Israeli Carry

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes, let us start with the Colt Government Model (which some refer to as the 1911): I have no problem with cocked and locked. I have a problem with the safety, however, but apparently no one else here does. I have no problem racking the slide. It is something that every pistol owner does frequently. The .45 auto (as everyone used to call it) is easy; so is the Glock. Others vary; the CZ, any of them, is difficult.

When I said we disagree on what is optimal, I didn't mean what is optimal for a fast draw, which I don't consider to be as important as other things or other people. Just the same, as I said about, I find that safeties slow me down. So I don't have a gun with a thumb (or grip, finger or toe) safety.

And by the way, I am one of those who spends a large part of his life sitting down.
 
Take a slightly different question

To those who say to the O.P. "Let your friends carry the way they want, it is no concern of yours."

I have a slightly different question.

If you saw your friends carrying in a holster that they thought was wise, but that you believed was not effective, would you try to convince them of your point of view? Would you seek advice and counsel from this forum?

The O.P. has done nothing more offensive than that, I think.

It is a good question to consider, but no good cause for rudeness.

Lost Sheep
 
BlueTrain said:
...And by the way, I am one of those who spends a large part of his life sitting down...
Click to expand...
That's often considered a good reason to carry crossdraw rather than dominant side -- but not with an empty chamber.

BlueTrain said:
...When I said we disagree on what is optimal, I didn't mean what is optimal for a fast draw...
Click to expand...
The point of a fast draw is not speed for its own sake. It's simply that if you do need your gun, you have no way in advance to know how much time you'll have in which to put it to use.

When it comes down to it, it's really not a question of quick draw or fast draw. It's a question of how long it can take us to perceive the threat, determine the need to fire, deploy our gun and engage the threat with accurate fire, having made the decision that shooting is warranted.

So how much time will we have in which to do all of that? I have no idea and neither do you. It's going to all depend on what happens and how it happens. We might have lots of time, or we might have very little. We simply can't know in advance.

If we can't get done what we need to do in the time circumstances allow us, we will not be happy with the outcome. Good training and diligent practice can help reduce the time we need to be able to effectively do what we need to be able to do. And since I can't know how much time I'll have, I'd rather not give up time if I can avoid it.
 
I'm perfectly willing to argue any side of the argument, as you all probably know by now. But I'd say perception of the threat and reaction is about 90% of it. And by reaction, all I mean is doing something, which might include running away, something never mentioned here. Wrong forum, I guess. But in any event, neither of my two and only handguns are suitable in my opinion for chamber empty carry. Just can't get a good grip on the slide. One's a CZ, which has both a slick and a narrow slide. So was the last CZ I owned. The other, a Walther P99, isn't much different.
 
Wow, 6 pages and this thread has only been around 4 days.

I never heard of "Israeli carry" until today; had to google it to find out what it was.

I once had a job as contract security guarding a military base, and we were required to carry our handguns (Beretta 92F, hate that gun) with an empty chamber, safety on, and only 10 rounds in the magazine. I hated that -- stupid way to carry, very unsafe (for us), but much safer in terms of liability (for the company).

Bottom line:
Carrying with an empty chamber will be slower when putting your gun into action. You can argue all you want, but you can't get around this. It will most likely take between half a second and two seconds to chamber a round. Some may not think that's a lot of time, but it's probably 100%-200% longer than the time it would take with a round already chambered.

Carrying with an empty chamber will require two hands to put the gun into action. Yes, there are techniques to chamber with one hand, which are good to know, but it wouldn't be wise to depend on them in an emergency

Carrying with an empty chamber will also delay getting a good two-handed grip on your gun (if you shoot that way; many do) and delay getting the gun lined up on target

Racking a round will make noise....which could be a good thing in certain circumstances, but in many cases would be a very bad thing

Having said all that, carrying with an empty chamber is safer. A gun with an empty chamber cannot go off. Every accidental discharge in history occurred with a round in the chamber, because that is a prerequisite to a gun going off. However, if you carry with an empty chamber, you could still have an accidental discharge as you are chambering a round, an most likely your muzzle will not be on target at that time.

If you feel comfortable carrying with an empty chamber, do so, but don't proclaim it "just as fast" or just as good as carrying with a round chambered.
 
If you saw your friends carrying in a holster that they thought was wise, but that you believed was not effective, would you try to convince them of your point of view? Would you seek advice and counsel from this forum?

The O.P. has done nothing more offensive than that, I think
Click to expand...

If my friends change or not its up to them but that doesnt mean that I wont voice my opinion and I expect them to do the same... Its not done in a pushy manner but rather as part of conversation watching a movie or sharing some food with family and friends.

But yes I might try to convince them if they had a poorly designed holster and yes if I felt it helpful I would seek the advice of the forum... Lots of experience on here and lots of good people...
 
Last edited:
Speed isn't as much an issue as the inability to use both hands, IMHO.
Click to expand...

This is the fundemental issue. Anyone who carries with the chamber empty has to understand the risk.. If they get into a situation where they need to draw their weapon and they don't have use of both hands, they are basically screwed.

It's a risk... no doubt about it. But anyone who carries a 380 is accepting the risk that the lightweight low energy bullet may not do the job... anyone who carries a snub revolver is accepting the risk that 5 shots may not be enough. Anyone who carries only one firearm is accepting the risk that they might loose it or drop it in a struggle.

We all carry what we are COMFORTABLE with... ie what we are confident with. Someone on this site asked not long ago "all I have is a 22 revolver, would I be able to defend myself"... and the wise consensus was "yes, if it is all you have, it sure beats nothing"...

Similarly, if the only way someone is willing to carry is with an empty chamber, well, it sure beats nothing. We all know that nearly all handguns are safe to cary with a loaded chamber, but we are not going to convice the empty-chamber-crowd by calliing them fools and accusing them of being irrational.
 
Cocked and locked for me.
Been that way for years.

How are you going to rack the slide of your gun if someone's holding your other hand?
 
When I carry a 1911, it's in Condition 1, "cocked and locked", and I have complete confidence in my guns mechanical condition; with all safety features operable. Too, I have practiced on almost a daily basis, the mechanics of a safe draw, utilizing all said safety features. I would not carry the piece, even using the "Israeli" carry, if the gun was untrustworthy for any reason.

In the spirit of open debate I'll offer this in counter-point. I believe it was Jeff Cooper who pointed out that the South African Army of 30 years ago, carried their Browning Hi-Powers cocked and unlocked, a round in the chamber, hammer cocked, and safety off...the thought apparently being that training took care of the safety issues.

HTH's Rod
 
Last edited:
Lost Sheep said:
At what point in a situation where you would feel the need to draw your gun would you actually chamber a round.

Followed up with

If you had that much (a) advance warning, (b) concealment and (3) discretionary options, are what other options would have been better? (I am thinking about some sort of disengagement.)
Click to expand...
This is a false argument. You think it makes sense, and if the OP's friends haven't practiced their Israeli draw extensively your point is probably valid, but simply making the statement as you have doesn't prove your point. It has been documented that IDF (Israeli Defense Force) operatives who carry with an empty chamber can draw, rack the slide, and fire faster than most people who carry a 1911 in Condition 1 can draw, snap off the thumb safety, and fire.

If the OP really feels he must intervene, IMHO offering a "shoot out" such as suggested a post or two above yours seems to me more likely to make the point. However, I don't think it's anyone's place to tell someone else how to carry their gun. I assume these are adults, so they are responsible for themselves. I would just comment (once, and once only) that "I hope you practice for if you ever need to use your pistol" and leave it at that.
 
After reading this long thread, I have a couple of observations to make. Condition 1 carry with a 1911 type pistol makes me uncomfortable, so I either carry revolvers or semi-automatics that have safeties that allow me to carry with a round chambered but hammer not cocked (if there is a hammer at all). Considering revolvers with the hammer on an empty chamber to be Israeli carry is not consistent with the concept of Israeli carry with a sem-auto; with a revolver, cocking the hammer either by SA or DA will immediately bring a loaded chamber into battery - the empty chamber just restricts the amount of ammunition available for the first course of fire. Last of all, Ron White coined the phrase "You can't fix stupid," not Larry.
 
One of my thoughts is: it is more selfish to carry in a cocked and locked configuration, Level 1, whereas it is more beneficial to the greater good to carry in Level 3. In one case a person is thinking of them-self, in the other the person is thinking of the welfare of others.
Click to expand...

I do not carry for the "greater good". That is for the police to do. I carry for the defense of my family and myself. When I carry one of my 1911s it is "cocked and locked". If you think that is selfish, I'll be sure to have myself a good cry about it later.
 
Posted by Aguila Blanca: It has been documented that IDF (Israeli Defense Force) operatives who carry with an empty chamber can draw, rack the slide, and fire faster than most people who carry a 1911 in Condition 1 can draw, snap off the thumb safety, and fire.
Click to expand...
Is that another way of saying that "some" people are faster than "most" people?

Forgive me, but I have serious doubts about the likelihood that practiced people of equivalent skill can draw, rack the slide, and fire faster than they can draw, and while doing so disengage the thumb safety, and fire.

Either basic critical path analysis or a simple time-and-motion study would make such a contention appear nonsensical at best.

One might consider that IDF operatives are not restricted by the rules of presentation that apply to civilian shooters in all but two states in this country.

Nor are sworn officers, and I am unaware of any who carry with an empty chamber.
 
Last edited:
IMHO, fast draw instantaneous shooting is not as important as situational awareness, having a firearm, and being willing to use it.
I have often carried a Browning HiPower with chamber empty, and felt quite well armed.
 
Part of the issue for me is the level of knowledge of my friends... On this forum I would hazard a guess you have mostly hardcore active gun carriers and shooters.. I hunt, I go to the range, I read about testing and conduct my own style of live testing when we butcher animals for food.

I dont claim I know all of everything but due to my family background and my career in the miltary I have used more different types of guns than most people probably will ever... I am a NRA certified Distinguished Expert with small bore rifles and in long past years I even competed to enter the junior olympics and olympics although I fell short I was still NRA rated as one of the top 100 in the nation.

Still I get it that there are people in this forum and on the street who may know more or may know specialized things that I dont know and have no experience with.... but I do have a solid general knowledge....

My friends however as a group tend to choose arms off advertising (Judge) and tend not to practice and dont carry often but when they do carry they go condition 3... Heck my one buddy has a H&K USP with the threaded barrel and he doesnt trust it nor himself to carry with one in the chamber.... They also tend to buy ammo based on everything from looks (its silvertipped so it must be better even though its bargin basement priced.) to advertising, as if things like PDX ammo would be better to use than a hollowpoint... Ignoring the obvious potential for the spread to hit things or people unintended.

I know I take guns and shooting much more seriously and when they do go to the range with my family and I, they tend to not shoot as tight a groups or at as long distances... I even had one argue with me that my 380 was much more effective than my 9mm.... you get the idea...

Still they are my friends and I want the best for them and I feel I at least need to tell them what I believe to be true even if it changes nothing...
 
Last edited:
Some forty seven years, ago I read Sixguns by Keith from beginning to end. Elmer opined that the S&W Model 39, with its DA trigger and hammer drop safety, was much safer than the Model 1911 and would be involved in fewer tragic accidents.

So I bought one. I had been very familiar with the Model 1911, and I did not like the idea of lowering the hammer on a loaded chamber (I had been doing that, and I had somehow missed the part in the Army manual that I had that cautioned against ever doing that). I liked the idea of having a DA pistol that could be stored safely with a round in the chamber and that had a manual safety that was easily manipulated by the strong hand from a shooting grip. I had also been favorably impressed by the P-38.

The idea of keeping a .45 "cocked and locked" never occurred to me, and I was shocked to see clerks in gun stores carrying that way. It sure didn't look safe to me.

After a CCW class, a little practice with the Tueller drill, some study of the risks of criminal charges resulting from drawing a firearm too soon in my state and many others, and some quality high performance defensive pistol training, I was even more convinced of the importance of being able to get a handgun into action very quickly--with one hand if necessary. I remained concerned about an unintentional discharge

A DA revolver meets the requirement. So do the Model 1911 and the FN Model 1935. So do semiautomatics with long trigger pulls, though I really do prefer to also have a manual safety. Some people consider that to be an uninformed opinion--the safety is between your ears, and all that--but maybe I'm just over cautious, and just maybe someone else may end up handling my firearm in spite of my best precautions.

To the uninitiated, a Model 1911 in Condition 1 looks alarmingly dangerous, but some police officers I know tell me that they have found in drills that persons who gain control of their Kimber back up guns are less likely to be able to use them than many other weapons. People are not as familiar with them as they were in the old days.
 
Well, I think most sides of the issue have been addressed but I still get the impression that the theory falls apart in practice. The theory being that the biggest disadvantage of chamber empty carry is that you need two hands to get the gun into action. True enough and it is for sure slower for all of us average people, both of us. But when people practice, I never seen them doing any of this. Two hands always.

Not only that but I never saw that many people actually drawing from the holster and shooting. Maybe that do that part at home in the basement like I do. That's how I decided that cocked and locked wasn't for me when it came to speed and it wasn't because I didn't trust the gun. I just found the safety difficult to manipulate. Someone here even said having to use two hand (to chamber a round) makes it harder to get a two handed grip. Well maybe it does and maybe folks should do a little more shooting with just one hand. After all, you may not have two hands available, etc.

What happens when it is your shooting hand is the one that's unavailable?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top