CCW stops robbery...lucky!

Is it tough being a genius?

I mean, with a subject line like "CCW stops robbery ... lucky!", I can see how a person of your IQ would confuse it with a thread about home repair and continue to read on and be confused.

Steve

Reply to
SteveB
Loading thread data ...

All my CCW weapons are carried with a live round in the chamber. Why on earth would one NOT have a live round in the chamber? Modern weapons have new designs where they will not discharge if dropped on the hammer. On older weapons, that was why it was carried on a dry hole. With some semiautos, it takes quite a bit of effort to load the first shell. And a bit of time, too, which could make all the difference. I carry my semi-auto with one in the chamber, hammer down, with 17 behind it. It takes a full trigger squeeze to fire the first round, and then it will shoot as fast as you can pull the trigger.

Carrying on empty? What do you do, say wait a minute while I load?

Steve

Reply to
SteveB

I've got the KelTec 3AT, and consider it very safe for the same reasons.

Steve

Reply to
SteveB

"Dave Bugg" wrote in news:XNgfj.434$ snipped-for-privacy@newsfe07.lga:

racking as you clear the holster sounds like a good way to have an accidental discharge. ever hear the term "slam-fire"?

it also requires you have both hands free.

Reply to
Jim Yanik

Chuck Taylor and Massad Ayoob both disagree with your theory. You should learn how to do it right. Until then, you should contain your defective theory.

Reply to
JoeSpareBedroom

You don't know much about the Baretta 92F I take it.

So do many other handgun manuevers. You do it your way, I'll do it mine. Gawd, for supposed gun rights and ccw supporters who dislike nanny government, you folks sure seem to like individual nannyism.

Reply to
Dave Bugg

Your mere comment suggests that there may be a reason to leave a chamber empty. There must be a reason. You mentioned it. Were you being satirical?

Reply to
tnom

Not a problem. Indiana law allows the use of deadly force not only in self-defense, but in the defense of others also.

Reply to
Doug Miller

When I was doing my quals training as a reserve deputy in the late

70s, unloaded was generally nothing at all in the firearm. Not having a round in the chamber was scoffed at in this context, probably less so in a civilian, but was still considered loaded. Don't know if usage has changed any in the meantime.

Two in the torso, one in the head. You are now safe and the bad guy is now dead.

Reply to
Kurt Ullman

Yep. Robbers still, just not armed (g)

Reply to
Kurt Ullman

Indiana is similar, as far as I know. What part do you think would have been different in IN?

Reply to
Kurt Ullman

On older revolvers it is possible for the gun to go off if you drop it on the floor just right. If you carry the hammer down on an empty chamber, it can't happen. When you pull the trigger or c*ck the hammer, the cylinder turns and parks a loaded chamber in front of the hammer, ready to go.

That's the reason. Some people do it; most probably don't bother. Personally, I've never dropped a firearm. And back when I carried a Colt Govt. model .45, I carried it cocked and locked. As for revolvers, I've never carried one for personal defense.

Reply to
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

Yep.

Reply to
JoeSpareBedroom

You know what's funny, though? I've noticed in the news that a lot of people who get shot in the face are described as having non life threatening injuries. Of course, that's all the info we get, so we don't know what caliber they were shot with.

Still, it's strange.

Reply to
JoeSpareBedroom

That is the cop's mantra, although that is new from my time. Two in body mass, hopefully the heart, one in the head (not face) in case body armor is involved, as it is more and more. In that order.

Reply to
Kurt Ullman

"Dave Bugg" wrote in news:tJjfj.84$ snipped-for-privacy@newsfe06.lga:

I know its BEretta("Baretta" is an old Robert Blake TV show),and it probably has a spring-loaded firing pin,not free-floating. IIRC,it's DA/SA,so you -could- carry it with a round chambered,hammer down,and eliminate the extra step at a critical moment. That's my major beef;it's one more thing you gotta do in a CRITICAL moment. Plus,you get to carry one extra round!

Stubborn,aren't ya? ;-)

Hey,we're just discussing the pros and cons here,not mandating anything. chill out.

Reply to
Jim Yanik

snipped-for-privacy@milmac.com (Doug Miller) wrote in news:NYpfj.33685$ snipped-for-privacy@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net:

these days,robbers often shoot people *after they have complied*,for no reason,and witnesses or bystanders too.

I'm NOT REQUIRED to act as a police officer and demand they surrender,and it's too big a risk (and STUPID!!) to let THEM have the first shot.

Their drawing and threatening with a gun puts me at risk just as much as the one they are pointing the gun at.

Reply to
Jim Yanik

Kurt Ullman wrote in news:kurtullman- snipped-for-privacy@70-3-168-216.area.spcsdns.net:

no,double tap,then EVALUATE. doing a head shot after a double tap with the threat already neutralized is murder.

Reply to
Jim Yanik

Kurt Ullman wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@70-3-168-216.area.spcsdns.net:

What matters is where the shot entered,it's angle of entry and exit.

people may get a face shot that just rips up their jaw or teeth and cheek,passes thru.That may be disfiguring and HURT like hell,but not "life- threatening".Even losing an eye is not always "life-threatening'.

A cop could probably get away with a head shot after a disabling double tap,but it's a risk for a civvie.

Encountering robbers with body armor is thankfully,still uncommon.

Reply to
Jim Yanik

| >> Kurt Ullman wrote in | >> news: snipped-for-privacy@70-3-168-216.area.spcsdns.net: | >>

| >> > In article , | >> > "JC" wrote: | >> >

| >> >>

| >> >> I don't see anything in the article that indicates that his weapon | >> >> was unloaded. Many times I will rack just to make sure. So, perhaps | >> >> he ejected one while injecting another. Maybe he racked for effect. | >> >> Lots of ifs and maybes here. Anyhow, all's well that ends well. | >> >

| >> > The robber's weapon was unloaded. | >>

| >> Quote; | >> The newspaper noted that Officer Jason Bockting, in his documentation | >> of | >> the incident, said when the suspect seemed to hesitate, "Merrell | >> racked | >> the slide on his gun to load a round in the chamber." | >>

| >> endquote | >>

| >> "to load a round in the chamber";not "load another round". | >> Sounds empty to me. | >

| > When I was doing my quals training as a reserve deputy in the late | > 70s, unloaded was generally nothing at all in the firearm. Not having a | > round in the chamber was scoffed at in this context, probably less so in | > a civilian, but was still considered loaded. Don't know if usage has | > changed any in the meantime. | >

| >

| >>

| >> Merrell could easily have been shot while racking the slide. | >> that is an "effect"....not a good one,though. | >>

| >> I would have just shot the robber;2 rounds to the center of body. | >

| > Two in the torso, one in the head. You are now safe and the bad guy | > is now dead. | >

| | no,double tap,then EVALUATE. | doing a head shot after a double tap with the threat already neutralized is | murder. | | -- | Jim Yanik | jyanik | at | kua.net

I disagree. One, two or even three shots right to the head. I've two bullet scars in the chest to prove that someone can still get off a kill shot AFTER being shot in the torso. If you wait to "assess" the threat, your chances of survival are very slim. I was very, very lucky over 40 years ago, that my encounter was with a drunk gone crazy in a beer joint. I have since made it a promise to myself that if I ever have such an encounter again, I'll shoot first, ask questions later and take my chances.

Reply to
JC

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.