Cocked/locked vs Hammer Down

Status
Not open for further replies.
I still maintain Browning did not design it or intend it to be routinely carried cocked & lock.
Browning didn't, but the Army did. And the pistol was built to Army specifications, for Army use.

John Moses Browning was a brilliant engineer, designer, manufacturer and business man. But he was never in a gunfight, never in battle.
 
Vern,
I just take exception to "the way John Browning intended it to be carried" statements. :)
Whether the Army intended it to be carried cocked & locked is another matter, but the "end" form with safeties was finalized to meet military demands. Browning did not originally include a thumb safety on the pistol.
Denis
 
Whether the Army intended it to be carried cocked & locked is another matter, but the "end" form with safeties was finalized to meet military demands. Browning did not originally include a thumb safety on the pistol.

The reason that the Army asked for a thumb safety was to enable a horse-mounted soldier to place the gun on-safe and reholster with one hand while regaining control of a spooked horse, so as not to shoot self or horse while engaged in the exercise...not to carry cocked and locked.
 
The Army's preference was always for Condition 3 -- chamber empty, magazine loaded. However, when use was considered imminent, then Condition 1 was the authorized mode of carry.

The Army never authorized Condition 2.
 
Bad idea to carry hammer down on loaded chamber. Perennial question, both sides weigh in, poster usually ends up carrying the way he or she initially wanted to anyway.

Maybe so DPris but some things have been clarified in this thread for those with eyes to see, like;

"The way God and John Browning meant it to be carried Condition One"
Browning, along with Colt engineers, designed the gun to the military's demands. Had Browning been left alone it would have been a very different gun.

The military intended the 1911 to generally be carried in condition 3. C&L was for interruptions in firing or for just prior to engagement. Condition 2 was often used by troops in the field authorized or not. Different branches of the service had slightly different demands and all three modes were used.

Cooper had a decided impact, a positive one IMHO, on the prevalence of C&L these days. We speak of the conditions that Cooper came up with.

These 3 points and a couple of others ought to at least be acknowledged.
And, based on the development of the 1911's design evolution, I still maintain Browning did not design it or intend it to be routinely carried cocked & lock.

I agree with ya. The mechanical evolution of the gun, the evolution of holsters for it, etc. all point to a gun that was not ,in decades past, routinely carried C&L by as many shooters as carry it that way now either percentage wise or in raw numbers. Jeff Cooper and a few bigger changes in society account for the change.

Mechanically the 1911 has never stopped evolving, it continues to do so today. Testiment to a solid basic design. New grip safeties, new thumb safeties, new types of extractors, barrel lengths and calibers JMB never thought of, etc.

I encourage folks to choose a gun that suits them. That fits their hand well and that they enjoy shooting then get to know it. In the 1911 that means you have three options for carry.

For me, and others, condition 2 is for situations where condition one is not possible or is inadvisable. Some folks can't imagine such a situation. Their experience is limited perhaps. I also carry condition one when I can.

Under duress, the seemingly simple become difficult, thus the fine motor skills required to perform the cocking of the hammer could become problematic, whereas the quite natural act of swiping the thumb saftey is quite easy.

The assumption here is that the only time one would carry a 1911 is where you expect to need it immediately and under stress. The assumption is wrong.

The assumption that cocking a hammer is a fine motor skill that one would loose under stress is also wrong. Generations of shooters have and continue to carry single action wheelguns in all sorts of situations, particularly while hunting and manage to cock a hammer. Ol Wyatt Earp didn't know he'd loose his fine motor skills up against the Clantons.

It's a matter of training.

If a fella dedicates themselves to the 1911 it rewards ya.

tipoc
 
Tipoc, I too am a big fan of the single action revolver. There is a signicifant difference between the hammer designs of the S.A.A. and the 1911, of course it's quite easy to cock the hammer on a S.A.A., that's it's method of operation and it's manual of arms. The manual thumb-cocking of the hammer of the 1911 is not designed to be the initiator of the cycle of operation, it's the manual racking of the slide( if in condition 3), which cocks the hammer, or the swiping of the thumb safety off ( if in condition 1) starts the firing sequence.
To compare the hammers and manual of arms of the single action revolver against the single action semi-auto is an apples & oranges comparison.
 
I gave up 1911s 20 years ago and haven't looked back.

That must have taken alot of courage to say my friend... you still go to support groups every Wednesday, don't you... :D ;)

Neat thread with very knowledgeable folks. Thanks.
 
I think the majority of worries over Condition Two is the concern that people will decock their 1911's with only one hand (like they've seen in the movies). However, decocking is something that should be done at leisure, and when you have two hands and 100% of your brain on the topic at hand. The proper procedure, as demonstrated by Jerry Ahern in several articles in Petersen's Handguns, requires one thumb resting on the hammer, and the other thumb in between the hammer and the firing pin.

Just the same, I prefer ambi-safeties and locked and cocked on my Commander-style 1911.
 
To compare the hammers and manual of arms of the single action revolver against the single action semi-auto is an apples & oranges comparison.

The only thing I compared was cocking the hammer. I made no other comparisons. Earlier in this thread another poster said that decocking a 1911 was no more difficult than decocking a da revolver or a levergun. A true statement which does not imply a similarity in the manual of arms.

tipoc
 
Earlier in this thread another poster said that decocking a 1911 was no more difficult than decocking a da revolver or a levergun. A true statement which does not imply a similarity in the manual of arms.
With a revolver, you have two controls to deal with -- a trigger and a hammer. With an M1911, you have three -- trigger, hammer and grip safety. That greatly increases the danger of a Negligent Discharge -- and that's why Ahern puts a thumb between hammer and firing pin.

But very few revolvers have both grip safety and thumb safety lock -- so why go through all those gyrations to make safe? Just engage the safety lock and holster the gun.
 
I'm just waiting for a true heretic to jump in here and mention that JBM was correcting his 1911 mistakes with the Browning Hi-Power.
 
These discussions always amuse me

Because it is the poor old 1911 that get the brunt of the concern, carrying cocked and locked. Thousands upon thousands of people carry other gun designs every day, with a round in the chamber and the safety on, without a second thought. I don't mean just other "combat" handguns, I mean rifles and shotguns as well.

In mechanical function, many rifles and shotguns are actually "cocked and locked", and yet almost no one debates endlessly whether or not this is a safe mode of carry. All manufacturers recommend carry only with an empty chamber and load only immediately prior to firing. Certainly the best advice from a CYA standpoint, but the real world, and the people in it tend to behave somewhat differently. Do you stalk deer or flush pheasant with your chamber empty? Most do not. Most carry with the chamber loaded and the safety on.

But the 1911 get the debate. Probably because of the visible hammer. Previous generations (and many still today) have been conditioned to know that a cocked hammer means the gun is ready to fire. Many older designs of firearms that have exposed hammers do not have safeties, other than the hammer, so the sight of a cocked hammer was an automatic warning signal.

But we don't have the same visual cue with an internal hammer gun, so the debate is less, maybe even non-existent. A double standard to be sure. I never hear anybody whining about how dangerous it is to carry a Luger, or a Remington 870, Ruger .22 auto, or an AR-15 "cocked & locked". The only real safety is between the user's ears, and if not correctly used, mechanical devices are not an adequate substitute.

The whole grip safety "thing" is, to me, another non issue. Hold the pistol in a firing grip, and the grip safety is depressed, and not an issue.

The other thing is the series 80 firing pin safety system. Someday, if I win the lottery, I will conduct my own drop tests with 1911s, but until then, I believe that more is made of this problem and actually exists. First of all, dropping the gun "more than 10 feet", and landing muzzle down on a hard surface, discharging the round. OK, maybe, but then the round is fired into the hard surface, with a danger of ricochet, yes, but to me this seems a small risk. For nearly 70 years, the risk was considereed so small as to not warrant any redesign.

I believe (I do not know what was in the mind of the Colt engineers) that the series 80 Colt firing pin lock was designed and installed in order to satisfy the California "drop test" requirements, and not for any real world risk potential. In order to get their gun on the California approved list, they had to modify the design, so they could sell their product in California.

Personally, I have no use for the firing pin lock, and will not own a Colt so equipped.

As to the carrying of the gun in Condition Two (hammer down on a live round), go ahead, if it comforts you. I see no benefit, only the potential risk involved with accidental discharge, should you slip when lowering the hammer.

And as far as the military carrying the gun in Condition Three (chamber empty), one must remember that military regulations are formed with the benefit of the service in mind, and any benefit to the individuals in uniform is purely incidental. The service requires chamber empty carry to minimize accidents with the handgun. The majority of service members issued a handgun for the performance of their duties are not exceedingly well trained. And in general they are young men, and prone to all the foolishness that young men do. MPs get more training, but they are far from the average, being police, and even some of them have trouble.

The 1911A1 .45ACP is a superb and superlative combat handgun, in the hands of a properly trained and competent user. It's dominance of both the combat and target disciplines for literally generations is more than enough proof for anyone not blinded by bias to see.

If you can't master the "complexities" of the 1911, I suggest you confine yourself to a revolver, or find a different hobby, one that does not require a minimal amount of eye-hand-mind co-ordination. Maybe stamp collecting, as long as you are properly protected from those dangeous paper cuts. I would have said politics or the news media, but we already have more than enough incompetent people there already.
 
Because it is the poor old 1911 that get the brunt of the concern, carrying cocked and locked. Thousands upon thousands of people carry other gun designs every day, with a round in the chamber and the safety on, without a second thought.
Yup. I eagerly await someone instructing us on how to lower the hammer on a loaded Ruger MKII or III, or on a Browning Buckmark.:p
 
As to the carrying of the gun in Condition Two (hammer down on a live round), go ahead, if it comforts you. I see no benefit, only the potential risk involved with accidental discharge, should you slip when lowering the hammer.

I know of one. That of helping to keep dirt and other such stuff out of the lockwork...which may have been part of the reason that the US military wanted it to be carried hammer down. With the hammer cocked, and with the pistol exposed...there's a pretty sizeable opening between the hammer and the frame. Go and look.

Same goes for the "old/outdated" small-ish ejection port. The lowered ports allow bigger things to get in and work their way under the barrel...but I digress.

Cocked and locked is the best way to carry...and a safe way to carry...if you feel a great need for the pistol to be ready to go as quickly as possible. If you're requirements aren't that pressing...Condition 2 is still an option.

I'll stand by what I said about decocking the gun safely. It can be done without a great increase in risk...but ya gotta know how. ANyone who can make the trip...I'll be more than happy to demonstrate.

Cheers!
 
That is why you carry a DA/SA revolver and get good changing out moonclips.
Carrying my 1911 cocked and locked gives me the willies.
 
which may have been part of the reason that the US military wanted it to be carried hammer down.
The Army wanted it carried with the chamber empty. Once a round was chambered, the gun was to be carried cocked-and-locked. Hammer down on a live round was never authorized.
 
I've carried Cocked and Locked since 1977 for both duty and off duty use.

While I'll agree that lowering the hammer on a 1911 with a chambered round can be done safely, the practice is unnecessary and is a negligent discharge waiting to happen. IMHO
 
Hammer down on a live round was never authorized.

I know. Never said it was. Meant hammer down/empty chamber.

I've carried Cocked and Locked since 1977 for both duty and off duty use.

Me, since 1969...and yes. There's always a risk involved when handling a loaded gun...cocked and locked or otherwise. That's why we follow the four rules.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top