Concealed Carry for Women

A look at the pluses and minuses of off-body and on-body techniques
Like most men in law enforcement, I have little or no fashion sense. My closet contains clothes in “earth tones” (brown, green, black and tan), along with the occasional blue (jeans) and white (T-shirts). I dress as if I’m preparing for some sort of tactical event, where the ability to camouflage myself is the key to survival.
You'll find no chartreuse, periwinkle or mauve in my wardrobe! My wife, on the other hand, has a mix of different types of clothing. As a fellow law enforcement officer, she also has some drab colored stuff, but for her, that's for wearing while on the job or on the range.
The rest of her gear is what I categorize as "girlie stuff" – dresses, blouses, skirts, etc. True, not what you want to be wearing during an end-of-days scenario, but it all looks a heck of a lot better during date night.

CARRYING CONCEALED MEANS THAT my wife, like most women, has to decide how to “tactically accessorize” before going to work, shopping or just out on the town. In other words, she has to pick a carry option for her firearm that works with what she is wearing.
Both of us are very strong believers in carrying concealed all the time. We do it to protect our children, each other, the public and ourselves.
Tactical accessorizing is pretty easy for me. I pick a weapon I like to pack and I choose my carry options, generally carrying it either OWB (on the waistband) or IWB (inside the waistband).

At 5-foot-10 and 190 pounds, I can generally frame handgun with relative ease, especially given that I generally purchase clothes with concealed carry in mind. I have plenty of "cover coats" and "cover shirts" designed to wear as over garments to cover up my weapon.
This usually consists of a shirt or jacket one size larger than I would normally wear. For women, it's not so simple. The average American female is 5-foot-4, while the average male comes in at 5-foot-9. Men are obviously bigger and heavier, so, in simple terms, more body mass equals more space to conceal a handgun. A 115-pound female isn’t going to be able to conceal an M1911A1 on her person, regardless of whether it is carried inside or outside the waistband. However, she can generally hide a small- or medium-frame gun with little or no difficulty. From a fashion standpoint, most women aren't going to want to wear extra-large clothing to cover up their piece. Women do have a distinct advantage, though, in terms of additional options for concealed carry.

They can opt for off-body carry. This involves the use of purses, handbags and other accessories to carry a handgun. Now I don't want to exclude my brothers who have embraced their more feminine side and opted to carry a "murse" (man purse). They are popular in Europe, so maybe there is something to it. I use a tactical murse to carry at the gym, so I'm not totally opposed to the idea, especially if it goes with your man bun hair-do … Generally, though, women are the ones who carry purses on a regular basis.

OFF-BODY CARRY HAS both advantages and disadvantages. Here are a few: Advantages of off-body carry Ability to carry a larger weapon:
If a suppressor-equipped HK USP .45 SOCOM is your preferred carry weapon, you can carry it in a purse. For more practical applications, though, large-frame handguns such as a SIG P226 or .45-caliber Glock 21 can also easily be carried in this manner. This means more firepower. Read the rest of concealed carry for women.

This is a common recommendation and the 642 is often marketed to women who are novice shooters as their first or only gun, but I think it’s particularly poorly-suited to novice. It takes a lot of practice to shoot a double-action revolver well, so it doesn’t make much sense to me to have a beginner start with one of the very most difficult revolvers to shoot well.

The 642’s main selling points as a women’s carry gun are that it’s (1) simpler to operate than a semi-auto and (2) easy and relatively safe to carry in a purse or a pocket because of its light weight, long, heavy double action trigger pull (less likely to accidentally discharge), enclosed hammer (less likely to snag when drawn from a purse or pocket), and integral “gutter” sights (same).

It is certainly simple to operate, but all of the traits that make it easy to carry make it difficult and unpleasant to shoot, particularly for a novice. The light weight means it has very sharp recoil with .38 +P; its long double-action trigger pull is difficult to master; it cannot be shot in single-action mode; and its “gutter” sights are rudimentary and difficult to see well, and have a very short sight radius to boot. It will be frustrating and unpleasant for a casual, novice shooter to learn to shoot it, and could very well cause her to give up and quit going to the range.

If you want to go the double action J-Frame route, I’d go with the Model 640. It’s steel-framed and 8 ounces heavier—a bit more of a hassle to carry, but the recoil is much easier to manage. It’s also chambered in .357 Magnum, so if she gets used to the .38 +P and wants to carry something with a little more proven effectiveness, she can move up to magnums (although, as a Model 60 owner, I can attest that you want to stick to lighter magnum loads). If you can afford it, I’d go with the 640 Pro Series, which has a fluted barrel and far better dovetailed, sort-of-Novak-style Tritium night sights. Better yet, if she carries a big enough bag and doesn’t mind the weight, just get a full-size revolver like a model 686.

However, I think it would be better still if she went with the largest 9mm semi-auto she can carry and got a good holster (even if it’s a purse holster). It will just be much easier to learn to shoot it well, and it really won’t take long to learn to operate it and carry it safely and properly. However, I think it’s a bad idea for anyone to carry a semi-auto without a round chambered, so if she is uncomfortable doing so (and some people just are) she should stick with a revolver.

All that said, if she’s never going to go to the range and you just want a gun that she won’t leave at home or forget how to use, the 642 might fit the bill. I think it’s a bad idea for anyone who carries not to train, but if my life was on the line, I’d still rather be an untrained person with a gun than an untrained person with no gun.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.