Wallet Holster Legal or Not?

[Spirithawk]

Ok, here's what I found out about my wallet holster. Believe what the written statute says right? Can't go wrong doing that.  WRONG!!!! I'll tell you why! I got a call back from a semi-local ATF agent this morning and he called The Firearms Technology Branch who's supose to have the final verdict. He said, much to his surprise, that the BATF's attorneys, quote "In their infinite wisdom!",  determined my holster did fit the Other Weapon rule thus you have to pay a $200 tax to register them. Why was he so surprised?  He carries a Kel Tec just like I have been doing himself thinking it was perfectly ok! Nowww, end of story right? Wronggggg again. The Attorney's ruling was supose to have been made 2 years ago. A site that sells an almost identicle wallet as mine not only says they are legal, they post a link backing their statement up! Also, wouldn't you know it, the document is dated 2 years ago! Who's the link too? Why The Firearms Technology Branch.... who else? Sooooo this kinda throws a wrench in the ignore what you hear and trust what you read in the statutes don't it? Now Savage, that's not directed at you bud. It's directed at a very screwed up systom! Bottom line, I could carry a copy of this document and raise one heck of a stink if challenged but, even though I think my holster is by far the smartest way to carry, it's just not worth the hassle. I do intend to call the ATF agent back and point out the link to the document which should either be verified as correct or removed from the site selling the holsters. Plus all manufactures of this type of holster should be notified there was a change after their being told, and issued statements, that they WERE legal if that's what the mix up is about! I've been trying but, of course, no answer so far. It's almost as if the BATF intentionaly puts you in a situation that they can bust you for later! Here's the link to the contradictory document, they were evaluating an almost identical holster as mine and even mention carrying a Kel Tec P32 in it. Click on the image to enlarge so you can read it. The company I got my wallet holster from also informed me they also have a letter from the ATF stating their product is legal:

http://gunnersecurity.com/Images/atf.png

Ever hear of the term F.U.B.A.R.? To put it more politely the BATF's regulations are as clear as mud! It seems even to them! What really iritates me the most is that the companies making and selling these holsters are justified in believing they're legal because they have verification from the BATF. If it turns out they aren't legal then the BATF,rather than correcting their error, are allowing it to go on thus putting not only the companies, who did their part, at risk of Federal Violations, but the hundreds, if not thousands,  of citizens who bought and are using these holsters as well. Now I've also been told that my CCW permit also makes a differance. Anyways, I feel it's important enough to get to the real facts. I've turned the matter over to a man who was instumental in getting both the CCW law and The Castle Law passed in Missouri. I feel he can not only get to the bottom of it but if neccassry, lobby to get the law changed.

[44 Man]

It's almost as bad as the treasury boys and their tax codes.  They tell you right off that if you call them with a question and receive the answer, that it 'may not be correct'!  I had heard back in the 70's that this type of holster was a no-no from ATF but a few years later they got their head out of their - and realized it was just a holster!  The only thing said then was you had to have a valid 'CCW' permit for one.  You just can't have a holster that 'presents' the gun for you, as in spring loaded, etc.  Good luck, but I wouldn't put too much validity in your 'opinion' that you received and would go back to what the statute says, that's the final athority.  44 Man

[RB1235]

Well buddy if it were me and I figured on having to carry a letter to not go to jail on a fed firearms charge,,,,,,,,,,, I wouldn't carry the holster. I used to carry a walther that way until they outlawed them. Now I just put a thin piece of plastic cut to the shape of a wallet in my pocket. The pistol doesn't fit in, just in between the plastic and you. Quick and easy to draw as long as you carry the pistol the same way every time for quick acquisition.

[Spirithawk]

I'm carrying in a belt holster for the time being. I sent pics of the holster, along with the BATFE's letter saying it was legal, to their headquarters and am just waiting on an answer. Not holding my breath though. lol The BATFE is reknowned for changing their minds mid stream and not bothering to notify anyone. To me that spells intrapment but, like with the IRS, they make up the rules to suite themselves at any given moment. I just really feel bad, if the holster is illegal, for all the people carrying in it that don't have a clue that they are breaking the law because they are going by the BATFE's own statement that it is legal. Not tho mention the folks making and selling them because the BATFE told them, in writing, that it was perfectly ok! Right now, my campaign is not to just know myself but to force their hand into making the truth of the matter known to both the manufactuers and those now using the holster. To either say yes we stand by what we said or no we changed our minds but didn't think it important enough to let anyone know! That statement the link is to is not signed by just any run of the mill agent. It's signed by an agent who's specific job it is to know and who's branch it is that is instrumental in the laws being made in the first place! That's what bugs me. 

[SHOOTALL]

I had ask the ? on another topic . I remember when Galco had some really nice ones. I wanted one but found out at gun has to look like a gun . Nope ain't got a clue why . At one time you could buy a 22 gun that looked like a writing pen . But it had to bend to form a grip when it was able to fire .

[Savage]

Like SpiritHawk said, it's just not worth the hassle. As the statute clearly defines these holsters as illegal, I wouldn't take anyone's  word that it's anything else. There are too many ways to carry that work as well.
Savage

[Spirithawk]

Actually they are not illegal, you just have to be willing to shell out an exorbanent price to legally use one.  The main reason I liked mine was that you could reach for it without obviously reaching for a firearm. The holster I now use works fairly well in that I can stand with my arms crossed and draw my weapon fairly easily and quickly without telegraphing the move. I'll post pics of what I now use for both my Kel Tec and Derringer. I carry both on my belt, one left front and one right front.

[Savage]

True. The $200 tax makes it legal. Isn't it wonderful what money can buy!
Savage

[nova71]

does this include the Uncle Mike's Sidekick pocket holsters ? or just the ones that you can fire without having to draw the pistol?  I have read it but not exactly sure what holster is not legal 

[SHOOTALL]

The ? i have is if you pay the transfer tax can it be used in all states your ccw is good . With short bbl rifles and shotguns crossing state lines can be a problem

[Spirithawk]

Nova) Suposedly it just applies to firearms that completely hide the weapon while still allowing it to be fired while in the holster. Problem is, mine doesn't fit that description as the weapon is easily visable. You should be safe with your holster but the one thing I have learned in all this is that you can't count on anything. When the agency that enforces firearms laws, including the branch that says which are legal and which aren't, can't, or won't, tell you what the actual law is, then there is a real problem with the systom. By being refered , by several BATFE offices, to my local Sherrif's Office who says I'm perfectly legal as long as I have my CCW, only to be told a day or so later by yet a differant agent that I'm not, and then to be shown letters from the same " know all enforce all BATFE branch " clearly stating that the holsters have been evaluated and found perfectly legal, they are very much contradicting themselve's time and time and time again. Then when sent pictures of my actual wallet, along with their own letter saying it's legal, they fail to answer at all.   And people wonder why my hair is gray and getting thin!   They make the laws but aparently we are the only ones required to abide by them, they can do whatever they choose according to whim.

Shootall) they can't even give me, in writing, a definite answer about anything and frankly at this point just their word is as worthless as Obama as president! My personal guess, the wallet's legal, they are not real happy about it, so they cloud the issue untill you're too afraid to carry it. They are embaressed and po'ed that someone came up with a design that got around their nonsense law!

Savage) I know I can be hard headed, particularly where government stupidity is concerned, it's just in my DNA being Cherokee.   But I want you to know I do apreciate you concern and thank you for it.

[Savage]

Savage) I know I can be hard headed, particularly where government stupidity is concerned, it's just in my DNA being Cherokee.  Grin But I want you to know I do apreciate you concern and thank you for it.

You are quite welcome. I do what I can to keep a fellow citizen from running afoul of the mess that is our government.

does this include the Uncle Mike's Sidekick pocket holsters ? or just the ones that you can fire without having to draw the pistol?  Huh I have read it but not exactly sure what holster is not legal  Embarrassed

According to the letter of the statute, the common feature that makes these holsters AOW is the hole that allows the gun to be fired while the gun is still in the holster. Your Sidekick holster is fine.  It's another senseless restriction on firearms and related items that's been in place since 68. If the legality of any gun related item is questionable, it's always best to read the appropriate statute yourself. Many items are legal to manufacture and own, but illegal to have in your possession outside your residence. Automatic opening knives and brass knuckles come to mind in that group. The laws are senseless and confusing, it pays to check out laws in your jurisdiction as well as the federal ones. Everyone stay safe and legal where you can.
Savage

[Spirithawk]

Quote -
According to the letter of the statute, the common feature that makes these holsters AOW is the hole that allows the gun to be fired while the gun is still in the holster. Your Sidekick holster is fine.

I agree, but if you think about it, doesn't that them give them room for the arguement that most Western style holsters thus would be illegal as well. According to the way the statute reads they are.  After all, it simply states a holster having a hole allowing the weapon to be fired without being drawn. It says absolutely nothing about where that hole is located!  Would not the open toe a Western holster be considered a hole allowing the weapon to be fired while in the holster if you so desire to? It sure don't say a perfectly round hole now does it? It doesn't say a hole over the trigger either! Combine the open toe with the cut out area allowing quick access to the trigger and guess what? A Western holster fits the description they give pretty darn well now don't it? I've seen many cowboy action shooters simply swivel their holster and fire without drawing. It's not common but it is most certainly done. So is the BATFE going to charge every single person with a Western style holster with a felony? Of course not, but it's certainly a double standard now isn't it. Why won't they? Because look at the uproar they'd have on their hands! They have enough problems to deal with without stirring up a hornets nest like that! So why favor the one holster over the other if the law clearly says both are illegal by definition? Clearly the law needs to be changed and a closed mouth don't get fed! I'm bringing the issue up with everyone I can think of and I am not resting untill the BATFE gives me an answer why they allow one and not the other! I'm a Cherokee Activist and, not without connections, that will get my voice heard. As the saying goes, " Sure you can trust your government. Just ask any Indian! "

[SHOOTALL]

Just because federal law allows you to have a restricted object state law may not . if you travel be sure.

[Spirithawk]

That's part of the responsibility of carrying and it doesn't just apply to restricted objects. Ordinances can vary from city to city,to township, to county, to state and depending * aparently* on the mood of the BATFE on any given day to them too. That applies to normally legal weapons as well. You have to be an attorney specialising in firearms laws to often know what's what and where! I still haven't got the BATFE to put a determination on my wallet into writing, legal or not! I'm not that dead set on carrying in the holster in question but as a disabled Vietnam Vet, with an honorable discharge and absolutely no criminal record and a CCW permit holder, I don't think it's too dang much to ask for a definitive answer! Their lack to give one, through either ignorance or pure lazyness, is what burns me!