Just a housing that the Glock Pistol fits into, you need a BATF&E (Form 1) and a Federal tax stamp
Link to a video,
The Glock pistol can be holstered when not in use.
In a short answer, no.
It is common for folks to get blasted, or to blast other people/things with slung carbines off-safe.
Don’t trust me, but take the time to read what a real been there-done that guy has to say on this issue;
http://www.combatshootingandtactics.com/published/the_weapon_safety.PDF
Yes - exposed trigger guard needs a manual safety.
Period.
The CAA RONI has an ambi safety that works by covering the trigger guard. Seems to work well in my limited testing.
I made a post with several links to companies who modify Glock Pistols or sell drop in parts to add a manual safety but the post went MIA. So depending on your point of view both opinions are readily available.
“It is common for folks to get blasted, or to blast other people/things with slung carbines off-safe.”
This is absolutely correct and has occurred too many times with MP5’s, 870’s, Benelli’s, AR15’s, etc…
Your long gun MUST have a safety and it needs to be used.
OK, you’ve listed the cons, where are the pros?
A PDW should be able to “pass thru barriers”, and should NOT be “less effective against body armor”.
Actually, you ARE talking about battle rifles. Like the term or not, when you employ a weapon, and things start getting shot, its a battle.
There is no such thing as “low risk”. If there is any risk, and it warrants you bringing a firearm, than it is not “low risk”.
Where is a place that battle rifles are prohibited that pistol caliber carbines arent? Serious question. Lets be honest, the PCC is still a rifle, and it really isnt that much “more” than a pistol.
We may not be on the same page here so let me explain, we are not talking Military or Law Enforcement missions but the average Joe living everyday life. The average guy 99.9% of the time will never have the need for a battle rifle in everyday life and with all the different local and state laws may not be legally able to own or travel with one depending on location. Most persons who can legally carry do so with a variety of handguns and thats fine but for those who wish to have something a bit more in terms of range and accuracy over a handgun may look at a PCC like the Kel-Tec Sub-2000 folding carbine or one of the other PCC choices. As for your statement were would a PCC be legal were a Battle rifle may not is a question that only a astute person schooled in state and local laws for ever jurisdiction in this great country could maybe answer, but I personally know that I would rather try to explain a covert PCC which uses the same magazines and ammunition as does my pistol then a hard core assault rifle especially in states like New Jersey, New York and any other that try’s to restrict my second amendment and HR-218 rights. As for the term Low-Risk just traveling through a bad neighborhood can elevate your personal risk of a encounter but that does not mean one will occur. Military and Police look for bad guys were Joe Public just wishes to go about life being able to address the extremely remote chance of a hostile encounter.
Where do you come up with this stuff? 99.9% of John Q Public wont need a handgun either, but many still carry them. By your “logic” Joe Schmoe wont 'need" those either.
Not to mention if there are restrictions on battle rifles, then there will more than likely be restrictions on many semi-auto, higher capacity handguns.
That is all those types of carbines offer. They dont offer superior ballistic performance to a handgun.
Also, as a person who has owned a KelTec Sub2K, I realized it had some severe drawbacks. Such as shooting the weapon left handed puts the spent casings into the right eye. If its your strong side or weak side get ready for some pain.
If you dont know of locale or jurisdiction where “battle rifles” are prohibited, why worry about it? Even in NYC there is no such laws, same for LA. I’m willing to gamble that there isnt a place where “battle rifles” are specifically outlawed.
Also, enough of the evil rifle sillyness. A good shoot is a good shoot. I live in an extremely liberal county in Texas. Dallas County to be exact. Our DA, and all his upper echelon are diehard ultra liberals, and they remind everyone every chance they get. They have stated their position on frearms and “assault rifles”. However, there have been several shooting by homeowners in Dallas County, many of them usings things such as Polish Underfolder AKs, various ARs(one of which was surpressed), as well as SKSs, etc. All of them, including the one where a Polish underfolder AK was used(multiple baddies were capped), were no-billed.
Again, it doesnt matter where you travel, down the street for gas, to work, etc, your threat level should always be elevated. If you take a gun of anykind with you, you understand that. So why not take a weapons with you that will give you best advantages. The PCC offers nothing but ammunition compatability with a handgun, which we all know is marginal in stopping a determined badguy. I dont know about you, but ammunition compatability is last god damned thing I am concerned about when I am fighting for my life.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phila PD
We may not be on the same page here so let me explain, we are not talking Military or Law Enforcement missions but the average Joe living everyday life. The average guy 99.9% of the time will never have the need for a battle rifle in everyday life and with all the different local and state laws may not be legally able to own or travel with one depending on location
Fail-Safe response,
Where do you come up with this stuff? 99.9% of John Q Public wont need a handgun either, but many still carry them. By your “logic” Joe Schmoe wont 'need" those either.
Not to mention if there are restrictions on battle rifles, then there will more than likely be restrictions on many semi-auto, higher capacity handguns.
Phila PD rebuttal,
Where do I come up with this stuff? I was starting to wonder the same about your responses. Hugh difference in traveling off your home stead in a NON-L/E/O, Military or Security capacity with a battle rifle over a concealed Handgun or a concealed compact folding PCC carbine, if you don’t know the difference then I wont waste bandwidth trying to explain it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phila PD
Most persons who can legally carry do so with a variety of handguns and thats fine but for those who wish to have something a bit more in terms of range and accuracy over a handgun may look at a PCC like the Kel-Tec Sub-2000 folding carbine or one of the other PCC choices.
Fail-Safe response,
That is all those types of carbines offer. They don’t offer superior ballistic performance to a handgun.
Phila PD rebuttal,
Your kidding right? Better Accuracy over range (That is all those carbines offer) over a handgun. Hell yes! Accuracy and superior tactics win gun fights more so than any other factor. And yes PCC’s do offer better ballistic performance over handguns with proper load selection. If a given handgun is able to expand and penetrate a bullet to proper depths out to 20yds but a PCC with its greater muzzle velocity is able to do the same job out to 30yds or more. I would have to say the PCC offered superior ballistic performance over a handgun.
Fail-safe wrote,
Also, as a person who has owned a Kel-Tec Sub2K, I realized it had some severe drawbacks. Such as shooting the weapon left handed puts the spent casings into the right eye. If its your strong side or weak side get ready for some pain.
Phila PD rebuttal,
There is a extended ejection port clip which helps left handed shooters with this problem, I already have one and it works fine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phila PD
As for your statement were would a PCC be legal were a Battle rifle may not is a question that only a astute person schooled in state and local laws for ever jurisdiction in this great country could maybe answer, but I personally know that I would rather try to explain a covert PCC which uses the same magazines and ammunition as does my pistol then a hard core assault rifle especially in states like New Jersey, New York and any other that try’s to restrict my second amendment and HR-218 rights.
Fail-safe wrote,
If you don’t know of locale or jurisdiction where “battle rifles” are prohibited, why worry about it? Even in NYC there is no such laws, same for LA. I’m willing to gamble that there isn’t a place where “battle rifles” are specifically outlawed.
Phila PD rebuttal,
Your totally kidding right??? You just go right ahead and not worry about or gamble that there is not a law restricting battle rifles and travel into that jurisdiction with one. Its your freedom and life possessions on the line, ignorance is not a criminal defense.
Fail-safe wrote,
Also, enough of the evil rifle silliness. A good shoot is a good shoot. I live in an extremely liberal county in Texas. Dallas County to be exact. Our DA, and all his upper echelon are die hard ultra liberals, and they remind everyone every chance they get. They have stated their position on firearms and “assault rifles”. However, there have been several shooting by homeowners in Dallas County, many of them using things such as Polish Under folder AKs, various ARs(one of which was suppressed), as well as SKSs, etc. All of them, including the one where a Polish under folder AK was used(multiple baddies were capped), were no-billed.
Phila PD rebuttal,
Your talking about home defense on ones property which has nothing to do with Joe Public taking a battle rifle on the road in a non-L/E/O, Military or Security capacity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phila PD
As for the term Low-Risk just traveling through a bad neighborhood can elevate your personal risk of a encounter but that does not mean one will occur. Military and Police look for bad guys were Joe Public just wishes to go about life being able to address the extremely remote chance of a hostile encounter.
Fail-safe wrote,
Again, it doesn’t matter where you travel, down the street for gas, to work, etc, your threat level should always be elevated. If you take a gun of any kind with you, you understand that. So why not take a weapons with you that will give you best advantages. The PCC offers nothing but ammunition compatibility with a handgun, which we all know is marginal in stopping a determined bad guy. I don’t know about you, but ammunition compatibility is last god damned thing I am concerned about when I am fighting for my life.
Phila PD rebuttal,
A battle rifle has to be readily available for it to be of any use so being locked in a trunk or broken down in a back pack makes is useless. At least a compact folding PCC like the Kel-Tec in 9mm or .40S&W in its little nylon carry bag offers the ability to have superior accuracy and ballistics over a handgun should the need arise. Now I’M not saying I would not want my M-4 in 6.8 if the crap hit the fan but how realistic is it that just traveling around town or walking thur a shopping mall would I be able to conceal or justify my evil black rifle. My little PCC in its case passes for a small web-book which I can deploy in just a few seconds. You say the advantage of a PCC is marginal over a handgun, that marginal may just save your life.
Phila PD:
You speak broadly of “pistol calibre carbines” (to include, I guess, all of them) and seem to pin some of your hopes on +P or +P+ ammo.
I’d like to remind casual readers of the thread that many carbines in this catagory can’t use +P or +P+ ammo. I keep looking for a reason to get one of these, and in researching them, reread an American Rifleman review on the Marlin PCC in 9mm. They said (paraphrasing) not a good idea using non standard pressure ammo. [note, this Carbine no longer listed by Marlin] The explanation was due to “most” of these catagory carbines being built on a blowback type action. They’re much like a 22 LR semiauto. They depend on a big massive bolt to have enough inertia to delay the opening of the breach until pressures are safe. The higher pressure ammo causes extra battering of the carbine. So, in general, if counting on even better ballistics due to +P/+P+ ammo, it might not be available.
Checking KelTec’s website on the KelTec Subrifle 2000, they don’t mention ammo. Downloading the manual, they don’t seem to recommend or prohibit +P/+P+ ammo. They say:
“Never use Non-standard, reloaded or damaged cartridges. …
Never use ammunition where the pressure levels exceed
industry standards.”
Under “Ballistics” they say:
“At close range and
high power ammunition the SUB rifle has the energy
of a .357 Magnum.”
I know, the sentense is bad, but it’s a cut and paste direct from the manual, and should likely have a “with” or “using” etc after “range and”. Searching for +P or +P+ in the manual there is a graph on page 17 that shows a curve for BOTH a 9mm 115gn FMJ and a 9mm 115gn JHP +P. So, I’d believe +P is approved for the KelTec Sub 2K. The above quoted sentense with “exceed industry standards” should be approval also, as for the last several years popular publications like to point out that +P ammo isn’t special, it’s just at the upper level of the SAMMI specs.
A quick comment on the idea of a golden velocity window for the bullet to perform as intended should be made. The velocity increase shown by Molan and the “Balistics by the inch” page, as well as the KelTec manual says a standard 115gn load should have about 1300-1350fps muzzle velocity from a 16 inch barrel. Running a number of ballistic coeficients from .11 to .18 at standard temp and pressure, you’ll be back at a “normal Pistol barrel length” velocity around 70 to 90 yards downrange. So at that distance, you’re back in your bullets design window.
In summary, this post makes two points. Not every PPC might be OK with +P/+P+ ammo (although the KelTec seems to be with +P). The bullet from the PPC will be back at the velocity it would have had from a pistol barrel some 70 to 90 yards downrange.
There is zero difference between traveling with a “battle rifle” vs a PCC, folding or not. They are both rifles. Assuming you purchase them from an FFL, both are checked as rifles. I carry what you deem a “battle rifle”, and I have carried both of the PCCs you have mentioned here. Other than the calibers, I saw them all the same, as rifles. I am as non-LEO/military/security as a person can get, but I still see the value of a rifle caliber carbine. See: Mark Wilson, Smith County, Texas, and imagine if that Joe Schmoe had a rifle caliber weapon if he would still be here today.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phila PD
Most persons who can legally carry do so with a variety of handguns and thats fine but for those who wish to have something a bit more in terms of range and accuracy over a handgun may look at a PCC like the Kel-Tec Sub-2000 folding carbine or one of the other PCC choices.Fail-Safe response,
That is all those types of carbines offer. They don’t offer superior ballistic performance to a handgun.Phila PD rebuttal,
Your kidding right? Better Accuracy over range (That is all those carbines offer) over a handgun. Hell yes! Accuracy and superior tactics win gun fights more so than any other factor. And yes PCC’s do offer better ballistic performance over handguns with proper load selection. If a given handgun is able to expand and penetrate a bullet to proper depths out to 20yds but a PCC with its greater muzzle velocity is able to do the same job out to 30yds or more. I would have to say the PCC offered superior ballistic performance over a handgun.
While true accuracy and tactics win fights, so does better performing ammunition. You can have all the advancing under fire, and shots to the torso you woant, but with a rifle caliber round, you would still be more effective.
A pistol caliber carbine is still firing a pistol round. We know, I am not sure if you do, that pistol rounds arent the best at stopping bad people doing bad things. I want you to prove that a pistol caliber carbine offers better terminal performance than the same round fired from a pistol barrel. You made the claim. Can you prove your asssertion? The fourth paragraph of your original post, you admit you dont know. According to Molon’s data, the increase in velocity isnt much, which doesnt mean much really.
Fail-safe wrote,
Also, as a person who has owned a Kel-Tec Sub2K, I realized it had some severe drawbacks. Such as shooting the weapon left handed puts the spent casings into the right eye. If its your strong side or weak side get ready for some pain.Phila PD rebuttal,
There is a extended ejection port clip which helps left handed shooters with this problem, I already have one and it works fine.
So leftyies have to purchase an aftermarket part just to make the weapon shootable? Not necessary with ARs, AKs, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phila PD
As for your statement were would a PCC be legal were a Battle rifle may not is a question that only a astute person schooled in state and local laws for ever jurisdiction in this great country could maybe answer, but I personally know that I would rather try to explain a covert PCC which uses the same magazines and ammunition as does my pistol then a hard core assault rifle especially in states like New Jersey, New York and any other that try’s to restrict my second amendment and HR-218 rights.Fail-safe wrote,
If you don’t know of locale or jurisdiction where “battle rifles” are prohibited, why worry about it? Even in NYC there is no such laws, same for LA. I’m willing to gamble that there isn’t a place where “battle rifles” are specifically outlawed.Phila PD rebuttal,
Your totally kidding right??? You just go right ahead and not worry about or gamble that there is not a law restricting battle rifles and travel into that jurisdiction with one. Its your freedom and life possessions on the line, ignorance is not a criminal defense.
Dont try and dance around it. Find me the jurisdictions, and their subsequent laws, where “battle rifles” are verboten. Put up or shut up. Afterall, if its your freedoms, you’d figue you’d do you homework and find out where these jurisdictions located. Locate them.
Even if there was such an unconstitutional place there are still other weapons that can offer far superior terminal performance that are not “battle rifles”. The Marlin models 30 and 336 in 30-30Win come to mind.
Fail-safe wrote,
Also, enough of the evil rifle silliness. A good shoot is a good shoot. I live in an extremely liberal county in Texas. Dallas County to be exact. Our DA, and all his upper echelon are die hard ultra liberals, and they remind everyone every chance they get. They have stated their position on firearms and “assault rifles”. However, there have been several shooting by homeowners in Dallas County, many of them using things such as Polish Under folder AKs, various ARs(one of which was suppressed), as well as SKSs, etc. All of them, including the one where a Polish under folder AK was used(multiple baddies were capped), were no-billed.Phila PD rebuttal,
Your talking about home defense on ones property which has nothing to do with Joe Public taking a battle rifle on the road in a non-L/E/O, Military or Security capacity.
OK, I mistakenly broad stroked all of those shootings as homeowners, my mistake. The incident did not involve just homeowners. Atleast one was in a cul de sac. Another was a gentleman who owns several kiosk style businesses.
However, it still should noted that Dallas County is one of the more liberal jurisdictions in the US, and so-called “battle rifles” havent posed a problem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phila PD
As for the term Low-Risk just traveling through a bad neighborhood can elevate your personal risk of a encounter but that does not mean one will occur. Military and Police look for bad guys were Joe Public just wishes to go about life being able to address the extremely remote chance of a hostile encounter.Fail-safe wrote,
Again, it doesn’t matter where you travel, down the street for gas, to work, etc, your threat level should always be elevated. If you take a gun of any kind with you, you understand that. So why not take a weapons with you that will give you best advantages. The PCC offers nothing but ammunition compatibility with a handgun, which we all know is marginal in stopping a determined bad guy. I don’t know about you, but ammunition compatibility is last god damned thing I am concerned about when I am fighting for my life.Phila PD rebuttal,
A battle rifle has to be readily available for it to be of any use so being locked in a trunk or broken down in a back pack makes is useless. At least a compact folding PCC like the Kel-Tec in 9mm or .40S&W in its little nylon carry bag offers the ability to have superior accuracy and ballistics over a handgun should the need arise. Now I’M not saying I would not want my M-4 in 6.8 if the crap hit the fan but how realistic is it that just traveling around town or walking thur a shopping mall would I be able to conceal or justify my evil black rifle. My little PCC in its case passes for a small web-book which I can deploy in just a few seconds. You say the advantage of a PCC is marginal over a handgun, that marginal may just save your life.
My Hungarian AK (SA85) loaded with a 20rd mag full of Sapsan sits in the floor board of my truck. While you are trying to unfold your KelTec my AK is ready. Then again, you’re talking about the Ruger PC9 in your original post. My AK isnt much, if any, longer than the PC9, so that argument goes down the toilet.
If marginal extra terminal performance may save your life, what does superior terminal performance get you? Save your life mostest?
I don’t think anyone is saying that real rifles shooting real rifle bullets aren’t MUCH better at fighting than PCCs.
I’d still prefer a PCC over a handgun in anything more than an arm’s length fight.
Anyway…
The Kel Tec is OK for +P according to Kel Tec’s customer support people.
I like my sub 2000 for what it is, a niche weapon that gives me a long gun for use in situations where it would be cumbersome to have, keep, use and/or store a real rifle while traveling.
The sub 2000 goes in and out of hotels in a shoulder bag that doesn’t scream gun, even shorter folders (not talking about SBRs here) still look like rifles in rifle cases when you carry them around, unless one goes to lengths to camouflage the bag (racket bags, whatever).
I understand the limitations of the system, much like folks who carry mouseguns do when carrying deeply concealed in non-permissive environments.
Sorry to bring up an old thread, but that’s what newbies to forums do, isn’t it? 
I own an Glock 17 and a Marlin Camp 9 Carbine. I just think it cool to own a handgun and a rifle that shoot the same cartridge. Since I own a .357, adding a .357 carbine appeals.
As for home invasion, all of the above would probably work fine. The Glock would be my first choice followed by the Camp 9.
I am often asked about pistol caliber carbines (PCC) by folks that want to know if the longer barrel will give more velocity and therefore better terminal ballistics. I always point them to Ballistics By the Inch (http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/results.html). As has been noted by others, you get slightly more velocity, but not as much as some might think.
As most of you know, the designed velocity range where bullets work best is fairly narrow, and more velocity will not always result in better terminal performance.
About the only thing PCCs bring to the table is longer sight radius and a shoulder stock for better accuracy. But we need to remember why we carry pistols.
Pistols are carried because they are small enough to be carried concealed and/or on the person all day. Pistols are very poor fight Stoppers. If you know for sure that you are going to be in a gun fight, bring a long gun and several friends with long guns.
A PCC has the disadvantage of a rifle (big and basically un-concealable) and the disadvantage of a pistol (poor caliber and poor fight stopping ability).
They are surely fun “toys” and can be shot for a lot of enjoyment, but there are better tools for almost any job. 
Posting problems
posting problems
While there is surely always better tools for any job PCC’s do fill a role between pistols and center fire rifles. Depending on the design and if one is able to legally own a SBR PCC’s can fit a variety of roles. Are PCC’s perfect? “NO” not in any shape or form but they do offer advantages over pistols at distance with proper ammunition if one can not legally own or afford an AR or AK platform. Other benefits are they are cheaper to train with and PCC’s like the Ruger PC-9 or PC-40 are so over built that one may never wear them out and they can take a ton of heavy use and keep on ticking. Now don’t get me wrong I love my 5.56, 6.8 and 7.62x39mm rifles and would grab one for serious work 100% of the time but originally when this thread was started it was based on a traveling PPC like the folding Kel-Tec Sub-2000 in 9mm or .40S&W for un-excepted encounters which may occur while traveling (Vehicle/Hotel room…Ect) were both pistol and carbine use the same ammunition and magazine. Of course the pistol most likely would come into action first and may decide the outcome before a PCC ever comes into play but just having the option to switch to a PCC if the situation allowed could turn the odds in your favor depending on the circumstances. I would rather have a folding PCC like the Kel-Tec and not need it then needing a long gun while traveling and have my AR/AK sitting in a safe at home. PCC’s have been used in many forms, Thompson, Uzi, Sten, MP-40 and the PPSH-41 during numerous wars over the past 80 years so at least with me I still see a use for one.
I like both my 9mm and .45 AR. They are great fun, and I have other choices available for serious business.
The pistol caliber carbines are cheap to load for. They are much more pleasant when it comes to noise and blast. Chicks dig them.
I have never understood why some people are so down on them. By their logic, no one should own a .22 rifle.