PDA

View Full Version : Carry without a round in a chamber = FAIL


Pages : [1] 2

RollingCode3
04-07-2011, 1:01 AM
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=086_1260862712

Watch the video. A unloaded gun will do you NO GOOD when you NEED IT. Without a round in the chamber you are carrying a unloaded gun. To do otherwise would be to carry a paperweight.

Defensive shootings happen in seconds, you most likely will NOT have time to rack the slide or you remember to rack the slide.

luckystrike
04-07-2011, 1:16 AM
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=086_1260862712

Watch the video. A unloaded gun will do you NO GOOD when you NEED IT. Without a round in the chamber you are carrying a unloaded gun. To do otherwise would be to carry a paperweight.

Defensive shootings happen in seconds, you most likely will NOT have time to rack the slide or you remember to rack the slide.

a pistol with a dry chamber used by a moron or frantic people that lose their cool under pressure will do you NO GOOD.

I wish california considered that unloaded.

iareConfusE
04-07-2011, 1:17 AM
Yep. If I chose to carry, I would never carry without a round chambered.

awall919
04-07-2011, 2:00 AM
Agreed with above statements. I must also disagree with the first aid administered to the victim by the bystanders.
Though... If the victim had more training or at least more experience carrying a firearm,(which i can't say he didn't), in my own personal opinion things would not have turned out the way they did. Of course my statements are open to criticism.

kenjimatic
04-07-2011, 4:28 AM
One day I went into a bait shop to get some things to go fishing and a customer was open carrying. There was an off duty LEO asking him if the gun was loaded and the guy said it's an empty magazine in the gun and the LEO just left it at that and left. I was just thinking to myself that since the gun is out in the open and everyone can see he is carrying. A bad guy can just approach him with no warning and attack him or shoot him without notice. You can carry conceal while fishing as long as it's transported legally to the fishing spot so why not just do that? Guess he just wanted to reserve his right to bear arms and show everyone his H&K :D.

Sorry to thread jack but yes defensive shooting happens fast. It's not like the bad guy is going to say "hey, I'm going to come in and rob the store and get ready. Okay?"

rogervzv
04-07-2011, 4:44 AM
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=086_1260862712

Watch the video. A unloaded gun will do you NO GOOD when you NEED IT. Without a round in the chamber you are carrying a unloaded gun. To do otherwise would be to carry a paperweight.

Defensive shootings happen in seconds, you most likely will NOT have time to rack the slide or you remember to rack the slide.

Nonsense. This may be true for cops cruising South-Central LA. It may be true for our soldiers in Iraq. It is not true for most ordinary armed citizens.
The one time I had need for my gun to confront an intruder, I racked the slide to load the round and went to work. No problem.

rogervzv
04-07-2011, 4:47 AM
a pistol with a dry chamber used by a moron or frantic people that lose their cool under pressure will do you NO GOOD.

I wish california considered that unloaded.

People who lose their cool under pressure to the extent that they cannot rack a slide to load a round are people who cannot be trusted to walk around with a round chambered.

And we have all seen that thread where the gentleman shot himself in the drive-thru with his holstered weapon. I'm guessing it was a Glock that did not even have a slide safety. And he's carrying it around loaded in a drive thru. Great.

erikdjs
04-07-2011, 5:52 AM
And we have all seen that thread where the gentleman shot himself in the drive-thru with his holstered weapon. I'm guessing it was a Glock that did not even have a slide safety. And he's carrying it around loaded in a drive thru. Great.

I'd rather have a firing pin and trigger safety or grip & hammer safety than a slide safety. Sounds like a case of wandering booger hooks.

And I agree 100% with OP.

Spirit 1
04-07-2011, 6:31 AM
There's no such thing as one size fits all. Blanket statements most often reveal the holes in the blanket before they begin to cover all aspects. Because human abilities & psyche's are so extraordinarily different one must determine what is best for self under all imaginable
circumstances. Self defense is a complex matter of armament, training & psychology.

The first part is to be able in willingness, that all the psychology of 'Should I and would I?' is fully settled beforehand. The second is suitable armament, with that as readily available as the person wants it to be. The third is frequent training, so that actions of use are skillfully automatic, not semi-automatic. The fourth, after the first three, is to be observant in all situations, to remove factors of surprise and unpreparedness. The fifth is ongoing adaptability to changing circumstances. The sixth is to mold these into an enjoyable lifestyle not overwhelmed or obsessed with matters of personal defense, yet continuously ready, willing & able to take care of business regardless of the customer.

That is, it should be a matter of sober, rational and total preparedness causing peace of mind and continuous safety to the best of one's ability, rather than an obssession, or paranoia or a hero syndrome. This I've stated isn't meant to imply that anyone here is laboring under those last three delusions, but is simply my view on the way of it. Our ability to defend ourselves, should the need arise, should not entirely overthrow or even significantly alter the normal enjoyment of life in all its moments.

Some folks can draw - slam in a mag - rack the slide - acquire their target - shoot dead-center quicker than I can draw, thumb off a safety and fire on target, so it's different strokes for different folks, according to circumstances.

NoJoke
04-07-2011, 6:36 AM
revolvers are simple

rrr70
04-07-2011, 6:39 AM
Nonsense. This may be true for cops cruising South-Central LA. It may be true for our soldiers in Iraq. It is not true for most ordinary armed citizens.
The one time I had need for my gun to confront an intruder, I racked the slide to load the round and went to work. No problem.

People who lose their cool under pressure to the extent that they cannot rack a slide to load a round are people who cannot be trusted to walk around with a round chambered.

And we have all seen that thread where the gentleman shot himself in the drive-thru with his holstered weapon. I'm guessing it was a Glock that did not even have a slide safety. And he's carrying it around loaded in a drive thru. Great.


Epic FAIL.

Mr. Beretta
04-07-2011, 6:54 AM
revolvers are simple

Exactly!

JDW67
04-07-2011, 7:26 AM
To each and everyone in this thread:

Have any of you ever had to pull your weapon?

HighLander51
04-07-2011, 7:32 AM
It's not totally clear what happened, except that he did not have is gun on him, had to go to the counter and make it ready, whether it was ready or not already, and is facing the wrong direction. He was not experienced with that weapon, and clearly had no weapon retention training. Fortunately the BG(s) didn't get good hits either. Actually he would have better off with an edged weapon (and training).

But, loading Israel style doesn't have to be slow, you need to know how to do it, and do it quickly. There is no substitute for speed and accuracy. I am not saying this is faster that running a loaded gun, however there are many competitors who can rack load it, put 2 holes in center mass at 10 yards before the untrained shooter even touches his gun.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqyxP3_am3g&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7stLQvsDX8&feature=related

hossb7
04-07-2011, 7:39 AM
Nonsense. This may be true for cops cruising South-Central LA. It may be true for our soldiers in Iraq. It is not true for most ordinary armed citizens.
The one time I had need for my gun to confront an intruder, I racked the slide to load the round and went to work. No problem.

Glad you're okay but your sample size is quite small.

PandaLuv
04-07-2011, 7:45 AM
Did he die?

Hogxtz
04-07-2011, 7:46 AM
Highlander, those video's are cool. I wonder if they had to install weaker springs to be able to do that?

Shenaniguns
04-07-2011, 7:47 AM
Nonsense. This may be true for cops cruising South-Central LA. It may be true for our soldiers in Iraq. It is not true for most ordinary armed citizens.
The one time I had need for my gun to confront an intruder, I racked the slide to load the round and went to work. No problem.

People who lose their cool under pressure to the extent that they cannot rack a slide to load a round are people who cannot be trusted to walk around with a round chambered.

And we have all seen that thread where the gentleman shot himself in the drive-thru with his holstered weapon. I'm guessing it was a Glock that did not even have a slide safety. And he's carrying it around loaded in a drive thru. Great.


Holy Trolltastic!!! :rolleyes:

HighLander51
04-07-2011, 7:55 AM
And we have all seen that thread where the gentleman shot himself in the drive-thru with his holstered weapon

Yes it was a Glock, but not a gun problem, it was a holster problem, which is a shooter problem.

Which Way Out
04-07-2011, 8:13 AM
To each and everyone in this thread:

Have any of you ever had to pull your weapon?

I once had a dumba** is the sites of my rifle. I heard a lot of banging and yelling at my neighbors house one night at his back door. Got up and looked out the window and this guy was trying to get in. The neighbor was yelling and holding the door from the inside to keep it closed. I had this guy lined up with a angle shot if I needed to. Luckily the guy gave up and wondered down the road. He never knew I was there and what happen to him I don't know. Just glad he went away.
Kinda freaky when I think about it.

Shenaniguns
04-07-2011, 8:15 AM
To each and everyone in this thread:

Have any of you ever had to pull your weapon?


yes

Ksmash01
04-07-2011, 8:16 AM
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=086_1260862712

Watch the video. A unloaded gun will do you NO GOOD when you NEED IT. Without a round in the chamber you are carrying a unloaded gun. To do otherwise would be to carry a paperweight.

Defensive shootings happen in seconds, you most likely will NOT have time to rack the slide or you remember to rack the slide.

So am I to understand that an LEO on CGN just said I sould carry my gun loaded??? :43::chris:

PandaLuv
04-07-2011, 8:17 AM
^^^^
with ccw you can.

drunktank
04-07-2011, 8:19 AM
I've had to pull my weapon and there was no round in chamber. It was at a residence so circumstances were different. Out and about it would be more effective to have one in the chamber, but regardless of carry, training and practice are required

JDW67
04-07-2011, 8:19 AM
I once had a dumba** is the sites of my rifle. I heard a lot of banging and yelling at my neighbors house one night at his back door. Got up and looked out the window and this guy was trying to get in. The neighbor was yelling and holding the door from the inside to keep it closed. I had this guy lined up with a angle shot if I needed to. Luckily the guy gave up and wondered down the road. He never knew I was there and what happen to him I don't know. Just glad he went away.
Kinda freaky when I think about it.

Exactly...People talk about how they would do this or that if a certain situation comes up. But, until you're actually in that situation, I doubt anyone knows how they are going to react.

Ksmash01
04-07-2011, 8:23 AM
To each and everyone in this thread:

Have any of you ever had to pull your weapon?

Yes, twice.

Never had to fire though. The crackheads I encountered were rather submissive.

Soldier415
04-07-2011, 8:47 AM
An unloaded gun is as useful as a football bat

Ksmash01
04-07-2011, 8:47 AM
^^^^
with ccw you can.

I wasn't talking about having any permit...

I'm just glad I'm intelligent enough to know that even if he did say " go ahead and carry your weapon loaded without a permit" doesn't mean that I can.


Exactly...People talk about how they would do this or that if a certain situation comes up. But, until you're actually in that situation, I doubt anyone knows how they are going to react.

I'm from Oakland, where people have lots of chances to train in situations like those...nothin like live fire to get the adrenaline pumping...

titankeith
04-07-2011, 8:49 AM
To each and everyone in this thread:

Have any of you ever had to pull your weapon?

In the Marine Corps, yes I did, and took return fire as well....and this was a "peace time" mission. The fact is an unloaded weapon is not a weapon and leaves someone wide open to a first strike...which is why I wouldn't open carry...someone like that is a sitting duck for bad guys...I'd much rather CCW and bad guys think I'm a victim...element of suprise would be on my side...however, in that video, the perps seemed to know the target was armed and shot him immediately...and when that happens, adrenaline is up and we're ALL at 50% capacity and he had to targets with guns...bad situation no matter what, but if he had a round chambered, he could've gotten a round or two off and maybe got the perps instead of them taking his gun away...or they may have continued firing..not exactly a win-win for anyone...either way, he was going to get shot in that scenario.

G60
04-07-2011, 8:51 AM
Epic FAIL.

seriously. who's side is this guy on?

titankeith
04-07-2011, 8:51 AM
I've had to pull my weapon and there was no round in chamber. It was at a residence so circumstances were different. Out and about it would be more effective to have one in the chamber, but regardless of carry, training and practice are required

Agreed 100%. we need to train regularly for muscle memory, because adrenaline and shock has a way of messing up logic so we have to rely on learned response.

PandaLuv
04-07-2011, 8:53 AM
I wasn't talking about having any permit...

I'm just glad I'm intelligent enough to know that even if he did say " go ahead and carry your weapon loaded without a permit" doesn't mean that I can.




I'm from Oakland, where people have lots of chances to train in situations like those...nothin like live fire to get the adrenaline pumping...

Didnt know that you were not.
Oh either way, UOC is pointless because some guy can just whoop your *** with a stick and steal your expensive belt accesory.
Thats why I wouldnt carry my gun in public at all.

Diclaimer:
Although if I lived in a rough part of town, I would carry my gun loaded and safety's off at my own place/work if permitted.

evidens83
04-07-2011, 9:01 AM
Wow

ZombieTactics
04-07-2011, 9:01 AM
There's no such thing as one size fits all. Blanket statements most often reveal the holes in the blanket before they begin to cover all aspects. Because human abilities & psyche's are so extraordinarily different one must determine what is best for self under all imaginable
circumstances. Self defense is a complex matter of armament, training & psychology.

The first part is to be able in willingness, that all the psychology of 'Should I and would I?' is fully settled beforehand. The second is suitable armament, with that as readily available as the person wants it to be. The third is frequent training, so that actions of use are skillfully automatic, not semi-automatic. The fourth, after the first three, is to be observant in all situations, to remove factors of surprise and unpreparedness. The fifth is ongoing adaptability to changing circumstances. The sixth is to mold these into an enjoyable lifestyle not overwhelmed or obsessed with matters of personal defense, yet continuously ready, willing & able to take care of business regardless of the customer.

That is, it should be a matter of sober, rational and total preparedness causing peace of mind and continuous safety to the best of one's ability, rather than an obssession, or paranoia or a hero syndrome. This I've stated isn't meant to imply that anyone here is laboring under those last three delusions, but is simply my view on the way of it. Our ability to defend ourselves, should the need arise, should not entirely overthrow or even significantly alter the normal enjoyment of life in all its moments.

Some folks can draw - slam in a mag - rack the slide - acquire their target - shoot dead-center quicker than I can draw, thumb off a safety and fire on target, so it's different strokes for different folks, according to circumstances.

Smartest comments so far. Sadly, many - perhaps some here in this thread - cannot see sense when they encounter it.

I choose to carry my handgun chambered, with the safety engaged, wherever it makes sense to me to do so . This is quite a bit of the time. I am not all ashamed to say that I also carry un-chambered as I see fit, and as I believe the circumstances reasonably dictate. Similary, there are circumstances where it's in a bag without a mag inserted. My general position is that one should carry to the maximum condition of readiness they require to insure an effective use of the weapon, given the circumstances and their level of training. Some people would be foolish to carry cocked-n-locked, others unwise to ever be anything else.

I train often enough alongside shooters of all kinds of differing backgrounds (including SWAT cops and SF-types) to know that an un-chambered handgun in not necessarily a liability. I've often drawn to a "click" (owing to a dummy-round randomly loaded in the mag) during some exercise. I've been both surprised and delighted to learn that Draw-Click-Tap-Rack-Bang can happen very quickly with practice ... even when you aren't expecting it ... and I've completed my round of accurate shots well ahead of those trained professionals with perfectly functioning guns. My shot timer tells me that the difference between Draw-Bang and Draw-Rack-Bang is hundredths of a second. Tell me that an "unloaded gun is useless", and I'll laugh in your silly, silly face.

Ksmash01
04-07-2011, 9:13 AM
Didnt know that you were not.
Oh either way, UOC is pointless because some guy can just whoop your *** with a stick and steal your expensive belt accesory.
Thats why I wouldnt carry my gun in public at all.

Diclaimer:
Although if I lived in a rough part of town, I would carry my gun loaded and safety's off at my own place/work if permitted.

I wasn't talking about UOC either.....

Basically, I was inferring that RollingCode3 was advocating Permitless Loaded Carry(either concealed or not)......it was a joke.

I also think UOC is dumb, and only for macho wanna be mall ninjas. It's sorta like a book club for guys with guns, to me. I've never seen anyone open carry in an area where their safety was compromised, only in areas that scare soccer moms.

On the flipside, it sucks that the state would relegate our rights to such a condition.

I do carry a pistol loaded at home. I'm not permitted to do so anywhere else.

Soldier415
04-07-2011, 9:14 AM
To each and everyone in this thread:

Have any of you ever had to pull your weapon?



Once or twice in Afghanistan... ;)

HighLander51
04-07-2011, 9:16 AM
MHogxtz I wonder if they had to install weaker springs to be able to do that?

I thought that at first, but had one of the local Grand Masters do it on my stock G17, yea, pretty amazing. there is another one where an IPSC guy does a sub 1 load (from the belt) and put 2 in the A zone at 7 yards with an STI Open gun.

mif_slim
04-07-2011, 9:16 AM
I gotta new style of loading a gun I gotta practice now. Haha. Love those reloads.

rojocorsa
04-07-2011, 9:16 AM
I noticed the people doing the inertia cocking gimmick weren't being shot at.


Not that I'm any real authority on this, but my educated guess is that such cocking in a defensive situation might be more of a liability. It seems kinda dumb to do this considering that one can safely carry one in the pipe with most modern handguns.

PandaLuv
04-07-2011, 9:18 AM
I wasn't talking about UOC either.....

Basically, I was inferring that RollingCode3 was advocating Permitless Loaded Carry(either concealed or not)......it was a joke.

I also think UOC is dumb, and only for macho wanna be mall ninjas. It's sorta like a book club for guys with guns, to me. I've never seen anyone open carry in an area where their safety was compromised, only in areas that scare soccer moms.

On the flipside, it sucks that the state would relegate our rights to such a condition.

I do carry a pistol loaded at home. I'm not permitted to do so anywhere else.

Oh ok.

I can definitely agree on with the rest of what you just said.

titankeith
04-07-2011, 9:21 AM
Once or twice in Afghanistan... ;)

Respect.

Shenaniguns
04-07-2011, 9:36 AM
Smartest comments so far. Sadly, many - perhaps some here in this thread - cannot see sense when they encounter it.

I choose to carry my handgun chambered, with the safety engaged, wherever it makes sense to me to do so . This is quite a bit of the time. I am not all ashamed to say that I also carry un-chambered as I see fit, and as I believe the circumstances reasonably dictate. Similary, there are circumstances where it's in a bag without a mag inserted. My general position is that one should carry to the maximum condition of readiness they require to insure an effective use of the weapon, given the circumstances and their level of training. Some people would be foolish to carry cocked-n-locked, others unwise to ever be anything else.

I train often enough alongside shooters of all kinds of differing backgrounds (including SWAT cops and SF-types) to know that an un-chambered handgun in not necessarily a liability. I've often drawn to a "click" (owing to a dummy-round randomly loaded in the mag) during some exercise. I've been both surprised and delighted to learn that Draw-Click-Tap-Rack-Bang can happen very quickly with practice ... even when you aren't expecting it ... and I've completed my round of accurate shots well ahead of those trained professionals with perfectly functioning guns. My shot timer tells me that the difference between Draw-Bang and Draw-Rack-Bang is hundredths of a second. Tell me that an "unloaded gun is useless", and I'll laugh in your silly, silly face.



Really? I'd like to see the video on the clock that proves this ;)

HighLander51
04-07-2011, 9:38 AM
rojocorsa I noticed the people doing the inertia cocking gimmick weren't being shot at. Not that I'm any real authority on this, but my educated guess is that such cocking in a defensive situation might be more of a liability.

I'm not advocating Israel style carry, I'm just saying that it can be done faster with practice, of course not as fast as loaded, but faster.

I carry my Glock's hot using a carry clip appendix style. That is not for everyone either, and I don't recommend it either. But if you choose to run this way, make sure you can do it quickly.....

HighLander51
04-07-2011, 9:45 AM
ZombieTactics,My shot timer tells me that the difference between Draw-Bang and Draw-Rack-Bang is hundredths of a second. Tell me that an "unloaded gun is useless", and I'll laugh in your silly, silly face.

Shenaniguns, that is correct. the actual difference, for a good shooter, is less than .1 seconds. Get yourself a timer and prove it for you particular weapon and holster. You won't be able to do it first time out, but with hundreds of tries the time will come down.

When I was seriously practicing drawing from an IWB holster concealed, it was nothing to get down to .85 seconds for 2 rounds in the A zone at 5 yards.

You can't imagine times, you need a shot timer to know the difference.

iareConfusE
04-07-2011, 9:46 AM
Rolling isn't advocating carrying a loaded gun unlawfully. If you can't interpret his post to mean carry loaded lawfully, then you've got some issues.

Ksmash01
04-07-2011, 9:50 AM
Oh ok.

I can definitely agree on with the rest of what you just said.

Right on!!!


Anyway, carrying a weapon without a round in the chamber can only be useful to the people that train, and have become proficient in loading their weapon under stress. If you don't have the skills to employ the tactic, don't do it.

If your weapon is unloaded, leaving it out of the equation is probably best, depending on how easy/difficult it is to load it.

hkdad
04-07-2011, 9:52 AM
Nonsense. This may be true for cops cruising South-Central LA. It may be true for our soldiers in Iraq. It is not true for most ordinary armed citizens.
The one time I had need for my gun to confront an intruder, I racked the slide to load the round and went to work. No problem.

hey smarty, never heard of the 21ft rule? :rolleyes: no problem.

9igSoJHEdUo

Ksmash01
04-07-2011, 9:59 AM
Also, Rolling isn't advocating carrying a loaded gun unlawfully. If you can't interpret his post to mean carry loaded lawfully, then you've got some issues.

Thank you for clearing that up.

Pertaining to the bold: See one of my previous posts. I said it was a joke, and that I didn't actually interpret his post to advocate anything illegal. I also said that I was smart enough not to listen even if he were.

I also stated that carrying loaded lawfully(in my case) was almost a non-existent possibility. Besides being at home, and at the gun range, or other various infrequent circumstances(fishing, federal parks, etc.), I cannot carry a firearm loaded.

That said, I may dead duck if someone comes in to where ever I am and puts lead in my direction. I know I won't be able to fight back until the shooting stops, but by then(if I'm not hit) I'd be more concerned with my family, and the people that got injured.

Shenaniguns
04-07-2011, 10:04 AM
Shenaniguns, that is correct. the actual difference, for a good shooter, is less than .1 seconds. Get yourself a timer and prove it for you particular weapon and holster. You won't be able to do it first time out, but with hundreds of tries the time will come down.

When I was seriously practicing drawing from an IWB holster concealed, it was nothing to get down to .85 seconds for 2 rounds in the A zone at 5 yards.

You can't imagine times, you need a shot timer to know the difference.


That little of a difference seems hard to believe since even Sevigny takes 1.36 for an A zone head shot loaded though it is at 2 more yards and a slightly smaller target.

http://youtu.be/qU3jceN4JAc

Secondly a really fast aimed split is in the .15-.20 range, so you're saying that you can rack a slide faster then pulling a trigger? I'd have to see it demoed to believe it. I'm not saying it could be done quickly but I'm saying it takes much longer than .1 of a second.

ap3572001
04-07-2011, 10:10 AM
There are several things to think about here.
Is Your pistol a primary or secondary firearm?
Are You trained to draw,work the slide and fire?
Is the likely use offensive ( You wake from a noise and search Your house) or defensive? (You are being robbed at atm)


In my agency , per policy,we MUST carry one in the chamber. ON AND OFF DUTY.

l8apex
04-07-2011, 10:11 AM
Where is the popcorn?

Seriously though, whatever your mode of carry you should train with it. Training is good but it should also be accompanied by realism and focused practice. Realism meaning how you normally would have to deploy your firearm if needed.

This video, although tragic for the vic, portrays that sentiment.

Im not saying that if you are a civie you shouldn't take door kicking classes or other HSLD classes. What I am saying is that one should focus the majority of their training on scenarios that they would normally encounter. Keep it real and survive.

JDW67
04-07-2011, 10:18 AM
Agreed 100%. we need to train regularly for muscle memory, because adrenaline and shock has a way of messing up logic so we have to rely on learned response.

By far, the smartest post in this thread...:cool:

luckystrike
04-07-2011, 10:23 AM
1 in the tube isnt a one size fits all thing. depends on what the application is.
for instance the same person that told you "1 in the tube or its useless" is the same guy that told the woman she had a NEGLIGENT discharge when her car keys got caught on the trigger when she pulled out her keys.

I generally agree, but sometimes cocked and locked isnt for you.

Lead Waster
04-07-2011, 10:25 AM
First of all, don't die for money. Seriously, let them rob the store, even if it's your store. Much better to get insurance.

Having said that .... yes, who knows what the robber's intentions were ... rob and kill all witnesses? Well maybe THEN pull the pistol.

Maybe if he didn't pull his unloaded/unreliable pistol they would have just taken some stuff/cash and left. If he survived, I'm sure the hospital bills will exceed anything he would have lost.

Home defense is another story, you are not in a public place and there is no reason for the bad guys to leave in a hurry and just take what they can carry.

hkdad
04-07-2011, 10:27 AM
1 in the tube isnt a one size fits all thing. depends on what the application is.
for instance the same person that told you "1 in the tube or its useless" is the same guy that told the woman she had a NEGLIGENT discharge when her car keys got caught on the trigger when she pulled out her keys.

I generally agree, but sometimes cocked and locked isnt for you.

one in the chamber and a kydex holster with covered trigger guard is the answer. still worrying about AD? then, you are not confident enough and should train more.

Lead Waster
04-07-2011, 10:29 AM
hey smarty, never heard of the 21ft rule? :rolleyes: no problem.

9igSoJHEdUo

So basically, you should confront bad guys from 3 blocks away, from what I can tell (watching without audio at work)

Kestryll
04-07-2011, 10:31 AM
*PRO-TIP*

If many of your posts are missing, it's not a good sign for the future.

ZombieTactics
04-07-2011, 10:31 AM
A friend of mine on YouTube did a pretty decent video on this topic. I don't agree with everything he says in this video, but it's a useful point of departure for discussion. After watching this video, can anyone honestly say with a straight face that an un-chambered handgun is "useless" in the hands of someone trained to employ it effectively?:

c1R2jpi3Qwk

hkdad
04-07-2011, 10:32 AM
First of all, don't die for money. Seriously, let them rob the store, even if it's your store. Much better to get insurance.

Having said that .... yes, who knows what the robber's intentions were ... rob and kill all witnesses? Well maybe THEN pull the pistol.

Maybe if he didn't pull his unloaded/unreliable pistol they would have just taken some stuff/cash and left. If he survived, I'm sure the hospital bills will exceed anything he would have lost.

Home defense is another story, you are not in a public place and there is no reason for the bad guys to leave in a hurry and just take what they can carry.

if someone points a gun at me, it means to me that he or she is willing to take my life. i will not risk it if he or she uses the gun just to scare me. if i see an opening, i'll draw and i'll take the shot. like they say... it's better to be judged by twelve than carried by six!

Sky_DiveR
04-07-2011, 10:33 AM
The vid looks like he may have been shot before he pulled the gun. He may or may not have had a round in the chamber but it does looks like he had the safety on cuz he kept trying to fire the weapon and racking the slide. I've seen vids where the safety wasn't taken off and they do the same thing thinking that it's bad ammo not a safety. Either way... you need to know your weapon!

G60
04-07-2011, 10:45 AM
I hate to sound like one of those people who think up every crazy scenario in their head, but I believe carrying without a round in the chamber is unwise because are you 100% certain you'll have the use of your other free hand in a deadly force situation?

I have a 9 month old daughter to protect that I'm usually carrying around. I'm not going to bet my life and hers on the assumption I'll be able to have a free hand to rack my slide in the event I'm holding her and fighting off a person threatening both of our lives. It's up to you though. As was said, however you decide to carry, train well.

strapbytaurus
04-07-2011, 10:52 AM
anyone notice that they went for the shooter (who failed by the way) and only him? So is it better to not carry a gun at all?

fiddletown
04-07-2011, 10:54 AM
I carry whenever I legally can (mostly when visiting Arizona or Nevada), and I always carry with a round in the chamber (most of the time a 1911 in condition 1, or on occasion an H&K P7M8).

[1] That's how I've been trained -- with Louis Awerbuck, with Massad Ayoob, at Gunsite and with other instructors. I don't know of any major schools or instructors who teach carrying without a round in the chamber.

[2] Yes, with practice one can draw and rack the slide very quickly. But that takes two hands, and I'm not prepared to count on having both hands available in an emergency.

[3] You can not know ahead of time what you will need to be able to do if you need to use your gun. I see no reason, therefore, to add an obstacle to making my gun ready for use.

[4] A gun may be managed safely with at round in the chamber; it's up to you to do so. How an emergency happens is outside your control. How you train, practice and handle your gun is within your control.

[5] I always carry a gun in the same condition of readiness. If I need my gun, I don't want to have to guess if that time I have a round chambered.

joefreas
04-07-2011, 10:54 AM
If this guy had a loaded .357 magnum there would be a couple of dead perps there too-

novalondon
04-07-2011, 11:02 AM
People who lose their cool under pressure to the extent that they cannot rack a slide to load a round are people who cannot be trusted to walk around with a round chambered.

And we have all seen that thread where the gentleman shot himself in the drive-thru with his holstered weapon. I'm guessing it was a Glock that did not even have a slide safety. And he's carrying it around loaded in a drive thru. Great.

Shouldn't guess like that. Sigs are carried with loaded chambers too! and no external safetys either.....

Shenaniguns
04-07-2011, 11:07 AM
A friend of mine on YouTube did a pretty decent video on this topic. I don't agree with everything he says in this video, but it's a useful point of departure for discussion. After watching this video, can anyone honestly say with a straight face that an un-chambered handgun is "useless" in the hands of someone trained to employ it effectively?:

[youtube]c1R2jpi3Qwk[/ youtube]


I'm not saying it isn't impossible to do it quickly but you're also assuming that you'll always have your support hand free (Yes you can rack it off your belt boot etc...), or do it consistently under stress or duress efficiently is what is silly IMO. Having guns stick in my face and a trigger squeezed in my direction proves to me how fast things can happen whether you are trained well or not.

rogervzv
04-07-2011, 11:12 AM
Glad you're okay but your sample size is quite small.

You are not wrong. I am no expert. But I have been around firearms for a lot of years and carried a locked and cocked 45 for a living in the Army, so I have my opinion. It is only an opinion and I would not try to force others to adopt it. Not like these Democrats all do with their restrictive laws, in other words.

There is a reason that the Army required redundant safeties on the 1911 and M9 pistols. A good reason.

rogervzv
04-07-2011, 11:13 AM
Shouldn't guess like that. Sigs are carried with loaded chambers too! and no external safetys either.....

Didn't know that. But no harm in a little guessing. :chris:

SixtyDashOne
04-07-2011, 11:16 AM
No doubt there are people out there that have trained enough to where they can draw and rack a slide quickly. But if you're going to carry a gun, why NOT carry one in the chamber? Why not stack the odds in your favor by any means you realistically can? I don't understand why you'd WANT to carry a gun with an empty chamber, you're just adding one more step that you'll have to take in the event there's a conflict. It's kind of like driving around without a seatbelt because "oh I'll just buckle up if/when it looks like I'm going to get in a crash, after all, it only takes me a second to do so."

novalondon
04-07-2011, 11:18 AM
For those of us who have had repetitive training (law enforcement & or military-34 yrs combined) we all learned that we respond in actions in a scenario to how we were trained to use a certain item whether it be a stick weapon or chemicals or deadly force.
Carrying empty chambered is only used in shotguns or patrol rifles inside the vehicle.
Removing a long gun from it's carrier is a timed and thought out response as is the racking of it to chamber a round.
I cannot think of any school where handgun carry is taught in the empty chamber style of carry.
You carry for a single purpose despite all the arguments around the bottom line of carrying. It is for the ability to protect yourself or others in a hostile situation you may become involved in. Also, when your pushed to the level of removing the weapon from it's holster you are ready mentally to shoot to KILL and not injure or just WING an assailant OR if your not mentally ready to do that then,, you should NOT be carrying in the first place. So,bottom line is, ALL training for handgun/pistol carry is taught to carry with chambers loaded as life can and usually is lost in just a few seconds when firearms are involved.

socal-shooter
04-07-2011, 11:24 AM
even if he had a round chambered the guy would still be dead

he was popped well before he even reached for his weapon

the element of surprise is what got him

Shenaniguns
04-07-2011, 11:32 AM
even if he had a round chambered the guy would still be dead

he was popped well before he even reached for his weapon

the element of surprise is what got him


People get shot all the time without being killed, and I'd rather have a fighting chance with a loaded gun personally. If you don't have the mindset to fight until you can't fight anymore then it doesn't matter if you have a loaded or unloaded firearm or any weapon for that matter. The time he took trying to load that gun was about 6 seconds when he turned around until he finally went down, I don't know about you but 15-17 rounds could have been shot in that same time which may have stopped him from being shot more.

ZombieTactics
04-07-2011, 11:33 AM
... I cannot think of any school where handgun carry is taught in the empty chamber style of carry. ... I can introduce you to a retired RADM who built bridges and roads and airstrips all over Vietnam, and carried a 1911 at his side with an empty chamber. Empty-chamber was not just what was trained, but required for his SeeBees, who often found themselves under fire. I imagine that this had much to do with the nature of their work and mission, but simply serves to demonstrate that one size does not fit all.

FM 23-35, BASIC FIELD MANUAL AUTOMATIC PISTOL CALIBER .45, M1911 AND M1911A1
Page 18

l. In campaign, when early use of the pistol is not fore-
seen, it should be carried with a fully loaded magazine in
the socket, chamber empty, hammer down. When early use
of the pistol is probable, It should be carried loaded and
locked in the holster or hand. In campaign, extra maga-
zines should be carried fully loaded.

Shenaniguns
04-07-2011, 11:36 AM
I can introduce you to a retired RADM who built bridges and roads and airstrips all over Vietnam, and carried a 1911 at his side with an empty chamber. Empty-chamber was not just what was trained, but required for his SeeBees, who often found themselves under fire. I imagine that this had much to do with the nature of their work and mission, but simply serves to demonstrate that one size does not fit all.




So that training was from over 30 years ago? ;)

1911su16b870
04-07-2011, 11:46 AM
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=086_1260862712

Watch the video. A unloaded gun will do you NO GOOD when you NEED IT. Without a round in the chamber you are carrying a unloaded gun. To do otherwise would be to carry a paperweight.

Defensive shootings happen in seconds, you most likely will NOT have time to rack the slide or you remember to rack the slide.

+1 they happen...blink...that fast!

HighLander51
04-07-2011, 11:49 AM
ZombieT, your friends video isn't under a clock. Need to get times and targets for this stuff. I will video up my kid this weekend with some times and hits. If he shoots himself it will be a good lesson. I need to go to Laughlin at the end of the month so can't be screwing around with this stuff.

vintagearms
04-07-2011, 12:14 PM
Smartest comments so far. Sadly, many - perhaps some here in this thread - cannot see sense when they encounter it.

I choose to carry my handgun chambered, with the safety engaged, wherever it makes sense to me to do so . This is quite a bit of the time. I am not all ashamed to say that I also carry un-chambered as I see fit, and as I believe the circumstances reasonably dictate. Similary, there are circumstances where it's in a bag without a mag inserted. My general position is that one should carry to the maximum condition of readiness they require to insure an effective use of the weapon, given the circumstances and their level of training. Some people would be foolish to carry cocked-n-locked, others unwise to ever be anything else.

I train often enough alongside shooters of all kinds of differing backgrounds (including SWAT cops and SF-types) to know that an un-chambered handgun in not necessarily a liability. I've often drawn to a "click" (owing to a dummy-round randomly loaded in the mag) during some exercise. I've been both surprised and delighted to learn that Draw-Click-Tap-Rack-Bang can happen very quickly with practice ... even when you aren't expecting it ... and I've completed my round of accurate shots well ahead of those trained professionals with perfectly functioning guns. My shot timer tells me that the difference between Draw-Bang and Draw-Rack-Bang is hundredths of a second. Tell me that an "unloaded gun is useless", and I'll laugh in your silly, silly face.

At the range is different that being in the field but your obviously going to do what makes you feel "comfortable" doing anyway. :rolleyes:

ZombieTactics
04-07-2011, 12:14 PM
So that training was from over 30 years ago? ;)
As far as I know, the current 1911 training manual is unchanged in this respect. Do you know differently? The current M9 training manual recommends Condition 1 carry when on a mission, but SOP for many FOB locations is Condition 3. The M9 manual also shows the "slingshot" method of racking a round, which is pretty much acknowledged by every expert in the field as being either completely retarded or at least less than optimal. The manual also approves of the "tea-cup" grip ... wanna go there?

Was/is the C3 carry method always wrong or is it sometimes right? Or does it depend upon circumstances and weapon mechanics, as this information may imply? Should we all agree that the overhand racking method is wrong as well, or conclude that the military is simply "doing it like we've always done it" rather than thinking it through and adopting demonstrably superior methods?

At the very least it seems to me that "established sources" disagree on the C1/C3 issue ... so perhaps a bit less "this THE WAY" religious dogma is called for, which is what I've been saying all along.

Norsemen308
04-07-2011, 12:21 PM
I think we all are truly missing the point right off the bat.. its not about if the guy was well equiped with his gun, its also not about it being racked or not. What we should consider is the man got completely blind sided, you cannot tell me a racked ready to rock pistol would have saved his life. he was HIT before he even got out of the chair. You take a bullet to the gut and tell me your going to rack the slide like a pro. People will always argue, well i can shoot better, i can rack faster, well that might be.. and we might have killed the intruders but like it or not, we all would have died as well..

now i could be completely wrong, but i see hte video as the man is shot before he even stands up, i agree he had no formal training with the gun, but his ticket was punched before he got onto his feet

ZombieTactics
04-07-2011, 12:28 PM
At the range is different that being in the field ... This is both obvious and immaterial. If the only way to train would be "field training", then everything else is a complete waste of time. If something can be learned form the range, then it should be learned there.

... but your obviously going to do what makes you feel "comfortable" doing anyway. :rolleyes: I mentioned nothing of "comfort". The opposite retort could be that you are simply going to do whatever is "tactical, awesome, badasser-than-you and cool" without thinking it through. Neither "comfortable" or "tactical/awesome/badasser-than-you/cool" should enter the discussion, IMHO.

Shenaniguns
04-07-2011, 12:28 PM
I honestly do not know what the current training is in regards to the way they carry a 1911 (which is rare outside of some elite teams) or Beretta in the military, but if they train them for anything other than C1 then they are treating them like children IMO instead of providing proper training. Can you imagine if our Police were trained this way? Criminals would have even more of an advantage.

Soldier415
04-07-2011, 12:31 PM
The M9 manual also shows the "slingshot" method of racking a round, which is pretty much acknowledged by every expert in the field as being either completely retarded or at least less than optimal.

Say what? The slingshot method is only retarded with the M9, due to it being the worst design for a combat pistol ever. Having a safety that requires you to flip it UP with a thumb, and raising the likelyhood of engaging the safety while reloading or clearing a malfunction.

Every other pistol, slingshot is what we teach for a variety of reasons.

Remember, it is a slide-STOP, not a slide-RELEASE.

Shenaniguns
04-07-2011, 12:32 PM
I think we all are truly missing the point right off the bat.. its not about if the guy was well equiped with his gun, its also not about it being racked or not. What we should consider is the man got completely blind sided, you cannot tell me a racked ready to rock pistol would have saved his life. he was HIT before he even got out of the chair. You take a bullet to the gut and tell me your going to rack the slide like a pro. People will always argue, well i can shoot better, i can rack faster, well that might be.. and we might have killed the intruders but like it or not, we all would have died as well..

now i could be completely wrong, but i see hte video as the man is shot before he even stands up, i agree he had no formal training with the gun, but his ticket was punched before he got onto his feet

Like I said here:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showpost.php?p=6156594&postcount=72

Ivegotscars
04-07-2011, 12:52 PM
It's all about being ready for the unexpected. It's just like wearing a seatbelt. It's way too late to put on just as the accident starts.
Always keep one chambered for the unexpected.

SJgunguy24
04-07-2011, 12:58 PM
Did he die?

Yes, in that short video he expired.

Ivegotscars
04-07-2011, 1:01 PM
You can't put your seatbelt on durring an accident. The moral of the story is one in the chamber is better than 17 in the mag.

resident-shooter
04-07-2011, 1:25 PM
trollin gawn MAYD

ridiqls
04-07-2011, 1:45 PM
hey smarty, never heard of the 21ft rule? :rolleyes: no problem.

9igSoJHEdUo

+1

I learned that most people who are trained and immersed in the world of firearms (not all) are only trained in exactly that. In the OP's video scenario, no amount of fast or precise shooting technique, or even the fact that a round is chambered or not, would've saved his life. Action is always faster than reaction. The guy in the video was fighting a losing battle by even attempting to fire at someone who's already in the process of firing at him. Not much he could've done at that point anyway he got ambushed..


You can't put your seatbelt on durring an accident. The moral of the story is one in the chamber is better than 17 in the mag.


True. Depending on distance and timing. Distance allows for opportunity. In an altercation with a distance of 20+ feet, I'd take the 17 in the mag. At a distance of 7 feet, I'll take 1 in the chamber, drawn and pointed. At a distance of 0-1 feet, I'd forget the gun and take unarmed combat any day of the week.

SinisterBud
04-07-2011, 2:12 PM
What if u dont have the other hand free to rack the slide

hkdad
04-07-2011, 2:21 PM
What if u dont have the other hand free to rack the slide

then you are effed...:D

tileguy
04-07-2011, 3:45 PM
you hook the rear sights on your pants pocket or belt it works every time not a problem

SinisterBud
04-07-2011, 3:51 PM
you hook the rear sights on your pants pocket or belt it works every time not a problem

What if the bad guys on u. If u carry and dont have it loaded leave it at home its no good to u but u could ask the bad guy to hold on while u rack the slide. Please hold i need to load my gun thank u. By they way u guys talk most of u dont have a CCW if did u would carry loaded. If u dont i fell sorry for u

titankeith
04-07-2011, 3:55 PM
The vid looks like he may have been shot before he pulled the gun. He may or may not have had a round in the chamber but it does looks like he had the safety on cuz he kept trying to fire the weapon and racking the slide. I've seen vids where the safety wasn't taken off and they do the same thing thinking that it's bad ammo not a safety. Either way... you need to know your weapon!

I noted that in post#29...Other than not being in condition "yellow" mental status, I don"t think there was a whole lot more he could've done to prevent getting shot...however, he did struggle with his own weapon which I would attribute to stress and lack of training. If the SHTF, you'll be stressed and not at 100% capacity and it's easy to make mistakes under that kind of fire...he turned his back on them, which is a big mistake and when he had his gun out he was taking more fire, and he couldn't return fire because of either a safety, or empty chamber. I do agree with you, though...know your weapon, and train, train, train!

wizard101
04-07-2011, 4:19 PM
He should have just let the burglars steal the jewelry.
Useless trinkets.
I don't care if you have a CCW or UOC or LOC or LCC or PCC or QCC or ABC........

...not worth losing your life over. Jewelry probably Made in China.

EPIC FAIL on all accounts.

PandaLuv
04-07-2011, 4:22 PM
Troll much? ^^^

hatidua
04-07-2011, 4:30 PM
<--- one in the pipe, carry every day.

ridiqls
04-07-2011, 4:53 PM
He should have just let the burglars steal the jewelry.
Useless trinkets.
I don't care if you have a CCW or UOC or LOC or LCC or PCC or QCC or ABC........

...not worth losing your life over. Jewelry probably Made in China.

EPIC FAIL on all accounts.

They shot him before anything could happen.

fuenstock
04-07-2011, 5:00 PM
I dont know if the guy had a chance with 2 gunman running in guns blazing, but if his pistol had one in the chamber he probably would of atleast taken a bad guy with him. Bad situation to be caught in.

MASTERLAB
04-07-2011, 5:07 PM
same video sent to me by frontsight, i completely agree, if you are going to carry, be locked and loaded (in a legal mannor, when legal of course)

ZombieTactics
04-07-2011, 5:08 PM
What if u dont have the other hand free to rack the slide

What if <insert excuse here> ?

We can play the "what if" game for ever ... it's called the "sophists ploy" in some debate circles ... meaning that it's a pointless and irrational argument on its face.

You can just as easily ask what if ... :

... the first round is a dud or fails to fire?
... your first shot stovepipes because you are limp wristing under stress?
... you bobble the safety on your 1911 (or whatever) ?
... the first bad guy sneaks up behind you and pins your arms back, and the second guy pulls your gun and tries to shoot you in the head? (gee that 1 in the chamber really helped you this time, huh?)
... it's your strong hand which is disabled? Do you just give up, or draw with your support hand and get down to business as best you can?
... and on and on and on and on ...


The answer is you train to handle issues as they occur, and hope that you've trained well enough. It only goes to show further that there is no universal situation dictating ONE AWESOME KILLER METHOD of doing things. As many situations as you can describe where one in the chamber would be an advantage, another person can describe as many where it would not confer a significant advantage ... or perhaps none at all. There are all sorts of situations where I have one-in-the-pipe ... because it makes sense in that case. Others not so much. I am never complacent, but the more I train and the better skilled I become, the more I realize that I am the determining factor, not some special perfect gun or perfect caliber or perfect carry condition.

PandaLuv
04-07-2011, 5:15 PM
Jesus, honestly looking back at the video it seems crazy and super quick.
Just like fights in real life.

wizard101
04-07-2011, 5:17 PM
Troll much? ^^^

Troll a little?????????????????

SinisterBud
04-07-2011, 5:30 PM
All u can really do is train and try to be prepared and even then if a bad guy walks up and shoots u 6 times your SOL.

fiddletown
04-07-2011, 5:53 PM
you hook the rear sights on your pants pocket or belt it works every time not a problemIt actually can be a problem unless you've practiced it a good deal. It can be very awkward. Have you? How quickly can you do it? Have you tried it under extreme stress?

This is indeed the technique that's usually taught for racking a slide one handed. It can be slow and uncertain. That's why it's best left for situations in which one hand is out of commission, from an injury for example.

At the very least it seems to me that "established sources" disagree on the C1/C3 issue ...I'd be curious to know which "established sources", other than perhaps the U. S. Military, promote C3, at least for normal, on body carry in a holster. It seems to be that these days pretty much all established sources, e. g., various police agencies, schools like Gunsite and Thunder Ranch, and instructors like Massad Ayoob, Tom Givens, John Farnham and Louis Awerbuck all teach carrying with a round in the chamber.


What if u dont have the other hand free to rack the slide
What if <insert excuse here> ?

We can play the "what if" game for ever ... it's called the "sophists ploy" in some debate circles ... meaning that it's a pointless and irrational argument on its face...Yes, one can play "what if" pretty much forever. But in the case of the defensive use of a handgun --

[1] You have no way of knowing if you'll ever need your gun. But you also have no way of knowing exactly what your problem is going to be if you do need your gun, and so you have no idea what you'll going to need to be able to do to solve that problem. And since you don't know that, it doesn't seem to me to be particularly wise to eliminate at the front end your option of readily deploying your gun one-handed. Maybe if something bad happens to you it won't matter. But you can't know that ahead of time.

[2] It seems that in real life it's really not all that uncommon that one will wind up putting his gun to use with one hand. And in that vein, this is an interesting article (http://www.gunsandammo.com/content/winning-hand) encouraging one to train to be able to put his gun to use with one hand.

UserM4
04-07-2011, 6:04 PM
The guy in the video looks like he would've died regardless of how he was carrying. He got shot before he could even pull out the gun. May have expired from the first wound.

jonnyt16
04-07-2011, 6:15 PM
Maybe I'm missing something, but how do you guys know for sure there wasn't a round in the chamber?? His back was turned when he first had the gun so maybe he actually pulled the trigger, gun jammed, and he was racking the slide trying to clear the jam?? Just sayin'.

ridiqls
04-07-2011, 7:00 PM
Maybe I'm missing something, but how do you guys know for sure there wasn't a round in the chamber?? His back was turned when he first had the gun so maybe he actually pulled the trigger, gun jammed, and he was racking the slide trying to clear the jam?? Just sayin'.

Could be true. No one will ever know..

I'd like to know what caliber the robbers used. He had a good fight left in him even after getting shot.

DesertGunner
04-07-2011, 7:32 PM
Carrying without a round in the chamber is stupid. If you can't carry a gun safely you shouldn't carry one at all.

atomicwedgy
04-07-2011, 7:33 PM
perfect examply why force on force training should be strongly considered by all who carry

rattlesnake_nm
04-07-2011, 7:37 PM
I am chambered 100% of the time. That was unfortunate. The criminal scum who killed this man is the reason our 2nd amendment is so important. I would bet all my money the shooters have a long criminal history. We need to keep these idiots in prison forever, no tv, drugs, and cell phones just a bible and bread and water.

Mercureality
04-07-2011, 7:42 PM
he was popped well before he even reached for his weapon

the element of surprise is what got him

I just watched the video again, and it looks to me like he lunges under the counter in the opening moments, then is shot, just before he brings his gun to bear.

Since we don't know what happened before that split second decision, it's a little tough to make an accurate assessment over whether he should have done that. Still, while I agree with using a firearm to defend my life, it looks to me like this guy could have avoided getting shot by not reaching for a piece to begin with.

I think it's vital to learn to assess a situation, then choose when to fight, and when not to fight. In my opinion, fighting over replaceable stuff is usually a bad idea.

five.five-six
04-07-2011, 7:43 PM
Have any of you ever had to pull your weapon?

define "had to"

sanjosebmx
04-07-2011, 8:01 PM
Did he die?

The Agra police have released the CCTV footage of a murder inside a jewelery store. The images are of two gunmen barging into the jewelery shop on Sunday and opening fire.


sadly it appears so....

themailman
04-07-2011, 8:04 PM
CGN; never ceases to amaze me.

To those that say he should have just let them rob him:

I can not say what I would or would not do, but not every criminal is nice enough to let you live unharmed and simply take your hard earned possessions. Should we simply allow those that break into our homes to ransack and steal without our interference?

And to those that carry without a loaded chamber: If you are uncomfortable carrying loaded, so be it, at least you carry. But, do not advocate your carry method or tout it as a better practice. In the professional realm of gunfighting, your method is not only frowned upon, but also seen as a hinderance to winning the fight. If you are comfortable with carrying a loaded weapon, please do so.

sanjosebmx
04-07-2011, 8:08 PM
the victim did not look like he had time to 'let them rob him of his trinkets' the BG's seemed to come in and from what it looked like, shot him in the back and multiple times...

how anyone can armchair quarterback this one, with a 50 second clip without sound is beyond me, but I would say that if he had his gun holstered, and chambered, he may have had a chance....

Note to all Jewelry Store owners.... be ready...

sucks... hard to watch actually...

themailman
04-07-2011, 8:08 PM
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=16d800164c

Because criminals only want your money and wont shoot you unless you fight right?

Some people are bound to be sheep.

SheepDogHog
04-07-2011, 8:19 PM
Carrying without a round in the chamber is stupid. If you can't carry a gun safely you shouldn't carry one at all.

I lol'd seeing that statement and looking at your avatar.

You guys are retarded if you don't carry one in the chamber. Why would you not remove one less step that you have to do? Makes no sense. If you train to draw and rack, you're even more retarded.

rattlesnake_nm
04-07-2011, 8:27 PM
the victim did not look like he had time to 'let them rob him of his trinkets' the BG's seemed to come in and from what it looked like, shot him in the back and multiple times...

how anyone can armchair quarterback this one, with a 50 second clip without sound is beyond me, but I would say that if he had his gun holstered, and chambered, he may have had a chance....

Note to all Jewelry Store owners.... be ready...

sucks... hard to watch actually...

Agreed. It almost looked like a hit.

themailman
04-07-2011, 8:28 PM
I lol'd seeing that statement and looking at your avatar.

You guys are retarded if you don't carry one in the chamber. Why would you not remove one less step that you have to do? Makes no sense. If you train to draw and rack, you're even more retarded.

Not only do they carry empty, but they claim its the only safe way to carry and the only way it should be done. Sickening.

rattlesnake_nm
04-07-2011, 8:30 PM
Here is a more cheerful video with a happy ending http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f40dbfb815

SheepDogHog
04-07-2011, 8:45 PM
Not only do they carry empty, but they claim its the only safe way to carry and the only way it should be done. Sickening.

Never seen so many people scared of their own firearm. The "safety" involved with a Con3 weapon isn't worth it, or logical. You can actually go as far to say it is "unsafe" to have a Con3 weapon, haha (for defensive purposes obviously).

luckystrike
04-07-2011, 9:44 PM
one in the chamber and a kydex holster with covered trigger guard is the answer. still worrying about AD? then, you are not confident enough and should train more.

LOL

please reread my post.

Trendkill
04-07-2011, 10:43 PM
What if u dont have the other hand free to rack the slide

Then I shove the barell of my DAO revolver in their gut and rack the trigger about 5 times.

harbinger007
04-07-2011, 11:18 PM
Lance Thomas was a watch dealer who did pretty well with a loaded chamber but decided he needed to do more and instead relied on several handguns with loaded chambers. This guy's will to fight is heroic. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BTT/is_156_26/ai_82533205/?tag=content;col1

Exposed
04-07-2011, 11:48 PM
Keep in mind, this was not a robbery. During a robbery, you might have time to think. This was a straight execution. Also, the guy killed had killed someone 15 months earlier. This was a video taken of a retaliation killing.


(From the Thaindian Newspaper)
Agra, Dec 14 (IANS) Armed men opened fire in a jeweller%u2019s shop in Agra%u2019s Shah Ganj area, killing one person and injuring two others, police said Monday.
Shail Kundra, a shopkeeper, and Ramesh Lavani were sitting in a jeweller%u2019s shop Sunday evening when two armed men barged in. Before Kundra could pull out his pistol, the assailants fired three bullets into him. They also fired three shots at Lavani, police said.

The gunmen escaped firing in the air. In the process, a roadside hawker Amit was hurt. Shop owners immediately pulled down shutters and the whole market was closed in a jiffy, police told the media.

Eye witnesses said power supply to the market had been suspended for five minutes to enable the assailants carry out their mission. Deputy Inspector General Aditya Mishra has ordered an investigation of those in charge of the power supply feeder in Shah Ganj.

All the three shooting victims were taken to the emergency ward of the S.N. Medical College. While Kundra succumbed to his injuries Sunday night, the other two are out of danger now, police said.

Meanwhile, shopkeepers in the Shah Ganj area kept their shops closed Monday to protest Kundra%u2019s killing.

Police sources said the shootout was the result of a feud between two families. Around 15 months ago a shop owner named Ram Kishan Malhotra was shot dead. Police had then registered a case against Kundra and eight others. Shopkeepers said the dispute began over the possession of a commercial establishment in the Rui Ki Mandi area.

Police officials said the arms licences of both groups had been %u201Ccancelled long ago%u201D. They suspect the arms used in the shootout Sunday were unlicensed.

Read more: http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/uncategorized/one-dead-two-injured-in-agra-market-shootout-lead_100289158.html#ixzz0ZkUiJHXd

Dan-O
04-08-2011, 7:25 AM
Nonsense. This may be true for cops cruising South-Central LA. It may be true for our soldiers in Iraq. It is not true for most ordinary armed citizens.
The one time I had need for my gun to confront an intruder, I racked the slide to load the round and went to work. No problem.

I hope you're kidding

Shenaniguns
04-08-2011, 8:26 AM
Lance Thomas was a watch dealer who did pretty well with a loaded chamber but decided he needed to do more and instead relied on several handguns with loaded chambers. This guy's will to fight is heroic. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BTT/is_156_26/ai_82533205/?tag=content;col1


That man is a hero...

pkWgp2abM2w

thunderbolt
04-08-2011, 8:30 AM
It seems to me that what little you can do to increase your chances in a life/death situation seems reasonable. So I choose to keep a round chambered but I hope I never have to find out if I chose right. But hey if you prefer unchambered just as good. Your hide, your method.

However, in my own training I've wrestled with whether to be chambered or not and I found that as I became more comfortable with my gun, the more confident I was with one in the pipe. If you are worried about an accidental discharge there are many pistols out there that offer redundant safe features.

k1dude
04-08-2011, 8:50 AM
That watchmaker is one tough dude. Hats off to him. Incredible.

It just pisses me off that the gang is after him after THEY started it by trying to rob and probably kill him. It also pisses me off that he's 1 of only 2 CCW holders in Santa Monica.

PandaLuv
04-08-2011, 10:06 AM
That man is a hero...

pkWgp2abM2w

" Do I feel safer?... I just want to feel alive"

This guy is a true American.

fiddletown
04-08-2011, 10:51 AM
...I believe the circumstances/situation dictate which way to go at any given instance, after all-at any time you could go condition one.Why? How do you decide what mode of carry a particular circumstance dictates or warrants? Are you clairvoyant?

Yes, in theory you can chamber a round at any time. Of course, that assumes that at the time you decide to chamber a round, you'll have both hands available and/or you'll have the time to do so.

The reasons current doctrine as now commonly taught is to always carry with a round chambered are (1) if something is going to happen that will require you to use your gun, you can't know ahead of time what's going to happen, how it's going to happen, what you're going to need to do to attend to the problem and how much time you'll have to do it in; and (2) if you need your gun quickly and are under great stress, you'll need to know absolutely, without having to think about it, what state of readiness your gun is in.

SheepDogHog
04-08-2011, 11:02 AM
Interesting comments and reasons why to and why not to.

I believe the circumstances/situation dictate which way to go at any given instance, after all-at any time you could go condition one.

Exactly, so why not be preparred for the unknown?

Really? Here is a perfect example of that not being true. Before I holster I check the mag is locked, check the chamber for a round (cause I want one in there), check the saftey. Throughout the day I perform those checks just to ensure its state. One day, I dont know how, but when I was lifting something/getting out of the truck/got pushed into a wall/whatever (**** happens), somehow my mag release was pressed. So when I went to pull my pistol to check it later in the day, the mag falls out (which is why I check my weapon throughout the day). Now how the hell would you rack a round if something like that happened and you needed to draw in a situation. Yes there is still only one round, but I'd take one round over no rounds.

advocatusdiaboli
04-08-2011, 12:57 PM
As the wisest post yet said: it's not one-size fits all here. I would think Jeff Cooper (would love to have been able to ask him) would say it depends on your alert state. Sometimes, I would think, unchambered is just fine when safety and preparedness balance. And if you are paying attention to your surroundings, you'll be elevating your level and you'll be ready when you need to be. I'll bet even Mr. Cooper was sometimes unarmed, sometimes with nothing in the chamber, and sometimes loaded half-cocked and locked.

kel-tec-innovations
04-08-2011, 1:14 PM
He should have thrown the gun when it didn't work lol . Training...... more training....

ZombieTactics
04-08-2011, 1:38 PM
Not only do they carry empty, but they claim its the only safe way to carry and the only way it should be done. Sickening. Just for clarity ... who in this thread has made this suggestion?

Toolbox X
04-08-2011, 4:00 PM
I haven't read through this entire thread, and I'm not going to, but of course I have an opinion. Sorry.

I agree a round should be in the chamber. This also proves how dangerous safeties are. It's naive to say in one breath that an empty chamber is dangerous and then in the next breath explain how safeties are so safe. Anything that makes a gun not fire when you absolutely need it to is dangerous.

This video teaches a lot of important lessons no one on the first page of this thread identified.

Lesson #1: When sh#t happens it often happens fast. Really fast. There isn't always time to screw around with racking slides, or making sure the safety is off. And boy are you totally screwed if you accidentally knock the safety on.

Lesson #2: Pressure and stress make shooting effectively magnitudes harder. Sure you can ace that bullseye in the paper target at 15 yards while standing relaxed in your lane in the air conditioned indoor range. Trying to assess a life or death situation and react effectively in seconds or less is extremely difficult, for everyone.

Lesson #3: (This is the most important lesson I saw) Bullets don't stop people. At least they don't stop people quickly. That shop owner took a bullet before he even got his gun. He then took I can't tell how many more, but he had 2 guys both filling him full of lead from 3-8 feet. Yet that shop owner was dancing around the entire time like he hadn't been shot at all. It wasn't until he lost his gun and the bad guys left that he started to feel the effects of being shot 10-20 times. Sure he died, but he didn't die instantly. Not even close.

I can't tell for sure if the shop owner got a few shots off at the bad guys. If he didn't it sure didn't slow them down any, nor should it.

Don't any of you think for a second that whipping out your pistol and plugging a bad guy 3-4 times center mass is going to drop the bad guy like it does in a movie. That bad guy isn't going to feel those shots and if he has a gun in his hand he's going to probably shoot it in your direction.

HighLander51
04-08-2011, 4:03 PM
Mass likes to refer to Lance Thomas, quite a guy to be sure. Personally, the second time he got shot, I would have taken that as a message from God to get the heck outta that business.....

fiddletown
04-08-2011, 4:33 PM
...I would think Jeff Cooper (would love to have been able to ask him) would say it depends on your alert state...No, I'm sorry; but I seriously doubt that Col. Cooper would have said anything of the sort. I had the pleasure of meeting Col. Cooper, being trained by him and spending time with him in 2002. He was the chief instructor for the handgun class I took at Gunsite in 2002. While exactly this point didn't come up in so many words, I feel confident in my opinion based on the following:

[1] Gunsite was a hot range. Students and staff generally wore sidearms, and there was no rule or expectation that the sidearms be unloaded. It was, in fact, expected that sidearms be loaded at all times. It was expected that anyone there could safely manage a loaded firearm.

[2] Col. Cooper's sidearm was a cocked and locked 1911. At one point, for a demonstration, he cleared it. There had been a round in the chamber. When he reloaded, he chambered a round before holstering his pistol.

[3] He once wrote:

"A recent paper we saw discussed some training information from Alcatraz, and we discovered that the guards on that island were carrying their 1911s in Condition One long before that system was accepted by law enforcement in general. Of course, it is not now absolutely accepted, but we are getting there at last...."(Jeff Cooper's Commentaries, Vol. 8, No. 7, pg 44, 2000)

It seems from that Col. Cooper is expressing a very strong preference for carrying a sidearm in C1.

[4] He also once wrote:

"I suppose that all of us in the Family are well aware of the proper conditions of readiness to be used with the service pistol. We have not, however, described the proper conditions of readiness for the rifle. The rifle is essentially an offensive instrument which is made ready for action when action is expected. In mountain and desert hunting there is no need to carry a rifle with a shell in the chamber, and there is never any need to carry a rifle in Condition One when one is riding in a car. The action can be operated in a split second when necessary, and speed of the first shot is rarely an issue in any form of hunting...."(Jeff Cooper's Commentaries, Vol. 11, No. 7, pg 33, 2003)

Col. Cooper appears to clearly be distinguishing a pistol, which, as a defensive weapon, must be ready for instant use, from a rifle, the use of which can be planned.

...Sometimes, I would think, unchambered is just fine when safety and preparedness balance....Just what is that balance, and how is it achieved? In any case, if we're still considering Col. Cooper's view of things, I suspect that based on the protocol he instituted long ago at Gunsite, his view would have been that if one is going to be carrying a gun, he needs to be capable of managing a loaded gun safely.

...I'll bet even Mr. Cooper was sometimes unarmed, sometimes with nothing in the chamber, and sometimes loaded half-cocked and locked.Again, I strongly doubt you're correct here. Certainly, he clearly believed that the proper way to carry a gun was in C1.

I have to assume that were time he wasn't carrying a gun. I doubt he wore his pistol in the shower. But I also suspect that there were few times in his day in which he was not armed.

I visited him, and Janelle, his wife, at his invitation, at their home at Gunsite. It was the Sunday after the class, and he had asked me if I cared to watch the Grand Prix of Monte Carlo with him. So I of course I took him up on it.

All during the visit, he was wearing his sidearm. It was cocked and locked, and I have no doubt there was a round in the chamber. I was wearing a cocked and locked 1911 as well, and I've no doubt that the wearing of sidearms around the house was SOP at chez Cooper.

Paul S
04-08-2011, 4:41 PM
Nonsense. This may be true for cops cruising South-Central LA. It may be true for our soldiers in Iraq. It is not true for most ordinary armed citizens.
The one time I had need for my gun to confront an intruder, I racked the slide to load the round and went to work. No problem.

Nonsense you say?
Heaven forbid you should be attacked and need to respond RIGHT NOW.
Intruders make noise and give you a heads up so to speak. You think attacks from behind for little or no reason don't happen? Ask the poor Giant's fan attacked by some alleged Dodgers fan in L.A. at the beginning of this baseball season.
How about the fool right in front of you or right beside you who decides to jump off with you as the target.

However, carry on and do as you see fit sir...I just totally disagree with you.

vinson
04-08-2011, 5:46 PM
Any of you boys with the swollen testicles ( I say that because I think a lot of these comments are based on machismo and bravado) with one in the chamber ever get the "unexpected" when you holster your weapon and it slips from your hands and bounces around on the floor? Yah yah, it won't go off right? Bet your life on that? Happened to me the other day but as of yet, I don't keep a round in the chamber. I've been considering carrying with one in the chamber but I have found that there is a real process to iron out of adorning yourself with an IWB holster, going to the bathroom etc without dropping the gun, letting it clunk onto the bathroom floor while sitting etc. In time I will smooth out the system and probably go with one in the chamber, until then I'll keep reading how retarded I am by the rest of you experts.

SheepDogHog
04-08-2011, 6:19 PM
Any of you boys with the swollen testicles ( I say that because I think a lot of these comments are based on machismo and bravado) with one in the chamber ever get the "unexpected" when you holster your weapon and it slips from your hands and bounces around on the floor? Yah yah, it won't go off right? Bet your life on that? Happened to me the other day but as of yet, I don't keep a round in the chamber. I've been considering carrying with one in the chamber but I have found that there is a real process to iron out of adorning yourself with an IWB holster, going to the bathroom etc without dropping the gun, letting it clunk onto the bathroom floor while sitting etc. In time I will smooth out the system and probably go with one in the chamber, until then I'll keep reading how retarded I am by the rest of you experts.

Are you being facetious dude? You REALLY can't figure out how to unbuckle your pants, hold onto your pistol while you slide your pants down, and let the pistol rest inside your pants while you pop a squat? LOL you drop your weapon a lot man, but then again my swollen testicles probably give me an edge with weapon control.

fiddletown
04-08-2011, 6:22 PM
Any of you boys ... with one in the chamber ever get the "unexpected" when you holster your weapon and it slips from your hands and bounces around on the floor? ... Happened to me the other day but as of yet, I don't keep a round in the chamber. ....Sounds like a training issue. If things like this happen to you, some good, professional training might be a worthwhile investment.

JeepFreak
04-08-2011, 6:49 PM
That man is a hero...

pkWgp2abM2w

My favorite part... @ ~5:35

Reporter - "He said, "Don't do anything, or I'll kill ya'" - so why do anything? If you hadn't reached for your gun, maybe you wouldn't have gotten shot. Maybe he would have gotten a few of your watches, but it would have been over."

Lance Thomas - "That would have been up to him, wouldn't it?"

That's why I own a gun. That's why I carry a gun. I'm not leaving it up to "him".

Thanks for posting that video,
Billy

Shenaniguns
04-08-2011, 6:52 PM
Sounds like a training issue. If things like this happen to you, some good, professional training might be a worthwhile investment.



And a quality holster that won't drop your gun when you drop your pants. I don't understand why you need to unholster when your pants are down anyways.

NapaPlinker
04-08-2011, 6:55 PM
Would have been nice to know i was going to watch someone be shot to death..

PandaLuv
04-08-2011, 7:04 PM
Would have been nice to know i was going to watch someone be shot to death..

Well when you hear carry+fail, you can't expect anything good.

But yes, seeig people getting killed is pretty bad but that's life.

Blackhawk556
04-08-2011, 7:19 PM
From reading a lot of the posts, it seems many here think not having one in the pipe is worthless. Is it safe to assume that these same people think that UOC is not worth it? I'm not trying to start a flame war, I'm just asking a question that's all.

JeepFreak
04-08-2011, 7:22 PM
I hate to sound like one of those people who think up every crazy scenario in their head, but I believe carrying without a round in the chamber is unwise because are you 100% certain you'll have the use of your other free hand in a deadly force situation?

I have a 9 month old daughter to protect that I'm usually carrying around. I'm not going to bet my life and hers on the assumption I'll be able to have a free hand to rack my slide in the event I'm holding her and fighting off a person threatening both of our lives. It's up to you though. As was said, however you decide to carry, train well.

Same here. My daughter is 10 months.

...it works every time not a problem

Famous last words.

Billy

PandaLuv
04-08-2011, 7:28 PM
Quick question to people who have guns for HD and don't have a round in the chamber.

Do you guys keep the gun in the safe too?
Doesn't it seems like a waste of time by keeping an unloaded gun in the safe?
I understand why you would keep it in the safe(kids, housekeepers, roommates etc) but every second counts at these kind of situations. The attackers are usually more prepared than defenders.
That's why having a bullet in the chamber is smarter because you are semi ready for the shtf.

JeepFreak
04-08-2011, 7:29 PM
Here's a question I should probably know the answer to, so I'll hide it in this thread instead of starting my own...

DA/SA pistol w/ one in the pipe, full mag, hammer down, no safeties on the gun... is that condition 1 or condition 2?

Thanks,
Billy

fiddletown
04-08-2011, 8:14 PM
... Is it safe to assume that these same people think that UOC is not worth it? ....It's safe to assume that I don't think it's worthwhile. I can't speak for anyone else.

Soldier415
04-08-2011, 8:27 PM
Would have been nice to know i was going to watch someone be shot to death..
Its a video. Sorry if I dont have any sympathy.

jonnyt16
04-08-2011, 8:40 PM
Its a video. Sorry if I dont have any sympathy.
...or a soul.

S.A.
04-08-2011, 9:08 PM
Quick question to people who have guns for HD and don't have a round in the chamber.

Do you guys keep the gun in the safe too?
Doesn't it seems like a waste of time by keeping an unloaded gun in the safe?
I understand why you would keep it in the safe(kids, housekeepers, roommates etc) but every second counts at these kind of situations. The attackers are usually more prepared than defenders.
That's why having a bullet in the chamber is smarter because you are semi ready for the shtf.

No. I usually keep one pistol out of safe.Guess what? About 4yrs ago, my empty chambered pistol was used for self defense, at home and drew blood, bad guys. It was a surprise to us, trouble was at the door, but pistol performed just fine and trouble (2) went to hospital and then to jail. Empty chamber can and does work for me. Stay safe.

fiddletown
04-08-2011, 9:23 PM
...Empty chamber can and does work for me. ...Correction. It worked for you in one specific instance under particular circumstances. The next time you need your gun, if ever, the circumstances may be different; and the empty chamber might, or might not, work for you. And maybe someone else's circumstances will be different, and an empty chamber might or might not work for him.

Again, you do not know what's going to happen, how it's going to happen or when, if ever, it's going to happen. Maybe an empty chamber will work, and maybe it won't.

Of course, if you could solve your problem starting with a gun with an empty chamber, you should also be able to solve it starting with a gun with a loaded chamber. On the other hand, if you can't solve your problem starting with a gun with an empty chamber, perhaps you would have been able to solve it if the chamber had already been loaded.

rrr70
04-08-2011, 9:30 PM
Any of you boys with the swollen testicles ( I say that because I think a lot of these comments are based on machismo and bravado) with one in the chamber ever get the "unexpected" when you holster your weapon and it slips from your hands and bounces around on the floor? Yah yah, it won't go off right? Bet your life on that? Happened to me the other day but as of yet, I don't keep a round in the chamber. I've been considering carrying with one in the chamber but I have found that there is a real process to iron out of adorning yourself with an IWB holster, going to the bathroom etc without dropping the gun, letting it clunk onto the bathroom floor while sitting etc. In time I will smooth out the system and probably go with one in the chamber, until then I'll keep reading how retarded I am by the rest of you experts.

You shouldn't carry the gun.

silversix
04-08-2011, 9:41 PM
There's no such thing as one size fits all. Blanket statements most often reveal the holes in the blanket before they begin to cover all aspects. Because human abilities & psyche's are so extraordinarily different one must determine what is best for self under all imaginable
circumstances. Self defense is a complex matter of armament, training & psychology.

The first part is to be able in willingness, that all the psychology of 'Should I and would I?' is fully settled beforehand. The second is suitable armament, with that as readily available as the person wants it to be. The third is frequent training, so that actions of use are skillfully automatic, not semi-automatic. The fourth, after the first three, is to be observant in all situations, to remove factors of surprise and unpreparedness. The fifth is ongoing adaptability to changing circumstances. The sixth is to mold these into an enjoyable lifestyle not overwhelmed or obsessed with matters of personal defense, yet continuously ready, willing & able to take care of business regardless of the customer.

That is, it should be a matter of sober, rational and total preparedness causing peace of mind and continuous safety to the best of one's ability, rather than an obssession, or paranoia or a hero syndrome. This I've stated isn't meant to imply that anyone here is laboring under those last three delusions, but is simply my view on the way of it. Our ability to defend ourselves, should the need arise, should not entirely overthrow or even significantly alter the normal enjoyment of life in all its moments.

Some folks can draw - slam in a mag - rack the slide - acquire their target - shoot dead-center quicker than I can draw, thumb off a safety and fire on target, so it's different strokes for different folks, according to circumstances.

Yup. I tend to do both; just depends on the situation.

I guess that makes me bi:D

rogervzv
04-08-2011, 9:44 PM
Nonsense you say?

However, carry on and do as you see fit sir...I just totally disagree with you.

Not a problem. You know what opinions are like. :chris:

rogervzv
04-08-2011, 9:47 PM
I hope you're kidding

Nope. That's what happened.

PandaLuv
04-08-2011, 9:55 PM
No. I usually keep one pistol out of safe.Guess what? About 4yrs ago, my empty chambered pistol was used for self defense, at home and drew blood, bad guys. It was a surprise to us, trouble was at the door, but pistol performed just fine and trouble (2) went to hospital and then to jail. Empty chamber can and does work for me. Stay safe.

I am glad that you are fine and the bad guys are in jail.
I personally not going to use my handgun for safety for a while because I am not trained enough yet. When I am ready though, I am gonna keep mine loaded in a safe or in a holster.

I think if it happened to me, I would be too paranoid to remember to rack the slide.

Echidin
04-08-2011, 10:22 PM
Just goes to show how fast things can go down.

On a side note, but I just so happened to be listening to the Inception soundtrack while watching the video from the link. Very strange feeling.

novalondon
04-09-2011, 1:36 AM
I can introduce you to a retired RADM who built bridges and roads and airstrips all over Vietnam, and carried a 1911 at his side with an empty chamber. Empty-chamber was not just what was trained, but required for his SeeBees, who often found themselves under fire. I imagine that this had much to do with the nature of their work and mission, but simply serves to demonstrate that one size does not fit all.

Not to pick a fight but, I doubt seriously a RADM ever built anything. They flew into and out of country as quickly as they could mostly.. My uncle was a Senior chief in the Sea bees and he never had more than a LT or a CWO over his shoulder in the field from Nam to Diego Garcia and his pistol was always locked and loaded.. Me, never once did I ever see anyone with a empty chamber while I was in that green wet country of Viet Nam. Sorry, but in a combat situation we all were loaded to bear even in our hooches most of the time. Rules while incountry were to survive, not to be run by a rules and regs manual.

rogervzv
04-09-2011, 5:45 AM
......Me, never once did I ever see anyone with a empty chamber while I was in that green wet country of Viet Nam. Sorry, but in a combat situation we all were loaded to bear even in our hooches most of the time. Rules while incountry were to survive, not to be run by a rules and regs manual.

And rightly so! Thank you for your service.

tenpercentfirearms
04-09-2011, 6:20 AM
This is a free country. Carry your gun however you want. I choose to carry a Glock always loaded with a round in the chamber. I have never had an issue and personally I don't understand why I wouldn't want to carry one in the chamber.

If you feel it is unsafe to carry a Glock loaded and ready to go, that is your choice. Just be sure to practice this very scenario. Sit down in a chair and face to the side of the target. Draw, chamber, and shoot at a target to your side while retreating. Do it from the left and the right side. Tell us how your times are.

The target will not always be straight in front of your draw stroke.

This video is a little different because as you could see in the video, the suspects did not steal anything. They went straight after that one man. The accompanying article clears it up that they were out to murder that specific man. There might not have been anything he could do other than see them coming to the door and assume it was for no good purpose and start drawing sooner.

Sometimes it is your time to go. That is why you don't get in arguments and fights with people. It might increase your odds of finding that time.

Shenaniguns
04-09-2011, 7:01 AM
Quick question to people who have guns for HD and don't have a round in the chamber.

Do you guys keep the gun in the safe too?
Doesn't it seems like a waste of time by keeping an unloaded gun in the safe?
I understand why you would keep it in the safe(kids, housekeepers, roommates etc) but every second counts at these kind of situations. The attackers are usually more prepared than defenders.
That's why having a bullet in the chamber is smarter because you are semi ready for the shtf.


The only gun I have chambered and holstered is my Carry gun which this topic is about, the rest are in the safe. One huge difference in home defense and carry on the street is that you may have seconds to react on the street while you have 30 seconds to minutes in your home.

Cali-Shooter
04-09-2011, 7:21 AM
Did he die?

He looks quite deceased at the end of the video.

DesertGunner
04-09-2011, 9:51 AM
From reading a lot of the posts, it seems many here think not having one in the pipe is worthless. Is it safe to assume that these same people think that UOC is not worth it? I'm not trying to start a flame war, I'm just asking a question that's all.

An unloaded gun is a poorly balanced club. Advertising that you have an unloaded gun is not only pointless, it's unsafe attention-whoring. Thinking that you have a chance of drawing loading fast enough, when it counts is pretty delusional. IMHO, YMMV, of course.

negolien
04-09-2011, 9:52 AM
That's not neccasarily rue bud look at the Jews.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRdZ3hZ8y-w

DesertGunner
04-09-2011, 9:52 AM
You shouldn't carry the gun.

Ditto.

fiddletown
04-09-2011, 10:11 AM
That's not neccasarily rue bud look at the Jews.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRdZ3hZ8y-wWhat's not necessarily true.

We know that with practice the Israeli draw can be fast. But it still takes two hands. How do you know that if you need your gun quickly you'll have both hands available?

negolien
04-09-2011, 10:14 AM
IDF trains with unloaded chambers they don't seem to have many issues but then again training is key isn't it?

ZombieTactics
04-09-2011, 10:32 AM
Not to pick a fight but, I doubt seriously a RADM ever built anything. They flew into and out of country as quickly as they could mostly.. My uncle was a Senior chief in the Sea bees and he never had more than a LT or a CWO over his shoulder in the field from Nam to Diego Garcia and his pistol was always locked and loaded.. Me, never once did I ever see anyone with a empty chamber while I was in that green wet country of Viet Nam. Sorry, but in a combat situation we all were loaded to bear even in our hooches most of the time. Rules while incountry were to survive, not to be run by a rules and regs manual.

All fight-pickery (lol) aside, the man retired as a RADM. He's my father-in-law. He was where he was, did what he did, I've seen the pictures, and I tend to take his word at face value when I ask him about such things. When you get the fundraising letter for the SeaBee memorial being built ... that's his signature at the bottom.

fiddletown
04-09-2011, 10:42 AM
IDF trains with unloaded chambers they don't seem to have many issues but then again training is key isn't it?On the other hand, if one trains he can also safely manage a handgun carried with a loaded chamber. I've trained to carry my sidearm with the chamber loaded. I do agree that training is the key.

titankeith
04-09-2011, 11:19 AM
From reading a lot of the posts, it seems many here think not having one in the pipe is worthless. Is it safe to assume that these same people think that UOC is not worth it? I'm not trying to start a flame war, I'm just asking a question that's all.

I'm one of those...I respect what UOC is trying to do, but if bad guys wanted to set an example, the UOC dudes are screwed.

SIGSHOOTR
04-09-2011, 11:29 AM
Been reading the progression of this thread- very interesting (and amusing). Well, here are my 2 pence. For 5 years I carried in Condition 1. Given the environment I was operating in, it was the only way to go. I'm out now and thankfully don't need to carry a weapon as part of my everyday attire. My gun is strictly for HD and defense of my family. As such, I am very comfortable with my gun being in Condition 3. But that is a product of my training and experience. There is no hard and fast rule IMO. Like someone alluded to above- opinions are like.... and there was mine.

ZombieTactics
04-09-2011, 11:55 AM
A few random comments regarding the discussion at hand:

There seems to be more than a bit of chest-puffery and pissing-match nonsense on the part of some. I would submit to you that if you really think condition-of-carry is some badge of manhood, tacticool-ness or awesomeness, then you've effectively disqualified yourself from being taken seriously. Please go play with your toys and let the adults have a conversation. :rolleyes:

Stats & facts (which are not always the same thing) are stubborn things. There have been a lot of comments to the effect of "how do you know ...?", "what if ...?", etc. based upon the raw unsupported assumption that the absolute worst case is what will happen ... or at least that this is the case that one should prepared for, or risk otherwise incurring the "you aren't worthy" and "you're too paranoid to carry" wrath of their peers. ;)

In this respect, I find it interesting to note that only some fraction of a percentage of us will ever find ourselves in a position where we need to defend ourselves. I've been there, so that statistic might ring a bit hollow personally, but the facts are what they are nonetheless.

Of the cases where a citizen uses a gun to defend themselves, they only fire the weapon in 1 out of 330 or so cases. That's 1 330th people, not even a 3rd or a 30th.

In 87% of the cases where LE are attacked and/or killed, they didn't even draw their sidearm.

I can demonstrate that the difference between C1 and C3 amounts to only hundredths of a second.

So it occurs to me that all of this dogmatic, almost religious insistence that C1 is THE way and the ONLY way (perhaps even the truth and the light) for everyone at all times (forever and ever amen) is really about splitting tiny little hairs regarding situations which are among the very most unlikely imaginable.

The evidence seems to indicate that mindset is a far, far greater determiner of survival than whether one can cock their head to the side and tell you "cocked-n-locked" with gravel in their voice and steely-eyed self-assurance of testicular fortitude they imagine such an attitude confers upon them. (I guess the C0 guy will get all the chicks though, huh?)

It brings into open question who is being paranoid and who is basing their opinions upon a calm rendering of reality. Past a certain point the whole thing begins to take on the tone of a SpinalTap-inspired farce, with amps "going up to 11" ... sheesh.

And seriously ... carry how you wish. Instruct your students however you wish. I'd never for a minute call into question your manhood over your decision in this regard. I'll do the same (which is usually, but not always C1) for whatever reasons seem good to me, confident that my training and mindset are sufficient to fill in the hundredths-of-a second advantage the rest of you imagine you have, thanks.

SIGSHOOTR
04-09-2011, 12:04 PM
A few random comments regarding the discussion at hand:

There seems to be more than a bit of chest-puffery and pissing-match nonsense on the part of some. I would submit to you that if you really think condition-of-carry is some badge of manhood, tacticool-ness or awesomeness, then you've effectively disqualified yourself from being taken seriously. Please go play with your toys and let the adults have a conversation. :rolleyes:

Stats & facts (which are not always the same thing) are stubborn things. There have been a lot of comments to the effect of "how do you know ...?", "what if ...?", etc. based upon the raw unsupported assumption that the absolute worst case is what will happen ... or at least that this is the case that one should prepared for at risk, otherwise incurring the "you aren't worthy" and "you're too paranoid to carry" wrath of their peers. ;)

In this respect, I find it interesting to note that only some fraction of a percentage of us will ever find ourselves in a position where we need to defend ourselves. I've been there, so that statistic might ring a bit hollow personally, but the facts are what they are nonetheless.

Of the cases where a citizen uses a gun to defend themselves, they only fire the weapon in 1 out of 330 or so cases. That's 1 330th people, not even a 3rd or a 30th.

In 87% of the cases where LE are attacked and/or killed, they didn't even draw their sidearm.

I can demonstrate that the difference between C1 and C3 amounts to only hundredths of a second.

So it occurs to me that all of this dogmatic, almost religious insistence that C1 is THE way and the ONLY way (perhaps even the truth and the light) for everyone at all times (forever and ever amen) is really about splitting tiny little hairs regarding situations which are among the very most unlikely imaginable.

The evidence seems to indicate that mindset is a far, far greater determiner of survival than whether one can cock their head to the side and tell you "cocked-n-locked" with gravel in their voice and steely-eyed self-assurance they imagine such an attitude confers upon them.

It brings into open question who is being paranoid and who is basing their opinions upon a calm rendering of reality.

And seriously ... carry how you wish. Instruct your students however you wish. I'd never for a minute call into question your manhood over your decision in this regard. I'll do the same (which is usually, but not always C1) for whatever reasons seem good to me, thanks.

Well said... by far, the most intelligent post I've seen on this thread.

Shenaniguns
04-09-2011, 12:10 PM
Why is manhood, tacticoolness, bravado keep being brought into this discussion by the unloaded carry supporters implying the loaded carry supporters are trying to belittle them when this is not the case at all?

CalNRA
04-09-2011, 1:08 PM
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=086_1260862712

Watch the video. A unloaded gun will do you NO GOOD when you NEED IT. Without a round in the chamber you are carrying a unloaded gun. To do otherwise would be to carry a paperweight.

Defensive shootings happen in seconds, you most likely will NOT have time to rack the slide or you remember to rack the slide.

my local cops don't even think I should carry a gun outside of my home. Your sage advice is useless to 25+ million Californians.

Laser Sailor
04-09-2011, 3:54 PM
An unloaded gun is as useful as a football bat

Quote of the week goes to....

Spirit 1
04-09-2011, 5:23 PM
A few random comments regarding the discussion at hand:

And seriously ... carry how you wish. Instruct your students however you wish. I'd never for a minute call into question your manhood over your decision in this regard. I'll do the same (which is usually, but not always C1) for whatever reasons seem good to me, confident that my training and mindset are sufficient to fill in the hundredths-of-a second advantage the rest of you imagine you have, thanks.

That about covers it, as a matter of PERSONAL CHOICE.

Hard to justify where all the personal insults are appropriate throughout this thread, based on another person's beliefs? It's fine to have one's mind made up and set firm, but it doesn't have to be used as a battering ram or a bludgeon.

For some folks their gun is controlled by their thinking. For others their thinking is controlled by their gun. If the thinking is controlled by the gun that's potentially a very dangerous and deadly situation for everyone close. At every instant [in their mind] they've already drawn, emptied the magazine and shot dead every perceived threat before it even materializes, if it ever would? Not only the gun, but the brain is permanently cocked & locked with a finger on the trigger.

That ain't good. That's not responsible gun ownership, possession & use, in self defense.

Sometimes I carry in Con 3. Sometimes I carry in Con 1. At all times, it depends on circumstances. At all times I assess the threat level, and respond accordingly.

Even if a person is armed with a high-cap full-auto already in their hands with the safety off & extra mags, some frags, an RPG strapped to their back, with body armor & helmet, they're still NEVER ready for ANYTHING & EVERYTHING that can possibly attack them.

Rational Threat Level Assessment is the basic fundamental & we proceed from there.

HighLander51
04-09-2011, 5:44 PM
As promised, some actual engagement times, see post

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=419132

SoCalXD
04-09-2011, 5:51 PM
If this was the "armed robbers" message board, I'd be happy to see so many posters suggesting that carrying a gun in anything but condition 1 is a good idea. But since I consider most all of you to be brothers in arms, it saddens me to see such discussions going on.

What next... should we carry dull knives so we don't accidently cut ourselves, then sharpen them when we need to use them? ;-)

Read In the Gravest Extreme, and other all time classics if you don't have a law enforcement background or some IDPA training under your belt. Or better yet, go do some IDPA!

Shenaniguns
04-09-2011, 7:10 PM
As promised, some actual engagement times, see post

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=419132


Reposting my response here:


The video is fine and dandy but add in stress, a moving threat that doesn't always face you to attack, multiple threats, you probably will be moving etc....

Shooting under a timer (especially in a class or match) does add in stress that most of us 'should' try to do often but many of us do not have a shooting center close enough to do so.

And the ability to train while getting shot with Red and Blue training guns while getting attacked is out there, it's called Force on Force training from schools like Shivworks, Tactical Response and others.

_R4ajSiXARM
YPO3h2bTe9w
CkSPeOhGPHE

SheepDogHog
04-09-2011, 8:17 PM
As promised, some actual engagement times, see post

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=419132

Time is half of the argument. Anyone can train to do anything fast, but you can't train to make sure that round goes in the chamber every single time you rack.

@1:40....Exactly why you need to go Con1 on defensive carry. You never know if you'll chamber a round or not. Why do you think they teach transitional drills? Why reload a weapon and risk the chance of not getting a round in the chamber, when you have another gun ready to go with one in the pipe? Different drill but same principle.

On another note (not trying to be a dick, just curious), why did you not perform some type of immediate action if you are training defensive shooting when that handgun had a FTF?

xmustanguyx
04-09-2011, 9:06 PM
To each and everyone in this thread:

Have any of you ever had to pull your weapon?

Yes, I pulled my weapon out on some thugs beating the crap out of this guy behind my office...they beat and robbed him. I didn't know if he was a threat or not so my client called the cops and I held him at gunpoint. Adding insult to injury this idiot ends up getting arrested by the PD for disorderly conduct!

I was carrying unloaded concealed but had a full mag. No time at all to rack the slide. That's so far been the only time in public where I felt the need to exhibit my weapon. At home is a different story...I always come out cocked and at the ready.

fiddletown
04-09-2011, 10:34 PM
...Sometimes I carry in Con 3. Sometimes I carry in Con 1. At all times, it depends on circumstances. At all times I assess the threat level, and respond accordingly.

...

....Rational Threat Level Assessment is the basic fundamental & we proceed from there. A few questions for the proponents of "Rational Threat Level Assessment."

[1] Exactly on what bases do you assess the threat level? Exactly what criteria do you use to decide if circumstances warrant carrying in C1 or C3 or some other way?

[2] Exactly what sources of information do you rely upon to determine if one of more of your assessment criteria are, or are not, satisfied?

[3] How did you decide on the criteria you apply in your threat level assessments? How did you determine that those criteria would be helpful to assess the threat level and provide a sound basis for your decision whether to carry you gun in C1 or C3 or in some other state of readiness?

[4] Where did you receive your training in self defense and the defensive uses of firearms?

ZombieTactics
04-10-2011, 8:00 AM
A few questions for the proponents of "Rational Threat Level Assessment." I'm not certain if that's the phrase I'd use but I'll give it a shot anyway:

[1] Exactly on what bases do you assess the threat level? Exactly what criteria do you use to decide if circumstances warrant carrying in C1 or C3 or some other way? My basis is rooted in fact and a calm assessment of the particulars. I see no advantage to C1 while seated in a dark crowded theater, for instance. That would change radically if I had cause to believe that I was in danger of an attack directed specifically at me. I don't, so my level of preparedness is more general than specific. I submit to you that a handgun carried C3 in such a case is rational, and that it strains credulity to pretend that C1 would confer any meaningful advantage in such a case. FAR more people have died in theater fires than theater shootings. SO, if you want to question my method of carry, I'll simply note that you are completely irrational and inconsistent unless you carry one of these: fire-escape mask (http://www.raytechcatalog.com/product_info/xcaper-fire-escape-mask-336.html)

For my part, I've at least offered some actual stats and facts regarding defensive situations. The continued "you can't know ... ", "what if ...?" lines are indicative of of an unthinking position driven by fear of the unknown, not any semblance of rational analysis. Aside from this line of sophistry, what rational basis do you have for the absolute insistence that C1 is THE way, the ONLY way for all persons at all times, places and circumstances?

[2] Exactly what sources of information do you rely upon to determine if one of more of your assessment criteria are, or are not, satisfied? Crime statistics are a good place to start. I think it's better to plan well for what is likely than to plan poorly for every conceivable possibility. All of this C1/C3 discussion is - after all - arguing over milliseconds for anyone who trains adequately. The type of holster used probably makes a greater difference in some cases, but I don't see anyone having a big fit over that. I also find it telling that nobody has seen fit to challenge the person suggesting C0 carry (with a 1911, no less).

[3] How did you decide on the criteria you apply in your threat level assessments? How did you determine that those criteria would be helpful to assess the threat level and provide a sound basis for your decision whether to carry you gun in C1 or C3 or in some other state of readiness? I used my mind, a wonderful tool which many in this thread are all too willing to disregard in favor of group-think adherence to dogma. My gun, my life, my decision ... I'm not anyone's disciple regarding my choice and use of tools, because this isn't a religion for me.

[4] Where did you receive your training in self defense and the defensive uses of firearms? Many schools, including several of the "big names" likely to come to mind in any such discussion. I am not aware of any of them who recommend anything other than C1. I am certain taht more than one of them would tell me I am a fool for my opinion regarding this matter, but likely not much better at offering reasons why. I don't argue with my instructors, but I don't follow their guidance as though it were "holy writ". If I were your student, I'd shut my mouth and do as you instructed in your class. We wouldn't be having this discussion at that time, as it would disrespectful. Beyond that I think and do as I please, incorporating whatever makes sense to me. I am aware that most schools place "mindset" well above tactics, skills and gear. I use my mind as an active part of the equation.

titankeith
04-10-2011, 8:36 AM
The most interesting thing about this thread is how everyone is trying to CONVINCE everyone else of their method of carry.Those that are trained will carry how they were trained, I reckon, and that's fine. I personally am not here to shout down those that do not subscribe to my point of view. I understand ulitmately the arguements are about fractions of seconds, and I think we'd ALL agree that our mind set is substantially more important than how we chose to carry. I personally don"t care how you choose to carry...I know what I do, and NOONE could convince me otherwise...I won't bash on UOC ers, because I agree with their 2A politics, but I also do not agree with UOC becasue they are painting a huge target on themselves. I'm not a fan of having to rack from conceal, no matter how fast I train to be...but that's just me...I know there are plenty of guys that could probably pull from conceal, rack and place 2 to the thoracic cavity faster than I can, so good on them. However I know my limitations, even with training, and I need every advantage I can get when SHTF.
I thnink one thing we all can agree with, and that is how vital training is, as well as mental awareness. That should truly be the key of this discussion.

rogervzv
04-10-2011, 8:41 AM
The most interesting thing about this thread is how everyone is trying to CONVINCE everyone else of their method of carry.....

Yes, in fact the title of this thread leads with an opinion. Anyway, I agree with you that to each his or her own... :chris:

thomasanelson
04-10-2011, 8:53 AM
Nonsense. This may be true for cops cruising South-Central LA. It may be true for our soldiers in Iraq. It is not true for most ordinary armed citizens.
The one time I had need for my gun to confront an intruder, I racked the slide to load the round and went to work. No problem.

People who lose their cool under pressure to the extent that they cannot rack a slide to load a round are people who cannot be trusted to walk around with a round chambered.

And we have all seen that thread where the gentleman shot himself in the drive-thru with his holstered weapon. I'm guessing it was a Glock that did not even have a slide safety. And he's carrying it around loaded in a drive thru. Great.

+1

I read an article explaining the evolution of the US Air Marshall program long before 9/11. They used to carry P228s unchambered and where taught to rack the slide upon drawing their weapon. While I don't agree with that MO for DA/SA, I do agree for the average Joe (including myself) when I carry a striker fired weapon. To each their own, but I can draw and rack the slide of a Glock, XD, Sig-DAK or HK-LEM almost as fast as I can draw a DA/SA weapon.

Spirit 1
04-10-2011, 9:06 AM
A few questions for the proponents of "Rational Threat Level Assessment."

[1] Exactly on what bases do you assess the threat level? Exactly what criteria do you use to decide if circumstances warrant carrying in C1 or C3 or some other way?

[2] Exactly what sources of information do you rely upon to determine if one of more of your assessment criteria are, or are not, satisfied?

[3] How did you decide on the criteria you apply in your threat level assessments? How did you determine that those criteria would be helpful to assess the threat level and provide a sound basis for your decision whether to carry you gun in C1 or C3 or in some other state of readiness?

[4] Where did you receive your training in self defense and the defensive uses of firearms?

Zombie Tactics pretty much sums it up, but:

[1] All. All.

[2] All

[3] All available relevant criteria. Personal & other first person experiences, in addition to civilian, government & military training.

[4] From my father, a rather well known military & civilian firearms instructor, and reading & studying on the subject.

A 'Threat Level Assessment' compared to 'Condition 1 ONLY!' -

Say I choose to carry on a day trip, and go to a Nor-Cal beach. Parking is 500 yards from the beach, the beach is deserted because it's cold & windy on a weekday, and it's not anywhere near a tourist resort or even any towns. Rock outcroppings & boulders make the way down to the water quite difficult.

Fish still haven't gotten around to evolving even after countless thousands of years, preferring water for their own reasons, so little chance of a killer shark leaping out of the shallow water to chase me down the beach. Also there's no historical record of giant squid lassoing beach strollers to date, but anything's possible. Sand crabs are relatively small and benign, presenting no threat except for an occassional nip at a toe tip. Killer sea-weed on shore is already dead by its own devices. I don't hear any aircraft anywhere in the vicinity, so not much chance of blood-crazed maniacal terrorists armed to the hilt parachuting out of the sky to murder me in an explosion of full-auto assault. There's no access to the beach for any vehicles including motorcycles or ATV's so fairly unlikely a renegade biker gang whacked out on drugs & cheap wine will suddenly come screaming down the peaceful stretch of sand to assault & threaten life.

Me: I just might kick off my shoes, peel off the socks, roll up the pants legs and take a stroll out into the foaming surf, with my pistola left unloaded on shore in my rusksack 50 feet away. As for the unattended rucksack left with a firearm inside, it takes at least 10 minutes for anyone to make it down to the beach, and only seconds for me to make it from the water to the bag, and the beach is deserted for at least 1/8 mile in both directions, and I have eyes and remain aware.

That act of peaceful, unecumbered enjoyment of a weekday afternoon is apparently mindless insanity according to some, from what I read here. However, it is an example of Threat Level Assessment, and subsequent action according to personal analysis.

I survived the ordeal to tell of it here.

fiddletown
04-10-2011, 9:25 AM
A few questions for the proponents of "Rational Threat Level Assessment."
I'm not certain if that's the phrase I'd use but I'll give it a shot anyway,


[1] Exactly on what bases do you assess the threat level? Exactly what criteria do you use to decide if circumstances warrant carrying in C1 or C3 or some other way?
My basis is rooted in fact and a calm assessment of the particulars. I see no advantage to C1 while seated in a dark crowded theater, for instance. That would change radically if I had cause to believe that I was in danger of an attack directed specifically at me. I don't, so my level of preparedness is more general than specific. I submit to you that a handgun carried C3 in such a case is rational, and that it strains credulity to pretend that C1 would confer any meaningful advantage in such a case. More people have died in theater fires than theater shootings. SO, if you want to question my method of carry, I'll simply note that you are completely irrational and inconsistent unless you carry one of these: fire-escape mask

The continued "you can't know ... ", "what if ...?" lines are indicative of of an unthinking position driven by fear of the unknown, not any semblance of rational analysis.


[2] Exactly what sources of information do you rely upon to determine if one of more of your assessment criteria are, or are not, satisfied?
Crime statistics are a good place to start. I think it's better to plan well for what is likely than to plan poorly for every conceivable possibility. All of this C1/C3 discussion is - after all - arguing over milliseconds for anyone who trains adequately. The type of holster used probably makes a greater difference in some cases, but I don't see anyone having a big fit over that.


[3] How did you decide on the criteria you apply in your threat level assessments? How did you determine that those criteria would be helpful to assess the threat level and provide a sound basis for your decision whether to carry you gun in C1 or C3 or in some other state of readiness?
I use my mind, a wonderful tool which many in this thread are all too willing to disregard in favor of group-think adherence to dogma.


[4] Where did you receive your training in self defense and the defensive uses of firearms?
Many schools, including several of the "big names" likely to come to mind in any such discussion. I am not aware of any of them who recommend anything other than C1. I don't argue with my instructors, but I don't follow their guidance as though it were "holy writ". Thanks for the response. It's very vague and general. Perhaps others will find it meaningful. I do not.

For example, in response to my question about how you assess a threat level and what criteria you use, you write that you see no reason to carry in C1 in a crowded theater.

Aside from the fact that your answer doesn't really describe your thought process and the criteria you've applied to the decision, you merely state a conclusion, "I see no advantage to C1 while seated in a dark crowded theater", it begs a question: how did you get to the theater? Certainly you didn't just materialize in your seat. Presumably you traveled through some part of the city by some means. If you traveled by car, didn't you park the car and then walk from some parking lot to the theater entrance? Was the parking area well lit? Did you have to stop for gas or to attend to one or more other matters of personal business during your trip to the theater? Were there parts of your journey to the theater during which you would have concluded that C1 would be a better choice? Would you switch between modes of carry as you the level of threat changed from particular location to location during the course of your day?

Then again, in response to my question as to how you decided what criteria provide a sound basis for your decision about how to carry, you merely tell us that use your mind and that it's your decision.

Well of course you use your mind. I use my mind too to make my decisions. We all do. And of course, how you choose to conduct your life is absolutely your decision. But you really haven't told us much about how you make this particular decision, and that was the point of the question.

...The continued "you can't know ... ", "what if ...?" lines are indicative of of an unthinking position driven by fear of the unknown, not any semblance of rational analysis. Aside from this line of sophistry, what rational basis do you have for the absolute insistence that C1 is THE way, the ONLY way for all persons at all times, places and circumstances?...And I challenge your claim that my view is "unthinking", "driven by a fear of the unknown" and not the product of "any semblance of rational analysis."

[1] No position is "unthinking." Every opinion is a product of "thinking."

[2] Nor need my recognition that I am not clairvoyant and can not absolutely know the future, necessarily be fear. I can dodge folly without backing into cowardice.

[3] And the recognition that no amount of rational analysis can absolutely predict the future is, I submit, entirely rational. If rational analysis were perfect, I would not, for example, have any reason to diversify my investments. But I nonetheless do so, as does any wise investor, not "driven by fear of the unknown" but rather from recognition that things take place in the world beyond his control or powers of anticipation. (In that regard, I strongly recommend Nassim Nicholas Taleb's books Fooled by Randomness, the Hidden Role of Chance (Random House, 2004) and The Black Swan, the Impact of the Highly Improbable (Random House, 2007).)

As for a rational basis for preferring carrying in C1 to C3: C1 carry offers no disadvantage to me in situations in which C3 would have been adequate; and it offers me a significant advantage in situations in which C3 carry would have been inadequate.

...All of this C1/C3 discussion is - after all - arguing over milliseconds for anyone who trains adequately...Not entirely. There is also the issue of having both hands available.

....what rational basis do you have for the absolute insistence that C1 is THE way, the ONLY way for all persons at all times, places and circumstances?...I don't believe that I have indeed insisted that C1 is THE only way. I have stated my preference for C1 carry and I have challenged the reasons people have advanced in support of C3 carry, or in support of carrying in different modes at different times.

You have denigrated my view, charging me with being "unthinking", "driven by fear of the unknown", and devoid of "any semblance of rational analysis."

How you choose to carry your sidearm is unquestionably your decision. But I do object to your pretension that your choice is more rational than mine.

fiddletown
04-10-2011, 9:33 AM
Zombie Tactics pretty much sums it up, but:

[1] All. All.

[2] All

[3] All available relevant criteria. Personal & other first person experiences, in addition to civilian, government & military training.

[4] From my father, a rather well known military & civilian firearms instructor, and reading & studying on the subject....I've responded to ZombieTactics' post, and will pass on directly responding to yours. Others can decide for themselves how useful your response is.

ZX-10R
04-10-2011, 9:38 AM
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=086_1260862712

Watch the video. A unloaded gun will do you NO GOOD when you NEED IT. Without a round in the chamber you are carrying a unloaded gun. To do otherwise would be to carry a paperweight.

Defensive shootings happen in seconds, you most likely will NOT have time to rack the slide or you remember to rack the slide.

I agree.

k1dude
04-10-2011, 10:03 AM
All fight-pickery (lol) aside, the man retired as a RADM. He's my father-in-law. He was where he was, did what he did, I've seen the pictures, and I tend to take his word at face value when I ask him about such things. When you get the fundraising letter for the SeaBee memorial being built ... that's his signature at the bottom.

And I was there too. Trust me when I tell you along with several others here, when you were up country you had one in the chamber at all times everywhere. There were regs that said you weren't allowed to have a loaded weapon in certain places, but those regs were routinely ignored by everyone.

Top brass had to set an example with regs, especially those in the rear. As said before, top brass (Lt. Col. on up) rarely went into the field. And when they did it was usually to have their photo taken to prove they were in the middle of it. Then they flew back to hang in the Da Nang or Tan Son Nhut O' clubs.

With that said the Seabees may have had a different reason why they might have left the chamber empty. Construction is a rough trade and with all the carrying and movement of materials, I could easily see the sidearm being banged around like crazy. I could also see someone resting something heavy that they were carrying on the cocked hammer of the gun in the holster to help alleviate the load. I could also see with all the knocking around the safety could be accidentally disengaged. So I can understand where they might have totally different regs. Also, when they were operating in forward areas, they were usually surrounded by other armed units as they did their job. So being in condition 1 might be a safety issue. But as soon as they were on their own in a remote area away from other units, I imagine they would carry in condition 1 for their own peace of mind. And likely there wasn't anyone around at times like that enforcing the regs.

k1dude
04-10-2011, 10:31 AM
To all those that claim they carry in different conditions depending on the situation, how do you remember what condition your firearm is in at all times? I can't remember if I put my phone in my pocket half the time.

If you're in a theater or on the beach in condition 3, but carry at other times in condition 0 or 1 depending on where you are, how do you keep it straight?

When it suddenly all goes down, I wouldn't be able to remember if I had my sidearm in condition 0, 1, 2, or 3. If I was in condition 1 but thought I was in condition 3 in the heat of the moment, I'd probably waste time and ammo by racking the slide and extracting a good round. All that would be going through my mind is Oh Sh*t! Oh Sh*t! Oh Sh*t!

I wouldn't be thinking...hmmm...when I left this morning I put my coffee cup down on the counter and picked up my 1911. I then inserted the magazine. Did I rack it or not? Hmmm. Let me think. I think I racked it because the phone rang right when I was going to rack it. Let's see, I put down the gun and picked up the phone. It was mom and she was telling me about her leaky faucet. About 8 minutes into the conversation I had to tell mom I was running late and had to go. So then I grabbed the 1911 and rushed to the door. Then I dropped my keys as I was fumbling. I picked them up and then holstered the weapon. So NO! I didn't rack it! I'd better rack it now!

Yeah, not so good. It gives me comfort to always know I'm in condition 1. I don't need to think, just react. Pull gun, release safety, pull trigger.

k1dude
04-10-2011, 10:39 AM
That's not neccasarily rue bud look at the Jews.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRdZ3hZ8y-w

That video appears to be over 30 years old. Tactics, training, and equipment have evolved significantly since then. I'd be curious to see how they train today. I would imagine it's quite different now.

Spirit 1
04-10-2011, 11:12 AM
I've responded to ZombieTactics' post, and will pass on directly responding to yours. Others can decide for themselves how useful your response is.

Unfortunately you may not have understood my direct answers to your direct questions, and apparently decided on a vague insult for a reply.

Some of the main differences separating man & lower animals are adaptability & rational reasoning, with the two going hand in hand. This has caused the survival and flourishing of mankind far above & beyond the lower animals. As mankind, we all intend to survive, and hope to flourish.

Deductive skills & objective reasoning are different from reactions & subjective thought. Threat Level Assessment speaks to the ability to thoroughly analyze all available information without pre-conceived notions of what the results must be. If one is not skillful at Threat Level Assessment they have no business owning a gun and if they do own, they're a very serious potential threat to fellow man.

If carry & use of a handgun is not based upon continuous feedback of Threat Level Assessment then we have people going off half-cocked, just waiting for an excuse to justify use of a deadly weapon against another. It's part of the 'Reasonable man' clause in basic Law, and is the foundation for any justification of ownership for defensive use of any firearm in any way. It's similar to 'Probable Cause', which is a fundamental guideline for all law enforcement. Additionally, if one does not immerse themselves in continual Threat Level Assessment they are never truly safe, regardless of armament.

If you happen to go back through my responses here you'll find I never INSIST what condition is BEST for firearms carry. Some take offense to my posts, because they have a pre-conceived notion of what I must believe, or what I meant to say. That's because they're reading between the lines, instead of what's written.

That is, in fact, faulty 'Threat Level Assessment' because in fact I didn't threaten or attack anybody's CHOICE of how they CHOSE to carry!

I would strongly suggest to anyone contemplating or presently owning a firearm, and especially carrying currently for personal defense that they fully immerse themselves on the basics and more expanded thoughts & teachings on accurate Threat Level Assessment before they ever pick up a gun for personal defense. That can help prevent some terrible tragedies and also lower their chances of spending the rest of their lives paying for stupid mistakes that didn't ever need to happen in the first place.

wu_dot_com
04-10-2011, 11:13 AM
Not entirely. There is also the issue of having both hands available.



quick question for those who advocate the availability of both hands.

do you guys train all of your defensive shooting technique with one hand only? to be more specific, one hand draw, one hand aim, and one hand shot. one hand jam clearing, and one hand mag reloads. lets say if you do, then do you train equally with your off hand so you will be equally proficient in case your dominant hand is disable?

from what im seeing at the range, the answer is no for most people. they draw with one, then shoot with two, jam clearing with two, and reload with two.

the basis of your argument is that Israel draw require both hands to operate the gun, since one of your hand may be disable, thus Israel draw is more dangerous and you should always carry C1. to me, this is a converse accident fallacy unless you solely train to operate your gun with one hand.

my point is, unless you and all your instructors teach and train with only one hand operation for all defensive situation (which i know many dont), its ridiculous to use the availability argument. because the same argument can be apply to when you need aim, when you clear jams, and when you reload.

ZombieTactics
04-10-2011, 11:22 AM
Thanks for the response. It's very vague and general. Perhaps others will find it meaningful. I do not. I've stated some stats at least once in this thread. I've yet to read anything but raw assertions unsupported by anything but other raw opinions in response. "You can't predict the future" isn't exactly brimming with specificity, y'know? :rolleyes: I'll leave it to the reader to decide which approach is more meaningful.

For example, in response to my question about how you assess a threat level and what criteria you use, you write that you see no reason to carry in C1 in a crowded theater. ... [snipped but referenced nonetheless] I mentioned a specific scenario as an example ... you want to discuss something else. Rather than tell me why C3 was a bad idea based upon anything other than your raw opinion, you sidestepped the example altogether. I do in fact change my method of carry as the circumstances dictate. This should be obvious from my earlier assertions that I usually carry C1 but carry C3 when I think it makes sense.

Then again, in response to my question as to how you decided what criteria provide a sound basis for your decision about how to carry, you merely tell us that use your mind and that it's your decision. I've referenced statistics repeatedly in this thread. My mind tells me that I am generally well over 300 times less likely to be in a circumstance where C1 over C3 could even conceivably make a difference than otherwise. I have a reasonable suspicion that a careful further breakdown of available statistics would likely lead to a conclusion that it's closer to thousands of times less likely.

If you are going to throw around terms like "vague" and "general", I'll ask you to offer something more than "you never know ...", "what if?" and raw opinion on your part. If it's good for the goose ...

But you really haven't told us much about how you make this particular decision, and that was the point of the question. Actually I and others have offered quite a bit regarding how such decisions are made. On the other hand, "what if?" and it's derivations seem to be the only "reasoning" process available as a counter.

And I challenge your claim that my view is "unthinking", "driven by a fear of the unknown" and not the product of "any semblance of rational analysis." What thought process have you demonstrated other than a rote repetition of dogma? "What if?", "You never know ..." does not seem to indicate any sense of certainty. Maybe that's not "fear" per se ... perhaps that's too strong. It certainly doesn't meet the criteria of something known, however. My position is based upon what is overwhelmingly likely, yours appears to be not so ... but you are welcome to demonstrate otherwise. Facts and stats are preferable, please ... as imaginings of what might occur don't demonstrate a firm grasp on reality.

Nor need my recognition that I am not clairvoyant and can not absolutely know the future, necessarily be fear. I can dodge folly without backing into cowardice. Yes the bluster comes through clearly, I assure you. Certainly calling anyone with a differing opinion a "coward" settles the case rationally for the "thinking" man. :rolleyes:

... And the recognition that no amount of rational analysis can absolutely predict the future is, I submit, entirely rational. ...
But your case rest entirely upon an absolute notion that everyone adopt a position optimizing for that which you cannot possibly know and which is simultaneously tremendously unlikely. That's not rational.

As for a rational basis for preferring carrying in C1 to C3: C1 carry offers no disadvantage to me in situations in which C3 would have been adequate; and it offers me a significant advantage in situations in which C3 carry would have been inadequate. I can use your own method and ask you "what if someone grabs your gun from the holster and tries to shoot you?" If you reject this kind of approach, you've rejected the majority of the "reasoning" given for the "C1 ONLY" position. If you accept this approach, then you admit that there are indeed cases where C1 is a disadvantage. The logic is inescapable.

A "significant" advantage has yet to be proven or even adequately fleshed out verbally in all cases. There is zero advantage - for instance - in the 329 out of 330 cases where a handgun is used to stop a threat without the gun being fired. Of the 1/330th remaining case ... run that stat out and tell me how many cases are such that C1 made a difference, or could have, or would have. Do you know? Do you even pretend to know or even have a reason to assume one way or the other? Can you back that up with anything other than an isolated anecdote?


There is also the issue of having both hands available. If you want to keep bring up "what if" scenarios without some evidence that they are certain or even likely ... please do so. I am free to simply note the unsupported assertion of that which is unknowable.

I don't believe that I have indeed insisted that C1 is THE only way. I have stated my preference for C1 carry and I have challenged the reasons people have advanced in support of C3 carry, or in support of carrying in different modes at different times. That's awesome, and makes for great discussion.

You have denigrated my view, charging me with being "unthinking", "driven by fear of the unknown", and devoid of "any semblance of rational analysis." Well, those holding to my position (C3 sometimes can make sense) have been called "cowards" and "paranoid", so your point is?

How you choose to carry your sidearm is unquestionably your decision. But I do object to your pretension that your choice is more rational than mine. I'm not sure what the complaint is ... if I didn't think my position (C3 sometimes) is more rational and makes more sense, why would I defend it? If you don't think your position is "more rational", than why the discussion at all? If you DO, then your complaint is self-contradictory.

ZombieTactics
04-10-2011, 11:31 AM
To all those that claim they carry in different conditions depending on the situation, how do you remember what condition your firearm is in at all times? I can't remember if I put my phone in my pocket half the time.
...
When it suddenly all goes down, I wouldn't be able to remember if I had my sidearm in condition 0, 1, 2, or 3.
...
It gives me comfort to always know I'm in condition 1. I don't need to think, just react. Pull gun, release safety, pull trigger.

I suggest that everyone carry subject to their own level of training, presence of mind and within their own limitations. I'd never suggest to anyone that carrying C1 is "unsafe" unless they demonstrate a lack of safety. I'd prefer people not opine on the effectiveness or usefulness of the cases where I carry C3, unless it's demonstrated that I am ineffective as such.

I would also hope that for most people, pulling the trigger is a conscious act, and not simply the final stage of a unthinking reaction.

SheepDogHog
04-10-2011, 11:31 AM
Do you Con3 carry guys tie your shoes when you take them off too?

wu_dot_com
04-10-2011, 11:32 AM
Unfortunately you may not have understood my direct answers to your direct questions, and apparently decided on a vague insult for a reply.

Some of the main differences separating man & lower animals are adaptability & rational reasoning, with the two going hand in hand. This has caused the survival and flourishing of mankind far above & beyond the lower animals. As mankind, we all intend to survive, and hope to flourish.

Deductive skills & objective reasoning are different from reactions & subjective thought. Threat Level Assessment speaks to the ability to thoroughly analyze all available information without pre-conceived notions of what the results must be. If one is not skillful at Threat Level Assessment they have no business owning a gun and if they do own, they're a very serious potential threat to fellow man.

If carry & use of a handgun is not based upon continuous feedback of Threat Level Assessment then we have people going off half-cocked, just waiting for an excuse to justify use of a deadly weapon against another. It's part of the 'Reasonable man' clause in basic Law, and is the foundation for any justification of ownership for defensive use of any firearm in any way. It's similar to 'Probable Cause', which is a fundamental guideline for all law enforcement. Additionally, if one does not immerse themselves in continual Threat Level Assessment they are never truly safe, regardless of armament.

If you happen to go back through my responses here you'll find I never INSIST what condition is BEST for firearms carry. Some take offense to my posts, because they have a pre-conceived notion of what I must believe, or what I meant to say. That's because they're reading between the lines, instead of what's written.

That is, in fact, faulty 'Threat Level Assessment' because in fact I didn't threaten or attack anybody's CHOICE of how they CHOSE to carry!

I would strongly suggest to anyone contemplating or presently owning a firearm, and especially carrying currently for personal defense that they fully immerse themselves on the basics and more expanded thoughts & teachings on accurate Threat Level Assessment before they ever pick up a gun for personal defense. That can help prevent some terrible tragedies and also lower their chances of spending the rest of their lives paying for stupid mistakes that didn't ever need to happen in the first place.

where is the damn like button. you and zombie is one of the few guys on this thd that are logical and reasonable IMO.

FYI, your posts makes perfect sense, and i agreed with you 100%.

i tried to stay away from posting because i choose not to carry even though i have SD training. i truly think that carrying in my environment is more of a liability due to my logical thread assignment, but of course, some of those other internet commandos are all too eager to show their mochoness and parade their tacticool knowledge.

keep up the good posts. we need more people like you on this forum to balance the illogical and irrational voices.

wu_dot_com
04-10-2011, 11:39 AM
Do you Con3 carry guys tie your shoes when you take them off too?

whats your point?:confused:

are you trying to be funny? i dont get it?

if you are serious, please stop. some of us here are trying to have an intelligent conversation.

ZombieTactics
04-10-2011, 11:55 AM
Do you Con3 carry guys tie your shoes when you take them off too?
Do you Con1 guys wear combat boots to bed (and in the shower) just in case?

SheepDogHog
04-10-2011, 11:58 AM
keep up the good posts. we need more people like you on this forum to balance the illogical and irrational voices.

First of all, again with the machoness thing...where is this coming from, being prepared is trying to be macho? LOL and if CARRYING a firearm not ready to be fired is illogical, you sir have never had to use a firearm, and I would bet money on that. Talk to anyone who uses a weapon for a living, (who knows what they are talking about, not "internet commandos") and the only way they would ever carry that weapon is in Con1.

I gave up on weapons anyway, I can ninja kick faster then people can draw and rack. I've got the times to prove it. I also have ninja sense that allows me to see attacks before they can happen so I can hit you with my ninja star if out of range of my ninja kick, but highly unlikely because my max effective range of my ninja kick is about 75yds.

SheepDogHog
04-10-2011, 12:04 PM
Do you Con1 guys wear combat boots to bed (and in the shower) just in case?

I personally prefer ninja shoes over combat boots.

dark_ninja
04-10-2011, 12:13 PM
By far, the smartest post in this thread...:cool:

What I have learned from CATS instructors... you fall back on your lowest level of training... so the better trained you are the better your ability to react,shoot and survive will be.

... I'm going to study my training manuals and hit the range. Thanks OP for the post. Puts things in perspective,especially when my motivation to survive is high!

Not to thread jack but does anyone know of a range in the So Cal area that doesn't restrict you from rapid fire? Seems kind of silly unless it's law here in CA.

fiddletown
04-10-2011, 12:32 PM
...Deductive skills & objective reasoning are different from reactions & subjective thought. Threat Level Assessment speaks to the ability to thoroughly analyze all available information without pre-conceived notions of what the results must be. If one is not skillful at Threat Level Assessment they have no business owning a gun and if they do own, they're a very serious potential threat to fellow man.

If carry & use of a handgun is not based upon continuous feedback of Threat Level Assessment then we have people going off half-cocked, just waiting for an excuse to justify use of a deadly weapon against another. It's part of the 'Reasonable man' clause in basic Law, and is the foundation for any justification of ownership for defensive use of any firearm in any way. It's similar to 'Probable Cause', which is a fundamental guideline for all law enforcement. ....But you're talking about two separate issues.

The issue being discussed in this thread, as I see it, is in what stage of readiness one carries his sidearm as he goes through his normal, day-to-day activities.

But when the question turns to the "...use of a handgun is not based upon continuous feedback of Threat Level Assessment then we have people going off half-cocked, just waiting for an excuse to justify use of a deadly weapon against another....", that is another matter entirely. Now you're talking about the decision to actually use the gun. And that absolutely involves a process of threat identification and assessment.

I've spent considerable time wandering the streets of Prescott, and other towns in Arizona, wearing a sidearm in C1 -- sightseeing, shopping, having coffee, talking with folks -- doing all manner of very normal things. And never once have I identified any possible need for it. I also carried a handkerchief, and may well have sneezed, and therefore had use for it. But I didn't have use for my gun.

...I would strongly suggest to anyone contemplating or presently owning a firearm, and especially carrying currently for personal defense that they fully immerse themselves on the basics and more expanded thoughts & teachings on accurate Threat Level Assessment before they ever pick up a gun for personal defense. That can help prevent some terrible tragedies and also lower their chances of spending the rest of their lives paying for stupid mistakes that didn't ever need to happen in the first place. I agree completely, and I have trained quite extensively. Massad Ayoob's classes are especially useful in this regard. (I've taken LFI-I and also helped him with a MAG40 class last year in Arizona.)

I often teach the legal component of the NRA Personal Protection classes, so I have an opportunity to focus students' attention on the legal issues and the legal standards for justifying the use of force in self defense. This is an essential part of the training for anyone who chooses to have a gun for self defense.

But it is a different matter from the question of how someone lawfully carries a gun.

...do you guys train all of your defensive shooting technique with one hand only? to be more specific, one hand draw, one hand aim, and one hand shot. one hand jam clearing, and one hand mag reloads....Yes, actually I do. I may not be as proficient with my weak hand, but I'm trying to get better.

I've stated some stats at least once in this thread. I've yet to read anything but raw assertions unsupported by anything but other raw opinions in response. "You can't predict the future" isn't exactly brimming with specificity, y'know? ...How specific do I need to be? Do you dispute that you can't predict the future? Can you indeed predict the future?


For example, in response to my question about how you assess a threat level and what criteria you use, you write that you see no reason to carry in C1 in a crowded theater. ... [snipped but referenced nonetheless]
I mentioned a specific scenario as an example ... you want to discuss something else. Rather than tell me why C3 was a bad idea based upon anything other than your raw opinion, you sidestepped the example altogether... My original question didn't ask for a scenario. I originally asked, "Exactly on what bases do you assess the threat level? Exactly what criteria do you use to decide if circumstances warrant carrying in C1 or C3 or some other way?" Instead of answering the question, you outlined a scenario. It was you who sidestepped.


Then again, in response to my question as to how you decided what criteria provide a sound basis for your decision about how to carry, you merely tell us that use your mind and that it's your decision.
I've referenced statistics repeatedly in this thread. My mind tells me that I am generally well over 300 times less likely to be in a circumstance where C1 over C3 could even conceivably make a difference than otherwise. I have a reasonable suspicion that a careful further breakdown of available statistics would likely lead to a conclusion that it's closer to thousands of times less likely.[1] You've mentioned that statistic. You've not identified a source for it or otherwise validated it.

[2] You say your mind tells you that. Why? How? Based on what data? Cite your sources, please.

[3] And indeed, we generally know and accept the proposition that one is extremely unlikely to ever need to defend himself with a gun. Most of us go through our entire lives without needing a gun.

...Maybe that's not "fear" per se ... perhaps that's too strong. It certainly doesn't meet the criteria of something known, however. My position is based upon what is overwhelmingly likely, yours appears to be not so ... but you are welcome to demonstrate otherwise... What's known is that the future is unknowable. Yes, one can speak of odds, of likelihoods, of probabilities, but one can not legitimately speak of certainties (except the certainty of death).

...Facts and stats are preferable, please ...And the fact is that one can not speak with certainty about the future.


As for a rational basis for preferring carrying in C1 to C3: C1 carry offers no disadvantage to me in situations in which C3 would have been adequate; and it offers me a significant advantage in situations in which C3 carry would have been inadequate.
I can use your own method and ask you "what if someone grabs your gun from the holster and tries to shoot you?" If you reject this kind of approach, you've rejected the majority o=ZombieTacticsf the "reasoning" given for the "C1 ONLY" position. If you accept this approach, then you admit that there are indeed cases where C1 is a disadvantage. Which "disadvantage" I can mitigate by training (as you mitigate the disadvantage of C3 carry), carrying my sidearm concealed, and carrying a 1911 on-safe or an H&K P7M8 which has a non-intuitive manual of arms.

...There is zero advantage - for instance - in the 329 out of 330 cases where a handgun is used to stop a threat without the gun being fired. Of the 1/330th remaining case ... run that stat out and tell me how many cases are such that C1 made a difference, or could have, or would have... More of your statistics. What is your source?

wu_dot_com
04-10-2011, 12:52 PM
First of all, again with the machoness thing...where is this coming from, being prepared is trying to be macho? LOL and if CARRYING a firearm not ready to be fired is illogical, you sir have never had to use a firearm, and I would bet money on that. Talk to anyone who uses a weapon for a living, (who knows what they are talking about, not "internet commandos") and the only way they would ever carry that weapon is in Con1.


i've seen plenty of guys at the range who try to shoot beyond their ability, yet they all talked like they can shoot the wings off flys. that to me is showing off and being macho. it gets worst when there girls are around.many can talk the talk, but not too many can walk the walk.

carry C3 is not illogical, but carrying UOC is; in a practical sense (not political sense). as zombie tactic illustrated, C3 and C1 time difference is small. however, in a known none hostile environment where the occurrence of a rapid violence is not expected or anticipated, carry C1 can be a liability. by that i mean we are all human, and despite our best effort, we can and will be negligent with our weapons. carrying C3 in some situation cuts down the risk of ND occurrences. best example is how many people have ND their Glock while field stripping? not bashing on Glock, but it seems to be a fairly regular occurrences on glock forums. sometime, those ND happen to experience gun owners too.
The bottom line is, stupid ***** happen, and it takes an intelligent person to own up and acknowledge that.


I gave up on weapons anyway, I can ninja kick faster then people can draw and rack. I've got the times to prove it. I also have ninja sense that allows me to see attacks before they can happen so I can hit you with my ninja star if out of range of my ninja kick, but highly unlikely because my max effective range of my ninja kick is about 75yds.

didnt mean to disrespect sensei. :D with your skills, guns are nothing more than toys that makes loud noise.

wu_dot_com
04-10-2011, 1:04 PM
Yes, actually I do. I may not be as proficient with my weak hand, but I'm trying to get better.



i see where you are coming from and you are the few where your training agrees with your assumptions.

i personally evaluate the threat level of my surrounding based on a few factors. time of days, surrounding ares, reputations, suspicious movements, etc. when i am in questionable settings, my mental alert status is high. i avoid getting into questionable area and situations. thus with all my life spent in SoCA, i never felt the need to carry. looking back at those past situations, having a gun would not help resolve the conflicts.

this is not to say that i will never feel the need to carry in the future.

BTW i train for SD because i like guns.

DannyZRC
04-10-2011, 1:04 PM
I think a lot of the discussion in this thread, and every other thread where firearm safety and readiness are juxtaposed, is missing the fundamentals of any sort of comparative analysis.

What I'm talking about is Cost/Benefit analysis.

Clearly, the design of firearms, as well as the training and practices implemented for their use, are focused primarily on maximizing these two factors and, to an extent, balancing them against each-other:

1: The Firearm should fire fast and accurate shots at the shooters intended target when desired. (readiness)
2: The Firearm should remain inert and not shoot any shots when shots are not desired. (safety)

There are further sub goals in design and training, usually about various details of operation, or consistency in that operation.

So, what are the costs of going Chambered vs Unchambered? What are the Benefits to Chambered over Unchambered? (C1/C3 really only apply to 1911 pattern guns).

People have different priorities, and different perceptions about what constitutes satisfactory levels of readiness and safety.

Someone choosing to carry chambered believes that they have to be chambered to fulfill the first conditional above, but that being chambered doesn't compromise the second conditional

Someone choosing to carry UNchambered believes the reverse, that being unchambered does not compromise readiness, but that it is required for safety.

Some people are satisfied by different levels of safety (they think a glock is safe, I don't).
Some people are satisfied by different levels of readiness (they think an empty chamber is acceptable, I don't).
Some people are satisfied by a gun that has multiple conditionals in it's operation, like sometimes the safety is applied and therefore needs to be swiped off, or sometimes the gun isn't chambered and therefore sometimes needs to be racked. I don't like sometimes, I want always.
Some people are satisfied by a gun that is intolerant to environmental factors and poor handling, they are satisfied with a firearm that relies on more rigid standards of storage and employment.

Personally, I value consistency of operation, and I also value a high degree of handling tolerance in a firearm. I am willing to accept a (minimized as much as possible) penalty on readiness to achieve these ends.

Being human, I think my way is the correct way until proven otherwise (as does everyone else).

IMO, if you have a firearm that you don't trust in the chambered condition, you need to get rid of it for one that you do trust. If you have a firearm that you feel needs to be put into various conditions to satisfy safety and readiness as you move from environment to environment, you need to get rid of it for one that you can operate consistently across all conditions.

but it's a free country and you can decide to carry a different gun every day of the week, in different condition depending on if you're getting ice-cream or frogurt, if that's what floats your boat.

ZombieTactics
04-10-2011, 1:23 PM
How specific do I need to be? Do you dispute that you can't predict the future? Can you indeed predict the future? ...

What's known is that the future is unknowable. Yes, one can speak of odds, of likelihoods, of probabilities, but one can not legitimately speak of certainties (except the certainty of death).

And the fact is that one can not speak with certainty about the future.
The future is indeed unknowable. As such, you do not know if tomorrow is the day someone lifts your gun from your holster and shoots you in the head with it. I don't know that tomorrow isn't the day that I need that extra hundred 300 milliseconds to draw my gun and fire which C1 would give me. Inasmuch as the future is unknowable ... If you acknowledge one possibility, you must acknowledge the other as a matter of simple logic. The conclusion therefore is that ANY position based purely upon "you can't predict the future" is fundamentally flawed and irrational, because just as many "pros" can be imagined as "cons". "You can't predict the future" is therefore a meaningless argument on its face. If you assert that one is more "important" or "worthy of concern" than the other ... than it must be based on something other than simply asserting the unknown.

On the other hand ... odds can be computed to varying degrees of accuracy. As such, likelihoods can be known. Probabilities can be ascertained. When one says that some event has a "One in X chance" of happening ... it means something beyond a self-contradictory appeal to the unknown.

My original question didn't ask for a scenario. ... It was you who sidestepped. It's called "argument by example" ... no sidestep at all. I base my decisions upon reality, not a meaningless assertion regarding everyone's ability to predict the future. If that's not good enough, please model what a good answer would look like by answering your own questions for those of us with a differing opinion.

... You've mentioned that statistic. You've not identified a source for it or otherwise validated it. It is from the training manual of one of the many training classes I've taken, which claims to be sourced from FBI Uniform Crime Reports data. My understanding is that this reflects stats for 2009. If you know differently, this would be an excellent "put up or shut up" opportunity for you.

You say your mind tells you that. Why? How? Based on what data? Cite your sources, please. Through a process of logic applied to that which can reasonably known or shown to be statistically sound. You seem to eschew both, so I understand the confusion.

Which "disadvantage" I can mitigate by training (as you mitigate the disadvantage of C3 carry) ... If you acknowledge that the disadvantage of C3 can be mitigated through training inasmuch as can be done so for any perceived C1 disadvantages, (or those of odd manual-of-arms) then you have effectively destroyed your own argument. I can do no better myself, so I ask you to simply accede to that which you have willingly admitted.

JeepFreak
04-10-2011, 1:27 PM
Although I gave up reading this read around the middle of page 5, I came across this site and thought others here might appreciate the info. Check it out: http://www.gethomeafter.com/video.html
Billy

k1dude
04-10-2011, 1:58 PM
A situation happened this past Saturday that seems appropriate to this conversation.

I was shooting in a 3-gun competition and I wasn't properly counting the rounds out of my 1911. I ran my gun dry so I had to change mags and chamber a round. But for some reason when I racked, my hand slipped off the serrations. So I racked it again and kept shooting. But my time suffered accordingly. As many of you know, reloading is the most time consuming act in 3-gun.

I keep seeing these Youtube videos posted where they're using the Israeli technique of carrying C3 and racking the slide upon drawing. The times are impressive I have to admit, but what happens if you don't rack properly or a cartridge fails to load correctly? If I'm carrying C1, it doesn't matter at all when I draw and fire. My gun is already chambered correctly. A slip of my hand on the slide or a FTF malfunction won't happen because I've already taken the precaution of successfully chambering a round prior to holstering. Only a cartridge malfunction could ruin my day. But that doesn't matter because you'd be screwed either way with a cartridge failure using either method.

I'd rather remove all the steps where potential failure could happen. Try a tap/rack/bang when fractions of a second count. Using the Israeli method, you are trusting and praying on everything going exactly right. The more steps, the more opportunity for something to go wrong. Murphy's law. Why tempt Murphy?

Lone_Gunman
04-10-2011, 2:03 PM
The thing I don't really understand is why someone would choose to carry unchambered. It seems to me that any concern you may have about carrying chambered could be mitigated with the use of a proper holster. I carry a G26 in a hybrid leather/kydex holster. The trigger is fully covered until the weapon is drawn. If that's not enough how about a blackhawk holster that really secures the gun. I really can't think of a situation where carrying without one in the chamber makes sense.

fiddletown
04-10-2011, 2:22 PM
The future is indeed unknowable. As such, you do not know if tomorrow is the day someone lifts your gun from your holster and shoots you in head with it. I don't know that tomorrow isn't the day that I need that extra hundredths of a second to draw my gun and fire which C1 would give me. Inasmuch as the future is unknowable ... If you acknowledge one possibility, you must acknowledge the other as a matter of simple logic. The conclusion therefore is that ANY position based purely upon "you can't predict the future" is fundamentally flawed and irrational,...What it does is focus on the disagreement.

You are willing to accept the risks of (1) deciding for a given activity C1 or C3 is the most appropriate mode of carry; and (2) that if you chose C3, you won't need your gun under circumstances that would put you at a disadvantage by carrying in C3.

I am willing to accept the risk that someone will take my C1 gun from my holster and turn it on me.

The choice becomes a personal value judgment.

...If you acknowledge that the disadvantage of C3 can be mitigated through training...The disadvantage you might mitigate would be speed. You still can't very well mitigate the need for two hands.

In that regard, I just asked Massad Ayoob if he had some information on how often when a gun is fired in self defense it is fired one-handed. He replied:As a rule of thumb, it's about half the time. Haven't checked the NYPD SOP-9 reports lately, but in the past they've reflected that as well.

http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l142/fiddletown_2006/Random%20for%20boards/Screenshot2011-04-10at25731PM.jpg

ZombieTactics
04-10-2011, 3:21 PM
What it does is focus on the disagreement. No, I am sorry to inform you that a meaningless statement (in this context) like "you can't predict the future" focuses nothing, as it is self-cancelling and self-contradictory on its face. This isn't even arguable. If you state the reason for something is unknown, one can similarly retort that the reason to support an alternate position is unknown as well. Neither party has actually made an argument, as "unknown" is by definition unknowable. It is a NULL property.

You are willing to accept the risks of (1) deciding for a given activity C1 or C3 is the most appropriate mode of carry; and (2) that if you chose C3, you won't need your gun under circumstances that would put you at a disadvantage by carrying in C3. No, and this should not require explanation. I assert (1) roughly as you state it. I choose (2) C3 under circumstances where I have good reason to believe that there is no meaningful disadvantage, and to perhaps mitigate possible/likely C1 issues. To be clear ... these cases are the minority.

... The choice becomes a personal value judgment.

Then why the argument? Why do my personal value judgments bother you at all if it's not some matter of demonstrable superiority or genuine question of correct/incorrect? Why is it not simply a matter of "OK dude ... do as you please"?

fiddletown
04-10-2011, 3:41 PM
... I ran my gun dry so I had to change mags and chamber a round. But for some reason when I racked, my hand slipped off the serrations. So I racked it again and kept shooting. But my time suffered accordingly. ...

...If I'm carrying C1, it doesn't matter at all when I draw and fire. My gun is already chambered correctly. A slip of my hand on the slide or a FTF malfunction won't happen because I've already taken the precaution of successfully chambering a round prior to holstering. ...A failure to chamber when racking a slide, especially under stress, appears to be a well documented occurrence. From this post (http://thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4044470&postcount=9) on another board:...Based on some experimentation involving around 13,000 rounds of testing, manually chambering a round is a fairly error-prone procedure even under ideal conditions. That is, if you're going to have an otherwise functional gun using good ammunition jam on you it's more likely to jam during the manual chambering process than at any other time....

And from this post (http://thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4401244&postcount=47) on that board:...The ISHOT1000 matches kept statistics on this. Based on those records it appears that misfeeds/jams are about 60% more likely when loading the first round from a magazine than when a round is autoloaded by the firing process.....

fiddletown
04-10-2011, 3:53 PM
... If you state the reason for something is unknown, one can similarly retort that the reason to support an alternate position is unknown as well. Neither party has actually made an argument, as "unknown" is by definition unknowable. It is a NULL property.... Which again brings the question down to one of a value judgement, i. e., which unpredictable risks one prefers to accept.

...Then why the argument? Why do my personal value judgments bother you at all if it's not some matter of demonstrable superiority or genuine question of correct/incorrect? Why is it not simply a matter of "OK dude ... do as you please"?If you contend that your choice is the more rational, I will challenge that. I accept your choice as your personal choice, but I'm not prepared to accept it as rationally, morally, ethically or tactically superior.

ZombieTactics
04-10-2011, 4:08 PM
A failure to chamber when racking a slide, especially under stress, appears to be a well documented occurrence. ...
That it occurs is not at issue.

The first "documented" assertion ... one test ... only states one opinion, based upon an unknown methodology that manually chambering a round is "more likely" to result in problems. How likely? ...

The second "documented" assertion - from ISHOT1000 no less - establishes only a 60% greater likely hood in cases where people are shooting 1000 rounds in a single day ... arguably reaching a point of actual physical failure at some point on the part of the shooter. How does that even marginally serve to show anything regarding the racking of a first round? Do you not even understand that stat in its logical context regarding the question at hand?

If anything this shows that you are willing to play rather fast and loose with any information you find and present it out of context to support that which it does not even address.

How many times will you split a hair before admitting that you've conceded the case?

ZombieTactics
04-10-2011, 4:16 PM
Which again brings the question down to one of a value judgement, i. e., which unpredictable risks one prefers to accept. No but you demonstrate you don't even understand the argument. A NULL value is meaningless , and confers nothing regarding risks unpredictable or otherwise. If your point was to say "it's all a value judgement", then why all the nonsense about the great unknown?

If you contend that your choice is the more rational, I will challenge that. Good for you ... but with what? My position (that C3 is sometimes sensible) by definition is more rational as it is based upon something other than "the unknowable".

I accept your choice as your personal choice, but I'm not prepared to accept it as rationally, morally, ethically or tactically superior. I said nothing of morality or ethics ... so I wonder if you are even comprehending what is written. The rationality of my position has been demonstrated, whether or not you chose to acknowledge it. You seem to split ever smaller hairs on "tactical", so it appears to be a shrinking case on that front.

And all I've ever offered to defend is that sometimes C3 makes sense.

fiddletown
04-10-2011, 4:19 PM
...How many times will you split a hair before admitting that you've conceded the case?Don't be silly.

fiddletown
04-10-2011, 4:33 PM
...My position (that C3 is sometimes sensible) by definition is more rational as it is based upon something other than "the unknowable"...Of course it's based on the unknowable. It's based on the expectations (1) that if you need your gun, you'll have the use of both your hands; (2) that if you need your gun, you'll have time to rack the slide and chamber a round; and (3) that if you need your gun you will be able to chamber a round successfully. You may have what you believe to be good and rational reasons to conclude that there is a high probability that these expectations will be met. But you can be wrong and/or the unlikely occurs. In any case, you can't know for certain that your expectations will be met.

ZombieTactics
04-10-2011, 4:34 PM
Don't be silly. Stubbornness and obstinence is often an admirable trait in a warrior, sort of like arrogance in a fighter pilot. :)

DannyZRC
04-10-2011, 4:37 PM
IMO, if you have a gun for which C3 makes sense, the solution is not C3, but rather a gun that makes sense in C1 in all situations.

If you decide that you'd rather have more complexity in your system, or accept more risk or a lack of readiness, then you are free to do so, but I don't think it's a defensible practice.

ZombieTactics
04-10-2011, 4:39 PM
Of course it's based on the unknowable. ... In any case, you can't know for certain that your expectations will be met. Like a lot of this discussion, you either don't understand what is written or simply don't care. Maybe you're a lawyer*, which would be the worst of all, lol. "Unknowable" (NULL) is different than an expectation based upon probability.

* I swear, this discussion reminds me of tutoring LSAT prep students

fiddletown
04-10-2011, 4:49 PM
Like a lot of this discussion, you either don't understand what is written or simply don't care. Maybe you're a lawyer, which would be the worst of all, lol. "Unknowable" (NULL) is different than an expectation based upon probability.I am indeed a lawyer. And a knowing that something may be likely is different from knowing as a matter of fact that something will occur. The former involves an acceptance of a risk that what may be likely will nonetheless not occur.

JeepFreak
04-10-2011, 4:53 PM
...I just asked Massad Ayoob...

http://www.slicky.net/smilies/eek3.gif
Billy

Although I gave up reading this read around the middle of page 5, I came across this site and thought others here might appreciate the info. Check it out: http://www.gethomeafter.com/video.html
Billy

Oh, and I forgot to mention (above), they make no mention about what one is to do if their support hand is unavailable or injured... which is why I carry with one in the pipe.
Billy

ZombieTactics
04-10-2011, 4:56 PM
I am indeed a lawyer. ...
Oh good lord ... nevermind then. You'll defend the notion that 2+2 = 82.5 if you have a paying client ... or another one will. I have no patience for nonsense regardless of how it is dressed up. I simply call it what is is on its face and move on. It certainly explains your insistence upon asking many questions and really answering none, as well as saying one thing and then pretending you meant another, or dropping/reframing context at will with no conscience regarding the integrity of the conversation. You aren't in this to discuss anything ... only to win by whatever means necessary.

You're probably a VERY good lawyer ... which is a compliment of a certain kind.

k1dude
04-10-2011, 6:10 PM
IMO, if you have a gun for which C3 makes sense, the solution is not C3, but rather a gun that makes sense in C1 in all situations.

If you decide that you'd rather have more complexity in your system, or accept more risk or a lack of readiness, then you are free to do so, but I don't think it's a defensible practice.

Agreed.

Uxi
04-10-2011, 6:21 PM
Openly carried, with a retention holster, I'm a fan of Condition 1. Never got to carry concealed, but I would be much more in favor Condition 3 especially if it was daily carry.

fiddletown
04-10-2011, 8:42 PM
...It certainly explains your insistence upon asking many questions and really answering none, as well as saying one thing and then pretending you meant another, or dropping/reframing context at will with no conscience regarding the integrity of the conversation. You aren't in this to discuss anything ... only to win by whatever means necessary.

You're probably a VERY good lawyer ... which is a compliment of a certain kind.I'm not going to debate your mis-characterization of my comments here. It's all there for all to read, and each reader of this thread can make up his own mind.

Spirit 1
04-10-2011, 10:16 PM
Originally Posted by fiddletown
Quote:

Originally Posted by Spirit 1
...Deductive skills & objective reasoning are different from reactions & subjective thought. Threat Level Assessment speaks to the ability to thoroughly analyze all available information without pre-conceived notions of what the results must be. If one is not skillful at Threat Level Assessment they have no business owning a gun and if they do own, they're a very serious potential threat to fellow man.

If carry & use of a handgun is not based upon continuous feedback of Threat Level Assessment then we have people going off half-cocked, just waiting for an excuse to justify use of a deadly weapon against another. It's part of the 'Reasonable man' clause in basic Law, and is the foundation for any justification of ownership for defensive use of any firearm in any way. It's similar to 'Probable Cause', which is a fundamental guideline for all law enforcement. ....
But you're talking about two separate issues.

The issue being discussed in this thread, as I see it, is in what stage of readiness one carries his sidearm as he goes through his normal, day-to-day activities.

That is the issue I'm seeing too, though it may not be obvious. I'm suggesting some latitude in that decision, according to actual circumstances that present themselves throughout any given day. Within that, I believe that it is a matter of ongoing Threat Level Assessment, at virtually every instant, that one remains as able to defend themselves as circumstances warrant. However, I am allowing for circumstances of relevant Threat Level to guide certain decisions.

Originally Posted by fiddletown
But when the question turns to the "...use of a handgun is not based upon continuous feedback of Threat Level Assessment then we have people going off half-cocked, just waiting for an excuse to justify use of a deadly weapon against another....", that is another matter entirely. Now you're talking about the decision to actually use the gun. And that absolutely involves a process of threat identification and assessment.

One thing I'm trying to add to the conversation is that this is an incredibly complex subject, which statement I believe you'd agree with? Going forward from there, my premise is that a blanket indictment against the awesome stupidity of anyone who doesn't carry in Condition 1 with a shell in the chamber at all times ready to draw at the instant of perceived danger does not even begin to cover even the basic precepts of proper use of a solely defensive firearm.

From my viewpoint, it's not 'another matter entirely'. I believe that carry in Con 1 means a person has already made the decision to use the weapon and that in some or many cases it just waits on an opportunity, rather than a true & valid need. Yes, I'm seeing the other side of it, being that if you're carrying in the first place the decision to use potentially deadly force has already been made.

But in some folk's statements here & elsewhere I see a very aggressive note to that decision of Con 1, and that also comes through their instantaneous reactions of very insulting or antagonistic comments aimed & fired at anybody & everbody who simply disagrees. It's obvious in those comments that the person hasn't been able to cooly & soberly analyze the situation of another person's viewpoints and decides instead to draw and pull the trigger before they even understand what the other person is actually saying & doing. That tells me that not only the gun is cocked & locked, but so are their thoughts & emotions. "You talkin' to me...?!!" was the movie line.

One must train, practice and remain proficient, and prepared. But you know too, there's the guys that sit home alone practicing their skills, while imagining they're blasting away all the imagined hordes of bad guys into Kingdom come, saving the day & the planet, far more into delusions of a movie hero in viewpoint and mindset. They rehearse their favorite fantasies over & over, shouting "Bang bang bang!" as they cavort, telling themselves it's training. In fact, it's much more likely a problem they ought to seek professional help to solve, before they kill some innocent people! Their gun is not a defensive weapon at all, but instead their future chance to really be somebody, whom others will deeply respect and humble themselves before in awe at the feet of their heroic acts. But I digress...

I simply believe that one may carry out an ongoing process of Threat Level Assessment all day long in all circumstances, and if circumstances develop that the level of personal safety deteriorates it's time to rase the level of preparedness to react. I don't believe that Con 1 is the single & only choice throughout every single day in all circumstances where a person is in possession of a defensive weapon.

Originally Posted by fiddletown
I've spent considerable time wandering the streets of Prescott, and other towns in Arizona, wearing a sidearm in C1 -- sightseeing, shopping, having coffee, talking with folks -- doing all manner of very normal things. And never once have I identified any possible need for it. I also carried a handkerchief, and may well have sneezed, and therefore had use for it. But I didn't have use for my gun.
Quote:

Originally Posted by Spirit 1
"...I would strongly suggest to anyone contemplating or presently owning a firearm, and especially carrying currently for personal defense that they fully immerse themselves on the basics and more expanded thoughts & teachings on accurate Threat Level Assessment before they ever pick up a gun for personal defense. That can help prevent some terrible tragedies and also lower their chances of spending the rest of their lives paying for stupid mistakes that didn't ever need to happen in the first place."

I agree completely, and I have trained quite extensively. Massad Ayoob's classes are especially useful in this regard. (I've taken LFI-I and also helped him with a MAG40 class last year in Arizona.)

I often teach the legal component of the NRA Personal Protection classes, so I have an opportunity to focus students' attention on the legal issues and the legal standards for justifying the use of force in self defense. This is an essential part of the training for anyone who chooses to have a gun for self defense.

But it is a different matter from the question of how someone lawfully carries a gun.

So, for me, I don't believe it is a different matter from the question of how to carry, but is instead an integral part of it. No, we're not clairvoyant, and cannot see into the future of a day's events and all the 'What if?' questions. Yes, we should be prepared to instantly defend ourselves: when instantaneous defense is warranted by circumstances. But, circumstances are apt to change in a dynamic world, and I prefer to adapt to circumstances as I interpret them.

fiddletown
04-10-2011, 10:50 PM
...I simply believe that one may carry out an ongoing process of Threat Level Assessment all day long in all circumstances, and if circumstances develop that the level of personal safety deteriorates it's time to rase the level of preparedness to react. I don't believe that Con 1 is the single & only choice throughout every single day in all circumstances where a person is in possession of a defensive weapon...Yes, assessing my environment is an ongoing process, all day in all circumstances. But that's not reason to be constantly adjusting the condition of the sidearm I'm carrying. It's there if I should conclude that I need it, and it simply stays in the holster as long as I don't need it. But I certainly don't want to be fiddling with it as I go about my daily business, changing it's condition of readiness as my assessment of my environment changes. Now doing so, I think, would be a safety issue.

...I believe that carry in Con 1 means a person has already made the decision to use the weapon and that in some or many cases it just waits on an opportunity, rather than a true & valid need....Believe what you like, but I can tell you personally that's not true for me. Nor do I believe it to be true of folks I've trained with.

...if you're carrying in the first place the decision to use potentially deadly force has already been made....I'd prefer to phrase it thus: "One carrying a gun for self defense reflects a recognition that circumstances could possibly arise requiring his justified use of lethal force to prevent the immediate death or grave bodily injury of an innocent."

...But you know too, there's the guys that sit home alone practicing their skills, while imagining they're blasting away all the imagined hordes of bad guys into Kingdom come, saving the day & the planet, far more into delusions of a movie hero in viewpoint and mindset. They rehearse their favorite fantasies over & over, shouting "Bang bang bang!" as they cavort, telling themselves it's training. In fact, it's much more likely a problem they ought to seek professional help to solve, before they kill some innocent people! Their gun is not a defensive weapon at all, but instead their future chance to really be somebody, whom others will deeply respect and humble themselves before in awe at the feet of their heroic acts. But I digress...Yes, you digress. And yes, the world is full of wackos, of many sorts. Such people as you describe remain wackos whether their guns are in C1 or C3.

Spirit 1
04-10-2011, 10:57 PM
The thing I don't really understand is why someone would choose to carry unchambered. It seems to me that any concern you may have about carrying chambered could be mitigated with the use of a proper holster. I carry a G26 in a hybrid leather/kydex holster. The trigger is fully covered until the weapon is drawn. If that's not enough how about a blackhawk holster that really secures the gun. I really can't think of a situation where carrying without one in the chamber makes sense.

This Threat Level Assessment I've been talking about involves analysis of your immediate environment. Your immediate environment according to your sig is Sacramento. Mine is not. I live in a remote, secluded area, with the nearest town about 25 or so miles away. On the side of a mountain with no close neighbors, access is limited and I can see & hear well in advance if anyone approaches. While outside, going about my business here I carry in Condition 1 at all times! Why, potential bad guys getting the drop on me? Yes: bears & mountain lions that are both here & much faster than I am.

Driving to town is on treacherous roads over the mountains, only one short straightawy in 25 miles, twisting & winding continuously beside steep cliffs, 1,000+ foot drops, blind hairpins etc. on a poorly maintained road in snow country. It's very rare to pass another car on a weekday.

When carrying on the way to town I choose Condition 3. If a mechanical failure or blowout sends me over the side the last other thing I want to worry about is an AD shooting myself in the impact of rolling & tumbling down the cliff. Condition 3 carry is safer. As I approach town the road becomes much more manageable so I have plenty of time to go to Condition 1 if needs be.

On the way home it's back to Condition 3, and arriving home it's back to Condition 1. For me, this all makes perfect sense, according to actual known Threat Levels.

Spirit 1
04-10-2011, 11:14 PM
Yes, assessing my environment is an ongoing process, all day in all circumstances. But that's not reason to be constantly adjusting the condition of the sidearm I'm carrying. It's there if I should conclude that I need it, and it simply stays in the holster as long as I don't need it. But I certainly don't want to be fiddling with it as I go about my daily business, changing it's condition of readiness as my assessment of my environment changes. Now doing so, I think, would be a safety issue.

I live and carry out my life in an entirely different environment with a different set of variables. City dweller, teeming metropolis, roving gangs, 'bad areas', all that big city stuff is thankfully far, far away from me. As per my immediately prior reply to Lone Gunman, my choice is the safest & most practical choice, for me.

Believe what you like, but I can tell you personally that's not true for me. Nor do I believe it to be true of folks I've trained with.

And of course it would be seen that I never said that it was true for you, nor did I suggest by innuendo.

I'd prefer to phrase it thus: "One carrying a gun for self defense reflects a recognition that circumstances could possibly arise requiring his justified use of lethal force to prevent the immediate death or grave bodily injury of an innocent."

We've already established that you are a lawyer, by your own admission of guilt hah! so I'd expect your preferences to be different there.

Yes, you digress. And yes, the world is full of wackos, of many sorts. Such people as you describe remain wackos whether their guns are in C1 or C3.

Yes, and even without guns...

JeepFreak
04-11-2011, 6:07 AM
This Threat Level Assessment I've been talking about involves analysis of your immediate environment. Your immediate environment according to your sig is Sacramento. Mine is not. I live in a remote, secluded area, with the nearest town about 25 or so miles away. On the side of a mountain with no close neighbors, access is limited and I can see & hear well in advance if anyone approaches. While outside, going about my business here I carry in Condition 1 at all times! Why, potential bad guys getting the drop on me? Yes: bears & mountain lions that are both here & much faster than I am.

Driving to town is on treacherous roads over the mountains, only one short straightawy in 25 miles, twisting & winding continuously beside steep cliffs, 1,000+ foot drops, blind hairpins etc. on a poorly maintained road in snow country. It's very rare to pass another car on a weekday.

When carrying on the way to town I choose Condition 3. If a mechanical failure or blowout sends me over the side the last other thing I want to worry about is an AD shooting myself in the impact of rolling & tumbling down the cliff. Condition 3 carry is safer. As I approach town the road becomes much more manageable so I have plenty of time to go to Condition 1 if needs be.

On the way home it's back to Condition 3, and arriving home it's back to Condition 1. For me, this all makes perfect sense, according to actual known Threat Levels.

http://www.slicky.net/smilies/rofl.gif Oh man! I'm glad I came back in to read this! Is this the best example of a situation where C3 is warranted?

Billy

negolien
04-11-2011, 6:53 AM
Hey,

Another thought here...There is another reason if you live in california to carry unloaded.. IT's THE LAW with UOC lol :<)....

titankeith
04-11-2011, 6:54 AM
I know this is beating a dead horse, and I still would say "whatever floats your boat, carry the way you feel the most comfortable" but I don't get why, just for the sake of muscle memory alone, one with decent training would not carry C1 all the time? To me, it's the most logical way to carry...and I always treat my unloaded wepons as if they are loaded. If you treat your weapon with respect, and practice trigget safety, you should NEVER (theoretically, I admit)have an accidental discharge. I like the folks on here saying Glocks are especially dangerous...LMFAO....get some training before you make such ignorant statments.

titankeith
04-11-2011, 6:55 AM
Hey,

Another thought here...There is another reason if you live in california to carry unloaded.. IT's THE LAW with UOC lol :<)....

LMAO.:rolleyes:

Shenaniguns
04-11-2011, 7:13 AM
This Threat Level Assessment I've been talking about involves analysis of your immediate environment. Your immediate environment according to your sig is Sacramento. Mine is not. I live in a remote, secluded area, with the nearest town about 25 or so miles away. On the side of a mountain with no close neighbors, access is limited and I can see & hear well in advance if anyone approaches. While outside, going about my business here I carry in Condition 1 at all times! Why, potential bad guys getting the drop on me? Yes: bears & mountain lions that are both here & much faster than I am.

Driving to town is on treacherous roads over the mountains, only one short straightawy in 25 miles, twisting & winding continuously beside steep cliffs, 1,000+ foot drops, blind hairpins etc. on a poorly maintained road in snow country. It's very rare to pass another car on a weekday.

When carrying on the way to town I choose Condition 3. If a mechanical failure or blowout sends me over the side the last other thing I want to worry about is an AD shooting myself in the impact of rolling & tumbling down the cliff. Condition 3 carry is safer. As I approach town the road becomes much more manageable so I have plenty of time to go to Condition 1 if needs be.

On the way home it's back to Condition 3, and arriving home it's back to Condition 1. For me, this all makes perfect sense, according to actual known Threat Levels.



The problem here is that you're handling, reloading, loading and especially holstering/unholstering as many times unnecessarily which in itself can be unsafe as that is when most ND's happen and not that 1 in 20 million chance that it will go off while holstered. Another issue is that you're causing a potential issue for bullet setback from constant loading and unloading.

Spirit 1
04-11-2011, 7:20 AM
http://www.slicky.net/smilies/rofl.gif Oh man! I'm glad I came back in to read this! Is this the best example of a situation where C3 is warranted?
Billy

Seems to me you miss the point again. Who said anything about 'best example', and was it my only example?? No, it's the second example I've given. And why a thinly veiled insult added?

By your sig of Jeep Freak I see a similar analogy. 4 wheel drive in Jeeps is there for when you need it, when the terrain gets rough. Jeeps came with locking hubs and no Limited Slip, but can be upgraded to ARB Air Lockers or whatever. Likewise stock tires can be upgraded to super sticky gnarly lugged rock crawling tires, nearly twice the original diameter. When you can see, by experience, knowledge & training, that things just took a change for the worst, or that the potential begins to appear according to changes in your surroundings & environment, you may simply flip a switch & lock in the axles for 100% traction at all 4 wheels.

Because that protection from getting stranded when things get bad exists, should you always drive with the axles locked in, everywhere you go, like a shopping mall? Do you need rock crawling tires for all terrains? I mean hey, could be the engineers overlooked something, and maybe there's a huge unknown underground cavern beneath all that beautiful blacktop at the mall, and at any moment the earth could open up & collapse and your Jeep fall in, and the only hope is ARB and some monster traction to dig your way out! So is locked & loaded the ONLY CHOICE for EVERYBODY that decides to drive a Jeep, whenever & wherever they might go? Do you insult everybody that's just too stupid to see that Jeeps with the axles locked & running 44" ultra-traction rock-crawling tires are the ONLY WAY to get from point A to point B???

Back to guns: what about carry of a Single Action revolver for self defense? Is that a universally BAD choice for everybody, because one must first rack the hammer before the gun can fire, same as Con 3 semi-auto pistol must rack the slide? What if the crane or a spring or hammer breaks and a person can't prepare the weapon to fire? What if 7 blood thirsty maniacs bust through the door and you only have 6 rounds, in a SA only???? What if you carry with the hammer down on an empty chamber for safety's sake, only having 5 shots? Or what if a guy get's his thumb blown off, or bitten off by a pack of attacking thumb-biting hyenas [the worst kind, believe me!] so he can't cock the gun!?? Are ALL Single Actions therefore a stupid choice for defensive carry because they must be cocked before firing?

I don't think so; and I don't shift into 4 lock until I need it. I also don't choose my 4WD for a relaxed 2,000 mile freeway trip.

Shenaniguns
04-11-2011, 7:40 AM
Back to guns: what about carry of a Single Action revolver for self defense? Is that a universally BAD choice for everybody, because one must first rack the hammer before the gun can fire, same as Con 3 semi-auto pistol must rack the slide? .


Another horrible example... Racking the slide is NOT the same as thumbing a hammer lol

Spirit 1
04-11-2011, 7:41 AM
The problem here is that you're handling, reloading, loading and especially holstering/unholstering as many times unnecessarily which in itself can be unsafe as that is when most ND's happen and not that 1 in 20 million chance that it will go off while holstered. Another issue is that you're causing a potential issue for bullet setback from constant loading and unloading.

Yes, there's no doubt at all that accidents may happen while loading any weapon. They also happen when holstering & un-holstering, or when cleaning, or just taking out a firearm to show someone or look at it, or when a loaded gun is put where it shouldn't be. Some folks may only load once a year, or a month, and others may load 100's of times in a weekend, so is frequent loading & use patently dangerous? Maybe the grabbers are right: these things are all just too danged DANGEROUS to even own, let alone to load & use them!??

Practicing safe firearms handling, knowing your defensive weapon intimately, practicing often [as possible, we believe], being wide-awake aware of what you're doing at every instant of gun handling and training yourself to not do stupid things effectively lowers the chance of 'accidental discharge' to near zero.

As for bullet setback, some have the brains to practice often, shooting up the ammo that might experience setback if it's not eliminated from the mag.

There's nothing in this world that makes any firearm 100% safe in every possible instance. There's also nothing that guarantees that Con 1 carry guarantees total & complete protection of yourself & others. There are circumstances where Con 1 is unwarranted, or impractical or the second best choice for carry. Therefore I choose to act as the situation dictates, and may carry Con 1 or Con 3, considering myself well protected in any event, if I stay completely aware of those events and respond accordingly.

fiddletown
04-11-2011, 7:47 AM
... I see a similar analogy. 4 wheel drive in Jeeps is there for when you need it, when the terrain gets rough. Jeeps came with locking hubs and no Limited Slip, but can be upgraded to ARB Air Lockers or whatever. Likewise stock tires can be upgraded to super sticky gnarly lugged rock crawling tires, nearly twice the original diameter. When you can see, by experience, knowledge & training, that things just took a change for the worst, or that the potential begins to appear according to changes in your surroundings & environment, you may simply flip a switch & lock in the axles for 100% traction at all 4 wheels....A pretty lousy analogy, however. A different machine, a different use, a different purpose and used in different circumstances.

... Back to guns: what about carry of a Single Action revolver for self defense? Is that a universally BAD choice for everybody, because one must first rack the hammer before the gun can fire, same as Con 3 semi-auto pistol must rack the slide? What if the crane or a spring or hammer breaks and a person can't prepare the weapon to fire? What if 7 blood thirsty maniacs bust through the door and you only have 6 rounds, in a SA only???? What if you carry with the hammer down on an empty chamber for safety's sake, only having 5 shots? Or what if a guy get's his thumb blown off, or bitten off by a pack of attacking thumb-biting hyenas [the worst kind, believe me!] so he can't cock the gun!?? Are ALL Single Actions therefore a stupid choice for defensive carry because they must be cocked before firing?...Any type of gun has certain design limitations (and advantages) which must be considered when choosing one for a particular purpose.

Shenaniguns
04-11-2011, 7:50 AM
Yes, there's no doubt at all that accidents may happen while loading any weapon. They also happen when holstering & un-holstering, or when cleaning, or just taking out a firearm to show someone or look at it, or when a loaded gun is put where it shouldn't be. Some folks may only load once a year, or a month, and others may load 100's of times in a weekend, so is frequent loading & use patently dangerous? Maybe the grabbers are right: these things are all just too danged DANGEROUS to even own, let alone to load & use them!??

Practicing safe firearms handling, knowing your defensive weapon intimately, practicing often [as possible, we believe], being wide-awake aware of what you're doing at every instant of gun handling and training yourself to not do stupid things effectively lowers the chance of 'accidental discharge' to near zero.

As for bullet setback, some have the brains to practice often, shooting up the ammo that might experience setback if it's not eliminated from the mag.

There's nothing in this world that makes any firearm 100% safe in every possible instance. There's also nothing that guarantees that Con 1 carry guarantees total & complete protection of yourself & others. There are circumstances where Con 1 is unwarranted, or impractical or the second best choice for carry. Therefore I choose to act as the situation dictates, and may carry Con 1 or Con 3, considering myself well protected in any event, if I stay completely aware of those events and respond accordingly.



Man you come up with horrible examples lol The times I've had to load, unload, holster and unholster 100's of times in a weekend was during a class setting under a semi-controlled environment on a range with a huge backstop. That is not even remotely the same as the example you gave where you change from C3 to C1 and back again while driving into town and back.

You can think you have brains or not but some bullets may set back as early as 3 or 4 chamberings so with your example you may need to rotate your carry bullets out weekly.

Spirit 1
04-11-2011, 7:52 AM
Quoting myself: "Is that a universally BAD choice for everybody, because one must first rack the hammer before the gun can fire, same as Con 3 semi-auto pistol must rack the slide?"

Another horrible example... Racking the slide is NOT the same as thumbing a hammer lol

What need is there for tossing out insults?

What's the difference time-wise in racking or hammering back? What happens when you rack the slide, or thumb back a hammer? Do both prepare the gun to fire?

What useful point does your comment make regarding the topic? Is it just a case of, "If all else fails, fire an insult!"? Does your comment show that Con 1 is superior to Con 3?

Shenaniguns
04-11-2011, 7:56 AM
Quoting myself: "Is that a universally BAD choice for everybody, because one must first rack the hammer before the gun can fire, same as Con 3 semi-auto pistol must rack the slide?"



What need is there for tossing out insults?

What's the difference time-wise in racking or hammering back? What happens when you rack the slide, or thumb back a hammer? Do both prepare the gun to fire?

What useful point does your comment make regarding the topic? Is it just a case of, "If all else fails, fire an insult!"? Does your comment show that Con 1 is superior to Con 3?


I'm commenting on your example, I'm not calling you horrible :rolleyes:

And thumbing a hammer one handed is not the same as a two handed in most cases racking of the slide... Another bad aww forget it haha


Dead serious question, how much experience do you have with handguns?