CCW: Keep one in the pipe?

[David Armstrong]

I have said the same thing when this discussion came up on other forums. There is no way you are going to have time to draw from concealed carry, rack to chamber then aim if you are confronted with a true life or death moment. Condition 1 for all single action autos. Fully loaded for all revolvers.

Again, it seems that reality would disagree with this claim, as people regularly manage to do just that and have been doing so for decades.

 

[David Armstrong]

The Thinking Gunfighter suggests that autoloaders which are literally unsafe with a round in the chamber, unsafe equipment and use, C3 is a safety advantage. Who knows how many years of study were required to arrive at this academic piece of inescapable logic.

A bit selective in the comments there, aren't we?? There are several reason given for C3 in addition to those. And yet, even given that inescapable logic, we have seen in this discussion some who have wanted to argue against the inescapable logic. That is often the problem with this discussion, even when confronted with facts and logic some still want to argue against it.

And ya know what... after what seems like endless academic baloney about C3, The Thinking Gunfighter concludes with this: From my position, I tend to suggest chamber loaded carry as the normal and standard default position

Of course. Don't think I have ever suggested otherwise. The issue is not what is my suggestion for normal and standard default, the issue is what is best for each person based on their needs, their equipment, their situation. I'm not foolish enough to suggest that my way is the only way, or even the best way for all. Wish others would adopt that philosophy.

Some people just like to argue.

Hard to argue with yourself, generally it takes at least two. Of course I don't know if it really counts as an argument when one side presents facts and the other side presents personal opinion.

 

[drolen]

Your car is your everyday transportation to and from work. Do u keep air in the tires or do u just drive around on flats?

This really is an example of the ridiculous cliche's that are always used in C1 vs C3. Let's take it a step further into riciculousness. Why stop at C1? Did you know than an attacker can cover the distance of 10 feet and be upon you before you could draw and fire in C1 status? If you're going to holster your weapon you're better off not having one. What, are you scared of carrying in that manner? If you're not comfortable with the low ready you should not own a gun. Matter of fact you should also never carry anything else in your hands, hold hands with your wife, or even allow anyone within a 5 foot buffer because they are invading your reaction space. Pistols? I don't think so. Nothing but a 7.62 auto will do because even the crappy 5.56 ARs are never going to punch through the body armor that any normal BG will have. Better make it a SCAR for me. And while we're at it I better have a couple friends. We'll all be decked out in super cool 5.11 Tactical garb and armor. I'm moving SWAT style from here on out because, you know, BG's come in groups. I'm also cooler than you because I've got my own MEDEVAC flying overhead just in case all that does not work. When I say tactical carry I mean tactical.

See where I'm going here? Why is it that if anyone makes a different decision than you then they are automatically wrong?

I'm going to defer to Capt Jim. He's said it over and over and there's no way I could say it better. I'd really like to hear anyone tell him or I that this statement is WRONG because this always comes down to a group of people that says "If you're not C1 you're wrong."

The whole point of this debate is NOT how a gun should be carried by a CCW...

All I am saying is that, carrying a gun with a loaded chamber or empty chamber as a CCW involves some risks.
People choose which risk they'd like to take and determine their type of gun and their style to carry.

There is no one single way of correct method of carrying.
There are different methods of carrying.

In my humble opinion some people confusing the "recommended way of carrying" with the "correct way of carrying".
That's all...

 

[Protected One]

Don't you think that the reason so much of whats being discussed here is arguable is because the discussion morphed to where it revolves around "carry preference", rather than self-defense effectiveness?

It seems to me that as long as two people are simply "carrying their guns around" (one in C1, the other - C3) there is no PRACTICAL difference between the two. No need to use the gun?...no foul. Yet if presented with the identical self-defense situation the difference between the two becomes very apparent. That's the reason C1 is the "recommended method of carry.

Fortunatelly, the overwhelming majority of us will never experience an actual need to draw and fire, so how we carry won't ultimatelly matter. But for those "few" who DO have the need I suspect that those carrying C3 will probably wish they hadn't.
It's not a question of "right or wrong" but rather, optimal or less-than optimal.

 

[Smoke]

Three things. Yes, it would be nice if everyone who had a gun would take a good training program, but very few actually will do that. Would you want to mandate a minimal training program before a person could purchase a handgun?? Second, of course, we regularly see folks with fairly high levels of training suffering from ADs/NDs, so training really doesn't guarantee safety. And third there are plenty of folks who are perfectly comfortable carrying with a round in the chamber that still choose C3.


And I'll bet that most of those places also dictate snatch-resistant holsters, bullet-resistant vests, carrying a two-way radio, etc. so I'm not sure why that matters. As pointed out there are still plenty of places that mandate C3 as policy.


You want to buy a gun for all those folks who have one that doesn't meet your standards? Shall we set a "minimum gun level" for everyone or should we let folks have the freedom to pick what they want? Lots of anti-gun folks out there think that all guns should meet standards they set also and that nobody should have one that doesn't meet those standards. Think they are right??


Again it seems you are a bit of an elitist, arguing that poor people who can't afford a gun you approve of should not be allowed to have guns. Personally I find that line of thought rather disturbing.

You do make some good points here but to be perfectly honest you come off more like someone who is always right and wants to prove he’s the smartest guy in the room more than someone who actually wants to discuss the issue.

 

[jlrhiner]

Mr. Armstrong,
I've read your posts here and on your blog. I'm unimpressed. I hope, sincerely, that you don't get someone killed with this nonsense. Good luck in your endeavors.

 

[Rastoff]

I'm going to defer to Capt Jim. He's said it over and over and there's no way I could say it better. I'd really like to hear anyone tell him or I that this statement is WRONG because this always comes down to a group of people that says "If you're not C1 you're wrong."

I agree with what you're saying about Cpt. Jim's comment on carrying the way that is comfortable for you.

All I've ever said, and this is at least the 4th time I've said this, do whatever you do without illusions. There are limitations to however you carry.

A rifle is more powerful than a handgun. We carry a handgun because of convenience. Holding the gun at the ready is faster than starting from your holster. It's not practical to walk around at the ready all the time so, we use a holster. Open carry is faster than presenting from concealment. There are tactical and legal reasons to carry concealed so, we do. A level 1 retention holster is faster than a level II or III. There are reasons to use a holster with better retention.



So, carry however you'd like. Just be sure you understand the limitations and ramifications of carrying that way. Don't fool yourself by thinking that everything can be done at the same speed or ease or with the same effectiveness.

 

[venomballistics]

Data .. we like data.
so I grabbed by 1911 carry piece went down into my home recording studio and got some
sound pressure level of a slide racking at 1M seems to average 83 dB which is slightly higher than ones alarm clock.
also of worthy note, the sound signature is rich in tones between 800 and 1500 Hz where the ear is most sensitive.
what I found interesting is that the sound of cocking the hammer registers at 70 dB , however it is about an octave and a half higher,
the safety made 65 dB in an octave higher still.
given the choice of these three attention getting actions .. Ill take the safety every time .. it, for both its octave range and its SPL give me the best chance of staying hid if thats the order of the day.

 

[David Armstrong]

Don't you think that the reason so much of whats being discussed here is arguable is because the discussion morphed to where it revolves around "carry preference", rather than self-defense effectiveness?

It seems to me that as long as two people are simply "carrying their guns around" (one in C1, the other - C3) there is no PRACTICAL difference between the two. No need to use the gun?...no foul. Yet if presented with the identical self-defense situation the difference between the two becomes very apparent. That's the reason C1 is the "recommended method of carry.

Fortunatelly, the overwhelming majority of us will never experience an actual need to draw and fire, so how we carry won't ultimatelly matter. But for those "few" who DO have the need I suspect that those carrying C3 will probably wish they hadn't.
It's not a question of "right or wrong" but rather, optimal or less-than optimal.

And therein lies the issue. You pose your entire argument around the "I am in a gunfight" paradigm while ignoring the the much larger paradigm of "I am carrying a gun around all the time." Depending on your needs and your situation C1 might be optimal. Or C3 might be optimal. One size does not fit all. It is sort of like saying "I thnk autoloaders are optimal so anyone who carries a revolver is wrong" or "I think IWB at 4:30 is optimal so anyone who carries any other way is wrong." There are times when the revolver might be optimal, or the OWB at 3:00 may be optimal.

 

[David Armstrong]

Mr. Armstrong,
I've read your posts here and on your blog. I'm unimpressed. I hope, sincerely, that you don't get someone killed with this nonsense. Good luck in your endeavors.

Thanks, Jim, I appreciate the concern and will give it all the attention and thought it deserves.

OK, that's all the thought and attention it deserves.

 

[David Armstrong]

Data .. we like data.
so I grabbed by 1911 carry piece went down into my home recording studio and got some
sound pressure level of a slide racking at 1M seems to average 83 dB which is slightly higher than ones alarm clock.
also of worthy note, the sound signature is rich in tones between 800 and 1500 Hz where the ear is most sensitive.
what I found interesting is that the sound of cocking the hammer registers at 70 dB , however it is about an octave and a half higher,
the safety made 65 dB in an octave higher still.
given the choice of these three attention getting actions .. Ill take the safety every time .. it, for both its octave range and its SPL give me the best chance of staying hid if thats the order of the day.

As always, training is your friend. If you are afraid of making noise racking the slide it is much like making noise flipping the safety...don't do it until you are in the draw stroke ready to fire.

 

[jlrhiner]

Thanks, Jim, I appreciate the concern and will give it all the attention and thought it deserves.

OK, that's all the thought and attention it deserves.

I believe, therein lies your problem.

 

[venomballistics]

As always, training is your friend. If you are afraid of making noise racking the slide it is much like making noise flipping the safety...don't do it until you are in the draw stroke ready to fire.

65 dB against 83 dB is virtually non existent. its octave range also plays a large role .. the safety is over 3 octaves higher, and easily muffled thus further reduced ...
kinda handy if you have to take the risk of sneaking past a threat in the ready as one might need to when your returning a non NY regulation big gulp in the restroom while other urgent needs arise.

 

[jlrhiner]

BTW, do you carry your defensive handgun without a round in the chamber?

 

[venomballistics]

BTW, do you carry your defensive handgun without a round in the chamber?

personally ... sometimes if I have a long arm as primary in C1 or C0 ... then the pistol is secondary ... kinda like it is for the IDF and others using C3

 

[fiasconva]

Has anyone even mentioned George Zimmerman yet? I skipped a few pages of this thread.

 

[Bkreutz]

Has anyone even mentioned George Zimmerman yet? I skipped a few pages of this thread.

Probably not because this thread isn't locked yet. .......

 

[fiasconva]

Good one. Just wondering what would have happened if he didn't have "one in the pipe".

 

[bluegrassarms]

As mentioned, if one would at least TRY to get an understanding of an issue before trying to argue about how bad (or good) it is, or what can be done and what can't, it would help a lot. In the situation you described she would have been taught an alternative to use if she felt uncomfortable with the full draw/rack/hold, most likely a draw to high chest with support hand held to rack. As for the rather silly list, a wee bit of common sense will indicate that most of those have nothing to do with carrying C3, thus are rather irrelevant and really serve no purpose other than to try to be argumentative on a fairly juvenile basis, IMO.

So whether the off hand is free an unencumbered when comparing a technique that requires far more use of the off hand to one that requires less is "juvenile"???

Wow.

It might seem thta way to those who have no idea what they are talking about. those with a little experience and training in C3 should understand it just fine.

You NEVER engage in any detail support of your position. Everything you say is vague and quickly and invariably goes back to "well if you were just an expert like me you'd understand". You barely get through a post without referencing your credentials.

It's a massive logical fallacy in which you engage constantly, the "argument from authority", where if you don't have a presumed degree in something it's somehow it's invalid, and anyone with REAL authority would already know that.

it's condescending and also a fallacy of argumentation that someone cannot be right b/c they don't have the proper resume.

the most intriguing part as I read on this board is that in most cases they do in fact have the resume, they just disagree with you. for example, though I try to avoid the point I have an advanced degree in the statistics we discussed elsewhere, yet you suggested I'd be failed as a student.

Not likely, but it isn't just with me. You talk down to everyone. I have hesitated to point it out, but this post was just too over the top to resist commenting.

 

[jlrhiner]

My question earlier was directed at Mr. Armstrong. (sorry Venom)

Does Dave Armstrong carry his defensive handgun with an unloaded chamber?