More one chamber empty carry

[Deaf Smith]

http://www.defense-training.com/quips/09Feb10.html

And Farnam ain't happy!

"When a person indicates that he chooses to not carry a gun, because he is sick, or he just enjoyed a cocktail, or he is on medication, or he has made the personal choice not to go armed, for reasons that apparently suffice for him, you'll hear not a peep of argument from my corner. Far be it from me to dispense unsolicited advice!

However, when an otherwise normal, rational, and able-bodied person knowingly holsters a modern, autoloading pistol whose chamber is empty, and then expects to share a car, or dinner-table, with me, he will have to find someone else with whom to socialize. I want nothing to do with him!

I consider that person unstable and worse than useless. He is intentionally living in fantasy-land, and being in his presence is therefore contrary to my best interests. This world has never been sympathetic with the delusional!

I can't count on his skills, nor obviously, his judgment. "

[Frank Ettin]

I really appreciate that way Farnam doesn't mince words.

[oldkim]

Just about to write off a lot of folks.

So simply because someone chooses not to carry a round chambered it makes them less than????

His choice.

I guess he hasn't met a lot of Israelis - they have mastered this technique of not carrying a round chambered. I can personally tell you that for those that have mastered this way of carrying they can draw, chamber and shoot faster than most in the US can draw.

If you are confused check out this on youtube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xohtwS1Tm4c

Don't get me wrong. I'm on the boat with what the heck.... but I'm not closed minded. We all have a choice. It's what makes each one of us an individual.

Which ever you choose - one needs to practice and become as good as one can get.

[Hotchief]

How about this thought?

Is carrying chamber empty the same as carrying a Spyderco knife with the blade closed in your front pocket? - Is that considered useless?
I think not...

I thought about this today, many consider a knife to be an alternate form of protection when unable to, or not carrying a gun.
I am one of those guys...

I carry several folding Spyderco knives, in which I can rack the slide & chamber a round with any of my guns faster than drawing my knife & flicking the blade open.

Just because I carry a folding knife, and someone may carry a handgun chamber empty, I see the same delayed timeframe in putting the weapon into defense - but I don't see them as useless...

I am one of the rare breed that trains with the mindset of chamber empty.
I work on having the dance down of chambering as I unholster & it feels right for me.

Carry on folks...

[Don H]

Serious question for the folks that carry with the chamber empty: How fast can a round be chambered with only one hand? Any links to videos showing this being done?

[Nnobby45]

I can personally tell you that for those that have mastered this way of carrying they can draw, chamber and shoot faster than most in the US can draw.

What do you mean by they? Not sure that the average Israeli has mastered that technique, but those with above average skills apparently have, and it may work fine where people carry to respond to a terrorist attack---- where both hands would be available.

Still doesn't address the often occuring scenario, in our own country, that involves the personal type of criminal attack that has one hand occupied and one available for the draw.

Where Israelis are concerned, armed society and all, they have a bit of paranoia where guns are concerned. The typical Israeli that carries a pistol would be alarmed at a condition One .45 Auto.

Or by two of 'em--- like those carried by Eugine Socket whose book "Gunfighting Israeli Style" I highly recommend. One was carried X draw and was sometimes visible. Wasn't uncommon for people to come up to him and say, angrily, "Is that pistol cocked?"

Well, yes it was, and so was the one they couldn't see. A pair of Swensons. Man has style. I believe he ended up hiding both of 'em to avoid problems.

I also like his video (even if it is a little old), which I think has the same name as the book.

[KAK]

If you dont carry one in the chamber why not just carry a revolver.

It seems like a DA revolver would be much faster than an auto you have to rack the slide on.

[RobAB]

While the guy certainly should get some training, acting as if he's unstable and a dangerous idiot is over the top and unnecessary. Treating the guy like a moron isn't going to do anything to help bring him into the fraternity, as it were. You can show and educate people without going on about how much smarter and better you are than those uneducated, weak willed, sheeple that aren't fit to lick your boots, etc. and to throw away your chance to do that very thing is the truly foolish action committed here.

[jhenry]

Farnhamis right, even if he is a bit over the top in his choice of words. Not good to alienate folks who may be able to see the light one day. Language like that tends to entrench folks in their positions.

We had this discussion very recently here, and despite folks claiming to be proficient at chamber empty carry, no one was able to articulate a valid reason to carry a normal modern handgun in such a manner that it was not ready for use. None. Why would a person make a concious choice to handicap themselves in this way? Simply saying or demonstrating that person X, or gunphobic country X, can draw and engage a target begining with an empty chamber is a specious argument and has nothing to do with the matter at hand. Convince me they can do it faster begining with an empty chamber than they can with a handgun which has an actual cartridge in the chamber, and tell us about it.

If your gun is not safe with a round in the chamber, then save your pennies and get a decent weapon. If you are simply afraid or nervous about carrying a weapon without intentionally disabling it, then that's fine with me, that is your buisness, but don't try to convince me you are just as proficient and quick by ADDING a step. This does not even begin to address the issue of perhaps not having both hands available at the time.

[AcridSaint]

I can rack the slide pretty fast one handed, but I can see no reason to ever carry without a round in the chamber. If you are carrying an unsafe gun, get a safer gun. The only reason it is done by the Israeli's was to standardize technique across multiple weapons systems. No one carrying a handgun for personal defense should be so unfamiliar with their weapon. Why in the world would you put yourself at an even greater disadvantage? You're already going to be in a reactive mode in nearly all gun fights.

[smince]

Based on readings elsewhere, the Israeli's no longer use chamber-empty carry since going to more modern weapons.

[jdscholer]

Gee, now I feel so ---"less than"; or maybe "at risk".

I support responsible concealed carry, and often carry myself. I also often don't. Sometimes I carry a DA revolver which is always "at ready", and sometimes I carry a striker fired auto that I won't keep with a chambered round.

I am fairly devastated that this guy won't knowingly include me in his list of social friends or dinner partners. Oh well, life goes on. jd

[bababooey32]

The comparison to Israeli carry is a non-sequiter. Ask any in the Israeli military if they would prefer to have one in the pipe! They carry that way because it is mandated, not because it is tactically superior. The individual Farnam is berating has chosen to carry in this manner - something that, in his opinion, is boderline insane. While that may be over the top, he is asserting that, when given the choice and with today's technology, carrying "chamber empty" shows a considered lack of judgement OR lack of knowledge. Niether of which are characteristcis of a person with whom he wishes to consort.

I have no problem interacting with someone who makes that choice, though I do think it shows a certain lacking (either in skills, judgement, knowledge and/or confidence).

To reiterate, if given the choice, I believe most Israeli soldiers would choose one in the pipe over chamber empty.

[RobAB]

The guy isn't borderline insane for carrying an empty chamber, he's just concerned, uncomfortable and simply doesn't know any better. He hasn't learned that carrying on a loaded chamber can be perfectly safe. He's also likely to never increase his knowledge because someone who is a gun "expert" (at least to his eyes) chose to humiliate and treat him like a fool instead of lead by example and explain.

The behavior is really no different than the story about the story about the tech support rep who tells the people to box up their desktop and send it back because they're too stupid to own a computer. It's stupid and unprofessional and shows the "expert" as a jerk with his nose in the air. If you're like this guy and knowledgeable of guns, how would you react to someone in another industry that you don't know much about treating you like an idiot?

[ClayInTx]

First, I do carry chambered.

HOWEVER,

The person who carries an empty chamber isn’t worth Farnam’s association?

BUT, the person who not only does not carry a chambered round because he does not even carry a gun is worth Farnam’s association and Farnam will not utter a peep of argument?

Both of these persons are not ready for instant draw and fire, but the one most unready is worthy?

Please give me a bit of time to parse this and I’m certain I’ll figure the logic; two hours to forty-seven years should be ample.

[w_houle]

no one was able to articulate a valid reason to carry a normal modern handgun in such a manner that it was not ready for use. None.

... and here we go again
For those who carry with an empty chamber, no reason is necessary and for those who don't, no reason is valid.
So on that: **** him, I have enough friends.

[win-lose]

...
However, when an otherwise normal, rational, and able-bodied person knowingly holsters a modern, autoloading pistol whose chamber is empty, and then expects to share a car, or dinner-table, with me, he will have to find someone else with whom to socialize. I want nothing to do with him!
...
I consider that person unstable and worse than useless
...
I can't count on his skills, nor obviously, his judgment

This is ridiculous. For people who lead "normal lives", choosing friends based upon their ability to defend you is just plain crazy. If the comments were about someone who starts trouble, I'd totally agree.

Folks, at some point, we need to live our lives....

[kraigwy]

Empty Chamer?

I try to ponder this:

Think about setting in a resturant, pushing my granddaughter to the floor while racking a slide.

I think not.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Farnam is a great guy. What he chooses to use as a criterion for friendship is his choice. We all have personal tipping points for friendships.

Anyway, Pat Rogers in SWAT just a bit OK said basically the same thing about unchambered semi carry. We have also beaten the Israeli thing into the ground.

Do we need another 100 posts on this? Go read past debates and see if you can come up with something beyond:

1. I'm scared I will shoot myself or someone will take the gun and shoot me.
2. If unchambered I'm behind the curve if I have to act quickly due to time to chamber or having a handicap necessitating a one handed chambering - which is slower unless you are the Flash.

[win-lose]

Farnam is a great guy. What he chooses to use as a criterion for friendship is his choice. We all have personal tipping points for friendships.

Fair enough... I don't know him and I definitely shouldn't judge him.

Personally, I do not share his philosophy on this specific issue of friendship.

[w_houle]

Do we need another 100 posts on this? Go read past debates and see if you can come up with something beyond:

1. I'm scared I will shoot myself or someone will take the gun and shoot me.
2. If unchambered I'm behind the curve if I have to act quickly due to time to chamber or having a handicap necessitating a one handed chambering - which is slower unless you are the Flash.

Okay. It's a level of escalation between carrying your gun and shooting. I know someone would think it to be brandishing, and bad form but it shouldn't be seen as such. It is an opportunity for whomever to think about the repercussion of their action as opposed to actions that don't allow for de-escalation.

[zukiphile]

We had this discussion very recently here, and despite folks claiming to be proficient at chamber empty carry, no one was able to articulate a valid reason to carry a normal modern handgun in such a manner that it was not ready for use. None. Why would a person make a concious choice to handicap themselves in this way?

I don't believe the matter is so clear. In one of those threads, you can find the following:

Some do. It is a matter of balancing the risk of carrying in a manner that delays the weapon from being ready immediately against the risk of being injured oneself because the weapon is at all times immediately ready.

The problem is that this is not within your control. If a nervous PO decides that he needs to remove your pistol from your person, how confident are you that he will not handle the weapon so as to cause it to fire? Where will it be pointed if it fires?

Now, I would expect that nearly all the time the PO can do this without incident. We see from these pages that it is not uncommon for PO to remove an arm from a fellow as a self-protective measure. No one wants to be the exception, the statistic that shows accidents happen.

Imagine the PO who placed your wife's pistol in her glovebox, safety off, hammer back, round in the chamber. If that PO removes your arm, would you like him to remove an arm from your possession chamber loaded or unloaded?

[AcridSaint]

Or an opportunity for them to react violently. When I was a teenager my old man told me "if you ever point a gun at someone, you better be ready to shoot them". I'll say this - I hope that anyone who ever pulls a gun on me plans on giving me a little time to reflect.

[RobAB]

I find the point of the thread not as the re-hash of pros / cons -- as pointed out, done to death -- but how you deal with the chance to educate someone who knows little. Certainly, the fact that it's about a contentious topic tends to overshadow everything else.

[w_houle]

Or an opportunity for them to react violently. When I was a teenager my old man told me "if you ever point a gun at someone, you better be ready to shoot them".

That's true, but is that a statement for one in the chamber or merely a statement of actually following through with using a gun as it's intended purpose if using it should prove to be the case

I'll say this - I hope that anyone who ever pulls a gun on me plans on giving me a little time to reflect.

To give you an opportunity to contemplate as to why someone would pull a gun on you, or is it merely your last window of opportunity to attack? Or are attempts at de-escalation just for suckers?