Smart Carry and One In The Pipe Poll Thread


PDA






Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
August 20, 2009, 09:09 PM
See Poll. Read Poll. Vote in Poll. Discuss Poll and Your Vote In Poll.

If you enjoyed reading about "Smart Carry and One In The Pipe Poll Thread" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Mags
August 20, 2009, 09:11 PM
Where's the poll?

Mags
August 20, 2009, 09:13 PM
There it is!

VA27
August 20, 2009, 10:08 PM
What is smart carry, some kind of new holster?

If it's not, and your question is, 'Should you carry a defensive sidarm chamber loaded', then the answer is yes, unless you've recently taken one of those Israeli handgun courses, then the answer is no, unless you expect the handgun you are carrying to be of some use in a sudden defensive situation, then the answer is yes.

My final answer is Yes, Regis.

Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
August 20, 2009, 10:10 PM
http://www.smartcarry.com/

DeepSouth
August 20, 2009, 10:13 PM
Smart carry, cautious carry, daily carry, pocket carry, IWB carry, whatever else carry
I always carry fully loaded, because I've never heard of anyone saying "Well I sure wish I had carried less ammo!" after a gun fight.

Mainsail
August 20, 2009, 10:17 PM
I cannot answer the question because I would never have need for such a ridiculous holster. If I need to conceal, and I rarely do, I'd be fine with a Milt Sparks VersaMax.

AK103K
August 20, 2009, 10:23 PM
I've been carrying a loaded Seecamp in one daily now for three years, and never had even a hint of an issue. Im not sedentary or desk bound either, but just the opposite. I climb all over stuff, in and out of trenches and holes, in and out of all sorts of equipment, etc, and constantly exposed to all sorts of dust, dirt, and wet, both rain and sweat, and of all the holsters I've used over the years, the one that has let the least amount of dirt, crap and moisture in, has been the Smart Carry.

The only thing I've had to deal with, has been wear spots through my pants where the rear of the slide rubs through. An iron on patch on the inside of my pants at that point solves that problem.

Of all the holsters I've owned, its probably the most versatile I've owned, and I wont be without one.

Oyeboten
August 21, 2009, 02:48 AM
Colt 1911 wise..."Yes"...of course...

Any Autoloaders I have ever had,"Yes", of course...


Revolvers, Cylinders 'Charged', of course.

CorpITGuy
August 21, 2009, 03:52 AM
Mainsail:

Some of us require deep concealment for many, many reasons.
Also, some of us live in states with no open carry.

My SmartCarry, while not my FAVORITE method of carry, is necessary all the time, and I'm very grateful for it.

Mainsail
August 21, 2009, 10:31 AM
Some of us require deep concealment for many, many reasons.
Also, some of us live in states with no open carry.

I didn't mean to sound snarky in my reply. I understand the need for deeper concealment but I find the IWB holster works just fine. The crotch-carry holsters seem like they would be difficult if you were doing a lot of bending at the middle. I'd be interested to hear how that works out form people who use them.

Of course, we're kinda off topic because the OP is asking about how you feel having a loaded gun pointed at your junk all day.

MCgunner
August 21, 2009, 10:34 AM
A caveat....I don't consider a Glock safe with smart carry. My revolver has all six in it when I carry, though, and my DAO Kel Tec P11 (very safe trigger) has one up the pipe, too.

Not with a Glock. My name ain't Plaxico........

Norinco982lover
August 21, 2009, 10:38 AM
I think I have to agree with MCgunner--I wouldn't feel safe with the Glock but I WOULD feel fine if it was my XD. The additional 1911 style grip safety just settles that in my mind.

~Norinco

p.s. I voted--yes, always.

eJack
August 21, 2009, 12:08 PM
Smart carry isn't a speed draw holster. Since you already have a delay compared to strong side hip carry, and you draw from front and center, I doubt Israeli carry would slow you down enough to make a difference. I'll bet the .1" of skin down the side of my leg on even a gun with no safeties at all, but no way no how will I bet my jewels on any safety.

Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
August 21, 2009, 12:37 PM
Or e-jack, good point, but you could use that same fact to make the opposite argument: You're *already* slowed on the draw, so it's absolutely imperative that you don't waste any more time racking, as compared to other methods; so therefore, if anything, you MUST carry one in the pipe with SmartCarry in the event you really, really need your gun quickly. I can draw fairly fast with SmartCarry - only lose maybe 1/2 to 3/4 of a second as compared to other methods. But with each passing year, as my gut grows, it slows down another few milliseconds. :)

Mainsail, why is it ridiculous? You may not have meant to sound snarky, but you certainly did! :p

Some of us require deep concealment for many, many reasons.
Also, some of us live in states with no open carry.

My SmartCarry, while not my FAVORITE method of carry, is necessary all the time, and I'm very grateful for it.


+1,000 to that!

I guess the answer is gonna depend on the gun, too - as someone said, XD yes, Glock no. So I voted YES - but that's with the loooooong trigger pull (albeit "pre-cocked") of the Kahr MK9. I also don't think I would with a Glock. There's an awful lot at stake down there, not to mention the femoral artery.

eJack
August 21, 2009, 01:44 PM
Or e-jack, good point, but you could use that same fact to make the opposite argument: You're *already* slowed on the draw, so it's absolutely imperative that you don't waste any more time racking, as compared to other methods; so therefore, if anything, you MUST carry one in the pipe with SmartCarry in the event you really, really need your gun quickly. I can draw fairly fast with SmartCarry - only lose maybe 1/2 to 3/4 of a second as compared to other methods. But with each passing year, as my gut grows, it slows down another few milliseconds. :)

Racing against the clock that makes sense. It's when defending your life that I fail to see the logic. I just put smart carry in the same category (for draw speed) as fanny pack carry. Since you can't out draw somebody your only option is to have yours out before that critical moment when you should already be firing. I would still say the risk to valuables outweighs the risk of that .1 seconds to rack on the draw making a difference.

AK103K
August 21, 2009, 03:54 PM
The crotch-carry holsters seem like they would be difficult if you were doing a lot of bending at the middle.
When worn properly, they are very comfortable, so much so, you forget your wearing it. The gun is flat against you, below the waist/belt line, so its not in a place that would get in the way of you bending over.

With that said, a lot may hinge (no pun intended :) ) on your build, as well as your dress. I'm in pretty good shape and have a 30/32" waist, and can stand with my feet flat on the floor, bend at the waist, and easily touch my plams on the floor. If your bigger with a "Dunlop", you may have another point of view.

The type of pants you wear will also tend to have an effect on what you can carry. I also mostly wear Carhartt type work pants, which sit fairly flat across the front. This tends to make the size of the gun comfortably carried smaller. If I switch to a pair of Dockers or something similar, the size of the gun isnt as much of an issue. The biggest I've carried in a Smart Carry is a SIG P239, and its probably about as big as I'd want to go, comfort wise anyway.

As far as access speed, its not as slow as you might think, and it can easily be done with one hand. If you have a Dunlop, you may need two. :)

FAS1
August 21, 2009, 04:38 PM
I have had my Smart Carry for several years. Although I don't use it all the time, the thing I like about it better than pocket carry (Kel-Tec) is that you also have a place for the spare mag. Also leaves your pocket avail. for other junk. I don'y carry anything larger than a G26 and comfort has never been an issue for me. I''ll use an IWB for a larger gun or if clothing allows.

And we think women always need too many accessories when dressing!

CorpITGuy
August 21, 2009, 05:47 PM
Smart Carry doesn't bother me one bit to bend over, sit, etc. WAY more comfortable than IWB for those things. Still, I'm not as comfortable about my speed of draw. If I can pocket carry or IWB, I'll do that instead.

DinoCrayon
August 21, 2009, 06:55 PM
I love the Smartcarry. People suggest that it makes a gun point at your manhood but I wear mine low enough that if it went off it would just put a hole in the ground between my legs.

'Safer' than when I carry appendix and the gun is pointing at my femoral artery in my thigh...

Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
September 9, 2009, 05:24 PM
Update: If anyone is interested, despite my previous practice consistent with most of you guys here, I recently changed to NOT keeping one in the chamber. Theory being, I'm getting older & more forgetful and sometimes not as careful. And, I take this thing off at the GF's house and lay it by the door on a table - in the unlikely scenario one of her friends, while visiting with us there, suddenly pulls the pistol out of the smartcarry pouch for some reason and pulls the trigger, nothing will happen. I feel safer this way; I dunno.

I practiced a few "Isreali-style" draw drills, trying to draw and rack in one smooth motion. Well, pulling something out of your pants can't really BE *smooth*, but as smooth as possible anyway.

Yosemite Sam
September 9, 2009, 06:54 PM
SmartCarry with Kahr MK9 as well. Been doing so since March and have kept the chamber empty just "to get used to it." I haven't had ANY problems with anything catching on the trigger, so I might switch to carrying one in the pipe. I just gotta practice drawing and holstering though 'cause that's where the danger is.

AK103K
September 9, 2009, 06:58 PM
Drawing isnt really a problem. Holstering is something I would only do if I took it off and placed the gun in it, then put it back on. I wouldnt try to reholster while the holster is still on. That I think isnt a real good idea.

okespe04
September 9, 2009, 07:08 PM
I think I learned this from my time here at THR but "leave one in the pipe or leave it at home" rings a bell.

Balrog
September 9, 2009, 07:20 PM
"leave one in the pipe or leave it at home"

That is some bad advice.

I guess if you would rather fight unarmed than rack a slide and shoot, it makes sense though.

AK103K
September 9, 2009, 08:03 PM
I never understood carrying an unloaded gun either, but hey, what ever floats your boat I guess.

Its not an issue or worry for me. :)

Phydeaux642
September 9, 2009, 09:41 PM
I cannot answer the question because I would never have need for such a ridiculous holster.

Wow! Just wow.

I have a Smartcarry strapped on at this very moment. I am wearing it a bit differently, though. I happen to be riding my bicycle today and I have the holster part of the Smartcarry on my strong side with a 642 in it, fully loaded by the way.

I have worn it as designed with no problems whatsoever. And, If your "junk" is in the way, you're a better man than me.

crew
September 10, 2009, 05:37 PM
If you need to draw and fire so quickly that you must have "one in the pipe".......then maybe you should be using a carry method other than SmartCarry. ????just a thought

AK103K
September 10, 2009, 07:54 PM
The biggest problem I have with not having a round in the chamber is, what if you need the other hand at the moment you need to load the gun? I keep hearing that it only takes a split second (assuming your well practiced at it) to get the gun loaded, but thats using "two" hands. What happens if you need that other hand to deal with the threat?

I use my Smart Carry as a back up, so its not as critical an issue if it were my only gun. I also have a "loaded" full sized handgun in a IWB holster on my belt. Even so, I can still access my Seecamp with no troubles using one hand, and its not all that slow to draw that way either.

PandaBearBG
September 10, 2009, 09:34 PM
For me, full magazine empty chamber. I know alot of people say you may need it for a quick shot, but I do not live in a war zone, or high risk area. Besides I used to have a rowdy temper back in the days of my youth and even though I am done with those days, I would rather not do anything rash that could lead to regret. In the civilian world, proper threat identification and 100% absolute conviction that you are going to take a man's life will take at the very minimum the same amount of time to chamber and fire. To identify, assess and make that decision is pretty paramount and for me at least not to be taken to lightly. I've done my duty overseas and even then it was difficult with all the media and constantly changing rules of engagement.

Now for home defense then no hesitation there, someone rattling the doorknob, lock and load. Walking up the driveway, lock and load. That's a different situation. But for me, verbal judo first, then warning, another warning, then draw/rack if the situation requires it. Even if it is a thug with a knife in the middle of the nite, I will give him multiple chances to back down and he will know it and he will know he will run out of options.

Maybe I would keep one loaded if I was running in the park in the middle of the night, but I don't run and the park has lights and always filled with people.

All this pertains to my lifestyle, my enviroment, and my personal choices.

easyg
September 10, 2009, 10:27 PM
Sure.

But I carry a revolver. ;)

eJack
September 11, 2009, 11:01 AM
Sure.

But I carry a revolver. ;)
I'll never understand why a revolver is good to go, but yet people think a semi auto needs manual safeties and or no round chambered to be safe.

AK103K
September 11, 2009, 11:07 AM
Lack of proficiency and training.

eJack
September 11, 2009, 11:21 AM
Lack of proficiency and training.
Which is odd IMO. Seems like the anti gun movement has pushed gun owners to historically unprecedented levels of civilian firearms training.

Also from your previous post, you can rack a slide one handed, but then again who wants to deal with that when you are seconds from death?

AK103K
September 11, 2009, 11:26 AM
Well, maybe sort of. There are also a lot of people who just ran out and bought a gun and got a permit or not, and really have no idea whats going on.

Then you also have the "one platform" people, who only have experience with one type and all others are scary. :)

eJack
September 11, 2009, 01:02 PM
Well, maybe sort of. There are also a lot of people who just ran out and bought a gun and got a permit or not, and really have no idea whats going on.

Then you also have the "one platform" people, who only have experience with one type and all others are scary. :)
True, but I would say that for the most part, fear buyers go out buy a gun, maybe shoot it a few times at a range, and then put it in their night stand or kitchen drawer. People who carry outside of an occupational necessity however tend to be the same people who get as much training as they can get their hands on. That is why I have always been opposed to ccw license requirements. The inclination to carry a gun is either criminal (in which case the law is irrelevant), or defensive (and face it, I have never heard of anybody that carries a gun by choice on a consistent basis just because they are concerned for their safety - they enjoy shooting and figure they might as well have their gun should they ever need it).

AK103K
September 11, 2009, 01:26 PM
I would think if they were the latter, then carrying the gun loaded would not be an issue. The gun and its mode of carry would be familiar and thought out.

Then again, I suppose not everyone is always thinking.

Hey, if you want to carry your gun empty, its your choice, whos to say your wrong. Me, if theres going to be an "Oh Scheiße" moment, I'd prefer to keep it simple, and keep it down to one per instance. :)

Evela
September 11, 2009, 02:44 PM
I do not, will not carry chambered for these reasons:

1. The Israeil draw/method is just as fast, with the rack occuring during the forward movement of the gun. Even new practitioners can draw-rack-fire, 3 shots, in about 1.5 seconds.

2. Because I am not a LE or SWAT professional I am not trained in hand-to-hand combat. If the BG is close enough to me to prevent me from using both hands, then I would not be inclined to draw (and then be obligated fight to retain my gun and prevent it from being used against me). I would be inclined to use all other means to escape or get clear, so that I could draw.

3. I find the Glock to be the perfect weapon for this proven method, reliable and ready to fire upon chambering. No safeties to fumble with.

4. I wish to avoid or greatly reduce the very real - much more likely - risk of an AD/ND that might well hurt or kill a loved one, or myself. I find that I can draw with much greater confidence knowing that my Glock cannot fire until I really want to.

It should be recognized that the Israeli method continues to be used, and is making a resurgence in the United States and among law professionals.

eJack
September 11, 2009, 03:30 PM
Not saying you're wrong for the reasons you gave, but...

I do not, will not carry chambered for these reasons:

1. The Israeil draw/method is just as fast, with the rack occuring during the forward movement of the gun. Even new practitioners can draw-rack-fire, 3 shots, in about 1.5 seconds.

While slower, yes Israeli carry is almost as fast when you have both hands free. That is an unfortunate if in a lot of cases.

2. Because I am not a LE or SWAT professional I am not trained in hand-to-hand combat. If the BG is close enough to me to prevent me from using both hands, then I would not be inclined to draw (and then be obligated fight to retain my gun and prevent it from being used against me). I would be inclined to use all other means to escape or get clear, so that I could draw.

I was unaware that LE or SWAT credentials were needed to be trained in hand to hand techniques. I guess I cheated. Seriously though, if you like to shoot, I'd bet you would love learning hand to hand to handgun transition and retention techniques. If you carry for self defense you might as well.

3. I find the Glock to be the perfect weapon for this proven method, reliable and ready to fire upon chambering. No safeties to fumble with.

As do many. A chambered glock is no different than a revolver in terms of how you shoot it. I've never seen a revolver with a safety and not chambering a glock is like leaving a cylinder empty so that the first trigger pull does nothing. (although even then you would do it one handed)

4. I wish to avoid or greatly reduce the very real - much more likely - risk of an AD/ND that might well hurt or kill a loved one, or myself. I find that I can draw with much greater confidence knowing that my Glock cannot fire until I really want to.

When drawing there is only one thing that can make a gun discharge, and that is a finger pulling the trigger. If that is an issue, then like #2, you have a great opportunity to have fun training. Chambered or not, want to or not, trigger pulls are the only way a glock is going to fire.

It should be recognized that the Israeli method continues to be used, and is making a resurgence in the United States and among law professionals.

I am unaware of any US law agency encouraging Israeli carry. If you know of any specific examples, I wouldn't mind hearing one. US use of Israeli carry seems to be more popular among open carry advocates in states that mandate it for open carry (such as Utah).

Hokkmike
September 11, 2009, 04:01 PM
I don't want to sound ignorant, but I guess I am; what is "smart carry" please?

AK103K
September 11, 2009, 04:36 PM
http://www.smartcarry.com/

eJack
September 11, 2009, 05:07 PM
I don't want to sound ignorant, but I guess I am; what is "smart carry" please?
When you are lost on what a term means, you will often find an answer quicker by typing it in the search engine of your choice, and paying close attention to the first couple results. Doesn't always work, but in this case it does.

Boba Fett
September 11, 2009, 09:08 PM
Evela.

Stop posting this Israelite Method, Israeli Draw, Israeli Rack CRAP as a way to carry unchambered! You've already had three threads closed where you started this crap, a number of your posts deleted and you persist in providing disinformation about a technique that is dangerous.

http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=471707
http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=401589
http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=90753

Massad Ayoob has even voiced his opinion against your nutty idea. He has affirmed that the Israeli Method is not a method for carrying unchambered.

You've had admins tell you to go somewhere else to post your crap yet you persist in posting it here where it is unwanted, unwelcome, and unaccepted.

If you insist on posting it, then I will continue to post the evidence of your BS and that you are nothing but a MALL NINJA.

Beware the Mall Ninja Evela: Closer of Threads. Your thread could be next!

Phydeaux642
September 11, 2009, 09:47 PM
Beware the Mall Ninja


"I am a Sergeant of a three-man Rapid Tactical Force at one of America’s largest indoor retail shopping areas."

kanook
September 11, 2009, 10:03 PM
I have lived, shot, and served in Israel for many years, and I am very familiar with the “Israeli Carry”. It is certainly not the fastest way to get into action, but it is the safest for barely-trained civilian carry in the usual crowded Israeli civilian environments (schools, busses, streets, malls, etc). A dropped gun will not fire, and a lost or misplaced gun found in cond 3 is safer than in cond 1. It had its roots in the early days of Israel with the many polyglot arms available–all with their own particular safety systems and Manual of Arms. Visualize an odd hodge-podge of worn-out BHPs, 1911s, Lugers, P-38s, PPKs, Steyrs, Webley autos, Rubys, etc, and you get the idea. The only fast and safe way of training and carry for those non-gun folks was cond 3 and rack on the draw. This out-moded cond 3 carry has carried over till this day–even tho there are much better and faster methods now available–I certainly do not use it and rely on cond 1 in all of my EDC guns–dmd

got this from someone who knows.

easyg
September 12, 2009, 12:34 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by easyg
Sure.

But I carry a revolver.
I'll never understand why a revolver is good to go, but yet people think a semi auto needs manual safeties and or no round chambered to be safe.
You really don't understand????

How about this...

My revolver has a 13 lbs. trigger, and an approx. 1" travel.

My Glock has a 5.5 lbs. trigger, and approx. .5" travel.

Which do you think is more forgiving of human error?

eJack
September 12, 2009, 02:20 AM
You really don't understand????

How about this...

My revolver has a 13 lbs. trigger, and an approx. 1" travel.

My Glock has a 5.5 lbs. trigger, and approx. .5" travel.

Which do you think is more forgiving of human error?

Yes, YOUR revolver has a 12lb trigger and YOUR Glock has a 5.5lb trigger. I've seen a lot of revolvers in the 5-6lb range and Glocks are available with 12lb triggers. Not that it matters since none of those will be forgiving of a goof with their finger where it doesn't belong.

Chris Plitt
September 12, 2009, 12:23 PM
I've seen those before, another company came out with them first... Thunderwear I think it was called. I remember a training class I did... one of the instructors was italian... and... he didn't have much space for it... another was irish... he said it was quite comfortable... I'll leave that up to you to interpret.

Chris Plitt
September 12, 2009, 12:42 PM
I'm sorry, but this Israeli carry stuff is total BS. In a firefight .3 seconds is a LIFETIME. I am 100% confident that I can draw my Sig with no safeties and a round in the chamber and engage my target .25 seconds quicker than anyone doing an extended .3 israeli draw could. If you are in a close up situation, lets reach out and hand the person the gun, because, I've tried this several times... this draw takes a little bit of room. I can understand the safety aspect, but if you have a quality holster then there should be no worry about things getting snagged on triggers, and whatever scenario you can come up with. Less is more... Simple is Good... and an Israeli draw complicates things, and forget it if you have wet hands on a Glock and are in a hurry. I've tried this and my hand had completely slipped off the slide before a round can be chambered. I think I'll take my chances with a quality firearm and see how I do...

metallic
September 12, 2009, 07:11 PM
I carry a cocked and locked 1911 outside of work, then during work I carry a da/sa pistol with the safety off and the hammer at half cock in a pocket holster. If I don't trust the pistol to be safe, I simply don't carry it.

FranklyTodd
September 12, 2009, 11:44 PM
I said yes, but I carry either DA0 snub (M&P340) or DA/SA (P2000SK). I don't think I would with a Glock...

doc540
September 12, 2009, 11:48 PM
Smartcarry is what I have to use, so I eventually went to a bobbed-hammer revolver for optimum safety and concealment.

Works like a charm.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v334/doc540/Guns/Smart%20Carry/SmartCarry002-1-1.jpg

I can draw, point, and fire in about 3 seconds which is a tradeoff for concealment, but a tradeoff I'm willing to make.

YMMV


re: "I'll never understand why a revolver is good to go, but yet people think a semi auto needs manual safeties and or no round chambered to be safe."

revolver
1. much heavier trigger pull
2. several mechanical processes have to operate
3. hammer has to rise and drop
4. cylinder has to turn inside a relatively tight holster

Leaning over car fenders, working around the house, doing yardwork, I've never had any of a revolver's firing processes even begin to commence for almost two years of carrying with a Smartcarry holster.

orionengnr
September 13, 2009, 12:43 AM
If it's not loaded, it's a club. And in the Smart Carry, it is a fairly inaccesible club...

It is certainly not the fastest way to get into action, but it is the safest for barely-trained civilian carry in the usual crowded Israeli civilian environments (schools, busses, streets, malls, etc). A dropped gun will not fire, and a lost or misplaced gun found in cond 3 is safer than in cond 1.
Pure opinion..and not a very well-informed opinion, at that.

model of 1905
September 13, 2009, 01:05 AM
I carry a S&W M&Pc 357 10+1 (no external safety) in a Smart Carry every day. It's on me as I type this. No worries. No issues and no limitations.

nelson133
September 13, 2009, 08:06 AM
IMHO, anyone who would advocate carrying an auto with the chamber empty for self defense hasn't been in a self defense situation. You stop thinking and react as you have trained. Unless you train repeatedly to draw and rack, you probably won't. Drawing early and racking the gun could be seen as a provocation in legal terms, especially with so many of the jury pool trained by tv and movies. If you feel the need for an empty hamber, carry a revolver.

Chris Plitt
September 13, 2009, 03:45 PM
IMHO, anyone who would advocate carrying an auto with the chamber empty for self defense hasn't been in a self defense situation. You stop thinking and react as you have trained. Unless you train repeatedly to draw and rack, you probably won't. Drawing early and racking the gun could be seen as a provocation in legal terms, especially with so many of the jury pool trained by tv and movies. If you feel the need for an empty hamber, carry a revolver.
Very true Nelson, plus, the repeated chambering of a round in this nature could cause the bullet to become seated farther back in the case and increase pressure to unsafe levels... all it takes is 1/16 of an inch in .40 to double the chamber pressure... if I remember correctly.

Thats a risk I would rather not take...

sloman
September 13, 2009, 04:07 PM
It's a "Must Have" for carry under certain circumstances. And yes, I always carry one in the chamber when wearing it. Been using one for 5 years with no problems except occasionally when bending. Price you pay for concealment

full metal
September 14, 2009, 03:04 AM
Hell yeah, I used to have one, thanks Doc for posting the web page I need to get one again. It gets pretty hot here in Arizona, and out of all the holsters that I have owned the smart holster is the best for CCW when you wear shorts and tank tops.

9MMare
September 14, 2009, 03:39 AM
I didnt take the poll because I dont use 'smart carry'.

I have done some reading on this, and I will be carrying my S&W fs M&P 9mm 17+1 when I carry.

It will mostly be purse carry and I intentionally got the M&P with a thumb safety as I dont want accidents while drawing it from a purse...just an extra measure of safety from snagging on things.

OTOH, in my nightstand, I dont keep one in the chamber. I think I'll have enough time to rack if I hear an intruder at nite.

metallic
September 14, 2009, 11:01 AM
OTOH, in my nightstand, I dont keep one in the chamber. I think I'll have enough time to rack if I hear an intruder at nite.

That may cause problems if you intend to use the same weapon for concealed carry that you use for a nightstand gun. Repeatedly chambering the same round will cause the bullet to eventually become recessed in the case, which will increase the pressures inside the barrel when the weapon is fired. Not saying you're wrong for doing it, just saying it's something that should be a consideration :)

03Shadowbob
September 14, 2009, 01:33 PM
I use my smart carry all the time as I am in surf shorts and t-shirts almost everyday as well as soccer shorts when coaching. Sitting, bending, etc is not an issue with deep concealment guns like the LCP, P3AT, Minimag etc..
Since I live in Florida and dress the way I do, if I could only have one holster, this would be it. That's how much I use it.

9MMare
September 15, 2009, 02:22 AM
That may cause problems if you intend to use the same weapon for concealed carry that you use for a nightstand gun. Repeatedly chambering the same round will cause the bullet to eventually become recessed in the case, which will increase the pressures inside the barrel when the weapon is fired. Not saying you're wrong for doing it, just saying it's something that should be a consideration :)

This is very helpful!

Right now, I am shooting it at least once a week, so 'same round' probably changes enough to be safe.

(And I'm not yet carrying it)

What do you recommend?

metallic
September 15, 2009, 11:35 AM
Wow! I wish I could afford to shoot that often! Probably the easiest solution is to just leave the handgun in your holster with the round chambered at the end of the day. The stuff I have in my 1911 is around $1.25/round, so I only really cycle out what is in the magazine maybe every 3 months. If you intend to keep the same ammo and same frequency of practice after you start carrying, then like you said, not really a problem :)

esq_stu
September 15, 2009, 12:03 PM
I go to the gym daily at 0530 with my wife. There's always a SmartCarry with a chambered PM9 or Glock 26 under my shorts.

WVMountainBoy
September 15, 2009, 05:49 PM
Yes, of course. If I have to draw and fire then the situation has already gone bad enough that I don't want to concentrate on racking the slide. Same reason I keep my 870 ready to go beside the bed.

easyg
September 15, 2009, 10:42 PM
Yes, YOUR revolver has a 12lb trigger and YOUR Glock has a 5.5lb trigger. I've seen a lot of revolvers in the 5-6lb range and Glocks are available with 12lb triggers. Not that it matters since none of those will be forgiving of a goof with their finger where it doesn't belong.
You're wrong.

A 12 lbs. trigger is much more forgiving than a 5 lbs. trigger should a "goof" have their finger where it doesn't belong.
This is why there were quite a few cases of cops having negligent discharges when they transitioned from revolvers to handguns like the Glock.
For years they got away with poor finger control (because a heavy double-action revolver trigger is not an easy thing to accidentally pull), but the Glock was quick to make an example of them.

Heck, I sometimes jog with my revolver in my front pocket.
There's no way I would do that with a Glock.

BTW, who the heck would put a 12 lbs trigger on a Glock?

eJack
September 15, 2009, 11:28 PM
You're wrong.

A 12 lbs. trigger is much more forgiving than a 5 lbs. trigger should a "goof" have their finger where it doesn't belong.
This is why there were quite a few cases of cops having negligent discharges when they transitioned from revolvers to handguns like the Glock.
For years they got away with poor finger control (because a heavy double-action revolver trigger is not an easy thing to accidentally pull), but the Glock was quick to make an example of them.

Heck, I sometimes jog with my revolver in my front pocket.
There's no way I would do that with a Glock.

BTW, who the heck would put a 12 lbs trigger on a Glock?

Belting out "your wrong" like that isn't exactly the high road way, but since you at least made somewhat of a case, I'll respond.

While saying that a 12 lb trigger is "more" forgiving than a 6 lb is true, neither are what I would consider forgiving. One ND is one too many. I don't consider any gun to be safe with a finger on the trigger or jogging around with it rumbling loose in your pocket.

As for who would put a 12 lb trigger on a Glock, that would be the NYPD. Glock developed a replacement trigger called the New York trigger. It is designed to feel like a DAO revolver.

Now if you don't mind, please be civil.

MCgunner
September 15, 2009, 11:49 PM
I'll never understand why a revolver is good to go, but yet people think a semi auto needs manual safeties and or no round chambered to be safe.

It's called a proper DA trigger. That's why I like the Kel Tec P11 trigger. It's very smooth and easy to use, but long and very safe to carry. I carry revolvers and autos and a TRUE DA auto is the only auto for me. Not only is it safer to carry and just as accurate if you take the time to learn it, it also keeps the training similar, just pull that DA on the first shot.

As for who would put a 12 lb trigger on a Glock, that would be the NYPD. Glock developed a replacement trigger called the New York trigger. It is designed to feel like a DAO revolver.

Actually, the NY trigger is an 8 lb trigger and has the same short throw as I understand it. It's just the installation of a stiffer trigger return spring. It wouldn't have helped Plaxico. Anyone that carries a glock in anything short of Kydex or very stiff leather with full coverage for the trigger is a potential Plaxico.

dkk73
September 16, 2009, 12:29 AM
This thread mirrors a discussion I had with myself over several years, with several different holsters and guns evaluated.

First, I truly believe some of these choices are situational and depend upon one's actual and perceived levels of risk. Sooo... YMMV and if you have a super-orthodox view, let's just say ahead of time we might disagree.

(1) Got a SmartCarry early on and find it my most useful holster for a number of reasons. For many people an IWB simply is nowhere near as versatile. Those who refuse to go anywhere they can't get by with IWB/OWB are served well without this "ridiculous" holster, but it is invaluable for the rest of us. Really, some of the people reading this board must conceal absolutely in a range of clothes and situations.

(2) I became uncomfortable carrying my G27 in the SmartCarry with one in the pipe. This is with an NYT and getting it as "revolver-like" as I could. Spent lots of time trying various things and reading a lot of opinions which are partly reflected in the prior posts... Ended up carrying Israeli-style in low-risk situations and training a lot to draw and rack. The drawbacks of this technique (and it's advantages) are already discussed and I was ultimately not really happy with the solution.

(3) Eventually I just sold the Glocks. To answer your question, I carry the HK USPc (not cocked-and-locked) and P7 without concern. I carry a 442 with only mild concern. I really think there is something about the "curve" of the trigger pull (weight vs. distance) that makes me less concerned vs. the Glock trigger. As mentioned, it's not peak weight alone. Overall, the P7 is almost the perfect gun for this holster method.

(4) If I am in a situation where speed and 1-hand draw are more important (e.g. going into city, convenience store, out at night), I will usually try hard to use an IWB and an auto (preferred) or pocket-carry the 442. I realize I can't predict what will happen, but I can certainly predict the kinds of exposures I will have and make an educated choice about preparedness.

As for the mechanics, the cloth sides of the holster actually do make it almost impossible to actuate the trigger. The main issue for me is that there is more chance of fumbling/snagging given that the holster mouth is not held open and it is not rigid in general. So, I don't think it'll just go off when holstered. I'm more worried about ND due to the mechanics of gun handling when going to the post office and discretely fussing around with it in my car.

As for your "junk" the holster doesn't really point towards it. However, if you aren't confident enough about trigger/safety/habits/holster/gun to sweep your own body while moving around holstered, I would submit that holster location is not itself the main problem.

eJack
September 16, 2009, 12:29 PM
It's called a proper DA trigger. That's why I like the Kel Tec P11 trigger. It's very smooth and easy to use, but long and very safe to carry. I carry revolvers and autos and a TRUE DA auto is the only auto for me. Not only is it safer to carry and just as accurate if you take the time to learn it, it also keeps the training similar, just pull that DA on the first shot.

Actually, the NY trigger is an 8 lb trigger and has the same short throw as I understand it. It's just the installation of a stiffer trigger return spring. It wouldn't have helped Plaxico. Anyone that carries a glock in anything short of Kydex or very stiff leather with full coverage for the trigger is a potential Plaxico.

For the Glock, from the Glock web site:

N.Y.1 The GLOCK „New York“ trigger has its name from the New York Police Department. It facilitates officers changing from revolvers to pistols. Increases trigger pull weight from 2,5 kg / 5.5 lb. to 4,9 kg / 11 lb.


N.Y.2 The N.Y.2 trigger spring is even harder than the N.Y.1 trigger spring. The user will obtain a continuous very hard revolver-like increase of the trigger pull weight from 3,2 kg / 7 lb. to 5 kg / 11 lb.

As for triggers in general, I still feel that safer doesn't equal safe. In other words, if it can't be done safely with a Glock, it probably shouldn't be done with a revolver either. JMO.

easyg
September 16, 2009, 12:34 PM
Belting out "your wrong" like that isn't exactly the high road way, but since you at least made somewhat of a case, I'll respond.
When a person is posting information that is simply wrong, there's nothing uncivil about telling that person that he is wrong.

While saying that a 12 lb trigger is "more" forgiving than a 6 lb is true, neither are what I would consider forgiving. One ND is one too many. I don't consider any gun to be safe with a finger on the trigger or jogging around with it rumbling loose in your pocket.
I'm not advocating running around with one's finger on the trigger, regardless of the type of gun.
But it is safe to carry a non-cocked revolver, with a heavy double-action trigger, in a manner that may be unsafe to carry certain other handguns, like a Glock.
And a single-action revolver can be carried about any way you like.
You can even twirl an uncocked single-action revolver around your trigger-finger all day long without the chance of a negligent discharge.

ALL HANDGUNS ARE NOT EQUAL WHEN IT COMES TO CARRY METHODS.

As for who would put a 12 lb trigger on a Glock, that would be the NYPD. Glock developed a replacement trigger called the New York trigger. It is designed to feel like a DAO revolver.
And why did NY feel the need to add a 12 lbs trigger?

Because, as I have said, the heavier trigger is more forgiving of human mistakes than a lighter trigger.


Now if you don't mind, please be civil.
Nothing I said was uncivil.
Everybody is wrong sometime.

eJack
September 16, 2009, 12:53 PM
When a person is posting information that is simply wrong, there's nothing uncivil about telling that person that he is wrong.


I'm not advocating running around with one's finger on the trigger, regardless of the type of gun.
But it is safe to carry a non-cocked revolver, with a heavy double-action trigger, in a manner that may be unsafe to carry certain other handguns, like a Glock.
And a single-action revolver can be carried about any way you like.
You can even twirl an uncocked single-action revolver around your trigger-finger all day long without the chance of a negligent discharge.

ALL HANDGUNS ARE NOT EQUAL WHEN IT COMES TO CARRY METHODS.


And why did NY feel the need to add a 12 lbs trigger?

Because, as I have said, the heavier trigger is more forgiving of human mistakes than a lighter trigger.



Nothing I said was uncivil.
Everybody is wrong sometime.

See previous post. Not as wrong as you seem to claim. Sorry I was off by 1 lb. BFD. As for carry methods, there are safe methods of carrying any handgun, and then there are methods that have varying degrees of risk depending on the design of the handgun. When it is the safety of myself and others around me, I choose not to accept those degrees of risk. NY added the 12 lb trigger because of years of bad training that did result in accidents even with revolvers but became worse with Glocks. If you are the guy that gets hit by a ND, that is the only one you are going to care about. Rates of occurrence aren't going to matter one bit. And yes belting out "your wrong" is widely considered uncivil. Especially when you lack factual evidence and it is really just a difference in opinion.

B yond
September 16, 2009, 12:54 PM
I would not carry a gun in any kind of holster that I wasn't comfortable keeping chambered.

Being comfortable carrying chambered is why I carry guns with a DA first shot, manual safety, and exposed hammer.

No, I would not shove a chambered stock glock into a smartcarry (or an IWB) for that matter. Sooner or later something would engage the trigger and I'd end up with a leak.

easyg
September 16, 2009, 01:32 PM
eJack,
Do you honestly believe that carrying an uncocked double-action revolver, with a 12 lbs 1" pull trigger, is equally as safe or dangerous as carrying a Glock with a 5 lbs .5" pull trigger in the same carry manner?



For example:

Do you think that carrying a standard unaltered Ruger GP100 revolver tucked in the waistband (aka "mexican carry") is equally safe or dangerous as carrying a standard unaltered Glock 17 in the same manner?

eJack
September 16, 2009, 01:48 PM
eJack,
Do you honestly believe that carrying an uncocked double-action revolver, with a 12 lbs 1" pull trigger, is equally as safe or dangerous as carrying a Glock with a 5 lbs .5" pull trigger in the same carry manner?

For example:

Do you think that carrying a standard unaltered Ruger GP100 revolver tucked in the waistband (aka "mexican carry") is equally safe or dangerous as carrying a standard unaltered Glock 17 in the same manner?

No and no. Nor did I ever say so. What I said is that safer does not equal safe. If a carry method is unsafe with a Glock, I wouldn't consider it safe with a revolver just because of the trigger weight difference. The trigger weight difference can make it safer but not necessarily safe.

easyg
September 16, 2009, 02:12 PM
No and no. Nor did I ever say so. What I said is that safer does not equal safe. If a carry method is unsafe with a Glock, I wouldn't consider it safe with a revolver just because of the trigger weight difference. The trigger weight difference can make it safer but not necessarily safe.
So, do you honestly believe that carrying a double-action revolver with a 12 lbs trigger is unsafe in a Smartcarry?

eJack
September 16, 2009, 02:32 PM
So, do you honestly believe that carrying a double-action revolver with a 12 lbs trigger is unsafe in a Smartcarry?

No, and again, nor did I say so. I don't own a smart carry, but just looking at the pictures it is good to go for any handgun that fits and is otherwise safe. That includes stock Glocks and revolvers. I've never heard of a single smart carry accident, and doubt one is possible without a finger on the trigger malfunction. If you are concerned, chamber a snap cap, do what ever it is you think could discharge the gun and see if the firing pin drops.

easyg
September 16, 2009, 02:40 PM
No, and again, nor did I say so. I don't own a smart carry, but just looking at the pictures it is good to go for any handgun that fits and is otherwise safe. That includes stock Glocks and revolvers. I've never heard of a single smart carry accident, and doubt one is possible without a finger on the trigger malfunction. If you are concerned, chamber a snap cap, do what ever it is you think could discharge the gun and see if the firing pin drops.
I'm surprised that you feel the Smartcarry is safe for a gun like the Glock.
After all, it is not a rigid holster.
Really not much better than carrying the pistol in one's back pocket....which I would do with a revolver,but not with a Glock.

Would you carry a Glock loose in your back pocket?
What about a revolver?

eatont9999
September 16, 2009, 05:31 PM
I carry with one in the pipe at all times. I like the 1911 platform the most and that is the way you carry a 1911. Some people are afraid of keeping one in the pipe and the hammer cocked with a 1911, but they usually don't understand the safety features of the gun in the first place. I usually carry either a 1911 or a .38 snubby. The snubby is always fully loaded.

eJack
September 16, 2009, 05:39 PM
I'm surprised that you feel the Smartcarry is safe for a gun like the Glock.
After all, it is not a rigid holster.
Really not much better than carrying the pistol in one's back pocket....which I would do with a revolver,but not with a Glock.

Would you carry a Glock loose in your back pocket?
What about a revolver?
Since I don't have smart carry, I have only a limited idea of how stiff the material would be. I guess I would try pulling the trigger through my pants to see if an innocent groin scratch could result in disaster and go from there. If is like other soft holsters I have, that won't be possible. As for back pocket carry, i'd opt for no on both. I'm a big believer in holsters.

Evela
September 18, 2009, 05:29 PM
Frankly, there are many who believe that "locked and loaded" is dangerous, especially when drawing your gun when your opponent is within arm's length is foolish.

Many experienced practioners, agree that an arm's length confrontation - the distance that is the basis of the "both hands" objection - is a matter of martial arts, not the shooting arts. The goal is evade, disarm, escape and to gain distance so that you can draw, chambered or unchambered. Mas Ayoob is one of them.

'One more time, at arms length, is the object to shoot the other guy, or is it not to get shot? Correct, it is the latter! With that in mind... and within arm's reach, let's look at a non-shooting option.

You are facing the other person a yard away. He goes for his gun. You go for yours. You are good at this: you can react, draw from concealment, and get off a shot in 1.5 seconds. Hell, let's say you're extremely good... and can do this in a second, flat.

You're still behind the curve. The best you can hope to do is to shoot him him just before he shoots you, or shoot each other simultaneously. He is already past the apex of the power curve by the time you can react. His hand is already on his gun, completing the tough part of the draw, the access. Now all he has left to do is the simple gross motor skill part, the ripping the gun up, shoving it towards you, and jerking the trigger. Even if he is a bozo with a stolen gun... he can do this in half to three quarters of a second. You are so close you have to assume you'll take a hit. Remember... proximity negates skill.

Even with your one second draw and lightning reflexes, there is an excellent chance his shot will go off a quarter second ahead of yours. He's an angry homicidal criminal, trying to draw a gun and shoot you as fast as he can, and his attempt to do so is already underway. That's why you're behind the curve. Dying together in the same ambulance is not victory. This (trying to draw and shoot) won't work.

Suppose we had the option of responding with a simple gross motor skill ourselves. Suppose further that ours was easier to accomplish than the opponent's. Would we now have a fighting chance to beat the draw he has already begun? Yes, absolutely. And oddly enough, that option exists.

If you are an arm's length apart and facing one another, as he goes for his gun, you go for his gun too! It is instinctive... to use your hands to ward off danger coming toward you. Let your hands do what is instinctive. Depending on how fast your opponent is your hands should interdict his gun and gun hand just as the weapon is coming out of the holster or just after it has cleared leather.

This movement will "stall the draw" or "smother the draw". You have just bought yourself time... kept him from shooting you, at leaset for the moment. Now, finish what you began. With your lower hand, firmly seize his gun and with your higher hand, grab his wrist. If your left hand is holding his wrist, pull it to your left as your right hand (holding the gun) pulls to your right. You will feel an almost effortless release as his hand separates from his gun.

Where you go from here is up to you. Run away with his gun... create distance between the two of you and draw your own gun. But the point is, you have stalled his draw and disarmed him faster than you could have drawn your own gun and shot him ... and you haven't been shot.'

Bottom line: if you are very close to your opponent, or ambushed, when you only have one hand free, drawing your gun - chambered or not - is a very dangerous idea. As Mas Ayoob has said so well, 'proximity negates skill'. Whether you are chambered or unchambered you need both hands and enough distance to shoot effectively.

1911Tuner
September 18, 2009, 07:43 PM
I think that a logical conclusion could be drawn by asking ourselves a simple question:

"Why would you not carry a defensive sidearm ready to go at an instant's notice unless you're forbidden by regulations to do so?"

Maybe another one would logically follow...

"How many members of the IDL obey that regulation to the letter when they're in a dangerous area?" Or even once they've gotten out of sight of the boss?

The thing about sudden life/death events is that nobody can predict the timing or the place or the ability to use both hands. People who are aware of this realize that the difference between surviving and dying is often measured in tenths of seconds...and that every tenth of a second spent fumbling with a weapon drops their chances of survival exponentially.

I can't speak for anyone else here...but if I was an Israeli who carried a pistol in that country...it would have a round chambered. Regulations be damned.

eJack
September 18, 2009, 07:59 PM
I'll bite. Comments in Bold.

Frankly, there are many who believe that "locked and loaded" is dangerous, especially when drawing your gun when your opponent is within arm's length is foolish.

Many people believe in things that are not so. Foolishness should be judged by results not beliefs. One important result is that a chambered firearm will not go off during a draw unless a finger pulls the trigger.

Many experienced practioners, agree that an arm's length confrontation - the distance that is the basis of the "both hands" objection - is a matter of martial arts, not the shooting arts. The goal is evade, disarm, escape and to gain distance so that you can draw, chambered or unchambered. Mas Ayoob is one of them.

There is no difference between martial arts and shooting arts. Or rather I should say, defensive shooting is a martial art. Goals vary depending on the circumstances. There are perfectly valid ways to employ a handgun while grappling. They are a lot easier if the handgun is already chambered.

'One more time, at arms length, is the object to shoot the other guy, or is it not to get shot? Correct, it is the latter! With that in mind... and within arm's reach, let's look at a non-shooting option.

The object is to stop the threat while minimizing injury to yourself and others. Getting shot isn't always the threat. Even if the initial contact is a non shooting option, it is much easier to transition to a handgun if it is chambered.

You are facing the other person a yard away. He goes for his gun. You go for yours. You are good at this: you can react, draw from concealment, and get off a shot in 1.5 seconds. Hell, let's say you're extremely good... and can do this in a second, flat.

[SNIP]

If you are an arm's length apart and facing one another, as he goes for his gun, you go for his gun too! It is instinctive... to use your hands to ward off danger coming toward you. Let your hands do what is instinctive. Depending on how fast your opponent is your hands should interdict his gun and gun hand just as the weapon is coming out of the holster or just after it has cleared leather.

In this type of scenario I would agree that pouncing on the other guys gun will be more effective than standing there like a paper target and getting ventilated like one. But the moment circumstances change, there will be no time like the present to transition and as I have mentioned, your better off with a chambered gun.

This movement will "stall the draw" or "smother the draw". You have just bought yourself time... kept him from shooting you, at leaset for the moment. Now, finish what you began. With your lower hand, firmly seize his gun and with your higher hand, grab his wrist. If your left hand is holding his wrist, pull it to your left as your right hand (holding the gun) pulls to your right. You will feel an almost effortless release as his hand separates from his gun.

Good luck disarming somebody who knows how to retain. Every time I've done force on force, the disarms turns into a deadlock and its a coin toss who wins. Unless that is, one person can get to a separate gun (helps if it is chambered) and end it.

Where you go from here is up to you. Run away with his gun... create distance between the two of you and draw your own gun. But the point is, you have stalled his draw and disarmed him faster than you could have drawn your own gun and shot him ... and you haven't been shot.'

Bottom line: if you are very close to your opponent, or ambushed, when you only have one hand free, drawing your gun - chambered or not - is a very dangerous idea. As Mas Ayoob has said so well, 'proximity negates skill'. Whether you are chambered or unchambered you need both hands and enough distance to shoot effectively.

With the one exception of trying to out draw an attacker who already is drawing a gun, I would have to disagree. And even in that one situation, circumstances allowing, pouncing with one hand and shooting from near contact with the other is a real quick way to end the fight. And having the handgun chambered will help. Virtually any other life threatening assault would be a great time to defend with one hand and offend with the other. Again, a chambered handgun works well for this. As for drawing an chambered handgun at close proximity, I still fail to see the danger. An unloaded handgun is still a potent weapon if you know what your doing. I for one would rather have an unloaded gun in hand than fend off an attacker empty handed.

Frank Ettin
September 18, 2009, 08:03 PM
...Many experienced practioners, agree that an arm's length confrontation - the distance that is the basis of the "both hands" objection...You're straying off topic here, but I'm curious --

[1] Exactly which "experienced practioners (sic)" agree on that? Would you care to name them?

[2] What makes you think that distance is the basis of the "both hands" objection? In fact, you can not predict how an emergency will arise, and there are any number of reasons why you might not have both hands available if it does -- avoiding an obstacle or moving someone to safety are just two.

The goal is evade, disarm, escape and to gain distance so that you can draw, .... Mas Ayoob is one of them.Yes the goal is to gain distance, but Mas does not recommend carrying without a round in the chamber. As Mas has written: "...A man not confident enough in his ability to carry a chamber-loaded semiautomatic pistol is better served with a revolver. Operating the slide before firing is a complex psycho-motor skill of the kind that does not survive stress well, and it's normally a two-handed operation...."(http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BTT/is_167_28/ai_110457294/ )

...you need both hands ... to shoot effectively.... Now that's not true at all, at least if one trains and practices. In Mas' LFI-I class we do a number of drills shooting strong hand only and weak hand only. Virtually all good classes include both strong hand and weak hand shooting. IPSC and IDPA competition also includes strong hand only and weal hand only shooting. It's an important skill to have. In fact there's an excellent chance that if you do need to use your gun in self defense, you will be shooting one handed.

As Mas pointed out: "...The history of gunfighting shows us at least half the time, we will fire our handgun one-handed when attacked by surprise. The gun must be in a condition that allows one-handed operation...." (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BTT/is_167_28/ai_110457294/ )

That said, I do have to say that I'd not be inclined to use a SmartCarry type contrivance. I prefer a holster. But if I did find a use for such a thing, I'd go along with dkk73 and use one of my H&K P7M8s (with a round in the chamber) or my Smith & Wesson 442.

eJack
September 18, 2009, 08:06 PM
I think that a logical conclusion could be drawn by asking ourselves a simple question:

"Why would you not carry a defensive sidearm ready to go at an instant's notice unless you're forbidden by regulations to do so?"

Maybe another one would logically follow...

"How many members of the IDL obey that regulation to the letter when they're in a dangerous area?" Or even once they've gotten out of sight of the boss?

The thing about sudden life/death events is that nobody can predict the timing or the place or the ability to use both hands. People who are aware of this realize that the difference between surviving and dying is often measured in tenths of seconds...and that every tenth of a second spent fumbling with a weapon drops their chances of survival exponentially.

I can't speak for anyone else here...but if I was an Israeli who carried a pistol in that country...it would have a round chambered. Regulations be damned.

I'm with you on this one. I'll never understand the relevance of the Israeli infantry to urban self defense. If I was riding in a personnel transport with 15 fellow soldiers, I'd be fine with being unchambered. If I was in a fire fight at moderate rifle distances, I'd still be fine with my sidearm being unchambered. But there's no dice I'd be going house to house unchambered and I doubt the Israeli's would either. Even if they do, since when did Israeli infantry become the standard to follow?

Evela
September 18, 2009, 10:43 PM
You all bit.

Great objections to my last post, one and all of you "draw at arm's length" advocates. Except you weren't objecting to me at all. The entirety of my post was straight from Mas Ayoob, who obviously supports his own position.

You've been had, and had good. It was great fun. BTW, Ayoob's position is right on the money, and it is especially true for the inexperienced and common CCW carrier.

That Ayoob - a highly experienced and well trained LE professional - chooses to carry hot is not at all surprising. Trained professionals are paid, equipped and trained to take extreme risks that are not appropriate for the ordinary gunowner. Personally, I think both approaches are perfectly valid for different reasons. At the same time he prefers the Israeli rack, and believes strongly that arm's length combat is not the time to draw any gun - unchambered or not.

And his arm's length perspective fits quite well with the Israeli system.

Unfortunately, none of you seem to be skilled practitioners of the Israeli system and accordingly are not the best resources for understanding it. I certainly don't reject those who choose to carry hot and take additional risks to gain what I believe represents a marginal but honestly perceived value to them.

Trust me, the millions of users - including me - who have been trained and use the Israeli system interpret the same situations from a very different perspective that in their opinion provides a higher value. It is not my objective to change your mind, but more to make clear to those who are still deciding that both methods are worthy of consideration.

For those who care, the system is well regarded by a significant number of Glocktalkers, possibly related to the Glock itself: possibly the perfect choice for the method, and the weapon of choice for it's many advocates.

Personally, I find "locked and loaded" rather silly and dangerous. I feel no need to risk my own life by trying to draw hot in a hand-to-hand situation. I prefer to follow Ayoobs recommendations in that case. But if you don't, that is certainly your decision. Regardless, I still think you are all fine gentlemen, despite your sometimes childish remarks and hope that you can join me in calm, respectful and open-minded discussion.

mokin
September 18, 2009, 11:07 PM
I've used Smartcarry for at least two years now. It did take some getting used to but I've long been comfortable with it. I also carry with one in the pipe.

Boba Fett
September 18, 2009, 11:17 PM
Posted by Evela
Personally, I find "locked and loaded" rather silly and dangerous. I feel no need to risk my own life by trying to draw hot in a hand-to-hand situation. I prefer to follow Ayoobs recommendations in that case.

Mall Ninja Evela yet again demonstrates his selective "following" of Ayoob.

Let's see...I think this is probably the 8th or 9th time I've posted this in response to your claims Mr. Mall Ninja Evela. But I guess it'll take at least a 10th. So for everyone's benefit and to once again prove you are simply a Mall Ninja, I give you Mr. Massad Ayoob:


http://www.backwoodshome.com/articles2/ayoob031207.html
Massad Ayoob:
You don’t want to carry a round in the chamber of any semi-automatic pistol that doesn’t have a firing pin lock. It’s not drop-safe. This includes the majority of .22 caliber semiautomatic pistols out there. Carry them with a full magazine and empty chamber, and activate the slide to chamber a round when it comes time to shoot. If that sounds too slow for self-defense, I agree with you. Do what I did and what every modern police department does for its troops, and equip yourself with a pistol that is drop-safe and therefore safe to carry with a cartridge in the firing chamber.


http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m.../ai_110457294/
Massad Ayoob:
A man not confident enough in his ability to carry a chamber-loaded semiautomatic pistol is better served with a revolver. Operating the slide before firing is a complex psycho-motor skill of the kind that does not survive stress well, and it's normally a two-handed operation. The history of gunfighting shows us at least half the time, we will fire our handgun one-handed when attacked by surprise. The gun must be in a condition that allows one-handed operation.


Posted by Evela
Personally, I find "locked and loaded" rather silly and dangerous.

So I guess you find Mr. Ayoob "silly and dangerous." Why on earth would you follow anything he says if you him so "silly and dangerous?"

Frank Ettin
September 18, 2009, 11:27 PM
...Great objections to my last post, one and all of you "draw at arm's length" advocates. Except you weren't objecting to me at all. The entirety of my post was straight from Mas Ayoob,....Then provide a citation. We've seen how you distort and mis-characterize Mas' teachings.

Have you ever met Massad Ayoob? Have you ever taken one of his classes? Last October in his LFI-I class, he taught us to carry with a round chambered.

In any case, you are again mixing apples and oranges. Trying to gain distance and avoiding or quickly breaking off a close encounter is one thing. Carrying the gun in such a way that it may be operated quickly and surely with one hand is another. These are completely independent issues.

...I feel no need to risk my own life by trying to draw hot in a hand-to-hand situation....Carrying with a loaded chamber is not about drawing hot to a hand-to-hand situation. It is about being able to deploy your gun if you don't have both hands free.

...I prefer to follow Ayoobs recommendations in that case...But you are not following Mas' recommendations.

Massad Ayoob recommends carrying one's weapon with a round in the chamber. Specifically he wrote: "...A man not confident enough in his ability to carry a chamber-loaded semiautomatic pistol is better served with a revolver. Operating the slide before firing is a complex psycho-motor skill of the kind that does not survive stress well, and it's normally a two-handed operation...."(http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BTT/is_167_28/ai_110457294/ -- emphasis added)

And he also wrote: "...The history of gunfighting shows us at least half the time, we will fire our handgun one-handed when attacked by surprise. The gun must be in a condition that allows one-handed operation...." (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BTT/is_167_28/ai_110457294/ -- emphasis added)

I certainly follow Mas' recommendations -- having taken his LFI-I class and having successfully shot his qualification course.

Evela
September 18, 2009, 11:51 PM
Sorry, coupla quickies are in order:

How many members of the IDL obey that regulation to the letter when they're in a dangerous area?" Or even once they've gotten out of sight of the boss?

Excellent point, and like anywhere else keen situational awareness (see Cooper) is important regardless of any means of carry. At a point, the gun is drawn-racked and made ready, better a bit too early than a bit too late. Until the color code changes to a more dangerous level there's no need to draw.

The thing about sudden life/death events is that nobody can predict the timing or the place or the ability to use both hands. People who are aware of this realize that the difference between surviving and dying is often measured in tenths of seconds...and that every tenth of a second spent fumbling with a weapon drops their chances of survival exponentially.

You are under the misimpression that the Israeli draw takes longer. For an inexperienced citizen - and some professionals too, under extreme stress the problem of fumbling with a weapon is much more likely with the fine motor skills affiliated with the safety (up/down, on/off, loaded or not). Racking is a relatively gross motor skill, that part of daily practice with the Israeli method, and much less likely to fail. And keep in mind is that AD's and ND's pose a far, far greater risk of sudden, immediate and unexpected death that are almost never predicted. And that is more than exponential.

Ejack, all your objections should be directed to Ayoob, as you are responding to his recommendations.

[1] Exactly which "experienced practioners (sic)" agree on that? Would you care to name them?

[2] What makes you think that distance is the basis of the "both hands" objection? In fact, you can not predict how an emergency will arise, and there are any number of reasons why you might not have both hands available if it does -- avoiding an obstacle or moving someone to safety are just two.

Mas Ayoob agrees, and the entirety of my post came from him, sorry. In the Israeli method using one hand to move or avoid an obstacle, or to protect your VIP is part of the process. Since you don't know the method, you wouldn't know that. You've also neatly avoided Ayoob's main point: that arm's length combat is not the time to draw a gun (unchambered or not).

As Mas pointed out: "...The history of gunfighting shows us at least half the time, we will fire our handgun one-handed when attacked by surprise. The gun must be in a condition that allows one-handed operation...."

One of your favorite quotes. It is well to realize that Ayoob is a top LE trainer and professional. Much of his writing is largely directed at his compatriots and at the skilled and trained practitioner. Since this quote seems to support your position you quote it. Unfortunately his own position regarding "arms length" interactions is contradictory. In this very long passage, Ayoob goes to great lengths to convince you NOT to draw, until you either disarm or get free and buy distance enough to draw and fire.

Ayoob's quote is not at all contradictory with the Israeli method. As a fully prepared and trained LE, Ayoob chooses to chamber. Other top operators choose not to. Either way, your objective remains the same - to buy distance enough to draw and fire, or draw/rack and fire. Both methods can quickly be brought to bear to allow one-handed fire, and use of the free hand for other purposes. No big deal.

...you need both hands ... to shoot effectively....

Now that's not true at all, at least if one trains and practices. In Mas' LFI-I class we do a number of drills shooting strong hand only and weak hand only. Virtually all good classes include both strong hand and weak hand shooting. IPSC and IDPA competition also includes strong hand only and weal hand only shooting. It's an important skill to have. In fact there's an excellent chance that if you do need to use your gun in self defense, you will be shooting one handed.


Selective quote out of context, no surprise when you consider that what I said was:

"Bottom line: if you are very close to your opponent, or ambushed, when you only have one hand free, drawing your gun - chambered or not - is a very dangerous idea. As Mas Ayoob has said so well, 'proximity negates skill'. Whether you are chambered or unchambered you need both hands and enough distance to shoot effectively.

It is clear that my entire passage - in context - has to do Ayoob's positions (a) that at arm's length, drawing one handed (your recommendation) is ill advised, and (b) that proximity negates skill. My point that "you need both hand and enough distance to shoot effectively" is accurate, although admittedly poorly worded, and a candidate for misrepresentation.

Once you gain Ayoob's distance, there is nothing in the Israeli system that states precludes shooting one handed. That is also true in your system. Both methods stand ready to shoot one handed if needed, but in general two-handed shooting is more effective in both methods, in that it offers more control and accuracy, quicker acquisition, especially in fast fire.

Bottom line:

Ayoob's arm's length recommendations is pretty clear. First, don't get yourself into this situation in the first place. Second, and if you do, don't draw, and buy distance. Either way, with distance, either draw works just fine, and especially for the inexperience CCW carrier.

And again, let's keep it respectful and continue to explore.

rbernie
September 18, 2009, 11:55 PM
No - we're done here. The OP has been addressed, and I'm of no mind to allow yet another continuation of this disagreement. Y'all have been duking this out in any number of threads, and it's time to give it a rest.

If you enjoyed reading about "Smart Carry and One In The Pipe Poll Thread" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!