Video: Israeli Army Draw; alternative to cock&lock

[M1911]

No, it's not just as fast as using two hands. And no, it's not as fast as having the chamber charged in the first place.

Watch that video and think about it. He draws the gun out of the holster. Hooks the rear sight over his belt, pushes down, then presents the gun.

If the chamber was already charged, he would have drawn the gun out of the holster and presented.

Look at the rear sights on the gun he's using. Now look at the rear sights on your gun. If you are using Novak, or Wilson, or many other low-profile rear sights, you'll find that it's pretty hard to hook them on your belt. Practice it with dummy rounds, from concealment, and see how long it takes and how many times you screw it up. Once you are confident doing that, get your buddy to help out. Have him start pushing and shoving you while you try to do it and you try to fend him off with your left harm. Not so easy, is it?

Finally, the amount of time spent to learn how to do that reliably could be better spent learning how to handle a gun with a round in the chamber. Why spend all that time learning to quickly charge the chamber? What does it gain? Does it yield any tactical advantage? No. Is it a disadvantage in some circumstances? Yes. So why do it?

Think about it this way. Robbie Leathem, Doug Koenig, and all the other professional shooters will do anything to be just a bit faster. If it was faster to stand on your head or wear a pink tutu, they'd do it. Do they carry chamber empty? No, they don't. Because it is slower.

[Deaf Smith]

The only reason to carry a weapon in condition three, besides being ordered to, is because you work in crowds so much you worry about the weapon being snached.

One handed chambering, under pressure, is not a sure thing. You can shortvstroke the action easly and fail to chamber or cause a jam. You can miss the rear sight you were supposed to use to chamber the round. It just is a real iffy situation.

It is far better to just learn your weapon well, and carry it fully loaded.

[sanson]

I carry a SA auto with chambered round but hammer at rest. I can easily pull the hammer back with my shootin' hand. (other hand free).. the only reason I keep a chambered round is because it takes two hands to hold the gun & pull the slide.

[Samurai]

Watch it, there, orionengnr! My father-in-law has a seeing-eye chihuahua!

(I hope he's reading this, too!)

[OBIWAN]

Mr. Smith nailed it....as usual

While I certainly want everyone to feel safe with their chosen sidearm

A whole lot can go wrong in the process of chambering a round

In addition to those obstacles listed, I would add the possibility that some pesky article of clothing could find its way into a bad place.

At contact distances a pistol without a round chambered will likely be employed as an impact weapon only...if it is not dropped during all that manuevering

In cases like that you would probably be better served with a good knife than an unloaded gun

[miniuzi]

I never said a one handed cocking motion was faster than having a round in the chamber. I simply provided proof countering 1911's statement that one handed cocking could not be done "quickly". It can. Obviously it is not intended to replace two handed shooting skills it is just another tool for the tool box to be used when needed. nothing more.

As far as doing it under pressure, I don't know. I've never had to do it while my life depended on it. But if I had to dig my rear sights into my own flesh to get the gun to load or clear a malfunction because my life depended on it I would do so.

And for the record I carry a Glock with a round in the chamber and have for many years safely. I would not think to carry with it in any other way.

[Chindo18Z]

That video (and the Israeli method of loading from Condition Three) has been around for many years.

It's not an optimum method for presentation, but is in fact the best the Israelis could come up with after mandating that their guys/gals would be required to carry empty chambers (in the interests of safety for relatively un-trained personnel).

It was a stupid idea then. It's a stupid idea today.

But back when that video came out, there was a huge market for Israeli Anything (Tactics, Training, Gear, Security Consultants, etc.). Someone is playing golf on a nice course today from the residuals of those video sales...

[Carlo]

Miniuzi pointed out: http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...22484305&q=mp5

This reminds me of a frequent discussion-gag between me and my (target)shooting master; he's also a certified instructors' instructor in our police and can show loads of tricks for chambering rounds or simply present very fast from condition 3. We used to get into this kind of debate before competitions to releif tension, I always concluded: "You'll never convince me to do that sort of thing as long as we have any revolver left ".

Carlo

[BlueTrain]

I believe the original proponent of the chamber empty carry was Fairbairn, the policeman, in that he wrote a book on the subject. I don't think the army ever published a book for general circulation on handguns. In any event, during WWI the method in the army manual was hammer down on a loaded chamber. The 1911 can be carried safely that way, more or less, though lowering the hammer presents its own problems.

Fairbairn's chief concern was safety but he still thought the 1911 automatic was the best choice for the job. He didn't like safties, however, and went so far as to pin the safety lever permanently in the off position. I have heard that some folks pin the grip safety down on their 1911's but probably nobody here does that. He claimed his department was accident free.

Regarding revolvers, it wasn't that long ago that people were arguing the relative merits of single actions and double actions--for speed. Now that is the same argument going on here. I think the argument that if you can't handle a 1911 cocked and locked safely, then you shouldn't carry a gun at all is a bit arrogant and not unlike the suggestion that if you aren't an expert with a handgun then you shouldn't be allowed to carry one. Elmer Keith pretty much thought the same thing and a lot of other writers came close to saying the same thing, including Fairbairn. He suggested a double barrelled shotgun with external rebounding hammers!

But then again, I'm no expert.

[OBIWAN]

"I think the argument that if you can't handle a 1911 cocked and locked safely, then you shouldn't carry a gun at all"

I don't believe anyone is saying that

What at least a few of us are saying is that if C&L is not your thing you should probably not choose a 1911 or a Hi-Power

If you are not comfortable carrying ANY pistol with a round chambered...including the belt and suspenders safe (DA/SA with a safety)

Then maybe we could talk about not carrying

[M1911]

What at least a few of us are saying is that if C&L is not your thing you should probably not choose a 1911 or a Hi-Power

+1

If cocked and locked gives you the heebee jeebees, then there are plenty of other very fine choices out there, from Glock, HK, Sig, S&W, etc., etc.; DA/SA, DAO, striker-fired; semi-auto or revolver.

I've never said the 1911 is the BEST gun. It may be the best gun for ME, but what works for me may not work for you (and vice versa).

[NukemJim]

"I think the argument that if you can't handle a 1911 cocked and locked safely, then you shouldn't carry a gun at all"

I don't believe anyone is saying that

Speaking strictly for myself, if you remove the 1911 from the first statement that is exactly what I was sensing. As always could be wrong.

As for condition 3 carry, again speaking strictly for myself, although I disagree with it, valid safety arguments can be made for it.

There are I believe 2 valid points here.

1) Condition 3 is slower in almost every circumstance.

2) Condition 3 is safer in regards to accident/negligent discharges

Whether the safety advantages outweigh the speed advantages is IMHO is a choice best left to the individual.

NukemJim

[CarlosDJackal]

And if you have to make that shot one-handed because you are carrying your child/keeping the attacker at bay/trying to hold yourself upright/ what-have-you, what will you do then? What are you going to do if you only have your offhand to make that shot?

Carrying an empty gun is like driving around the Interstate without your seatbelt on. If you can see the accident before it happens, you MIGHT have the time to snap it on.

Are you willing to count your life on this?

[miniuzi]

The Gun vs Knife video which has been all over the internet a couple hundred times should make even the most timid of individuals think twice about not carrying locked and loaded.

The hard truth of the matter is you can't win every fight but you can give your loved ones a chance to make a run for it and you could take a bad guy or two with you. I'd rather spend my last moment on the planet putting a couple rounds in the guy that killed me instead of trying to chamber a round while he/they terrorize the ones I love. It's not a likely scenario to happen anytime soon thankfully but one less action I have to take the better.

[Mark54g]

Wow, that one google clip about one handed charging makes so much more sense if you can actually understand the Russian they are speaking.

[Carlo]

If that video demonstrates something, it is, in my opinion, that shooters may be too locked on a certain course of action. If the knife user has two feet, so does the gunman. Sidestepping, gaining distance and or tripping the charging knifeman before drawing would give much better results than just standing there and drawing. This over emphasis on two handed shooting is also hard to understand for me, you've got to fend off a contact weapon, use the weak hand to defend and the strong hand to shoot.
Besides, I've seen the entire video (that is just a part), it's purpose is to demonstrate that knife defense is a martial arts mith, it partially achieves it's object, but technical premises are wrong (real criminals don't play Zorro, stab you repeatedly and the average street blade isn't a lightsabre).

Carlo

[Para Bellum]

1. For a soldier the handgun (sidearm) is a backup / secondary weapon.

2. For a LEO or civilian it's primary. Fast one handed use in hand-to-hand combat situations is the primary function of a LEO/civilian handgun in real life. No time and no hand to rack the slide. You need your weak hand to get some control and/or distance into your fight.

3. Everybody is slower when the chamber is empty. We tried and tested it. The results were ridiculous for the advocats of empty chambers. One guy tore his suit-pants to pieces and cut his thigh with his iron sights while the guy simulating the full chamber already had gone click-click-click.

[Glockoma]

When I carry a Glock, the chamber is empty. To me personally, the increase in accidental discharge safety is worth more than loading time/convenience, as my lifestyle choices keep the probability of a sudden firefight exceedingly unlikely, and I trust in my ability to observe and maneuver such that I have a good chance of getting the time to draw and load when necessary.

I'm thinking of moving to a titanium DA revolver as the carry weapon of choice, though, and that one I'd carry loaded and locked.

[M1911]

I'm thinking of moving to a titanium DA revolver as the carry weapon of choice, though, and that one I'd carry loaded and locked.

You're going to carry a DA revolver loaded and "locked"? Just how, pray tell, are you going to do that?

There is no manual safety (aka "lock") on a DA revolver.

[Tokamak]

The real problem is that we are talking about using a gun that is single action.

How about a firearm with a double action mechanism?

I carry one in the chamber, no safety and a leather holster that covers the trigger. I pull and shoot. In terms of safety, its like carrying a revolver.

I shot the 1911 in the military and enjoy shooting them at a range, but I do not carry one.

(woops someone did mention DA so change the title to I agree that the real problem is...)

[Glockoma]

Oops, I didn't mean DAO. I'm looking specifically at the Taurus 851SSULT DA/SA ultralight in .38spc, with a manual safety.

[M1911]

I'm looking specifically at the Taurus 851SSULT DA/SA ultralight in .38spc, with a manual safety.

Huh? What revolver has a manual safety? That Taurus certainly does not.

http://www.taurususa.com/products/pr...egory=Revolver

[G-Cym]

Carrying an unloaded gun is ridiculous. If you can't deal with cocked and locked perhaps you shouldn't carry one !!

A very ignorant statement. A: a gun with a magazine full of bullets is not unloaded. B: you shouldn't be telling anyone "yous shouldn't carry" just because they protect themselves in a manner different than that which you protect your self. Get off your high horse.

[Deaf Smith]

G-Cym,

To have emergency transportation, like a car, set up with gas in the tank but none in the primer system cause you were worried that over time it might cause engine problems would be kind of foolish, right?

Or to have a inflateable life boat on your ship but have to get the bellows out of a locked hold would make it much harder to get that boat, right?

Now most, if not all, handguns today are pretty much drop safe. Most, if not all, can't fire without a definite pull of the trigger. So making it hard to even activate your personal safety device (the pistol) is kind off foolish since they are pretty safe fully loaded.

And that's why it's not good to carry chamber emtpy. It is emergency safety gear that may very well have to be used quickly, unexpectedly, and in not so ideal conditions. And that is why chamber empty is a bad idea most of the time.

[G-Cym]

You're right, for many people in most situations, carrying unchambered is not the best choice. But mete didn't say that. He said if you carry unchambered, you shouldn't carry at all. And that is wrong, and out of line.