Mouse guns - cocked and locked ?

[bill_deshivs]

The early Colt is striker fired. It has no hammer.

   The Unceta (Astra) was an external Colt copy, but differed internally.

[chopprs]

Trotterlg, I am an Aeronautical Engineer and I think those things are junk....does that change your view? I am sorry but I never recieved any firearms design instruction in all of the five and a half years of Aeronautical Engineering Instruction that I recieved.

[trotterlg]

Well Choppers, how did you ever learn so much about guns if you never had any training or education in them?  And to think you are now a firearms expert with absolutely no firearms design instruction at all.  Only in the United States of America would this be possible!  It is a miracle for sure.  Larry

[sirbarkalot]

Trotterlg:

   

   Refer to page 74 of the NRA published "FIREARMS ASSEMBLY 4" 1980 version,,, (I am sure if you are doing "referb" on handguns, you have a copy there) and you will see the breakdown, and the instructions for proper disassambly, intended to aviod gun hacks who are doing refinishing at home from destroying guns they know little or nothing about from breaking them by attempting to take striker fired guns apart as if they were hammer guns.

   

   The Colt .25 Pocket Automatic of 1908 is not decended from anyone, and is a John Browning design, as is the pocket 32 and 380, both of which come apart in a similar fashion by the way, but have internal hammers.  I think you can still get copies of this invaluable book from the NRA.  You ARE a member, right?

   

   Your condecending tone toward Chopprs, who has been right far more than he has been wrong, as is the case here again, only shows how little experience you have had and makes me wonder what in the heck you are doing taking guns apart for "referb" without ever having worked on or taken apart a Colt 25 pocket?

   

   Now let the flames begin, but we all have areas where we "just don't know" and if you are another of the guys that is Duracoating guns for fun and profit, that certainly does not make YOU an expert.  OBVIOUSLY!

[chopprs]

Trotter, it is "Chopprs" no "e" and because I did not take any firearms classes in college does not mean I have never taken any at all......

   In fact over the years I have taken so many I can not count them all. I have taken handgun as well as long arm handling and instructor classes also personal, one on one gunsmithing with  a gent that is "old school" and does not hold classes. I have also had S.W.A.T. training. Not sure why I wanted to do that but I did learn a lot and it was fun.......also, I never said I was an expert. Lee did!

   

   ....my point was simply that a gun designed by an Aeronautical Engineer does not necessarily make it a good gun. There are no "FAA aproved" firearm classes......

   

   .......condecending tones welcome, I am a tough guy, I can take it!

[bill_deshivs]

"I prefer the reassurance of loading the gun in front of the criminal, as well. Much more intimidating to hear & see the weapon loading in front of your face."

   

   How "Lethal Weapon!"

[trotterlg]

Chopprs:  I have no idea if those guns were designed by an Aeronautical Engineer or not.  I was only using that thought to show that continued references to you have an Aeronautical Engineering degree has absolutely nothing to do with you're knowledge of guns, and you seem to completely agree with me on that point, so just drop all the aero stuff and talk about what you really know and what you just think you know.  My degree is in Electronics, which makes me just as qualified to talk about guns as a person with a degree in Aeronautics or Basket Weaving (all of which would be ZERO).  I can say I have done my share of ballistic analysis and warhead yield calculations for 30 years and have built a couple of guns from scratch, even have one in the lathe now.  I guess I could be sitting here writing all this while you are really just a fat little lady in Cambodia just funning with all of us.  That is the wonder of the internet I guess.  It does provide me some entertainment in my retirement however. Larry

[chopprs]

...yeah, I am a chubby Cambodian midget woman, howdja guess?

[sirbarkalot]

This is getting tiresome..............

   

   

   

[bama22]

I apologize if my inquiry has caused any ill will among forum members, and for saying that $80 was too much to pay for a Jennings,and to any well nourished Cambodians of any gender, I am truly sorry.  

   

   I have always heard that the California SNSs: Jennings, Raven, Lorcin, were, as some have said, "junk". That is why I was not willing to pay more than $50 for mine. Once I got it home I was pleasantly suprised, the thing worked good, had great sights, shot cheap ammo, and was fun to fondle. Living here in semi-civilized Alabama I dont have a good place to shoot very often, a cobbled-up range in the basement gets occasional use when the dogs allow it. Did I mention Aguilla SSS 60 grain loads work good ?  I realize that design faults and economy of production has rendered a sup-par product, and the consistentcy of the product is lacking. Some of the guys on this thread have gotten bad outcomes from their guns, some of us have gotten good results. If I hadn't heard of the numerous malfunctions, I might have though this was a good gun.  It's kind of like buying a bundle of cheap cigars, there is no consistency. But if you spend ten times as much for the box of cigars, they're going to all be about the same.

   

   I dont shoot a lot, so I dont expect this gun to go over a couple of hundred rounds while I have it. If anything goes wrong with it, it becomes scrap metal. My 1982 nickel Beretta 950bs probably has less that 500 rounds through it, most of the wear on it is on the outside where I've been dragging it around, it's nice inside, and has never failed me. The Colt 25 pocket hammerless I quess was about $15 in 1919, and the Browning might have been $50 in 1967. I quess you could call those "cheapies", though if you looked a current auctions you would see that their worth has held up very well. The California SNSs have not done so well in value retention, the bad reputation rules. But if you got a good one like I did, great! It wont be my primary carry.

   

   B A R K Y :

   

   Still want to know why Glocks are "despised". Do you use any high capacity auto pistol ?  Or just revolvers ?

[chopprs]

Bama, no worries. We do this all the time. I harbor no ill feelings toward anyone....and I am really not a Cambodian midget chubber!

   You will have to confer with him but my guess why the Barkmeister doesn't like Glicks is because there is not much carving to be done on them and I know he likes that sort of thing. Along with the fact that he is a professed revolver fan I think that closes the door on Glicks for him.  

   For me, I think they are wonderful guns but they are just kind of boring......no carving to be done, they always work and they look like a plastic brick. I have had a couple of them and sold them because I got bored quickly but they were flawless

   Minis are a lot more fun!

[scion]

I have a hard time understanding the rationale of carrying a CCW, a weapon meant primarily to defend against personal attack, without a round in the chamber.  Why place upon yourself a self inflicted handicap, both in reduction of ammo and deployment speed.  I can't think of a good reason to do that.

[sirbarkalot]

BAMA:

   

   Sorta like Chopprs said.  It is personal taste, and the fact that the flat bottom trigger guard slams into my chubby (but not Cambodian) trigger finger with every round fired.  After about 100 rounds, my trigger finger is bloodied and sore for a week.  I am a Glock armorer (or at least was sent to Glock Armorer School by the department; but who isn't?  It is a one day school and all that you learn there is that all the parts are ready to use, that if you have a problem with one, just start replacing parts until the problem goes away) so I know they are a reliable, great design that works well.  My distaste for them is that (as he said) they are a plastic brick and are kind of like a hammer to a carpenter.  They get the job done, but have no personality to get attached to.  They do have a very short trigger pull and a light action and are number one in the accidental discharge area.  There are FAR more AD with them than you know about, as in police departments where most of them happen, you don't read or hear about them unless the bullet hits someone.  The agency deals with it and disciplines the officers, but they don't broadcast the news of the shot out windshields, the holes in lockers, and interior walls, and in beds and dressers at home.

   

   Ref Chopprs:  He is NOT a chubby Cambodian.  He is actually from Laos.

   

   Scion:  Do a little research on the Israeli method of safe single action gun carry.  Read a little on the technique and watch some video so you can experience the speed with which it is applied on your own.  I cannot teach you EVERYTHING.  If you really want knowledge, you have to first accept that there is something out there that you may not know, and then seek the knowledge.  I have given you the lead.  You follow it, or remain in the dark.  OUR way (of what is generally accepted in the USA) is not the ONLY way.

   

   Barky

[scion]

Oh Lordy.  Fortunately my experience and training has not come from internet youtube videos.  The Israeli method is well known, but used by very few.  I'm not sure it is current Israeli SOP for that matter. No security force I've worked, with or even heard of, use the "Israeli method".  

   

   But are you saying the unchambered gun is somehow advantageous to the normal civilian CC user?  It's the perceived advantage that eludes me.  What is it?

[sirbarkalot]

Scion:

   

   The advantage would seem obvious to me.  It is SAFER!  You do not have accidental discharges with an empty chamber.  I only mentioned the Israeli method because they teach it, and it was in response to your statement  

   

   "Why place upon yourself a self inflicted handicap, both in reduction of ammo and deployment speed. I can't think of a good reason to do that."

   

   as a demonstration that is it not necessarily any slower or any disadvantage and is CERTAILY less likely to allow you to shoot yourself.  ESPECIALLY since the subject of this thread was about striker fired pistols in general and cheapie ones specifically.  

   

   If the Israeli method is "well known" to you, that fact was not made evident by your post indicating no understanding of it, or even it's existance.

   

   Personal defense carry is not military combat and not police work.  If a problem develops in your personal life, you most certainly (unless you are stupid or just not paying attention) will see it coming or at least be aware of the potential and have plenty of time to chamber that round.

   

   Example:  A road rage incident begins and the guy is following you and screaming at you.  Plenty of time to get the gun out and get the round chambered.

   

   Example: Your car quits in a bad area when you are coming home from work at night.  Plenty of time to change your mode and get the round chambered.

   

   

   Must I go on??

   

   Geeezzzzzz.... I feel like I am dealing with a junior high school class here.............  all your alleged experience and knowledge and you have to have every detail explained to you?/

   

   barky

[chopprs]

......good boy, now go lay down!

    WOOF!

[scion]

I just wanted to know why you thought unloaded was a supeior carry method.  Your answer... safety.  You think time is on your side.  Your experience is different from mine, that's all.  I know from first hand experience that it isn't, that's all.  We'll have to disagree on that point.  

   

   If you think a gun is unsafe, then you shouldn't carry it.  Fine, that's a personal decision.  If you choose to carry a unloaded gun, then that's your business too, not mine.  I don't care, I was just curious.

   

   I also detect a bit of "short man" rage in your condecending tone.  The ranting gives you away.  Geez... relax.  I guess you're not used to being challenged, but then, many masters of the "Israeli method" are typically legends in their own mind, and above reproach by us mere mortals.  

   

   On the day you "teach" me something about firearms, I'll let you know, and everyone else on the forum, but from what I read here, you are not very learned or experienced in real life practical techniques.  Maybe one more youtube video will solve that problem.  Hmmm....

[chopprs]

HAhahah.....dude! Yer one to talk about "short man rage!"""

    The question that comes to my mind is ....short what?

   I think first you should learn how to read. Barky did mention that his comment was directed towards what the thread discussion was based on, striker fired, cheapy weapons.

    Also, I would like to see you stand in front of ANY member of the Mossad and tell them that you think he is a legend in his own mind.......NOT!!! This statement alone says that you have less than no clue as to what a Mossad agent is. He would twist you up and laugh at you while you wee'd yourself before you had any clue what was happening. Those guys are SERIOUS BADASSES!!!!!!

   

   BTW, my dad was a smart man. He once said to me, "There is no man alive that can not teach you something and if any man says you can not teach him anything he himself is an idiot because he will never learn anything!"

[sirbarkalot]

Well said.  You can determine my size by my typing.  More "speak without know".  No surprise there.  And yes, we will agree to disagree.  If you want to carry a round in the chamber of a gun that sells to the dealer for $39.00 and many interior parts are made of Zinc alloy and count on those parts to keep the gun from going off, go ahead.  The manufacturer says not to do it, but what do they know?  I am sure you know better.  

   I don't go to or use you tube, but I know you do since you brought it up.

   

   I would and do carry firearms that are safe to carry with a round chambered in such a way.  Just not striker fired single action guns with nothing but a trigger block safety and a pot metal sear holding the fully cocked striker back.  But YOU can.  In fact I would ENCOURAGE you to.

   

   End of story.

   

   Have a nice day.  And I am SURE you have learned NOTHING from anyone on here...............

   

   After all, you have not had a Raven or Jennings apart, don't know the Colt 25 is striker fired, cannot IMAGINE why anyone would carry a gun chamber empty (Check with the US Military; they have tens of thousands of troops doing it; but what do THEY know?  They don't spray paint guns in THEIR garage)

   

   Barky

[scion]

Mossad.  Geeez.  You two knuckleheads live in a fantasy world.

[chopprs]

WOW!

   ......are you related to MDE?

[stungun]

Arguing sucks.  Discussions are better.

   

   I forgot one of the main reasons that I prefer unchambered with safety off...  shot placement is more consistent to shoot a DA auto-loader, than if it's cocked & locked.

   

   Perhaps most mouse auto-loaders are DAO, tho???

   

   The point remains...  consistency is key.

   

   Consistency between DA & DAO auto-loaders... between a Glock with no safety and a Jennings w/ the crappiest safety...

   

   ALL auto-loaders can be dealt with the same consistent way, providing ALL rounds to be fired consistently.

   

   A DA auto that fires DA on first pull and SA on subsequent pulls... is pretty much the last thing I want to be experiencing in a gunfight.

   

   And I'll admit I'm not expert, but I'm really good at trigonometry... and I kick ass at Duck Hunt because of it.

[chopprs]

LOL, glad you are good at Duck Hunt!

   

   About the Jennings, the last time I held one it was a Single action gun. Did they change something?

   

   

[sirbarkalot]

"......are you related to MDE?"

   

   Identical twins.......,

   Or maybe two of MDE's many personalities  

[westerly1965]

Note this post is two big so I must break it into two posts.  The first displays the test results and the second shows the summary.

     

   Hey Guys.  I just found a couple of things I thought might be interesting to some of you.  I know its long but its worth looking at as it quite simply explains the reality of the average ccw holder.  

   

   An unofficial testing revealed the following results.  I am sure they are up for discussion as to agree disagree.  Even when I carry my Guardian I don't carry one in the chamber the risk just isn't worth the reward for me.

   

   Standard method, first 20 trials: average = 1.52 sec, standard deviation (S.D.) = 0.05 sec.

   Standard method, all 30 trials: average = 1.48 sec, S.D. = 0.06 sec.

   Standard method, last 10 trials: average = 1.43 sec, S.D. = 0.04 sec.

   

   Israeli method, first 20 trials: average = 1.81 sec, S.D. = 0.11 sec.

   Israeli method, all 30 trials: average = 1.80 sec, S.D. = 0.10 sec.

   Israeli method, last 10 trials: average = 1.77 sec, S.D. = 0.08 sec.

   

   The data indicate that manually cycling the slide cost me about 0.3 second per trial, or about 20 percent more time than using the standard method. That was true of both the trials in which I didn't try for maximum speed and those in which I made an effort to get the shot off as quickly as possible while still maintaining a reasonable level of accuracy. (Of course, the 20 percent figure is valid only for this particular test which was conducted at a shooting distance of 5 yards; longer ranges would increase average shot time and reduce the percentage that 0.3 second would add, and shorter ranges would increase the time delay percentage.)

[westerly1965]

A Quick and Dirty Summary

   

   Chamber or unchambered is a choice. The professional will often (but not always) prefer the former. The inexperienced CCW user will often (but not always) prefer the latter.

   

   Choosing requires consideration of risk/reward. In any gunowner's life the likelihood of being hurt or killed, or of killing a loved one by accidental or negligent discharge is far, far, FAR higher than than by being unable to draw or fire in a hand-to-hand situation. Keep in mind the professional is FAR more likely to engage in close combat: he/she seeks out BG's, stops them, touches them. LE seeks out trouble, and often finds what he's looking for.

   

   Not true for the common CCF carrier, who just wants "pretty good protection". He/she is NOT going to approach trouble, in fact will work very hard to have awareness and get away, call 911. In almost all cases, he/she will have time to retreat, draw and brandish if they must. And will find the Israeli method effective 99% of the time.

   

   OTOH, AD/ND – which does happen to professionals too – is a VERY big deal for the new, casual CCW carrier. The chance of accidentally being shot or shooting an innocent with your gun is so much higher that it's not just not in the same ballpark, it's not even in the same universe. The risk is relatively huge in comparison and that is of great and legitimate concern to the common carrier.

   

   The Israeli method – with its unchambered gun – is a VERY safe alternative to locked and loaded insofar as AD's/ND's. Here's what I'd say to the common carrier:

   

   "In all truth, you will probably never even have to draw your gun on a human being. Most of the time you'll be able to avoid trouble and walk or run away. But if even in that very rare case you do feel forced to draw your gun, it is highly unlikely you will have to fire it. And even if you do have to shoot your gun in true self defense, it is highly likely that you will have the time to do. "

   

   "Now I must be honest, there is a very, very small chance you may be surprised and end up in actual or immediate hand-to-hand combat where you can't draw or fire your gun. You are not really prepared for this. If you draw your gun there's a big chance it will be taken away from you, and the first thing the BG is gonna do is to pull the trigger. This might be the one time you don't want to expose your gun. Better to escape somehow, then draw it".

   

   "The bottom line is this my friend. By using the Israeli method you will be protected in all but the rarest circumstance, a circumstance you are little prepared to handle anyway, and in a situation where any weapon you use may well be used against you. At the same time you will greatly reduce the very real, incredibly more likely tragedy of an accidental discharge that will hurt or kill you, or a loved one."

   

   "And another thing: if you ever do have to draw and fire, you will suffer a level of stress and panic that you can't imagine. You may feel faint, pee your pants, your hands will shake and you will lose fine motor skills – the kind that activating a safety requires. You will be confused. Is it on, is it off? Which gun am I carrying, the one where it's up, or the one where it's down? Is the safety already off? Did I forget to actually load the chamber? This is a time where you don't want to be concerned with safeties or whether the chamber really is loaded."

   

   "The Israeli draw is a good alternative that you should consider."

   

   "It uses gross motor skills that are not likely to fail under stress. You will not have to fumble with safeties. You will simply draw, load and fire, just as fast. Best of all, this is a simple skill that has been taught to millions of ordinary citizens – men and women – and that is known to be fast, safe and reliable under stress."

   

   "A professional is different. What you may never face, he faces everyday. And he is trained to take the risks. He may well have to draw and fire in a close combat situation. He knows how to retain his gun. He has a backup gun. He has Mace. He has a fighting knife. He has a comealong. And often even a bulletproof vest."

   

   "He is paid and trained to take risks that you do your best to avoid. He goes forward when you go back. As it should be. He may choose to carry locked and loaded – take the risks of an AD/ND – because is he paid and prepared to do so. You are not and probably will never, ever be."

[westerly1965]

Sorry for the three posts guys but if anyone is interested in the end of this summary here it is:

   

   "My friend, this is not a pretty picture. With your inexperience you may choose to carry "locked and loaded" cause that's all you've heard from the forum gunslingers. You may choose to risk fumbling under stress, plus the GREATLY increased chance of an accidental discharge. If you do draw your gun in close combat and even manage to make it off safe, you face the very real risk of being disarmed and being shot with your own gun."

   

   "Or you can choose the Israeli method, which greatly improves your chances of survival overall, accidental or intentional. Do know that you're not alone – although the method was designed for easy and reliable use by ordinary citizens, more and more professionals carry this way too."

   

   "If you hear that "locked and loaded" is the ONLY way, you have been badly misinformed. Don't be intimidated into a practice that for the inexperienced CCW carrier is intimidating in itself. Some of you – rightfully – are bothered by the increased accidental risks of "locked and loaded" to the extent that you don't carry, and choose to leave your gun at the bedside for HD."

   

   "Don't let this intimidation stop you from carrying!"

   

   "The Israeli method will allow you to carry in relative safety from accidents, but still retain the ability to engage your gun very quickly, reliably and effectively in all the conditions in which you choose to use it. It is forgiving and safe even when you may be scared. A great relief! If you choose this method you will be in good company."

   

   A couple final thoughts:

   

   1. The Israeli draw is just as fast as a regular draw. The well known Summit school (Texas/New Mex/SFO) routinely teaches new shooter to draw and fire three to the head in 1.5 seconds or less. Experienced practioners often find it faster, as the Iraeli draw tends to be more powerful and forceful.

   

   2. This draw has been used for decades by literally millions of people, and is still being taught to polics and SWAT here in the US. It is an entirely rational choice, particularly for the common CCW carrier.

   

   3. You give up very little – nothing if you realize hand to hand is for professionals – and eliminate the MUCH higher probability of shooting yourself or a loved one.

   

   Either method has it's advantages and disadvantages. Both are valid options, despite the backyard commandos hysteria.

[mayvik]

Again...what's the defintion of "MUCH" higher and "FAR" higher?  Do you have any data you can link to? (Not data you can type in a post; I'm not implying your data is fabricated but it's certainly not substantiated

   

   .000000002% is "much" greater than .000000001% if you're concerned with the 12th decimal place...but is it really "significant"?

[sirbarkalot]

Westerly1965:

   

   Thanks for posting that.  You conveyed the message I was trying to convey much better than I.  

   

   There seems to be some idea here by some that this method is old or outdated or out of style.  They are not aware it is being taught TODAY in Law Enforcement training centers and being proposed as an alternative and possible remedy to the dramatic increase in the level of AD's with the Glock, now that so many are carrying it.  

   

   Barky

[westerly1965]

Barky your welcome.

   

   Mayvik no I don't have a link for you and no I don't know if the results are accurate or not.  What I can tell you is that firing from an IWB with my Guardian .380 the variance of time it takes me to rack the slide as opposed to not is IMHO minuscule.  I am not a professional I am not a cop I do not work for swat nor am I an army ranger.  What I am is a concerned citizen that feels I have the right to protect myself and my family.  Even if you figure it takes a full second for me to rack my slide as opposed to being loaded all I am saying is that I feel that second is worth it for the exchange I get in safety.  I have a young child in my house he is not strong enough to rack a slide on any of my semi autos.  Bottom line here is you absolutely positively 100% can not get an AD or an ND if there is no round in the chamber.  If you want to carry with a round in that's fine with me its your decision.  As it is mine to either carry a revolver hammer down on an empty chamber or an auto with no round in the chamber.  Boils down to personal preference IMHO more so then it does speed of draw....for your average ccw citizen.

[scion]

Why is most of your post in quotes?

   

   Perhaps carrying an unloaded gun is comforting to the novice.  My solution would be for the novice to familiarize and train with a gun enough to become comfortable and loose the fear of their own weapon.  If someone is afraid of their personal weapon, or feels unable to operate it competently, perhaps they should not carry one.

   

   I know of no LE agency anywhere that encourages carrying an unloaded weapon.  I agree with that totally.  I've been in several firearm incidents and time was always an important factor.  

   

   The only AD incident I personally know of involved a friend of mine on the FBI HRT.  Even the most professional and competent can make a mistake... it isn't just the fumbling civilian.

   

   You said;

   "You may feel faint, pee your pants, your hands will shake and you will lose fine motor skills – the kind that activating a safety requires. You will be confused. Is it on, is it off? Which gun am I carrying, the one where it's up, or the one where it's down? Is the safety already off? Did I forget to actually load the chamber? This is a time where you don't want to be concerned with safeties or whether the chamber really is loaded."  

   

   How you can claim that fine motor skill loss makes the Israeli method somehow more suitable is ridiculous.  How adding more motions that take both hands and fine motor skills trumps a simple draw, aim and fire makes no sense.  You contradict yourself by stating this.

   

   You say;

   "This draw has been used for decades by literally millions of people, and is still being taught to police and SWAT here in the US. It is an entirely rational choice, particularly for the common CCW carrier."

   

   Again, I know of no LE agency that teaches this as any standard proceedure.  Would you care to name one LE, or SWAT unit that uses this method.  I routinely shoot with FBI, DEA, Secret Service and a variety of local LEO as well as a few special units.  Perhaps I'm too far removed from a beginner or novice level, but none of what you've just written about is even discussed or given a thought.  I've never heard any professional proclaim the advantages of carrying an unchambered round.  It just isn't modern firearm handling doctrine.  

   

   I'm sorry, but you're wrong on so many points here that I wonder what level of experience and practical firearms handling some of you have.

   

   I realize I'm beating a dead horse.  Minds are made up and opinions formed, but when I read such a quantity of crap, I'm compelled to write.

[westerly1965]

Scion,

   

   Please relax....if you had read and understood that post in entirety you would also understand that it is a simple repost that I put up as I thought it was interesting reading.  Hence the reason that it is all in quotes because as I said I DIDN'T WRITE IT!!!!!  Sheesh talk about beating a dead horse.  I didn't put it up to argue with you or anyone over carry techniques.  I could care less.  I just put it up because I thought it was interesting reading on the topic.  Like I said I'm not a cop, I'm not on swat nor am I an army ranger.  I choose safety over speed what it is is what it is.  You have the right to disagree with me.  As I do to disagree with you.  I guess well agree to disagree.  If you had paid attention to the article you would see that it is pointing out the difference between the trained professional and the civilian.  

   In the end any person in this type of life or death situation will either squeeze the trigger or wet themselves and most won't know which until the confrontation is over.  Maybe your a LEO and have to carry loaded I dunno.  Maybe you just like to argue either way I don't care.  My Guardian has no safety therefore I won't carry a round in the chamber.  Cheap mouse guns have safeties that cannot be trusted therefore you should not carry them chambered its kinda like common sense you know.  Put that Jennings in your pocket cocked and locked and get in a fight its more likely to blow your balls off then  to help you.  That's it Rant Mode off.  Carry however you want everyone is entitled to their opinion on it.

[rjtravel]

Just a few observations.  One (Scion) believes two hands are needed in order to cycle the action.  This is untrue - the Israeli militiry/police (all security are former military) can rack and present one-handed in one fluid movement.  They are very, very efficient and are perhaps the most accomplished fighting force in the world...out of necessity and frequent combat - even today and every day,  I once (1976) had firsthand experience with them.  Outside the Damascus Gate in old Jerusalem we were just down the street when they 'eliminated' a troublesome Brit.  They are fearsome - and carry with empty chamber.

   

   I too have valid reasons for empty chamber carry and agree with West and Barky, however would not argue my mode for everyone.  What is conspicuously absent in all the discussion is by far the most important, i.e. one should always, always carry in same condition and same location - always.  It is simply a psychological quirk that you will react just as you have trained even if your conscious mind knows better.  Carry crossdraw for a long time, suddenly change to strong side, then an immediate need arises and you won't be able to present your weapon.  It is just a strange quirk that affects every one of us.  

   

   Wow, didn't know this would be so lengthy!

   

   Richard

[chopprs]

Scion,

    You are most obviously one of the most arrogant persons that I have ever encountered. When confronted gentlemanly with information that is sincerely intended to help you and perhaps wean you from making a serious mistake you adamately look for loopholes instead of first considering the information and then answering intelligently. Your outlook is ridiculous and unless you are the most professional of professionals (which I sincerely and whole heartedly doubt) you will eventually shoot yourself with your own gun as you are seriously uneducated on the subjects with which you overly opinionate yourself. I think you are not an unintelligent man but simply arrogant therefore you do not have the excuse that MDE has. You CHOOSE to be stupid! Therefore I will no longer address you with my posts any longer. From now on anything that I say will be adressed to everyone but you, a situation that in your arrogance I am sure that you will welcome.....so we are at an agreement!

   

   BTW, please do not look me up on the internet and call me at my home in bed at 10:30 at night again to try to convince me that you are right.

   

   To all others:

   A special thanx to Westerly for his intelligent input, and I quote:

   "The bottom line is this my friend. By using the Israeli method you will be protected in all but the rarest circumstance, a circumstance you are little prepared to handle anyway, and in a situation where any weapon you use may well be used against you. At the same time you will greatly reduce the very real, incredibly more likely tragedy of an accidental discharge that will hurt or kill you, or a loved one."  

   Truer words have not often been spoken!

   Myself, I carry one in the pipe in my Kahr also in my 1911 with the safety on but if I was to carry a pistol, which I never would, as any of the ones mentioned herein(striker fired) there is no way that I would carry a live round in the chamber with such a questionable mechanism keeping it from shooting my Johnson off!

[bill_deshivs]

Lots of arrogant people here, so I guess I'll join in.

   The OP asked basically if carrying a striker-fired gun is safe.

   Here is the answer:

   Properly maintained, good quality striker fired guns are entirely safe. The Jennings is not a quality gun.

   Carrying any quality semiauto empty chamber makes very little sense. No one here is the Mossad, BTW.