CCW, 1 in chamber?

[gc70]

Originally Posted by fiddletown

if one has trained with Massad Ayoob, ..., he will have trained to carry with a round in the chamber.

While generally true, Ayoob is knowledgeable enough to not portray a generalization as an absolute and has written articles in which he advocates carrying without a round in the chamber in appropriate circumstances.

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by gc70

While generally true, Ayoob is knowledgeable enough to not portray a generalization as an absolute and has written articles in which he advocates carrying without a round in the chamber in appropriate circumstances...

Well let's have a look at Mas' own words, here:

Originally Posted by massad ayoob

....I...do not care for the concept of carrying the semiautomatic pistol with an empty chamber, for the many reasons other posters here have put forth.

Let's not forget that when the Israelis went with chamber empty protocol in mid-20th century, many of their wide variety of pistols were not drop-safe with a round in the chamber. US police don't carry such guns today as a rule, nor do the wiser of the armed citizenry, so that motive for empty chamber carry is usually not a factor in the discussion today.

and here:

Originally Posted by Mas Ayoob

...I've never recommended that a defense pistol be carried chamber empty, unless it was an obsolete or el cheap design that was not "drop safe."

I carry with one in the pipe, so does every law enforcement agency I know of in this country, and for several good reasons already stated by others on this thread, it is what I continue to recommend....

[gc70]

Very good; when challenged, you found one of Ayoob's exceptions regarding guns that are not "drop safe."

Originally Posted by Massad Ayoob

These should NEVER be carried with live rounds in the chamber. If one must use such a pistol, load only the magazine, and rack the slide to bring a cartridge into the chamber only when you perceive an immediate need to actually fire.

Nevertheless, I suspect that a lot of 1911's without firing pin locks are carried with a round in the chamber, regardless of Ayoob's opinion.

Ayoob's other exception is carrying a gun without an appropriate holster (Guns Magazine, February 2001).

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by gc70

...I suspect that a lot of 1911's without firing pin locks are carried with a round in the chamber, regardless of Ayoob's opinion...

A properly maintained 1911 is drop safe without a firing pin block. There are quite a number of 1911s without firing pin blocks on the California Roster of Handguns Approved for Sale, and that means that they have passed the California required drop test. Also see this post on another board.

Most pistols of current manufacture from good manufacturers will be drop safe.

Originally Posted by gc70

Nevertheless, I suspect that a lot of 1911's without firing pin locks are carried with a round in the chamber, regardless of Ayoob's opinion....

And here, you've been misleading. You really should post the entire quote. In that context, as you've posted, you've implied that Mas was writing about 1911s, but he was not; and what he wrote was (emphasis added):

Originally Posted by Massad Ayoob

...There are several inexpensive pistols such as the Lorcin and the Raven, to name but two, floating around out there that do not have secure firing pin designs and can discharge from impact if struck or dropped. These should NEVER be carried with live rounds in the chamber. If one must use such a pistol, load only the magazine, and rack the slide to bring a cartridge into the chamber only when you perceive an immediate need to actually fire...

So carry quality guns.

[gc70]

Originally Posted by fiddletown

And here, you've been misleading. You really should post the entire quote. In that context, as you've posted, you've implied that Mas was writing about 1911s, but he was not;

No implication was intended ... or needed; Ayoob simply believes firing pin locks are a necessity. Here is an entire article in which Ayoob writes specifically about the necessity of firing pin locks to make 1911s "drop safe."

Originally Posted by Massad Ayoob

I'm afraid there are very good reasons why the state of 1911 manufacturing art has come to include the necessity of rendering the pistols "drop safe."

I happen to agree with Johnny (and you) rather than Ayoob about the safety of 1911s without firing pin locks.

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by gc70

...Here is an entire article in which Ayoob writes about the necessity of firing pin locks to make 1911s "drop safe."...

Or an --

Originally Posted by Massad Ayoob

...upgrade with the heavy-duty Wolff spring and a titanium firing pin...

So Mas agrees that there is more than one way for a 1911 to be drop safe.

[tenusdad]

Fiddletown - why you would feel the need to make a post a dig at the person making the post is beyond me? I'm not real sure what one gets out of that.

I think there are a number of options available to a person most of the time that don't involve a lightening draw and fire response. Use your head is all I recommend.

Stay out of trouble spots, run if you can, go to the expense and trouble to learn some non-lethal defense techniques. If a pepper blaster will settle things, why would anyone want to apply more force? I'll use it if there is no other choice. I'll use my head, mouth or feet first if I can.

Sillinness? Well maybe - That's just a bit of humor laced with some truth my friend. I come to TFL to enjoy the conversation, friendly debate, offer an opinion, etc. If it's not fun then why bother? A pretty sharp old doctor once told me he judged a mans intellegence by his sense of humor, some folks just don't have one I guess. I'm now going to slink off somewhere and sob aloud because you no longer take my posts seriously.

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by tenusdad

Fiddletown - why you would feel the need to make a post a dig at the person making the post is beyond me? I'm not real sure what one gets out of that....

Well, for one thing, since you obviously consider yourself to be a very clever fellow, I got the sort of the response from you that I anticipated. And that gives me an excellent opportunity to discuss in more detail various of your comments. So --

• Originally Posted by tenusdad, post 61

  ...Without a gun I don't cringe in fear and tremble, do you? I just go. Then why would you feel it dangerous or unsafe to have a loaded gun without one in the chamber?...

  What does one have to do with the other? If one doesn't have a gun, one doesn't have a gun. If one may legally have a gun, and if one then chooses to bother to have a gun with him, he is doing so in the very unlikely event he will need to use it.
  
  If one has a gun without a round in the chamber, one has a gun which is less ready and available for use, in the extremely unlikely event that it's needed. The odds of needing a gun, which are very long, are completely independent from the odds of needing the gun quickly if one does need his gun. So the fact that it is extremely unlikely that one will need his gun is not really a good reason to carry a gun in a less ready state. One may be unlikely to need a gun, but if he does need it, he's likely to need it quickly.
  
  

• Originally Posted by tenusdad, post 61

  ...For the most part I/you don't really even need a gun; we just want that option just in case. I like having one and feel safer with it in my pocket...

  You might feel safer with a gun in your pocket, but the mere possession of a gun doesn't make you safer. One's incremental increase in safety, if there is any real increase in safety, will come from being able to effectively use his gun in self defense in the unlikely event he needs to in order to prevent immediate death or grave bodily injury. A gun is not a magic amulet that offers protection by its mere presence on one's person.
  
  A number of things can facilitate one's ability to effectively use a gun in self defense, such as --
  
  
  • Knowing and understanding the legal issues -- when the use of lethal force would be legally justified, when it would not be, and how to tell the difference. Understanding how to handle the legal aftermath of a violent encounter.
    
    
  • Knowing about levels of alertness and mental preparedness to take action. Understanding how to assess situations and make difficult decisions quickly under stress. Knowing about the various stress induced physiological and psychological effects that one might face during and after a violent encounter.
    
    
  • Good practical proficiency with one's gun. That includes practical marksmanship, i. e., being able to deploy one's gun and get good hits quickly at various distances. It also includes skills such as moving and shooting, use of cover and concealment, reloading quickly, clearing malfunctions, and moving safely with a loaded gun.
    
    
  • Having a reliable gun one can manage properly accessible and available to be put into use quickly if necessary.
  
  
  As Jeff Cooper used to say, "It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully."
  
  

• Originally Posted by tenusdad, post 61

  ....In all the years I've carried I have never had to pull my firearm and point it at anybody and pray I don't. If I felt in more danger or in worse situations I might do things differently. I feel pretty safe with the chamber empty in a gun where legal to carry...

  Glad you feel safe. But exactly how does the fact that you've never had to draw you gun in self defense lead to the inference that if you actually do need to use your gun as your last resort in self defense you'll have time to chamber a round first?
  
  

• Originally Posted by tenusdad, post 82

  ...Many of the TFL experts have apparently achieved "Perfection", never make a mistake, never have an off day, always recite, achieve, and perfectly execute all the rules of safe gun handling no matter the situation. Hats off to ya. I stand in awe of perfect people...

  Nonetheless, there are people who do manage to handle their guns safely. And safe gun handling is still within your control. One may have an off day, but how one handles that off day is still within his control, and so an off day doesn't need to include a gun accident.
  
  

• Originally Posted by tenusdad, post 82

  ...Or how about the, "may not have time to rack the slide"? How much time is really lost?...

  It's not so much a question of how much time may be lost, it's a question of how much, or how little, time you might have. I don't know, and neither to you. If a nasty incident happens, how it happens will determine for you how much time you have in which to deal with it. If you have enough time to do whatever you need to do, fine; but if you don't, you will most likely not be happy with the outcome. You're free, of course, to extend the time you might need to respond by adding further, avoidable mechanical steps to your response. But when you don't know how much time you might need, that seems counterproductive to me.
  
  And it's always possible you will have only one hand available with which to use your gun. For example, see the New York City Police Department Firearm Discharge Report for 2009 (the most recent year available).
  
  On page 8 (page 32 of the pdf, there's a long introduction), it is noted (emphasis added):

  
  ...Utilizing a two‐handed grip, standing, and lining up a target using the firearm’s sights is the preferred method of discharging a firearm, but it is not always practical during an adversarial conflict. Of officers reporting their shooting techniques, 62 percent gripped the firearm with two hands,...

  Therefore, 38% of the officers reporting their shooting technique used in the adversarial conflict (apparently the NYPD term for "gun fight") fired their gun one-handed.
  
  To be sure, this is a small and particular sample. But it is at least strongly suggestive that in defensive uses of a pistol, firing the gun with one-handed is not that uncommon.
  
  

• Originally Posted by tenusdad, post 111

  ...I plan to show great restraint in administering any lethal force. For one I don't want to hurt anyone unless absolutely necessary and two, use that gun and the reality is that you are probably in for the legal hassel of your life. Use it wrong and you live with it the rest of your life. ...

  Are you suggesting that those of us who choose to carry a gun with a round in the chamber really want to hurt someone, even if it's not necessary? And of course, the use of lethal force invites manifold legal complications. And is one unable to exercise appropriate restraint with a round in the chamber?
  
  It's really not a question of quick draw or fast draw. It's a question of how long it can take us to perceive the threat, determine the need to fire, deploy our gun and engage the threat with accurate fire, having made the decision that shooting is warranted. So how much time will we have in which to do all of that? I have no idea and neither do you. It's going to all depend on what happens and how it happens. We might have lots of time, or we might have very little. We simply can't know in advance.
  
  

• Originally Posted by tenusdad, post 132

  ...I think there are a number of options available to a person most of the time that don't involve a lightening draw and fire response. Use your head is all I recommend.
  
  Stay out of trouble spots, run if you can, go to the expense and trouble to learn some non-lethal defense techniques. If a pepper blaster will settle things, why would anyone want to apply more force? I'll use it if there is no other choice. I'll use my head, mouth or feet first if I can...

  You characterize these as options, but they are not. If it is appropriate to use your gun, you've run out of options. And in general, it will be appropriate to use one's gun only when he has run out of options.
  
  One must always use his head. And if one can avoid using his gun, he must do so. If he uses his gun when he could have avoided doing so, he will most likely be in great trouble. But when all other options have run out, and now one must turn to his last resort, his gun, it will be advantageous for the gun to be available and ready.

Originally Posted by tenusdad

...Sillinness? Well maybe - That's just a bit of humor laced with some truth my friend. I come to TFL to enjoy the conversation, friendly debate, offer an opinion, etc. If it's not fun then why bother? A pretty sharp old doctor once told me he judged a mans intellegence by his sense of humor,...

Ah humor! I guess these are some examples of what you consider humor:

• Originally Posted by tenusdad, post 61

  ...Girls, girls -...

• Originally Posted by tenusdad, post 61

  ...Too many people believe they live in the action movies...

• Originally Posted by tenusdad, post 61

  ...If any of you narcs or fantasy narcs...

• Originally Posted by tenusdad, post 82

  ...They must live charmed lives to make it out of the Post Office without their daily Bruce Willis encounter, most uncommon valor....

• Originally Posted by tenusdad, post 82

  ...Well could be attacked by the 10 iron pumped meth crazed bikers with swords I guess...

• Originally Posted by tenusdad, post 82

  ...Next we will hear - "I even heard one firearm instructor say that carrying with an empty chamber is so dangerous it causes impotence, acne and bad breath and perps can see right through your gun and know. " ...

If these sorts of snarky, insulting comments are your idea of humor, I dare say your sense of humor needs a tune-up.

[tenusdad]

Fiddle ol friend - you might want to consider cutting down on the caffine. You can win (waving white flag). You got more time on your hands than me. No hard feelings here, heck forward me your address and I'll mail you a bag of lollipops.

[daliff89]

i don't know about anyone else, but i'm fairly nervous about willingly using hand-to-hand techniques in response to an attack while i'm carrying a firearm...

i'd probably try to talk my way out of the situation (if possible) and then try everything i could to leave the situation, but it's highly unlikely i'd do anything other than those two things before i did draw my weapon

it's not that i'm super anxious to pull my weapon and use it, it's that i'm not super anxious to give my attacker the opportunity to pull my weapon and use it

if you're confident in your hand-to-hand techniques to the point that you would take on an armed attacker with them, i don't really see the point in carrying a firearm

that's supposed to be the point of carrying concealed, so that you're ready to react to a threat in a split second

[RetiredMajor]

Folks are free to carry an unloaded gun if they want...it's their life!

[TXGunNut]

if you're confident in your hand-to-hand techniques to the point that you would take on an armed attacker with them, i don't really see the point in carrying a firearm..dailiff


I got into dozens of fights with unarmed offenders as a LEO, never felt the need to shoot my opponent but never felt that justified leaving my firearm at home.

[AustinTX]

Fiddle ol friend - you might want to consider cutting down on the caffine. You can win (waving white flag).

Your concession has exactly nothing to do with his "winning" on the merits.

[Les Paul]

Gentlemen, lets not prove to the public that some gunowners could benefit from a good anger management seminar. Lighten up, who wants to chat with grouchy people?

[Skadoosh]

Les, that's a heck of a first post.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Wandering by and seeing nothing new. The reasons for chambered carry were put forward well and as usual someone wants to argue as they enjoy doing it. Then they think they are clever in Internet reparteee and end up looking foolish. Then they get personal.

Warning, stay with the logic and not the cutesy remarks. Not our style.

Closed.