Kayso a little over a week ago I began carrying my PF-9 via the belt-clip. I had asked you guys for your thoughts on that in this thread. I told myself I would test this carry method 2 weeks before even considering carrying a chamber-loaded pistol this way. Lots of folks are like me and they are very skittish about carrying a chamber-loaded pistol without the trigger covered.
So okay, the PF-9 has a trigger that only resets after the gun is cycled (like, say, the Glocks; unlike the Kel-Tec P-11 which has a multiple strike capability). So I decided to experiment by carrying the gun chamber-empty with the trigger set on an empty chamber. This way I would know if the trigger had pulled itself sometime during the day because at the end of the day it would no longer be set. Does this make sense?
At the end of each day this past week I checked and rechecked and rechecked and rechecked (you know how we are) to ensure the chamber was empty and then I pulled the trigger to see that the PF-9's trigger was, in fact, still set. This is a long narrative to explain something that is quite simple, but I think you see what I'm saying.
As most of you would expect, the trigger was still intact each time, meaning it had not pulled itself during my daily activities. In point of fact, I can tell the gun was never even close to unintended trigger-pull. At this point I am getting closer to declaring this a safe way for me to carry even with a chamber-loaded PF-9.
Now, I realize this has been a very short experiment thus-far - too short to declare anything of significance. And I realize many people simply will never be willing to carry a pistol without the trigger covered. And I don't fault those people at all... on the contrary, I commend them for their dedication to safety. But from my experience this week (plus the fact that manufacturers continue to provide this design after several years in a severely litigious world), I feel this will likely be a safe way to carry comfortably in situations where concealment is difficult.
So okay, the PF-9 has a trigger that only resets after the gun is cycled (like, say, the Glocks; unlike the Kel-Tec P-11 which has a multiple strike capability). So I decided to experiment by carrying the gun chamber-empty with the trigger set on an empty chamber. This way I would know if the trigger had pulled itself sometime during the day because at the end of the day it would no longer be set. Does this make sense?
At the end of each day this past week I checked and rechecked and rechecked and rechecked (you know how we are) to ensure the chamber was empty and then I pulled the trigger to see that the PF-9's trigger was, in fact, still set. This is a long narrative to explain something that is quite simple, but I think you see what I'm saying.
As most of you would expect, the trigger was still intact each time, meaning it had not pulled itself during my daily activities. In point of fact, I can tell the gun was never even close to unintended trigger-pull. At this point I am getting closer to declaring this a safe way for me to carry even with a chamber-loaded PF-9.
Now, I realize this has been a very short experiment thus-far - too short to declare anything of significance. And I realize many people simply will never be willing to carry a pistol without the trigger covered. And I don't fault those people at all... on the contrary, I commend them for their dedication to safety. But from my experience this week (plus the fact that manufacturers continue to provide this design after several years in a severely litigious world), I feel this will likely be a safe way to carry comfortably in situations where concealment is difficult.
