Concealed Carry in Israel?

[Naphtali]

Just before I deleted it, I viewed an old video advertisement for an Israeli-manufactured "improved" Browning Hi-Power pistol. The demonstrators were highly skilled and quickly accurate with the pistol. And then I realized the demonstration shooting included a feature of usage that was bizarre.

Every shooter cycled the slide of his pistol before shooting. In my mind that means one-armed shooters and shooters with "bad" or weak hands have a strong likelihood of doing no better than a tie were that person confronted by an unexpected attack - now prevalent in Israel. In an article about Utah's current legislative bill for Constitutional Carry, reference was made to "Israeli Carry," meaning what I observed in the advertisement video.

The explanation for the carry mode by Israeli military makes at least some sense in a silly way. Are Israeli civilians with handgun licenses (I don't know whether there is an additional license needed to carry concealed.) also required to carry their semiautomatic pistols with chamber empty? Although I do not know whether civilians can carry revolvers and derringers. If they can, how are these people allowed to carry - that is, must revolvers and derringers also be "empty" for that all-important emergency first shot?

 

[mpreusse13]

I just saw something about this the other day an I believe it has nothing to do with civilians but how the military is trained to carry and present their weapon.

Sent from my R1 HD using Tapatalk

 

[ContinentalOp]

I just saw something about this the other day an I believe it has nothing to do with civilians but how the military is trained to carry and present their weapon.

I don't have an answer to the OP's question regarding civilian carry, but one thing to keep in mind is that Israeli citizens have (I believe) 2 years of mandatory military service. I don't know how much pistol training factors into that, if at all, but that could have some influence on how licensed civilians carry their guns. If they carried pistols with the chamber empty while serving in the military, then they'll probably carry the same way as civilians. Just a guess, though.

 

[BB57]

That's correct - it is not a legal requirement, but rather an offshoot of military training. Given two years of mandatory active military service and continuing reserve service requirements, military training has a big impact on how things are done in Israel.

In a larger context, carrying a pistol hammer down on an empty chamber was the norm for militaries to train their troops to carry a single action semi-auto like the 1911 or the Browning Hi Power with the hammer down on an empty chamber (Condition 3). Most militaries and police departments in Europe also carried DA pistols like the Walther PP in the same fashion.

The rationale was that the shooter would draw the weapon and then rack the slide to chamber a round, making the weapon loaded, cocked and ready to fire (Condition 0).

The safety (or decocking lever) came into play once the shooting was done, rendering the weapon safe with, for a single action, hammer cocked, safety on and chamber loaded (Condition 1), or for a DA pistol, hammer down on a loaded chamber, until the circumstances allowed a return to the normal carry condition.

It's important to remember that militaries issue pistols primarily to support troops who carry them, but who have only very infrequent need to use them. In that regard carrying on a empty chamber and racking the slide to cock and load makes a great deal of sense.

Some folks advocate for carrying a Hi Power or 1911 with the hammer down on a loaded chamber (Condition 2). However there is significant disadvantage to this in that it requires fine motor skills to cock the hammer and under extreme stress those fine motor skills will be seriously degraded. It's just as fast to rack the slide to cock the pistol and chamber a round, and it's done with gross motor movements that are more reliable under extreme stress.

Condition 3 carry is still common in Europe and in many militaries and police departments outside the US. It makes a great deal of sense for a Glock as well, all things considered.

For civilians here in the US, carrying a single action pistol in Condition 1 more common, and was preferred by most LEOs when single action semi-autos were common duty weapons.

 

[Wise_A]

Ugh. This again. Couple things.

(1) The Israelis first adopted the hammer-down carry method because of the limitations of their equipment. Remember, the Israelis got dumped into unfriendly country, and weren't given much help. They pretty much took whatever arms they could get. That meant that their pistols weren't standardized. Literally whatever junk got donated to them.

How do you train a bunch of guys to carry a bunch of non-standardized semiautomatic pistols, in various states of working order, of virtually all mechanisms and actions? Hammer down on an empty chamber. It allows for safe carry of any handgun, no matter the design, even if it's some piece of trash with half a hammer hook and a busted thumb safety.

---

(2) The most popular way for a Palestinian troublemaker to get a hold of a weapon is to steal it from an Israeli on the street. Remember, the Israelis also have to share sidewalks with their enemies.

What's the first thing said Palestinian does with his new sidearm? He shoots the guy that he stole it off of.

Carrying with a hammer down on an empty chamber makes drawing and firing take longer for both sides. Hence, you've got more time to react to having your gun snatched.

American police have done the same thing in different ways. On guns with magazine disconnects, popping the mag catch either during a struggle for the gun, or when transporting prisoners, was standard training for a while.

Now, combine #1 with #2, and you have your answer as for why.

All that said, for the competent American CCW carrier, empty chambers make no bloody sense whatsoever.

 

[KSDeputy]

I agree with Wise A. My pistols are mostly DA/SA, and that is what we were trained on. I always carry with a round in the chamber, and the safety off. It is as safe as a revolver. I have been told that in WWII, the single action .45's were carried with an empty chamber, and soldiers racked a round in the chamber when they need to use them. I would carry a single action pistol like that, they can be very dangerous carried cocked and locked.

 

[poordevil]

My Dad was a Combat Photographer in the Pacific during WWII. He told me many times he carried his .45 cocked and locked. I carry my Colt Government Model the same way.

 

[elm_creek_smith]

I would carry a single action pistol like that, they can be very dangerous carried cocked and locked.

Nonsense. There are only dangerous men.

 

[blues7]

Condition 3 carry is still common in Europe and in many militaries and police departments outside the US. It makes a great deal of sense for a Glock as well, all things considered.

For civilians here in the US, carrying a single action pistol in Condition 1 more common, and was preferred by most LEOs when single action semi-autos were common duty weapons.

Excellent overall post, BB57, but I will have to disagree with you on Condition 3 carry for the Glock. (But to each his own. No need to argue the matter further on this forum, imho.)

I did carry a Gov't Model (Series 70) cocked and locked prior to carrying Glocks on and off duty beginning in 1988.

 

[apollo99]

I trained with some Israeli military guys many moons ago for a short while. They carry hammer down, and chamber empty. As they bring the weapon into firing position they chambered and cocked the pistol. Let me tell you these guys were fast and to the point. Their training was spot on. Now if they only had one arm, that would change things, but from where I was standing, their method of carry didn't slow them down at all.

 

[ISCS Yoda]

First, let me note because I like to vent about these things that the 1911 is designed to be carried cocked and locked - but why anyone carries a 1911 in the 21st century is a mystery to me and I keep telling people that even though there are millions of y'all out there. YMMV of course!

Second, this is true:

I have been told that in WWII, the single action .45's were carried with an empty chamber, and soldiers racked a round in the chamber when they need to use them.

I have seen WW2 combat footage and it is very clear in some of those films that the GIs involved in the fighting are drawing their 1911s from their holsters and racking the slides. I cannot say if they all did that but it was not at all uncommon, despite the fact that 1911s were designed for cocked and locked carry.

A traditional double action pistol or a striker fired pistol should be carried with a round in the chamber and the hammer down. That is how they are designed to be carried.

Third, as to Israelis, the following is more or less correct:

The Israelis first adopted the hammer-down carry method because of the limitations of their equipment. Remember, the Israelis got dumped into unfriendly country, and weren't given much help. They pretty much took whatever arms they could get. That meant that their pistols weren't standardized. Literally whatever junk got donated to them.

How do you train a bunch of guys to carry a bunch of non-standardized semiautomatic pistols, in various states of working order, of virtually all mechanisms and actions? Hammer down on an empty chamber. It allows for safe carry of any handgun, no matter the design, even if it's some piece of trash with half a hammer hook and a busted thumb safety.

The additional feature is that because the Israelis had so many NON-STANDARDIZED handguns it wasn't just a safety issue it was a training issue - you can train EVERYONE to carry their pistols hammer down on an empty chamber, racking it when the pistol is drawn for use. Everyone can do that the exact same way. And so, after the modernization and standardization of handguns in the IDF, the Israelis maintained that level of training. Hammer down, chamber empty. It works for them. Moreover, if you watch them in combat drills the IDF soldiers can draw, rack, and commence firing (accurately) as fast if not faster than their counterparts in other armies using standard double action shooting techniques. They really are that good.

Fourth, as to Israelis, I am not sure if this was a joke or based on some knowledge:

The most popular way for a Palestinian troublemaker to get a hold of a weapon is to steal it from an Israeli on the street. Remember, the Israelis also have to share sidewalks with their enemies.

What's the first thing said Palestinian does with his new sidearm? He shoots the guy that he stole it off of.

Israel has VERY strict gun control. Remember, the founders of the State of Israel were European Socialists with no general exposure to civilian firearms ownership. There is no right to keep and bear arms in Israel. In order to obtain a handgun permit you WILL have to have been in their armed forces, and then deal with whatever rigorous administrative hurdles currently in place. Obtaining a handgun license in Israel is VERY difficult. And you can only have one gun, as I recall. Over 21, pass mental and physical tests, and demonstrate a need to have one. They reduced some of that standard in 2015 due to the attacks that were ongoing but they didn't reduce it much. The chances of a Palestinian stealing a handgun from an Israeli is likely nil - that's why I took the above as a humorous remark.

You will see civilians in the streets carrying rifles, generally ARs, sometimes UZIs, here and there a Tavor, or a Galil, and of course the ever present soldiers will be carrying weapons. Not counting military members or the police you will rarely see a handgun - if you do, it is probably an off duty military member, off duty LEO, or a West Bank settler. Don't expect to see it - it's simply not the same mind set as we have here in the world of the Second Amendment.

 

[Naphtali]

I trained with some Israeli military guys many moons ago for a short while. They carry hammer down, and chamber empty. As they bring the weapon into firing position they chambered and cocked the pistol. Let me tell you these guys were fast and to the point. Their training was spot on. Now if they only had one arm, that would change things, but from where I was standing, their method of carry didn't slow them down at all.

When I mentioned "one-armed," I did not necessarily mean a one-armed person. My thinking was one arm might be injured or being grabbed or restrained by the "problem person." Or, perhaps, one hand is fending off a knife blade or billy club, or nunchuck. It's challenging to cycle a slide one-handed.

 

[Wise_A]

Israel has VERY strict gun control. Remember, the founders of the State of Israel were European Socialists with no general exposure to civilian firearms ownership. There is no right to keep and bear arms in Israel. In order to obtain a handgun permit you WILL have to have been in their armed forces, and then deal with whatever rigorous administrative hurdles currently in place. Obtaining a handgun license in Israel is VERY difficult. And you can only have one gun, as I recall. Over 21, pass mental and physical tests, and demonstrate a need to have one. They reduced some of that standard in 2015 due to the attacks that were ongoing but they didn't reduce it much.The chances of a Palestinian stealing a handgun from an Israeli is likely nil - that's why I took the above as a humorous remark.

You will see civilians in the streets carrying rifles, generally ARs, sometimes UZIs, here and there a Tavor, or a Galil, and of course the ever present soldiers will be carrying weapons. Not counting military members or the police you will rarely see a handgun - if you do, it is probably an off duty military member, off duty LEO, or a West Bank settler. Don't expect to see it - it's simply not the same mind set as we have here in the world of the Second Amendment.

First three results on google.

Israeli security guard shoots Palestinian trying stealing gun - Xinhua | English.news.cn

Bedouin steals gun from security guard in nationalistically motivated attack | JerusalemOnline

Beersheba man nabbed for attacking security guard, stealing gun | The Times of Israel

Here are a couple more:

Israeli Man Uses Martial Arts Weapon to Overpower Palestinian Terrorist – TheBlaze

Palestinian shot trying to steal guard's weapon - Israel - Jerusalem Post

http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Pa...lice-officer-possibly-in-Fatah-rivlary-399468

And oh hey, here's a video.

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeFB17CtTww[/ame]

Unfortunately, that's all I could find in 5 minutes.

 

[Wise_A]

When I mentioned "one-armed," I did not necessarily mean a one-armed person. My thinking was one arm might be injured or being grabbed or restrained by the "problem person." Or, perhaps, one hand is fending off a knife blade or billy club, or nunchuck. It's challenging to cycle a slide one-handed.

Precisely why empty-chambering is such a horrendously bad idea. There was actually a pretty good article in The Blue Press (sorry, can't remember the month), which described an incident in which a guy died precisely because his chamber was empty. He was holding a door closed against his pistol-armed assailant, and lost control when he tried to chamber a round. He was pushed back into the room, and the attacker shot him dead.

 

[Camster]

Israel has VERY strict gun control. Remember, the founders of the State of Israel were European Socialists with no general exposure to civilian firearms ownership. There is no right to keep and bear arms in Israel. In order to obtain a handgun permit you WILL have to have been in their armed forces, and then deal with whatever rigorous administrative hurdles currently in place. Obtaining a handgun license in Israel is VERY difficult. And you can only have one gun, as I recall. Over 21, pass mental and physical tests, and demonstrate a need to have one. They reduced some of that standard in 2015 due to the attacks that were ongoing but they didn't reduce it much. The chances of a Palestinian stealing a handgun from an Israeli is likely nil - that's why I took the above as a humorous remark.

Quote:You will see civilians in the streets carrying rifles, generally ARs, sometimes UZIs, here and there a Tavor, or a Galil, and of course the ever present soldiers will be carrying weapons. Not counting military members or the police you will rarely see a handgun - if you do, it is probably an off duty military member, off duty LEO, or a West Bank settler. Don't expect to see it - it's simply not the same mind set as we have here in the world of the Second Amendment.
Unquote.
When I was there about thirty years ago,some civilians,working as volunteer guards where crowds might be,such as a movie theatre, had M1 carbines.
In the last year,a good friend who lives there,thought about getting a handgun.With being a reserve officer possessing the rank of captain(it's captain or higher),it would not have been too difficult.However with grandkids in the house and an anti-gun wife,he decided not to pursue it.

 

[apollo99]

Talk about one handed reloads, I've been trying to find some video on it, I've seen guys using their boot heels or other parts of their bodies. If any one has a link to the heel reload, I would like to take a look at it.

 

[Wise_A]

It's a unicorn. Really--is anybody going to do any trick stuff like that in a life-or-death struggle?

Every reputable source I've ever read repeats the same thing over and over again: simple, gross movements. No fine motor control.

 

[elm_creek_smith]

I saw an older officer (not Israeli) open his duty revolver, a 4 inch S&W Model 15 Combat Masterpiece, one-handed, eject the empties, and shove the barrel into his waistband with the cylinder open. He then reloaded it with his 2x2x2 ammo pouch, closed the cylinder, and was ready to rock. He had obviously practiced this because it was fast!

His left hand was busy holding his bobbed-hammer S&W Model 12 Airweight pocket gun on two miscreants while a third was on the ground screaming some.

 

[Arik]

I've seen Russian soldier load and unload his Makarov one handed without ever touching a piece of his clothing or any other form of help. It's cool but not practical and not done outside of showing off

The Israeli civilians you see with ARs, Uzis, Tavors walking around are actually soldiers in civilian clothes. They are required to carry at all times so you'll see them with rifles at coffee shops, restaurants, busses, even at the beach

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

 

[BB57]

Excellent overall post, BB57, but I will have to disagree with you on Condition 3 carry for the Glock. (But to each his own. No need to argue the matter further on this forum, imho.)

I did carry a Gov't Model (Series 70) cocked and locked prior to carrying Glocks on and off duty beginning in 1988.

I have no objection to people properly carrying a Glock with a Loaded chamber, but the devil is in the details, and those details don't get discussed enough.

The Glock was designed to Austrian military specs that required one hand operation, so it was indeed intended to be carried with a round in the chamber. However, it was also intended to be carried in an outside the waist band duty holster that provided ample protection for the trigger and less chance of an intrusion into the trigger guard when re-holstering.

However, it also had the side benefit of working well for European agencies that still preferred to carry pistols with an unloaded chamber, which didn't hurt potential sales.

I certainly have no objection to a Glock being carried with a round in the chamber, provided it's properly carried in a holster that fully encloses and protects the trigger.

With all handguns, pistol, revolver, single action, double action, striker fired, etc, the holster is the first level "safety". With a Glock, it's arguably a little more important as once it's out of the holster, all of the safeties are tied to the trigger and any trigger contact has the potential to de-activate all the safeties.

Where I get critical of some Glock users is when I start seeing Glocks used in concealed carry with poorly thought out carry methods like a belt clip on the slide or a Versa Carry style holster that does not adequately protect the trigger.

One of the common denominators in "Glock leg" accidents is when the shooter/victim is carrying a Glock in an IWB holster where a wad of shirt, a jacket drawstring or other foreign object finds it's way into the holster. That's a much more significant problem with an IWB holster than it is with a duty holster, particularly with many of the current duty holsters that sit fairly far out from the waist.

Historically it's also not unheard of for a police officer under extreme stress after a shoot to try to re-holster his pistol with his finger still in the trigger guard. The combination of:

A) a lack of any other trained action such as de-cocking or applying the manual safety; and/or
B) the comparatively short and light trigger pull relative to a DA revolver or DA semi-auto pistol; and/or
C) the lack of a hammer on a striker fired pistol than could otherwise be felt coming back when re-holstering with a trigger guard intrusion;

makes an AD slightly more likely with a Glock than with a traditional DA revolver, DA semi-auto, or a 1911 style single action semi-auto.

Thus, while there is less training required in the actual operation of the pistol, compared to a 1911, there is an increased need for training the shooter how to safely holster and carry a Glock - a point that is often lost on armed citizens who decide they want to carry a Glock.

As noted above, with an OWB duty holster, an AD that occurs in a re-holstering situation is less likely to hit the shooter in the leg or foot In contrast, with an IWB holster any AD with a Glock while re-holstering is very likely to hit the leg. For that reason I advise concealed carry permit holders who want to carry a Glock in an IWB holster to use a holster that:

1) fully encloses and protects the trigger;
2) has a reinforced mouth that will not fold over and potentially intrude into the trigger guard; and
3) has a belt clip that allows the holster to be removed, so that the pistol can be re-holstered with the pistol out in front of the shooter where he can visually confirm nothing is obstructing the trigger, and then be inserted back into the waist band as a unit with the trigger fully protected.

If a CCW permit holder with a Glock isn't willing to take this approach, then he or she is better off carrying it with an unloaded chamber and racking the slide during the draw to make it ready to shoot. It's just a matter of risk management - the odds of an armed citizen ever actually needing a handgun for self defense are extremely low, while holstering the handgun is a daily event, and the frequency of that event combined with poor holster choice and/or poor technique creates a significant risk.

In short, as noted above, in the absence of adequate training or standardization, carrying on an empty chamber has some merit, and that applies to the Glock as much as any other handgun type.