'Fobbit fashion' holster unsafe

After spending a large part of my current deployment working in the Forward Operating Base Ramadi safety office, I believe the writer of "Taking charge of safety" (letter, Dec. 8) is the most uninformed officer I have ever heard trying to talk safety.

Negligent discharges do not occur only when clearing a weapon. Ideally, that is where most would prefer they happen, but accidental discharges do occur "inside the wire" and far from the gate. It is this type of discharge that makes the wearing of the holster, which points the barrel backward, a large risk.

The captain says, "My 9 mm will not discharge unless I want it to, or you could argue that I could have an accident." No crap. A negligent discharge is an accident. He also wants readers to believe that if a soldier is trained not to have his or her finger "inside the trigger guard," then all accidental discharges will disappear. Sorry, sir, but most negligent discharges I have recorded occur by accident. Examples are gear tugging on triggers and soldiers leaning the wrong way and putting pressure on the trigger.

Knowing that these types of accidental discharges occur is what makes me wary of holsters that point the barrel behind the wearer. I have noticed an alarming number of higher command using these. The Army issues leg holsters and shoulder holsters that orient the muzzle downward, away from other soldiers. It is a muzzle awareness principle, and some soldiers who have been issued 9 mm handguns seem to think that coolness outweighs everything we have been taught.

Holsters that orient the barrel to the back of the wearer are not safe. These holsters are simply "fobbit fashion." Until someone is hurt, I am sure no one who wears one of these holsters will think twice about the red flag they have painted on the soldier standing behind them.

Spc. Lauren A
Forward Operating Base Ramadi, Iraq

Stars & Stripes, 13 December, 2005.