ongoing argument with friend - wont' carry in chamber

[Paul30]

As mentioned by at least two posters, a chambered glock carried through the activities of daily life depends on a properly designed, quality holster. I was close enough to be sprayed with gravel when someone reholstering a glock hung the trigger on the edge of the holster. I fully assign ultimate blame to user error, but a poorly designed "golly gee wizz tacticool" holster did not help. Luckily in this case no one needed medical attention.

Everyone needs to know his limits. If a chambered round is outside that mans limits, let him be. Even if he is not ready for a quick draw type event, he is still better prepared than an unarmed person.

I was at a gun show once when a police officer was trying a new holster for his 10mm glock, he put a bullet through is femor right there in the middle of the gun show. Guns going off when I'm not wanting them to is something to be considered. That's also why you never point it at something your don't want to destroy. Sometimes that is hard, when you consider the multiple angles involved with shooting pool, you realize that unless you are over soft dirt stuff can still happen. That said, anyone who isn't being rude about it should be given a pass when suggesting safety recommendations. The last thing I would want is my CCW to shoot someone I did not mean to shoot, and that includes me.

 

[HICKMAN]

don't harass him over it, if he wants a safety then so be it.

If you want to enlighten him a little, point out that cops carry loaded glocks all the time.

If he wants something to ease his mind while he gets comfortable, have him get a safe-T-Blok.

 

[findingZzero]

I don't often carry, but if I did, my first chambered rnd would be DA and therefore more difficult to accidently discharge. Stay mellow my friend......

I have the option to decock the first rnd.

 

[JetGirl]

Meh. It's his choice, not yours.
I do weird things that make me feel safer that other people probably think "OMG!! WHAT IS SHE THINKING?!!" about, too.

 

[Thegeek]

I've seen a few accidents where people have either shot their own leg/foot, or blown a hole in whatever it was they were standing on by reholstering a gun with their finger on the trigger. Quality holster or not, when it stops your finger but not the gun, the trigger is going to make up the difference.

I carry one in the chamber and always have. If the weapon is well made, the bullet in the chamber has as much chance of going off as the ones in the magazine without a trigger pull. The problem is always the person losing concentration.

 

[Chr15topher]

I never chamber a round simply because I have a 3 year old running around. I always keep my firearms in a safe place BUT wouldn't want to chance it.

 

[OneBadV8]

Irritating the crap out of me.
The latest... he's dumping the glock for a gun with a thumb safety so he can finally carry one in the chamber.
Statement "i'd rather gamble with the thumb saftey than one in the chamber on the glock".
wtf! can't get through...
rant over.

Convince him to take a Force on Force class (take it with him) and I bet he changes his tune. Because when gun fights happen, they happen right now.

 

[Birds Away]

Glock owners can be so arrogant. This is one of my biggest peeves in the gun industry. There is nothing wrong with a safety, and there is no need for him to see the err of his ways. If you prefer no safety, fine, but it is a matter of preference.

^^^^this. I can understand discussing the fallacy of carrying with an empty chamber. I cannot understand why everyone seems to get so offended when someone prefers a mechanical safety device. There are a lot of modern DA/SA handguns that come with these devices and a lot of people on this forum use them. What's the beef? There are an awful lot of gun owners who seem to take it personally when some other gun owner chooses a gun different from theirs. I don't get it. If the guy feels more comfortable with a safety then, I say, go for it. Someone explain to me how this gentleman's choice of carry is anyone's business but his own. Sounds like a bunch of statists who want to enforce their will on other people.

 

[88GT]

^^^^this. I can understand discussing the fallacy of carrying with an empty chamber. I cannot understand why everyone seems to get so offended when someone prefers a mechanical safety device. There are a lot of modern DA/SA handguns that come with these devices and a lot of people on this forum use them. What's the beef? There are an awful lot of gun owners who seem to take it personally when some other gun owner chooses a gun different from theirs. I don't get it. If the guy feels more comfortable with a safety then, I say, go for it. Someone explain to me how this gentleman's choice of carry is anyone's business but his own. Sounds like a bunch of statists who want to enforce their will on other people.

Where do you get this is arrogance on the part of Glock owners?

OP said nothing about Glocks except that the friend in questions was moving away from one towards another gun with a manual safety.

Nobody here is saying Glocks are better and that manual safeties are poor choices.

A lot of us are saying that choosing to carry with a round in the chamber only because you have changed your choice of firearm to one with a manual safety is illogical. I don't care if someone wants to EDC a firearm with a manual safety. His choice. But to do so because he thinks it makes it a safer firearm for carrying one in the chamber is stupid...and potentially dangerous. That's like saying you're going to stop wearing your seat belt because you're now driving a car that has airbags.

 

[Birds Away]

Where do you get this is arrogance on the part of Glock owners?

OP said nothing about Glocks except that the friend in questions was moving away from one towards another gun with a manual safety.

Nobody here is saying Glocks are better and that manual safeties are poor choices.

A lot of us are saying that choosing to carry with a round in the chamber only because you have changed your choice of firearm to one with a manual safety is illogical. I don't care if someone wants to EDC a firearm with a manual safety. His choice. But to do so because he thinks it makes it a safer firearm for carrying one in the chamber is stupid...and potentially dangerous. That's like saying you're going to stop wearing your seat belt because you're now driving a car that has airbags.

I don't see this as being illogical at all. I have known many people who will not carry a gun that doesn't have a mechanical safety. They feel safer and more confident knowing there is a safety mechanism between them and a fat finger discharge. I really don't understand how this is a stupid decision. You may argue that they need only follow the four rules and they will be fine. I agree. But if this makes them more comfortable and they train to it, what's the problem? Driving a stick when automatics are available isn't a stupid choice, it's just a choice.

 

[wizard_of_ahs]

 

[karatejoe]

+1 This is my preference. Safer than most options, yet as quick as any other. If you have practiced a DA first shot, it is as accurate too.

Those who carry a glock or other striker fired gun that has the trigger as it's only safety need to be ready to resist the urge to catch it if you drop your gun. If you happen to drop it, don't try to catch it. These guns are designed to safely hit the ground without firing, but if you try to catch it you might just catch it by the trigger. We all treat them safe and it's rare to drop one, but stuff happens.

Finally a good safety tip. So so true. IT will not go off no matter how hard it hits the ground. If you drop it. by all means dont reach for it.

 

[karatejoe]

I all ways chamber my S&W.40. I have chambered all my hand guns for the last 20 years. People shooting their selves while holstering or what ever are careless. IPD instructors drilled safety in our brains day after day. The only gun NOT chambered is my 12 gauge ( my choice) and my AR15 ( wifes request).

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Bunch of hypocrites. So many of you are irate over the government wanting to control us, yet you want to control how other people carry...

Please point out to me one post indicating that we should control how other people carry. Engaging in the free flow of ideas and participating in training certainly doesn't equate to control.

 

[HoughMade]

A couple of issues- as for carrying without one in the chamber, I understand why, but to assume you will always see trouble coming and be able to prepare for it is an unwarranted assumption. Sure, racking the slide can be pretty fast, even one handed, but that's a lot of motion.

As for using a manual safety or not, obviously that's a judgment call. If you want one and and train and practice with it you should be fine. A well practiced draw stroke will incorporate the safety coming off as the gun comes forward, so there's no loss of time. However, practice is the key.

To all those who claim that a manual safety somehow makes you less safe, less of a man, less proficient.....maybe it would make you that, because you haven't practiced with it. I suppose we're going to conclude that the 1911 "cocked and locked" crowd are taking their life into their hands? Not if they are trained.

And for for the no safety, no how, no way crowd, generally speaking- you are correct in that proper gun handling will keep your finger off the trigger and the gun will be perfectly safe until you pull the trigger. Again, training and practice....and hope for perfection.

So, why all the "it's gotta be my way" posturing? You do it your way, have fun, practice, train and be safe. Someone else can do it their way and hopefully be just as safe, just as fast and just as proficient.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1YqcvuRRggM[/ame]

How'd that video get on there....sorry.

 

[Bapak2ja]

Irritating the crap out of me.
The latest... he's dumping the glock for a gun with a thumb safety so he can finally carry one in the chamber.
Statement "i'd rather gamble with the thumb saftey than one in the chamber on the glock".
wtf! can't get through...
rant over.

Quit arguing with him. Never does any good and just makes everyone mad.

I switched from a Glock to a Taurus in part because I wanted a manual safety because I carry one in the chamber. I practice disengaging the safety as part of my draw. By the time the gun comes on target, I have the safety off and all I need to do is squeeze. I prefer the manual safety over the grip safety. I really appreciate the trigger safety and the thumb safety on my 709, and wish my 24/7 had the trigger safety, too. (My gen 1 does not have the trigger safety.)

The 1911 has a grip safety and a thumb safety. I doubt anyone here would offer those who carry one a jar for their cajones. Folks have different opinions; but if they are carrying, there is no need to revoke their man card.

 

[JetGirl]

The 1911 has a grip safety and a thumb safety. I doubt anyone here would offer those who carry one a jar for their cajones. Folks have different opinions; but if they are carrying, there is no need to revoke their man card.

This thread just got weird for me to be in it.

 

[HoughMade]

This thread just got weird for me to be in it.

Now, the missing word in this post intrigues me. I choose to interpret it as:

"This thread just got weird enough for me to be in it."

 

[Bapak2ja]

This thread just got weird for me to be in it.

No, it was already weird. I just alluded to one of the earlier posts where one suggested giving a jar to the guy who wants a thumb safety. If the line troubles you, I will happily delete it. No problem.

 

[Bapak2ja]

Hand him a jar for the cojones. If he's not going to wear them, at least preserve them in case he wants/needs them later.

This is the comment to which I alluded. It was one of the earliest on the thread.