CCW: One in the chamber or not?

Discussion in 'Carry Issues' started by ArlenGunClub, Jan 24, 2013.


Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. PhotoFeller

    Silver Member

    Thanks for adding much-needed balance to the debate.

    We always hear a deafening chorus of voices promoting C1 as the best method, but your comments demonstrate that the C3 technique is sensible, safe and unfairly critisized by people who say its too slow in most SD situations.

    I hope your late-in-the-game opinions will receive the attention they deserve.
     

    Wanna kill these ads? We can help!
  2. I agree that it seems intuitive that a pistol in C3 is safer to carry than one in C1, but there’s a fallacy in that line of reasoning. Some of you have cited the fact that even LEOs with their greater level of training and experience have NDs and thus C1 carry must be inherently unsafe. In fact a good friend of mine who happens to be an LEO and an experienced gun handler experienced an ND recently that wreaked his hand.

    However, the rest of the story is that the ND happened with an “unloaded” pistol. I think if you averaged the number of hours that cops carry C1 pistols vs. the number of NDs they suffer you would find the ND rate to be surprisingly low. Maybe lower than the rate of NDs suffered by non-LEO C3 carriers. And no, I have no data to back up that statement; it’s purely supposition on my part.

    The point is complacency kills. And complacency is what causes NDs, not carry mode. And people that habitually carry such as LEOs will be more vulnerable to complacency than most others.

    It seems to me that those with the C3 mindset view pistols as either “safe” to carry or “unsafe” based on whether or not the chamber is loaded. The C3 mindset seems to be “if my carry piece is unloaded I can still make a mistake and not suffer an ND". This breeds complacency and violates one of the four basic rules of gun handling, i.e. “treat all guns as if they are loaded at all times”. You might protest that you do that anyway. Well, if that’s so, then you are just as safe carrying in C1 as in C3.
     

  3. PhotoFeller

    Silver Member

    As I understand your position, (1) eliminating complacency makes C1 with a Glock perfectly safe and (2) C3 is less safe than C1 because the former leads to complacency. It follows that a disciplined gun handler who overcomes complacency, as one must do to carry C1 safely, can manage any automatic pistol without fear of committing a ND, including a 1911 in C0.

    I'm just trying to understand your logic and its practical application. Applying your logic to a cocked and unlocked 1911 simply amplifies the need for handling perfection with a firearm that is less tolerant of careless mistakes. However, if our handling technique is complacency free, any pistol can be carried in any condition without fear of a ND. Is that a reasonable interpretation?
     
    #243 PhotoFeller, Feb 6, 2013
    Last edited: Feb 6, 2013
  4. +1


    In my opinion C1 doesn't render a semi-auto inherently unsafe, but it does place the highest priority on awareness and safety.

    Certainly true, and complacency happens to the well-trained as it does with civilians, regardless of the condition the carrier believes the gun is in.

    The big difference is that trained LEO must always be prepared for a life-threatening confrontation, as part of their sworn duties. Conversely, civilians --- except in the most extreme, dire situations --- are wisely counseled to withdraw (if possible), immediately call 911, and seek safety until the police arrive. But as for the immediate issue, anyone may at an unexpected moment experience a ND; if one's habit is to carry C3 it does not inoculate him/her from that experience but it does by habit place one additional safety check into the process. LEO must carry C1; I choose to normally stay one step behind LEO and one step ahead of Barney Fife.

    In the example of LEO dashboard cameras, when was the last time you read, heard, or saw a civilian deliberately walk into an unknown situation where CQB might suddenly occur? I think police have the most difficult job in America, given the criminals and political sharks they have to successfully defend against. Again, there's a great difference between my personal circumstances and those of LEO, and I'm determined not to become a poster child for the Brady Campaign. When I think conditions warrant I will carry C1; when not I'll continue to be a cautious civilian. This question is always an individual, personal decision and one only the individual can decide. There is no right-wrong, in my opinion, and I fully accept the views of those who for their own reasons always carry C1.
     
    #244 unit1069, Feb 6, 2013
    Last edited: Feb 7, 2013
  5. Cavalry Doc

    Cavalry Doc MAJ (USA Ret.)

    34,969
    0
    0
    Wow, 7 years and there always seems to be one of these threads here......

    I prefer one in the chamber, always have, always will. You can all do what you want, at least you have a gun, that's a step in the right direction.
     
  6. PhotoFeller

    Silver Member

    Hey, Doc, the question hasn't been definitively settled in 7 years...or maybe as long as Glocks have been available. In your mind, yes. In my mind, yes. But you and I have different opinions. Maybe there is no 'right' answer.
     
  7. This was posted anonymously by someone claiming to be USMC.

    "I am an Iraq and Afghan Veteran with the USMC. We didnt even carry our weapons at condition 1 the entire time while in country. We only went condition 1 when we went outside the wire. SO why if I was condition 3 while in Iraq would I need to be condition 1 while carrying around town? A weapon does nothing if you dont have situational awarness. Please people carry condition 3 and if you sense danger go condition 1. Because as he said NDs are WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY more common than a shootout at Starbucks!!!!!"
     
  8. I have spoken my opinion already and am in no way trying to argue but this quote is a lil off in my opinion.
    He said that they only carried c1 when outside the wire. During civilian carry in this country there is no inside or outside the wire.
    I carry c1 but I'm an Leo and am used to it (by no means am I better than anyone) but it is what I am used to and like.
    I am always aware of my surroundings but there are some places that I feel more comfortable than others to let my guard down a lil.
    But in my opinion that I gathered from having a bunch of buddies in different branches of the military, from seals, special forces and regular military. When behind the wire for the most part you don't have to worry about an armed confrontation inside the wire (only rockets,mortars and sniper fire).
    I guess what I'm tryin to get across while a lil deep in the captain Morgan is that it's comparing apples to oranges
     
  9. One in the chamber - proper holster. Anything else is a huge risk. Like a gun in the lockbox in the vehicle - enter vehicle, retrieve weapon WITH one in the pipe. Period. Having a gun nearby or almost ready is a setup for disaster.
     
  10. Do you treat your "unloaded" Glock any differently than you would a chamber loaded 1911?
     
  11. It's an issue that will never be definitively resolved until technology produces the firearm that eliminates human error. And because sensible people understand how counter-intuitive it is to carry a deadly weapon outside one's comfort level it's always going to be an individual choice.
     
  12. This...quality holster for any gun. Worries averted :beer:

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I317 using Tapatalk 2
     
  13. PhotoFeller

    Silver Member

    I asked you first, thanks.

    Remember your points: Carry mode doesn't kill, complacency does, and, C3 breeds complacency while C1 does not.

    If one has eliminated human error (complacency) from his gun handling technique and mode doesn't matter, the Glock in C1 and the 1911 in C0 could, theoretically, be carried, drawn, fired, reholstered and handled admistratively with equal safety. Because the 1911 has a grip safety, it even provides a measure of additional protection against a ND. All one has to do is keep his finger off of the trigger of these or any other semi-auto.

    Despite the above, I know of no one who recommends civilian, LEO or military carry of 1911s cocked and unlocked.
     
    #253 PhotoFeller, Feb 7, 2013
    Last edited: Feb 7, 2013
  14. Arc Angel

    Arc Angel Deus Vult!

    6,920
    1
    0
    :) Interesting comments! It’s early morning; I can’t sleep; so I guess I’ll take the time to reply to this one, too: Any pistol routinely kept in C-3 IS inherently safer than another pistol kept in C-1; and this additional safety has little or nothing to do with an individual user’s personal skill level with firearms. Neither is it entirely correct to place all the responsibility for gun safety on the user; nor all of the blame for ND’s upon him, either. Sometimes a gun problem can be mechanical, and have little to do with exactly, ‘How’ the gun was handled.

    Mechanical anomalies can happen with: a Glock, a Remington, a Browning, or a Sako firearm. Personally, I’ve had both a Browning, ‘A-5’, and a Sako, ‘Finnbear’ ND on me. I, also, have a little personal experience ND’ing a Glock (one episode); BUT, I’ve certainly read about and heard of numerous other instances of mechanical problems with Glock pistols; AND, I know that a Glock’s trigger mechanism can be induced to, ‘stack’. In fact, I’ve done this myself; and, based on recent changes made on Glock trigger bars, I am certain the factory knows about this, ‘stacking problem’ too.

    The expression, ‘inherently unsafe’ actually applies to much more than just the manner in which a firearm is loaded and maintained. When it comes to gun safety there is never an acceptable reason to rationalize that one carry condition is safer than another.

    ALL FIREARMS ARE INHERENTLY UNSAFE!

    Hence the validity of Cooper’s first rule of firearm safety. Tinker, tailor, soldier, spy, it doesn’t matter who you are, or what you do for a living: Unsafe gun handling is still unsafe gun handling! All any gunman can do is to, ‘play the odds’, and attempt to, ‘stack the deck’ in his favor. THIS is the essential advantage to placing a semiautomatic pistol in C-3 rather than in C-1.

    Personal safety with a firearm - especially with a firearm that is frequently carried and handled - is just such a tradeoff. The user, ‘trades off’ several thousand hours of the greater potential lethality entailed in C-1 carry against a possible few seconds of sudden and unexpected (?) dire necessity while carrying in C-3.

    There IS some justification for law enforcement personnel to carry their handguns in C-1; however, nobody can convince me that the huge numbers of private citizens who presently carry - just like law enforcement - actually need to do so. In fact there is plenty of evidence to prove that the vast majority of private citizens do NOT need to do so.

    I associate, and have associated, with a large number of young gunmen who: carry their Glocks in C-1, remain confident in their gun handling ability, irrationally trust to fate that, ‘nothing’s going to go wrong’, remain instantly ready to, ‘repel all boarders’, and repeatedly take that C-1 pistol with them everywhere they go - Into their cars, and into their homes every single day. Do these fellows REALLY NEED to expose: themselves, their families, and everyone else they come into contact with to such potential danger?

    (Here the likelihood of needing an instantly available, ‘one-handed’ pistol should - with a considerate frame of mind - be thoughtfully compared to the real, the definite, risks any C-1 semi-auto poses to EVERYONE in the vicinity.)

    That’s it, right there! 'Administratively' there is no such thing as an unloaded firearm! ‘The gun is always loaded.’ CANNOT be only a rule. When properly learned it becomes A HABIT, instead - A habit that a seasoned gunman should never break! Yes, I know of law enforcement personnel who have ND’d their firearms. I, also, know about several children of law enforcement personnel who have ND’d a parent’s firearm, too! (One of these children survived his, ‘ND event’; and his father brought him to me for training. I turned that young man into an excellent rifleman. When he graduated college and got his commission he told me that several of the Army's rifle range instructors had asked him, ‘Where’ he learned to shoot like that!) :supergrin:

    :headscratch: Nope! I do not agree with the above statement. It might read well on the Internet; but it doesn’t truly reflect reality. Complacency does kill; BUT, the various factors entailed in complacency with a gun are too numerous to support the assertion that the method and mode of carry are not involved. Method and mode of carry ARE both involved! So are mechanical anomalies inherent to the gun, mental lapses in a user’s concentration, and personal physical failures to (consistently) perform as expected. All of these deviations from, ‘life in a perfect world’ can be, and usually are, offset by carrying a pistol in C-3.

    Personally, I do not consider anyone who regularly carries his semiautomatic pistol in C-3 to be, ‘less of a man’; BUT, at the same time, I know a whole lot of other people who do. Neither do I consider such a person to be, ‘less ready’ to skillfully defend himself. I’m not just, ‘talking out of my hat', either. I spend a lot of time on isolated public firing ranges. Murders have occurred at some of these ranges! Not being, ‘the new kid on the block’ I do worry about who’s going to be there or show up while I’m using the range. Know what?

    THE BRUTAL TRUTH IS THAT IF YOU’RE GOING TO GET IT, YOU’RE GOING TO GET IT; AND THE FACT THAT YOU ARE IN C-1, OR C-3; HAVE TWO GUNS ON YOUR PERSON; OR, ‘CAN SHOOT WITH THE BEST OF THEM’ IS NOT GOING TO SAVE YOU!

    Me? I’d rather be lucky; I’d rather be alert; I’d rather possess that unique (perhaps, ‘seasoned’) ability to suddenly, ‘switch mental gears’ and instantly surpass psychological, ‘fright mode’ and pass into a smooth, ‘killing mode’ rather than to just walk around like a thoughtless, inconsiderate, and well-armed goofball who has deluded himself into believing that he’s safer because he’s in C-1.

    In my experience NOTHING could be farther from the truth! In varying degrees everyman, ‘walks with God’; some walk more; and some walk less. In the end, however, (and as unpleasant a reality it may be to the conscious mind) NONE of us are actually, ‘masters of our own souls’. We, all, ‘play the percentages’; and, at least to my mind, C-3 carry of a semiautomatic weapon is a safer, more considerate, ‘bet’ for civilian everyday carry. C-3 carry involves far less uncertainty and risk than C-1 carry ever would, or could.

    I’ve got a lifetime of shooting experience that has taught me: It’s not how fast you come out of the holster; it’s not how quick you are to fire; using one hand, or two hands does not matter, either. It’s how well - how, 'squarely' - you place your muzzle on COM and take those first two or three shots that really counts. All of these things said:

    THERE IS NO ADEQUATE DEFENSE AGAINST SOMEONE WHO EITHER SHOOTS YOU IN THE BACK OF THE HEAD, OR HAS HIS GUN OUT, AND GOING, BEFORE YOU DO.

    In this regard every single one of us, ‘walks with God’; and neither C-1, nor C-3 carry is going to have anything to do with the outcome of such a catastrophic event. ;)
     
    #254 Arc Angel, Feb 7, 2013
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2013
  15. Cavalry Doc

    Cavalry Doc MAJ (USA Ret.)

    34,969
    0
    0

    Just my take on it, but most ND's occur because someone thought there was not a round in the chamber.

    Human faults will never be a 0% possibility. There's a quote out there about people designing fool proof systems underestimating the ingenuity of fools.

    The guns are fine, it's people that need to be tweaked.

    Carry one in the chamber, carry without one in the chamber, carry with no cartridges at all, don't carry at all, it's a personal choice, do what you think is beat and let everyone else do the same.

    Problem solved.
     
  16. RichardB

    Silver Member

    Arch Angel,

    Amen. If I don't have the time or wits to rack my slide back I wasn't meant to win that day.
     
  17. tnedator

    Lifetime Member

    546
    0
    386

    About to run out the door, so don't have time to break it down, but will just add three more points.

    First, I fully agree that far too many people carrying are under-trained in my opinion. While not supported by most gun owners, and certainly not the gun owners that frequent GT and other forums, I think we should have a nationally recognized concealed carry license, BUT that it should require much more training (multi-day, lot's of hands on/range/tactics).

    Second, I was not inferring that you were saying nobody should carry or be allowed to carry. Instead, I was simply saying that the logic used to defend not having a weapon prepared for a self defense situation (C1), which is that most people will never have to defend themselves in their lifetime, is the same argument that the anti-gun crowd uses as the reason why nobody should be carrying period. Personally, I don't know why people carry a concealed weapon if it isn't with the sole purpose of defending themselves if that one in a million attack is on them.

    Third, as to drawing too late and using the dash cams as evidence. While I commend, even when disagreeing, with most of your comments, in this one, I think you are way off base and making a dangerous and non-reality based argument.

    Police have been given far greater latitude in their ability to draw (brandish if you will) a weapon, especially in situations where they are making a traffic stop or in some other way temporarily detailing someone, as compared to the ability for regular civilians to draw their weapon.

    The bar is very high for citizens to draw and brandish a handgun. In many, if not most, states the bar for brandishing a weapon is the same or roughly the same as firing it in self defense. In many, if not most, states it is aggravated assault or something similar and is a felony and sometimes a minimum prison sentence.

    So, the law has already put the honest, law abiding citizen "behind the curve."

    I've posted elsewhere the importance of situational awareness and trying to to allow yourself to be put in a situation where you have a close encounter, but the fact is that it isn't always under our control. We can't pull a gun on every person that looks dodgy that is about to pass us on the street. Fact is that if you are going to be mugged/robbed the person likely will not draw their weapon, make it clear until they are only feet away. They aren't going to stand 20' away (forget 15-20 yards), pull their knife and say, "throw your wallet on the ground or i'm gonna come over there and take it from you."

    There is no question that part of that awareness is to switch to the others side of the street if you see someone that you believe could be a bad guy, or take an alternate route. If someone suspicious is approaching them, you can and should loudly ask them what they want, tell them not to approach, etc. However, that simply doesn't come close to covering every situation, such as walking down a street and having someone pop out of a darkened entrance way, out between two cars or any one of hundreds of other examples I could give.

    So, while we all need to do our best to avoid putting ourselves in the situation of having a close encounter, the fact is that's what is likely to happen if in that VERY rare circumstance we have to draw a gun to defend ourselves.

    As such, as responsible gun owners with concealed carry permits that are carrying a gun in a responsible way, we should be trained (as well as possible) to defend ourselves in the manner we are most likely to be attacked, which on the street is in a very close encounter.

    My point had nothing to do with entertainment or some "cool" notion of gunfighting, ti was pointing out the reality, which is that it's far more likely that the issue with chambering a round will not relate to the .5 seconds it takes, but the ability to use your weak hand to rack the slide, and it has nothing to do with it hanging limp from being shot (the example you gave and discounted as unrealistic).
     
    #257 tnedator, Feb 7, 2013
    Last edited: Feb 7, 2013
  18. 1. Safety is not a mechanical device it is an attitude backed up with good habits.
    2. If you treat all firearms as if they are always loaded all the time then it doesn’t matter if the mechanical device that blocks the firing mechanism is engaged or not.
    3. “Complacency Kills” is not an internet cliché, it’s a literal truth and I’ve seen it happen it the most literal way possible
    4. No matter how many times you’ve had the discussion safety is always worth discussing.
    5. Some of you don’t post responses, you write novels.
    6. I wish I could take some of you guys to work with me. You might gain a whole new perspective on safety and you’d probably have a pretty good time as well.
     
  19. SpitFyRRe

    SpitFyRRe Bang Bang

    302
    0
    386
    I always always always have one in the chamber when I carry. When you need your gun, seconds can mean the difference between life and death.

    If I need my gun right then, I don't want to have to pull the gun out then fumble as I rack the slide. I would rather be able to pull the gun out and start firing if needed.

    Personal preference is all.
     
  20. Arc Angel

    Arc Angel Deus Vult!

    6,920
    1
    0
    I see you understand! ;)

    Still, it's that nagging doubt that SHOULD always be, 'rubbing away at the back of your mind' that will keep you sharp and prevent you from becoming either distracted or complacent. (Two of the three outstanding personal attributes that every predator always looks for! The third, of course, being any perceived weakness in an intended victim.)

    As for, 'time and wits'? I'd suggest you never forget that, in addition to your hands, you've, also, got your feet; and the other guy always has knees. Whenever there's no time to do anything else, first thing, get off the other guy's vertical body centerline. Then - somehow, someway - disrupt the other guy's balance and clear yourself from any weapon BEFORE completing your, 'reply'.

    At CQB distances savvy gunfighting is exactly the same thing as good knife fighting technique; AND, considering the prerequisite level of personal skill, methodology, and necessary acquired reflexes, skillful infighting techniques are next to impossible to teach during one of these 3-5 day handgun self-defense courses!

    In all fairness to many of the shooting schools, though: At CQB distances it makes more sense to simply teach a typical student how to defend himself by shooting his pistol from high retention (As nutty as it is!) than it does to attempt to teach someone how to minimize his body's silhouette, and become a much more difficult-to-hit physical target BEFORE beginning to, 'reply'. (Paper doesn't shoot back, isn't evasive, and is only rarely moving! It, also, doesn’t require, ‘squat’ in order to get someone shooting quickly from, literally, under his nose! Hence the true origin of, self-defense shooting, ‘from high retention’.) :supergrin:

    You are soooo ….. right! At risk of exposing my age and acquired doubtful nature: I, personally, believe that antithetical, anti-Second Amendment politicians - Who realize that they will not succeed in preventing people from exercising their Second Amendment rights - actually encourage and allow these incredibly lax gun laws to pass through the legislation process in order to foster safety problems among all of their fellow citizens who insist upon carrying deadly weapons. Sometimes, after a long day at the range, I’ll think to myself that it’s, actually, amazing more of us don’t end up by, ‘shooting ourselves or each other in the foot’, so to speak.

    OK, got ya! Nevertheless, crime in the United States has never been greater; street gangs (drug gangs) have never been more numerous, or covered as much territory; and as long as: crime, drug abuse, and sexual license continue to escalate among the American population, then, more and more Americans are going to need to, AT LEAST, have effective means of self-defense immediately available to them.

    Ironically - and I do mean IRONICALLY - it’s often these very same politicians that are so anxious to disarm America who are, simultaneously, responsible for allowing numerous adverse social factors and lax laws to exist! Aberrant social situations, (e.g.: out-of-control illegal immigration) and weak or unenforced laws which both actively contribute to, or actually increase: the growing number of criminals, the growing number of crimes, and the corresponding increases in increasingly depressed, increasingly violent, and increasingly unstable, socio-economic living conditions, e.g.; Large American cities like: Detroit, Trenton, Harrisburg, and Philadelphia.

    I live in Northeastern Pennsylvania. Who in their right mind would want to travel to Philly without wearing a gun? Paradoxically, though, Philadelphia politicians are among the most staunchly anti-Second Amendment politicos in America today! Far from being, ‘The birthplace Of The Nation’, Philadelphia, today, is more of an absolute caricature of what the American nation was, originally, intended to be. :freak:

    Which should tell any thinking human being that all of these incessant political calls to disarm America - To stop, ‘gun violence’ - are, in reality, nothing more than a tacit admission that we have failed as a national society, and Western civilization’s great experiment in forming a democratic republic has, ...... failed!

    Getting rid of guns, and severely limiting their use and effectiveness is NOT going to stop violence - Not at all! Instead, all that’s going to happen here is what the news media presently refers to as, ‘gun violence’ will simply morph into some other form of painful and bloody social terror. The problem really truly isn’t with guns; the real problem is with people and what’s going on inside of their godless reprobate heads. Getting rid of guns didn’t solve any of Great Britain’s social ills. Boycotting numerous firearms only made things worse; and, if the same dumbass logic is applied, here, in America then we may only expect things to get even worse here, too.

    Ahh, I never said that! In fact I didn’t even mean to imply it, either.

    Spot on! We are in complete agreement. There is a double legal standard which all American courts that I know of don’t hesitate to apply with supremely indifferent duplicity: One far more pragmatic (and lenient) standard for using firearms is applied to law enforcement, and another radically different, much more stringently interpreted, and far less useful standard for displaying or using firearms is applied to armed citizens among the general population.

    In my experience it isn’t necessary to, ‘pull a gun’ on everyone who looks dodgy. Usually, it’s more than sufficient to simply let them know that you’re aware, and are watching them. (Dodgy people tend to be cowards-at-heart; and it’s often enough to make them aware that whatever they have in mind isn’t going to be, either, easy or worth it.)

    Changing direction, or the speed at which you move are always good, ‘opening moves’. So, is loudly voicing your concern and verbally making your intentions clear. (You got that right out of the NRA self-defense manual; didn’t you!) I’ve already alluded to the concept that whether a man wants to, or not, ‘We, all, walk with God.’ That’s, ‘Why’ The Lord’s Prayer includes the words, ‘And lead us not into temptation; but deliver us from evil’. Let me ask this: Between carrying my pistol in C-1, or repeating The Lord’s Prayer to myself everyday, and carrying in C-3 which practice do you think is going to keep me the most safe?

    If it’s your time then it’s your time. The only reason, ‘Why’ I’m writing this right now is, try as they might, the doctors weren’t able to finish me off back in 2009. They did their damnedest; but, it wasn’t yet my time. All their efforts to, ‘heal’ me failed; and, finally, I made a miraculous recovery all by myself - One that a leading cardiologist who was reading my most recent test results remarked, ‘I don’t know what to say?’ ‘We don’t usually see this!’ I, however, knew exactly what to say; and I replied, ‘It’s not my time, yet; is it!’

    To get back to the original topic: Quite honestly I have no valid reason to feel disadvantaged by the way in which I usually carry my (C-3) pistol - No disadvantage at all. I have a whole regimen, a personal manual of arms, that I live by. I may be in C-3; but I never seatbelt my jacket or cover garment lapel over my gun. I tend to wear my pistol, forward, so that I’ll be just that much faster if I have to reach for it. I, also, keep a BUG readily available to my support arm and/or in an outside coat pocket if I’m forced to close my coat; etc., etc., etc.

    (I suspect you’d be amazed at how well I watch out for myself, and move about as I go through what most people watching me would imagine to be the, 'normal behaviors' of a, ‘normal day'.)

    On the Internet everybody talks like C-1 carry is the, ‘end all’ and, ‘be all’ of getting ready for a sudden, ‘ambush moment’. Trust me on this: C-1 carry is only one small part of being ready to defend yourself with a semi-auto; AND, in the real world, C-1 carry is NOT the most important thing a self-defense gunman needs to do in order to make and keep himself, ‘good-to-go’. ;)

    While I will admit to a certain personal prescience, at the same time I can’t imagine what it must be like to be that psychic. Quite frankly I don’t think of myself as a, ‘responsible gun owner’. Instead, I think of myself as a, ‘morally-inclined gunman’. Accepting responsibility is fine; but, personally, I’ve always been more concerned about doing the right thing (the Christian thing). In fact, doing the, ‘Christian thing’ occupies a great deal of my life. I’m only going to be here for a little while longer; and concepts like the, ‘Golden Rule’ are of increased importance to me. I honestly believe and appreciate that I should, ‘Do unto others as I would have others do unto me.’ As I’ve previously explained: This is one of the reasons, ‘Why’ I extend the courtesy of CONCEALED C-3 CARRY to everyone with whom I come into daily contact. (Even the, ‘bad guys’!) :supergrin:

    As for, 'responsible gun ownership'? I've got an entire lifetime (replete with a few mistakes) that - far from being just safety rules - are actually thoroughly inculcated GUN HANDLING HABITS. Hard won experience has taught me the folly of trying to be safe with a gun by following a bunch of memorized rules. A good memory is only marginally able to keep someone safe with a gun. On the other hand, impeccable gun handling habits - which a gun owner/user is emotionally unwilling to break - will always be the best and the most responsible way to properly handle and use a gun. Should I get into a sudden ambush type of CQB gunfight, I'm not going to be the one doing the shooting; my proprioceptive reflexes - MY HABITS - are what the other guy is going to be confronting!

    (Which brings up that other great perennial argument about, 'fight or flight' physiological responses; but, that's a whole other topic for another controversial thread!)

    I know. The remark wasn’t really aimed at you. It’s based more on my general experience with arguing this subject - Which, quite frankly, seems to have more lives than the little gray jungle cat that, at the moment, is sleeping next to me on the desk!

    That's it! I'm done. :wavey:
     
    #260 Arc Angel, Feb 7, 2013
    Last edited: Feb 7, 2013

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page