Condition One 24/7 OK for my gun?
Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 4
- Posts: 227
- Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 7:35 pm
- Location: League City, Texas
I am all for safety and pride myself in that fact. My wife appreciates it as well. Txi....you summed up my entire point when you stated that they are an inaniment object that require an outside force to cause them to react the way that a firearm operates. I agree that people can do stupid things, but I would never call well maintained firearm unsafe based soley upon personal opinion. Thanks for the insight Txi. Your opinion is respected as always.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 9
- Posts: 1006
- Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 11:29 am
- Location: Pearland, TX
- Contact:
you may not call it unsafe, but i will. As an object it's not inherently safe or unsafe, but as it's intended use (as a weapon for humans who are sometimes idiots) it's a bad idea to make a weapon without a separate thumb (or other similar) safety device.razoraggie wrote:I am all for safety and pride myself in that fact. My wife appreciates it as well. Txi....you summed up my entire point when you stated that they are an inaniment object that require an outside force to cause them to react the way that a firearm operates. I agree that people can do stupid things, but I would never call well maintained firearm unsafe based soley upon personal opinion. Thanks for the insight Txi. Your opinion is respected as always.
but that's my opinion.
now with a thumb safety, i'd be OK with it. Other than that issue, i think glocks are good guns. Not great, but good. I just personally want that extra line of protection that lets me know that even if something accidentally hits the trigger it's not going off unless i have that separate safety switch thrown :)
incidentally, i've also seen those little trigger insert safety blocks they sell for glocks. Neat idea that doesn't require any gunsmithing. Personally, i want a thumb lever.
if i ever own one, i will have one installed.
another thread hijacked.... i guess not maybe, we're still essentially talking about condition one carry.
-
Topic author
Geez, let me be more specific. I didn't know I was on trial. Yes, I am aware that the gun itself would not spontaneously fire off. Read my signature... that should sum up my feelings on NDs. My point, as you obviously were too excited to pause and consider, was that the Glock firearm is, as I call it, unsafe. What I mean is that unlike a gun with a physical safety switch or even one like my XD, the Glock takes MUCH less effort to engage. This is not a contest to see who is cooler, the Glock-heads or the XD-fans... In fact it has nothing to do with that. Drop it. You and I are in total agreement anyhow; No gun is going to fire without a catalyst forcing it to do so.razoraggie wrote:I am all for safety and pride myself in that fact. My wife appreciates it as well. Txi....you summed up my entire point when you stated that they are an inaniment object that require an outside force to cause them to react the way that a firearm operates. I agree that people can do stupid things, but I would never call well maintained firearm unsafe based soley upon personal opinion. Thanks for the insight Txi. Your opinion is respected as always.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 4
- Posts: 4331
- Joined: Wed May 04, 2005 6:40 pm
- Location: DFW area
- Contact:
Ouch, sunburn? I don't think he was challenging you or putting you on trial.TheYoungGuy wrote:Geez, let me be more specific. I didn't know I was on trial. Yes, I am aware that the gun itself would not spontaneously fire off. Read my signature... that should sum up my feelings on NDs. My point, as you obviously were too excited to pause and consider, was that the Glock firearm is, as I call it, unsafe. What I mean is that unlike a gun with a physical safety switch or even one like my XD, the Glock takes MUCH less effort to engage. This is not a contest to see who is cooler, the Glock-heads or the XD-fans... In fact it has nothing to do with that. Drop it. You and I are in total agreement anyhow; No gun is going to fire without a catalyst forcing it to do so.razoraggie wrote:I am all for safety and pride myself in that fact. My wife appreciates it as well. Txi....you summed up my entire point when you stated that they are an inaniment object that require an outside force to cause them to react the way that a firearm operates. I agree that people can do stupid things, but I would never call well maintained firearm unsafe based soley upon personal opinion. Thanks for the insight Txi. Your opinion is respected as always.
*CHL Instructor*
"Speed is Fine, but accuracy is final"- Bill Jordan
Remember those who died, remember those who killed them.
"Speed is Fine, but accuracy is final"- Bill Jordan
Remember those who died, remember those who killed them.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 4
- Posts: 227
- Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 7:35 pm
- Location: League City, Texas
No kidding....
No argument was meant to erupt from this thread Young. You expressed you're opninion and I expressed mine. No one is "cooler" for carrying a firearm with no secondary safety and I don't appreciate the sarcasm surrounding my safety habits; it's a personal choice I have made. Didn't mean to step on your toes and I don't feel as though I was being argumentative. I was just responding to your post.
Geez....have we gotten away from the subject at hand or what?!?!
No argument was meant to erupt from this thread Young. You expressed you're opninion and I expressed mine. No one is "cooler" for carrying a firearm with no secondary safety and I don't appreciate the sarcasm surrounding my safety habits; it's a personal choice I have made. Didn't mean to step on your toes and I don't feel as though I was being argumentative. I was just responding to your post.
Geez....have we gotten away from the subject at hand or what?!?!
-
- Banned
- Posts in topic: 3
- Posts: 1447
- Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2006 2:29 pm
- Location: Dallas/Fort Worth Area
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 1
- Posts: 4899
- Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 6:10 pm
- Location: Vidor, Tx
- Contact:
An XD can be carried cocked and loaded but not locked and loaded. The presence of a hammer has nothing to do with the firearm being cocked now the presence of a manual safety that has to be turned off and on determines locked and loaded the XD has no such manual safety.Right2Carry wrote:Again I think a question was asked. How do you carry an XD cocked and Locked? It has no hammer.
To get back to the original thread keeping a gun loaded and ready to go won't hurt anything you should replace carry ammo at least once a year the $1.50 or so a shot is cheap insurance.
"To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
George Mason
Texas and Louisiana CHL Instructor, NRA Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, Personal Protection and Refuse To Be A Victim Instructor
George Mason
Texas and Louisiana CHL Instructor, NRA Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, Personal Protection and Refuse To Be A Victim Instructor
-
- Banned
- Posts in topic: 3
- Posts: 1447
- Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2006 2:29 pm
- Location: Dallas/Fort Worth Area
Agreed and that was my point.S&W6946 wrote:The term "cocked and locked" as first used in this thread referred to keeping a round in the chamber. To me that term generally applies to a 1911 pistol and the manner in which it is carried and not an XD.
Call me picky....
“Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference in the world. But, an American Soldier doesn't have that problem". — President Ronald Reagan, 1985
-
- Member
- Posts in topic: 2
- Posts: 65
- Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 5:05 pm
IMHO "Condition One" would be appropriate for both "Cocked and Locked" & "Locked and Loaded" however hs already stated above, "Locked and Loaded" would be appropriate for use in describing "Condition One" for an XD or any other firearm without a hammer. The hammer of a firearm was once called the "Cock" and its position "cocked" or "uncocked". The term "Locked and Loaded" came from the original phrase "Loaded and Locked" which the military used to describe the ready to fire condtion of the M1 Garand. Loaded magazine inserted and bolt locked forward. Some sources credit John Wayne for the current usage "Locked and Loaded" when he inadvertantly reversed the the words in the movie "Sands of Iwo Jima"Right2Carry wrote:Agreed and that was my point.S&W6946 wrote:The term "cocked and locked" as first used in this thread referred to keeping a round in the chamber. To me that term generally applies to a 1911 pistol and the manner in which it is carried and not an XD.
Call me picky....
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 9
- Posts: 1006
- Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 11:29 am
- Location: Pearland, TX
- Contact:
nice history lesson. really it was... i'm always interested in this stuff.BadCo45ACP wrote:IMHO "Condition One" would be appropriate for both "Cocked and Locked" & "Locked and Loaded" however hs already stated above, "Locked and Loaded" would be appropriate for use in describing "Condition One" for an XD or any other firearm without a hammer. The hammer of a firearm was once called the "Cock" and its position "cocked" or "uncocked". The term "Locked and Loaded" came from the original phrase "Loaded and Locked" which the military used to describe the ready to fire condtion of the M1 Garand. Loaded magazine inserted and bolt locked forward. Some sources credit John Wayne for the current usage "Locked and Loaded" when he inadvertantly reversed the the words in the movie "Sands of Iwo Jima"Right2Carry wrote:Agreed and that was my point.S&W6946 wrote:The term "cocked and locked" as first used in this thread referred to keeping a round in the chamber. To me that term generally applies to a 1911 pistol and the manner in which it is carried and not an XD.
Call me picky....
we all knew what he was talking about though.
-
- Banned
- Posts in topic: 3
- Posts: 1447
- Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2006 2:29 pm
- Location: Dallas/Fort Worth Area
I would say that using the term locked on any XD or Glock without a manual safety is wrong. Neither of those guns lock. Locked usually refers to a manual safety. I also don't think that either an XD or a Glock are fully cocked, they are in a half cock position.
I have always thought the term cocked and locked when with 1911 style guns.
IMHO using Cocked and Locked while referring to an XD or Glock is just wrong.
I have always thought the term cocked and locked when with 1911 style guns.
IMHO using Cocked and Locked while referring to an XD or Glock is just wrong.
“Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference in the world. But, an American Soldier doesn't have that problem". — President Ronald Reagan, 1985
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 9
- Posts: 1006
- Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 11:29 am
- Location: Pearland, TX
- Contact:
ahhh, ok, sorry, i missed that. I'm not familiar with the XD. Didn't realize it didn't have a manual safety.Right2Carry wrote:I would say that using the term locked on any XD or Glock without a manual safety is wrong. Neither of those guns lock. Locked usually refers to a manual safety. I also don't think that either an XD or a Glock are fully cocked, they are in a half cock position.
I have always thought the term cocked and locked when with 1911 style guns.
IMHO using Cocked and Locked while referring to an XD or Glock is just wrong.
*sits down and shuts up* :)