[oldgranpa]

Which pistols do you have or have handled that you consider safe to carry with a round in the chamber?
(Besides the 1911 which can be carried cocked and locked.)
And mention which ones you consider unsafe with a round in the chamber...like a Browning Baby, Raven, or other striker fired types.
Just a few I think of are DAO types like Glocks, Kel Tecs, my PM9, etc. that seem pretty safe.
And a few hammer types like Makarov and Bersa that have a "decocker" safety that allows the hammer to fall without firing.
Also tilt-up barrel Berettas and Taurus types ought to be safe.

og.....who hasn't seen every brand and is curious ???

 

[lelandray]

If it's unsafe to carry a round in the chamber, then it's useless to me, so I can't think of anything that's "unsafe." Any loaded gun has the potential to be part of a chain leading to an accident, but most accidents are caused by operator error. In my opinion, the Glock and other striker fired pistols have the most potential for accidental discharges, though that potential is decreased exponentially with training and practice.

 

[weshowe]

lelandray and all,

I'll second your opinion. If I have to load or "activate" a pistol just before use it's not a weapon, but a liability.
Lot's of latitude of what you want to carry, etc. in this area.
Although some may go in the "to easy" to shoot category.
Use what you like...the safety is between your ears, anyway.

Wes

 

[randomman]

Everygun I own I feel is safe to carry loaded. An Erma-Excam RX22, Smith & Wesson 22A, Ruger P95, and a RIA 1911.

I have no problem with packing cocked'n'locked, or a round in the chambe of a Glock or even a Baby Browning .25. In my opinion the only safety a gun really needs, is the one between your ears.

<Knocks On Wood>

-Rob

 

[jimhigginbotham]

I certainly cannot improve on Leland's response.

Maybe the easier way to approach this is to list pistols that give people pause even when they are well trained and attentive.

If we used the patent office's definition of "pistol" (Sam Colt holds the original patent for a mass produced "revolving pistol") then I submit that the traditional Colt SAA ("peacemaker") is one that no one should carry with a round under the hammer.

Niether is the standard over/under derringer of which modern copies exist (some modern copies might include a transfer bar or other safety but some do not) safe to carry with a round in the chamber. Also the Freedom Arms .454s and the like do not have a transfer bar and should not be so carried.

It might be quibbling but I don't think that the baby brownings or any of the cheap pistols using the same design should be carried on the person with a round in the chamber *unless* it is carried in a holster to insure the safety remains on. That goes for Glocks also since the safety is on the trigger. If you have a good holster that covers the trigger/safety...no problem.

There are probably others but it might require a little reflection.

Jim

 

[Guest]

I used to fear carrying a Glock with a round in the chamber (my gosh, no "safeties"). That lasted until I believed I might need it, realized I might not have gotten the chance to rack the slide, and got over it. I did some research and now am as confident as I can be in a Glock with a round in the chamber. I carry one almost every day. That said, safeties are still mechanical devices that can fail, so I still exercise muzzle discipline just in case.

I would not carry an older six shot revolver with a round under the hammer, by the way. Modern designs eliminated the problem, but older ones are still dangerous if loaded with six.

 

[oldgranpa]

Thanks, Jim, for your observation which better states what I was thinking about.
og

 

[Josh Smith]

Hi OG,

Any firearm that has a sliiiiiding safety with no postive click to keep it in place I consider unsafe for cocked'n'locked.

All others I consider safe for condition 1 (SA) or condition 0 (DA).

Josh <><

 

[jimhigginbotham]

Josh, that is an exceptionally good point. One tends to forget that there are such pistols...but there are!


I should make one more point. At one time the SAS (both British and Austrailian) typically carried Browning P-35s cocked with the safety OFF! I am not sure if this was a universal practice but I have talked to enough of their former operators to say it was rather common.

I also knew a lady who for a short time carried a Sig 245. She found she could not master the DA/SA switch and so carried hers the same way.

This is known informally as "Condition 0". IF (note the big IF) you have a really good holster that covers the trigger this is probably OK but it sure does grab ones attention. It even shocks some.

Take a moment to think. A glock is carred on half cock (the striker is approximately 50% back). I have confirmed by an odd circumstance that a Glock will indeed fire when the striker is droped from this position (and the F.B. block is depressed). So before we condemn the "Cond. 0" carry we need to consider some of this. That is by no means a recommendation to do it, nor is it in any way a condemnation of Glocks (I frequently carry one myself).

I guess the point is that most manual safeties block the trigger. If you train yourself to keep your finger off the trigger until the weapon is indexed *and* the decision has been made to fire then you will have little problem as long as in a normal carry position the grigger guard is covered to keep out foreign objects.

I did not mean that to be so long :-/

Jim

 

[lelandray]

Speaking of "Condition Zero..." I have a couple of 1911s with extended thumb safeties that have an annoying habit of getting knocked off into the "fire" position while I'm carrying them. This bothered me a bit until I realized that (A) upon drawing the pistol, the very first thing I'll do is to click the safety off, and (B) the leather for the guns covers the trigger completely and / or has a safety strap which locks into place between the hammer and the rear of the firing pin. I have a holster for my carrying Hi Power which also knocks the safety off, so what I've done is simply get used to the idea that the guns are safe while in the holster, and ready to fire when outside the holster. This is essentially no different than carrying a Glock, though seeing the hammer in the fully back position is, for me, at least, a very good reminder of the potential damage I can do by pressing on the trigger.

Again, training and practice, practice and training. I would add that an integral part of this equation, and probably the most important single factor, is having a very intimate knowledge of not only how your gun operates, but internalizing that knowledge to the point where you know without conscious thought exactly how to operate the weapon in any mode.

And that's why I very seldom carry a Glock, since I haven't spent months and months with it on a daily basis. If I should begin to carry my one Glock, I'll spend a lot of downtime with it first.

 

[1911dave]

LelandRay, some REAL nice postings by you here. My own 1911 with it's extended ambi will sometimes find its way "off," and like you I have a holster which covers the trigger guard and interposes a thumbreak strap as double insurance, but not nearly as much as keeping your cotton-pickin' finger off the trigger till you're ready to shoot! =)

As Mr. Higginbotham points out, we probably shouldn't be any more afraid of the Condition Zero 1911 as the Glock, it takes approximately the same trigger press length and weight to get either to go bang, and it's "cocked" too...we simply can't see it.

 

[Guest]

Once in the so-called "half-cocked" position, the Glock's firing pin will have to overcome the firing pin safety and the trigger bar. The trigger bar holds the spur on the end of the firing pin until the trigger bar moves down and out of the way. The firing pin safety will prevent the firing pin from moving forward into the chamber. I no longer feel it is in the least bit unsafe, at least compared with other designs that contain their own issues, and no more so than other weapons.

 

[jimhigginbotham]

I hope I made clear that I don't think Glocks are "unsafe"...at least not unusually so (all guns are dangerous - they are supposed to be - they are just less dangerous than cars, lawnmowers and a few other common tool/appliances )

The things is, that where the striker rests there is enough force to set the round of, lest anyone think that they are safe for that reason. The F.P. stop *should* prevent this unless the finger (or somthing else) happens to be holding some of the slack out of the trigger (which is what happened in the case I saw).

For all practical purposes a Glock is identical in function to a series 80 1911 if you welded down the thumb safety and deactivated the grip safety...with the exception that it will fire closer to out of battery than the 1911 (I have never been able to satisfy myself that they will fire completely out of battery as some claim as the source of the dreaded "Kaboom" - I am probably way off topic here ).

Onward,
Jim

PS - might be the same as the series 80 but not the 1939 Swartz, Kimber, Llama or S&W f.p. safeties - they work on the grip safety.

 

[Guest]

The things is, that where the striker rests there is enough force to set the round of, lest anyone think that they are safe for that reason. The F.P. stop *should* prevent this unless the finger (or somthing else) happens to be holding some of the slack out of the trigger (which is what happened in the case I saw).

Duly noted. I have held the slide muzzle down and pressed the firing pin safety in, to release the striker. I believe that it could strike the firing pin with enough force to set off a primer. That said, I can't understand how a firing pin safety and the trigger bar could be overcome without some effort on the part of the shooter, whether intentional or otherwise. Taking some "slack" out of the trigger should not be done until someone is ready to shoot. To do anything else would be, to paraphrase Bill O'Reilly, ridiculous!

 

[jimhigginbotham]

fortyforty;

Under normal circumstances it will not matter. However I have had my 23 take a fit where it would not reset the trigger untill I removed the slide and put it back on (This happened on the 2nd round with a clean pistol that had been carried for about 2 weeks since cleaning - there was a big ball of lint in the action but I am not sure that had anything to do with it). The pistol did not go off after the shot that stuck the trigger back but with it back the F.P. stop was of course not blocking the F.P.

The one I did see go off was on a brand new 23 owned by a Deputy in a neighboring county. He wanted to show me the great trigger he had as a guy in that county had told him you could use semi-chrome on a felt polishing wheel.

Well I tried it slow fire...it did have a good trigger! It also went of twice for every pull.... once when you press the trigger and once when you realease it...that's how I found out there is enough force on the striker as the thing had to be releasing from "half-cock".

Again both of the above are very unusual circumstances.

I have to admit, I don't know what is going on with the "kabooms". I have never been on hand for one (I did see a near "kaboom" with a 9mm in a class) but I know some folks who have been on hand when they occurred...with factory rounds not reloads. But I have been around when 1911s and Revolvers have let go. If you shoot enough, strange things happen. That one does not worry me excessively.

Again, not aruging here, I think we are on the same page, just ramblin

Jim

 

[lelandray]

In my area it's unsafe not to carry a pistol loaded; best to have one that is safe and loaded when you need it; Otherwise get a revolver.

I've visited places like that myself; though I don't know how relatively "safe" or "unsafe" I am at any time and in any particular place, my safest assumption has always been that even the most peaceful, totally "safe" place can very quickly take on an entirely different character, which is why I have a loaded handgun on my person or within arm's reach 24 / 7. I see a loaded pistol as sort of like having seat belts or air bags; you never really "need" them in your travels, but for a tenth of a second you might develop that need, so why not have them available?

 

[Guest]

Jim,

If we eliminated all "ramblin'", life would be very dull indeed.

It seems to me like pistol #2 was modified by someone who shouldn't have, and made the pistol unsafe by doing so. To me it is akin to someone polishing a sear to the point where the pistol goes full-auto. When the slide cycled, the trigger bar should have popped back into position to block the striker; obviously, it did not. It may have been a nice try, but it seems it was very badly done.

As for your own pistol, that is worrisome, and I wonder if you sent it back to Glock for examination. It seems that the trigger spring, which serves to reset the trigger, malfunctioned.

Ramblin' right back at you!

fof

 

[Chris Stephens]

Hi there OG,

Back in 1996, I took my CWP class and had to decide what weapon I wanted to qualify with and carry. In the early days of CWP here in SC, you had to carry the weapon that you qualified with and no other.

I purchased the Glock 23 with its safe action system just because you could carry it with a round loaded in the chamber all of the time and not worry about external safties being "wiped off" on presentation or reholstering. At the time, I was a hardcore 1911 shooter and competed regularly with "ole slabsides".

Back then, it seemed the perfect choice with its managable trigger pull and decent accuracy in a .40 S&W calibre package. The G-23 was also adopted as the sidearm of choice for the SC Law Enforcement Division, which was the first LEO agency in the country to adopt it for official duty.

I still carry it today and while I enjoy my BHP and revolvers, the G-23 to me is the perfect combination of size, handling ergonomics and safety.

Jim is absolutely correct of course, strange things can happen with any pistol, but the G-23 has served me well over the past 10 years.

Chris

 

[larry]

Very interesting posts indeed,

For me, most modern, quality handguns are technically safe. But I still feel uneasy with Glocks. These are the only guns I experienced premature discharges with - shooting a fraction of second before my sights were aligned - in tough, realistics training sessions. This is due to the light, mushy trigger pull - and lack of training/displine, some will add. I never experienced that with DA/SA (even in SA) designs or SA like 1911 or HP. Those offer a definite pull that prevents the problem.

Even if I trained much more with DA/SA (P225 and P5), the safest system for me is a SA, cocked and locked , like my LW Commander. There is something comfortable in the grip safety-thumb safety combo. It is very personnal and psychological, I admit. I don't care much for a FP safety.

Bye

L.

 

[Guest]

Larry,

I must admit that, each time I've held a 1911-type pistol, the grip safety makes me uneasy. I am never quite confident that my grip is such that, in a hurry, it would be depressed 100% of the time. I will stick with weapons with no grip safety, for now, such as the Glock or the Hi-Power.