• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

What determines the legality of a OWB holster?

Vefrancis

Newbie
Joined
Sep 27, 2017
Messages
7
Location
jacksonville, NC
What types of holsters are illegal for OWB? How much of the holster/gun must be visible? Is a inside the pants legal? Thanks in advance, I'm a new member of this forum.
 

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,823
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
My reading of NC laws doesn't reveal any sort of OWB holster as being 'illegal' in N. Carolina.

The only holster that I'm aware of which is regulated in any way would be one that disguises the nature of the handgun (i.e. a wallet holster that covers the slide, or one of the HK Operational Briefcases that conceals an entire MP5k.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
My reading of NC laws doesn't reveal any sort of OWB holster as being 'illegal' in N. Carolina.

The only holster that I'm aware of which is regulated in any way would be one that disguises the nature of the handgun (i.e. a wallet holster that covers the slide, or one of the HK Operational Briefcases that conceals an entire MP5k.

so does the august member from the peach state have any type of cite, per forum protocals ~ # 5, cite to authory, for their outstanding postulation regarding NC statutes on disguises or briefcases, did you reach your conclusions while picking nits/fleas...?

just saying
 

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,823
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
so does the august member from the peach state have any type of cite, per forum protocals ~ # 5, cite to authory, for their outstanding postulation regarding NC statutes on disguises or briefcases, did you reach your conclusions while picking nits/fleas...?

just saying
Well, yeah, I do, thanks.
"Wallet holsters" that have a hole from which to fire the enclosed handgun are classified as "Any Other Weapon" by the ATF, see ATF Guideline with pretty pictures or read the dry text at Section 5845(e) of the National Firearms Act.

The 'HK Operational Briefcase' falls under the same definition as a wallet holster that disguises the fact that it conceals an operational firearm, when equipped with a firearm, of course. Wallet holsters without a handgun or operational briefcases without accompanying firearms are just pieces of leather and bits of plastic+metal.



Thank you for this wonderful teaching opportunity, such a moment would not be possible without people like you on the forum.

p.s. I didn't say "North Carolina laws" on disguised handguns, you parsed that all on your own. I said "...any law". ... just sayin' :)
 
Last edited:

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
Well, yeah, I did, thanks.
"Wallet holsters" that have a hole from which to fire the enclosed handgun are classified as "Any Other Weapon" by the ATF, see ATF Guideline with pretty pictures or read the dry text at Section 5845(e) of the National Firearms Act.

The 'HK Operational Briefcase' falls under the same definition as a wallet holster that disguises the fact that it conceals an operational firearm, when equipped with a firearm, of course. Wallet holsters without a handgun or operational briefcases without accompanying firearms are just pieces of leather and bits of plastic+metal.

Thank you for this wonderful teaching opportunity, such a moment would not be possible without people like you on the forum.

You guys in NC have been arguing this since Nov 2011, you'd think by now there'd be some sorta ... consensus.

a very close review of 26USC section 5845 fails to mention HOLSTERS whatsoever and to cite (e) you might review section (a) which provides a definition what the CODE is specifically discussing:

(a) Firearm
The term “firearm” means (1) a shotgun having a barrel or barrels of less than 18 inches in length; (2) a weapon made from a shotgun if such weapon as modified has an overall length of less than 26 inches or a barrel or barrels of less than 18 inches in length; (3) a rifle having a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length; (4) a weapon made from a rifle if such weapon as modified has an overall length of less than 26 inches or a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length; (5) any other weapon, as defined in subsection (e); (6) a machinegun; (7) any silencer...

(e) Any other weapon
The term “any other weapon” means any weapon or device capable of being concealed on the person from which a shot can be discharged through the energy of an explosive, a pistol or revolver having a barrel with a smooth bore designed or redesigned to fire a fixed shotgun shell, weapons with combination shotgun and rifle barrels 12 inches or more, less than 18 inches in length, from which only a single discharge can be made from either barrel without manual reloading, and shall include any such weapon which may be readily restored to fire. Such term shall not include a pistol or a revolver having a rifled bore, or rifled bores, or weapons designed, made, or intended to be fired from the shoulder and not capable of firing fixed ammunition.

So did i miss the august member from the peach state's commentary regarding any type of NC statutory cite, to back up their wonderful and insightful comments about H OL S T E R S use within NC which is what the OP had a query about?

and how did you word it...oh ya, quote: Thank you for this wonderful teaching opportunity, such a moment would not be possible without people like you on the forum. unquote, as you have hit the nail on the head in your assessment of your kind contribution this evening.

shopping


shopping


readily available

addendum: you quoted 20 year olde ATF NEWSLETTER quantifying wallet holsters as NFA...I am truly having trouble stopping laughing from you poor search capabilities...most excellent teaching exercise...
 
Last edited:

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,823
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
Neither are considered AOW's: #1 has neither a hole from which a shot may be discharged nor does it disguise the shape of the firearm in an operable condition. #2 has a covered trigger, rendering shooting from within the holster a bit ... difficult.



addendum: you quoted 20 year olde ATF NEWSLETTER quantifying wallet holsters as NFA...I am truly having trouble stopping laughing from you poor search capabilities...most excellent teaching exercise...
If you have reason to laugh, then I suppose you have a citation to authority of some more recent ATF Newsletter that's at odds with the previously published one?
Do you realize how old the ATF's definition of what a machinegun is??
Has it changed materially?

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms
Washington, DC 20226

FEB 25 1976

Gentlemen:

The January 15, 1976, issue of the Shotgun News contains an advertisement by you offering for sale a "Wallet-Holster" designed specifically for concealing and firing a High-Standard derringer pistol and other derringer pistols.

Section 179.11 of Part 179, Title 27, Code of Federal Regulations, defines a pistol as follows: A weapon originally designed, made, and intended to fire a small projectile (bullet) from one or more barrels when held in one hand, and having
(a) a chamber(s) as an integral part(s) of, or permanently aligned with, the bore(s); and
(b) a short stock designed to be gripped by one hand and at an angle to and extending below the line of the bore(s). The term shall not include any gadget device, any gun altered or converted to resemble a pistol, any gun that fires more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger, or any small portable gun such as: Nazi belt buckle pistol, glove pistol, or a one-hand stock gun designed to fire fixed shotgun ammunition.

Placing the High-Standard derringer in the "Wallet-Holster" negates the use of the birdshead type stock which can no longer be gripped by the hand in the conventional manner. The derringer thus becomes a concealed gadget device in the same category as a can gun, a belt buckle pistol, or a cigarette lighter gun, and is classified as "any other weapon" in the amended National Firearms Act of 1968.

There is no violation of the National Firearms Act in the mere possession of a derringer with a rifled bore, nor in making, transferring, or receiving a "Wallet-Holster" designed to contain the derringer. However, any person who might possess the installed combination of the High-Standard derringer or any other derringer designed to be carried and fired in the "Wallet Holster" would be in possession of a "firearm" as defined in Section 5845(a)(5) of the Act. Such a firearm is subject to the tax imposed under Section 5821, and to the making provisions of Section 5822 of the Act. Sections 5811 and 5812 on transfer taxes and transfer provisions are also applicable. Publication 603 (Rev. 6-74) and its 1975 Supplement, ATF P 5300.5, which contains the sections of law mentioned above, are enclosed for your convenient reference.

We strongly recommend that you publish a warning sheet which outlines the status of these commodities to accompany the sale of each "Wallet-Holster." Such action on your part would be prudent business practice. Please contact us or our nearest Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms Office is you have any questions concerning
The contents of this letter.

Sincerely yours,

A. Atley Peterson
Acting Assistant Director
(Technical and Scientific Services)

Again, thank you for providing this opportunity for another 'teachable moment'.
 
Last edited:

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
Neither are considered AOW's: #1 has neither a hole from which a shot may be discharged nor does it disguise the shape of the firearm in an operable condition. #2 has a covered trigger, rendering shooting from within the holster a bit ... difficult.

If you have reason to laugh, then I suppose you have a citation to authority of some more recent ATF Newsletter that's at odds with the previously published one?
Do you realize how old the ATF's definition of what a machinegun is??
Has it changed materially?

Again, thank you for providing this opportunity for another 'teachable moment'.

tis not even close to Chrismas and here you are dancing under the mistletoe...

as eye95 stated...not playing your silly arse game...
 

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,823
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
So.. are you saying those hosters ARE "AOW"s or are you just being jejune?

The ATF newsletter plainly illustrated what sort of holster was considered an AOW when used in conjunction with a firearm.
If the august member from the Tar Heel state is is confused between the two then it's not really my fault.
 

bc.cruiser

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2011
Messages
786
Location
Fayetteville NC
The State of North Carolina does not address the issue of OWB holsters. If you can wear it, go ahead. I believe you may be asking what type holster is considered for lawfully OCing. If so, again the State does not address the matter. The statutory concern is whether or not the gun is concealed (covered and on/about your person). That is the direction Fallschirmjäger took. My Luger has a full coverage holster with a buckled flap; recognizable as a holster, but keeping the fact of the presence of a gun from view. This may be considered concealed. I don't know because I don't carry with this particular holster.

The issue of AOW holsters, or wallet gun holsters, is different. Those that disguise the appearance of the gun apparently would not be legal as OC. ATF references (FFL Newsletter, August 1997 https://www.atf.gov/file/56386/down...earms-guide-identification-firearms-section-9 ), and NCGS 14-269 cover this.

Here is an OCDO discussion from the NC sub-forum of June 2011. http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?91380-legality-of-pocket-holster. Note posts 12 and 13.

Another explanation (3rd post): http://naaminis.com/smf/index.php?topic=4634.0

In short, we have no state laws about holster types. If the holster does not disguise the gun, it is not restricted in use. If a holster does not conceal a gun from being readily recognizable as a gun, then you are OC.

Have a safe day.
 

gutshot II

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2017
Messages
782
Location
Central Ky.
So.. are you saying those hosters ARE "AOW"s or are you just being jejune?

The ATF newsletter plainly illustrated what sort of holster was considered an AOW when used in conjunction with a firearm.
If the august member from the Tar Heel state is is confused between the two then it's not really my fault.

See Urban Dictionary's description of people that use this word here:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=jejune

Personally, I would never say anything like that about anyone that posts on this forum(due to forum rules and all), but then, I am not a dictionary and they are. They probably know best.
 

Vefrancis

Newbie
Joined
Sep 27, 2017
Messages
7
Location
jacksonville, NC
Sorry, I was lost in all the self satisfying mumbo jumbo, of the two dueling members, who were trying to out do each other instead of answering my original question.
 

bc.cruiser

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2011
Messages
786
Location
Fayetteville NC
Did your question get satisfactorily answered?

If you look at the top of this page you will note the two females on the right are using IWB holsters.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
Sorry, I was lost in all the self satisfying mumbo jumbo, of the two dueling members, who were trying to out do each other instead of answering my original question.

Vern, sorry you missed my orginal post to your query you posted in the holster thread...before that thread got axed.

but please vern, feel free to follow the initial mumbo jumbo misinformation to your query from the august GA member but BC's seemed to be on track.

enjoy which ever holster you wish to put your 1911 in...

cheers

ps, nice to see you treat forum member the same across the nation.
 
Last edited:

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,823
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
Vern, sorry you missed my orginal post to your query you posted in the holster thread...before that thread got axed.

but please vern, feel free to follow the initial mumbo jumbo misinformation to your query from the august GA member but BC's seemed to be on track.

My reading of NC laws doesn't reveal any sort of OWB holster as being 'illegal' in N. Carolina.
The State of North Carolina does not address the issue of OWB holsters. If you can wear it, go ahead.

Yes, I think I see the subtle difference as well, Solus. Good catch, kudos, and a big Huzzah! to you.
 
Top