Anyone carry with an empty chamber?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I agree that having a round in the chamber is faster. It's common sense. A lot of people always say "keep your finger off the trigger" and "get a good holster" and you'll be fine. Well 99.9% of those people have never been in a true life and death panic situation. Under extreeme stress, while digging under layers of clothes to get to your gun, and your eyes glued in shock to the threat at hand, everyones going to be able to keep their finger off the trigger while drawing? I highly doubt it. I've read stories about people having to use their guns in defense situations, actually two of them in this months "combat handguns" magazine. In both of the situations, the ccw holder had ample time to draw his weapon, and rack the slide if he needed to. Anyways, I think both methods can be very effective, it's all about your enviroment, and how comfortable you are in your carry method.

Thanks for all the replies! This seems to be a very informitive site.


PS heres a link to a very dramatic story from another gun board. I'm posting it because I was curious if you guys felt he'd had time to rack his slide.

http://glocktalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=126319
 
An unloaded gun is about as useful as milk ducts on a bull. :p

"But...but...it only takes a second to rack a round into the chamber. Besides, its safer."

Yeah? Well, it only takes an average able bodied person 1.5 seconds to close 21ft. and jab a knife into your gut. How safe do you feel now?


Edited to reply to the comment:

"Under extreeme stress, while digging under layers of clothes to get to your gun, and your eyes glued in shock to the threat at hand, everyones going to be able to keep their finger off the trigger while drawing?" -- Weezer

First of all, if you are 'digging under layers of clothes to get to your gun' then you really haven't given your carry method enough thought, have you?

The old adage "Perfect practice makes perfect.' applies here. People who practice religiously should be able to draw from concealment and place two rounds into the a-zone of their target in two seconds or less. They should also be able to reholster without looking or accidentally shooting themselves during the process.

It really depends on how serious a person is about carrying a gun. Its a huge responsibility that shouldn't be taken lightly.

If you do not practice, you should.
 
I don't carry, never have, but when my FL permit arrives and I'm able to carry in PA I won't keep one in the chamber. I say do whatever you're comfortable with.
Personally, I train a lot and will be ready if the horror ever presents itself - well, it actually did twice. I know deep to my core that I'll have the presence of mind to rack a slide and end a deadly threat before it knows what happened. I just don't think that I'll feel comfortable with one in the pipe during all types of activities. Who knows - maybe time and experience will change my mind.
 
Speed aside, to fight sometimes you need your off hand or you need retention position. Condition Three makes neither possible.
 
I think we need to keep this debate in perspective. Concealed carry is only a means to an end, namely preparedness, or the ability to respond to a threat. Imagine a "preparedness scale," where "100" is a Navy Seal on patrol and "0" is my 70-something mother at church. Moving from Condition Three to Condition One might move you up 2 or 3 points on the overall scale, but it also probably, in my opinion, increases the odds of a mistake. Other factors, such as situational awareness, physical condition, training, behavior, judgment, etc., will make a much, much bigger difference.

Now, I normally like to get every last percentage point on my side, but in the end we all have to decide what we're comfortable with and what tradeoffs we're willing to make. Heck, sometimes I even get my mail without putting on a flak jacket first. :)
 
It might be relevant to point out that "Condition 3" carry is the preferred mode of carry in Israel, where the threat level is relatively high.

The Israelis (including civilians, police and military) have extensively proven this technique not on the range, but in battle. Sure preferences may vary, but to say condition 3 carry is always a bad idea is to deny the fact that it's been very, very effective for a pretty sizeable sample group.
Click to expand...

In battle? Know how often sidearms are used in battle?

Leibster, Isrealis carry their primary weapon in Con1. Unless you're a master of concealment, your primary is a handgun.

*Con3 carry works? I promise you, if someone is sawing on you with a Kbar you'll wish you had a round chambered.*

Col. Cooper's color codes notwithstanding, the first you'll know of your attacker is when he's already on you.

If it makes you more comfortable, though...well, that's hard to argue with.
 
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It might be relevant to point out that "Condition 3" carry is the preferred mode of carry in Israel, where the threat level is relatively high.

The Israelis (including civilians, police and military) have extensively proven this technique not on the range, but in battle. Sure preferences may vary, but to say condition 3 carry is always a bad idea is to deny the fact that it's been very, very effective for a pretty sizeable sample group.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



In battle? Know how often sidearms are used in battle?

Leibster, Isrealis carry their primary weapon in Con1. Unless you're a master of concealment, your primary is a handgun.

*Con3 carry works? I promise you, if someone is sawing on you with a Kbar you'll wish you had a round chambered.*

Col. Cooper's color codes notwithstanding, the first you'll know of your attacker is when he's already on you.

If it makes you more comfortable, though...well, that's hard to argue with.
Click to expand...

Thumper,

By "battle" I meant any confrontation involving lethal force, be it by civilians, police or military.

It's remarkable to me that you think there is only one best way of doing things. Condition 3 does work. It's been proven in hundreds upon hundreds of actual encounters, and it's simply not possible to state categorically that it is inferior to Condition 1.

As for wishing I had a round chambered if someone's sawing on me with a KBar, maybe, maybe not. I do know a friend of mine who pushed a terrorist with a hatchet away from him, drew, chambered and fired and lived unharmed to tell about it.

--Leibster
 
Last edited:
Condition 3 does work. It's been proven in hundreds upon hundreds of actual encounters, and it's simply not possible to state categorically that it is inferior to Condition 1.
Click to expand...

Got any links or references? i'd be interested in the proof as i have a neighbor who carries in 3.
 
Leibster,
You offer no data to back your claims, other than "the Israelis do it". Yet you addressed me, because I didn't like that carry method. :rolleyes:

I really don't care how the Israelis carry, or how you carry, if you even can carry living in Los Angeles.
I carry a gun professionally and it will always have a round chambered, because for me it is not a debate for entertainment, it is about my day to day survival.

Empty chamber is a bad idea, if you are not competent enough with a weapon to carry it with a round chambered, then you shouldn't be carrying a firearm.
It is a valid carry method for people who can't be trusted to carry with a round chambered. ;)

Oh, BTW. Most militarys consider the 9mm an adequate defensive round, but we all know better now don't we. ;)
 
Last edited:
Okay, you asked for data, so below is a very small sampling. I’m sure I could find more, but my time is limited.

As far as your swipe at me not carrying, you’re right. Here in California, permits are scarce. But I lived in Israel for some years, and I HAVE carried in condition 3 in some pretty tense areas, like: the Gaza Strip, Ramallah, Nablus, and other West Bank cities, the Muslim Quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem, and lots of other interesting places. I’ve done this both in uniform and as a private citizen, and I’ve felt adequately protected.

Again, I’m not implying in any way that you change your carry method. If it works for you, stick with it. I’m simply baffled by your oversimplification of fighting. I’m sure you’d agree that fighting is a fairly complex topic, and just because you are confident that something works well for you, doesn’t mean that there aren’t other highly effective techniques that you choose not to employ. Your assertion that “Empty chamber is a bad idea, if you are not competent enough with a weapon to carry it with a round chambered, then you shouldn't be carrying a firearm.â€, is simply narrow-minded.

http://www.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca/~ab133/Archives/Digests/v02n100-199/v02n152.html
“ On April 3, 1984, three Arab terrorists trying to machine-gun a Jerusalem crowd killed only one victim before being shot down by Israeli civilians. The next day, the surviving terrorist said his group had planned to gun down other crowds of shoppers, leaving before police could arrive.â€

“ On April 6, 1994, (quoting an Associated Press release from
Jerusalem): ``A Palestinian opened fire with a submachine gun at a bus
stop near the port of Ashdod today, killing one Israeli and wounding
four before being shot to death by bystanders, officials said....''

In both these cases, the civilians were carrying in Condition 3.

And I’m sure everyone remembers that shooting at LAX airport here in Los Angeles, where a gun-wielding terrorist was killed by an Israeli El Al security guard carrying in condition 3.

Interestingly, none other than Jeff Cooper admits that while it’s not his preferred mode of carry, condition 3 is surprisingly fast and effective:

http://www.dvc.org.uk/~johnny/jeff/jeff5_13.html
Jeff Cooper's Commentaries
Previously Gunsite Gossip
Vol. 5, No. 13 December, 1997

“ I recall that when I had something of the same problem in training honor guards who stood outside the doors of important people with their pistols in Condition 3, we wiped the slide on the way between "Clear" and "Point." It worked pretty well, and surprising speed could be achieved even from a full flap military holster."

Curiously, the most noted Cocked and Locked proponent is a fan of condition 3 in his shotguns…
http://www.dvc.org.uk/~johnny/jeff/jeff3_14.html
Jeff Cooper's Commentaries
Previously Gunsite Gossip
Vol. 3, No. 14 November, 1995

" The question arises as to the proper condition of readiness for the house shotgun. I do not feel entirely sure of my ground here, having only the skimpiest number of examples to draw upon, but for my own purposes I rack a shotgun in Condition 3, with the chamber empty and the hammer down. I put one round of No. 6 low-base in the magazine, and then stuff three rounds of high-base 00 buck forward in the buttcuff and three rounds of rifled slug at the rear. I feel that if I have to get out of bed and man that shotgun I will have time to rack the action once as soon as I seize the piece. One round of No. 6 low-base should suffice for any uninvited guest, and if the action threatens to continue it is the work of a moment to select either 00 or rifled slug as circumstances may warrant."


Just my two cents.

--Leibster
 
Your data shows that someone successfully used a pistol that was in condition 3 initially. I never doubted it, but how many have suffered serious injury or death while attempting to make their weapon hot?
That doesn't show that it is a good idea, it is an inferior method.
I don't care who is a proponent of it, it is a bad idea.
I carry my shotgun hot too, Jeff Cooper has some good ideas, but that is not one of them. I am not a follower of the Col Cooper, so quoting him carries little weight with me.
I dare to think for myself after evaluating the methods available.

You seem to think that because I don't agree with you that I am not seeing the broad topic of fighting as well, as you obviously think you do. :rolleyes:
I have trained in many places and choose my methods based upon what is best for me. I have examined and discounted many methods of fighting with all kinds of weapons including firearms.
You have to eliminate the poor or inferior techniques and take what is the best.

I have trained in martial arts that are virtually useless in self defense, but are widely practiced worldwide. Yet many remained convinced that they are in a valid martial arts form.
I left them and found useful forms of fighting, since training in an inferior style, only makes you proficient in inferior techniques.

I am not willing to embrace inferior techniques, I acknowledge their existance and pity those who believe that they are viable means of self defense.
I learn from their shortcomings and advance my knowledge and ability from there.

I am not short sighted or hard headed, I simply discounted condition 3 as an inferior technique long ago and moved onto what is a superior technique, which is having my weapon loaded and ready to go.
 
I never doubted it, but how many have suffered serious injury or death while attempting to make their weapon hot?
Click to expand...

The same could be asked for condition one; how many have suffered serious injury or death due to AD from this mode of carry? The undeniable fact is, that even for most uniformed officers, they're unlikely to get into a gunfight over their careers. And the average civilian is fairly unlikely to get into a fistfight, let alone a gunfight.

Regardless, I think we have reached an impasse. I didn't realize that you not only "dare to think for yourself" and that you had all the answers to your specific tactical needs, but to everyone else's as well!

My mistake.

--Leibster
 
Leibster,
Thanks for the link but i saw no place in there where it mentioned the condition that the firearms used were in. Are you basing your statement that they were in 3 on supposition or did i miss something?
 
:uhoh: Whoa! Ease up a bit, guys! ;)

I think it gets down to what the individual feels comforable with. When I started, I just didn't feel comfortable with one in the pipe.

Later, I "saw the light" (actually, I just became more comfortable with carrying a firearm) and now carry with one in the pipe. (See my post above.)

I'd rather HAVE a gun (without one in the chamber) than no gun at all.

The one thing I think EVERYONE will agree on (watch this start a war!) is that however you carry, you should carry that way consistently and practice that method religiously. (and be damed good at it!)

It was lots of practice that convinced me that *I* don't need the added complexity of a safety. - especially when I have different weapons and differents types of safeties. Now that I have consistency (aim weapon, pull trigger) I am much faster. I do not worry about AD because I am confident that I will keep my finger out of the trigger guard now. (Wasn't so sure before.)

Take Care!

Logistar
 
Curt,

You are correct, there was no direct reference to condition 3 carry. Until very recently (very late '90s at the earliest), there was virtually no-one in Israel espousing any other form of carry. And since the condition 3 carry method is what's universally taught across the entire security apparatus (Police, military, special forces, and anyone who carries a sidearm), it's INCREDIBLY unlikely for any shooting to have occurred where the defender was carrying one in the pipe. I do know that El Al security guards carry condition 3, so the incident last year in LAX was definitely condition 3.

--Leibster
 
Gonna' put my 2-cents in here--

I am not comfortable with a Glock-- Personal pref--

I prefer a 1911 cocked and locked or a Smith revolver--

When I was required to be armed -- I would often need a small "back pocket" gun--
I used an AMT 380 with an empty chamber-- It was the smallest I could be comfortable with and conceal readily -- but didn't trust the safety--
It all depends on the gun--

With a Glock-- you either believe inthw safety system and carry it fully loaded -- or you don't--;)
 
If we're talking rifles, it depends upon the threat level. Typically, condition 3. However, there are certain specific circumstances where condition 0 is the preferred mode (loaded chamber, safety off, rifle in hand). It's contextual to the perceived threat level and the nature of the mission.

--Leibster
 
It's contextual to the perceived threat level and the nature of the mission.
Click to expand...

Right...I defined it in the question (combat zone...i.e. attack imminent.)

So the logical question is, if you KNEW you were going to be attacked sometime that day, how would you carry?

Edited to say,before the argument continues, that I respect your right to carry in whatever condition you like.
 
No.

ALL I want to have to do in an SD situation is set up the shot and pull the trigger, then repeat as necessary.
 
I see your logic, Thumper, and it is sound. The question is, what is the likelihood of imminence of the attack versus the liklihood of an accidental discharge. When I did patrols in Lebanon, attacks were clearly more imminent than dining at the corner felafel stand. Accordingly, in Lebanon my M-16 was chambered with the safety off, along with an extra 8 30 round mags at the ready. When I chowing down on felafel, my concealed handgun was in condition three.

I once read that 50% of all American police that are shot, are shot by themselves or fellow officers. (I don't have the source handy, but I'm pretty sure it was a Handguns Magazine article from about 6 or 7 years ago.) A large portion of these are leg wounds when re-holstering a chambered weapon.

The feeling in Israel that brought about this carry method is that most people are better off carrying condition 3, for safety's sake. They feel that this is a good balance between readiness and safety. However, based upon actual performance since that tiem, there is an overall satisfaction level with the efficacy of this technique that causes it to continue to be the preferred mode of carry.

Hope that makes sense; I'm getting the flu and my head feels all mushy. :)

--Leibster
 
If it works for you, that works for me...Condition 3 beats the heck out of nothing at all.

I'll still carry chambered, though. ;)
 
I once read that 50% of all American police that are shot, are shot by themselves or fellow officers. (I don't have the source handy, but I'm pretty sure it was a Handguns Magazine article from about 6 or 7 years ago.) A large portion of these are leg wounds when re-holstering a chambered weapon.
Click to expand...

I have no doubt that you read that in a gun rag, no doubt at all.

I have no data outside of my agency, but I can tell you that in a 1000+ officer dept, we have had two officers shot by friendly fire in my 12 years.
One shot his left ring finger off, at the distal joint, while handling his Beretta 21 off duty and the other took a ricochet off of the concrete, which got him in the left buttock. The ricochet occurred while training an academy class.
So our numbers are either way below the average, or the article was typical gun rag propoganda.
During the same time we have had a couple dozen cops shot, none mortally, so either some agencies are shooting themselves in droves, or the numbers are bogus.

I would love to see the study they used.
 
Leibster,
We obviously disagree on carry methods.
No matter how you carry, patrolling in Lebanon is worthy of my respect and admiration. No wonder you feel safer in LA, you were in Lebanon.

I apologize for being so annoying earlier.

Now to get a good Falafel. :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

BSA1
  • Locked
Colt 1903/1908
Replies
21
Views
2K
Chuck Dye
C
M
  • Locked
carrying with one in the chamber
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
144
Views
7K
Gardien
G
M
  • Locked
  • Poll
Attention Glock 36 users. Mag/carry questions...
Replies
13
Views
818
alistaire
A
K
  • Locked
  • Poll
CCW: Chamber loaded or empty?
2
Replies
40
Views
2K
mbott
M
A
  • Locked
One in the chamber
2
Replies
48
Views
4K
Sam1911
S
Back
Top