What are your carry variables?


How do you carry?

  • Round Chambered, Safety On

    Votes: 33 43.4%
  • No Round Chambered, Safety On

    Votes: 2 2.6%
  • Round Chambered, Safety Off

    Votes: 32 42.1%
  • No Round Chambered, Safety Off

    Votes: 6 7.9%
  • Other

    Votes: 9 11.8%

  • Total voters
    76

S&W340PD

New member
I carry a revolver for now, and it is DAO. One of the reasons I chose a revolver for carry at first, was so I didnt have to 'worry' about a chambered round/safety on situation. After carrying and becoming much more familar with auto's, I am considering swapping my carry gun. If I do, it will be chambered, safety off.
 

tattedupboy

Thank God I'm alive!
I think legally using a weapon as a deterrent would be against the law. A CCW holder is not part of law enforcement. By definition all state laws on use of force state you can only use your weapon if your life is in danger or think it's in danger. I was told if you pull your weapon you had better prepared to fire it.

I think that depends. Since most states only allow deadly force to be used in defense of one's life, and not in the defense of property, if I wanted to stop someone who's about to mug me, and I brandish my weapon, and that stops him, it would not be against the law, because in this case, the criminal did not commit the crime and I did not use deadly force in defense of property. While deadly force in defense of property is illegal, non lethal force in defense of it isn't. Got it?

BTW, I always carry with a round in the chamber and safety on, which can be disengaged with a simple sweep of the thumb. When I first began carrying back August of 2004, I used to carry Mexican style with an empty chamber and the safety on (Good thing I never had to use it!) Then, when I became familiar with gun forums such as this, packing.org, and opencarry.org, I learned what a buffoon I had been. Since then I have alternated between IWB, SmartCarry, and OWB, but always with a round in the chamber. Also, lots of practice, practice, and practice.
 
Last edited:

doublenutz

New member
I always assume there is a round in the chamber until I have properly cleared my weapon.

Therefore Round Chambered/Safety On
 

doublenutz

New member
By definition all state laws on use of force state you can only use your weapon if your life is in danger or think it's in danger.

This is not true... If deadly force were used in defense in the case of trespassing onto ones property for the purpose or act of committing a crime, in most sates the use of deadly force would be wholly justified (provided you do not chase an offender off of your property and then shoot or shoot the offender in the back).

Just had a case here in Portland Oregon, less than a half mile from my home where a man was awoken in the middle of the night by an intruder on his premises... the old bugger shot the intruder DEAD! No charges were filed against the the shooter for protecting his property and life. I believe this incident was published in either this month or last months NRA Rifleman Magazines- "The Armed Citizen".
 

ishi

New member
I think that depends. Since most states only allow deadly force to be used in defense of one's life, and not in the defense of property, if I wanted to stop someone who's about to mug me, and I brandish my weapon, and that stops him, it would not be against the law, because in this case, the criminal did not commit the crime and I did not use deadly force in defense of property. While deadly force in defense of property is illegal, non lethal force in defense of it isn't. Got it?

This claim is FALSE. Defense against a mugging isn't about retaining your property, it's about retaining your LIFE. Muggers routinely kill people who don't have enough money to satisfy them, or who don't want to give up their property (which actually is your right, since there is no law that requires you to comply with a mugger!).

The law requires you to be in reasonable fear of death or serious bodily injury. A mugging satisfies these requirements because it is reasonable to believe that the mugger will use deadly force if you do not comply. That's why mugging is a FORCIBLE felony. They don't have to verbalize any threat to harm you, the threat is implicit in their actions.

I don't want to flame you man, but please don't tell people they can't defend themselves against muggers. It's false and it's dangerous.
 
Last edited:

tattedupboy

Thank God I'm alive!
This claim is FALSE. Defense against a mugging isn't about retaining your property, it's about retaining your LIFE. Muggers routinely kill people who don't have enough money to satisfy them, or who don't want to give up their property (which actually is your right, since there is no law that requires you to comply with a mugger!).

The law requires you to be in reasonable fear of death or serious bodily injury. A mugging satisfies these requirements because it is reasonable to believe that the mugger will use deadly force if you do not comply. That's why mugging is a FORCIBLE felony. They don't have to verbalize any threat to harm you, the threat is implicit in their actions.

I don't want to flame you man, but please don't tell people they can't defend themselves against muggers. It's false and it's dangerous.

Obviously, it's debatable whether shooting a mugger is the result of defending property or life so I'll use another example. If I'm a clerk in a convenience and I see a shoplifter and shoot him after he has stolen some merchandise, without him ever having threatened me directly, I would not be justified. If, however, I brandished my weapon in order to prevent him from doing it, or threatened to shoot him, then that would be justified, because deadly force would not have been employed (Yes, it might seem extreme to threaten to shoot a petty thief, but the burden of proof would be on him to prove that I made the threat; furthermore, my property would still be intact).
 

Homer1

New member
I voted round chambered with safety on.
I carry a GLOCK so that is with round in chamber and
finger OFF trigger that and what is between my ears
is my safety on.
 

doublenutz

New member
Obviously, it's debatable whether shooting a mugger is the result of defending property or life so I'll use another example. If I'm a clerk in a convenience and I see a shoplifter and shoot him after he has stolen some merchandise, without him ever having threatened me directly, I would not be justified. If, however, I brandished my weapon in order to prevent him from doing it, or threatened to shoot him, then that would be justified, because deadly force would not have been employed (Yes, it might seem extreme to threaten to shoot a petty thief, but the burden of proof would be on him to prove that I made the threat; furthermore, my property would still be intact).

Tat, just want to first clarify that, we are not busting your chops but bro the shoplifter example is worse than the first. These days in retail, shoplifters often times are more violent and likely to have armories in their pockets more than you may know. More retailing employees are injured every year by shoplifters than by in your face armed robberies. So much so that, most of America's largest retailers have adopted a policy prohibiting employees (other than Loss Prevention officers) from stopping shoplifters, for the safety of their employees and customers.

I have a friend that works for Lowe's in Texas and he has personally had a gun jammed in his face by a shoplifter he tried to stop from stealing merchandise worth less than $30.00. Shoplifters in the act of a their crime have often made the commitent that they are going to steal and that means that they also realize they may be caught. So the armed shoplifter also understands that if they get caught, they will increase their chances of getting away.
 

big dog

New member
I carry with no round chambered and safety off. I worry about the consequences of response time and failing to properly rack the slide, but I feel safer.

You might as well carry a big stick or rock!, if you aren't able to handle a loaded weapon with out scaring your self you better learn how to dial 911 and leave it up to the police to save you...........
 

Ziggy

New member
Conditions

I've got to say, it's become outright offensive the number of people implying, or stating, that someone who doesn't carry with a round in the chamber is "afraid" of their gun. It's a matter of personal choice and the circumstance under which one feels the need to carry. It has nothing to do with training, practice, comfort with the weapon or the ability to use it if necessary.
The fact that some people have a different opinion than you about what is necessary doesn't mean you have to be an a$$hole about it. And what condition it is appropriate to carry in is a matter of circumstance and opinion.
 

Red Hat

New member
Obviously, it's debatable whether shooting a mugger is the result of defending property or life so I'll use another example. If I'm a clerk in a convenience and I see a shoplifter and shoot him after he has stolen some merchandise, without him ever having threatened me directly, I would not be justified. If, however, I brandished my weapon in order to prevent him from doing it, or threatened to shoot him, then that would be justified, because deadly force would not have been employed (Yes, it might seem extreme to threaten to shoot a petty thief, but the burden of proof would be on him to prove that I made the threat; furthermore, my property would still be intact).

A few states have clarified that debate. SC passed the "Castle Doctrine" self-defense bill, it simply states that if a criminal breaks into your home, your occupied vehicle or your place of business, you may presume he is there to do bodily harm and you may use any force necessary against him. If you have the right to be somewhere you have the right to defend yourself and others. Furthermore, this law provides protection from criminal prosecution and civil litigation for those who defend themselves from criminal attack.
 

tattedupboy

Thank God I'm alive!
Tat, just want to first clarify that, we are not busting your chops but bro the shoplifter example is worse than the first. These days in retail, shoplifters often times are more violent and likely to have armories in their pockets more than you may know. More retailing employees are injured every year by shoplifters than by in your face armed robberies. So much so that, most of America's largest retailers have adopted a policy prohibiting employees (other than Loss Prevention officers) from stopping shoplifters, for the safety of their employees and customers.

I have a friend that works for Lowe's in Texas and he has personally had a gun jammed in his face by a shoplifter he tried to stop from stealing merchandise worth less than $30.00. Shoplifters in the act of a their crime have often made the commitent that they are going to steal and that means that they also realize they may be caught. So the armed shoplifter also understands that if they get caught, they will increase their chances of getting away.

What is so bad about this example? It is my experience that most shoplifters are unarmed petty thieves, primarily schoolkids. Also, please don't dismiss my scenario as if it is impossible, because it is actually quite probable and realistic. Why shouldn't a storeowner or clerk prepare themselves for this type of scenario?

Please let's not get into the game of me laying out a scenario and you telling me why it's a bad example. My so-called "bad examples" are taking place every day, and law abiding gun owners have only a few precious moments to decide whether to fire their weapons, brandish them, do nothing, or call the police.
 

ishi

New member
O... If, however, I brandished my weapon in order to prevent him from doing it, or threatened to shoot him, then that would be justified, because deadly force would not have been employed (Yes, it might seem extreme to threaten to shoot a petty thief, but the burden of proof would be on him to prove that I made the threat; furthermore, my property would still be intact).

This is aggravated assault! It's a felony. Hope you like bunking with Bubba :eek:
 

PDW

New member
I've got to say, it's become outright offensive the number of people implying, or stating, that someone who doesn't carry with a round in the chamber is "afraid" of their gun. It's a matter of personal choice and the circumstance under which one feels the need to carry. It has nothing to do with training, practice, comfort with the weapon or the ability to use it if necessary.
The fact that some people have a different opinion than you about what is necessary doesn't mean you have to be an a$$hole about it. And what condition it is appropriate to carry in is a matter of circumstance and opinion.


+1 I agree completely! I carry a Kel-Tec so there is never a safety on. Sometimes I carry loaded, most of the time not. I have been around guns my entire life, and because I choose to not always carry hot doesn't mean I am afraid or inept. I guess my chances of regretting not carrying loaded are probably about the same as someones elses chance of regretting that they DO carried loaded.....

-PW
 

rabywk

New member
+1 I agree completely! I carry a Kel-Tec so there is never a safety on. Sometimes I carry loaded, most of the time not. I have been around guns my entire life, and because I choose to not always carry hot doesn't mean I am afraid or inept. I guess my chances of regretting not carrying loaded are probably about the same as someones elses chance of regretting that they DO carried loaded.....

-PW

Ok, I am going to chime in on this one. We should not be passing judgement on anyone who makes a effort to protect themselves or their families. Yes I do carry chambered and I will only carry chambered because that is what "I" am comfortable with.

For those who do not carry one chambered I would ask, why? If it is because they don't feel comfortable with it, then I would recommend training. If it is because of a personal decision being made then, leave it alone. It is their decision.

I do personally think that carrying a gun unchambered could cost you time when a BG presents himself, but what is more dangerous? Carrying an unchambered gun or not carrying one at all.

Personal choice is big here guys. You want the anti's to see that having a CCW is a personal choice we have made to protect our families and self, then we need to understand other peoples personal choices. Don't flame or insult people because their views differ from yours.

<Stepping off Soap Box Now>
 

Commander_Cob

New member
I'm glad to see that some understand the personal decision I've made to not always carry chambered. Again, I will restate that we do not carry in town, but only in backcountry. I fall sometimes, and my gun is older with no firing-pin block. It is a SAFETY concern, although the potential for negligent discharge might be minimal. I would also like to chime in about whether guns make suitable deterrents. I believe that most instances a gun is pulled, BGs realize real fast this is a serious threat to their life. Our CCW instructor pointed out that when a gun is pulled on someone they will typically turn and head the other way. Are you going to shoot someone in the back? I'm not. Guns make businesses, cars, and homes safer, despite what I consider gray-area laws.
 

MufDady

New member
I carry a Glock, with one in the tube.. I don't want to be in a situtation having to rack the slide, the time that takes could result in an outcome I don't want.. I hope and pray the day won't come I have to use my Gun, but if it does I want to be ready............
 

doublenutz

New member
Please let's not get into the game of me laying out a scenario and you telling me why it's a bad example. My so-called "bad examples" are taking place every day, and law abiding gun owners have only a few precious moments to decide whether to fire their weapons, brandish them, do nothing, or call the police.


No biggy bro... just thought I would share a valid statistic and real life store policies that are reacting to shoplifters in retail environments today.
 

ishi

New member
What is so bad about this example? It is my experience that most shoplifters are unarmed petty thieves, primarily schoolkids. Also, please don't dismiss my scenario as if it is impossible, because it is actually quite probable and realistic. Why shouldn't a storeowner or clerk prepare themselves for this type of scenario?

Please let's not get into the game of me laying out a scenario and you telling me why it's a bad example. My so-called "bad examples" are taking place every day, and law abiding gun owners have only a few precious moments to decide whether to fire their weapons, brandish them, do nothing, or call the police.

Tattedupboy,

I'm not trying to bust your chops here, it's the idea I'm going after, not you! Good people can have wrong ideas about the law, and I don't want to see good people go to prison because of those ideas.

Brandishing a deadly weapon is aggravated assault, which is defensible by the same criteria that deadly force is defensible by: namely, to stop a deadly assault (or deadly threat of assault) or to stop a forcible felony in progress. Shoplifting is a not a felony and certainly not a forcible felony. So, brandishing a weapon at a shoplifter who is not making any threats is a felony and will land you in prison.

Generally speaking, it makes no sense to brandish a weapon. You can only legally do so in situations where you or others are in immediate danger of being killed or seriously injured (or if the BG is in committing forms of forcible felony such as mugging and rape). These are the same criteria where the use of deadly force is defensible (in my state, Arkansas, check your state's laws). Unless you really think you have a chance at calming down that murderous attacker, you're only putting yourself at risk by brandishing and not using.

Again, not trying to bust anybody's chops, but getting this stuff right is critical to all of us.

(ishi is not a lawyer, but maybe should have been one)
 
Last edited:

DrLewall

Charter Member
Can we please get back on topic? Can someone post up a new topic on this current discussion..tnx
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
49,437
Messages
623,663
Members
74,275
Latest member
zxclord123
Top