Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-25-2013, 10:46   #401
PhotoFeller
Senior Member
 
PhotoFeller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Midwest and SW Florida
Posts: 2,959
Blog Entries: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by tnedator View Post
For me, it isn't just that 1/2 second, because lets face it, we often have that much variance in how we carry (location wise). Let's say the difference between OWB with a jacket, vs. IWB with a shirt, then if you happen to be tucked, even slower.

So, no doubt there is a time factor, and under stress, if you flub the rack, then it might be even longer (assuming you don't use something like a Kahr that isn't reliable with a slingshot rack).

For me, as I've mentioned earlier in this thread, the bigger issue is making the assumption that everything will be perfect in that critical moment when you need to defend your life that you will be able to use both hands. I'm not talking about the arm hanging limp at your side because you were shot in it (one of the reasons they teach one handed chamberings), but instead the more realistic scenarios such as trying to fend off an attacker with your weak hand, while drawing your weapon, or a struggle where you are on the ground with the attacker on top of you, or countless other scenarios where it is impossible to use both hands to rack a weapon, and where attempting to rack the weapon on your belt or boot would be impossible or very, very difficult.

That said, it is like everything in life, something that has to be decided by balancing the pros and cons and likelihoods. Many on here that are proponents of C3 justify it in large part based on the fact that chances are they will never have to use a gun to defend themselves. This is true. Granted, that's the same argument that many in the anti-gun community use to argue why nobody needs to carry period.

Personally, I'm hoping and praying that I am one of those people that NEVER have to draw their weapon to defend themselves and that the only time I ever fire my weapon is at the range. That said, there are a LOT of cases where people need to use a weapon to defend themselves and if the time comes that I have to do so, it doesn't matter if the odds are 1 in a million or 1 in 5 trillion that a person will have to use a weapon to defend themselves, because the bad guy won't be saying, "hey, since the odds were against you ever having to defend yourself, I realize you probably aren't ready, why don't you take 10 seconds to compose yourself and then I will attack you."

Fact is that you either take the "hope/pray for the best and be prepared for the worst" or you just bury your head in the sand and pretend that you will never be that 1 in a million.
I accept almost everything you say in this post as statements to support your carry mode, but the final paragraph where you slip in the knife with the old "...bury your head in the sand..." remark really is unwarranted; its aimed unfairly at C3 proponents who thoughtfully take the risk of ND along with the low probability of attack into consideration. You have your preferred method, which is fine, and we have ours.

To me its amusing that many C1 advocates don't care if the probability of attack is 1 in a million, or 1 in a billion, carrying in C1 is a high, 24/7 priority. Yet the real high-risk things we do routinely, such as allowing our kids to ride on school buses without seat belts, don't even show up on the list of dangers we want to protect against. Are there other routine daily activities that present greater risk than assault by a bad guy...things that we fail to do everything possible to prevent? You bet there are.

We all are guilty of "putting our heads in the sand" to some extent. I suggest that we be careful not to do it with risks that really have serious consequences and are more likely to strike us and our loved ones. I don't worry much about 1 in a million risks.

Last edited by PhotoFeller; 02-26-2013 at 21:11..
PhotoFeller is offline  
Old 02-25-2013, 10:53   #402
Seriously?
U.S.A.F. Ret.
 
Seriously?'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: In the woods.
Posts: 178
This IS a difficult decision.

I've carried with one in the chamber for six years.

After reading this whole thread and weighing all the odds of all the scenarios.....

I'm going start carrying with an empty chamber.

It's a personal judgement call.....and it's a close one.

But, for me, that's the way it's going to be. Never thought I'd win a quick-draw contest anyway and I'm hardly ever in situations where I might get jumped by bad guys.
__________________
“The Proles had reverted to a lifestyle that suited them, heavy physical work, family, church, petty quarrels with neighbors, hunting and fishing, T.V., sports, beer and gambling filled up the limited horizon of their minds.”
― George Orwell
Seriously? is offline  
Old 02-25-2013, 10:55   #403
vandros
10mm fan
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: southwest
Posts: 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by tnedator View Post
...

IMHO, the most important thing is to choose a method and stick with it. If you think C3 is adequate, then let it be adequate whether in Wal-mart or driving through a dangerous neighborhood...


I, like you, fully appreciate the benefits of "consistency". But, I can't agree with the quoted argument. Different levels of threat call for different levels of response.

Think going from White to Red color code. To me the colors can be mapped onto carrying a gun as follows:
(1) Gun is in the safe, locked unloaded (totally safe - White).
(2) Gun is in the holster or by the bed side in C3 (threat is possible - Yellow).
(3) Gun in the holster or by the bed side in C1 (threat is present, its parameters unknown - Orange).
(4) Gun in the hands in low-ready or other pertinent position, shooter behind cover/concealment (lethal threat is definite and clearly identified - Red).

As you see, C1 v. C3 becomes part of a larger threat response framework. Holding c1 v. c3 constant has clear benefits (i.e., consistency), but also has downsides (i.e., reduced flexibility, and thus effectiveness in responding to various threats). You are clearly aware of the benefits, but seem to ignore the downsides.

Just my 0.02!

P.S. I think you and I will never agree on this (given our prior exchanges in this thread). Nevertheless, I want new shooters on this forum to be exposed to a variety of perspectives on this important issue.
__________________
glock 4 gun; strider 4 knife

Last edited by vandros; 02-25-2013 at 12:37..
vandros is offline  
Old 02-25-2013, 11:08   #404
vandros
10mm fan
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: southwest
Posts: 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhotoFeller View Post
After this long discussion, I'm thinking very seriously about having a Cominolli manual safety installed on one of my G19s. A shop in Texas (Ten Ring Precision) does these installations for $133, including the kit.

Adding the Comnolli safety does not void the Glock warranty. It does not affect the factory Glock safety mechanisms. It operates like a 1911 thumb safety with a distinct tactile sensation when it is snicked off. Having it put on by a gunsmith that is very familiar with the installation is worth the extra cost.

That's my thinking today. 1911 guys will understand why this enhancement to the Glock design makes sense. Maybe my next involvement in a C1 vs.C3 thread will have new insights to share.

SPECIAL FEATURES:
Fits all model Glock pistols.
Ergonomically designed and located.
Positive engagement and disengagement.
The safety has no effect on factory function, trigger pull or internal working of your Glock.
With manual safety engaged, all Glock passive safeties are locked in place.
Pistol can be loaded and unloaded with manual safety engaged, thus diminishing the chance of an unintentional discharge.
Long wearing, properly heat treated, stainless steel parts.
Durable flat black tactical finish.
The manufacturers warranty is not voided.
Lifetime warranty on parts and labor to the original customer when installed by Ten-Ring Precision, Inc.
Not sure how I feel about this, bro. I'm personally very disinclined to mess with the internals of my firearm (be it custom triggers, firing pins, connectors, barrels, etc.). I feel if gun was made and tested in certain specific configuration, then when we, non-experts (which includes many gunsmiths), start messing with this configuration bad and unexpected things are likely to happen with gun functioning. I'd err on the side of leaving it stock internally.

But, your desire to put an external safety on a glock is VERY understandable. Perhaps, we can appeal to glock to add this feature to some of its guns, given the # of unintentional discharges you quoted in your recent posts? That should appeal to glock's bottomline imho, given how many new shooters opt for glocks, then have unintentional discharges, and then forever switch to another weapon system...
__________________
glock 4 gun; strider 4 knife

Last edited by vandros; 02-25-2013 at 11:21..
vandros is offline  
Old 02-25-2013, 11:25   #405
PhotoFeller
Senior Member
 
PhotoFeller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Midwest and SW Florida
Posts: 2,959
Blog Entries: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by vandros View Post
Not sure how I feel about this, bro. I'm personally very disinclined to mess with the internals of my firearm (be it custom triggers, firing pins, connectors, barrels, etc.). I feel if gun was made and tested in certain specific configuration, then when we, non-experts (which includes many gunsmiths), start messing with this configuration bad and unexpected things are likely to happen with gun functioning. I'd err on the side of leaving it stock internally.

But, your desire to put an external safety on a glock is very understandable. Perhaps, we can appeal to glock to add this feature to some of its guns, given the # of unintentional discharges you quoted in your recent posts? That should appeal to glock's bottomline imho, given how many new shooters opt for glocks, then have unintentional discharges, and then forever switch to another weapon system...
I understand your point of view, and I'm still stewing about the decision to have a manual safety added. I dunno, I may not give in to changing something that has served me well for years (C3).

The gentleman who installs these kits is a well known custom gunsmith who guarantees the work for life. Glock's warranty doesn't cover the parts or his installation, but adding the safety is acceptable to Glock as not interfering with the factory warranty. The only modification of my gun would be the safety.

The safety kit was designed by a former LEO who saw first hand the NDs police departments were experiencing with Glock pistols.

Testimonials I've read on other forums say the safety works and looks like a factory installed component.

I'll probably try it on one pistol and evaluate it for my other Glocks. Maybe.

Last edited by PhotoFeller; 02-27-2013 at 10:47..
PhotoFeller is offline  
Old 02-25-2013, 11:35   #406
PhotoFeller
Senior Member
 
PhotoFeller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Midwest and SW Florida
Posts: 2,959
Blog Entries: 2
Here's another fascinating bit of information from the NYC Police Commissioner's report on firearm discharges involving officers:

OFFICERS WOUNDED (SHOT) BY "SUBJECTS" IN 2011=3

OFFICERS WOUNDED BY ACCIDENTAL DISCHARGE IN 2011= 6

This would indicate the locker room is more dangerous than working the streets!
PhotoFeller is offline  
Old 02-25-2013, 11:39   #407
billn
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 445
One in the Chamber? Depends. Have you been properly trained and practice enough to be safe?
__________________
Certified Glock Armorer
G19, G26 gen4

'Those who are willing to sacrifice essential liberties for temporary security deserve neither liberty nor security.' - Benjamin Franklin
billn is offline  
Old 02-25-2013, 18:38   #408
PhotoFeller
Senior Member
 
PhotoFeller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Midwest and SW Florida
Posts: 2,959
Blog Entries: 2
2011 was a very good year for NDs (only 15) for the NYC police. Here is the ND history looking back a few years:

24 in 2002
25 in 2003
27 in 2004
25 in 2005
26 in 2006
15 in 2007
15 in 2008
23 in 2009
21 in 2010
15 in 2011

If you add up the 10 year results, the total is 216 NDs, or an average of 22 per year.

I don't know how many years NYPD has used Glock pistols, but I suspect a good many of these NDs (most, I suspect) were with Glocks.

I do know it isn't politically correct to post statements here that cast a negative shadow on Glock pistols. Really, I'm not. And, I'm not bashing the NYPD. I'm just trying to highlight the true risk of carrying a Glock in C1 without gun handling experience and training beyond what most of us attain...and maintain.

DONE.

Last edited by PhotoFeller; 02-27-2013 at 10:52..
PhotoFeller is offline  
Old 02-25-2013, 21:53   #409
dosei
Senior Member
 
dosei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Upstate SC
Posts: 4,115
Quote:
Originally Posted by vandros View Post
Interesting vids. The real worst-case scenario is when you have type-3 malfunction (spent case in the chamber, and another round fails to feed, jamming into the spent case) when operating the weapon one handed. I, for the life of me, cannot figure out how to clear this malfunction one handed... It seems if this happens during a fire fight, you are pretty much f&^*ed!

You can't figure out "how"?
Maybe this will help.
Is it fast...heck NO! Clearing a type 3 malfunction is time consuming with both hands, so it's a no-brainer that it'll take a tad longer with only one hand. But there certainly are ways to do it.
__________________
Big Dawg No. 1431
Carolina Glocker No. 1431
"Freedom is a system based on courage" (Charles Peguy)
"Know where the attack against you is likely to come, whether on the street or in court, and have a proven counter already in place" (Mas Ayoob)
dosei is offline  
Old 02-25-2013, 22:00   #410
Peace Warrior
CLM Number 221
Am Yisrael Chai
 
Peace Warrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: With the other 7,999,999
Posts: 28,446
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhotoFeller View Post
...I think "God fearing society" is proper usage of 'society'. ...
Interesting, so what then is, quoting you, a "God fearing society?"
__________________
“After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn't do it.” - William S. Burroughs
"Women are like shells on the beach, and there's plenty of shells, so just keep looking, sooner or later you'll see one that makes it worth getting your shoes wet." - Peace Warrior
"Love 'Em All!!! Let Jehovah sort 'em out." - The Holy Bible
"It's a lot simpler to fool people than it is to convince them they've been fooled."
Peace Warrior is offline  
Old 02-25-2013, 22:42   #411
PhotoFeller
Senior Member
 
PhotoFeller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Midwest and SW Florida
Posts: 2,959
Blog Entries: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peace Warrior View Post
Interesting, so what then is, quoting you, a "God fearing society?"
PW, I still don't have a grade from my last assignment. Lets take one step at a time, shall we?

I'm thinkin' we may be getting off on a track unrelated to the OP. Don't you think so?
PhotoFeller is offline  
Old 02-25-2013, 22:55   #412
rolltide_pisco
NRA Life Member
 
rolltide_pisco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Western Kentucky
Posts: 1,312
Since I CCW a Glock 27, I carry one in the chamber. It's not going off unless I pull the trigger
__________________
S&W M&P Shield 40
Del-Ton DTI-15 Echo MOE, Ruger 10/22
Kentucky CCDW License
rolltide_pisco is offline  
Old 02-26-2013, 09:07   #413
vandros
10mm fan
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: southwest
Posts: 164
Nice! Thanks Dosei!



Quote:
Originally Posted by dosei View Post

You can't figure out "how"?
Maybe this will help.
Dealing with One Hand Only FTE/Double Feed Stoppages by Gomez-Training.com - YouTube
Is it fast...heck NO! Clearing a type 3 malfunction is time consuming with both hands, so it's a no-brainer that it'll take a tad longer with only one hand. But there certainly are ways to do it.
__________________
glock 4 gun; strider 4 knife
vandros is offline  
Old 02-26-2013, 10:09   #414
PhotoFeller
Senior Member
 
PhotoFeller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Midwest and SW Florida
Posts: 2,959
Blog Entries: 2
Some say "If you don't carry with one in the chamber, why bother to carry at all?"

I believe its better to have SD capability for 99+% of the situations with C3 than 0% of the time with no firearm.

Proponents of C1 say a surprise attack that allows no time to rack the slide would be deadly. (Some say this situation may be deadly no matter what carry mode you use.) But what about the more likely scenarios where we are forewarned and can chamber a round? In these cases, having a weapon in C3 is just as effective as having one in C1.

Can an operating problem occur under extreme stress when the slide has to be racked. Yes, but we're not talking about brain surgery here. In fact, racking the slide is about the simplest and easiest maneuver I can think of with a hand held device. It's a 'no brainer'.

So, I'll take 99+% protection any day compared to no protection at all. If you think 99% is too high, plug in the appropriate number and I'll take it compared to not having a gun at all.

Last edited by PhotoFeller; 02-26-2013 at 10:22..
PhotoFeller is offline  
Old 02-26-2013, 10:50   #415
vandros
10mm fan
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: southwest
Posts: 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhotoFeller View Post
Some say "If you don't carry with one in the chamber, why bother to carry at all?"

I believe its better to have SD capability for 99+% of the situations with C3 than 0% of the time with no firearm.

Proponents of C1 say a surprise attack that allows no time to rack the slide would be deadly. (Some say this situation may be deadly no matter what carry mode you use.) But what about the more likely scenarios where we are forewarned and can chamber a round? In these cases, having a weapon in C3 is just as effective as having one in C1.

Can an operating problem occur under extreme stress when the slide has to be racked. Yes, but we're not talking about brain surgery here. In fact, racking the slide is about the simplest and easiest maneuver I can think of with a hand held device. It's a 'no brainer'.

So, I'll take 99+% protection any day compared to no protection at all. If you think 99% is too high, plug in the appropriate number and I'll take it compared to not having a gun at all.
To play devil's advocate for a moment, I think the essence of the argument proponents of c1 are making is as follows (as I understand it): We should train/prepare for the worst case scenario. If we do, we'll be able to take care of all scenarios.

Owning a gun, in the first place, is an example of this. You and I, own a handgun to some degree because we want to be ready for the "worst-case" (no matter how rare) scenario of facing an armed attacker wishing to hurt/kill us, our loved ones, or other innocent people. So, by virtue of owning a gun, we seem to already be buying into the idea that preparing for the worst-case scenario is a very reasonable thing to do.

So... If we own firearm to prevent the worst-case scenario, in order to remain logically consistent, carrying in C1 appears to be the only reasonable behavior (as compared to C3 or C4). C1 does objectively give us an edge in various worst-case scenarios described in this thread (no matter how probabilistically unlikely those scenarios are. to calculate this, first calculate probability of armed attack, then of all these attacks calculate probability of you becoming injured or in other ways unable to rack the slide).

But, as many mentioned, there is a problem with such line of reasoning. As you prepare (by owning a gun and carrying it in C1) for one worst case scenario (for example, armed attacker trying to kill your family incapacitates your strong arm) and reduce the probability that you will lose in such scenario, you also increase the likelihood of another worst-case scenario (having an unintentional discharge that can hurt/kill you, your loved ones or other innocent people) and increase the likelihood that you will lose in that scenario. And that's the rub - there is no solution where you are prepared for all worst-case scenarios perfectly. So, one has to "pick their poison" and make their own calculus (depending on one's threat assessment, one's skills, one's level of training and amount of time dedicated to maintaining that training, one's perception of how innately careful one is, and many other factors). You and I are in agreement - our careful calculus leads us to opt for C3. We are also in agreement, I think, that people calling us wimps or idiots for doing this are macho imbeciles who don't realize how the same solution doesn't apply to every problem. We are also in agreement that everyone should engage in very careful calculus on their mode of carry and not follow blindly what some guy told them they aught to do (e.g., listen to experts carefully, but recognize that even they do not know your situation as well as you do).

Another problem with this quite understandable desire to be prepared for the worst-case scenarios occurs when such line of reasoning is taken to its extreme. Then, if you are an average person leaving in an environment with average level of threat present, you become a "prepper." In this case you begin to see as very reasonable (and in fact as the only prudent options) the following behaviors: stocking up on Spam and water needed for a 6-months survival in a situation when you are unable to resupply, surrounding your house with a 2-inch-thick steel fence, digging a water- and chemicals-impermeable underground bunker, constantly wearing a bullet-proof vest, conceal-carrying 7 glocks on you at a time, stocking up on short-wave radios in the event your town's communication system is destroyed, trying not to leave the house, acquiring a sniper rife and AK stocked with a minimum of 10k rounds for each, placing a handgun, shotgun, night-vision goggles, a crossbow and frame-thrower under your bed, building an air balloon to evacuate in case asteroid hits ocean and massive tsunami floods the planet, etc. If one is a special-forces operator working in the field (or even a normal citizen living in a very dangerous area) - some of these might be very reasonable behaviors. But if one is a Joe-6-Pack living in a crime-free town, perhaps he has gone too far in trying to be prepared for the worst-case scenario...

OK, back to work...
__________________
glock 4 gun; strider 4 knife

Last edited by vandros; 02-26-2013 at 11:56..
vandros is offline  
Old 02-26-2013, 11:22   #416
Smooth_squeeze
Senior Member
 
Smooth_squeeze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 521
In my opinion, whether C1 or C3 should be guided by what you feel most comfortable/safest with. If someone is a sleepwalker, they shouldn't keep a gun with a round chambered for obvious reasons. If one isn't, that's different.

There's a scenario which is not all that far fetched, IMHO.

Some monster has broken into your home, and is in your bedroom, in the dark. If you don't have a round already chambered, how quietly can you rack the slide and get ready? I can tell you I can't rack a slide with no sound; perhaps you can. At that moment, if you are laying in bed and can slip your hand onto a ready to fire handgun, you have the best chance.

Some burglars/rapists/murderers/etc. can get into unlikely places pretty quietly. As for me, I want to be ready to rumble if that fateful time comes.
Smooth_squeeze is offline  
Old 02-26-2013, 11:52   #417
PhotoFeller
Senior Member
 
PhotoFeller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Midwest and SW Florida
Posts: 2,959
Blog Entries: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by vandros View Post
To play devil's advocate for a moment, I think the essence of the argument proponents of c1 are making is as follows (as I understand it): We should train/prepare for the worst case scenario. If we do, we'll be able to take care of all scenarios.

Owning a gun, in the first place, is an example of this. You and I, own a handgun to some degree because we want to be ready for the "worst-case" (no matter how rare) scenario of facing an armed attacker wishing to hurt/kill us, our loved ones, or other innocent people. So, by virtue of owning a gun, we seem to already be buying into the idea that preparing for the worst-case scenario is a very reasonable thing to do.

So... If we own firearm to prevent the worst-case scenario, in order to remain logically consistent, carrying in C1 appears to be the only reasonable behavior (as compared to C3 or C4). C1 does objectively give us an edge in various worst-case scenarios described in this thread (no matter how probabilistically unlikely those scenarios are. to calculate this, first calculate probability of armed attack, then of all these attacks calculate probability of you becoming injured or in other ways unable to rack the slide).

But, as many mentioned, there is a problem with such line of reasoning. As you prepare (by owning a gun and carrying it in C1) for one worst case scenario (for example, armed attacker trying to kill your family incapacitates your strong arm) and reduce the probability that you will lose in such scenario, you also increase the likelihood of another worst-case scenario (having an unintentional discharge that can hurt/kill you, your loved ones or other innocent people). And that's the rub - there is no solution where you are prepared for all worst-case scenarios perfectly. So, one has to "pick their poison" and make their own calculus (depending on one's threat assessment, one's skills, one's level of training and amount of time dedicated to maintaining that training, one's perception of how innately careful one is, and many other factors). You and I are in agreement - our careful calculus leads us to opt for C3. We are also in agreement, I think, that people calling us wimps or idiots for doing this are macho imbeciles who don't realize how the same solution doesn't apply to every problem. We are also in agreement that everyone should engage in very careful calculus on their mode of carry and not follow blindly what some guy told them they aught to do (e.g., listen to experts carefully, but recognize that even they do not know your situation as well as you do).

Another problem with this quite understandable desire to be prepared for the worst-case scenarios occurs when such line of reasoning is taken to its extreme. Then, if you are an average person leaving in an environment with average level of threat present, you become a "prepper." In this case you begin to see as very reasonable (and in fact as the only prudent options) the following behaviors: stocking up on Spam and water needed for a 6-months survival in a situation when you are unable to resupply, surrounding your house with a 2-inch-thick steel fence, digging a water- and chemicals-impermeable underground bunker, constantly wearing a bullet-proof vest, conceal-carrying 7 glocks on you at a time, stocking up on short-wave radios in the event your town's communication system is destroyed, trying not to leave the house, acquiring a sniper rife and AK stocked with a minimum of 10k rounds for each, placing a handgun, shotgun, night-vision goggles, a crossbow and frame-thrower under your bed, building an air balloon to evacuate in case asteroid hits ocean and massive tsunami floods the planet, etc. If one is a special-forces operator working in the field (or even a normal citizen living in a very dangerous area) - some of these might be very reasonable behaviors. But if one is a Joe-6-Pack living in a crime-free town, perhaps he/she has gone too far in trying to be prepared for the worst-case scenario...

OK, back to work...
Glad you took a break to catch up with the discussion. Excellent post.
PhotoFeller is offline  
Old 02-26-2013, 12:10   #418
Droid noob
Senior Member
 
Droid noob's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 262
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhotoFeller View Post
2011 was a very good year for NDs (only 15) for the NYC police. Here is the ND history looking back a few years:

24 in 2002
25 in 2003
27 in 2004
25 in 2005
26 in 2006
15 in 2007
15 in 2008
23 in 2009
21 in 2010
15 in 2011

If you add up the 10 year results, the total is 216 NDs, or an average of 22 per year.

I don't know how many years NYPD has used Glock pistols, but I suspect a good many of these NDs (most, I suspect) were with Glocks.

I do know it is politically incorrect, or worse, to post statements here that seem to cast a negative shadow on Glock pistols. Really, I'm not. I'm just trying to highlight the true risk of carrying a Glock in C1 without gun handling experience and training beyond what most of us attain...and maintain.

DONE.
I once shadowed a police officer. They have to handle their firearm more than we do. Any time they book an arrest, they must unholster and put in lock box. I don't unholster most of the time. I simply take the holstered gun off and put in safe.
Droid noob is offline  
Old 02-26-2013, 12:14   #419
PhotoFeller
Senior Member
 
PhotoFeller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Midwest and SW Florida
Posts: 2,959
Blog Entries: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smooth_squeeze View Post
In my opinion, whether C1 or C3 should be guided by what you feel most comfortable/safest with. If someone is a sleepwalker, they shouldn't keep a gun with a round chambered for obvious reasons. If one isn't, that's different.

There's a scenario which is not all that far fetched, IMHO.

Some monster has broken into your home, and is in your bedroom, in the dark. If you don't have a round already chambered, how quietly can you rack the slide and get ready? I can tell you I can't rack a slide with no sound; perhaps you can. At that moment, if you are laying in bed and can slip your hand onto a ready to fire handgun, you have the best chance.

Some burglars/rapists/murderers/etc. can get into unlikely places pretty quietly. As for me, I want to be ready to rumble if that fateful time comes.
Squeeze, I can't rack a slide silently either. Nor do I want to.

Folks used to say the sound of their shotgun chambering a round would send most burglars packing. Maybe racking a slide would have the same effect.

My bedside gun is kept in C3, but I have a dandy alarm system that will awaken me and the neighbors. In fact, my alarm system from ADT provides coverage of doors, windows (glass breakage) and motion detectors. Heat and smoke detectors are also integrated into the ADT system. This is my effort to mitigate risk of home invasion and fire for my family. The service is expensive, but its more important than 'stuff' we do without to afford it.

The argument I've heard most against a ready-to-go bedside gun is the risk associated with grabbing it in the darkness before you're fully awake. That makes sense to me.

Last edited by PhotoFeller; 02-28-2013 at 20:26..
PhotoFeller is offline  
Old 02-26-2013, 12:15   #420
Droid noob
Senior Member
 
Droid noob's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 262
I've been thinking about c1 and c3 a lot lately with my Glocks and remora holster. Last night I had sweats on with g27 in remora holster. I was also carrying my 2 month old girl in my left arm. I had no way to rack the slide should someone barge in. I would hate to be looking frantically for a hard surface to rack or finding a spot to put her down quickly.
Droid noob is offline  

 
  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 23:09.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 787
198 Members
589 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31