george burns
Member
http://americangg.net/lose-life-empty-chamber/, self explanitory. Too bad it happened, but perhaps it will save someones life.
Here is one we speak about often, 2 dead carrying with empty chamber
- Thread starter george burns
- Start date
- Status
OP
OP
george burns
Member
That's amazing, it must be a liability, issue or the insurance that covers the union demands it, God forbid an officer gets hurt or killed due to "policy" that would be a nightmare, and a lawsuit that would bankrupt the department. It could be claimed that it was the cause of such an incident. I am really sorry to hear that for your sake.
First no union, we're a right to work state. Second about 5 years ago we transitioned from .38 revolvers to glock 40's. with a 38 it was a NBFD as you carry no round under the hammer the other five chambers loaded pull the trigger and revolver goes boom.
They're mostly worried about AD's, had a couple bad ones including one where his/her partner was shot while doing a number 2 in a porta jon.
They're mostly worried about AD's, had a couple bad ones including one where his/her partner was shot while doing a number 2 in a porta jon.
grampajack
AR Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2016
- Messages
- 1,714
Man that is just too tragic.
jr_watkins
Member
I like 'Active Self Protection' videos, but I think there is a contradiction here. They also preach about "don't draw on a drawn gun" (even mentioned it in this video)! Especially when there are "multiple armed robbers" as noted by the narrator. The look of the video is that the robber wasn't intent on shooting anyone, and didn't do so until his life was threatened. To me that is the lesson here. When you pull a weapon on someone they are likely to fight for THEIR life. There seems to be a mind set that the criminal will cower at the sight of the hero's gun when presented and that just isn't always the case. I realize the OP was going for the chambered vs unchambered debate, but "self explanatory" assumes that all would have ended well for the victims had he been able to fire shot(s) immediately. Lots of other things could have gone wrong, missed shot(s), safety on, malfunction, or success against the first robber only to be killed by the second, etc. Point being when you engage it doesn't all go your way, especially when you are at a huge disadvantage in both numbers and preparedness. Argue chambered/unchambered all you want, it isn't the only factor or the biggest factor in my opinion.
shootstraight57
Member
Unfortunately I was on the job and my partner never carried his service handgun with a round in the chamber! I had numerous discussions with him on it, but one night while on patrol he realized he wasn't fast enough to rack the slide and fire. While in the car during the pursuit I said " I told you so". Luckily he came out of that motor vehicle stop unscaved. Some people you just can't get through to.
Jim Watson
Member
Less risky but otherwise about as sensible as the empty automatic chamber.
Hasn't been a name brand DA revolver that needed an empty chamber under the hammer in a long long time. Colt since about 1908, Smith a little later, although the S&W hammer block was not fully reliable until the 1945 redesign.
I would not draw such a conclusion from the video. The victims where there at the scene and were able to assess body language and words spoken.
entropy
Member
Sorry, I'm not trusting my life to the caprice of an armed assailant. Since all I could see in the video was occasionally the robber's arm and a leg, I'm not drawing the same conclusion as you. Merely producing the weapon, even if he's shakily holding it claiming "I don't want to hurt you", is deadly intent to me. It might go off "accidentaly" as guns often do at crime scenes, and I'm not going to bet my life on his ability or lack thereof to handle a gun. If he comes on like a Tier One operator, or Barney Fife, I'm hitting him with everything I have as soon as possible, and it will definitely have a round in the chamber.
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
I certainly agree about not trusting robbers and such not to shoot me. Deadly threat is most definitely there and the would-be victim has the right to defend accordingly against it. However, he did it in a very poor manner, forcing the situation in which he most definitely did not have any advantage. He didn't have surprise, speed, or violence of action. He didn't have a distraction. He just went for it, and he lost. Mind you, I am not against forcing the situation, but it is good to be smart about when you do it.
Liberty1776
Member
A gun without a round in the chamber is effectively unloaded, and makes a poor club.
Don't disagree, just explaining the logic behind the decision
I'm afraid I don't see the logic. Can you help with that?
exactly, I feel If I am not comfortable with a loaded weapon I should not carry one ,
Rock185
Member
WOW Sarge7402, I spent 30+ years in LE full time, and several more years as a reserve officer. This is the first time that I've heard of a US agency that required an empty chamber. I have seen empty chamber carry mentioned by people who apparently don't trust themselves and/or their firearm with a loaded chamber. "The Israelis do it" is a common response. I have mentioned to some that I have seen occasions where shooters trying to load the chamber under stress have struggled to do so. Apparently not Israeli trained. It is also my personal experience that in a lethal force situation, one may not have both hands free to chamber a round. That support hand may be occupied with something else very important at the time. May you always have time sir, should the need arise.
armoredman
Member
Holy cowski...I've been with state corrections for 15 years and one thing I have always been on staff, on and off duty - keep your firearms hot! One up the spout is required per policy. I cannot imagine your policy will surivie the first wrongful death lawsuit. Sorry, amigo. They need to amend that policy ASAP.
GunnerShotz
Member
Bad stuff happens so much faster than most of us want to imagine. The faster you can get from retention to trigger pulled the better. That's the only time you might have to think about it and you'll want to use that time wisely.
I would keep that your agency carries not chambered under your hat , would not want the bad guys knowing that,
We were required to chamber a live round when we walked out of the armory, and against policy to not carry a live round in the chamber
We were required to chamber a live round when we walked out of the armory, and against policy to not carry a live round in the chamber
Rock185
Member
I worked about 2/3 of my time in LE with a large dept., the other 1/3 in a much smaller one. Both required fully loaded guns. That most definitely included one in the chamber.
Torian
Member
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2013
- Messages
- 1,016
The military also has a policy of empty chambers in a combat zone depending on perceived threat levels. When I was in Iraq we carried mags in with an empty chamber. In Afghanistan we were locked and loaded at all times (even when sleeping indoors), unless we were on a major FOB. We certainly saw more NDs due to this...but that never made us stop doing the right thing.
Somehow the NDs almost always resulting from someone clearing their Beretta in the clearing barrel and just being an idiot while doing it. I never figured out how it kept happening either.
Somehow the NDs almost always resulting from someone clearing their Beretta in the clearing barrel and just being an idiot while doing it. I never figured out how it kept happening either.
Military policy varies. As a MP working the gates on security in 2002 we loaded M9's one in the chamber with a full magazine, including the M16 on site. This was at Ft. Benning at every gate.
It was for all extents and purposes security theater as our biggest enforcement actions were arresting service member's children for drunk driving - put up supervised entry gates to get on post and what did they expect?
We left post and there was a sigh of relief. Our company commander was the SERT team leader with at least a dozen LEO's from surrounding locations. Carrying locked and loaded was just part of life for them, and after the first few weeks, it was normal for us. Keep in mind we were Army Reservists and at least 80% went back to their civilian jobs which did not have firearms at a part of the daily loadout. More like ink pens and cell phones, maybe a tool belt.
I understand a "empty chamber" policy isn't something the rank and file willingly accept - it's the civilian carrier who adopts it who needs to rethink their position. And empty gun is useless when they need it, just as much as a utility knife with no blade in it can't cut open a box. It's putting faith in the object as if it can control the will of the other person, when in point of fact it's only doing that to the person carrying it. To their detriment.
Self inflicted witchcraft, as it were. I hear recently that Caucasians aren't proficient in that but the evidence seems pretty clear considering the latest generation of liberals.
It was for all extents and purposes security theater as our biggest enforcement actions were arresting service member's children for drunk driving - put up supervised entry gates to get on post and what did they expect?
We left post and there was a sigh of relief. Our company commander was the SERT team leader with at least a dozen LEO's from surrounding locations. Carrying locked and loaded was just part of life for them, and after the first few weeks, it was normal for us. Keep in mind we were Army Reservists and at least 80% went back to their civilian jobs which did not have firearms at a part of the daily loadout. More like ink pens and cell phones, maybe a tool belt.
I understand a "empty chamber" policy isn't something the rank and file willingly accept - it's the civilian carrier who adopts it who needs to rethink their position. And empty gun is useless when they need it, just as much as a utility knife with no blade in it can't cut open a box. It's putting faith in the object as if it can control the will of the other person, when in point of fact it's only doing that to the person carrying it. To their detriment.
Self inflicted witchcraft, as it were. I hear recently that Caucasians aren't proficient in that but the evidence seems pretty clear considering the latest generation of liberals.
OP
OP
george burns
Member
Having lived through an incident 2 times when guns were pointed at me and put to my head, I swore I would never again let someone decide when I die. I would always take the shot if I had the oppertunity. Carrying empty is giving the bad guy the say so as to when you meet your maker. I want to be able to decide that on my own. If I go I 'm taking a few with me. Even if someone has a gun pointed at you, there is a good chance that you will get the oppertunity to respond, if they knew you had a gun you would already be dead. That type of criminal would never stick up an armed person, "they have told me this" on several occasions, thus you have a split second, as in the video to react. no one says you are going to live if you comply.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked