Does a +1 pocket pistol violate the 4 rules?

[Mainsail]

...you can't "show it" to your friend if he didn't personally confirm it was unloaded. The other person has no way of knowing if it's unloaded or not, hence the "always" rule.

If you're showing your friend a loaded gun you have no business owning any firearm. You see? Your so called rule is a lie. You freely admit to showing your friend a loaded gun, so the rule is a lie to you. If, as you say, all guns are always loaded, then why on earth would you hand a loaded gun to your friend?!?!

 

[xXxplosive]

Always carry +1 but in your pocket make sure it's not pointed at the twins.....

 

[ljnowell]

No, the first rule is there not just for your benefit, but for the benefit of people around you. So you can't "show it" to your friend if he didn't personally confirm it was unloaded. The other person has no way of knowing if it's unloaded or not, hence the "always" rule.

Just let him go. He is posting just to argue and see his own words. Read the other thread titled Rule #1, same thing there.

 

[JEB]

i really dont see it as being any different than any other iwb or owb holster

 

[JohnKSa]

It does not violate the safety rules IF it is in a holster that protects the trigger and prevents it from being operated.

If it is not in a holster that covers and protects the trigger then it shouldn't be pointed at anything you don't want to destroy whether the pistol is in your pocket or not.

 

[azyogi]

When I learned the 'RULES' there were five. The fifth being, Safety's aren't, see rule one. This one took more explaining than all the rest, for if safety's aren't safe, why the name? My mentor, beat into me by dent of the socratic method, the fact that only safe handling made a gun safe, not some mechina. I guess this rule got dropped due to it's complexity to explain, or maybe the passing of that method of instruction.

 

[jakemccoy]

I was going to post my thoughts, but the poll results pretty much answer the question. The people who answered yes were probably joking around or just want to be contrarians. The people who answered maybe are probably thinking too hard.

 

[Cosmoline]

Cooper's rules only apply if you're handling the firearm folks. Otherwise you'd never be able to even store the things. Even then they don't really apply to teardowns, cleanings, inspections, etc. or you'd never be able to inspect a barrel's crown. Absolutes without a common sense interpretation become absurdities.

You'd need to come up with a different set of rules for holstering and storage. These matters were not Cooper's concern when he came up with the four rules. Whether or not a trigger-blocking holster is required for carry depends greatly on the type of firearm in question. For a single action semi with one in the tube I'd say yeah. For a double action revolver? Not really.

 

[usp9]

Does a +1 pocket pistol violate the 4 rules?

A "maybe" vote. Real life is a compromise.

 

[Warhawk83]

Not for me,there is no way in hell my LCP will fire itself while in my pocket. I don't keep anything in the pocket that would even touch the 97 pound pull trigger either.

 

[cskny]

When I learned the 'RULES' there were five. The fifth being, Safety's aren't, see rule one. This one took more explaining than all the rest, for if safety's aren't safe, why the name? My mentor, beat into me by dent of the socratic method, the fact that only safe handling made a gun safe, not some mechina. I guess this rule got dropped due to it's complexity to explain, or maybe the passing of that method of instruction.



No, that one isn't gone! We had it recently in a class too.