Home › Main Category › Personal Defense
Gene L
Senior MemberPosts: 10,305 Senior Member
Bad ideas
Gene L
Senior MemberPosts: 10,305 Senior Member
I've seen a bunch, but the one that comes to mind today is the holster that was designed to carry a 1911 in Condition three. You charged the gun by pushing down on the butt of the gun while still holstered, and room was allowed for the slide to go rearward and and then forward to put a round in the chamber. You then drew the loaded firearm out of the holster and took care of business...drawing a cocked and unlocked gun from the holster doesn't seem safe to me.
Anyone remember these, or other not so great ideas?
Anyone remember these, or other not so great ideas?
Not too many problems you can't fix
With a 1911 and a 30-06
With a 1911 and a 30-06
0
Replies
-- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, German writer and politician
With a 1911 and a 30-06
Not true. The striker on some guns is partially loaded (cocked) and on others it's 100% loaded as long as you put one in the chamber. Sigs don't have the little trigger dohickey at all. And don't you have to squeeze the trigger on a 1911 as well as the grip safety? What's the difference?
-- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, German writer and politician
With a 1911 and a 30-06
-- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, German writer and politician
The concept of the holster that Gene is referring to is the stupid I am referring to...
Charlie Miller IIRC.
With a 1911 and a 30-06
Depends on what part of Texas you're from. Some parts like big cities pronounce it like a Yankee, Piece phonetically PEEEECE, then you have those more culturally affected areas where you will hear it pronounced Poace, or out west where you hear it pronounced with a shorter twang as Pace. Just depends on what kind a redneck or what part of Texas you're from.
Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
He like to say he invented some new words that day.
NRA Endowment Member
His boss probly told him to geta model 28 :jester:
I can't remember getting into a struggle down on the street with one where security was called for, but they were kinda neat looking and did protect the revolver. I kinda went with the flow when we were issued them, as did everyone else. This was in 1977 or so. Who knew?
I wasn't in uniform all that long...long enough.
As for "warning shots" a friend of mine was getting his ass kicked down with a bad guy. He was on his back with a 220 guy on top of him pounding him. My buddy cranked off a round beside the assailant's head which ended the fight, so it's not always a bad choice, even though it was against policy where I worked.
Back when I was working, a prisoner went to a medical call in Athens (outside our county) for a medical problem, which of course we paid for. He was in cuffs, but the nurse insisted on him being freed. He promptly escaped, knocking over the nurse and the doctor. It was pre-planned, btw, a girlfriend was waiting for him. The deputy guarding him fired a warning round which didn't do any good, but did get some complaints, which I ignored or explained (Athens is in a different county.) The metro liberal LEO called me to half-heartedly complain about it since a citizen had beefed and askd if we were going to take any action for a discharge of a firearm in their jurisdiction. I said no except for a counseling. It filled out their report.
Anyway, we caught the bastard and his girlfriend about four hours later in a cheap motel. Meaning warning shots do not always stop the action, but sometimes they do. Example 1.
Pardon me for straying.
With a 1911 and a 30-06
BAMAAK,
Thought we were talking about "striker fired" guns. Does not apply to 1911s. That is what that pointy thingy is above the "lemon squeezer".
Called a hammer.
-- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, German writer and politician
It's a lost art.
George Carlin
...and a "safety" which you use in the same motion, with the same finger as the trigger just doesn't seem to scream
"BAD IDEA!", to you? What if somebody called the edge of a precipice with a 5000 foot drop a "parachute"?
Amazing. Isn't it?
piece of debris contacts the safety, and also
depresses the trigger.
I "don't want it to fire", and that's why I use an
external safety which is separate from the trigger.
Please, let's not have the patronizing "training"
discussion, because a lot of these folks having these
NDs are very well trained LEOs.
But rude certainly is in style, this month. Have at it.
Wouldn't you like to call me some undignified name,
as you overtly infer that I have a single digit IQ?
"If it walks, quacks, and flies like a duck- - - - - -"
ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
As evidenced by the famous DEA agent who was the only person in the room qualified to handle his sidearm...
NRA Endowment Member
-..--.-...--!
.--_--..---..--..-...-.--!
-..--.---.----.-..---!
I found this archival western union telegraph exchange circa 1913 of a SAA owner berating one of them newfangled 1911 owner for needing a add-on mechanism to "safe" their firearm. Fascinating stuff!
You seem a little 'touchy'... You should probably eat more fibre. Personally, I would recommend bran muffins, but any whole grain foodstuff will help. Add fresh greens, too.
George Carlin
Sorry, when cellar dwellers who bought a used glock with birthday and
Christmas money, want to act all patronizing and sanctimonious,
because they refuse to face the fact they bought a gun which has one of the
world's worst safety records, I'm not inclined to take any crap.
You want to defend the incredibly poorly thought out safety design
on it's merits, fine. But inferring people's
diet's are wrong, and they are myopically stupid, because they refuse
to step into line, kowtow, and start sucking down the Perfection Kool
Aid has nothing to do with the topic, or the gun.
Consider the whole point of a safety is to avoid a ND. Giving people
a false sense of security, by putting that
safety in a position where it is integral with the trigger, is worse than
no safety at all. As, BTW, countless NDs over the decades, by the trained,
and the untrained will attest.
Better check this, LM, I'm sure I misplaced a preposition, or comma, somewhere.
I'm sure that bad grammar will make this whole post worthless.
NRA Endowment Member
BAM! :applause:
Danoobie, to paraphrase the former Soviet spec ops instructor when asked about his training techniques: They're supposed to be dangerous. They're pistols.
If somebody is allowing something (errant holster edge, loose clothing, booger hook) to come into contact with the trigger of their firearm at ANY time, for ANY reason... I guess they shouldn't be calling themselves 'highly trained', should they? I would bet a large sum of money (large to me, anyway) that the vast majority of those "countless" NDs were EXACTLY as you labeled them... negligent. I would also bet a larger sum of money that those same "countless" NDs were, in fact, countable... and FAR fewer than fearmongers and Glock haters alike would have us believe.
I have to let you in on a little secret, one you might have known had you been here longer than somebody waiting at a deli counter; I defend Glocks but I don't really like them. They feel funny in my hand. However, i have an appreciation for stuff that is designed well and does what it is supposed to. Glocks do what they are supposed to. Every time. The problem with Glocks is that stupid people forget that simple fact, as well as other pertinent safety actions... in short, they forget that they are handling an object that is supposed to be dangerous and treat it like it's a paperweight or a glass of milk.
If my "inferring" your diet offends you, this may not be the place for you. Just sayin'
George Carlin