I never understood the Israeli practice of carrying with an empty chamber

[4V50 Gary]

Off duty soldier is attacked from behind. Had trouble racking the slide. Happily other people intervene and the soldier does get it racked and dispatch the naughty assailant.

https://t.me/intellinews_russian/57161

[stuckinthe60s]

how fast it all happens.............
4v, see how see fumbled with it? and he was skilled. most people who wrestle a gun out of a holster in a brawl dont know the gun....and the time a perp fumbles with it trying to figure it out, gives the soldier time to beat him to a pulp, take it back, rack it, and kill him.
thus the practice.
make sense now?

[bamaranger]

I cannot tell from the video if the "soldier" is carrying concealed or openly. But this video and others make a case for how aware one needs to be carrying a handgun openly in public.

I agree that empty chamber is not a good practice, robbing one of critical time when such time may well not be available. Even if not grappling, and the threat is distracted, the time and noise of cycling the slide cues the suspect and robs you of some of your advantage in counter ambush.

But I have seen the practice done, by those who should have known better, to include one individual that would carrry his DA Model 10 REVOLVER with the hammer on an empty charge hole. You can't teach folks like that otherwise.

[tangolima]

Firearm is dangerous power tool. We ought to use the tool the way we don't feel fear, or something bad is going to happen.

I heard old timers commenting on today's common practice of keeping finger off trigger till moment before firing. Too slow, they said. Apparently back then they kept finger on the trigger, just like on the old movies. They really do that on the range. That's why I have parted with some range buddies.

The way I carry? I don't talk about it.

-TL

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[TunnelRat]

My understanding is the practice is in part a result of the reality of the Israelis having a conscript army. Skill levels vary across soldiers and one way to further ensure safety is to carry without a round chambered. Before we go too far in criticizing the Israelis, however, that's not an unheard of practice in other countries. I believe people have even shared manuals on this forum for the 1911 that show the pistol was to be carried without a round chambered until going into immediate action. In terms of preventing someone from hurting themselves or others inadvertently, not having a round chambered will make a difference.

The problem I see with this is extending this practice from a military setting to a concealed carry setting, where you're generally reacting to a close in threat that is already in the act of attacking you and you are probably isolated from other members of a unit. Assuming that you have the time and opportunity to draw and rack the slide in this condition seems like a big risk.
That said, we've also had threads on this forum where private citizens in the US do the same.

[jmr40]

Looking at the video it seems like it worked.

Empty chamber for most people isn't as bad as some try to make it. The US military carry their weapons with empty chambers until the threat is imminent. The practice is more common than a lot of people think.

The Marines on Iwo Jima had to turn all of their ammo after they THOUGHT the island was secure and they were supposed to leave the next day. No live ammo was allowed on transport ships. A couple of dozen Japanese attacked the unarmed Marines during the night and killed a bunch before an Army unit that was taking their place could arrive and finish the fight.

One reason I'm told the Israeli army trains this way is due to the fact that there is no one standard sidearm. They use a variety and there is no one training method to cover all handguns. If you have to chamber a round before firing, they all work the same. And someone who is skilled at it can be pretty fast.

[Double Naught Spy]

Despite decades of hearing people claim the Israelis are so super superior and thus wanting to mimic certain things like carry .22 lr for defense (Mossad kills people with it all the time, right?) or carrying with an empty chamber (good enough for their Special Forces), but the empty chamber isn't a tactical advantage thing. As noted above, it is a safety thing, not because everybody that they have is superior in their skills, but because they are not.

I know it looks super cool and tactical to draw, charge, and fire really fast. All that hand movement is quite a show, until the show is a disaster like with the soldier in the video above. The soldier IS lucky somebody intervened. The Good Sam is lucky the soldier didn't kill him as well.

I believe people have even shared manuals on this forum for the 1911 that show the pistol was to be carried without a round chambered until going into immediate action. In terms of preventing someone from hurting themselves or others inadvertently, not having a round chambered will make a difference.

The US military goes as far as disarming its soldiers on base and those on guard duty used to (maybe still do) carry no ammo or very limited ammo here in the US.

[tangolima]

I don't think anybody in his right mind would carry with empty chamber to look cool. They actually look stupid to their peers. So they do that for a strong reason.

It may seem natural to a lot of people. But being a combatant every second of our lives may not be a life style everybody would choose to live. A bit off a tangent perhaps, rights to keep and bear arms are not for self defense only. We carry the way best fit our lives and purposes.

-TL

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[4V50 Gary]

I noticed he was fumbling to get the slide back too. I wonder if his hands were bloody and that made grasping the slide and working it more difficult.

I never thought of it until now but since LEO guns are cleaned before leaving the range, have oil sprayed on the slide and have the officer try to rack it. It would be good just for the experience. Now go clean the darn thing afterward Deputy Smith!

[Double Naught Spy]

Soldier died.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/man-50...ead-by-victim/

[JohnKSa]

I wonder if his hands were bloody and that made grasping the slide and working it more difficult.

That's one of the disadvantages of chamber-empty carry.

The results from the ISHOT1000 matches showed that chambering the first round from the magazine was less reliable (caused a malfunction about 60% more often) than the normal firing sequence.

That was uninjured, no blood on the hands or gun, no one trying to kill the shooter.

[WmMunny]

There's really no hard and fast right answer.

Weigh the probability/risk for your lifestyle and activities: Likelihood of needing to immediately fire to defend yourself vs. the likelihood of a negligent discharge of an always-chambered round in a cocked pistol…

[JohnKSa]

Likelihood of needing to immediately fire to defend yourself...

It goes way beyond just speed.

1. The likelihood of not having a free hand to rack the slide due to injury or having to hold a child or drawing from an unorthodox position, or having to defend with the weak hand, etc.

2. The likelihood of inducing a malfunction when racking a round into the chamber. As mentioned, manually chambering a round was less reliable than the normal firing cycle in the ISHOT1000 matches.

3. The likelihood of needing to ready a firearm surreptitiously. The normal loading cycle of a semi-auto pistol is quite loud.

4. The likelihood of being injured in the arms or hands in a way that makes it difficult to manually load the chamber.

....the likelihood of a negligent discharge of an always-chambered round in a cocked pistol…

1. There are many firearms out there that can be carried chamber loaded without being cocked.

2. There are many firearms out there that can be safely carried chamber loaded, or even chamber loaded and cocked.

3. If a gun is handled properly, there's no need to significantly increase the chances of an unintentional discharge by having the chamber loaded. One can take one's time and choose the time and place to deal with a chamber loaded firearm to insure that there's no rush and there's no stress that could affect the outcome.

There's really no hard and fast right answer.

No, there's not. But there is an answer that's right for the vast majority of people out there.

There are two solidly defensible reasons for carrying chamber empty:

1. It is mandated. The person is given no choice

2. There is no availability of firearms that can be carried safely with a loaded chamber.

Other than that, it gets really problematic to justify chamber empty carry.

[stinkeypete]

There is utility in carrying on an empty chamber, and no one solution fits every need.

-It was my understanding that Israeli police carry on empty chamber because Training for the manual of arms for so many semi-autos in a precinct is a training nightmare.

-No one ever shot themselves in the leg with an empty chamber Glock. Fact.

-The safety on my Chinese copy of a TT Olympia is very stiff. I use that gun for squirrels and pinecones. I carry it in my pocket with an empty chamber.

-The Cowboy carries with an empty chamber under the hammer of his Colt because when riding a horse, the hammer can force into the gunbelt when riding rough. If a round is chambered, there were negative outcomes. Sort of the Original Glock Leg.

I don't mind a round in the chamber with transfer bar revolvers or double/single action semi-autos with a safety. Spending a lot of time in the rough, clothes torn by thorny vines, falling down, and all sorts of non-city things happen to me regularly.

Unless in the field, I don't carry at all. Yet here I am, retired, and have not died yet from not following advice about how to be a "tactical operator."

No one ever shot themselves in the leg from being too safe.

[Double Naught Spy]

No one ever shot themselves in the leg with an empty chamber Glock. Fact.

In crisis situations, people have had trouble making empty chamber Glocks run. Fact.

People have shot themselves in various places and a lot of other things with Glocks they thought had empty chambers. Fact.

The cowboy carries with an empty chamber under his hammer...

Completely different and irrelevant comparison. The cowboy still only need to pull the trigger and the gun will fire because upon pulling the trigger, a chambered round would appear under the hammer, whether the previous chamber was empty or not.

No one ever shot themselves being too safe.

But people have severely hampered their ability to defend themselves by being too safe.

However, touching on the safety business, you are right, if people were safe enough they would not shoot themselves in the leg, even if they had chambered rounds. The people doing that are not being safe.

[TunnelRat]

Originally Posted by JohnKSa

2. There is no availability of firearms that can be carried safely with a loaded chamber.

I think for me personally this is where I have the hardest time understanding the logic. In 2024 there are a glut of firearms on the market. You can have a pistol with a double action first pull of 10+ lb. as well as a manual safety and a magazine disconnect. While I’m not saying I personally would use that pistol, I have a hard time looking at the firearms out there currently and believing that there isn’t one that meets a person’s requirements for safe carry with a chambered round. The options are not solely a Glock (as mentioned in the other comment) or unchambered carry. There are, as John and others have pointed out, real negative complications associated with unchambered carry.

[JohnKSa]

There is utility in carrying on an empty chamber...

Of course there is. I provided the situation where there is utility and you provided an example. When there is no availability of firearms that can be carried safely with a loaded chamber.

That's the reason that some SA revolvers need to be carried with an empty chamber under the hammer. Although, to be fair, that doesn't put them at any disadvantage in terms of getting the gun into action over someone carrying an SA revolver with a round under the chamber since the hammer will have to be cocked to fire in either case.

...and no one solution fits every need.

Correct, if it's mandated or if guns that can be carried safely with a loaded chamber aren't available, then chamber empty carry is the solution.

-No one ever shot themselves in the leg with an empty chamber Glock. Fact.
...
No one ever shot themselves in the leg from being too safe.

If all that matters is never having an unintentional discharge then there's an easy solution. Don't carry a gun. 100% security is always simple. If there are other things that are important, then they must be considered as well.

-The safety on my Chinese copy of a TT Olympia is very stiff. I use that gun for squirrels and pinecones. I carry it in my pocket with an empty chamber.

1. This subforum is about self-defense, not about plinking or small game hunting.
2. If you really have a gun that can't be carried chamber loaded safely or because there is some other design/function problem that prevents it from being carried chamber loaded safely (e.g. safety is too hard to operate and must be on for safe chamber loaded carry) then hopefully you wouldn't choose that gun for self-defense use unless it was your only option and then we're back to one of the only two defensible reasons for carrying chamber empty.

[bamaranger]

Can anyone advise what pistol the victim was carrying?

[rc]

First rule of a gun fight is to have a gun.

Second rule of a gun fight is not to draw from the drop. If someone is pointing a gun right at you, it's probably better to run, find cover or comply than try to draw.

Next, be aware of your surroundings. Don't let someone get the drop on you.

Lastly, you better have luck on your side.

I think chamber loaded, chamber empty depends on your habit. If you do something different every time, that's when you'll pull and click instead of pull rack and bang. One of the main advantages of double action revolvers is they are always ready and relatively safe to carry. The same can't be said for many semi automatic pistols. I'm sure there are a few LE with a Glock limp.

[Double Naught Spy]

One of the main advantages of double action revolvers is they are always ready and relatively safe to carry. The same can't be said for many semi automatic pistols. I'm sure there are a few LE with a Glock limp.

There is nothing special about double action revolvers that they are always ready. I have bought two over the years and neither was ready when I bought it. Neither happen to be ready right now. How are they always ready?

Oh, you mean they are always ready once you load them to being ready and then they are ready. Isn't that how semi-autos work? They are always ready if you load them to being ready. If they aren't ready, then you have to do something to make them ready. Overall, the process is basically the same, only the steps are different.

Relatively safe. Okay, but people were having UDs with double action revolvers long before semi-autos were ever popular. We don't hear a lot about revolvers anymore because so few people carrying them, so few departments carry them, by comparison to semis.

[fastbolt]

Old topic, long since beaten into a mud puddle.

FWIW, I once spent a day training (special LE swat training opportunity) with some Israeli gentlemen who were part of a special group of highly trained Israeli government folks. I noticed they kept their Glocks chambered. Every time a Glock was holstered as a live weapon and was appropriate for the training. They even simulated 'loading the chamber' before holstering EMPTY Glocks, when using them for demo purposes in parts of the training involving no live ammunition could be present.

I asked why they didn't carry with an empty chamber, like was often discussed in training circles and advertised as a technique taught by some former Israeli military in commercial classes here in the US.

He basically politely chuckled, and said that carrying with an empty chamber was done for safety reasons ... for the average military and civilian police in the course of their duties.

[HiBC]

The example of "Glock knee" was given. OK. Supposedly Alec Baldwin had an
"Empty Chamber" . The routine,or the expectation the chamber is empty leads to complacency....or at least,it can.

Is my "No Safety" version of a Shield Plus with a round in the chamber dangerous?
Darn right it is. I know it is. All the time, every time .

A key component is the holster. It keeps the trigger inaccessible to touch.

An organization like the IDF will have policy. Policy is not optional. Its not always good policy. A certain amount of sausage making might go into policy making. So we get mediocre policy.
"Ok, I will concede to allowing handguns but only if the chamber is empty"

[Mike P. Wagner]

Originally Posted by jmr40

One reason I'm told the Israeli army trains this way is due to the fact that there is no one standard sidearm. They use a variety and there is no one training method to cover all handguns. If you have to chamber a round before firing, they all work the same. And someone who is skilled at it can be pretty fast.

This is what I have heard from several Israeli friends - they want to be able to use whatever firearm is available - even those taken from an enemy.

If you know absolutely nothing about a specific pistol’s controls or condition ie. “Is there a round in the chamber?”, this is allegedly the fastest to bring it into the battle.

The number of people I have talked to is certainly not statistically significant. :-)

So I don’t Knopf whether this is true or not.

[Double Naught Spy]

Well, the important thing is that the Israeli system of downgrading everyone to the same level of (not) readiness seems like a good idea and works for them, except when it doesn't.

[Shodan]

Originally Posted by Mike P. Wagner

This is what I have heard from several Israeli friends - they want to be able to use whatever firearm is available - even those taken from an enemy.

If you know absolutely nothing about a specific pistol’s controls or condition ie. “Is there a round in the chamber?”, this is allegedly the fastest to bring it into the battle.

The number of people I have talked to is certainly not statistically significant. :-)

So I don’t Knopf whether this is true or not.

That sounds like a reasonable explanation, especially if told to you first hand. An interesting follow up question would be to ask why they'd carry their own gun in that condition. One that they are hopefully very familiar with.