger LC9 in a zippered jacket pocket.

I just picked an LC9 up myself. Great little gun isn't it? Did you ever get or look at getting a sidemount laser for it?

Lasers on pistols are a NO NO as far as I am concerned, and in a stressful situation the laser will not help ya at all but may in fact make things worse. I drop my LCP in my inside pocket if my jacket, otherwise I am carrying my XD or Sig on my hip.

Chrispy1200 wrote:

I'd think twice about actually having it on your person. I've seen pictures of some nasty hip bruises from some pretty small get offs.

Nothing like pistol whipping yourself to add insult to injury!

Chrispy1200 wrote:

I'd think twice about actually having it on your person. I've seen pictures of some nasty hip bruises from some pretty small get offs.

I wouldn't think twice about it - and I carry a Browning Hi Power which is not a particularly small pistol.

This idea got kicked around the campfire hot and heavy about four or five years ago on ADV. I found it kind of amusing as it was back when the previous generation cell phones were still pretty prevalent i.e. phones that were just about the same thickness as a pistol, about the same length as the grip and upper frame. What I found amusing was that there were quite a few "You'll put an eye out with that" proponents that apparently didn't have the least bit of concern that the cell phone they had in their pockets would do the damage in a fall they were arguing a pistol would do. I think their real problem was that some people carried (pistols, not cell phones I mean).

Riders have been stuffing enduro tool kits and cameras in jacket pockets, knives and leathermen on their belts, etc for quite some time. I've never seen the concerns raised about those items that come up when it's a pistol instead, and I'm not sure why that is.

goosebags wrote:

Any daily comuters Carry a weapon while riding? If so, how are you carrying? Any issues?

If I'm heading into town, the pistol goes in a tuckable IWB holster, where it will spend the day once I'm off my bike to do whatever I am doing. I don't want to re-dress and screw around once I hit town.

If I'm heading out with the intent of riding, then the pistol goes in a chest carry rig that is similar in design to radio chest packs worn by coaches/support staff at sporting events. A holster intended for town carry doesn't do a very good job of carrying in comfort when a pair of pants and a riding jacket go over top. Not to mention, if you did need the pistol for some reason or other, you'd have to spend some time digging through your riding clothing first to get to it. Chest packs are very comfortable and can hold other stuff out of the way yet easily accessible as well.

Pokey wrote:

Lasers on pistols are a NO NO as far as I am concerned, and in a stressful situation the laser will not help ya at all but may in fact make things worse.

Lasers are a personal choice. However, the very reason all our combat arms troops are trained with lasers on their rifles and many police departments are moving to lasers on pistols is precisely because lasers DO help in stressful situations. I'm not following the issue that closely, but I've been training troops heading overseas on laser use as part of their workup training for about four years now. During that time, no bad stories about lasers have come back from the sandbox to the Small Arms School, nor have I heard of any police force that moved to mount lasers on sidearms reversing course and having them removed. And a lot of the initiative to mount lasers on sidearms (aside from their minaturization over the last couple of years) is former soldiers/reserve soldiers who used them on tours in Afghanistan and Iraq during urban operations putting their virtues forward to their departments.

But... it is a personal choice.

Jäger wrote:

Pokey wrote:

Lasers on pistols are a NO NO as far as I am concerned, and in a stressful situation the laser will not help ya at all but may in fact make things worse.

Lasers are a personal choice. However, the very reason all our combat arms troops are trained with lasers on their rifles and many police departments are moving to lasers on pistols is precisely because lasers DO help in stressful situations. I'm not following the issue that closely, but I've been training troops heading overseas on laser use as part of their workup training for about four years now. During that time, no bad stories about lasers have come back from the sandbox to the Small Arms School, nor have I heard of any police force that moved to mount lasers on sidearms reversing course and having them removed. And a lot of the initiative to mount lasers on sidearms (aside from their minaturization over the last couple of years) is former soldiers/reserve soldiers who used them on tours in Afghanistan and Iraq during urban operations putting their virtues forward to their departments.

But... it is a personal choice.

You are not talking civilian use, BIG difference in combat situations and when you are already cocked and locked, weapon ready, and in full self preservation or attack mode. Yes there is a very good reason why SEALS, SWAT, Special Forces and many other tactical units use lasers on their weapons. In an up close and personal situation like a civilian could be in, there is very little time to think or react, and a laser sight on a pistol in those situations are of little to no use IMHO. So yes it all comes down to a personal choice, but for me it seems to give more of a false sense of security than any kind of advantage.

An oldie but goodie ......

Pokey wrote:

You are not talking civilian use, BIG difference in combat situations and when you are already cocked and locked, weapon ready, and in full self preservation or attack mode.

A laser is a sight.

Just a sight. It isn't a tactical computer. It simply removes the requirement to align a front and back sight. In fact, one of the biggest reason's for their success is the sight appears where most people being attacked have their eyes focused - on the threat. You can coach people "front sight, front sight, front sight" all you want, repetitive studies have found over and over again that most police involved in defensive shootings couldn't even remember if they even used the sights, much less what their sight picture was.

I remember similar objections when we started putting optical sights on every infantryman's rifle back in the early 90's: too complicated, not snipers, big difference, etc. Here we are twenty years later and optical sights of various varieties appear to be hear to stay.

That aside, most police shootings don't start with police cocked and locked, weapon ready, etc and so forth. If they thought they were in that mode, the shotgun or patrol rifle would be in their hands - not a pistol.

Quote :

Yes there is a very good reason why SEALS, SWAT, Special Forces and many other tactical units use lasers on their weapons.

And your ordinary soldier. And your ordinary police officer. I.e. those who do the bulk of the gunfighting in our society on our behalf. If there's a perception that these are a piece of equipment for elite/specialized units, it is a very inaccurate one.

Quote :

In an up close and personal situation like a civilian could be in, there is very little time to think or react, and a laser sight on a pistol in those situations are of little to no use IMHO.

So there's little time to think or react, but apparently enough time to align a front and rear sight? Particularly in a dark environment where you can barely even see the sights, much less align them? And do police get more time to react than a civilian, when the 103,274th mundane contact they've had in their career suddenly attacks them? I don't think so.

I'm not sure how many gunfights or TICs you've been in where you've witnessed lasers fail those using them. The ones I've been in, the lasers were on rifles, not pistols, so I'll accept arguments that doesn't count. However, given the shortage of lawsuits, publicized stories of how somebody died because they relied on a laser sight, etc, it appears they aren't quite as bad as you imagine they are.

Quote :

So yes it all comes down to a personal choice, but for me it seems to give more of a false sense of security than any kind of advantage.

The beauty of it is that, like the choice to carry, nobody is obligated to put a laser on their firearm. In fact, you're not even obligated to have any kind of sight. But "you'll put your eye out" claims should at least be accompanied with some supporting evidence.

I've watched many people - including my wife with her J frame - shoot at close range first with open sights and then again with the laser. It's pretty obvious after watching a couple of dozen people do this that they're not only on target faster, but their splits are faster as well and their scores are generally better. I can't see that result reversing in real life - if it did, people like Ayoob would be all over that.

Sometimes new technology is indeed as good as it looks.

I've had my eye on a Ruger LCR in .357 for carrying while hiking and camping, but haven't yet made the purchase nor figured out an acceptable way to carry it on my bike/person while out and about. At least here in AK carrying is more or less openly and widely accepted, particularly in bear season and areas, so I'm not as worried about concealed carry, but I'd need to carry comfortably for long periods of time on and off the bike.

skierd wrote:

I've had my eye on a Ruger LCR in .357 for carrying while hiking and camping, but haven't yet made the purchase nor figured out an acceptable way to carry it on my bike/person while out and about. At least here in AK carrying is more or less openly and widely accepted, particularly in bear season and areas, so I'm not as worried about concealed carry, but I'd need to carry comfortably for long periods of time on and off the bike.

I find a chest holster is about as good as it gets for outdoor use. It's basically a square, like the radio harnesses you see ski racing coaches and whatnot wearing. Think of it like a sandwich - there's a zipper down the side of the harness on your strong side, the handgun fits in a holster inside, carried horizontally. So to get at the handgun, you pull the zipper down, reach in and draw the handgun. Velcro bits on the outside hold handheld radios and/or GPS units.

The straps go up over your shoulders, criss-cross on your back, and then around your side to attach at the bottom corners of the harness. This allows you to wear a backpack without it getting in the way, not having to remove riding clothing to get at it, etc. And with the weight of the handgun on your shoulders, the weight you notice carrying a larger handgun on your belt becomes pretty much unnoticeable.

The LCR is a well built handgun, but .357 is pretty minimal for critters, although fine against the two legged variety. You also get quite a double whammy because the short barrel of the LCR really costs you a lot of energy - makes it great for concealing, but like everything else, you don't get something for nothing. I think you might also discover that the little LCR in .357 will be quite a handful to shoot accurately - a handful on steroids. My wife's J-frame with 3" bbl in .38 Spl +P weighs about the same, and it is pretty nasty even for somebody who's put mucho rounds through revolvers over the last 40 years.

Having said that, if your intent is overwhelmingly for two legged problems, the LCR is very concealable and so light you won't notice carrying it all day. Good choice for that. If you decide to load it with 180 or 200 grain +P loads for bear as well, I suspect you'll only try those one or two times before deciding it was a bad idea. And yet you'll still have to contend with the energy loss from such a short barrel.

If you are thinking critters as well, there's various persuasions of revolvers that qualify with 4" barrels - still reasonably concealable, and a 4" barrel makes a big difference in the energy department. Better yet (my opinion only), is a pistol of the 1911 or Glock variant chambered in 10mm or 40 S&W if you must. It ain't a .44 Magnum, but it also is respectfully close to the .41 magnum in performance when loaded with 200 grain bullets - 200 grain bullets at 1300 fps is nothing to sneer at. And being flat, much more concealable than a revolver.

Like bikes, a handgun that handles everything well is mostly a myth.

I'm primarily concerned with large hungry four legged critters (bears), with the ability to carry concealed more secondary. 357mag and 44mag are more or less the standard recommendations up here. A full or fuller size weapon is likely the more effective choice, but the weight shape and form factor of a snub nose is appealing especially if I ever move back to civilization. I'd love a 1911 style pistol too... is. 45acp an effective cartridge for larger mammals?

http://www.holsters4guns.com/holsters/product/Bull_Dog_Fanny_Pack_holster_Black.html

this works

skierd wrote:

I'm primarily concerned with large hungry four legged critters (bears), with the ability to carry concealed more secondary. 357mag and 44mag are more or less the standard recommendations up here. A full or fuller size weapon is likely the more effective choice, but the weight shape and form factor of a snub nose is appealing especially if I ever move back to civilization. I'd love a 1911 style pistol too... is. 45acp an effective cartridge for larger mammals?

I think Alaska is very civilized. It's places like Maryland, Delaware, etc that I consider uncivilized. But, I digress... just don't think leaving Alaska is the same as returning to civilization. Unless the destination is... ohh... Montana for example.

Snubbies just aren't anywhere near the top as a good choice for a critter gun. You don't need an easily concealable handgun for critters (and, as far as that goes, concealing a 4" bbl pistol is not that difficult at all in the alternative). If I insisted on only one, I'd pick up a 4" pistol in 10mm. If I wanted the best of both worlds, I'd look at a 3" bbl 9mm or .40 S&W for social occasions, and a 5" pistol or 6" wheelgun for my bear wrench. The neat thing about handguns is there are so many barely-used guns on the market at fire sale prices. So unless you're set on brand spanking new, you can get a pretty great deal if you pay attention and have a bit of patience.

I don't think .45 ACP is a great choice for four legged critters. On the other hand, it ain't bad. And, more importantly, the idea of coolly stopping a charging bear with a handgun is mostly myth. A lot of those defensive uses run along the lines of feeding the critter your left arm to chew on while sticking the muzzle of the gun against their head with the other one. At those ranges, a .45 will work... There's also some hopped-up variants of the .45 ACP that take it up many levels...

The easiest choice in pistols is 10mm. Glock will sell you a Tupperware 10mm if you don't mind those things (and many don't). There's also 1911's in 10mm available. Perhaps the least expensive is RIA's new version:
http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/rock-island-armory1911-tactical-ii-10mm-pistol/

I recently went somewhat along that route. But in my case, I found a dirt cheap STI Ranger II (4.25" bbl, not 5") in 40 S&W. Another $30 got me a chambering reamer that made the 40 S&W into it's original parent 10mm. After that, changing out to a 20 lb spring and an EGW flat firing pin stop, and I was good to go. Conceals very well, but big enough to do the business if required, but again small enough to easily carry on a bike.

I dont see any "fire sale" prices at all. I visit the local shops two to three time each week and nothing is on sale. Used guns are going for new+ prices since all the B/S about gun laws.
The wait for a new hand gun is 12-20 weeks around these parts. Ammo is another story,my dealer said all federal ammo is sold out for the next three years.
My dealer is treating me fine price wise,selection is slim to none. I picked up the only new .44mag to see the store in 5 months.
At every shop in the area you can only get one box of anything,thats it no more ammo for you. Reloading supplys are gone.

dtx wrote:

I dont see any "fire sale" prices at all. I visit the local shops two to three time each week and nothing is on sale. Used guns are going for new+ prices since all the B/S about gun laws.

I just looked at some of the online sites and I see your point, being from the Land of Kennedy's. A used Glock 20 in excellent condition, with night sights, can be found around here for around $500. Same thing is being advertised in Mass for $950. Eek... State you live in obviously has some influence on things.

A few months ago, I missed a Dan Wesson CBOB in 10mm, excellent condition, that was advertised for sale in The Mountain Trader for $500. There's a steal of a deal I wish I'd gotten to first.

Quote :

The wait for a new hand gun is 12-20 weeks around these parts. Ammo is another story,my dealer said all federal ammo is sold out for the next three years.
My dealer is treating me fine price wise,selection is slim to none. I picked up the only new .44mag to see the store in 5 months.
At every shop in the area you can only get one box of anything,thats it no more ammo for you. Reloading supplys are gone.

I suspect if you patronize Double Tap or Buffalo Bore, you won't have any problems getting serious ammo. Winchester white box is getting skimpy on the shelves around here, but it's there for those who are looking for it.

Reloading supplies are also likewise available, but skimpy in some areas. Fortunately, I usually have about two year's worth of components on hand at any given time, so I can usually sail through periods of fear buying without too much trouble.

Dan Wesson ! I know the family and they made them in town.

Getting anything lead or brass shipped in is not going to happen. This sucks as we are working on some loads for the .357 and .44 mag lever guns.

Prices at some deales are over the top as a friend was going to buy a .357 Henry for 900.00 $ used,one week before i got one in .44 at 700.00 $ new. You should see the line,30-40 people a day all day long at Cabelas. They set up 4 seat booths to do background checks and chairs to wait,average wait is 4-5hrs in Ct.

Local dealers are now out of .22 and they cannot get any as sales reps have stopped showing up. Pres O is the best gun salesman of the year

I always carried a Springfield XD40 in the waistband, but since riding this year I decided to change it up and I use a shoulder holster under a zipper sweatshirt or vest. Works great.