Safe revolver carry?


PDA






HKGuns
August 25, 2012, 10:41 PM
Looking for input on best practice for revolver carry.... Should you always carry a revolver with the hammer over an empty cylinder? Or, does it depend on the revolver? Looking for some sage knowledge on this topic.

I figured this would have been covered previously, but my search turned up squat.

Thanks for your input.

If you enjoyed reading about "Safe revolver carry?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
JERRY
August 25, 2012, 10:43 PM
Wheres the tongue in cheek smilie when you need one?

HKGuns
August 25, 2012, 10:45 PM
Huh? Not following you Jerry. It sounds like you think I am not serious, I am a former auto only lifetime shooter who only recently discovered revolvers. It really is a serious question, perhaps stupid, but serious. I can't control my revolver ignorance.

JERRY
August 25, 2012, 10:47 PM
O.k., i will play along....

What exact revolver are you speaking about?

HKGuns
August 25, 2012, 10:50 PM
I currently own only three revolvers. Two model 29's and a model 10. But if there are exceptions I'd like to understand those and the reasoning as well.

bikemutt
August 25, 2012, 10:52 PM
On my deep conceal revolvers that are pocket holstered I tend to leave the next chamber up to bat empty. The first trigger squeeze will be a dud, deliberate or otherwise.

JERRY
August 25, 2012, 10:52 PM
Carry them all fully loaded as in a round in every chamber.

Bubba613
August 25, 2012, 10:57 PM
Carry them all fully loaded as in a round in every chamber.
Uh yeah.
No revolver made in the last 100 years probably will go off unless you pull the trigger. I carry two revolvers, both fully loaded.

HKGuns
August 25, 2012, 10:59 PM
Great. Pretty simple then, but wanted to ask and not assume anything. Thanks for the fast decisive, responses. Sorry if it was a completely ignorant question.

Buford57
August 25, 2012, 11:04 PM
All of the models you mentioned are safe to carry with all chambers loaded.

That empty chamber routine is a holdover from the Colt single action. The only reason for an empty chamber under the hammer is to prevent a blow to the hammer from causing an accidental discharge. Modern double action revolvers such as yours and even modern single actions have internal safety features to prevent this.

If you don't know, you have to ask. No problem with that.

R.W.Dale
August 25, 2012, 11:06 PM
I think rather than explaining the technology I think it would be best if you demonstrated to yourself how a revolver safety works.

UNLOAD THE GUN

Now pull the trigger to the rear releasing the hammer AND HOLD THE TRIGGER

Look between the rear of the cyl between it and the frame. You should be able to see the firing pin where it would have came through the breachface to strike the primer.

Now looking at the firing pin release the trigger slightly.

Note the firing pin disappeared.


Now do the same exercise only this time. Just pull the hammer back 3/4 of the way and let it go without using the trigger. You should never see the firing pin.

Any "modern" DA revolver will have some form of this passive safety. I carry mine fully stoked

tomrkba
August 25, 2012, 11:15 PM
A "hammer block" is a mechanical device that prevents the firing pin from contacting the primer. If your gun has such a device, then you may carry the gun fully loaded. I believe all models of the S&W 29 and S&W 10 have a hammer block. You can call S&W with the serial numbers and ask a technician.

Dlowe167
August 25, 2012, 11:20 PM
I carried a charter arms .44 special bulldog pug for awhile. New ones u dont have to worry about,if finger out of trigger. On snub noses like that. Only problem I could see having in the hammer may catch when pulled out. Id suggest bobbing the hammer. Other than that great idea!

HKGuns
August 25, 2012, 11:24 PM
Thanks even more! I learned something tonight. I did as you suggested RW and you can see the hammer move back as you release the trigger. It is hard to see but you can just barely see the firing pin backing out as well. Thanks a bunch.

R.W.Dale
August 25, 2012, 11:36 PM
Thanks even more! I learned something tonight. I did as you suggested RW and you can see the hammer move back as you release the trigger. It is hard to see but you can just barely see the firing pin backing out as well. Thanks a bunch.

I find that understanding how the safety works goes a long way towards building confidence

lloveless
August 25, 2012, 11:41 PM
If your gun has a hammer, to prevent snagging of the hammer when drawing from concealment merely place your thumb over the hammer while drawing for a snag free draw. No need to cut the hammer off.
ll

Guillermo
August 25, 2012, 11:57 PM
HK

any quality modern revolver (modern defined as post WWII) could have someone use a mallet, pounding on the hammer, and it not go off. The trigger has to be pulled.

That is why when you are uncocking a revolver, as soon as the hammer releases, you let the trigger go forward.

That is why you keep a thumb on the hammer when you are holstering (a shirttail wadded in the trigger can push it back. Holding the hammer prevents that)

Thumb on the hammer when drawing from a pocket stops snagging.

bikemutt
August 26, 2012, 12:20 AM
"Thumb on the hammer when drawing from a pocket stops snagging"
True, when there is an exposed hammer.

X-Rap
August 26, 2012, 12:27 AM
any quality modern revolver (modern defined as post WWII) could have someone use a mallet, pounding on the hammer, and it not go off. The trigger has to be pulled.



Don't count all SA revolvers in that claim.
I don't know about all the "modern" SA revolvers but there are quite a few Rugers and Colts out there that might kill you if dropped right. I'm guessing that many of their clones are the same.

One_Jackal
August 26, 2012, 02:03 AM
I think the Op is referring to older single action revolvers. We have moved forward....

Guillermo
August 26, 2012, 02:30 AM
Don't count all SA revolvers in that claim

X-rap is right
being a double action guy I assumed we were talking double actions.

that and the fact that he said he owned "Two model 29's and a model 10" so I thought he was talking about those.

Single actions are NOT that which I was speaking of.

JERRY
August 26, 2012, 03:27 AM
the OP mentioned two model 29s and model 10. i think he means S&W revolvers...not S/A guns...

David E
August 26, 2012, 03:34 AM
Should you always carry a revolver with the hammer over an empty cylinder?

A cylinder is not a chamber, a chamber is not a cylinder. Using proper terms avoids confusion.

Or, does it depend on the revolver?

Yes, as has been mentioned about old design single action revolvers, but the guns you cited are safe to carry fully loaded if they are in good working condition.

HKGuns
August 26, 2012, 10:46 AM
A cylinder is not a chamber, a chamber is not a cylinder. Using proper terms avoids confusion.

Thanks for your contribution. I think everyone understood the question except you. Don't post if that is the only value you can add.

Guillermo
August 26, 2012, 10:54 AM
Don't post if that is the only value you can add
the guns you cited are safe to carry fully loaded if they are in good working condition.

DavidE understood quite well and answered the question as well as offered more.

And, of course, he is right. (he makes a habit of that)

BBQLS1
August 26, 2012, 11:21 AM
Don't count all SA revolvers in that claim.
I don't know about all the "modern" SA revolvers but there are quite a few Rugers and Colts out there that might kill you if dropped right. I'm guessing that many of their clones are the same.

Yep. Most of the newer ones do have a transfer bar safety and are fine to carry. The three screw models do not though.

True replicas of "old west" style guns may not have one. They aren't safe to carry with the hammer over a loaded chamber.

Most new guns are perfectly safe. It's best to understand your gun though.


BTW, I thought the first few responses were not very "high road." I hold my tongue here, you should too. :D Besides, nothing wrong with seeking knowledge on what you don't understand.

Guillermo
August 26, 2012, 11:25 AM
I hold my tongue here, you should too

I am NOT holding your tongue!!!

:neener:

X-Rap
August 26, 2012, 12:42 PM
Safe Revolver Carry? That was the question

A newb asked in the OP, whats to say another newb with a 3 screw or a SA Colt he just inherited from gramps reads all these replies and stuffs his old SA full and it falls out of his truck and he's gut shot.
There really is no shortage of these guns and I'll bet some into the cowboy action could come up with a pretty long list of copies that are the same.
Words mean things and as I read through posts with such definitive answers about revolvers I thought it best to at least clarify so that someone didn't take the wrong message from the info already posted.

Guillermo
August 26, 2012, 12:48 PM
I thought it best to at least clarify so that someone didn't take the wrong message from the info already posted.

you are right and that is why I clarified

CraigC
August 26, 2012, 12:55 PM
I have to agree with the nitpickers, even though the OP referenced DA's, you can't just say "No revolver made in the last 100 years probably will go off unless you pull the trigger." because that statement doesn't specify DA's, nor does it preclude SA's. I wouldn't even say "most" modern SA's were safe to carry with all six chambers loaded. Because there are more makers producing traditional single action revolvers than those with transfer bars. You have guns from Colt, USFA, Doug Turnbull, STI, Great Western, Uberti, Cimarron, Taylor's, Dixie Gun Works, EMF, Pietta (several brands), Texas Longhorn Arms and 20yrs of Ruger production without transfer bars. All of which amounts to millions of guns and all of which were made in the last 60yrs.


I think everyone understood the question except you. Don't post if that is the only value you can add.
I thank David E for correcting the terminology. Using proper terms is important. As stated, it avoids confusion and few things make you look more like a neophyte than calling a chamber "cylinder". But then again, "you know what I mean" is rarely good enough for me. Because while I may know what you mean, I am not the only one reading it. I'm sure quite a few think I'm an uncompromising A-hole because I'm a stickler for the details.

David E
August 26, 2012, 12:56 PM
Thanks for your contribution. I think everyone understood the question except you. Don't post if that is the only value you can add.

It wasn't the only value I added, and it IS information worth knowing.

Look, using proper terms avoids confusion......AND it keeps the person asking the question from coming across as an idiot, which is mainly why I posted that.

If someone asks; "I think one of my cylinders is bad, how can I check?"

Does he have a convertible revolver that comes with two cylinders........or did he mean he has a bad "chamber?"

Before it's determined to be the former, HKGuns and a host of other people would tell him how to check for a bad chamber.

Proper terms avoid confusion.

Guillermo
August 26, 2012, 01:01 PM
"No revolver made in the last 100 years probably will go off unless you pull the trigger."

okay okay

I clarified!!!

put the buggy whip down, my butt already stings!!!

David E
August 26, 2012, 01:05 PM
Hey, I thought the word "probably" saved you!

And you're right: no properly working gun made in the last 100 years probably (I'll even say likely) won't go off with all chambers loaded.....unless and until it's abused, mishandled or in a fire.

Guillermo
August 26, 2012, 01:07 PM
actually my statement was wrong as it was "any quality modern revolver (modern defined as post WWII) could have someone use a mallet, pounding on the hammer, and it not go off. The trigger has to be pulled."

Had I added "double action" my posterior would be unmolested

CraigC
August 26, 2012, 01:16 PM
I'm not touching that one!

Guillermo
August 26, 2012, 01:23 PM
i'm not touching that one!

thank you!!!

I have taken enough abuse

:what:

jeepnik
August 26, 2012, 05:46 PM
Uh yeah.
No revolver made in the last 100 years probably will go off unless you pull the trigger. I carry two revolvers, both fully loaded.
Not true. They are still making Peacemaker style revolvers that can be dropped on the hammer and fire if a round is under the hammer. And, some older, but certainly less than 100 years old, revolvers with the firing pin attached to the hammer can fire if dropped hard enough on the hammer.

But, most (there are always exceptions) double action revolvers are safe to carry fully loaded, as as more modern designed single actions such as the new model Rugers.

Old Fuff
August 26, 2012, 09:11 PM
Pity the poor neophytes who donít fully all of the technical terms and words applied to a certain kind of firearm. The situation is not helped when the various manufacturers assign different names to the same part or parts. Confusion is permitted, and if the Old Fuff understands the question he can probably answer it Ė hopefully in plain English.

Most of the popular revolvers made since the beginning of the 20th century (1900) are hand-ejectors, which mean that to load or unload the cylinder you unlatch it and swing it to the left. Cartridges or fired cases are extracted or ejected by manually pushing on a rod.

Colt: Hand-ejector models have had a positive hammer block that prevents unintentional discharges since 1908, and are safe to carry fully loaded.

Smith & Wesson: Had less then positive hammer blocks since the 1920ís, but a positive one was introduced in 1945. All hand-ejectors that have model numbers also have a positive hammer block, with the exception of some models that have an enclosed hammer and are double-action-only (DAO). Why? Because they safe without it. All can be carried fully loaded.

Ruger: All hand-ejector revolvers have a transfer-bar safety, and can be carried fully loaded.

Taurus: All post-war revolvers have either a hammer block safety or a transfer bar safety, and can be carried fully loaded.

Charter Arms: All hand-ejector revolvers have a transfer-bar safety, and can be carried fully loaded.

Most but not all obscure makes and models of hand-ejector revolvers have some form of safety that allows them to be carried fully loaded. If you encounter one where you are not sure, or if it is something other then a hand-ejector, open a thread and itís likely an answer will be forthcoming.

Most, if not all, of the manufacturers listed above, as well as some others, will on request download an ownerís manual for their current or recent products. These are free, and usually in .PDF format. When this service is available I urge everyone to take advantage of it if they donít have a manual.

Gladius
August 26, 2012, 10:13 PM
A friend of mine carried his S&W M25-5 not with an empty chamber under the hammer, but with the next indexed chamber empty. I thought it odd, but it did save his bacon one time when some moron decided to "scare" my friend, using his own gun (unauthorized by my friend, of course. Lessons were learned, needless to say...). :eek:

Swing
August 26, 2012, 10:16 PM
A "hammer block" is a mechanical device that prevents the firing pin from contacting the primer. If your gun has such a device, then you may carry the gun fully loaded.

This. Its been around a while. On those wheelguns that have them, no worries about carrying fully loaded. Just keep your finger off the trigger until when ready to fire.

HKGuns
August 26, 2012, 10:19 PM
Fluff, you are too kind to post all of that great information. Thanks very much.

Guillermo
August 26, 2012, 10:31 PM
Fluff, you are too kind to post all of that great information.

I agree Fluffy

You are amazing

:neener:

doc2rn
August 26, 2012, 10:45 PM
Some people report that carrying one of the old spur on the hammer S&W can cause an AD if you drop/fall on it. The ones like Ruger GP revos on the other hand have a safety transfer bar that comes up to block unwanted hammer strike. So it really does depend on which revo your talking about.
Me I carry all 6 in my mod 10 in a Galco high rise open top holster and have never had a single problem with it.
As always listen to the sage advice of Old Fuff, the man knows his stuff!

David E
August 26, 2012, 11:18 PM
some moron decided to "scare" my friend, using (my friends) own gun. Lessons were learned, needless to say... :eek:

I hope one of the lessons learned was not to have idiotic morons for friends...

Guillermo
August 26, 2012, 11:27 PM
some moron decided to "scare" my friend

Reminds me of the old joke about the mom telling her kid that her friends taught her to swim by bringing her to the middle of a lake and tossed her in the lake

"mom...they were not trying to teach u to swim"

Driftwood Johnson
August 27, 2012, 04:19 PM
Howdy

It's time for a few photographs.

Here is a photo of the parts from a Second Generation Single Action Army, made in 1973. The parts have not changed much since the Single Action Army was first introduced in 1873, and current production is the same. The photo is a little bit fuzzy, but you can clearly see the various cocking notches cut into the hammer. One arrow is pointing to the tip of the trigger, usually called the Sear. The other arrow is pointing to what is sometimes called the 'safety cock' notch on the hammer. In theory, the idea is that when the hammer is pulled back about 1/8", the tip of the sear will lock itself in the 'safety position' with the firing pin pulled back about 1/8" from any primer that happens to be under it. There is a small overhanging lip on the 'safety cock' notch, that traps the sear, so the trigger cannot be pulled when the hammer is cocked to the 'safety cock' position. In theory.

In actual practice, the sear is very thin, and it does not take much of a blow to shatter it. Or to break off the overhanging lip on the 'safety cock' notch. It has been demonstrated over and over again that a strong blow to the hammer, such as dropping the gun onto the hammer on a hard surface, or accidentally dropping a stirrup onto the hammer of a holstered Colt WILL break off this flimsy safety feature and the gun WILL fire if a live cartridge is under the hammer. It has happened many, many times.

Somebody wanted a Cowboy Action Shooter to list guns that are currently made this way. I can tell you with absolute authority that ALL the SAA clones currently made by Uberti and Pietta in Italy share this same design. They all will fire if dropped on the hammer. There is no transfer bar in any of them. There was one model made by Beretta that did have a transfer bar, but it is no longer in production. And the Colt Cowboy also had a transfer bar, but it is no longer in production either. Some of these guns are imported with a special cylinder pin that has an extra cut out on it, so that the pin can be locked backwards, preventing the hammer from falling all the way. Most of us throw that pin away and replace it with a traditional pin that only has one cut out for the transverse latch. Once the pin has been replaced, these guns will fire just like any other revolver made to the Colt design if dropped on the hammer.

For this reason, we have an ironclad rule in Cowboy Action Shooting. ALL revolvers are only loaded with five rounds, with an empty chamber under the hammer. ALL revolvers, even modern Rugers with a Transfer Bar, just to keep things consistent.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v495/Driftwood_Johnson/colts/Interior%20Parts%202nd%20Gen%20Colt/interiorpartswitharrows.jpg



Historically, what happened was revolver manufacturers realized the shortcomings of the old Single Action designs, so around the turn of the Century they started producing revolvers that could be safely carried fully loaded. Most of them employed some sort of rebounding hammer, not a hammer block. Iver Johnson even had an advertising slogan, 'Hammer the Hammer' illustrating a carpenter's hammer striking the hammer of one of their revolvers to demonstrate how safe they were.

Let's jump ahead a bit to Ruger. Early Ruger revolvers were very similar inside to the Colt design. Even though they employed coil springs instead of leaf springs, they still had the unsafe 'safety cock' notch on their hammers. And they were just as unsafe as the old Colts when fully loaded with six rounds. So in the mid 1970s Ruger completely redesigned their single action revolver line to employ a transfer bar. A transfer bar is the exact opposite of a hammer block. If the transfer bar is not in place, the hammer cannot reach the firing pin to strike it. When the hammer is cocked AND the trigger is pulled back, the transfer bar rises to a position where it will be struck by the hammer, and then transfer the hammer blow to the firing pin, discharging the revolver. But normally, the trigger return spring pulls the transfer bar down out of position so if the gun is dropped on the hammer, nothing will happen, other than marring the finish of the gun. For this reason, all Ruger single action revolvers produced since the mid 1970s are completely safe to carry fully loaded with six rounds.

Sorry, I don't have a photo of a transfer bar in position, but next time I take one of my Rugers apart I will take one. In the meantime, here is a photo of a Three Screw Ruger. If it has three screw heads on the side of the frame, it is NOT safe to load with six rounds. ALWAYS only load it with five rounds, and keep an empty chamber under the hammer.


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v495/Driftwood_Johnson/rugers/FlatTop44Mag04.jpg



Here is a photo of a modern Transfer Bar equipped Ruger Blackhawk. Notice there are no screws at all, just two pins. These are the guns that have the transfer bar and are safe to load with six rounds.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v495/Driftwood_Johnson/rugers/BlackhawkConvertible02.jpg



OK, let's move on to Double Action.

I can't tell you much about Colts or Rugers or Tauruses, but I can show you photos of the inside of a Smith. Modern S&W revolvers actually have two redundant safety mechanisms built in. This photo shows the at rest position of a S&W revolver with the trigger released and all the way forward. The arrow is pointing to nub at the bottom of the hammer and another nub at the top of the Rebound Slide. The Rebound Slide has a very strong coil spring inside it, and when the trigger is released, the spring pushes the slide forward which in turn resets the trigger for the next shot. But the Rebound Slide spring is so strong, that as the Slide moves forward the nub at its top wedges the nub at the bottom of the hammer back, pulling the firing pin back from any primer that may be under the hammer. S&W first employed the Rebound Slide in their Hand Ejector revolvers in 1902, and it has been used ever since.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v495/Driftwood_Johnson/smith%20and%20wesson/44%20Hand%20Ejector%204th%20Model/44handejector4thmodeltriggerforwardwitharrow.jpg



In the next photo, I am holding the trigger back, in the firing position. The Rebound Slide is all the way back, and the nub on top is clear of the hammer, allowing the revolver to fire. When I release the trigger, the Rebound Slide will return forward, pushing the trigger forward and wedging the hammer back as in the first photo. This single feature is what made the early S&W revolvers with swing out cylinders safe to carry fully loaded.




http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v495/Driftwood_Johnson/smith%20and%20wesson/44%20Hand%20Ejector%204th%20Model/44handejector4thmodeltriggerback.jpg




Here is a photo of the mechanism of a S&W revolver made in 1908. The parts are shaped slightly differently, but the concept is the same. The Rebound Slide forces the hammer back. There was no redundant hammer block in these guns, simply the rebounding hammer.


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v495/Driftwood_Johnson/smith%20and%20wesson/interior%20views%20and%20parts/38MPmechanism.jpg




But eventually S&W decided to make the guns a bit safer. so a pivoting hammer block was introduced. Here is a photo of the side plate and trigger assembly from a 38-44 Heavy Duty made in 1930. The hammer block is a piece of spring steel pinned to the side plate. There is a ramp or wedge built onto the pawl and one arrow is pointing to it. The other arrow is pointing to the bearing surface on the hammer block. As the trigger is pulled, the ramp on the pawl engages the tab on the hammer block, pivoting the block out of the way and allowing the revolver to fire.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v495/Driftwood_Johnson/smith%20and%20wesson/interior%20views%20and%20parts/triggerandsideplatewitharrows.jpg



The story is, during WWII a sailor was killed when a Victory Model revolver fell to the deck of a destroyer, discharging the revolver. Apparently even with the safety features built in, the pin that the hammer rotates on was deformed or sheared off by the blow, allowing the revolver to fire. So S&W got a directive from the War Department to fix it. They brought in their design staff and over the space of one week came up with the hammer block that has been placed in all S&W revolvers ever since.

The next photo is back to the big 44 in the earlier photos. I have placed the hammer block in position. Notice the Rebound Slide has pushed the hammer back. The Hammer Block rides on the little pin in the side of the Rebound Slide. There is an angular cut in the side plate that the Hammerr Block rides in. As the Rebound Slide pushes the trigger forward, it also causes the Hammer Black to rise up to positively block the hammer from moving forward far enough for the firing pin to strike a primer, even if the hammer pivot pin should shear off. That is the redundant safety system inside all modern S&W revolvers.



http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v495/Driftwood_Johnson/smith%20and%20wesson/interior%20views%20and%20parts/44handejector4thmodelhammerblock.jpg

That's pretty much it in a nutshell, why the old Single Action revolvers were unsafe with a live round under the hammer, what Ruger's solution was, and what one major Double Action revolver manufacturer's solution was.

Yes, the old spur trigger S&W revolvers, as well as all the Tip Ups and Top Breaks would also fire if the hammer was struck hard enough. Some did have a 'safety cock' notch on the hammer, but it could not be trusted.

HKGuns
August 29, 2012, 01:12 AM
Thanks very much for your excellent information and really nice, informative pictures Driftwood. I hope I wasn't the only one who learned something from this thread.

Soldiernurse
August 29, 2012, 02:09 AM
I own only one revolver, the other five S/A. IMO, [except for a fee off topic post] this thread is a great read.

Warp
August 29, 2012, 04:00 AM
Good thread.

A cylinder is not a chamber, a chamber is not a cylinder. Using proper terms avoids confusion.


I agree.

brnmuenchow
August 29, 2012, 11:44 AM
Kind of funny story actually, I came across a situation where I began to question carrying a revolver fully loaded or not I was carrying a .38 Spl. snub nose in a pocket holster. My family and I went to dinner one evening and my brother-in-law who knows I carry noticed that when we sat down to the table he was sitting directly across from my right leg where I keep my pistol. I guess he started thinking: "Hey! I have a pistol pointed in the direction where the family jewels are at!" So he asked very quietly if I had a pistol pointed at him, and I told him that if he did not behave this evening he would find out.:D Realizing all jokes aside it bothered him and I began to wonder if just for my own piece of mind and not making anyone feel uncomfortable sitting across from me should I carry fully loaded. I decided that since it's not a SAA and the ability for this particular revolver to simply go off are not likely, (you would have a better chance of getting kidnapped by terrorists at a national NRA convention.) that I would continue to carry but I told him that I leave the empty chamber just so he would not be so worried... and yes, I know it's a lie. The problem with not carrying fully loaded in a pocket revolver is that many are 5- shot and if you carry with a chamber empty that only leaves 4. Not only do I carry with the full five but extras in my pocket ready to go if needed. ;)

ArchAngelCD
August 30, 2012, 04:14 AM
A friend of mine carried his S&W M25-5 not with an empty chamber under the hammer, but with the next indexed chamber empty. I thought it odd, but it did save his bacon one time when some moron decided to "scare" my friend, using his own gun (unauthorized by my friend, of course. Lessons were learned, needless to say...). :eek:
Are you trying to tell us someone took your friends gun, pointed it at him and pulled the trigger to "scare him"??? You left out the part where the guy that pulled the trigger lost his life! :fire:

Please tell me he didn't really pull the trigger and if he did your friend was sure he could never do it again. (that would be the only lesson needed)

If you enjoyed reading about "Safe revolver carry?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!