# Drawing and firing, "Israeli-style"



## Grenadier (Jun 13, 2008)

I used to prefer carrying my pistols "Israeli-style," which basically means that you have a loaded magazine in your pistol, but don't keep a round chambered.  When you need to, you draw, rack, and fire in one series of movements.  

Here's a pretty good video of a guy showing how fast the "Israeli-style" method can be.  

I don't carry that way anymore, though, since 1) I'm not nearly as accomplished as the guy in that video, and 2) I simply prefer keeping the gun in its holster, with a round in the chamber, since my holster covers the trigger guard completely.  

Still, I find this guy's speed and accuracy to be quite impressive, especially since he's doing this with the garmets that he's using.


----------



## Deaf Smith (Jun 13, 2008)

I understand the Israeli's use this method because long time ago they had rather large numbers of types of simi-autos they have in stock. From P-35s to 1911s to Sigs, Smiths, Jerochos, Stars, and what ever they can get ahold of.

The advantage is mainly of safety. A chamber empty pistol is harder to have an AD/ND with, at least if you are just toying around with it. Also if the gun is snatched, it makes it harder for the attacker to manipulate it. It will give you a second or more time to presuade him to give you your gun back.

But there are major disadvantages.

1) Two handed slide manipulation with wet or sweaty hands is problematic. This is especially true if the slide has very narrow or slick serritations. It is also prone to double feeding and short stroking the weapon.

2) Having two hands to do this slide manipulation leaves you at a real disadvantage if you don't have two hands to do this! This can be in a retention situation where you are struggleing with the attacker and, well, it's kind of difficult to ignore the attacker!

3) It leaves you prone to being jumped as the attacker knows you will have to add extra operations to fire the weapon. Hip shooting or retention shooting will be out of the question for you.

4 If you don't have two hands, racking the slide on your pants, or leg, or side of car, is also problematic (and by problematic we mean it can be screwed up real easy in a tense situation.) This is especially true of your carry gun is 'slick', I.E., melted corners and such to keep it from snagging on anything (and if it's snag proof, then it's real hard to make the slide hang on anything to get it to rack.)

5) It adds another step to the process to use the weapon. One needs to keep in mind the KISS principle. Don't make emergency equipment more complex to use, make it simpler. That's one of the reasons the simi-auto is more popular than the revolver (at least reliable ones!)

So, you see, the Israeli method, while a good administrative method for newbie shooters on a range, is not something one wants for a CCW method.

Deaf


----------



## tkd1964 (Jun 13, 2008)

I used this method when I carried my Glock. It worked quite well even with sweaty hands. Not always but at times. As long as you are observent and practice holstering and drawing you shouldn't need to use this method. I never use a holster that has a thumb strap either. If the holster doesn't restrain the pistol, get a new holster.:highfive:


----------



## tellner (Jun 13, 2008)

I dunno. It's just not working with my revolver or flintlock


----------



## MBuzzy (Jun 13, 2008)

Air Force and Army have vastly different standards for carrying weapons, but the Air Force method is to keep a loaded mag, a round chambered, and the weapon on safety.  That means you draw, flip the safety and fire.  Needless to say, we're less concerned about safety and more about having the round available when needed.  

I'm honestly not sure what the Army method is, but I believe that it is the same as the "israeli method."


----------



## MA-Caver (Jun 13, 2008)

tkd1964 said:


> I used this method when I carried my Glock. It worked quite well even with sweaty hands. Not always but at times. As long as you are observent and practice holstering and drawing you shouldn't need to use this method. I never use a holster that has a thumb strap either. If the holster doesn't restrain the pistol, get a new holster.:highfive:



Well, as the man in the video said... practice makes perfect. That's the key with ANYTHING we do.


----------



## KenpoTex (Jun 13, 2008)

I personally think that carrying a defensive weapon in "Condition-3" is absolutely stupid (the exception would be shotguns carried "cruiser ready" when in the car).

Being safe means using a good quality holster and keeping your booger-hook of the bang-switch until it's time to shoot.


----------



## MBuzzy (Jun 13, 2008)

KenpoTex said:


> I personally think that carrying a defensive weapon in "Condition-3" is absolutely stupid (the exception would be shotguns carried "cruiser ready" when in the car).
> 
> Being safe means using a good quality holster and keeping your booger-hook of the bang-switch until it's time to shoot.


 
Normally I'd fully agree, but I think that it depends on the situation.  A civilian carrying a gun, definately...in fact, in most cases, I would say that it is best to even carry with no mag.  A cop, at least loaded mag.  Federal Agent or other, no problem with a round chambered.  Military, NO DOUBT round chambered.  

It completely depends on your job and situation and WHY you are carrying the gun.  There are professions out there that if the gun comes out of the holster, someone's getting shot.


----------



## Deaf Smith (Jun 13, 2008)

MBuzzy said:


> Normally I'd fully agree, but I think that it depends on the situation. A civilian carrying a gun, definately...in fact, in most cases, I would say that it is best to even carry with no mag. A cop, at least loaded mag. Federal Agent or other, no problem with a round chambered. Military, NO DOUBT round chambered.
> 
> It completely depends on your job and situation and WHY you are carrying the gun. There are professions out there that if the gun comes out of the holster, someone's getting shot.


 
No mag? Who would carry it with no magazine in it? I'd carry a rock before I'd do that! I know of no class of carrier, CCW or police or military, that needs a weapon with no magazine. I can see some military guards with no round in chamber (but definatly not in a war zone), but all others chamber loaded.

Deaf


----------



## Deaf Smith (Jun 13, 2008)

KenpoTex said:


> I personally think that carrying a defensive weapon in "Condition-3" is absolutely stupid (the exception would be shotguns carried "cruiser ready" when in the car).
> 
> Being safe means using a good quality holster and keeping your booger-hook of the bang-switch until it's time to shoot.


 
Absolutly Ken!

Deaf


----------



## MBuzzy (Jun 13, 2008)

Deaf Smith said:


> No mag? Who would carry it with no magazine in it? I'd carry a rock before I'd do that! I know of no class of carrier, CCW or police or military, that needs a weapon with no magazine. I can see some military guards with no round in chamber (but definatly not in a war zone), but all others chamber loaded.
> 
> Deaf


 
Official carrier, I agree.  They should always have a mag.

I'm used to the Air Force rules, where we are required by regulation to have a round chambered.  So, if carrying with a loaded mag is standard, why is the "israeli style" different? 

I can definately see situations where no mag is needed.  When I go practice shooting at the indoor range, I never carry with a mag.  The average civilian with a concealed carry permit, I see no need to have a mag in.  Mainly for safety...if it isn't there, it takes that extra step and requires more thought.  A civilian in that situation should be shooting as a LAST resort, not like a cop or military, where the weapon comes out for many reasons and needs to be ready to fire.


----------



## jks9199 (Jun 13, 2008)

MBuzzy said:


> Normally I'd fully agree, but I think that it depends on the situation.  A civilian carrying a gun, definately...in fact, in most cases, I would say that it is best to even carry with no mag.  A cop, at least loaded mag.  Federal Agent or other, no problem with a round chambered.  Military, NO DOUBT round chambered.
> 
> It completely depends on your job and situation and WHY you are carrying the gun.  There are professions out there that if the gun comes out of the holster, someone's getting shot.


If you're carrying a gun to defend yourself -- it should be ready to do so.  Fine motor control nosedives under the stress of a fight for your life.  The last thing I want to be doing is fussing with the magazine or even the slide when someone's shooting at me.  

If you're simply transporting a gun somewhere, it should be unloaded and secured properly.

"Cruiser safe" is a compromise for the shotgun; it's not under perfect control when it's locked up in a cruiser, and stupid mistakes have happened when cops have had to remove it from the car.  Or when something like a crash sent stuff careening around the car...  So, you keep the magazine tube loaded, but the chamber empty.  It's kind of like the old practice of keeping a revolver with an empty chamber under the hammer.


----------



## KenpoTex (Jun 14, 2008)

MBuzzy said:


> Official carrier, I agree. They should always have a mag.
> 
> I'm used to the Air Force rules, where we are required by regulation to have a round chambered. So, if carrying with a loaded mag is standard, why is the "israeli style" different?
> 
> I can definately see situations where no mag is needed. When I go practice shooting at the indoor range, I never carry with a mag. The average civilian with a concealed carry permit, I see no need to have a mag in. Mainly for safety...if it isn't there, it takes that extra step and requires more thought. A civilian in that situation should be shooting as a LAST resort, not like a cop or military, where the weapon comes out for many reasons and needs to be ready to fire.


So, because I'm a _civilian_, I shouldn't have my weapon in a condition that permits immediate use should the need arise?  This means that if I'm forced to use my weapon, I'm going to have to draw the gun, draw the mag, insert the mag into the pistol, rack the slide, and ONLY then will I be able to shoot the S.O.B. that is attacking me...this makes no sense at all.

When carrying for defensive purposes, I see nothing "safe" about a weapon that is not ready to use.  I'll even go so far as to say that if you are carrying your weapon with an empty chamber or without a magazine inserted, it is indicitive of either a lack of training, poor mindset, or both.


----------



## Deaf Smith (Jun 14, 2008)

I can understand some ranges are 'cold' ranges. No loaded guns (the indoor range I go to, which I have a life membership, gives me no such restriction and lets me draw and do all kinds of stunts most are not allowed to, but then they know me real real well.)

Shotguns almost always have very poor safeties. The safeties block only the trigger, not the sear, nor hammer, nor firing pin, and thus any jar such as dropping the weapon always carries some danger. And that's why 'cruiser ready' is a good way to carry the shotgun.

As for defensive firearms, always fully loaded unless their mechanisms make it unsafe to do so (like older submachineguns that cannot be carried uncocked with a loaded magazine in place, or SSA revolvers like the Colt SSA which if the hammer is lowered if the chamber under the hammer is live and it's dropped on the hammer.)

Deaf


----------



## MBuzzy (Jun 14, 2008)

KenpoTex said:


> So, because I'm a _civilian_, I shouldn't have my weapon in a condition that permits immediate use should the need arise? This means that if I'm forced to use my weapon, I'm going to have to draw the gun, draw the mag, insert the mag into the pistol, rack the slide, and ONLY then will I be able to shoot the S.O.B. that is attacking me...this makes no sense at all.
> 
> When carrying for defensive purposes, I see nothing "safe" about a weapon that is not ready to use. I'll even go so far as to say that if you are carrying your weapon with an empty chamber or without a magazine inserted, it is indicitive of either a lack of training, poor mindset, or both.


 
Luckily, according to the law, you can carry your weapon however you want with the right permit.  My _personal_ opinion is that I wouldn't carry with a mag in.  But I also wouldn't carry a weapon without a very specific purpose.  I have never been in a situation where I've said to myself "gee, I wish I had a gun right now."  So that does color my statements a bit.

I really think of how you carry your weapon as simply more steps between you and killing someone.  Round chambered, safety on I see for situations when if the gun comes out, someone's dying and needs to die now.  Loaded mag in the weapon no round, I would think of in a situation where the gun can be used "procedurally" or in situation control.  No mag, it a situation where the gun comes out as a last resort and very seldom.  Basically, each condition requires one additional step before someone dies.  To me, the more distinct steps possible, the better.  It simply requires more thought and deliberate action.  But it is still all a matter of preference.  I wouldn't advocate for any change in SOP or in laws or rules.  Just my opinion.  The only times I've ever have been in target practice and Iraq....basically two different ends of the spectrum.

by the way, please take no offence, I don't use the term civilian in a derogatory sense.  In my opinion, officers not on duty, military not on duty, federal agents not on duty, etc are all civilians also.  Basically I just use it as someone who doesn't carry in an official capacity.


----------



## tellner (Jun 14, 2008)

With respect Buzzy that's really bad advice. Other people have already pointed out that it makes the gun worthless for protection except as a not terribly effective club. There might be half a dozen people on the planet who could draw the weapon from a minimally engineered retention holster, draw a magazine, insert the magazine, rack, acquire a target and fire at realistic self defense distances. If you're hinting that a civilian doesn't need to actually fire the pistol, just wave it around and intimidate the bad guys I would suggest that you have taken leave of your otherwise well-developed senses.

So what problem are you trying to solve? You talk about NDs and having time to think about the situation, to carefully consider what's really going on. It's more of a problem for law enforcement than the rest of us. Police are often called to situations where they don't know who is who or what happened. The real threat may not be apparent, and they have to do insane things like get close to angry violent people and grapple them into submission. That's why shooting the wrong person is more common among LEOs than the general population according to the standard NIJ studies.

When someone who doesn't carry tin and doesn't have a paycheck signed by the DoD is in a deadly force self defense situation it's usually pretty clear to the defender who is trying to do what to whom. Responding in a timely manner is more of a problem. You get to carry your weapon in an exposed holster that's designed for quick access. We have to keep ours concealed which makes them even slower to deploy.

Israeli style can be fast enough with practice. Condition 1 makes sense if you really think you can trust your safety. But honestly, as long as the holster keeps the finger off the little lever even Condition 0 will do. People have carried revolvers for years with no safety and a full cylinder. They weren't any less safe with them than guys who carry self-loaders. But an empty chamber and no magazine? I'd rather have an umbrella. At least I can poke someone with it. And that's a higher percentage move than fumbling to load while the goblins are beating my head off the concrete.


----------



## Andy Moynihan (Jun 14, 2008)

MBuzzy said:


> I really think of how you carry your weapon as simply more steps between you and killing someone. Round chambered, safety on I see for situations when if the gun comes out, someone's dying and needs to die now..


 

With all due respect, if you are legally drawing your weapon in any capacity, that is EXACTLY what HAS happened.

If you are not justified in shooting to stop a deadly force threat, you are not justified in drawing/shooting AT ALL.


----------



## Deaf Smith (Jun 14, 2008)

MBuzzy said:


> I really think of how you carry your weapon as simply more steps between you and killing someone. Round chambered, safety on I see for situations when if the gun comes out, someone's dying and needs to die now. Loaded mag in the weapon no round, I would think of in a situation where the gun can be used "procedurally" or in situation control. No mag, it a situation where the gun comes out as a last resort and very seldom. Basically, each condition requires one additional step before someone dies. To me, the more distinct steps possible, the better. It simply requires more thought and deliberate action.


 
MBuzzy,

If you have ever been in a situation were you have been scared, I mean real scared? I have no doubt you know how hard it is to do fine motor skills or complex ones. It can be when your car skids, or you are drowning in a lake, or... someone about to kill you. Surely when your car is starting to skid on ice you don't want to a) power up the breakes, b) adjust the tire pressure, c) and steer all while the situation is going downhill. Or if you are drowning you don't want to have to undo the safety latch on your CO2 powered life preserver, unwind the cord, and then inflate it. No, you just want to jirk the cord... NOW!

Adding more steps does not help at all. It takes your mind off the situation at hand where you could have spent extra time de-esclationg the situation instead of trying to bring a gun up into a readiness state.

And that is why U.S. cops use simple weapons like Glocks. They do not want extra steps. And they don't carry chamber empty handguns either. And they speak with many volumes of experience.

Deaf


----------



## jks9199 (Jun 14, 2008)

MBuzzy said:


> Luckily, according to the law, you can carry your weapon however you want with the right permit.  My _personal_ opinion is that I wouldn't carry with a mag in.  But I also wouldn't carry a weapon without a very specific purpose.  I have never been in a situation where I've said to myself "gee, I wish I had a gun right now."  So that does color my statements a bit.
> 
> I really think of how you carry your weapon as simply more steps between you and killing someone.  Round chambered, safety on I see for situations when if the gun comes out, someone's dying and needs to die now.  Loaded mag in the weapon no round, I would think of in a situation where the gun can be used "procedurally" or in situation control.  No mag, it a situation where the gun comes out as a last resort and very seldom.  Basically, each condition requires one additional step before someone dies.  To me, the more distinct steps possible, the better.  It simply requires more thought and deliberate action.  But it is still all a matter of preference.  I wouldn't advocate for any change in SOP or in laws or rules.  Just my opinion.  The only times I've ever have been in target practice and Iraq....basically two different ends of the spectrum.
> 
> by the way, please take no offence, I don't use the term civilian in a derogatory sense.  In my opinion, officers not on duty, military not on duty, federal agents not on duty, etc are all civilians also.  Basically I just use it as someone who doesn't carry in an official capacity.



What "specific purpose" would you carry a gun for?  If you're carrying a gun solely to go out and kill someone, you're pretty much contemplating murder unless it's in the line of military duty.  (Note that US police DO NOT carry guns to kill people; we carry guns to protect ourselves and others.  The fact that someone may die when we employ them is an unfortunate byproduct.)

If you're carrying a gun to protect yourself -- it needs to be ready to use because you won't have time to mess with it when you need it.  What you're suggesting is akin to suggesting that a trained martial artist needs to walk around with his hands tied behind his back unless he's being actively attacked, or that you should have to carry a knife disassembled in different pockets.



Andy Moynihan said:


> With all due respect, if you are legally drawing your weapon in any capacity, that is EXACTLY what HAS happened.
> 
> If you are not justified in shooting to stop a deadly force threat, you are not justified in drawing/shooting AT ALL.



Well said.  That's all that it amounts to.



Deaf Smith said:


> MBuzzy,
> 
> If you have ever been in a situation were you have been scared, I mean real scared? I have no doubt you know how hard it is to do fine motor skills or complex ones. It can be when your car skids, or you are drowning in a lake, or... someone about to kill you. Surely when your car is starting to skid on ice you don't want to a) power up the breakes, b) adjust the tire pressure, c) and steer all while the situation is going downhill. Or if you are drowning you don't want to have to undo the safety latch on your CO2 powered life preserver, unwind the cord, and then inflate it. No, you just want to jirk the cord... NOW!
> 
> ...




The various Glocks are pretty near perfect cop-guns.  Minimal extra parts or steps to deal with, tolerant of abuse (see HERE, for a measure of how much abuse a Glock can take!), and reliable.  I don't like that you need to pull the trigger to field strip it; that's caused more than a few accidental discharges.

And the simple fact that is that when it's hitting the fan, you don't have time, coordination, or mental ability to handle a lot of extra steps.  See Dave Grossman's description of the physiological effects of life-or-death combat HERE and HERE.  As fine motor control goes down, the last thing you want to be doing is juggling with a magazine, trying to rack a slide, and so on before you're able to defend yourself.


----------



## MBuzzy (Jun 14, 2008)

All very good point, I believe I may have to alter my opinion!  

I suppose that my line of thinking is more to prevent the "passion" shootings or "oops I pulled the trigger" which probably isn't much of an issue.  Those who carry are generally responsible enough not to worry about it.  

That is a very good point that when the situation does arise, motor control goes out the window....which is what is making me backpeddle a bit.  I've been in situations where I probably could not have gotten the weapon out of the holster, let alone loaded and racked.  

Honestly, I've never carried outside of a firing range or uniform so its good to see the other perspective.


----------



## MBuzzy (Jun 14, 2008)

Oh yeah...by "specific purpose" I mean line of duty.



Andy Moynihan said:


> With all due respect, if you are legally drawing your weapon in any capacity, that is EXACTLY what HAS happened.
> 
> If you are not justified in shooting to stop a deadly force threat, you are not justified in drawing/shooting AT ALL.


 
I'm not aware of police officer regulations, but military wise, there are procedural situations where the weapon is ready to fire whether the threat is present or not.  Clearning rooms, convoy situations, show of force, etc.  As limited as they are....I've had a weapon out, with no immediate intention to fire and no immediate threat - thought definate cause to have it out (guarding undesirables, etc)


----------



## jks9199 (Jun 14, 2008)

MBuzzy said:


> Oh yeah...by "specific purpose" I mean line of duty.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not aware of police officer regulations, but military wise, there are procedural situations where the weapon is ready to fire whether the threat is present or not.  Clearning rooms, convoy situations, show of force, etc.  As limited as they are....I've had a weapon out, with no immediate intention to fire and no immediate threat - thought definate cause to have it out (guarding undesirables, etc)


What's happening in cases where a police officer (or the military, for that matter) has a gun out without an immediately APPARENT threat is simple; it seems highly likely that such a threat may present itself suddenly and with little warning.  Each agency has its own specific policies and SOPs, but generally speaking a police officer is permitted to have his gun out anytime he reasonably anticipates needing it.  Typical situations include room or building clearing, dealing with a suspect that they believe may be armed, some traffic stops, and more.  Sometimes we'll draw and be a little sneaky about it (low hold, down by the leg or otherwise out of immediate sight), other times you're staring down the barrel of the gun until we know what's going on.  It's real simple; action is always faster than reaction.  Having my gun out means I'm much more likely to successfully get it into play when I need it than if it's in the holster...  

A few of the times you mention are times that cops don't have a gun out, as a general rule.  We don't make a "show of force."  If I draw, I anticipate that there is a good chance I will need to use lethal force in the immediate future.  The fact that I've drawn may deter and de-escalate the situation -- but I anticipate that I'll be shooting.  And we seldom would draw during some sort of convoy/escort, or on routine patrol, unlike a military unit.

I also want to address another comment you made earlier in the thread; cops off duty are in a really complex situation.  We may or may not have full authority depending on state law.  For example, in VA, officially I am a mere citizen off duty, outside my jurisdiction, but within my jurisdiction I have full authority and, per GOs, I am "subject to duty" and could actually face discipline for failing to act -- but I have colleagues in other states or federal agents who have full authority anywhere they go, at anytime.  But, at the same time, I don't stop being a "cop", and depending on the situation, wouldn't hesitate to take police action.  (There are plenty of threads about when to take action and how to make that decision; here's one.)  Additionally, some of the folks we deal with just aren't happy about the outcome.  So, many of us carry our guns off duty; some of us are, in fact, required to do so.


----------



## Archangel M (Jun 14, 2008)

The best safety there is is keeping your finger off the trigger and outside the trigger guard until you are ready to shoot.


----------



## Deaf Smith (Jun 14, 2008)

JKS,

I carry a Glock (Glock 27). I compete in IDPA with a Glock (Glock 17). I have several Glocks (26, 27, 19, 32, and 17!)

Yes I have other handguns, and my other carry gun is a Smith 642, and there are new kids on the block like the Smith M&P that give Glocks a run for their money now days, but... In Collin County, Texas, they have the annual Glock .vs. 1911 match (I've been in it.) 1000 rounds over one day. No cleaning allowed. Any jams call a halt to the shooting and the it's documentated.

Virtually all Glock 17s and 19s pass the 1000 round test without any jams of any kind. Most Glock 20s, in .45, have 2 jams for the 1000 rounds. Only ONE 1911, a Springfield Armory 9mm, and ONE STI .45, have gone the 1000 rounds without a jam.

I'm pretty sure a P-35 would do it (I used it in IPSC for many years making class 'A' with it.) But I don't know of many handguns that would!

MBuzzy,

Don't sweat it. I do know military regs. The regs are to protect the carrier officers in case someone is injured. They don't care about the gunts. 

Even in Iraq, inside the green zone supposedly no mags allowed in their weapons (that never happend in the war with Germany or Japan in all but the most rear units!) And one time they did take up the magazines, at an air base, and sure enough, some Japanese attacked the base and killed an awful lot of people who had guns but no ammo.

Deaf


----------



## kwaichang (Jun 14, 2008)

I wouldn't put most peoples skills against any Israeli agent's skill with a hand gun.  But that's my experience talking.:uhyeah:
Just remember that "sight picture and trigger control" means the ability to hit your target.:flame:

If you carry, you should be prepared to use the weapon.  Fully loaded, round in the chamber and saftey on is fine for cwp personnel.

It is better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it.


----------



## SeanKerby (Jun 15, 2008)

When going from home to range, Condition 4. No magazine in wpn, no round in chamber, wpn on safe.


When actually carrying, Condition 1. Round in chamber, magazine inserted, wpn on safe.

That's just me.


----------



## MBuzzy (Jun 15, 2008)

For LEOs and those with Concealed Carry Permits, I'm curious, are there any rules for how the weapon should be carried?


----------



## Grenadier (Jun 15, 2008)

MBuzzy said:


> For LEOs and those with Concealed Carry Permits, I'm curious, are there any rules for how the weapon should be carried?


 
For concealed carry permit holders, there is no real hard and fast way to carry the weapon.  It just comes down to whatever the person wants to do. 

There are several options available, for several types of pistols.  

Single action semiautomatic pistol (1911, Browning Hi Power) users have several choices:

Chamber empty, hammer down (like the Israeli style method). 
Chamber loaded, hammer down, safety can be on or off.  
Chamber loaded, hammer cocked, safety on (cocked and locked).  

For double action semiautos, including double action / single action types:

Chamber empty, hammer down (as above).
Chamber loaded, hammer down, safety, if any, can be on or off.


In general, people don't carry their weapons with the chamber loaded, and the hammer cocked in a double action weapon, since most current double action weapons, when the safety is engaged, it also acts as a decocking device.  


Personally?  For my double action weapons (including my Glocks), it's chamber loaded.  They're always carried in stiff leather holsters that have the trigger guard completely covered.  

If I were to carry a single action semiauto, then I would use the "cocked and locked" method, or the loaded chamber / hammer down method.


----------



## jks9199 (Jun 15, 2008)

MBuzzy said:


> For LEOs and those with Concealed Carry Permits, I'm curious, are there any rules for how the weapon should be carried?


It depends.

In VA, the only rules I'm aware amount to "don't be reckless and don't let kids get ahold of it."  There's nothing in the laws about what sort of holster or where it must be carried on the body.  There are locations where you cannot carry a concealed gun, like private property that's posted "no guns" or bars.

For a LEO, it comes down to agency policies.  I know of some agencies where you are required to carry your duty gun (or another gun issued by the department), others that specify what you may carry off duty, and there are still a few that let you carry anything you can qualify with...  Most require some sort of retention holster, though a thumb snap is generally enough.


----------



## KenpoTex (Jun 15, 2008)

MBuzzy said:


> For LEOs and those with Concealed Carry Permits, I'm curious, are there any rules for how the weapon should be carried?


 
I highly doubt that there is any LE agency/department in the USA that mandates carry with an empty-chamber (and I'd be very interested to hear of any).  I'm _almost positive _that there is no state that requires this for CCW holders.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 16, 2008)

KenpoTex said:


> I personally think that carrying a defensive weapon in "Condition-3" is absolutely stupid (the exception would be shotguns carried "cruiser ready" when in the car).
> 
> Being safe means using a good quality holster and keeping your booger-hook of the bang-switch until it's time to shoot.


 HEAR, HEAR!  The power of the BOOGER-FINGER!


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 16, 2008)

KenpoTex said:


> So, because I'm a _civilian_, I shouldn't have my weapon in a condition that permits immediate use should the need arise? This means that if I'm forced to use my weapon, I'm going to have to draw the gun, draw the mag, insert the mag into the pistol, rack the slide, and ONLY then will I be able to shoot the S.O.B. that is attacking me...this makes no sense at all.
> 
> When carrying for defensive purposes, I see nothing "safe" about a weapon that is not ready to use. I'll even go so far as to say that if you are carrying your weapon with an empty chamber or without a magazine inserted, it is indicitive of either a lack of training, poor mindset, or both.


 You're a civilian?  Darn, I had you pegged as 'on the job'.  I can usually spot another copper, even on the internet.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 16, 2008)

Deaf Smith said:


> JKS,
> 
> I carry a Glock (Glock 27). I compete in IDPA with a Glock (Glock 17). I have several Glocks (26, 27, 19, 32, and 17!)
> 
> ...


  While owning several GLOCKS myself, and having carried one for 12 years of police duty, i've transitioned to carrying a 1911 because I prefer the trigger operation that enhances accuracy.  You are correct, however, in that GLOCKS are inherently more reliable than just about any other handgun out of the box.  But since i'm willing to spend the time and effort in keeping my custom 1911 clean, correctly oiled, and the proper springs changed at the proper time, it's an acceptable trade off.  

I wouldn't recommend a 1911 to anyone who merely wished a reliable reasonably accurate 'buy and forget until I need it' gun....a GLOCK has that market cornered in spades....it requires virtually ZERO maintainance and fires the first time every time.

Jeff Cooper grudgingly said it best.



> "The Glock is okay. It is generally reliable, it is comparatively inexpensive, and it is available in respectable calibers. Above all, its aftermarket service is superior. The great part of its sales comes from police departments, where maintenance and quick service are of primary importance. It may not be the best choice for the expert pistolero, but such people are not in the majority." -Col. Jeff Cooper
> 
> "It is true that I am no champion of the Glock pistol, but I think it unseemly to pick on this device when it is obviously satisfactory in most uses." -Col. Jeff Cooper



About has a high a praise for any modern semi-auto pistol as you're likely to get from Col. Cooper....who detested the typical long and heavy first shot triggers seen on Sigs, Berettas, Smiths and others, referring to them as 'Crunch Tickers'.  I never felt poorly armed with a GLOCK.


----------



## Andy Moynihan (Jun 16, 2008)

sgtmac_46 said:


> You're a civilian? Darn, I had you pegged as 'on the job'. I can usually spot another copper, even on the internet.


 

He's a civilian * at THIS time*. not sure about before?


----------



## Grenadier (Jun 16, 2008)

sgtmac_46 said:


> Jeff Cooper grudgingly said it best.
> 
> About has a high a praise for any modern semi-auto pistol as you're likely to get from Col. Cooper....who detested the typical long and heavy first shot triggers seen on Sigs, Berettas, Smiths and others, referring to them as 'Crunch Tickers'. I never felt poorly armed with a GLOCK.


 
On a side note, one of the gun grabber organizations tried to get Jeff Cooper to say negative things about Glocks, trying to milk out anything that could be interpreted as a safety hazard.  

He told them to go stick it where the sun doesn't shine, and that Glocks worked just fine for the job.


----------



## KenpoTex (Jun 16, 2008)

sgtmac_46 said:
			
		

> You're a civilian? Darn, I had you pegged as 'on the job'. I can usually spot another copper, even on the internet.





Andy Moynihan said:


> He's a civilian * at THIS time*. not sure about before?


CJ degree and various private-security jobs (currently armed EP stuff), never had a commission though.


Sarge and Gren, thanks for the Col. Cooper trivia...interesting.


----------



## kwaichang (Jun 16, 2008)

jks9199 said:


> It depends.
> 
> In VA, the only rules I'm aware amount to "don't be reckless and don't let kids get ahold of it." There's nothing in the laws about what sort of holster or where it must be carried on the body. There are locations where you cannot carry a concealed gun, like private property that's posted "no guns" or bars.
> .


Yep, in fact if you'd carry in plain site, there isn't a need for a permit at least in my area of Va. and I believe that cities have the right to modify that caveat.
CCP doesn't specify how to carry.  I'm a 9mm carry (basically) and have seven in the clip, one in the chamber, safety on.  I feel comfortable.  
There have been too many shootings in parking lots of major malls down here, so I never go without carrying.  Now some malls say "no guns" on their doors; I deal with it on a situation by situation deal.
Oh, and my concealed holster does *not* have any type of strap to secure the weapon, thus no delay in my draw.


----------



## tellner (Jun 16, 2008)

MBuzzy said:


> For LEOs and those with Concealed Carry Permits, I'm curious, are there any rules for how the weapon should be carried?



It really depends on the State (for CCW holders) and the Department (for law enforcement). 

The general rule is "don't let it show" if you're in an area where CCW is legal but open carry is not. And even when open carry is within the rules it tends to get the unfriendly attention of bystanders and the police, so it's best to be discreet. 

What's more annoying is the list of _places_ where firearms may not be carried. Most places that includes bars and public schools. Some States add churches or government buildings. Others forbid it on public transportation. Sometimes State law conflicts with city ordinance even where other law preempts cities from being more restrictive.


----------



## Deaf Smith (Jun 16, 2008)

sgtmac_46 said:


> About has a high a praise for any modern semi-auto pistol as you're likely to get from Col. Cooper....who detested the typical long and heavy first shot triggers seen on Sigs, Berettas, Smiths and others, referring to them as 'Crunch Tickers'. I never felt poorly armed with a GLOCK.


 
While I have two SIGs, 225 and 239, I to don't care for DA/SA transitions. Hence the Glock with just one type of trigger pull. Now I have, oh, 5 1911s, Kimber, Springfield Armory, and Colt. One in 9mm and one in .22. The rest are .45s. But until I make master level IDPA in stock service class, I'll keep using the Glock. Once I hit master (I'm expert in all categories), I'll then transfer to 1911s till I make master in enhanced and custom defense (both 1911 categoies, one 9mm/40, the other .45.) After that I go to wheelguns for the last category, stock service revolver.

You see, I feel one should compete with one carries least one goofs up the festivities cause the manual of arms are different.

Oh, the 1911s I have are very good. Very expensive to. But it's a Glock I compete with, so it's a Glock I carry.

Deaf


----------



## Deaf Smith (Jun 16, 2008)

_



			For LEOs and those with Concealed Carry Permits, I'm curious, are there any rules for how the weapon should be carried?
		
Click to expand...

_
_In Georgia you cannot carry the weapon in any position but along the hip. No ankle rigs, no forarm holsters, no inside thigh rigs, etc... I think sholder holsters are ok, but not anywere else._

_Each state is different. Oklahoma you can't carry a .50 cal. Yes, .45 is ok but nothing above it (no .50 GI for me!) Some states, like NY, require the serial numbers of the guns to be on the permit (max of 4 guns for NY.) Texas has no such requrement. _

_Oh, there are tons of laws on where and where not you can carry. What states recognize your permit (or like Alaska and Vermont, you don't need no stinken permit!)_

_http://www.handgunlaw.us/_

_http://www.usconcealedcarry.com/_

_http://www.kc3.com/index.html_

_and others. Huge amont of info._

Deaf


----------



## kwaichang (Jun 16, 2008)

Deaf Smith said:


> _What states recognize your permit (or like Alaska and Vermont, you don't need no stinken permit!)_
> 
> _http://www.handgunlaw.us/_
> 
> ...


 
Indeed.  It's one of the reasons I miss Arizona so much.  Nothing like going grocery shopping and seeing your fellow citizens strapped with their 45's.


----------



## jks9199 (Jun 16, 2008)

KenpoTex said:


> I highly doubt that there is any LE agency/department in the USA that mandates carry with an empty-chamber (and I'd be very interested to hear of any).  I'm _almost positive _that there is no state that requires this for CCW holders.


In fact, I'd be willing to bet it's the exact opposite.  We're trained to carry a full mag, plus one in the chamber.  So, on my duty belt with my issued Glock 22, I've got 2 full spare mags (15 each, for 30 rounds) as well as 1 in the gun (another 15) and one in the chamber for total of 46 rounds...


----------



## kwaichang (Jun 16, 2008)

jks9199; yeah, in your neck of the woods you need all the ammo you can carry.
May you do your twenty and retire quietly.


----------



## jks9199 (Jun 16, 2008)

sgtmac_46 said:


> While owning several GLOCKS myself, and having carried one for 12 years of police duty, i've transitioned to carrying a 1911 because I prefer the trigger operation that enhances accuracy.  You are correct, however, in that GLOCKS are inherently more reliable than just about any other handgun out of the box.  But since i'm willing to spend the time and effort in keeping my custom 1911 clean, correctly oiled, and the proper springs changed at the proper time, it's an acceptable trade off.
> 
> I wouldn't recommend a 1911 to anyone who merely wished a reliable reasonably accurate 'buy and forget until I need it' gun....a GLOCK has that market cornered in spades....it requires virtually ZERO maintainance and fires the first time every time.
> 
> ...



That's why I said that the Glock is a damn near perfect COP gun; it's not the fanciest, best machined, prettiest or most just about anything else gun on the market.  But Glocks almost invariable will work, no matter how they're used or abused.  (I used to work with someone who NEVER in 5 years cleaned his, whether on the range or in the field.  It never failed to fire...  Not a practice I'd recommend, but it speaks well for the reliability.)  The reality is that even a cop who's obsessive about cleaning and maintaining his sidearm is likely to need it sometime after he's been out in the rain, or had road crap blasted over them...  That pristine gun he starts with every day isn't likely to be pristine when he needs it.  And there are minimal extra steps to deal with, and it breaks down easily into a manageable set of parts.  (Four; receiver/grip, barrel, slide, and spring.)  The "finicky bits" aren't part of field service; only an armorer deals with them.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 20, 2008)

jks9199 said:


> That's why I said that the Glock is a damn near perfect COP gun; it's not the fanciest, best machined, prettiest or most just about anything else gun on the market. But Glocks almost invariable will work, no matter how they're used or abused. (I used to work with someone who NEVER in 5 years cleaned his, whether on the range or in the field. It never failed to fire... Not a practice I'd recommend, but it speaks well for the reliability.) The reality is that even a cop who's obsessive about cleaning and maintaining his sidearm is likely to need it sometime after he's been out in the rain, or had road crap blasted over them... That pristine gun he starts with every day isn't likely to be pristine when he needs it. And there are minimal extra steps to deal with, and it breaks down easily into a manageable set of parts. (Four; receiver/grip, barrel, slide, and spring.) The "finicky bits" aren't part of field service; only an armorer deals with them.


Oh yeah, if you're going to issue guns (a practice I have mixed feelings about) the GLOCK is #1 on any list.  I would NEVER issue anyone a 1911.


----------



## Archangel M (Jun 20, 2008)

The newer and custom 1911's can be finky, but the Army Issued one I carried back in the 80's-90's was pretty AK47 like in its reliability. Not as accurate Ill grant you, but rain, mud and sand wouldnt keep it from its appointed rounds, so to speak.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 20, 2008)

Archangel M said:


> The newer and custom 1911's can be finky, but the Army Issued one I carried back in the 80's-90's was pretty AK47 like in its reliability. Not as accurate Ill grant you, but rain, mud and sand wouldnt keep it from its appointed rounds, so to speak.


  Actually the problem with the standard 1911 comes from the ammunition.  The old ones fired ball pretty handily, but due to the angle of the barrel to the magazine, loading different types of ammunition can be a problem.  That's why custom 1911's have throated barrels.

As for the 1911's on the market that aren't reliable, there are some custom shops producing some pretty darned reliable (and need I say accurate) 1911s.   I have a Nighthawk Talon 1911 made by Nighthawk Custom that is uber-reliable.  Likewise you'll find the reliability of Wilson Combat, Ed Brown, Les Baer etc are plenty reliable.  But be prepared to spend $2500.00 and up for such custom guns.

When you start talking semi-custom, however, such as Kimber, Colt and Springfields being produced right now, they may or may not be entirely reliable out of the box.  Sometimes they need more gunsmithing and should be proofed for reliability before being relied on.

Moreover, as we go from full-sized 1911's to the smaller and shorter ones, reliability suffers.

Again i've heard it said best that a 1911 is not for every or most shooters.....


----------



## Andy Moynihan (Jun 20, 2008)

You don't want to go shorter than Commander( 4 1/4-4 1/2 inch barrel) length in a 1911.

Shorter than that, if you grip it any kind of loosely when you shoot, expect it to become a jamomatic.

I have a Para Ordnance Lightweight Commander(all steel model) that has never given me a problem. But then I clean/oil it every time I use it.


----------



## tellner (Jun 20, 2008)

My straight out of the box Norinco 1911 has been completely reliable and fed everything I've put through it without a problem.


----------



## Deaf Smith (Jun 20, 2008)

Reliablty can be taken to the extreems.

Now I do like the fact the Glock can go 1000 rounds without cleaning. Does that mean I'll not clean it? Actually for my competion Glock 17, yes. Carry Glock, NO.

A well made 1911, if cleaned reguarly, will do fine (as will many other makes.) If they can go 400 rounds strait, well that's about all one can ask for a good gun to do. If you get more, great!

You will find most revolvers won't go 400 rounds before they get grudgy and the cylinder is hard to turn, but then 400 rounds through a wheel gun is quite a lot!

One of the keys to reliablity is to shoot the gun when it's hot. That is, fire several magazines out of it as fast as you can, till it's smoken. If it will do that, which is abnormal, then that indicates it will hold together when needed.

You can then fire then weapon on it's side, upside down, limp wristed, weak handed, low powered loads, hot loads, and other not so normal methods to see if it fails. There are many good checks to see if your carry gun is rock solid.

Deaf


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 20, 2008)

tellner said:


> My straight out of the box Norinco 1911 has been completely reliable and fed everything I've put through it without a problem.


 And that happens....but the issue is consistency.  Your Norinco works great, the next one out of the same lot has problems.  It's hit or miss.  When you find one that works great, don't sell it for love or money!


----------



## tellner (Jun 20, 2008)

sgtmac_46 said:


> And that happens....but the issue is consistency.  Your Norinco works great, the next one out of the same lot has problems.  It's hit or miss.  When you find one that works great, don't sell it for love or money!



Definitely. Over the years I've coddled and accessorized that gun to within an inch of its life - two piece guide rod, ambidextrous safety, beaver tail grip safety,  extended slide stop, snubbed hammer, flat checkered mainspring housing, Crimson Trace grips and tritium night sights. Some day I'll probably have it Duracoated. 

A good 1911 is a thing of beauty and a joy forever. And you can't hardly kill 'em with a stick.


----------



## KenpoTex (Jun 21, 2008)

tellner said:


> A good 1911 is a thing of beauty and a joy forever. And you can't hardly kill 'em with a stick.


 
Yup.  I agree with Tom Givens' statement that "a properly built, well-tuned 1911 is one of the finest fighting tools ever created" (or words to that effect).   It's just unfortunate that it's hard to find a good one (which is why I carry and recommend a Glock).

JMB is probably spinning in his grave at the thought of all these companies pumping out shoddy copies of his masterpiece.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 21, 2008)

tellner said:


> Definitely. Over the years I've coddled and accessorized that gun to within an inch of its life - two piece guide rod, ambidextrous safety, beaver tail grip safety,  extended slide stop, snubbed hammer, flat checkered mainspring housing, Crimson Trace grips and tritium night sights. Some day I'll probably have it Duracoated.
> 
> A good 1911 is a thing of beauty and a joy forever. And you can't hardly kill 'em with a stick.


  I couldn't agree more!


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 21, 2008)

KenpoTex said:


> Yup.  I agree with Tom Givens' statement that "a properly built, well-tuned 1911 is one of the finest fighting tools ever created" (or words to that effect).   It's just unfortunate that it's hard to find a good one (which is why I carry and recommend a Glock).
> 
> JMB is probably spinning in his grave at the thought of all these companies pumping out shoddy copies of his masterpiece.


  It's neither easy, nor more importantly CHEAP, tin find a good well-tuned 1911.  Mine cost me $2500.00....but it was worth every penny.

A GLOCK is a service weapon, it's a reasonably accurate, uber-reliable combat instrument.  A 1911 is precision device, well suited to combat in the right hands, but also a labor of love and devotion.  

Anyone wanting a gun 'just in case' is well advised to buy a GLOCK.....I have 3....and i've carried the GLOCK on the road for nearly 12 years with never a thought of being poorly armed.


----------



## Deaf Smith (Jun 21, 2008)

sgtmac_46 said:


> A 1911 is precision device, well suited to combat in the right hands, but also a labor of love and devotion.


 
Sad thing is, it wasn't that way many years ago and yet it was still reliable back then!

Look, those WW1, WW2, and later.45s (up to the early 70s) were know to be reliable and well, just fair in accuracy. But they sure wern't 'precision devices'! Rattled like a can of BBs they did.

My Colt 1991 Govt. .45 is pretty reliable. Not Glock reliable, but pretty good. It cost me $500. I just added a Kings spade grip safety, trigger, and had a modest trigger job done. Now my Kimber Gold match shoots rings around it, but for CCW, I don't need that much accuracy (nor 1000+ dollar ccw guns!) I need reliablilty and just 'OK' accuracy. If it will hit a 12 oz coke can every time at 20 yards, slow fire, well that's plenty good in my book. 

But why do I pack a Glock over the 1911? Weight is why. Weight and size.

Now like other have posted, the mico .45s arn't real reliable (and you have to change the springs out every 500 rounds or so). Plus those micro .45s KICK! So that leaves the steel 1911 or commander size guns. They are heavy and they are big  (yes I know about the LW Commander, owned several.) Cooper was right, God intended for the 1911 to be a 5 inch barrel slegehammer.

Glocks are neather big nor heavy (at least the midsize and sub-compacts arn't.)

That and the reliability of the Glocks is what lead me to the dark side of polymer.

Deaf


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 22, 2008)

Deaf Smith said:


> Sad thing is, it wasn't that way many years ago and yet it was still reliable back then!
> 
> Look, those WW1, WW2, and later.45s (up to the early 70s) were know to be reliable and well, just fair in accuracy. But they sure wern't 'precision devices'! Rattled like a can of BBs they did.
> 
> ...


 Can't fault your logic.


----------

