CCW 1911, cocked and locked or no?

[PotatoJudge]

How is cocking a 1911 unsafe? The only way I can see is if A) you're doing it while pulling the trigger or B) letting go of the hammer just before the half-cock notch can set off the round. I don't know if B is possible with the standard power mainspring or how much less likely it is with lighter mainsprings.

Wasn't the wide spur put on the 1911 hammer for use on horseback?

 

[shooter1]

This is probably one of the most debated subject threads on most forums. I would suggest that anyone who wants to carry a 1911 in any other condition other than cocked and locked, do so quietly. There is no merit to the argument that manuplitations and contortions to make a weapon ready to fire are in any way an advantage to C&L carry.
str1

 

[seeker_two]

Good answer, PJ....

While you can use a finger to block the hammer, the SAA was designed for use on horseback -- where you often have only one hand for the gun.

...and, due to a lot of dead horses & limping horsemen, the Army required the 1911 to have both a grip safety and thumb safety...

Despite that, manipulating trigger, hammer and grip safety of the M1911 is not my idea of a safe recreational activity.

Neither is relying on a 1/4" piece of metal to prevent your falling hammer from causing your pistol to put a hole in something where a hole doesn't belong...

But, like many other activities, proper technique and practice can make it safe and fun...

I would suggest that anyone who wants to carry a 1911 in any other condition other than cocked and locked, do so quietly.

I'll stop if he stops....

 

[Vern Humphrey]

How is cocking a 1911 unsafe? The only way I can see is if A) you're doing it while pulling the trigger or B) letting go of the hammer just before the half-cock notch can set off the round. I don't know if B is possible with the standard power mainspring or how much less likely it is with lighter mainsprings.

I arrived on the scene just a few seconds after one Einstien managed to perform just that stunt.

Wasn't the wide spur put on the 1911 hammer for use on horseback?

Nope. Nowhere in Army manuals of any date will you find instructions to carry the gun in what we call Condition 2.

 

[PotatoJudge]

Which stunt, A or B?

Have you read any pre-WWII manuals or documents relating to the development of the pistol in relation to safeties, conditions of carry, or hammer design? I haven't, it's just that by WWII the gun had been around for nearly 30 years and mounted cavalry was not a concern anymore.

One last thing, not meant to offend anyone, but the military makes stuff as idiot proof as possible. Condition 2 is the least idiot proof of the 4 conditions of carry. The fact that they didn't recommend it should be taken with a grain of salt.

My main concern is the mechanical safety of the conditions. As far as I know, all 4 are mechanically safe.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Have you read any pre-WWII manuals or documents relating to the development of the pistol in relation to safeties, conditions of carry, or hammer design? I haven't, it's just that by WWII the gun had been around for nearly 30 years and mounted cavalry was not a concern anymore.

Yep -- in fact, I was stationed at Fort Benning for several years. The Infantry School has a huge collection of manuals, dating back well into the 19th Century.

No manual ever authorized or even mentioned Condition 2.

One last thing, not meant to offend anyone, but the military makes stuff as idiot proof as possible. Condition 2 is the least idiot proof of the 4 conditions of carry. The fact that they didn't recommend it should be taken with a grain of salt.

The first sentence doesn't seem to jibe with the second -- yes, the military does try to make things idiot proof. And the fact that they don't recommend or authorize Condition 2 ought to tell us something.

 

[PotatoJudge]

I asked about the manuals because of an earlier post of yours from July 24, 2005. You stated:

While it's true that Browning apparently envisioned a pistol that would be thumb cocked and uncocked, that's not the pistol the Army adopted. And the Army -- not Cooper -- dictated cocked-and-locked or empty chamber carry as the only two authorized ways to carry the M1911. The earliest manual I've read is dated 1941 -- long before Cooper made his reputation -- and clearly says that when an imminent need for the pistol is forseen, it should be carried cocked and locked.

Hence the questions about WWI and mounted calvary.

As to the military and condition 2, I don't know what was taught or recommended. I don't know how the paradigm of pistol use changed between the wars or what the overall thinking was regarding the training of the troops at the time. In other words, I don't know how long the military has been idiot proof.

And the fact that they don't recommend condition 2 tells us something: they don't recommend it above 1 or 3 as an accross the board rule for hundreds of thousands of guys ranging from very bright to dumb as a post. It means condition 2 isn't idiot proof. And I agree, it's not.

 

[Lonestar49]

1000 flys cannot be wrong

...

Locked and cocked.. just the way it was designed to be carried at all times.


LS

 

[seeker_two]

Yep -- in fact, I was stationed at Fort Benning for several years. The Infantry School has a huge collection of manuals, dating back well into the 19th Century.

No manual ever authorized or even mentioned Condition 2.

What a pistol is capable of and what the Army dictates are two entirely different things. The Army still requires the M9 to be carried in Condition 3 or 4, despite the safety of the Beretta design.

One last thing, not meant to offend anyone, but the military makes stuff as idiot proof as possible. Condition 2 is the least idiot proof of the 4 conditions of carry. The fact that they didn't recommend it should be taken with a grain of salt.

Very good point. The military (esp. lately) will dictate weapons handling for the lowest common denominator (i.r. keep the least trained, least intelligent soldier from putting a hole in something without a direct order from a superior). Hence, the idiots who write the manuals mandate Condition 3 or 4 carry for the idiots who read the manuals instead of mandating the time & training needed for teaching Condition 1 or 2 carry safely. That's why our soldiers in the Green Zone have to clear & unload their weapons when they enter a base or stand guard--despite the attacks that happen in the Green Zone.

Military intelligence is an oxymoron...at least above the rank of Sargeant...

 

[tegemu]

Why carry an unloaded gun?

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Yep -- in fact, I was stationed at Fort Benning for several years. The Infantry School has a huge collection of manuals, dating back well into the 19th Century.

No manual ever authorized or even mentioned Condition 2.

What a pistol is capable of and what the Army dictates are two entirely different things. The Army still requires the M9 to be carried in Condition 3 or 4, despite the safety of the Beretta design.

Follow up on that thought.

If Condition 2 were safer or more fool-proof than Condition 1, the Army would have definitely specified carrying in Condition 2 rather than Condition 1.

Very good point. The military (esp. lately) will dictate weapons handling for the lowest common denominator (i.r. keep the least trained, least intelligent soldier from putting a hole in something without a direct order from a superior). Hence, the idiots who write the manuals mandate Condition 3 or 4 carry for the idiots who read the manuals instead of mandating the time & training needed for teaching Condition 1 or 2 carry safely. That's why our soldiers in the Green Zone have to clear & unload their weapons when they enter a base or stand guard--despite the attacks that happen in the Green Zone.

The Army has always mandated carrying any weapon in Condition 3, except when immediate use is anticipated.

The point is, the Army, with all its concern for safety, never mandated nor authorized Condition 2.

Military intelligence is an oxymoron...at least above the rank of Sargeant...

I have known many a sergeant who would make a potato look smart.

 

[koja48]

I would suggest that anyone who wants to carry a 1911 in any other condition other than cocked and locked, do so quietly.

Whenever I carry, I always do so "quietly;" hence the term "concealed." But if/when I may need it, we're BOTH ready . . .

 

[shooter1]

koja48,
Not exactly what I meant, but alrighty then!
str1

 

[seeker_two]

The Army has always mandated carrying any weapon in Condition 3, except when immediate use is anticipated.

The point is, the Army, with all its concern for safety, never mandated nor authorized Condition 2.

...or Condition 1, for that matter.

But I think our discussion has drifted from the root of the matter...is Condition 2 a safe carry method? Based on the weapon's ORIGINAL design (spur hammer, short beavertail) and the history of the designer (who grew up carrying revolvers in Condition 2 and designed his earliest autos for that method of carry), Condition 2 IS a viable, safe option. What some officer orders a private to write in a training manual isn't based on design as much as what is expedient for military training---hence, Beretta M9's in Condition 3 & 4.....

Condition 1 is good.....so is Condition 2....which is better?....it's up to you....

I have known many a sergeant who would make a potato look smart.

I've met many potatoes who could qualify as generals, too...

 

[Vern Humphrey]

...or Condition 1, for that matter.

Actually, the Army did authorize Condition 1, right in the manual. It was to be used when the pistol was loaded but not immediately used in action.

But I think our discussion has drifted from the root of the matter...is Condition 2 a safe carry method? Based on the weapon's ORIGINAL design (spur hammer, short beavertail) and the history of the designer (who grew up carrying revolvers in Condition 2 and designed his earliest autos for that method of carry), Condition 2 IS a viable, safe option. What some officer orders a private to write in a training manual isn't based on design as much as what is expedient for military training---hence, Beretta M9's in Condition 3 & 4.....

Browning was not a soldier nor a gunfighter. The Army had long experience with many men carrying loaded guns, and that experience mandated Contition 3 as the normal method of carry (when the weapon had to be ready for use) and Condition 1 when a round had been chambered.

 

[shooter1]

I have not heard any valid argument for condition 2 carry, other than personal preference. It offers no advantage, real or imagined, over condition 1. I have no quarrel with anyone who wishes to carry condition 2, or condition 10. (condition 10 is unloaded, chained to the truck seat, unloaded mag and ammo in locked glove box) If anyone can demonstrate any mode of carry other than condition 1, that is superior in the 1911 platform, I'll implement it today. Otherwise further discussion is pointless.
str1

 

[Vern Humphrey]

I have not heard any valid argument for condition 2 carry, other than personal preference. It offers no advantage, real or imagined, over condition 1.

The primary "advantage" is that Condition 1 doesn't give you an opportunity to slip and have an ND while decocking and recocking.

 

[PotatoJudge]

Say you're carrying in a manner that leaves the safety (especially extended safeties) exposed. Safety pushed off, you're carrying in condition 0. Drop a condition 1 gun, safety is knocked off, pick it up and stick it in your pants (has happened to cops in pursuit). Condition 0, stuck in your pants.

Condition 2 is condition 2 no matter how the gun is carried, dropped, or kicked. The chances of the hammer accidentally getting cocked are nill. 1911 safeties are rarely, but regularly, accidentally flipped off.

About the only time I carry in 2 is when I don't have a holster on me and am carrying where I may drop the gun. Like walking around the ranch after forgetting my holster and carrying in my back pocket.

Vern, will you explain the ND while recocking? Can it happen with an intact half cock notch and without pulling the trigger? That is, does the hammer have enough energy to set off the primer pulled back to just before the half cock notch?

 

[crebralfix]

As others have said: carry it with an empty chamber for a few days around the house. Keep a notepad and pen with you to note how many times the hammer struck the firing pin without pulling the trigger.

 

[Kevin108]

Owning 2 Glocks and getting a 1911, I was REALLY iffy about it at first. It's been 6 months and I'm as about 90% as comfortable with it as my Tupperware.

 

[zahc]

I've been strongly considering carrying in condition 0 as a matter of course. Why? Well, why not?

My other guns are an XD and an M&P. Marketing buzzwords aside, these two pieces of tupperware appear to be single action, striker fired weapons with firing pin block safties, some kind of trigger widget, and in the case of the XD, a grip safety.

It seems to me that my series 80 1911 in condition 0 is about the same thing as either one. I don't stake much on the trigger widget, much less so the hinged trigger on the M&P.

When safely holstered in a trigger-covering holster, the trigger can't be pulled. In the very unlikely case of a sear malfunction, there is BOTH the series 80 FPB and the half-cock shelf to stop the hammer, so nothing will happen. EVEN IF the holster is somehow punctured in the trigger area, or the gun falls out and tragically something gets caught in the trigger gaurd, nothing will still happen because of the grip safety. If I pull it out of the holster and pull the trigger, it will go bang.

Tell me, how is a condition 0, series 80 1911 substantially different than my M&P? You can see that scary exposed hammer? The M&P doesn't even have a grip safety.

 

[shooter1]

zahc,
When I aquire a shooting grip on a 1911, using the thumbs forward grip, the safety on my 1911s are disengaged. No concious thought, or action. I once had a duty holster that somehow disengaged the thumb safety durring the course of the day. I was carrying a Kimber Pro Carry ll at the time with the FPS. It was no great cause of concern for the reasons you mentioned in your latest post. You could say I carried in condition 0 quite a bit with that holster! I would come more likely carrying in condition 0 than in condition 2. Condition 2 just makes no sense to me. Trigger disipline would be the key here. The XD and MP triggers, even as good as you can make them, don't compare to a good 1911 trigger.
str1

 

[Vern Humphrey]

I once had a duty holster that somehow disengaged the thumb safety durring the course of the day.

This is not at all uncommon when the snap is on the left side of the holster, up against the safety lever. I don't recommend using a safety strap with a M1911, but if you do, the snap should be on the right side, away from the safety lever, and well below it.

 

[shooter1]

Vern,
The subject holster is a Gould and Goodrich I believe, still have it in a box somewhere. The Safariland SLS (Rotating Hood) I wore with BDUs would occasionally do the same thing. It happened with some of the other guys as well. Wasn't a major problem tho as only a few of us were authorized to carry 1911s.
str1

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Stop and think -- how many people have got in trouble for disabling a safety device? Now I agree that a holstered M1911, with the trigger covered is perfectly save. But accidents can happen. And a holster that disengages the safety lock is a lawsuit waiting to happen.