In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Glock safety question (re: Israeli Carry).
beantownshootah
Member Posts: 12,776 ✭✭✭
Just wanted to add something here, wrt "Israeli carry".
First of all, as already mentioned Glock does NOT recommend empty chamber carry with its guns.
That doesn't necessarily mean its "wrong" to carry that way, but most people who carry Glocks (ie police, etc) are carrying with loaded chambers, and so long as you keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on target, its perfectly safe to do so.
quote:Laredo Lefty
If you read the owners manuals that came with your Glocks, nowhere in them do they recommend carrying them with an empty chamber.
The only organization I have ever heard of that carries pistols with empty chambers is the Israeli military.
I just want to correct this popular misconception.
The empty chamber carry is a throwback to the days of the Israeli Haganah military, where you had a bunch of raw recruits with no firearms training, using an assortment of non-standardized guns in various conditions, some even cobbled together in garages.
Given this variety of different weapons (ie ones that all kinds of safeties, including some that might NOT be drop-resistant), the Israelis found that the best "universal" way for everyone to carry safely was with no round in the chamber. That reduced drop discharges, accidental discharges, etc.
Remember, also that *EVERYONE* in Israel has to serve in the military, and unlike most of the USA, where you might only encounter soldiers on or near a military base, in Israel, you'll see soldiers at the mall, at the gas station, in the park, etc. They have to be armed, but 99.9% of the time, they're not going to get into any situation where they might have to actually use their weapon.
So in that sort of situation, it makes sense to keep the chamber empty (in pistols). Many Israeli civilians who carry, will keep the chamber empty.
But if there is a perceived threat, they go to "cocked and locked" (or hammer down on live round) carry. If they are just going about their day to day business outside of a dangerous area, they will carry the longarms with the mag OUT of the gun entirely.
In terms of pistols, I know as a fact that the Israeli Magav, which are one of the only Israeli forces that actually use Glock pistols, *DO* carry them with a round in the chamber when they are on service.
shilowar
Starting Member
Actually one slight correction! Our military, the US Army carries their Beretta's chamber empty on Post in non combat situations. The MP's are required to carry chamber empty, if they chamber a round they better be able to justify it or they are subject to discipline. This include over seas bases such as Germany.
And this makes sense.
Racking the slide on a gun takes less than a second with practice.
That extra second is a compromise that buys you extra safety in case the gun is accidentally dropped, lost, or seized.
First of all, as already mentioned Glock does NOT recommend empty chamber carry with its guns.
That doesn't necessarily mean its "wrong" to carry that way, but most people who carry Glocks (ie police, etc) are carrying with loaded chambers, and so long as you keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on target, its perfectly safe to do so.
quote:Laredo Lefty
If you read the owners manuals that came with your Glocks, nowhere in them do they recommend carrying them with an empty chamber.
The only organization I have ever heard of that carries pistols with empty chambers is the Israeli military.
I just want to correct this popular misconception.
The empty chamber carry is a throwback to the days of the Israeli Haganah military, where you had a bunch of raw recruits with no firearms training, using an assortment of non-standardized guns in various conditions, some even cobbled together in garages.
Given this variety of different weapons (ie ones that all kinds of safeties, including some that might NOT be drop-resistant), the Israelis found that the best "universal" way for everyone to carry safely was with no round in the chamber. That reduced drop discharges, accidental discharges, etc.
Remember, also that *EVERYONE* in Israel has to serve in the military, and unlike most of the USA, where you might only encounter soldiers on or near a military base, in Israel, you'll see soldiers at the mall, at the gas station, in the park, etc. They have to be armed, but 99.9% of the time, they're not going to get into any situation where they might have to actually use their weapon.
So in that sort of situation, it makes sense to keep the chamber empty (in pistols). Many Israeli civilians who carry, will keep the chamber empty.
But if there is a perceived threat, they go to "cocked and locked" (or hammer down on live round) carry. If they are just going about their day to day business outside of a dangerous area, they will carry the longarms with the mag OUT of the gun entirely.
In terms of pistols, I know as a fact that the Israeli Magav, which are one of the only Israeli forces that actually use Glock pistols, *DO* carry them with a round in the chamber when they are on service.
shilowar
Starting Member
Actually one slight correction! Our military, the US Army carries their Beretta's chamber empty on Post in non combat situations. The MP's are required to carry chamber empty, if they chamber a round they better be able to justify it or they are subject to discipline. This include over seas bases such as Germany.
And this makes sense.
Racking the slide on a gun takes less than a second with practice.
That extra second is a compromise that buys you extra safety in case the gun is accidentally dropped, lost, or seized.
Comments
Carrying your weapon with an empty chamber makes no sense to me. It takes a little longer to get it into action.... and that slight amount of time could be critical.
With respect to the US military carrying Berettas chamber empty. That is an "administrators" decision to require that condition of carry probably based on his or her lack of faith in the training the personnel get. If soldiers are having unintentional discharges, dropping or losing their guns, then it sounds like more training is needed.
If a gun is LOST, what difference does it make if it had a round in the chamber or not?
If a gun is seized from the user, the theory is that it will take longer for the bad guy to get it up and running if the chamber is empty. Well, guess what. It will take you longer to get it going also.
Back when we were still using revolvers in law enforcement we had a guy on our department who carried a Python with 5 rounds in the cylinder. When I asked him why he did this, he said it was in case his gun was taken away and used against him, it would go click the first time. I said yeh but it will click when you try to use it also plus now you have only 5 shots in the gun. This guy had no confidence in his gun retention abilities.
...however my Sig Sauer has no safety....there is a load level decocker, but there are zero safeties on my Sig(perhaps a drop safety which a Glock also has).SIG-Sauer P220 thru P229 design pistols have five safety devices:
Decocking Lever
Safety Intercept Notch
Firing Pin Safety
Disconnector
Hammer Reset Spring
If the Israeli military is or was carrying guns with empty chambers... Just how is that a "Misconception"? Its true.
The misconception (and I didn't say it was yours personally) is that the Israeli military always carries this way. That's simply NOT true.
The Israeli military will carry with magazine-in-chamber-empty under *certain* specific circumstances only, in practice, not all that often.
They'll do this under what might be termed "code orange", that is to say, when they think there COULD be an imminent threat, but haven't actually identified a specific one. If there is an identified threat, they'll go to cocked and locked carry, or actually open fire depending on the exact circumstances.
Again, with respect to the question about GLOCKS, despite the so called "Israeli carry" the Israeli Border police (which are technically a military force) carry their Glocks with a round in the chamber.
quote:Carrying your weapon with an empty chamber makes no sense to me. It takes a little longer to get it into action.... and that slight amount of time could be critical.
Again, there is a spectrum of carry appropriate to a spectrum of risk. You're thinking of cops on duty, or civilian concealed carry. In that situation, I'd agree, loaded chamber is *likely* the better option.
But this is *NOT* the situation with the Israeli military most of the time.
You can (and should) think of this "Israeli" carry as half-way in between carrying a loaded weapon with a live round in the chamber, and carrying a totally empty gun with the magazine out.
Would you agree that it makes little sense for 18 year old soldiers walking around populated civilian areas in peacetime with no threat imminent to carry loaded fully automatic guns with live rounds in the chamber?
That *IS* the realistic day-to-day situation in Israel. The soldiers HAVE to carry their weapons around with them all the time, for obvious reasons, even though the expectation that they'll have to actually use them at any given moment is virtually zero.
Remember, there are *ALSO* civilian Israeli police whose job it is to keep the peace. The purpose of the Israeli Defense Forces (ie the Israeli military) is primarily to defend Israel against FOREIGN enemies, like Syria, etc. That requires constant presence of armed soldiers.
quote:With respect to the US military carrying Berettas chamber empty. That is an "administrators" decision to require that condition of carry probably based on his or her lack of faith in the training the personnel get. If soldiers are having unintentional discharges, dropping or losing their guns, then it sounds like more training is needed.
Its very easy to second-guess American military policy, but I think there is a little more to this than simply training issues. (EG, the American military police is probably fairly well trained already).
Remember, these are American soldiers with live weapons on foreign soil during peacetime. I politely suggest this is a "touchy" situation, and it wouldn't take very much to make it a very ugly political one. One incident could cause a MAJOR international fiasco.
EG, how would YOU feel about German soldiers with loaded guns walking around in America? What do you think would happen if such a soldier "accidentally" (or even deliberately) discharged their weapon?
So sure, this is a compromise, but I think its a realistic political one. The military police on duty in Germany aren't likely to encounter an actual military threat. If they were, they'd be allowed to carry with chambered rounds.
For shilowar:
I agree 100%. If you don't like Glocks, then don't buy/own/carry one (assuming you get that choice).
I also agree that almost all so called "accidental" discharges are in fact "negligent", but that's a bit besides the point.
At best, you might reduce its incidence, but no amount of training can ever eliminate human error (negligent or not). In the real world, people get tired, stressed, etc, and good intentions notwithstanding, not everyone follows all the rules of gun safety meticulously all the time.
As an example, multiply 100,000 cops with Glocks by 2000 carry hours per year each, with associated tens of thousands of draws, holsterings, and stripping for cleaning, and you're going to run into a certain amount of poor gun handling and errors.
This is why, to the extent possible, you try to design systems that prevent error absolutely, or at least can mitigate the likely result of human error.
With all respect to so-called Glock "perfection" and this particular safety issue, I think there are simply better designs out there than the Glock, that's all.
Whether or not a lack of an external safety or the necessity to pull the trigger before disassembling the gun makes Glocks "unsafe" is debatable, but I *DO* think that Glocks in particular are particularly unforgiving when it comes to poor gun handling, that's all.
If you need a gun for defense and you carry it with with an empty chamber, planning on having enough time to rack a round into the chamber, THAT IS JUST PLAIN DUMB. What if milliseconds count AGAINST you protecting your life or that of a loved one? Do you REALLY want to give away milliseconds racking a round or do you want to be able to draw and fire? What if you are somehow prevented, or injuried and DON'T HAVE A FREE HAND with which to rack a round? If that happens YOU ARE OUT OF THE FIGHT! For those who believe in carrying a semi-auto with an empty chamber is that REALLY what you want?
In addition, it is simply unsafe to carry a Glock (or an SR9, or a MP40, etc.) with a chambered round UNLESS the firearm is in a holster which covers the trigger. Otherwise, it is not much different than carrying an Old Colt Single action in a COCKED mode. And as everyone would admit, that is just plain stupid.
Prove me wrong on this simple issue or shut up.
nothing to prove wrong on the holster issue, with a glock(or most any other handgun for that matter)covering the trigger is common sense. Milliseconds do count in life defending situations and I think that is one reason glocks are so popular, they take some of the guesswork out of fast reaction time. Present the gun, aim and pull the trigger, no thinking if you left a safety on or it is decocked ect ( round always in the chamber of course). So yes, Glocks strengths can also be their weakness for some, but arguing about it seems pointless, they sell like ice in july.
Uh...the Springfiedl XD models, just for one example, have a grip safety. That means that ONLY if the firearm is gripped and an actual attempt to fire is attempted, will the firearm actually fire. Unlike a Glock for only one example.
My nepnew is a State Trooper. His has been in 100 times the frackuses as mine with no problems.
I believe proper weapons handling would be more of an issue where accidental discharge is concerned.