Carry without a round in a chamber = FAIL

[Cali-Shooter]

Did he die?

He looks quite deceased at the end of the video.

[DesertGunner]

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]

hum

That's not neccasarily rue bud look at the Jews.

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

[DesertGunner]

You shouldn't carry the gun.

Ditto.

[fiddletown]

That's not neccasarily rue bud look at the Jews.

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

What'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]

IDF trains with unloaded chambers they don't seem to have many issues but then again training is key isn't it?

[ZombieTactics]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

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]

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.

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]

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]

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]

An unloaded gun is as useful as a football bat

Quote of the week goes to....