Made a Big Mistake today.

[George Hill]

A lesson learned the hard way is a leason learned well. I'm glad this lesson didn't end up in the evening news.

This could have have happened to anyone - so mind your tongues. Handling guns is very much like handling serpents. All it takes is just a moment of wandering mind, slip of attention, just a brief second of carelesness... and it will bite.

Let this lesson be an example to all of us in that we are all going to be extra vigilant in our handling as I know we all are. Federal guy shoots him self... an XD owner shoots himself... and one of our own has an ND. Don't point fingers because it might just be a mirror you are pointing at tomorrow.

I know some old biker guys. They say that there are two kinds of riders... those who have spilled and those who have yet to spill. Some riders might scoff. I did. I spilled. These old riders... they live here in this little town. Neither one of them have fallen off a bike yet. That is what they say... "Yet". Because they respect the bikes and are always careful about them and not so arrogant as to think "It can't happen to me... I'm too good". That's how they have lived to be old bikers... both are in the late 60's early 70's I would guess. Still riding. Still careful.

 

[RonGoode]

Since this has happend to me...

Since this has happened to me, I'm all but unwilling to use my 1911 or Star. I'm acutally probably going to get rid of them. Actually, probably all of my guns but three. I've come to feel I don't need such a wide variety of guns. I have one for carry, my .380, my .22 for plinking, and my 45 LC Double Action Revolver I keep by my bed. I'm so uncomfortable chambering a round on my two SA autos and then easing the hammer down. I almost sweat I'm so worried about it going off. Cocked and locked worries me too. I think for the time being it's time to unload some dead weight, narrow things down some, and maybe in time, when I feel like it, maybe start reaquiring more handguns.

 

[BluesBear]

Sorry to hear this Ron.

 

[OF]

I think you're doing the right thing, Ron. If you are uncomfortbale with the action type, you should get rid of them.

Can anyone convincingly explain how lowering the hammer on a 1911 pattern pistol is any more dangerous than lowering the hammer on your a single action or double action revolver?

Uhhh...it's not. But why would you want to lower the hammer on the revolver either? The point is, you're chosing to undertake an extrrememly hazardous procedure for no good reason. None. Other than you are uncomfortable with the action type of your firearm. I think you should also consider carrying something that would prevent you from having to pull the trigger on a loaded firearm to make it ready.

I just don't see how that is a good idea. And I don't think it's 'safety-nazi' to think so.

- Gabe

 

[Archangel]

Just out of curiosity...

For those of you who are afraid of or don't trust cocked and locked, what exactly is it that you are afraid of or don't trust?

 

[Joe Demko]

But why would you want to lower the hammer on the revolver either?

Because you choose not to take a shot and it would be irretrievably stupid to put a cocked revolver in its holster.

 

[TCD]

quick question:
is it possible to open the cylinder while the hammer is cocked?

So you could cock, unload, lower hammer, reload?


edit: I don't understand why you are uncomftorable with "cocked and locked"

as mentioned many times in this thread, there are several safties which must be disengaged first.

 

[Joe Demko]

is it possible to open the cylinder while the hammer is cocked?

Not on any revolver I've ever owned. (Ruger, Colt, Smith and Wesson, North American Arms, Harrington and Richardson)

 

[OF]

Obviously, I meant aside from being forced to lower the hammer manually when you were unable to take the shot you had only a second earlier intended to make (something you would do once in a blue moon when you had no choice). So let me rephrase, so as not to continue to seem 'irretreivably stupid' (thanks for that, Golgo, I had temporarily forgot why you have been one of two people on my 'ignore list' for some time now. Why I was compelled to read your contribution to this thread, I have no idea). Why would you lower the hammer on a live round as a regular part of your administrative gunhandling routine?

- Gabe

 

[Joe Demko]

something you would do once in a blue moon when you had no choice.

You ever do any hunting with a revolver? Happens more than once in a blue moon.

 

[OF]

Maybe I'll just repeat this bit here:

"Why would you lower the hammer on a live round as a regular part of your administrative gunhandling routine?"

- Gabe

 

[BluesBear]

For those not familiar with the term

A Blue Moon is the second full moon occuring in a single calendar month.

The point is, you're chosing to undertake an extrrememly hazardous procedure for no good reason.

Newsflash!
It's a GUN. It already is, inheritently hazardous.
But then so is a carving knife, a stove and an automobile.
You just learn to handle each of them safely.
While carving your Easter Ham your knife could slip and cut your hand.
While cooking your hand could slip off of the handle of the skillet and get burnt.
While driving and attempting to stop your car your foot COULD slip off of the brake and you'd run into/over something/someone.
Are you advocating that we all stop eating, cooking or driving?

As 1911Tuner often quips, "Is gun. Not safe!"

Why would you lower the hammer on a live round as a regular part of your administrative gunhandling routine

Because I CHOOSE to.
When my Colt Government is not on my person it is stored hammer down on a loaded chamber (aka Condition 2). Period. Always. Each and every time. No exceptions. And that is the ONLY "good reason" I need.
That is MY personal choice. It is the way I do it. I am NOT trying to talk anyone else into doing it. Why are so many of you trying to tell those of us who do this, that we are wrong?

The safety and purpose of a firearm depends entirely upon the person handling it. (Lupine, THR)
Safe gunhandling resides between the ears rather than between the hands. (Col. Jeff Cooper, USMC)

 

[jc2]

That is MY personal choice. It is the way I do it. I am NOT trying to talk anyone else into doing it. Why are so many of you trying to tell those of us who do this, that we are wrong?

Because of comments like these

It's not any more dangerous than any other loaded condition.

It is more dangerous that Condition 1 and unneccessarily dangerous to put it in Condition 2.

The 1911 pattern pistol was DESIGNED to be manually cocked and uncocked.

It was NOT designed to be manually cocked and uncocked. It was designed to be cocked on chambering a round (i.e., "self-cocking"). Pull open the slide and lock it back, insert a loaded magazine, and then release the slide. You will see it work as it was designed to work. Fire a round (with rounds in the magazine)--you will see it work as it was designed to work.

Carrying in Condition 2 is no more nor less dangerous than carrying in Condition 1.

Yes, it is.

Nobody's really arguing with your choice, but your statements went beyond that. Personally, I think it would show better use of the safety "between the ears" if you remove the round in chamber before you STORE any weapon, but it's your choice. (BTW, while you are now backpeddling now say "store" in Condition 2, you might want to look at some statements referring to "carrying" in Condition 2).

 

[1911Tuner]

Fascinating Thread

jc2 said:

"The 1911 was NOT designed to be carried cocked and locked."

Not flamin' or hijackin' this thread...but I'd like to hear your explanation
for that statement.

The U.S.Army advised against cocked and locked carry for a couple of reasons...not the least of which because the Ordnance Department realized
that the average conscript wasn't exactly an expert pistolero.
The Field manulas DO, however, advise that whenever action is iminent...which means that any time you're anywhere that enemy activity
or contact is likely...that the pistol should be carried with a chambered round and the safety engaged, the same as with the service rifle.

"Line of Departure! Lock and Load!" (That doesn't mean, "We're under
attack! Get ready to fire!")

I guess a better question would be:

"Why should the 1911 NOT be carried in Condition One?"

Before there is an argument about a broken sear or hammer hooks...the pistol won't discharge if that happens, and in the event of a broken
sear, hammer hooks, AND half-cock notch...the thumb safety will impede the
fall of the hammer enough to prevent a discharge as long as the firing pin spring is in anything approaching reasonable shape.



Standin' by...

Tuner

 

[BluesBear]

Nobody's really arguing with your choice, but your statements went beyond that.

Yes you are arguing. You opinion is different than mine. But you seem to think that YOUR opinion is right and my OPINION is wrong.

Personally, I think it would show better use of the safety "between the ears" if you remove the round in chamber before you STORE any weapon, but it's your choice..

I think it would show better use of the stuff between your ears if you didn't try to cram your opinions down someones throat.

(BTW, while you are now backpeddling now say "store" in Condition 2, you might want to look at some statements referring to "carrying" in Condition 2).

Backpedaling? ME? LOL!
Where did I say I advocated carried in Condition 2? Where? Show me?

Perhaps the "backpeddling" was a Freudian slip on your part, since peddling is trying to sell someone something.
Pedaling is what you do on a bicycle.

 

[jc2]

1911 Tuner -

I probably wasn't just real clear in context (and you sort of pulled me out of context, to boot). I intended to say what the earliest 1911 manuals state: the weapon is to be carried with the chamber empty, and a round chambered only when action is imminent. When the earliest manuals clearly state carry it with the chamber empty until action is imminent, it certainly tends to indicate that's how the 1911 was designed to be carried.

There are times and places when a 1911 should be in Condition 1, and I have carried a 1911 many a mile in Condition 1. I did add that I thought there were lot of people running around with 1911s Condition 1 that probably shouldn't in Condition 1.

BluesBear -

Where did I say I advocated carried in Condition 2? Where? Show me?

You must of missed it. I quoted you (directly) saying, "Carrying in Condition 2 is no more nor less dangerous than carrying in Condition 1." Do you see it, now? By the way, you made up the "advocated" part--I suggested you look at some the statements you made about carrying in Condition 2 (such as the one I quoted).

Again, no one questioned your choice to store and/or carry in Condition 2. I did question some of rationale (because some it is just plain wrong, and some, like storing a loaded weapon, just does not make sense).

 

[1911Tuner]

Manuals

Yeah...and modern Colt owner's manuals state clearly that we shouldn't load the gun at all, until we're on the target range and ready to fire...

I think maybe some of those manuals were written for folks who've never owned or handled a gun and wake up one fine mornin' and decide to go buy a gun...or maybe Colt just feels like the safe path is to address the
lowest common denominator.

And...I don't think I took it outta context when I asked why...Just curious
about where it came from...

Anyways...

Cheers!

Tuner

 

[OF]

Relax, Bear. If you didn't want your opinion discussed, perhaps you shouldn't have posted it on the internet.

You go ahead and walk around with the gun pointed at your temple all day for all I care. You have been making assertions that Condition 2 is no more dangerous than Condition 1. This is incorrect. It is your opinion, and your opinion is demonstrably incorrect. It's that simple. Your gunhandling procedures to make your gun ready are more dangerous than those who carry condition 1. You may be able to do it a thousand times just fine, congratulations. That doesn't mean it's not more dangerous.

And thanks for the newsflashes, real eye-openers. But from here on out, I can do without the condescending attitude and rudeness. If you can't debate the topic without freaking out, maybe you're in the wrong place.

Some people will endlessly put up with that kind of condescending attitude in their discussions. I'm not one of them.

- Gabe

 

[BluesBear]

A direct blow to the hammer of most 1911s can fire the weapon.

No it won’t. Learn more about your weapon.

Remember, back before the New Model Rugers, you always, ALWAYS carried a single revolver with the hammer down on an EMPTY chamber! It's the same principle.

No it is NOT the same principle. Learn more about your weapon. Especially the inertia firing pin part.

It was NOT designed to be manually cocked and uncocked.

Then why does it have a hammer spur? Why does it even have an external hammer?

It was designed to be cocked on chambering a round (i.e., "self-cocking"). Pull open the slide and lock it back, insert a loaded magazine, and then release the slide. You will see it work as it was designed to work.

That’s why it’s called Single Action.

Fire a round (with rounds in the magazine)--you will see it work as it was designed to work.

Wow. Is that why they call it a semi-automatic?


And one more. (not taken out of context)

The 1911 (and other SA autos) are NOT designed to be carried (and certainly not stored) cocked and locked.
The 1911 is DESIGNED to be carried with the chamber EMPTY.

Just what day of the week was it when John M. Browning pulled you aside and whispered this revelation into your ear?
Speaking of design. Browning only added the thumb safety at the “urging†of the U.S. Army.

Since this thread has degraded into nothing more than a urinals at 20 paces contest I will humbly withdraw and let those better suited to that competition continue.
I know THR has an ignore feature somewhere….

 

[jc2]

You are terribly confused BluesBear. Most 1911s (does not include the Colt Series 80, the Kimber II and the SW1911) can fire (and will fire) if the hammer receives a direct blow of sufficient force. You don't know much about 1911s! . . . and, yes it is the same reason you carried a SA revolver hammer down on an EMPTY CHAMBER (except New Model Rugers).

Why does it have a hammer spur. There's lots a reason including lowering hammer on an empty chamber, a little extra weight for a harder hammer strike, maybe the Army wanted an external hammer (they are pretty big on external hammers). Don't forget that most (if not all of JMB designs were internal hammer designs before the 1911--and I am not certain, but I believe a prototype 1911 had an internal hammer).

As for the "not designed for cocked and locked carry," remark yes, you did take it out of the context (go back and read the sentence that followed it where I added an explanation). I have already addressed and clarifed my meaning to 1911 Tuner two replies up. (Don't you read what has been posted before you reply?) The 1911 was a joint JMB and Army Ordinance design. As you pointed out, it was not designed in vacuum. From day one (long before liability became a compelling issue), the manual (and don't forget the Army did have a hand in designing the 1911) has stated it was to be CARRIED chamber empty, and a round chambered (and the safety applied--NOT the hammer lowered) only when action was imminent. (BTW, that was context in which my "not designed for cocked and locked carry" was made--go back and read the entire paragraph and not just what you want to quote).

 

[1911Tuner]

Misconceptions Abound

'Twas stated:

You are terribly confused BluesBear. Most 1911s (does not include the Colt Series 80, the Kimber II and the SW1911) can fire (and will fire) if the hammer receives a direct blow of sufficient force.

Beg to differ here. The inertial firing pin of the 1911 is held some distance away from the cartridge, even with the hammer down. If the pistol is dropped from a height of about 8 feet straight down onto a hard surface, the firing pin can reach the primer with enough force to light it...but a direct
blow to the hammer spur won't do it. The hammer is resting solidly against the firing pin stop, and the firing pin is shorter than the channel that it rides in,
unless something is badly out of spec. The pin does not rest against the
primer as with an older Ruger or an 1873 Colt SAA.

Hope this squares things up and puts out a few fires.

For the record...The Series 80 system doesn't make the 1911 any more or less safe to carry in Condtion One. Both designs require that the trigger be
pulled in order to fire a round. The Series 80 only prevents a discharge in
the event the gun is dropped onto concrete off the top of a house.

Be of good cheer and mindful of your muzzle.

Tuner

 

[jc2]

I hear what you're saying Tuner--particularly dropping part. I don't know if I'd say "never" about a stout blow enough under to the hammer under the right circumstances (and a weak enough fire pin spring) though I'll admit I was thinking more about the hammer lowered to half-cock rather than all the firing pin stop. Bottom line remains, if there's a round in the chamber, it should be cocked and locked. As I said earlier, the hammer is great loaded chamber indicator!

 

[natedog]

Just curious, but when the slide cycled, did it hurt your thumb at all?

 

[thefitzvh]

Then why does it have a hammer spur? Why does it even have an external hammer?

Second strike if you have a hard primer.

I'm sorry, but if you pull the trigger and attempt to lower the hammer on a live round, you're an accident waiting to happen.

I, for one, wouldn't get caught on the range with someone that pulled a stunt so foolhardy.

 

[GSB]

On C&L -- even if one is concerned about the safety of older 1911-style models, I'm not sure there's need for concern over newer variants with firing pin safety devices like the Kimber Series II. Even given a catastrophic sere failure with both primary and secondary notches failing, these newer models should be every bit as safe as a good DA/SA.