POLL - Do you carry: With a round chambered - No round in chamber - Page 9

POLL - Do you carry: With a round chambered - No round in chamber

This is a discussion on POLL - Do you carry: With a round chambered - No round in chamber within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by SIGguy229 You made the assertion as fact...I'm calling you out. Show me. Show me where someone has been charged or sued for ...

View Poll Results: How do you carry your SD Pistol? With a round in the Chamber - No round in chamber

Voters
2590. You may not vote on this poll
  • With a round in chamber

    2,324 89.73%
  • No round in chamber

    266 10.27%
Page 9 of 94 FirstFirst ... 56789101112131959 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 135 of 1396
Like Tree699Likes

Thread: POLL - Do you carry: With a round chambered - No round in chamber

  1. #121
    New Member Array 45super's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Pensacola, FL
    Posts
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by SIGguy229 View Post
    You made the assertion as fact...I'm calling you out. Show me. Show me where someone has been charged or sued for carrying a Glock with a round in the chamber.

    Secondly, before you jump in here and start thumping people and assuming "how little people think about what happens after the smoke clears"--if I were you, I'd post less and read more. You've been here 5 minutes making grand assertions. I'm asking for proof in the form of court cases where you prove your assertion is true.

    Otherwise, you quickly gain the reputation of being "THAT" guy...

    By the way--welcome to DC.com. We are polite and respectful of each other, but if you're going to state something is "fact"--be prepared to prove it. You'd be surprised how much we talk about what happens after the smoke clears...so before you assume what the rest of us do/don't do or consider/don't consider...maybe you should get to know us. Meanwhile, you're starting off with a credibility issue.
    Calm down, tough guy. If some words on a page make you go to water, I wonder what a gun in your face would do. I may have just joined, that doesn't mean I just started carrying. Got me? Your statement, "Show me where someone has been charged or sued for carrying a Glock with a round in the chamber" makes ZERO sense--never wrote that anywhere. YOU GET SUED FOR KILLING SOMEBODY! As for responding to you about "after the smoke clears," first you gotta share with us when you shot somebody in self-defense, the smell of the smoke, the screams coming from the guy on the ground as the life drained from his body. Yeah, I’m calling YOU out. Share the case number or press account. I don't give a damn how many posts you've done, VIP SCHEEMIP. If you haven't been through the aftermath of a deadly force situation, you're nothing but a pretender.

    So take a breath and ask a sane, intelligent question and I’ll answer you, or are you THAT guy?

    As for Glock being sued over reliability problems, and loosing. Care to place a wager?

    Friends?


  2. #122
    Senior Member Array Chevy-SS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Rhode Island
    Posts
    926
    Heheheh, this is getting interesting......

    Personally, I also was hoping that you could "Show me where someone has been charged or sued for carrying a Glock with a round in the chamber". It's a perfectly reasonable question, based on the assertions made in your prior postings.

    Peace

    -
    'Be careful, even in small matters' - Miyamoto Musashi

  3. #123
    VIP Member Array Gene83's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    2,220
    From the Florida Highway Patrol policy manual...

    Service handguns will be carried with one round in the chamber and with the magazine loaded with 10 rounds for the Glock 37 and 11 rounds for the Sig Sauer P226.

    http://www.flhsmv.gov/fhp/Manuals/1002.pdf

    Apparently they don't see a safety issue with carrying chambered.
    "The superior man, when resting in safety, does not forget that danger may come." ~ Confucius

  4. #124
    RKM
    RKM is offline
    Distinguished Member Array RKM's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    1,881
    I don't think carrying a chambered round in a Glock, despite the owners manual saying not to would hold any weight in court. I'm not even sure having a round in the chamber would even be brought up in court. It's common knowledge among firearms experts and LE/Military that when carrying a firearm for self defense, a round be in the chamber regardless off the manufactures "warning". Their warning is there to prevent moronic people from suing them after accidentally shooting themselves. ND's happen to the best of us. The worst of us are the ones that turn around and sue the manufacture for the incident that's clearly operator error.

    Glock's are always under the spot light for having a slew of ND's. Main reason being is the shear number of them out there. There are so many out there that when accidents happen, chances are, it might be a Glock. Not because it's a Glock, but because so many people own them. I don't have the facts to prove it, but I have a feeling, most ND's with Glock's are LEO related. You hear about it ALL the time!

  5. #125
    VIP Member
    Array archer51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    22,362
    Quote Originally Posted by 45super View Post
    Never forget the three zones of concealed carry: before, during, and after.

    Regarding the “after”…

    I would NEVER carry a Glock with a round in the chamber (Condition Zero)—which is your only choice if you chamber a round (which is why I NEVER carry a Glock). The Glock owner’s manual specifically warns against doing this for civilians (they call it, "ready to fire") and therefore the Glock is NOT courtroom (civil) safe should you be sued for wrongful death or excessive use of force, to name but two of far too many possibilities.

    I also NEVER do “Israeli Carry” (Condition 3—fully magazine, empty chamber) which is why I carry my Kahr CM9 "hot". I haven’t found any gotchas in their manual regarding Condition Zero carry (and the longer trigger pull is much less of a legal liability IMHO).

    Ref: Glock Manual, p. 15, bottom left (in red):
    CAUTION:
    DO NOT CARRY THE PISTOL IN THE READY TO FIRE CONDITION. THIS IS NOT THE RECOMMENDED SAFE CARRYING METHOD FOR CIVILIAN USE.

    And no, your opinion of what Glock means by this does NOT count. That's up to your jury to decide.


    It seems you missed item 11,on page 17 of the Kahr manual which says to never carry the gun loaded. Kind of defeats carrying it, don't you think?
    baren likes this.
    Freedom doesn't come free. It is bought and paid for by the lives and blood of our men and women in uniform.

    USAF Retired
    NRA Life Member

  6. #126
    VIP Member Array xXxplosive's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,826
    Even some of the Colt boxes for the 1911A1 model have a disclaimer of not carrying the gun with one in......let me tell you as one who found himself twice in dire situations and lucky to have a loaded concealed firearm......No shots fired, thank God.....but IMO from experience, carrying a gun thats not loaded is risking your own life.....Trouble Doesn't Make An Appointment.

  7. #127
    Distinguished Member Array ArkhmAsylm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    St. Paul, Minnesota
    Posts
    1,410
    Quote Originally Posted by RKM View Post
    ...ND's happen to the best of us. The worst of us are the ones that turn around and sue the manufacture for the incident that's clearly operator error.
    I think that having an ND would exclude one from being included in the "best of us" category, IMO. Just sayin'...
    Stubborn and baren like this.
    "Historical examination of the right to bear arms, from English antecedents to the drafting of the Second Amendment, bears proof that the right to bear arms has consistently been, and should still be, construed as an individual right." -- U.S. District Judge Sam Cummings, Re: U.S. vs Emerson (1999)

  8. #128
    VIP Member Array Gene83's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    2,220
    Quote Originally Posted by xXxplosive View Post
    Even some of the Colt boxes for the 1911A1 model have a disclaimer of not carrying the gun with one in......let me tell you as one who found himself twice in dire situations and lucky to have a loaded concealed firearm......No shots fired, thank God.....but IMO from experience, carrying a gun thats not loaded is risking your own life.....Trouble Doesn't Make An Appointment.
    It's pretty much a standard statement that manufacturers use to try and limit their liability. That way they can always say "we told you so" if anything adverse happens. The statement is often written in red and appears at the front of the owner's manual.

    Always store and carry this product empty, with
    the hammer forward on an emptied chamber.
    Failure to do so could result in an unintentional
    discharge.
    CIBMike likes this.
    "The superior man, when resting in safety, does not forget that danger may come." ~ Confucius

  9. #129
    VIP Member Array SIGguy229's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Kommie-fornia-stan
    Posts
    7,101
    Quote Originally Posted by 45super View Post
    Calm down, tough guy. If some words on a page make you go to water, I wonder what a gun in your face would do. I may have just joined, that doesn't mean I just started carrying. Got me?
    Again....if you were to post less, and read more and get get to know us, you wouldn't bring out the ____ measuring statments. I'l chalk that one up to ignorance.....because posts like yours tend to come to new people who just started carrying. My apologies for the confusion. I'll defer to your vast expertise.
    Quote Originally Posted by 45super View Post
    Your statement, "Show me where someone has been charged or sued for carrying a Glock with a round in the chamber" makes ZERO sense--never wrote that anywhere. YOU GET SUED FOR KILLING SOMEBODY!
    Unless you live in a state that has the Castle Doctrine and if ruled a justifiable shoot, you are immune from civil proceedings. I'll repeat the question in context of your post
    Quote Originally Posted by 45super
    therefore the Glock is NOT courtroom (civil) safe should you be sued for wrongful death or excessive use of force, to name but two of far too many possibilities.
    My question is, again, with your vast knowledge and expertise, please cite to authority where someone has been sued for carrying a loaded Glock after a defensive shooting.

    Quote Originally Posted by 45super View Post
    As for responding to you about "after the smoke clears," first you gotta share with us when you shot somebody in self-defense, the smell of the smoke, the screams coming from the guy on the ground as the life drained from his body. Yeah, I’m calling YOU out. Share the case number or press account. I don't give a damn how many posts you've done, VIP SCHEEMIP. If you haven't been through the aftermath of a deadly force situation, you're nothing but a pretender.
    OK....ya see...insults don't get you far, but they do get you the attention of the mods who, like the rest of us, like a polite membership.

    Secondly...my experience is not in question here--frankly, I'm going to stop questioning yours; but put broadly, I am a combat vet of OIF 1, OIF 2 (that is, Iraq in 2003, 2004) and Afghanistan 2009. This isn't about me. What is in question is the credibility of your assertions. Don't make it personal, because it isn't personal. Show where carrying a loaded Glock has proven to be a liability in a court case.

    Quote Originally Posted by 45super View Post
    So take a breath and ask a sane, intelligent question and I’ll answer you, or are you THAT guy?
    Again, you're making it personal. I have asked an intelligent question...now please answer the question.

    Quote Originally Posted by 45super View Post
    As for Glock being sued over reliability problems, and loosing. Care to place a wager?
    Nope. That isn't my question
    OD* likes this.
    Magazine <> clip - know the difference

    martyr is a fancy name for crappy fighter
    You have never lived until you have almost died. For those that have fought for it, life has a special flavor the protected will never know

  10. #130
    Administrator
    Array SIXTO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    20,330
    SIGguy229 and Doodle like this.
    "Just blame Sixto"

  11. #131
    VIP Member
    Array tacman605's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Arkansas/On the X in Afghanistan
    Posts
    3,053
    NO SIXTO DONT. I thought this thread was dead and gone now it is getting good.

    GECKO .45 LIVES AGAIN.
    SIGguy229 likes this.
    "A first rate man with a third rate gun is far better than the other way around". The gun is a tool, you are the craftsman that makes it work. There are those who say "if I had to do it, I could" yet they never go out and train to do it. Don't let stupid be your mindset. Harryball 2013

  12. #132
    Senior Member Array adric22's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Fort Worth, TX
    Posts
    1,146
    Quote Originally Posted by 45super View Post
    I thought that was clear. Glock says not to; Kahr's manual makes no mention of it (that I could find), so I'm not working against the manufacturer's explicit instructions. The trial lawyer--and the family of the guy you shot (they're suing you)--will want to know if you followed Glocks instructions. And, regarding Q-tips, they're not suing me because I shot one of their employees, hello!
    I have to admit doing a palmface on this paragraph. And I'm known around here for being one of the dreaded "carry-unchambered" folks. I find the entire concept of the above statement to be insane. So I shot and killed a guy and you think the family is going to be concerned with whether or not I followed Glock's instructions? Let me make an analogy. That is like saying I stabbed and killed somebody and the court is going to care if I performed the stabbing technique correctly? Being that it is a given that you need a round in the chamber to shoot the gun, that means a round will have been chambered at some point or another.

    The absolute only time I could see something like this ever coming up is if some kind of accident occurred. Perhaps some kind of ND that ended up injuring/killing somebody. Then you claim it was an accident, but they might be able to say you were criminally negligent because you had a round in the chamber when you weren't supposed to. But I suspect that would be low on the list compared to breaking other well known rules of gun safety such as not pointing a gun at something you don't want to destroy, etc.
    "Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws." -Plato

  13. #133
    VIP Member Array Gene83's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    2,220
    Quote Originally Posted by adric22 View Post
    I have to admit doing a palmface on this paragraph. And I'm known around here for being one of the dreaded "carry-unchambered" folks. I find the entire concept of the above statement to be insane. So I shot and killed a guy and you think the family is going to be concerned with whether or not I followed Glock's instructions? Let me make an analogy. That is like saying I stabbed and killed somebody and the court is going to care if I performed the stabbing technique correctly? Being that it is a given that you need a round in the chamber to shoot the gun, that means a round will have been chambered at some point or another.

    The absolute only time I could see something like this ever coming up is if some kind of accident occurred. Perhaps some kind of ND that ended up injuring/killing somebody. Then you claim it was an accident, but they might be able to say you were criminally negligent because you had a round in the chamber when you weren't supposed to. But I suspect that would be low on the list compared to breaking other well known rules of gun safety such as not pointing a gun at something you don't want to destroy, etc.
    I think that what 45super might have been trying to bring up was the old attorney grasping at straws to win a civil lawsuit against you argument, as in....

    "Isn't it true that you modified the trigger on your gun so that it was in effect a "hair trigger"?

    "Isn't it true that you had the gun loaded with 'dum dum' bullets?"

    "Didn't you deliberately go against the manufacturer's instructions and carry the gun with a live round in the chamber ready to kill someone?"

    See how that line of questioning goes? Try to load the jury with a bunch of people that don't know anything about guns and see how it goes. Maybe you win a big settlement for your client and a nice paycheck for yourself.

    If it was a justified shooting and you have your ducks in a row, you're probably going to prevail even in the event of a civil suit, but nothing's guaranteed once it gets in front of a jury. In situations where you can invoke castle doctrine, a civil suit will probably never take place.

    Like I said, I think that was the point that was trying to be made, either that or it was an exercise in getting stuff stirred up on the forum.
    "The superior man, when resting in safety, does not forget that danger may come." ~ Confucius

  14. #134
    VIP Member Array SIGguy229's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Kommie-fornia-stan
    Posts
    7,101
    Maybe. But that is not how his point was communicated. Meanwhile, if there are cases out there, I'd like to hear about them.
    Magazine <> clip - know the difference

    martyr is a fancy name for crappy fighter
    You have never lived until you have almost died. For those that have fought for it, life has a special flavor the protected will never know

  15. #135
    VIP Member Array Gene83's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    2,220
    Quote Originally Posted by SIGguy229 View Post
    Maybe. But that is not how his point was communicated. Meanwhile, if there are cases out there, I'd like to hear about them.
    I know that wasn't how it was communicated and I wouldn't be surprised if my "stir stuff up" thought was accurate. I couldn't find any civil cases where it had been brought up, but it would have to be something unusual (like the OJ Simpson civil trial) to make it into the news anyway.

    By the way, you handled the whole thing pretty well without turning it into an all out flame war.
    "The superior man, when resting in safety, does not forget that danger may come." ~ Confucius

Page 9 of 94 FirstFirst ... 56789101112131959 ... LastLast

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

380 safety with round in chamberr
,
carry with round in chamber
,
carrying a gun with a round in the chamber
,
carrying with a round in the chamber
,
ccw chambered or not
,

concealed carry chambered or not

,
concealed carry with round in chamber
,

do you carry with a round chambered

,
should i carry my gun with a round in the chamber
,

should i carry with a round in the chamber

,

should you carry a round in the chamber

,

should you carry with a round in the chamber

Click on a term to search for related topics.