CCW: Keep one in the pipe?

[Waywatcher]

By that type of logic the anti-gun crowd would be right in their belief that the handful of mass killings committed by maniacs justifies trying to deprive law abiding citizens of handguns - in spite of the MANY MORE LIVES SAVED by them (primarily by untrained people).

Quite frankly, even if the numbers showed that more lives were taken than saved by guns, I still wouldn't give a rip. I know what you're saying, and I agree with you, but I also don't care if I am statistically correct to carry a gun for defense--I know I am correct doing it.

 

[Capt.Jim]

So what we're saying is that it's ok for someone new to guns to carry condition three because they are not comfortable with it?

So what else is it ok for them to do? Simply buy a gun, load it and strap it on? No training? No practice?

I don't think so. And that's the problem right there. There's always an excuse why we shouldn't do it right the first time.

Get quality training and practice and you won't be uncomfortable with condition one carry.

My opinion? Yes it is. But it also happens to be the prevailing opinion. Condition one is the PROPER method of carry when carrying a gun for self defense.

If you don't agree, fine, you control your destiny. But I would urge you to recheck your mindset.

No....
Simply what you insist in NOT UNDERSTANDING is WHY a C3 person may decide to carry that way.
You keep thinking these must be ALL NEW people and IF they have adequate training they will feel comfortable in carrying C1.

The reason a person carry in C3 may NOT be simply because they think their semi auto will go BANG while in it's holster without them touching it or they FEAR it will start shooting on its own. No!

Their FEAR is somehow they may be the NEXT PERSON who repeats a similar mistake like those very well trained and experienced LEOs we all love and respect who caused ND or an AD and resulted the death of an innocent person or caused themselves great bodily harm!

Because in their eyes, IF the enormous amount of training and years of accumulated experience wasn't enough to prevent an accident like that for an LEO, "how could they ignore that possibility and take that risk because they've just had a 10 hr CCW class and read two Massad Ayoob books and took a 2 day intense SD course...?
Oh, and of course they go to the range once a week and shoot at a fixed paper target too.

Of course, if your premise was right and if you defend your premise by saying: "if they think that way, it means they are still not ready to carry or own a gun".
Let's assume you are right for a moment.
How long they should not be carrying before having enough training for them to feel "nah an AD or ND will never happen to me"?
17 or more years of training?

Because, they just heard on the news that the TRAINING of a police officer with 16 years in the force wasn't enough to prevent him to shoot his girlfriend accidentally during a dance because of an AD.
Or another officer of 15 years shot his son while he was taking of his jacket...
Or another one shot himself in the foot in front of a classroom full of students...
At a school, in a "SAFE GUN HANDLING class!!!

......Yet, these are ALL SPECIAL people we expect them to be like jedi-masters with light-sabers, who have extensive training and familiarity with their guns. But still, BANG happens!

But, you insist that in order to carry in PROPER way for SD, these people MUST HAVE to take that risk with no "if"s or "but"s! Otherwise they must not own a gun. Period!

If they were ever cornered in a restaurant like Luby's by a crazed gunman they must sit silently and wait their turn to be executed for the next 120 seconds, rather than pull their semi out of it's holster and rack within 1/2 a second and save multiple lives including their own!

But you're right! Yours is much better and GREAT ADVICE!

They shouldn't be carrying at all and since they do not carry the PROPER way they don't deserve to defend themselves or their loved ones under any circumstance!

------------
As for conclusion:

This is what I stand for:

When you buy a gun in order to defend yourselves, get TRAINING, learn the LAW, calculate the CONSEQUENCES, consider the RISKS and then CARRY AT ALL possible TIMES HOWEVER THE HECK YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE with it...

That IS the issue here, and....That IS my point!

 

[cmort666]

They shouldn't be carrying at all and since they do not carry the PROPER way they don't deserve to defend themselves or their loved ones under any circumstance!

Everybody has an inalienable right to be stupid.

There's no right to survive the consequences of that stupidity.

Whether it's driving drunk, sharing needles with intravenous drug users or carrying an unloaded firearm, you own the consequences of your own bad choices.

 

[Kanewpadle]

No....
Simply what you insist in NOT UNDERSTANDING is WHY a C3 person may decide to carry that way.
You keep thinking these must be ALL NEW people and IF they have adequate training they will feel comfortable in carrying C1.

The reason a person carry in C3 may NOT be simply because they think their semi auto will go BANG while in it's holster without them touching it or they FEAR it will start shooting on its own. No!

Their FEAR is somehow they may be the NEXT PERSON who repeats a similar mistake like those very well trained and experienced LEOs we all love and respect who caused ND or an AD and resulted the death of an innocent person or caused themselves great bodily harm!

Because in their eyes, IF the enormous amount of training and years of accumulated experience wasn't enough to prevent an accident like that for an LEO, "how could they ignore that possibility and take that risk because they've just had a 10 hr CCW class and read two Massad Ayoob books and took a 2 day intense SD course...?
Oh, and of course they go to the range once a week and shoot at a fixed paper target too.

Of course, if your premise was right and if you defend your premise by saying: "if they think that way, it means they are still not ready to carry or own a gun".
Let's assume you are right for a moment.
How long they should not be carrying before having enough training for them to feel "nah an AD or ND will never happen to me"?
17 or more years of training?

Because, they just heard on the news that the TRAINING of a police officer with 16 years in the force wasn't enough to prevent him to shoot his girlfriend accidentally during a dance because of an AD.
Or another officer of 15 years shot his son while he was taking of his jacket...
Or another one shot himself in the foot in front of a classroom full of students...
At a school, in a "SAFE GUN HANDLING class!!!

......Yet, these are ALL SPECIAL people we expect them to be like jedi-masters with light-sabers, who have extensive training and familiarity with their guns. But still, BANG happens!

But, you insist that in order to carry in PROPER way for SD, these people MUST HAVE to take that risk with no "if"s or "but"s! Otherwise they must not own a gun. Period!

If they were ever cornered in a restaurant like Luby's by a crazed gunman they must sit silently and wait their turn to be executed for the next 120 seconds, rather than pull their semi out of it's holster and rack within 1/2 a second and save multiple lives including their own!

But you're right! Yours is much better and GREAT ADVICE!

They shouldn't be carrying at all and since they do not carry the PROPER way they don't deserve to defend themselves or their loved ones under any circumstance!

------------
As for conclusion:

This is what I stand for:

When you buy a gun in order to defend yourselves, get TRAINING, learn the LAW, calculate the CONSEQUENCES, consider the RISKS and then CARRY AT ALL possible TIMES HOWEVER THE HECK YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE with it...

That IS the issue here, and....That IS my point!

I understand your point. Have a along. I just disagree. YOU are the issue.

Excuses. All excuses. It is these excuses that we ALLOW that cause people to be dangerous to themselves and everyone around them.

Thinking ahead and preparation is needed in place of excuses. Excuses is the major problem we have today. Everyone is entitled to something. Entitled to their excuses and laziness.

There is absolutely no valid reason to carry a gun for self defense without a round chambered. None.

Scared of the gun? Tough! Learn how to use it properly.
Kids at home? Tough! Buy a pistol safe.

People want to carry a gun. Fine. They figure they will learn as they go. Big mistake. These are usually the folks that have accidents or shoot someone when they should not have.

Ask yourself this...... If a person can justify in their own mind that carrying an unloaded gun is ok, where else are they lacking? If a person can justify something like this in their mind then they are lacking. Lacking in mindset, attitude, and situational awareness. You can't just turn this stuff on by strapping on a gun.

There's a hell of a lot more to them concealed carry package that gets left out because of these excuses.

Instead of encouraging them to do what's wrong, more experienced people such as you and I need to help them to it right.

Carrying a gun is serious. It should be taken as such and not approached halfassed.

 

[Protected One]

There is absolutely no valid reason to carry a gun for self defense without a round chambered. None.

Valid (adjective): Producing the desired result; effective.

Here's a "valid" reason: The carrier chooses to...for their own reasons.

 

[venomballistics]

Valid (adjective): Producing the desired result; effective.

Here's a "valid" reason: The carrier chooses to...for their own reasons.

Oh heck ... been missing a ride on a merry go round lately.
Guess this might do.
usually, that reason for c3 carry tracks back to fear born of a lack of understanding of their sidearm.

Way back in page one I made a statement that still stands in undeniable truth.
an empty chamber is a forfeit in a gunfight. anyone who does not fully understand the mechanics of their arm should learn or trade it for something they do understand

 

[forrestinmathews]

The thing about this discussion is that it will never end until all the champions of condition 3/empty chamber carrying/Barney Fifing have all had their weapons taken away from them by BG's and been beaten, shot or stabbed to death. It has become apparent that the survivors would still champion it out of foolish pride and staunch refusal to admit their own ignorance.

See, I told you. They think they're right. They'll look really stupid right before they die, fumbling to get the slide racked. They'll feel they made the right choice as the shock of defeat and low blood pressure sets in. Condition click, that's the ticket! Hold on I've got to tend to this lion with some sandpaper...

 

[jlrhiner]

Out of 350,000,000 firearms (+/- 10 or so) in this wonderful country, once in awhile a nimrod has an negligent discharge. Most of them blame their equipment.

And it's been my experience, that by and large, the majority of LEO's are not "gun people", firing and handling their sidearms the minimum required to maintain their qualifications. Assigning the whole group "Jedi like status" may be a dis-service. (wasn't it Col. Cooper who said "asking a police officer about firearms is like asking the bellboy what wine to have with dinner. He might know, but why take the chance")

And let's face it, access increases your chances. That's why we train. You don't have to go to the latest ninja pistolero. Set on your couch and practice taking up the trigger. Know when it breaks. Do a 100,000 reloads while watching NCIS. Draw it and just as importantly, re-holster it. Work out your problems. Continuously check your equipment.

Folks come on here looking for information. Sometimes they get in the middle of a few of us that speak very passionately about favorite issues. I certainly have opinions formed over the last 40 years or so.

From my point of view. Carry what you want. But be good with it. Big holes are better than small holes, but if you can hit what you aim at, your probably good to go. Most all semi-auto handguns are designed to keep one in the chamber. (I didn't design them, I just had to learn how to live with them, you should too) All modern revolvers are designed to have all cylinders loaded. I know, but it's true. Here's one I'm going to add myself. If you can't draw your sidearm and hit COM at @15' without using your sights in under 2.5 seconds, go through your guns away and turn in your man card. (or woman card) Can't do that? Maybe some practice.

Can you come up with a reason to carry a PDW without a round ready to fire? Sure you can. But they will be poor reasons, and in reality, decrease your chances of surviving a gun fight (or knife fight, or ball bat fight, or stun gun fight or even the first round of the knockout game.) I told my daughter these are grown up decisions that have grown up consequences.

Play it anyway you want. Carry how you want. Carry what you want. Just know that not everything in life awards everybody a prize. There are right ways to do things, and wrong ways to do things.

 

[cmort666]

Valid (adjective): Producing the desired result; effective.

I suppose it depends upon WHAT the "desired result" of carrying a firearm is.

I carry a firearm to protect myself from the immediate and credible threat of death or great bodily harm from an unlawful assailant.

Carrying an unloaded firearm wouldn't achieve that.

Others might have other "desired results".

I don't know what they might be...

 

[RalphMP9FS]

I was taught in the military to carry a chambered round in the M-16, but to always have the manual safety on until you intend to fire. There was a reason for that logic, but most here lack that understanding I guess. With the absence of a manual safety, the only other safe alternative is to carry unchambered until ready to fire. IMO, too many Rambo's on here are flexing their internet muscles.

 

[forrestinmathews]

With the absence of a manual safety, the only other safe alternative is to carry unchambered until ready to fire. IMO, too many Rambo's on here are flexing their internet muscles.

So I'm to presume that you carry the weapon in your handle there in condition three with the hammer down on and empty chamber?

I can assure my large knife is in the closet with my headband. I'd not say anything here I wouldn't in a discussion in person. I get heated about this because I truly believe that this condition three business is dangerous to the end user in all non military applications. I furthermore conclude that the training to manipulate the slide off articles of clothing and sides of the body is taught as last ditch to people who already had a round chambered to start with.

It's okay not to carry a round under the hammer. General Patton did it all the time with his Colt SAA.

 

[Capt.Jim]

There are soooo many wrongs in some of you guys thinking method that it is impossible to point it out one by one by only responding with posts.
If I do it, this thread will grow into a few thousand posts.

I give up!

I will agree to disagree and I will end my participation of this crazy topic here.

You guys may wanna continue and good luck with it!

I made my point clear and those who understood me, well; "good for them". Those who didn't or did but doesn't agree, well; "good luck to them too".

No matter how differently you may be thinking on this issue, you're all my friends!

Be safe!

 

[RalphMP9FS]

In hindsight, I didn't choose an M&P with a manual safety because the safety lever bulges out and appears that it can easily get caught on loose clothing. Today, I happened to stumble across a totally different/unique design that would solve my chambered or unchambered decision.

The answer to my dilemma is the Canik 55 TP-9 9mm Semi Auto Pistol, two stage trigger, a decocker and a true heavy pull double action when chambered and uncocked.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ip87FoNHZMM

 

[Rastoff]

With the absence of a manual safety, the only other safe alternative is to carry unchambered until ready to fire.

So, an M&P with a manual safety is safer to carry than one without?

Is that you in that video?

 

[RalphMP9FS]

So, an M&P with a manual safety is safer to carry than one without?

Is that you in that video?

If mine had a manual safety, I wouldn't be concerned carrying with one in the chamber, but due to the M&P safety design, I chose not to have the exposed safety.

No, that's not me, just an alternative design that I really like.

 

[ChattanoogaPhil]

I look at all this heavy debate with a little humor. I carry a .380 and have been told by more than one here how useless the caliber is. So what difference would it make if one was in the pipe or not?

Many with carry permits don't carry much and very few carry all the time everywhere they go. My guess is that a lot of folks who profess with such fervor how important C1 is don't always carry. So guess what... they ain't always got one in the pipe either.

 

[Arik]

I look at all this heavy debate with a little humor. I carry a .380 and have been told by more than one here how useless the caliber is. So what difference would it make if one was in the pipe or not?

Many with carry permits don't carry much and very few carry all the time everywhere they go. My guess is that a lot of folks who profess with such fervor how important C1 is don't always carry. So guess what... they ain't always got one in the pipe either.

Always carry if I'm out of the house. ALWAYS! Store run? Carry! Walk dog for 5 min? Carry! Go to a restaurant? Carry! Night Club? Carry! Funeral? Carry! The only places I don't carry is where it's illegal by law. In my state that is limited to Gov buildings and schools. I live, work and play within 30 miles of NJ so sometimes I have to go there and when I do I leave my gun at work/friend's house but when I come back I put it right back on.

Yes 380 is still lethal but so are rubber bullets and tasers. Why compromise?

I was in a situation once when I was 15 that proved that to carry without one in the chamber is just dumb. My mom and I got attacked going to her car in a parking lot. The man came out of nowhere and was gone just as fast. Luckily all he wanted was her purse. Had he wanted anything else there would have been barely any time to draw let alone chamber. Everything happened in 1.3 seconds. It was that fast. We only saw him when he grabbed the purse. And dont give me that situational awareness unless you look under and around every car in a parking lot as you head to your car. Its true that there might not have even been time to draw but I sure wouldn't want to add ANOTHER step to it

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

 

[Shooting Padre]

To assume I will have time to chamber a round is a good example of the the word assume broken down. *** U Me. It makes and *** out of you and me. I'm older, slower now than I used to be and it isn't going to get any better. I don't need the act of racking the slide to activate my ccw to slow me down any more. So... one in the pipe for me. Read my signature!

 

[ChattanoogaPhil]

A

Yes 380 is still lethal but so are rubber bullets and tasers. Why compromise?

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

Not sure what your lethality compromise point is?

Majority of handgun shootings aren't lethal.

There isn't any significant difference in lethality that I see here between .380 and other larger calibers.
An Alternate Look at Handgun Stopping Power | Buckeye Firearms Association

If you don't want to compromise carry a rife. But hey, this is for another subject.

Folks get just as wound up about calibers as they do loaded chamber practice. I would not be surprised to see similar unimpressive differences for average Joe chamber empty/loaded carry if any study was actually done on a large number of self defense and carry unintentional discharge occurrences, and of course the howling that would follow (on both sides of the debate) that it just can't be!

Eh... I keep one in the pipe and believe it is the best way to go. But don't much worry about others who don't.

 

[Arik]

That study has its own false info.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk