I just don't like to waste my time on things that aren't going to happen.
Sounds intelligent, but "aren't going to happen" and "are unlikey to happen" are not the same thing.
Let's go back to JT1JT1's idea of applying risk management techniques. Regardless of whether they are applied in financial risk management (say, insurance planning, investment strategy, or internal controls design), system engineering, or battle planning, the techniques generally involve the same basic steps. Key among them are
identifying the risks,
evaluating the risks, and d
eciding how to handle them. Evaluating them involves assessing both the
likelihood and the
potential consequences; handling could comprise either
accepting the risks or
mitigating them. This is a widely accepted, structured approach, but it is dependent on a lot of judgement.
Two risks have already been identified:
I could be jumped unexpectedly at close range with deadly weapons by an unanticipated threat.
The
likelihood is going to depend on the environment. I cannot visualize the environment where the Duke lives in Maine, so I'll discuss where I live--a large suburban area adjacent on two sides to an urban area with one of the highest murder rates in the nation, and on two sides with meth country. Three interstate highways that converge here give easy entry and egress to people from the surrounding areas--and by the way, two of them are major drug arteries. (Maybe it's now clear why I carry, but I'll try to complete the analysis).
So: how would one assess the likelihood of being jumped in a parking lot or at an ATM, or service station lot, or at curbside?
My assessment, assuming that I will try to avoid the most dangerous situations (more on that later) is that the likelihood is
remote. Maybe that's understating it somewhat, but that doesn't really change the analysis....
...because you have to factor in the potential
consequences, and the consequences of getting stabbed, slashed, or shot would be
extremely severe.
For that reason, accepting the risk is out of the question, so we now turn to
mitigation.
The mitigation approach I choose is multifaceted:
- Avoid high risk situations to the extent possible. Stay out of bad areas, don't go alone at night to some places, avoid the fringes of parking lots, get in and out quickly.
- Carry concealed a gun that can be put into use immediately, and train.
- Carry an effective less-than-lethal means of defense.
Now, not all of those steps are available to everyone, unfortunately.
Moreover, the assessment of likelihood may not be the same for the Duke as it is for me. If the likelihood is
less than remote, one may come up with a different strategy.
Let's turn to the other one:
I could also be taken out by a sharpshooter at 300 meters.
Where I live, the likelihood is
less than remote, and I don't know of a viable mitigation technique, so I think I have to accept the risk.
That wouldn't be true for the soldier in Iraq. The chance is at least greater than remote, the consequences are very severe, and there are mitigation strategies that can be and are being applied.
Now, downtown here is somewhere in between. About every two weeks someone is shot while sitting on his porch. That requires doing something--moving, or staying off the porch.
Not much I can do about those situations...
Probably true for one, but fortunately not true for the other --unless you live in [fill in the blank].
...and they probably won't happen anyway.
That assessment is step one in risk management.
We've looked at two risks. The OP asked about another one: the risk of a negligent discharge at various stages of drawing a semi-automatic pistol with a round in the chamber. That was the original question.
Unmitigated, the likelihood and potential consequences combine to lead to the conclusion that accepting the risk is not indicated. So, what are the mitigation techniques?
Obviously, one alternative is to not carry chambered.
For me that conflicts with the approach selected for mitigating another risk. Maybe that's not true for the Duke, but it is for me.
Another is to select a weapon that can be safely carried with a round in the chamber and to keep it in a proper holster. That's my choice, except for off-body cary, which was brought up earlier by rbernie.