Is it really safe to carry a round loaded in the chamber?

[M1911]

I believe that 3/10s of a second, to rack one in is a very prudent thing.

I'm sure you can do this. When you have both hands free, that is.

But your support hand might be busy with other duties, like fending off the perp, pushing your spouse to safety, carrying a small child. If that is the case, you will not charge the chamber in 3/10ths of a second. You may not be able to charge it all, particularly if you have low-profile sights. When was the last time that you practiced charging your chamber by snagging the rear sight on your belt?

I have no problems with someone who decides to consistently carry condition 3 and consistently trains that way, provided they recognize what the issues are.

I sometimes carry a Glock in the waist band, no bullet in that chamber I can tell you that. I know when it is in my waist band it is not loaded, simple.

If in the holster it is loaded, maybe. If I had to have a confrontation I would probably put one in the chamber, just for GP. Most persons have the ability to pick and choose.

The question is whether you will pick the right response under stress, depending upon whether you decided to load the chamber that morning or not. Do you really think you'll be able to remember whether the chamber is full or not when Mongo is trying to choke you out and you are the only thing between him and your wife? Why do you want to complicate your decision making at that point?

I strongly urge you to pick a condition (chamber full or chamber empty) and stick with it. I've chosen condition 1. I respect those who have chosen otherwise.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I love the descriptions of carrying guns as the fights that civilians will get into aren't that dangerous or risky.

Let's try another take. We all know the Tueller Drill (or should). One way to avoid getting sliced and diced is to move in a direction that acts against the attacker and drawing your gun.

Now having done the former drills, I would hate to have to move and also be sure that I rack appropriately. When you are moving off line, you aren't standing there square to the range for the optimal rack.

Of course, if one only shoots square range and never tried dynamic force on force - you can overestimate your ability to run the gun under pressure.

I've at the NTI had to shoot someone in a Tueller like situation. It was down to milliseconds. If I had to rack, I would have been clubbed (not really) with a baseball bat.

[springmom]

....over at the 1911 forum is here:

http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=140211

People describe literally rolling on the floor and TRYING to get an (unloaded!) C&L 1911 safety to disengage. Didn't happen.

Springmom

[Lurper]

Semi-automatic pistols were never designed to be used as fast-draw weapons. The pump priming before you can get it to gush is a little too time-consuming for quick draw. If it is carried ready to go it is in an unsafe condition.

You should probably choose a different "expert". I think .72 second hits at 10 yards is pretty quick. It can also be done with a revolver and a single action revolver. Gaylord obviously had a bias against autos and a lot has changed in the last 40 years since he wrote that. As far as safety goes, a modern quality single action auto is not going to fire until the trigger is pulled. On a series 80 1911 even if your thumb slipped off the hammer while you were lowering it (real question is why would you be doing that), the gun would not fire unless you were holding the trigger to the rear. Even on older ones, if your thumb slipped off of the hammer it would not have enough inertia to drive the firing pin into the primer with enough force to detonate it. It is far less safe to carry an auto (any auto) with an empty chamber. It doesn't matter how much you practice or how proficient your are at racking the slide, you will be far slower than someone of equal skill carrying in condition 1. Many people will hold on to a belief like a pit bull in spite of logic, common sense and reason. It is a free country, you are entitled to your own choices and opinions. If you really feel it is unsafe, then carry a revolver.

[Harley Quinn]

It sure is not the bad guy.

But still, I think it is a what if situation. If you want to, do what you want.

The situation is as a general rule, especially in a house very risky business to have it loaded. In fact in some States it is illegal.

Opinion's are just that. What if's are just that.

Safe gun carry is important. If I had a CCW (I do) but I did not have a lot and I mean a lot of training (I do). I would find the safest (I consider the 1911 designs to be one). That is probably one of the reasons for it's major come back and everyone is making them.

Now lets look at why you dont want to mix and match all the time and carry different guns one day then the next. It has been shown that under stress we don't always work like we do when not under that stress.

So the thing that helps is many hours and hours of hand on action.
They say it takes the brain about 1000 repeats to make it happen like we want it to under stress.
Some poles differ, but it is a pretty much a foregone conclusion that you need training and not just a few hours and 100 rounds.

Just be very prudent, and remember, the life you take, does not come back.
I still put in about 50 times more training in hand to hand than I do Shooting.

It is just the nature of the beast, you are much more likly to need that then you are your gun.

HQ

[Ace On The Line]

Depends on the gun and the person. I carry 7+1 at all times. Should you be required to use your gun in a life or death situation, the less you have to deal with the better. One step less to perform under stress could mean the difference between going home to your family or taking a ride to the morgue.

[Double Naught Spy]

Semi-automatic pistols were never designed to be used as fast-draw weapons. The pump priming before you can get it to gush is a little too time-consuming for quick draw. If it is carried ready to go it is in an unsafe condition.

Well Doug, since you are a fan of Chic Gaylord, just what guns were designed for fast draw. The answer better not be "revolver" as the revolver was not designed for any sort of draw. It was designed for >1 shot capacity and was simply a mechanical forerunner to the semi-auto, used in pistols, shotguns, and rifles. It is not the action type that determines whether or not a gun can be quick-drawn or not.

Generally speaking, it is the holster that is designed for draw parameters, not the gun. I can show you any myriad of revolver holsters that won't quick draw.

Additionally, while not design parameter per se, it does not mean the gun will not function in that capacity. Glocks were not designed as hunting guns, but I know folks who hunt quite well with Glocks.

[springmom]

http://www.smartcarry.com/cocklock.htm

The author puts it very succintly. Boatman makes it clear that cocked and locked is the way this gun is intended to be carried. This "it's too dangerous" issue simply is not true.

Again, though, if this is uncomfortable, Doug, carry a revolver. They're super guns, I love my snubbie, they don't have the issue to worry about.

Springmom

[WhyteP38]

The situation is as a general rule, especially in a house very risky business to have it loaded. In fact in some States it is illegal.

HQ, in what states is it illegal to keep a loaded gun in your house? I'm not doubting you, but I can't think of any. I'm guessing New Jersey is one example, but I'm not sure, and I can't think of any others. Illinois, maybe?

[Harley Quinn]

I believe it is legal if you have a lock on it in CA. Then again it may be OK just as long as some child does not get into it.

When purchasing and receiving if you don't have a safe to put it in then you have to buy a lock.

Maybe I have misspoken. Any more clairification would be good.

HQ

[WhyteP38]

When I lived in CA, every firearm I bought--handgun or long gun--came with a cable lock that connected through the opened action. You were not required to use it, but if a child got hold of the gun and fired it, you were headed for an all-expenses-paid room with Bubba at Stoney Lonesome.

I escaped CA in late 2005, and the gun laws may have changed since then. In CA, if you miss a day, you've missed a dozen new gun restrictions. (But at least the CA legislators aren't wasting time, effort, and tax dollars on non-issues such as failing schools, skyrocketing housing costs, crumbing infrastructure, a failing power system, hospital closings, and multi-billion-dollar deficits.)

[Magyar]

Since this thread has not been mercifully ended, I don’t think I’ve read so much BS in my life. The very training “experts” I was advised to take to give me better insight in PD firefights are the same ones still teaching the worthless “tactical reloads”. If you want more on this subject: start another thread…
Back on the topic, just remember this: in a confrontation you will be under a lot of stress. Hand trembling, shaking; all this while you are attempting to unholster & flick off that safety & most of you are still attempting the Weaver within 3 yds: quite worthless. Hey, what about the use of 2 hands? Critics of Cond. 3 talk about using the support hand. “What happens if a machete chops your hand off, and other nonsense?” That is ridiculous as saying your thumb “hang-nail” will hit the mag release while attempting a safety off! I’m willing to bet that if you have more than one pistol, different brands, without looking you cannot tell if the safety goes up or down. If you have to think about it: forget it!!
I will say this one more time: Most practitioners of the “Israeli Draw”, especially from the cross-draw position, will be just as quick coming up shooting via point shooting, ala Applegate, Steiner, Jordan, et al than any other configuration. If you cannot accept this, than you still are in a fantasy world of facing down Cole Younger on the streets of Laredo….

[jacketch]

I think it is most interesting from this thread that so many people interested in being safe "draw the line", so to speak, at carrying with a round in the chamber. I think it would be much more safe to carry without a magazine in the gun or if carrying a revolver, no rounds in the cylinder. Heck, too be really safe, just carry with the gun partially disassembled.

After 40 years of carrying a 1911 cocked and locked with one in the chamber and mistakenly thinking it was safe, I may begin carrying with the slide removed from my gun. Then I'll be really safe

[Lurper]

I will say this one more time: Most practitioners of the “Israeli Draw”, especially from the cross-draw position, will be just as quick coming up shooting via point shooting, ala Applegate, Steiner, Jordan, et al than any other configuration. If you cannot accept this, than you still are in a fantasy world of facing down Cole Younger on the streets of Laredo….

Mag, you need a dose of reality. Get a video camera and a timer and support that statement. I'll get a video camera and timer and show you sub 1 second c.o.m. hits all day long. If you can match that with the "Israeli Draw", then you're a better man than I'll ever be.

[shield20]

Magyar has it right on 1 thing - this thread and other similar ones - do go on and on.

Bottom line as I see it - if you want to be the best prepared to defend yourself and your loved ones, if you want your CCW pistol to be ready when you most likely will need it - which is NOW!!, if you want to carry in the easiest condition to get into action - as designed and intended and as is plenty safe for most indivduals, then carry the way you are supposed to - with 1 in the chamber, safety off in a DA or C&L on a 1911.

However - if you just don't trust yourself to the point where you are more concerned with an ND or AD then your readiness, if you really think that extra time and handling of the weapon during a life & death situation is somehow better or easier then a little bit of thought while clearing a piece when things are nice and calm, if you REALLY think it won't be a problem to HAVE TO use 2 hands to draw and fire, and you can train yourself to quickly work the slide on a semi (or to cock a the hammer on an SA) BUT can't learn to consistently drop a thumb safety on a 1911 then so be it - carry empty. THAT however is a trade-off I just don't understand - not as a cop, not as a civilian, nor as a GI do I see making any gun that much more difficult to fire then is necessary - adding extra steps like loading it (???) when lives are on the line (MY life), when combat is imminent like it always is with CCW?...just don't make sense.

[Charles S]

Since this thread has not been mercifully ended, I don’t think I’ve read so much BS in my life. The very training “experts” I was advised to take to give me better insight in PD firefights are the same ones still teaching the worthless “tactical reloads”. If you want more on this subject: start another thread…

Megar,

If you had taken any classes from the experts, you would realize that tactical reloads are taught as a tool that has limited, but very real application. Are tactical reloads for every situation, no. There are very few situations in which tactical re-loads are appropriate. Tactical reloads are not worthless, your ignorance through lack of education limits your understanding of the salutations in which they can be utilized.

Col. Jeff Cooper has for years stated that he is unaware of a situation in which a reload of any type has been the deciding factor in a gunfight, but he teaches the speed reload and the tactical reload. Re-loads are tools, tools that are rarely needed, but important to have.

Back on the topic, just remember this: in a confrontation you will be under a lot of stress. Hand trembling, shaking; all this while you are attempting to unholster & flick off that safety

You are correct about the stress, so your solution is to add complexity to the task?

most of you are still attempting the Weaver within 3 yds: quite worthless

I don’t shoot Weaver.

will say this one more time: Most practitioners of the “Israeli Draw”, especially from the cross-draw position, will be just as quick coming up shooting via point shooting, ala Applegate, Steiner, Jordan, et al than any other configuration. If you cannot accept this, than you still are in a fantasy world of facing down Cole Younger on the streets of Laredo….

You are in a fantasy world. I would like to see evidence you can draw and hit the target in under 0.75 seconds. I can and will be happy to demonstrate it for you time and time again. The better shooters can do it in under 0.33 seconds (Miculek, Clark, Leatham).

Name one police agency that utilizes condition three. You can't. One eliete military orginization. You can't. It is taught to people with limited training. I don't fit that mold.

If you choose to train with a technique designed for the majority of soldiers with limited training that is your business. Just don’t expect anyone with experience or real training to follow suit. In the thread you stared on your technique it was pointed out to you a number of situations in which you will need one hand to defend yourself and still be able to shoot, yet you have deliberately chosen a technique that requires two hands to shoot.

You quoted Ayoob, he quickly answered and stated that he did not recommend Israeli carry.

You have never answered me, but again I will ask. What real experiences are basing your ideals on? What training do you have?

I already know the answer to both. None, that is why you avoid the question.

I honestly don’t have a problem with your choice to carry in condition three, your lack of training and general ignorance of proper carry leads me to believe you would be unsafe otherwise. As a matter of fact, until you have had some training, I would recommend you might re-think your carry gun, you might need to re-think whether or not you should carry at all.

Owning a gun does not make you an expert, training, practice and experience do.

My biggest problem with you is that you seem to need to insult anyone who’s opinion differs from you. My opinion differs, I have derived my opinion through training under those with practical experience. Mr. Cirillo has been in more shootings than almost any other policeman alive, why don’t you take a class under him and ask him what he thinks of your Israeli carry?

This thread has been dragging on too long. I fall back on my default position (the position Mr. Ayoob takes also), that cocked and locked is not for every one. There are some people who just have not had enough, training, experience and exposure to safely carry in that manner.

If you lack that training and experience, then you are wise to choose to carry otherwise. Honestly, although the majority of gun writers would lead you to believe otherwise the 1911 is not the only viable handgun design. There are plenty of excellent handgun designs that do not require cocked and locked carry.

Charles

[Doug.38PR]

Looking back we seem to have gotten bogged down in discussing the 1911 and it's locking mechanism. My original post was for semi automatics in general. Lets try to expand a little. I still want to discuss the 1911 but lets talk about other semi autos, hammerless ones, DA ones etc.

[Charles S]

Looking back we seem to have gotten bogged down in discussing the 1911 and it's locking mechanism. My original post was for semi automatics in general.

You are correct, we have drifted off topic.

Is it really safe to carry a round loaded in the chamber?

To again answer your original question in as direct a maner as possible.

A firearm, whether a revolver or a semiautomatic handgun is inanimate and cannot fire on its own. That means the question you are really asking is: Can an individual be as safe with a round in the chamber of an semiautomatic pistol as they can be with a revolver?

With a quality autoloader without a safety the answer is yes, (I have in mind Sig, Glock, Kahr).

With a quality autoloader with a safety, I believe the auto is safer.

To qualify that I must state I am referring to individual’s with actual handgun experience and training.

Honestly neither a revolver nor a semiautomatic handgun is safe in the hands of an individual with no training and no experience.

If you don’t know how to check the chamber, then you have had no training and the semiautomatic is unsafe in your hands.

Charles

[Glenn E. Meyer]

What is the functional difference between a SW 642 or Colt DS in your pocket or belt vs. a Kahr PM9 except for a small different in trigger pull?

That's the core of the issue. Similarly, a Glock can have its trigger pull increased if one is so fearful.

However, Charles S has written quite a cogent set of posts. With training - a quality semi is quite safe. No quality training - then you are a risk with most guns.

[springmom]

Doug, it just doesn't matter, a semiauto is not going to fire until someone sticks their finger in the trigger and shoots the gun. It's not going to go off by itself. Most semis have SOME safety measure unless they've been messed with inside, and those safeties work. My XD is safe to carry with one in the chamber. Nothing is going to enable the grip safety to be engaged and the trigger to be pulled unless it is a person holding the gun and deliberately pulling the trigger. Nothing is going to enable my Ultra Carry to fire unless I take off the thumb safety, grasp the grip so as to engage the grip safety, and THEN pull the trigger. Nothing is going to enable my S&W .38 snubnose to fire either, unless I pull the trigger. No safeties on a revolver, you see, just the trigger.

In a sense, the semiautos are safer because there are more mechanisms to prevent accidental discharge on THEM than on a revolver. Hm. Maybe to be safe you NEED to carry a 1911 or an XD or a Glock or a SIG......or whatever.

Springmom

[ATW525]

Looking back we seem to have gotten bogged down in discussing the 1911 and it's locking mechanism. My original post was for semi automatics in general. Lets try to expand a little. I still want to discuss the 1911 but lets talk about other semi autos, hammerless ones, DA ones etc.

Well, at the moment I have on me a Beretta 96FS. With the safety engaged the trigger is completely disabled and the hammer can no longer physically actuate the firing pin. The slide can be manipulated while the safety is engaged allowing the loading and unloading of the weapon with the trigger disabled, and the hammer automatically decocks when the slide returns to battery. There is also a firing pin block that requires the trigger be pulled before the firing pin can strike the primer and a loaded chamber indicator to allow instant checking of chamber condition.

Though these features don't supercede the need for good gun handling, they add extra layers of security when combined with safe gun handling technique. I feel 100% confident that carrying a round in the chamber is not only safe, but is in fact safer than carrying a revolver with no manual safety.

[Harley Quinn]

I believe Glen has summed up this over the hill thread and continuous use of mis-representation of the original poster.

Stats are on the side of the person who does not wish to carry the pistol with one in the chamber. Give all the opinions you want about your life and times carring your pistol or revolver.

Training is the key.

If you are in some of the more dangerous parts of town or you feel you need to have one in the chamber by all means do it.

But and to say it again (last time) You are much safer to have the pistol (not revlover) empty (chamber) and ready to load. Pretty simple really.

For all you gunfighters by all means carry one in the chamber. Cross draw or on your strong side hip, go for it.

Israeli (killers for quite some time, justifiably so I might add) carry, or whatever big name (LT COL. Cooper USMC Retired) you want to slip into the conversation, is not you and you are the one we are talking about.

HQ

[springmom]

Except that you fail to either back up your assertion or to define "safe". There just is no data to back up the idea that carrying Condition 1 is inherently less safe in regards to AD's.

Like you, I'd like to see this thread die a merciful death. Doug.38 has his mind made up, and those of us who carry Condition 1 are happy to do so and feel in no danger doing so. If the thread continues, I'd like to see some actual DATA posted on either side, myself. Proof, not hypothetical stuff, which is what the original post provided.

Springmom

[Charles S]

Stats are on the side of the person who does not wish to carry the pistol with one in the chamber.

Please provide statistics that indicate the level of accidental discharges are higher with trained individuals who carry with a round in the chamber in modern auto loading pistols.

Some statistics for you.

The last 10 years the LAPD carried revolvers they recorded 50 accidental discharges (this equates to approximately 5 a year). The LAPD converted to auto loading pistols and in the first year with over 2300 officers carrying autoloaders with a round in the chamber there were no accidental discharges (Ayoob, 1987). This is during the transition with little experience. IMHO newly issued equipment is a time when officers are most venerable to accidents.

Ayoob, M., (1987) The Semiautomatic Pistol in Police Service and Self-Defense. Concord, NH. The Police Bookshelf.

Again, it is about the training, not the equipment.

Charles

[Harley Quinn]

You have a short memory about AD's. Or maybe it was another Mom. I will find the post and edit. If not you.

HQ