TexasCHLforum.com

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

TheYoungGuy wrote:

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.

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.

Ouch, sunburn? I don't think he was challenging you or putting you on trial.

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?!?!

TheYoungGuy wrote:Geez, let me be more specific. I didn't know I was on trial.

HAHAHAHA!

dont take it personal man. that's just how we show the love to one another.

there's often spirited debate, especially around this issue.

Again I think a question was asked. How do you carry an XD cocked and Locked? It has no hammer.

Right2Carry wrote:Again I think a question was asked. How do you carry an XD cocked and Locked? It has no hammer.

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.

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.

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....

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....

Agreed and that was my point.

Right2Carry wrote:

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....

Agreed and that was my point.

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"

BadCo45ACP wrote:

Right2Carry wrote:

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....

Agreed and that was my point.

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"

nice history lesson. really it was... i'm always interested in this stuff.

we all knew what he was talking about though.

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.

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.

ahhh, ok, sorry, i missed that. I'm not familiar with the XD. Didn't realize it didn't have a manual safety.

*sits down and shuts up* :)

To each his own. I love Glocks and allways carry one in the tube. I just keeep the buger picker off the bang switch. We all have fun here.