Do you carry your 1911 in "condition 0?"

[WalkingWolf]

That is a bad idea, basicly you are carrying a gun that is not ready to use. The average gun fight isabout 3 seconds long according to FBI statistics, and that's from initial contact not from when the bullets start flying, given that, and the fact that you will probably be caught by surprise (If your situational awareness is good you can generaly avoid the fight, that you didn't suggests you were caught by surprise.), and the fact that action beats reaction, and your actual time to draw, and fire is closer to 1-2 seconds, you simply do not have time to fiddle with the hammer. If your gun is not ready to go when the fight begins it will likely not be a factor in the fight as you will not employ it.

Additionaly cocking the hammer is a relatively fine motor skill that can be fouled under stress, assuming you remember to do it. It also requires you to break your firing grip to do, unlike the safety, you would have to rotate the gun in your hand bringing it out of position in order to put your thumb over the hammer (a proper 2 handed firing grip on a pistol has both thumbs on the support side facing forward one on top of the other, as opposed to the crossed thumbs of a revolver grip).

The 1911 was designed to be carried with the hammer back.

As far as carrying in condition 0, or 1, you should never rely on a mechanicle safety, if you are practicing proper safety your finger will be off the trigger thus you do not need the safety, in fact the 1911 was originally designed without a manual safety as the M1910 the safety was only added because the military insisted on it (they were transitioning from revolvers, and the officer core who were used to the heavy trigger pull of a revolver didn't trust the lighter trigger of semi-autos) the new model was called the M1911. Most modern pistols don't even have safeties, even single actions like the Springfield XD. When I carry a pistol with a safety I carry it with the safety off.

NO it was not, this has been debunked over and over, and actually I believe in this very thread. Several models were submitted to the US army without a thumb safety including the 1910. They were rejected until Colt was forced to add the thumb safety, this is undisputed history. I cannot understand how anyone who makes claims of nomenclature of 1911's would not be aware. Soldiers have been cocking hammers on guns for over 200 years without difficulty. Your contentions are bovine scatology.

 

[Small_Arms_Collector]

NO it was not, this has been debunked over and over, and actually I believe in this very thread. Several models were submitted to the US army without a thumb safety including the 1910. They were rejected until Colt was forced to add the thumb safety, this is undisputed history. I cannot understand how anyone who makes claims of nomenclature of 1911's would not be aware. Soldiers have been cocking hammers on guns for over 200 years without difficulty. Your contentions are bovine scatology.

Nothing to say to that except you're completely wrong. The 1911 was designed to be carryied cocked it was the military that insisted on carrying with an empty chamber a decision that was beyond stupid. They never carried hammer down on a loaded chamber, or at least weren't supposed to. However the army decided to carry it it does not change the fact that it was designed to be carried cocked.

 

[Greg Bradburn]

A million likes for this. The best response so far

Why anyone would choose to carry a 1911 pistol in condition two, then choose to preach how they are "safer" than condition one beats the heck outta me.

Just a few questions:

1) After you chamber a round, how is putting your thumb on a tiny little part of the hammer, then pulling the trigger to effectively (although slowly) drop the hammer onto a live round "safer"? You must have the highly esteemed and underappreciated "safety" thumb issued to you. The thumb I was issued at birth is the normal human one that is prone to error.

2) How, exactly, is carrying a gun with a live round in the chamber with a firing pin behind it and a hammer resting directly on the very thing needed to poke the primer "safer"? You must be psychic to know that nothing will ever, under any circumstances, come into contact with the hammer. One little tap. That's all it takes. One....little....tap. But this is somehow "safer".

3) In the hypothetical situation that you need to unholster your firearm.......don't you need to use your "safety thumb" to cock it? (BTW: Wan't it cocked before? Oh yeah....you used your "safety thumb" to de-cock it before needing to re-cock it. Seems like rework to me.) Don't you feel a little apprehensive about using your thumb to cock a weapon? Where do you point it while you use your super "safety thumb" to do so?

4) Are you cocking it while pointing it at the "bad guy"? You do know you are pointing a loaded weapon at a human being, right? Are you absolutley positive the hammer caught the sear before sliding your thumb off it? Really? Are you sure? Because if your super duper "safety thumb" doesn't know for absolute certain that the hammer you are playing with, hovering over a live round, while pointed at a human being, has definately and for certain caught the sear, it might be too bad for Mr. BadGuy. Hope Mr. Badguy doesn't turn out to be your neighbor looking for his dog Fluffy behind your trash cans.

5) Or, do you point your gun somewhere else while using your nifty "safety thumb" to cock it? Where, exactly is this predetermined safe direction? Is your super "safety thumb" have a built in direction finder? Does it know what direction is safe while in the White Castle parking lot?

6) Where do you point your pistol when playing with the hammer over a live round when out in public?

7) If condition two is so much safer......why is there even a thumb safety on a 1911? If you carry in condition two....you'd never use it.

I guess John Moses Browning wasn't as smart as you after all, huh? Why in the heck did he even put the durned thumb safety on the 1911?

Guess he never heard of the great and almighty "safety thumb".

Nope. Meybe it's just me, but I'll choose to leave the thing cocked after chambering a round. (That's how it needs to be if I'm gonna use it, right?) Then, I'll click this marvelous invention of John Browning to engage an ingenious little thing that blocks the trigger, locks the slide, and keeps the sear from rotating. (Oh, and don't forget the grip saftey.) Yup. No external parts that could bump the firing pin.

This way, I don't need to do any fancy work when faced with a stressful situation. I'm sure the adrenaline will be flowing and things often happen quickly when they go into slow motion. I feel confident knowing that my firearm is absolutely not going to go "BANG" until I move that nifty little switch down...."CLICK" with my thumb.

Pretty simple. No reason to think more into it than neccessary.

 

[WalkingWolf]

Nothing to say to that except you're completely wrong. The 1911 was designed to be carryied cocked it was the military that insisted on carrying with an empty chamber a decision that was beyond stupid. They never carried hammer down on a loaded chamber, or at least weren't supposed to. However the army decided to carry it it does not change the fact that it was designed to be carried cocked.

I find it amazing that some people in their bias completely ignore history and facts. Colt manufactured a semi auto before the 1911 with a shrouded hammer(hammerless) that was designed to be carried cocked and locked. There is no need for a hammer spur on a gun designed to be carried cocked and locked. The spurred hammer is there for a reason, and was there on the 1910 Colt semi auto that is identical to the 1911 except for a thumb safety. You can have your own delusions, but you can't have your own facts. Somebody who is not competent enough to use a 1911 hammer is probably not competent enough to carry any firearm.

 

[Xion]

I don't see a problem with condition 3. I carry my Sig in that manner most of the time. I only carry with a round in the chamber when I'm somewhere I consider abnormally dangerous.

Would you carry a revolver ,with no bullets ? Same difference .

 

[WalkingWolf]

Would you carry a revolver ,with no bullets ? Same difference .

Actually SA "revolvers" and some early DA were carried with a empty chamber under the hammer. It is still recommended for clones without a transfer bar.

 

[MAC702]

Actually SA "revolvers" and some early DA were carried with a empty chamber under the hammer. It is still recommended for clones without a transfer bar.

That condition did not affect how long to use the first shot, but only the total capacity, as the one under the hammer would be the last to fire.

I know you know this, I think you just didn't see what he was getting at.

 

[WalkingWolf]

That condition did not affect how long to use the first shot, but only the total capacity, as the one under the hammer would be the last to fire.

I know you know this, I think you just didn't see what he was getting at.

Ohh I got what he was getting at, BUT still it is a fact that revolvers were carried with a empty chamber, and some still are. How one carries is completely their responsibility, to me the argument is ehhhhh. I carry with a round in the chamber of a semi auto, but I don't care how others do it. It is like the ongoing discussion or how many rounds to carry. It boils down to personal choice.

I am thinking of starting a thread about which kind of underwear to wear while OCing. I wear boxers, but I am a old guy who does not change that easy.

The young guys probably OC commando...

 

[Xion]

Actually SA "revolvers" and some early DA were carried with a empty chamber under the hammer. It is still recommended for clones without a transfer bar.

that's much different then carrying an auto that you have to rack .

 

[WalkingWolf]

that's much different then carrying an auto that you have to rack .

Huhhhh, every single action revolver has to be cocked, it is more than one action to fire, just like racking is... Duuuuuhhhhhhh!

 

[eye95]

That is still hugely different. Different amount of time. Different number of hands needed. One can be done will the firearm is being brought to bear on the target. Etc. In fact, the only similarity I can see is the requirement for two actions by the operator.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

 

[Fallschirjmäger]

Huhhhh, every single action revolver has to be cocked, it is more than one action to fire, just like racking is... Duuuuuhhhhhhh!

Last time I looked, every single action revolver could be cocked by the thumb of the same hand holding the revolver while every pistol I've seen requires two hands to rack the slide. Perhaps you are aware of an exception?

Everyone who's survived a deadly confrontation where they racked the slide before taking action against the target will tell you they were never too busy to rack the slide. Those who didn't have time to rack the slide won't say anything, they're too busy being dead.

Using two hands to rack the slide is perfectly fine as long as you can always guarantee

You won't be carrying anything in your other hand
You won't be holding on to your child's hand, or your wife's, or your husband's, or your lover's.
You won't be hanging on to the leash of a pet that's frightened and pulling away
You won't be hanging on to the arm of someone fighting or assaulting you
You won't be injured in your other hand so as to make it useless
You won't be hanging on to a pole, a ledge, a doorway, or anything else to keep from being dragged
Your S.O. won't have a death grip on your off hand out of terror​

... that's a few too many "won't be" assumptions for me to want to risk, but everyone has a right to determine their own risk level.




Saying, "I'll load the pistol once it gets dangerous" is like saying "I'll put on my seat belt once traffic gets dangerous." Seat belts and defensive firearms are there to meet dangers that you didn't anticipate. If you anticipated possible danger when driving you'd have put your seat belt on before you left your driveway.

 

[Xion]

Last time I looked, every single action revolver could be cocked by the thumb of the same hand holding the revolver while every pistol I've seen requires two hands to rack the slide. Perhaps you are aware of an exception?

Everyone who's survived a deadly confrontation where they racked the slide before taking action against the target will tell you they were never too busy to rack the slide. Those who didn't have time to rack the slide won't say anything, they're too busy being dead.

Using two hands to rack the slide is perfectly fine as long as you can always guarantee

You won't be carrying anything in your other hand
You won't be holding on to your child's hand, or your wife's, or your husband's, or your lover's.
You won't be hanging on to the leash of a pet that's frightened and pulling away
You won't be hanging on to the arm of someone fighting or assaulting you
You won't be injured in your other hand so as to make it useless
You won't be hanging on to a pole, a ledge, a doorway, or anything else to keep from being dragged
Your S.O. won't have a death grip on your off hand out of terror​

... that's a few too many "won't be" assumptions for me to want to risk, but everyone has a right to determine their own risk level.




Saying, "I'll load the pistol once it gets dangerous" is like saying "I'll put on my seat belt once traffic gets dangerous." Seat belts and defensive firearms are there to meet dangers that you didn't anticipate. If you anticipated possible danger when driving you'd have put your seat belt on before you left your driveway.

+infinity you made my point.

 

[MAC702]

Assuming you have both hands already free, racking a slide manually, especially under stress, is the most likely time to induce a failure to feed or go fully into battery.

There is little comparison to a single-action revolver being put into action via its normal cocking method (one or two hands), though yes, this can be fumbled a bit as well, though not nearly as likely, and is fixed by simply cocking again.

 

[WalkingWolf]

Assuming you have both hands already free, racking a slide manually, especially under stress, is the most likely time to induce a failure to feed or go fully into battery.

There is little comparison to a single-action revolver being put into action via its normal cocking method (one or two hands), though yes, this can be fumbled a bit as well, though not nearly as likely, and is fixed by simply cocking again.

Any type of motor function takes muscle memory or use of the brain to tell the parts of the body to move. It is like opening the door on a car, maybe all people should remove their car doors to eliminate this step.

If that is what YOU want to do it is fine, but none of us should make assumptions or rules for others. I made it clear, I will make it clear again, I carry a round in the chamber, so NO I don't actually rack the slide. But I certainly have no problem with those that do. And clearly many here have problems with the decisions of others or they would not keep harping on it or making excuses, or statements as to why they should not, and do YOUR way. It is likely most people will tell you to "bugger off".

Only difference on the internet most sites telling someone to "bugger off" is against the rules. I do it anyway!

 

[MAC702]

And back on ignore you go. When will I ever learn?

Nothing in my post advocated anything as to how someone should do something.

Some people simply must argue and insult others, I guess.

 

[WalkingWolf]

I never understand the lunacy of telling people they are on ignore. It is a juvenile tantrum just because they don't like the message. If you are going to ignore just ignore and shutup about it. It makes you look like a two year old.

Crybabies!

 

[CitizenJohn]

For those who carry with the hammer down on a loaded chamber ,all I can say is try that at a training range like Gun site , Sigarms , or even Front site . No matter what you say ,thumbing the hammer on a 1911 as you draw is unsafe . While safeties have been known to fail , as long as the trigger is covered by the holster and you keep your finger off the trigger , the gun won't go BANG!

Don't forget to use "thumb check" when holstering/reholstering ... no matter the pistol or the "condition" you carry it in.

A FFDO evidently did not employ that basic FLETC taught skill and shot a hole in his airplane. No one was hurt thank goodness but he got fired from the airline and of course, was discharged from the program.

 

[WalkingWolf]

Last time I looked, every single action revolver could be cocked by the thumb of the same hand holding the revolver while every pistol I've seen requires two hands to rack the slide. Perhaps you are aware of an exception?

Everyone who's survived a deadly confrontation where they racked the slide before taking action against the target will tell you they were never too busy to rack the slide. Those who didn't have time to rack the slide won't say anything, they're too busy being dead.

Using two hands to rack the slide is perfectly fine as long as you can always guarantee

You won't be carrying anything in your other hand
You won't be holding on to your child's hand, or your wife's, or your husband's, or your lover's.
You won't be hanging on to the leash of a pet that's frightened and pulling away
You won't be hanging on to the arm of someone fighting or assaulting you
You won't be injured in your other hand so as to make it useless
You won't be hanging on to a pole, a ledge, a doorway, or anything else to keep from being dragged
Your S.O. won't have a death grip on your off hand out of terror​

... that's a few too many "won't be" assumptions for me to want to risk, but everyone has a right to determine their own risk level.




Saying, "I'll load the pistol once it gets dangerous" is like saying "I'll put on my seat belt once traffic gets dangerous." Seat belts and defensive firearms are there to meet dangers that you didn't anticipate. If you anticipated possible danger when driving you'd have put your seat belt on before you left your driveway.

Single action revolvers are mostly cocked by the off hand of the shooter in SASS. It is safer, faster, and more accurate. But none of that really matters because it is none of your business how other people carry. The continual intrusion into others method of carry is rude and stupid.

 

[teddyearp]

Wow, what a long lived and lively thread. I'll keep the rest of my opinions about the tangents this thread has taken to myself, for now.

But I will reply that I would carry condition 1, but I am like the one poster who posted way back when that I have found that when getting in and out of my vehicle I end up with condition 0. Probably a combination of my body shape and my 'el-cheapo' holster. With the grip safety I doubt this is a problem, but it begs me to ask this one tiny question:

What "condition" is a 1911 style (not a Glock, nor an "XD", nor anything else but either a true Colt 1911 or exact operational simile) handgun considered when you have a fully loaded magazine, one in the pipe and the hammer on half cock?

Would that be "1.5"? or ".5"? or even "2.125"? Ok on that last one I got sarcastic, sorry, I do mean this to be an honest question.

TIA