testtest

Why I Carry with an Empty Chamber — Should You?

wclardy said:
I'm sure I could trust that Glock-invented trigger toggle if I tried harder, but I just can't imagine any situation where it would prevent an accidental discharge -- unlike manual safeties and grip safeties.
But then again, I'm a bit of a heretic and think that my first priority is not shooting anything that doesn't qualify as a life-endangering threat.
Click to expand...
Perhaps we could agree that keeping ones finger off and away from the trigger, unless you are ready to shoot, and, keeping the firearm pointed in a safe direction at all times, will result in better outcomes. Glocks, among others of this type of design are great choices. I have used them safely for years without incident.
 
lee1010 said:
Need help please???? I have the glock 43x mos and I'm trying to mount the crimson trace ct rad micro to it.no plate required it's a direct fit..it came from a friend I traded with and he filed down the screw that I need can someone tell me if I can just get a screw from the hardware store that has a starbit head or Allen wrench head ? I'm not sure if there strong enuf or if the thread pattern is correct ?I tried a M4 ×8 from the hardware store and it seemed to have a lot of wiggle while screwed over 3/4 the way in the glock 43x mos??is there a specific type of screw ???
Click to expand...
Lee1010 I moved your post out of this thread and into it's own thread. This should get you more views and hopefully some answers.
 
I finally read this article. It's one of the dumbest i have ever read regarding firearms/2A.

So many issues.

The church thing....ridiculous. First of all, carrying the smallest possible is a terrible idea in my opinion. This is a crowded place and highly likely you make have to make a fairly long shot. Longer barrel, bigger sight radius is way more important. Last thing I want in a situation where I am taking a 50 foot or more shot in a room of 50 people is an LCP 380. Also, church is the one place it's easiest to carry the largest gun possible. I wear a suit coat. I regularly carry a G17 or full-size 1911. I actually could carry both if I had a shoulder holster

As far as the no round in the chamber...that is literally the worst gun advice I have ever heard. I think it should be illegal to train someone to do that. In fact, I think if a trainer trains that, and the carrier is killed while drawing that way, the trainer should be liable
 
PAGunGuy said:
I think it should be illegal to train someone to do that.
Click to expand...
Really? Because you don't like something it should be illegal? What else don't you like that should be illegal? Strawbery Ice cream maybe? So much for freedom of choice. Better to be trained how to carry without a round in the chamber than no training at all. Or are you one of those people that think someone should be required to have training to practice a Constitutional guaranteed right. Not defending carrying with empty chamber, and it's not my way, but ILLEGAL o_O
 
Bassbob said:
In a tight to the body OWB holster ( my choice is Muddy River Tactical) under an unbuttoned flannel or button up type shirt, slightly oversized, or a jacket.

AIWB

It's completely doable either way you just have to experiment with placement, clothes choices, etc.
Click to expand...
My IWB is also Muddy River Tactical!
 

Attachments

  • Muddy River Tactical IWB.png
    Muddy River Tactical IWB.png
    2.5 MB · Views: 103
Last edited:
bc22wm said:
Really? Because you don't like something it should be illegal? What else don't you like that should be illegal? Strawbery Ice cream maybe? So much for freedom of choice. Better to be trained how to carry without a round in the chamber than no training at all. Or are you one of those people that think someone should be required to have training to practice a Constitutional guaranteed right. Not defending carrying with empty chamber, and it's not my way, but ILLEGAL o_O
Click to expand...
LOL...come on. I was being facetious. Now, I do think it's absolutely terrible and I do think that a trainer should have some liability if they are teaching this. But obviously I don't think it should be illegal

As far as requirements for training...you couldn't be more wrong. I am 100% for constitutional carry. I am also against universal background checks and red flag laws. And 18 year olds should be able to buy and carry pistols in all 50 states

I think we should be able to walk into Walmart and grab a fully automatic off the shelf and walk up to self-check out and be on our way.

In fact, I think that felons should have their rights restored once they have paid their debt to society.
 
PAGunGuy said:
In fact, I think that felons should have their rights restored once they have paid their debt to society.
Click to expand...
Being a retired Prison guard, my opinion surprise many. I 100% agree BUT only after they have paid IN FULL. That includes probation, parole, and restitution, but not a commuted sentence. You just know some leftwing, moonbat will commute everything they can down to time served just to be fair to the little darlings o_O. If you can't trust them in society with an inanimate object maybe we can't trust them in society.
Sorry for jumping to conclusions PAGunGuy. There are so many "we need a law" "that should be illegal" that I'm beginning to feel like a long-tailed cat in a rocking chair factory.
 
bc22wm said:
Being a retired Prison guard, my opinion surprise many. I 100% agree BUT only after they have paid IN FULL. That includes probation, parole, and restitution, but not a commuted sentence. You just know some leftwing, moonbat will commute everything they can down to time served just to be fair to the little darlings o_O. If you can't trust them in society with an inanimate object maybe we can't trust them in society.
Sorry for jumping to conclusions PAGunGuy. There are so many "we need a law" "that should be illegal" that I'm beginning to feel like a long-tailed cat in a rocking chair factory.
Click to expand...
I also agree with this 100%. And it blows my mind how short sighted people are that believe making it illegal for felons to own guns will actually keep them from having guns. It's like hate crime laws or all these other addendums to murder charges. It's a way for them to say publicly that murder is illegal while manipulating the charging and sentencing to make only certain murders or groups of murderers illegal. I mean unjustifiable killing equals murder. And it is illegal. That should be the end of it. You kill someone for no justifiable reason you spend life behind bars or go to the chair, end of story, that's how it should be. Making excuses for why someone murdered is BS. I don't care how rough your home life growing up was or that you were oppressed by society. Unless you can justify killing someone, killing them should result in you going to prison for the rest of your life or getting strapped to a chair.
 
bc22wm said:
Being a retired Prison guard, my opinion surprise many. I 100% agree BUT only after they have paid IN FULL. That includes probation, parole, and restitution, but not a commuted sentence. You just know some leftwing, moonbat will commute everything they can down to time served just to be fair to the little darlings o_O. If you can't trust them in society with an inanimate object maybe we can't trust them in society.
Sorry for jumping to conclusions PAGunGuy. There are so many "we need a law" "that should be illegal" that I'm beginning to feel like a long-tailed cat in a rocking chair factory.
Click to expand...
I can agree with no rights restoration until probation & parole requirements are satisfied, but not restitution; unless you’re a white-collar criminal, the odds of you being able to find a job once you’re out of prison that will allow you to pay off what has been assessed against you is low…it’s essentially a massive extension of the sentence.

I think if they show that they are paying it off—no matter how little, no matter how slowly—they should get full restoration of rights.
 
HansGruber said:
I can agree with no rights restoration until probation & parole requirements are satisfied, but not restitution; unless you’re a white-collar criminal, the odds of you being able to find a job once you’re out of prison that will allow you to pay off what has been assessed against you is low…it’s essentially a massive extension of the sentence.

I think if they show that they are paying it off—no matter how little, no matter how slowly—they should get full restoration of rights.
Click to expand...
Yep, otherwise it amounts to debtor's prison.
 
HayesGreener said:
Anyone convicted of a violent felony, especially with a weapon, should never legally possess a firearm. I would much rather they just stay locked up. Property crimes, victimless crimes, I don't care if they get their rights back.
Click to expand...
Anyone convicted of a violent felony clearly shouldn't be released back into society at all. They do get released back into society though. And being a "Prohibited person" does exactly nothing to keep them from getting a gun when they get out.
 
bc22wm said:
Being a retired Prison guard, my opinion surprise many. I 100% agree BUT only after they have paid IN FULL. That includes probation, parole, and restitution, but not a commuted sentence. You just know some leftwing, moonbat will commute everything they can down to time served just to be fair to the little darlings o_O. If you can't trust them in society with an inanimate object maybe we can't trust them in society.
Sorry for jumping to conclusions PAGunGuy. There are so many "we need a law" "that should be illegal" that I'm beginning to feel like a long-tailed cat in a rocking chair factory.
Click to expand...
No problem. It's funny becuase I work in Parole, so yea, I think it was amazed people I think this way.

But I have seen rap sheet after rap sheet of people having multiple convictions of person not to possess. So they are going to get guns whether they are "allowed to" or not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top