# Something to Think About



## Teuthis (Apr 9, 2008)

There are probably three basic potential crises in which an armed citizen could be involved. 

The first would be personal self defense against most likely, one or two attackers. It could be in the home, a parking lot, driveway. One's straightforward response would be generally to use one's weapon to stop the attack. Hopefully one would have been alert enough to be prepared, or to actually avoid the attack. 

A second instance is in some local or regional crisis, such as a major storm or earthquake, in which one, perhaps in tandem with neighbors or a locally formed militia, provides support close to home against looters or rioters. This is again, rather straightforward; the difference being that there could be an organization of some type to regulate the response; even if it is just neighbors banding together. 

A third would be a sudden strike by some disturbed person or persons in a public place. We have all read about those recently. And we have all posited the idea of small-scale terrorist attacks in public. This one poses some considerable problems for an armed citizen. 

Suppose you are in a public place, restaurant, store, promenade, and you hear gunfire; multiple shots. If you are exceedingly brave and move towards the gunfire, drawing your own weapon, you will most likely not be aware of other armed citizens emulating your response. You are not trained to look for them, and you are quite frightened at moving towards the sound of gunfire, or a visible assailant. 

There are enough concealed carry permits being issued that who knows how many other armed citizens might be in the area, and being brave, as so many have professed, might converge on the gunfire. 

So three, four, more, armed people spot each other with guns. Do you think this could be a recipe for disaster as frightened, excited, untrained citizens open fire on each other? Or perhaps there is a rapid police response, and they encounter you, and perhaps others with your weapons, and knowing some gunman has killed people, open fire on you. LEO's can be frightened too. I do not think this an impossible, or even improbable event. 

My own considered response would be to, if possible, get the people around me out of harms way safely; get them to cover or to retreat, followed, or perhaps led, by me. I would certainly leave as quickly as I could manage. If danger pursues, innocent people will be gone, or hidden, and then I could take a defensive position if necessary; as a last resort. I am also then less likely to be targeted by other armed citizens or the police, as well as whatever maniac is shooting with the determination to kill people. Having a firearm gives me options other than panicked retreat, or hiding with the possibility of being found and killed. I also would not expose my firearm to view, so as to be considered passive by the police or other citizens. 

I usually observe every venue in which I find myself, in some tactical way, as to cover, retreat and vulnerability. That is why this concept dawned upon me; the chaos that could ensue with multiple armed citizens and the police converging on an active crime scene with weapons. It could eventually happen. Has anyone else here thought about such an event? I would be interested.


----------



## TOF (Sep 7, 2006)

I would hope that the good citizens would act as if at railroad tracks and:

1 Stop
2 Look
3 Listen

Plus one more Item

4 Think

If a loony is shooting up a Mall the sounds should lead one to the BG if you realy want to go that way. If I chose to close with the BG, which I most likely would not do, a moment or two of observation prior to spraying lead around would enhance correct target selection.

However; If the loony was spraying the area in which I was located I would certainly return fire.

Stay safe

:smt1099


----------



## submoa (Dec 16, 2007)

Consult a lawyer to verify the following. Only a complete idiot would take anything they read in an internet forum as irrefutable legal fact.

A handgun is a deadly weapon.
Deadly force is only justified if you are trying to prevent the *imminent* commission of a forcible felony where if you don't, you or someone else will be killed or seriously injured.
Castle doctrine releases you from the duty to retreat only when you are in your home, car or place of business (may vary by state). You have a duty to retreat everywhere else.​
Your carry permit does not
make you a freelance policeman or samaritan.
justify setting up an ambush for bad guys
authorize you to flash your gun as a negotiation tool
enlarge your penis​
For your scenarios:

1. Castle doctrine applies only in your home. In a public space like a driveway or parking lot you have a duty to retreat.

2. Protection of property during civil unrest does not suspend prosecution for open carry.

3. Unless you are in your place of business, the mall is a public place and you have a duty to retreat.

Here's an easy rule of thumb to follow: If you are in a public place and have enough time to call 911 on your cell, then its not time to use your gun.

Note: I reserve the right to respond to overcompensating Rambo fantasy posts with ridicule.


----------



## Todd (Jul 3, 2006)

I've edited your post to serve as my answer to the scenario.



Teuthis said:


> Suppose you are in a public place, restaurant, store, promenade, and you hear gunfire; multiple shots. If you are exceedingly *STUPID *and move towards the gunfire, drawing your own weapon, you will most likely not be aware of other armed citizens emulating your response, *AND WILL PROBABLY BE SHOT BY ONE OF THEM THINKING YOU'RE A BAD GUY BECAUSE YOU HAVE A GUN.* You are not trained to look for them, *NOR ARE THEY TRAINED TO LOOK FOR YOU, *and you are quite frightened at moving towards the sound of gunfire, or a visible assailant, *SO YOU SHOULDN'T DO IT.
> *
> There are enough concealed carry permits being issued that who knows how many other armed citizens might be in the area, and *PEOPLE* being *STUPID*, as so many have professed, might converge on the gunfire, *AND END UP SHOOTING EACH OTHER BECAUSE ALL THEY SEE IS "MAN WITH GUN". *


Considering how many stupid people there are out there with CCW permits, no way I'd want to be running around in a public place with a gun. One of those mall ninjas would probably shoot me upon seeing the gun. Not a chance in hell people are going to form up and work together. Anyone who thinks that they will has seen Red Dawn one too many times.


----------



## Todd (Jul 3, 2006)

submoa said:


> Note: I reserve the right to respond to overcompensating Rambo fantasy posts with ridicule.


You got that right! :smt023


----------



## Dsig1 (Dec 23, 2007)

The original post suggests using one's CW as an offensive weapon rather than a defensive one. This is what you become if you move toward the gunfire. My local club offers multiple classes, one of which deals with legalities of one's actions when using a firearm. An expert lawyer is brought in for this session. In essence, if you have an escape avenue, use it. Your CCW permit is not a ticket to search out and join a gunfight. The weapon is to be used in a self defense situation or in the immediate defense of others in immediate grave danger. Hearing gunfire does not allow you to assess that anyone is in danger.


----------



## fivehourfrenzy (Aug 12, 2007)

Todd said:


> Considering how many stupid people there are out there with CCW permits, no way I'd want to be running around in a public place with a gun. One of those mall ninjas would probably shoot me upon seeing the gun. Not a chance in hell people are going to form up and work together. Anyone who thinks that they will has seen Red Dawn one too many times.


+1. Just because YOU might think rationally in the situation doesn't mean anyone else with a gun will. There are those of us that carry because we are realistic about the world and want to be able to defend ourselves, and there are those that carry because they think a gun makes them a badass and/or they are paranoid. Put either of the two together from the "other guys," and if you're seen with a gun, they'll probably shoot you, which seriously complicates the situation.

Find cover and dial 911. If you can safely retreat, do so. It's nice to think I could take on a heroic standpoint and help others retreat as well, but odds are most people are gonna be panicked and running like hell for their lives, and you'd be better off staying out of their way. Of course there will be those who are bawling and curled up in a fetal position, and whether or not you choose to assist them is up to you, but if it risks your life, don't bother. It's not selfish to look after yourself and only yourself, and you don't have a duty to anyone to protect them, unless it's your family or loved ones. The girl curled up in a ball under a table could be the same one who cut you off on the interstate, almost causing an accident and flipping you off in the process. Plus, if you decide to help others and get killed in the process, you're not helping them a whole lot.

Now if you see the guy doing the shooting and he starts coming toward you, please do the right thing and turn his heart and lungs into a pile of mush.


----------



## Teuthis (Apr 9, 2008)

I was not, in my original post advocating the use of the firearm as an offensive weapon. I was quite clear about that. I was considering what could happen if representatives of many people posting on forums made good their boasts and moved toward gunfire. The idea is that chaos could result if multiple, armed citizens converged upon such a scene, perhaps mingled with arriving law enforcement. Such an event would not be out of the question in some future crisis. I think it is worth thinking about. 

Panic is precisely what ensues in such a situation. But panic can cause inaction as well as action. And not everyone can flee a scene in haste. Consider older people, people stunned into inactivity by fear, and disabled people. Instead of moving towards gunfire, one could make use of one's armed state to create some tactical advantage for those people. 

My own solution was to retreat as quickly as possible; and if I were armed, perhaps do so as a rearguard. If we found ourselves trapped inside a structure, then setting up a defensive position would be in order. Having the firearm could make that possible. 

An armed citizen's tactics should be cautious, defensive, protective ( if one is so inclined) and covert in terms of the display of one's firearm. Few non-professionals are trained and experienced enough to do more than retreat defensively, and perhaps protect unarmed citizens by helping them decamp. As a last resort, one brave enough might attempt to set up a barrier to the advancement of a shooter in order to save lives. This is what "Tactics" is all about; thinking one's way out of danger.


----------



## fivehourfrenzy (Aug 12, 2007)

If I was a LEO and arrived on scene, I'd tell the civilians to reholster their weapons and get lost.

As compassionate as I am, when it comes to a life and death situation, my top priority is my own life. I'll do what I need to do to get home, and if banding together with other gunners is what it takes, that's what I'll do. However, a single active shooter generally won't stick around to hold down a building. He'll shoot who he's able to shoot, then relocate.

Now, if zombies were attacking, I would bring some shooters with me, we would take shelter in a gun store, and whatever zombies that came near us would get their heads blown off. :mrgreen:


----------



## submoa (Dec 16, 2007)

Teuthis said:


> I was considering what could happen if representatives of many people posting on forums made good their boasts and moved toward gunfire. The idea is that chaos could result if multiple, armed citizens converged upon such a scene, perhaps mingled with arriving law enforcement.


Hmmm.. Gunfire. Followed by appearance of multiple armed wannabes. Who is the bad guy? Who is the good guy?



fivehourfrenzy said:


> If I was a LEO and arrived on scene, I'd tell the civilians to reholster their weapons and get lost.


Including the bad guy?

Disarm everyone. Take all armed people into custody, make sure they are mirandized and kept separated. Interview witnesses. Establish events clearly. Take statements from all armed civilians.

Explain to each "hero" as they are inteviewed that they will be placed into holding until all statements are taken. Charges of brandishing a deadly weapon, and obstruction of justice could be considered. At a minimum, the chuckleheads deserve a good scare.


----------



## Joeywhat (Apr 17, 2008)

Last I checked, using your gun in any offensive manner is illegal when carrying a CCW, so unless you feel like forfeiting your pistol and license, I'd just get the hell out of dodge if you're hearing gunfire. The ONLY time you're allowed to fight back is when your life, or the life of your family is in DIRECT danger.

Wasn't there a topic on something similar to this a month or so ago? It's just a plain bad idea, and it's going to get someone shot. THe last thing a cop needs is one more moron joining in that he might shoot thinking it's a BG. They don't have the time to sit down and think about who is good and who is not.


----------



## propellerhead (May 19, 2006)

Interesting discussion.



fivehourfrenzy said:


> Now if you see the guy doing the shooting and he starts coming toward you, please do the right thing and turn his heart and lungs into a pile of mush.


How do you know they guy is not another CHL/CCW going after the bad guy who happens to be right behind you?

Not all bad guys will be wearing masks, boots and trench coats with bands of ammo strung across their chests.


----------



## Todd (Jul 3, 2006)

Joeywhat said:


> Wasn't there a topic on something similar to this a month or so ago?


You will see there are scenarios like this that pop up all the time. And you will see that most of us have the same answer all the time; get out, protect your family, don't be a hero.


----------



## Joeywhat (Apr 17, 2008)

Todd said:


> You will see there are scenarios like this that pop up all the time. And you will see that most of us have the same answer all the time; get out, protect your family, don't be a hero.


Don't they teach this stuff in CCW classes? I know they did in mine...or are these guys just mall ninjas who don't need any official training?


----------



## Todd (Jul 3, 2006)

Joeywhat said:


> Don't they teach this stuff in CCW classes?


 No. Remember that all states are different and in some, all you need to do is show up at the PD or courthouse with your paperwork with no class even required.



Joeywhat said:


> or are these guys just mall ninjas who don't need any official training?


Even with required training to get your CCW, it's not gonna matter. The "I want to be a hero delusions of grandeur" instinct will kick in and some fool will rush head long into a fire fight not knowing what he's going up against.


----------



## submoa (Dec 16, 2007)

Joeywhat said:


> are these guys just mall ninjas who don't need any official training?


----------



## Liko81 (Nov 21, 2007)

OK, some MAJOR tactical errors being posited here.

You're sitting eating lunch with your family, minding your own business, and you hear gunshots. The LAST thing on your mind should be your handgun or of using it. the FIRST thing on your mind should be getting out. How quickly depends on the proximity of shots. If they are far away, you have time. If they are very close, run. If a shooting breaks out in your field of view, you have already made a fatal tactical mistake in not identifying something out of sorts before it turned into a shooting spree.

Let's assume for a second that that mistake was not fatal in the literal sense, or that you could be excused for not expecting it (not too many people in the Killeen, TX Luby's on October 16, 1991 would say they had any more than a couple seconds' warning before the truck crashed through the entrance). If bullets are being fired in your vicinity, you are justified in shooting. But can you? If the bullets are fired in your direction, your first concern is getting you and your family the hell out of the line of fire. If you can escape, fine. If not, get them out of sight and behind a good bullet stop (if the only handy bullet stop is you, so be it). That's the reason you got the permit, to protect you and your loved ones, right?

Only now, with no escape and with you between the BG and your family, does your own gun enter the picture. If your gun has been drawn or fired at any point before this, you have cut off all other options. You are now in the center of your family, drawing the BG's attention along with everyone else's, and if an accurate first shot wasn't the BG's first clue you were armed, he knows now and he is focused on you. He won't care who's in the line of fire. You on the other hand have to care, because all justification aside, you will not beat the criminally negligent homicide charge stemming from killing the person beyond or in front of him.

Now, you probably have plenty of arguments by now, first and foremost of which is probably your state's "stand your ground" law where you do not have a duty to retreat from a place you have a right to be. My answer to that is, there's legal, then there's prudent. Your permit and gun, and your 2A rights in general, are not a police badge, nor are they any sort of permission to be a vigilante. Whether you have to retreat does not really allow you to ignore the fact that in the majority of cases you can and probably should. Just because the DA is barred from giving any evidence to the effect that you stood your ground, and the jury is told not to factor in whether you stood your ground, doesn't mean that question isn't in their minds while they deliberate.

Now, more to your point. Most concealed handgun courses teach students the basics of situational awareness. When shots are fired, you are immediately in Orange; you know there's a threat but you don't know where. Thus, your head should be on ball bearings looking for possible threats and you should be heading perpendicular to the sound of the shots. Perpendicular motion requires the most angular adjustment, and most human architecture is built around corridors, so moving perpendicular to the sound generally moves you to the side of the corridor where you can more easily find cover. Now, LOOK. In a public shooting scenario, the vast majority of people go through an eons-old programmed panic response; freeze, identify, and run away. You have, through training, learned a modified response; freeze, identify, and get to cover. Some others have done the same, and are not panicking. Identify them; they are good guys, armed or not. The guy who has a gun and is NOT behind cover is usually your BG. If you're going to try to play the hero, draw and fire from cover. Make sure you have a clean shot and remember that in your average shopping mall you may be able to see 50 or 75 yards, but you will have only qualified to 15. If you do not see the BG yet and/or do not have a clean shot, but have time, get 911 on the phone; every second will count if people are shot.

When the police show up, it's probably all over. With a little luck, even if you didn't call 911, a few of the other guys who have managed to keep their heads will have done so and reported that the shooter is down and that there are armed civilian good guys on the scene. That is what they will then expect when they arrive. If your handgun is still out, which should only be because you didn't aim well enough and the BG's still alive, you will still be drawn on, and whether you are shot depends on your next move, which should be, if you have any common sense, to slowly place the weapon on the ground and put your hands behind your head. 

You will be handcuffed. You will probably be sat in the cruiser. This is normal; they are trying to contain the situation so they can look at what happened without worrying about what's going to happen next. If they ask you what happened, decline to speak to them until you have been checked out by EMS and have had the opportunity to consult a lawyer. Remember that what you say can be used against you in court, but what you say can never HELP you in court. If someone else was hit by your bullet, or says they were, let them make their case; don't make it for them.


----------



## Teuthis (Apr 9, 2008)

*Carrying a 1911 Military Style*

When the 1911 was the principle handgun of the US armed services, it was carried with no round chambered and the hammer down. They did not allow charged weapons, much less carrying cocked and locked. If one needed to use it , there was a drill to arm the pistol when one drew. This required two hands, but there were people who were highly skilled in the maneuver and could draw quite fast, rack the slide back as they did so, and have a charged pistol ready to fire as it came up. It was a popular skill to learn among pistol afficionados who carried the 1911 in service.

What does anyone think about carrying this way as an armed civilian? A Federal firearms expert assured me that the technique is too slow. I have great confidence in his knowledge and skills; but I still wonder.

Could it not be feasible most of the time? If one is alert, and perceives a condition orange situation arising, one could chamber a round at that time.

Conversely, what about having a round chambered, but since most 1911's have hammber blocks now, one could cock the pistol as one draws? I like that less. It could be clumsy.

The overall idea is a high level of safety; perhaps for pocket carry, or inside the belt carry. I do have a holster for my Kimber that loops between the hammer and frame to a snap. So I can carry cocked and locked with some safety. But there are other ways and other holsters for carrying the 1911. I am not personally averse to carrying it military style most of the time, and practicing the old drill. What does anyone else think?


----------



## submoa (Dec 16, 2007)

Teuthis said:


> When the 1911 was the principle handgun of the US armed services, it was carried with no round chambered and the hammer down...
> 
> But there are other ways and other holsters for carrying the 1911. I am not personally averse to carrying it military style most of the time, and practicing the old drill. What does anyone else think?


The Conditions of Readiness:

The legendary guru of the combat 1911, Jeff Cooper, came up with the "Condition" system to define the state of readiness of the 1911-pattern pistol. The are:

Condition 0 - A round is in the chamber, hammer is cocked, and the safety is off.

Condition 1 - Also known as "cocked and locked," means a round is in the chamber, the hammer is cocked, and the manual thumb safety on the side of the frame is applied.

Condition 2 - A round is in the chamber and the hammer is down.

Condition 3 - The chamber is empty and hammer is down with a charged magazine in the gun.

Condition 4 - The chamber is empty, hammer is down and no magazine is in the gun.

The mode of readiness preferred by the experts is Condition One. Generally speaking, Condition One offers the best balance of readiness and safety. Its biggest drawback is that it looks scary to people who don't understand the operation and safety features of the pistol.

Condition Two is problematic for several reasons, and is the source of more negligent discharges than the other conditions. When you rack the slide to chamber a round in the 1911, the hammer is cocked and the manual safety is off. There is no way to avoid this with the 1911 design. In order to lower the hammer, the trigger must be pulled and the hammer lowered slowly with the thumb onto the firing pin, the end of which is only a few millimeters away from the primer of a live round. Should the thumb slip, the hammer would drop and fire the gun. Not only would a round be launched in circumstances which would be at best embarrassing and possibly tragic, but also the thumb would be behind the slide as it cycled, resulting in serious injury to the hand. A second problem with this condition is that the true 1911A1 does not have a firing pin block and an impact on the hammer which is resting on the firing pin could conceivably cause the gun to go off, although actual instances of this are virtually nonexistent. Finally, in order to fire the gun, the hammer must be manually cocked, again with the thumb. In an emergency situation, this adds another opportunity for something to go wrong and slows the acquisition of the sight picture.

Condition Three adds a degree of "insurance" against an accidental discharge since there is no round in the chamber. To bring the gun into action from the holster, the pistol must be drawn and the slide racked as the pistol is brought to bear on the target. This draw is usually called "the Israeli draw" since it was taught by Israeli security and defense forces. Some of the real expert trainers can do an Israeli draw faster than most of us can do a simple draw, but for most of us, the Israeli draw adds a degree of complexity, an extra step, and an opening for mistakes in the process of getting the front sight onto the target.

Using the "half-cock" as a safety

The half-cock notch on the M1911 is really intended as a "fail-safe" and is not recommended as a safety. However, it has been used as a mode of carry. From Dale Ireland comes this interesting piece of service history from WWII:

When the hammer is pulled back just a few millimeters it "half cocks" and pulling the trigger will not fire the gun [on genuine mil-spec G.I. pistols]. I imagine this is an unsafe and not a recommended safety position. The reason I bring it up however is that it was a commonly used position especially by left-handers in WWII. My father carried his 1911 (not A1) to Enewitok, Leyte, first wave at Luzon, the battle inside Intramuros, and until he was finally shot near Ipo dam. He tells me that he regularly used the half cocked safety position especially at night and patrolling because bringing the weapon to the full cocked position from the half cocked created much less noise and he was left handed so he couldn't use the thumb safety effectively. He said using the half cocked position was all about noise reduction for lefties while maintaining a small amount of safety that could quickly be released.​
Again, the half-cock is intended as a fail-safe in the event that the sear hooks were to fail, and it is not recommended as a mode of carry. It should also be noted that on guns with "Series 80" type hammers, the hammer will fall from half-cock when the trigger is pulled. This would include guns from Springfield Armory and modern production Colts. But, if you happen to be a south paw and find yourself in the jungle with a G.I. M1911A1 and surrounded by enemy troops, the half-cock might be an option.


----------



## Todd (Jul 3, 2006)

Teuthis said:


> What does anyone think about carrying this way as an armed civilian? A Federal firearms expert assured me that the technique is too slow. I have great confidence in his knowledge and skills; but I still wonder.
> 
> Could it not be feasible most of the time? If one is alert, and perceives a condition orange situation arising, one could chamber a round at that time.


IMO, it's not a good idea. Fine motor skills diminish in times of stress. Add to that your hands may be sweating. Do you want to chance your life on the fact that you are going to be able to successfully chamber a round? The KISS principle come into play here for me. When literally every second could count, I prefer to know that all I need to do is draw my XD and fire; no round to chamber and no safety to fumble with.


----------



## fivehourfrenzy (Aug 12, 2007)

propellerhead said:


> How do you know they guy is not another CHL/CCW going after the bad guy who happens to be right behind you?
> 
> Not all bad guys will be wearing masks, boots and trench coats with bands of ammo strung across their chests.


I was implying if you saw the shooter shooting at random innocents and it was obvious he was the BG, then drill him.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

fivehourfrenzy said:


> I was implying if you saw the shooter shooting at random innocents and it was obvious he was the BG, then drill him.


In most of the recent mass murders, the killer(s) was pretty obvious. Then again, the VA Tech shooter looked an awful lot like the "tactical" guys I see walking around SHOT Show. As ever, I agree with the cooler heads here - gather up the family and get the hell outta Dodge. None of this "running toward the gunfire like a brave sheepdog" crap. I'll leave that for the posturing, testosterone-addled "warriors" who populate the more aggressive gun forums.

In a minor-grade disaster, on the order of a hurricane (versus, say, a nuclear strike), it could be very profitable to team up with your neighbors. But these associations have to be made before the fact. You don't have to train like a militia. Just knowing your neighbors, maybe attending a few HOA meetings or forming a neighborhood watch, will go a long way toward cooperation when it's most needed. So have a beer on the porch with your next-door neighbor, or have the family down the street over for dinner. Guns can come later, if they're ever needed. But by knowing your neighbors, you reduce the chances of fratricide - you won't mistake them for looters, and they will (we hope) recognize you.


----------



## fivehourfrenzy (Aug 12, 2007)

Teuthis said:


> What does anyone think about carrying this way as an armed civilian? A Federal firearms expert assured me that the technique is too slow. I have great confidence in his knowledge and skills; but I still wonder.


What submoa said. Also, in a defensive shooting situation, you might not have the time or presence of mind to rack the slide or cock the hammer. You might get attacked by a guy with a knife from ten feet away. You wanna be able to draw, thumb the safety off, and start unloading. Plenty of my friends argue that carrying without a round in the chamber is "safer." Like most everyone else will tell you, accidental discharges are pretty much a relic of the past. Also, picture this: a guy grabs you from behind while you're getting in your car, throws you to the ground, and pulls out a knife. While you manage to draw your gun, you're using your weak hand to hold a knife away from your neck. There's no round in the chamber, and if you even think about letting go of the knife to pull the slide back, you're dead.

A gun without a chambered round is nothing more than a glorified paperweight.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

Regarding the 1911 stuff...carrying a 1911 in Condition One is _perfectly safe_, so long as one uses a proper holster and observes Rule Three. There is simply no reason to use Condition Three, which is slower and more fumble-prone than Condition One, while offering the trained shooter absolutely nothing in return.

*Teuthis*, based on this and the Glock trigger-widget thread, I am beginning to suspect you simply want to carry all your guns without holsters. This is generally undesirable. I say that not as an employee of a holster manufacturer, but as someone who has been involved in the defensive aspects of pistol shooting for about 20 years. The purpose of a holster is to keep the pistol _safely_ accessible at speed, and good holsters do it very well.

While a thumb break holster makes some shooters feel better about their cocked 1911s, since there is a strap between hammer and firing pin, such a holster is entirely unnecessary. The 1911 is perfectly safe when carried cocked and locked in a quality open-top holster (that covers the trigger guard), and I did so for many years without incident. While a thumb break may be preferred for reasons of weapon retention in some scenarios, it is completely unnecessary from the standpoint of mechanical safety, and serves only to complicate and slow the draw.


----------



## fivehourfrenzy (Aug 12, 2007)

I'm directing this question at submoa and Mike out of curiosity. While I currently carry my 1911 in condition 1 and have no plans or desire to change that, what do the authorities say about condition 0? I personally think condition 1 is perfectly safe, yet offers a smooth, fluid draw and fire, and I wouldn't feel too comfortable carrying in condition 0. However, a SAO pistol like a Glock or XD is essentially cocked, but not locked as it doesn't have an external manual safety. How would you compare carrying a Glock in "condition 0" to carrying a 1911 in condition 0? This is based on curiosity, nothing more.


----------



## submoa (Dec 16, 2007)

fivehourfrenzy said:


> I'm directing this question at submoa and Mike out of curiosity. While I currently carry my 1911 in condition 1 and have no plans or desire to change that, what do the authorities say about condition 0?


I wouldn't call myself an expert on the 1911, but having carried one for years, I have the following opinions. In terms of operator safety the thumb safety blocks the sear and the grip safety blocks the trigger. The traditional 1911 does not have a firing pin block. Think about what could happen with a cocked and loaded gun if you drop it without a blocked sear and no firing pin block.

Furthermore, the thumb safety keeps the gun in battery while on. The act of holstering could put the gun out of battery with no guarantee of RTB when drawn.


fivehourfrenzy said:


> However, a SAO pistol like a Glock or XD is essentially cocked, but not locked as it doesn't have an external manual safety.


No. Neither Glock or XD are SAO pistols. They, and the P99 QA defy traditional SAO or DAO definitions. All three require racking the slide to partially cock the action. Pulling the trigger, completes the cocking and trips the sear to discharge the firearm. The partial cocking reduces the weight and distance of the trigger pull compared to DAO action.

SAO actions, the trigger trips the sear. DAO actions, the trigger fully cocks the gun from an inert state prior to tripping the sear and does not require the slide to be racked to partially cock the action.

With the exception of the P99 QA (decocker), Glock and XD requires pulling the trigger on an empty chamber to field strip. For my Cooper 4 safety rule obsessed mind, the Glock and XD field strip trigger pull is a rule 1 violation (all guns are loaded).


fivehourfrenzy said:


> How would you compare carrying a Glock in "condition 0" to carrying a 1911 in condition 0? This is based on curiosity, nothing more.


Glock has no manual safety so a condition 0 description does not apply. The split trigger, firing pin safety, drop safety and the fact that the Glock is not fully cocked is more than adequate if you can keep the inside of the triggerguard clear until you are ready to fire.


----------



## Teuthis (Apr 9, 2008)

I use holsters. I almost never carry anything, except rarely a snubbie, without a holster. I am just wanting a little more security. I cannot drill to the level that will make me comfortable with most of the triggers and firing systems out there. I do have a holster for my 1911 that has a snap strap between the frame and cocked trigger. I do use that and I'm looking for a better one. 

As to the widget for my Glock? The Trigger Blok. I said in another thread that I have drilled enough with it that I feel comfortable using it; just like thumbing the safety on a 1911. It gives me an additional margin of safety that I desire. With a holster. 

I try to use acute awareness of my surroundings to give me warning of any sudden event more than a quick draw technique. If I perceive a threat I will try to bring my pistol to readiness before the threat arrives. I guess I want to keep my mind and my firearm both in condition yellow.


----------



## fivehourfrenzy (Aug 12, 2007)

submoa said:


> I wouldn't call myself an expert on the 1911, but having carried one for years, I have the following opinions. In terms of operator safety the thumb safety blocks the sear and the grip safety blocks the trigger. The traditional 1911A1 does not have a firing pin block. Think about what could happen with a cocked and loaded gun if you drop it without a blocked sear and no firing pin block.
> 
> Furthermore, the thumb safety keeps the gun in battery while on. The act of holstering could put the gun out of battery with no guarantee of RTB when drawn.


The firing pin/striker block was a good invention. I'm pretty sure mine has one...

Not sure what you mean by the second paragraph.


----------



## submoa (Dec 16, 2007)

fivehourfrenzy said:


> The firing pin/striker block was a good invention. I'm pretty sure mine has one...


No safety device can replace the one between your ears. From 1911 to 1980, through WWI, WWII, Korea & Vietnam, 1911s have had no firing pin safety. They were added to commercial products make lawyers happy and give noobs peace of mind.

Colt introduced a firing pin block on the Series 80. The series 80 firing pin block is de-activated by the trigger. Many shooters, including myself, consider that the Series 80 firing pin block adds some mush to the trigger pull - "click crunch." Frankly, the series 80 firing pin safety makes it impossible to have a match trigger on this design.

Para's 1911s use the series 80 firing pin block.

Some 1911s (Kimber Series II & S&W) use the Swartz safety that deactivates the firing pin block by the grip safety. This doesn't interfere with the trigger action. On the other hand there have been complaints of RTB failures from Kimber's Swartz. Also, you have to remove the rear sight to maintain the Swartz FPB.

Springfields, STI, SVI, etc. are based on Series 70s and have no firing pin block. Instead they use a heavier firing pin spring and lighter firing pins.

You can piss off a real 1911 guy by starting a Series 80 debate.



fivehourfrenzy said:


> Not sure what you mean by the second paragraph.


The thumb safety fits into a notch in the slide, keeping the slide fixed in place. Holstering with the thumb safety off could allow the slide to move relative to the frame with no guarantee that the slide will return to battery when the gun is drawn.

Furthermore, holstering a 1911 cocked and chambered with the thumb safety off is asking for an ND as you will very likely be pushing on the grip safety to get the gun into the holster.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

*submoa* offers good information, as usual. I only dispute the categorization of the XD. It is actually a true SA design, since it is completely cocked by slide movement. It has a long take-up in the trigger, but the striker is completely cocked after cycling. http://www.gunsandammomag.com/techside/xd_010305/index.html

IDPA and ATF agree that the XD is a single action, unlike the semi-cocked Glock. I do not know enough about the P99's mechanics to compare it.


----------



## Liko81 (Nov 21, 2007)

fivehourfrenzy said:


> The firing pin/striker block was a good invention. I'm pretty sure mine has one...
> 
> Not sure what you mean by the second paragraph.


"Battery" is when the round is chambered and the action is fully closed with slide forward, also known as "at rest" as opposed to "cycling" when talking about the normal operation of the weapon. The act of drawing or holstering can move the slide backwards, opening the action and taking the gun "out of battery".

This is a bad thing for three main reasons:
1: On hammer-fired designs, the hammer strikes the bottom of the slide before hitting the pin, lowering the energy of the hammer which can result in a "light strike" that doesn't discharge.
2: On many designs, the slide must be fully forward in order for the trigger to properly engage the sear. In that case pulling the trigger accomplishes nothing.
3: If the slide is far enough back, the breech will be open, which allows a discharging cartridge to burst.

The 1911's safety includes a latch that locks the slide closed. The gun therefore cannot move out of battery while the thumb safety is engaged, meaning it is guaranteed to be in battery when you have cleared leather before you disengage the safety.


----------



## submoa (Dec 16, 2007)

Mike Barham said:


> It is actually a true SA design, since it is completely cocked by slide movement. ...IDPA and ATF agree that the XD is a single action


You are right... I stand corrected on XD's SAO definition.


----------



## fivehourfrenzy (Aug 12, 2007)

submoa said:


> The thumb safety fits into a notch in the slide, keeping the slide fixed in place. Holstering with the thumb safety off could allow the slide to move relative to the frame with no guarantee that the slide will return to battery when the gun is drawn.


RTB = return to battery. That makes sense now. The big thing about the XDs is the grip safety, so when holstering, theoretically they should keep the slide from being pushed back so the gun is out of battery. The thumb safety on the 1911 jams the slide from being moved at all.


----------



## khellandros66 (Oct 1, 2007)

My response;

On my home property, kill em all, if that boils down to bare hands so be it, NEVER let you assault against an attacker. I would not call for help this could put a neighbor (likely unarmed or inadequately so) in danger too.

In a public areas such as parking lot, bathroom etc, same deal but you must make it known your are in danger "HELP" "RAPE" Other will hear and call authorities. Safety in numbers too.

Public shooting. I would draw my gun but have it pointed towards the ground, and tell people to run in the opposite direction, tell them "GO THIS WAY TO BE SAFE" "GET AWAY GO BEHIND ME!" waving your hand to guide them away from the threat and show you mean then no harm.

Cheers

Bobby


----------

