Beautiful for Bersa

Flatjack holster for Bersa 380, again by Dennis of Dragon Leather Works.

This entry was posted in holster, pistol and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Beautiful for Bersa

  1. Very nice leatherwork. Is it a trainer pistol? If not that is a sweet blue.

  2. Pingback: SayUncle » Gun Porn

  3. O_W says:

    If the holster is fitted for a Bersa, why is it currently housing a P230?

  4. Dragon says:

    Heya O_W…

    Because I’m away on business, and couldn’t ship a Bersa handgun to Oleg to take the pictures, I sent the holster with a Bluegun of the SIG 230, which is, dimensiaonally, the same size/shape as the Bersa Thunder .380….both of which take 98% or their design cues from the Walther PPK/S.

    The only difference in the holsters is that you can put the Sig in a holster fitted to the Bersa Thunder .380, but you CANNOT put the Bersa into a custom-fitted holster for the SIG 230. The difference is in the shape of the trigger guard, where one is smaller than the other (The Bersa Trigger guard is a wee bit different, and cannot properly fit into a holster that was fitted specifically to the Sig 230…)

  5. LarryArnold says:

    I’d hate to have to keep it concealed, even if I am from Texas, not New Orleans. Nice work.

  6. Paul Koning says:

    Wow, did you see that Glock is telling Blueguns not to sell their fake guns to the public? (see the blueguns website)
    I’m not sure I was a potential Glock customer, but now I’m definitely not one. That’s not quite as bad as the blunder that started the Great S&W Boycott some years ago, but it is definitely the mark of an idiot in the PR department…

  7. Dragon says:

    Its a liability issue…Rings Blueguns are by far the BEST mock-up / model / trainer out there, that a simple spray of flat black paint is all you need to make it look real.

    I would be willing to bet that the move by Glock to restrict Blueguns from the sales was most likely the result of a lawsuit somewhere, where Glock is named in a suit that involves a “lifelike” model (be it a Bluegun, and AirSoft, etc…) and its easier for Glock to simply put the kabosh on the use of the design of their guns in such fashion than it is to actually defend themselves against spurious lawsuits.

    While there is are laws in place that shield manufacturers of guns from liability if their guns are used in crimes (and rightfully so, since they can’t control the Ctions of the people weilding the tools…) there are no laws to protect gun manufacturers from civil/ criminal liability if a fake model of solid plastic that LOOKS like theirs is used in a crime.

    A creative-thinking lawyer can build a case on that premise, and with a sympathetic jury seated, he stands a good chance at recovering damages from Glock. easier to just stop the likeness of their product from entering the marketplace, and cheaper in the long run.

Comments are closed.