You are correct, but many will argue this one......you may have just started a war.
Top offs on your carry gun, yay or nay?
- Thread starter ATex7239
- Start date
Load the chamber from ejection port or mag = new thick vs thin.
No. It’s not a “debate”.
You’ll break some guns while others are fine with it.
This is like debating “when backing up, do you use the brakes to stop the car, or throw it in drive and use the throttle?” I mean, both work, right?
So, the guys who use their brakes are wrong, aren’t they? Just slam it in gear and give it the gas…
Back to the topic of capacity. If the gun has the ability to bring an extra round into a fight, why would you not want that round?
My department procedure - insert full magazine. Send slide forward. Remove magazine. Add one round. Insert magazine. Holster weapon.
The Glock 19 already holds 15 rounds. I have two spare magazines with me.
But I’m going to carry that one extra round, because nobody here can predict exactly how the gun fight is going to go down. And when you’re in a gun fight, more ammo is better than less.
My department procedure - insert full magazine. Send slide forward. Remove magazine. Add one round. Insert magazine. Holster weapon.
The Glock 19 already holds 15 rounds. I have two spare magazines with me.
But I’m going to carry that one extra round, because nobody here can predict exactly how the gun fight is going to go down. And when you’re in a gun fight, more ammo is better than less.
Yeah, it was in jest. Loading the chamber from the mag is alway the right answer. That’s how semi auto pistols are designed to feed. Just because you could load from the ejection port doesn’t mean you should.
I put one in the pipe, THEN insert the magazine.
To the Op's question it depends on the weapon and situation, but it equates to 99.99% of my life no.
I will not casually carry a striker pin gun with a chambered round.
The only time I carried with one in the chamber was during the Los Angeles riots and I alternated between a revolver, and 1911 cocked and locked.
I had no choice but to intentionally walk through or into a potential fight, and knowing this I topped the weapon up to its max.
I will not casually carry a striker pin gun with a chambered round.
The only time I carried with one in the chamber was during the Los Angeles riots and I alternated between a revolver, and 1911 cocked and locked.
I had no choice but to intentionally walk through or into a potential fight, and knowing this I topped the weapon up to its max.
Last edited:
What is your concern with carrying a striker fired gun with a round chambered?
If the gun employs a trigger safety only, I will not carry with a round in the chamber, because a trigger safety does not do what I want a safety to do.
I've seen too many AD/ND incidents resulting from combined movement + holster issues, and or an external object resulting in AD/ND.
I have no need for everyday carry in what is effectively condition 0 on some weapons.
If there is a separate safety I feel a bit better about it, but still wont do it unless I'm walking into some kind of known hot zone which as a civilian I enjoy the position of being able to avoid known trouble.
I'm 1000% better prepared for trouble than the next guy, and my old school grandpa inspired ways keep myself family and friends out of trouble and safe. I've walked around in condition 0 exactly twice in my life, but one of those two times was a week in duration.
Last edited:
Negatory, I don't top off only because I drop the mag and empty the chamber when the pistol comes out the holster. I don't like loose ammo so I put the round back in the mag.
Sometimes I get worried about my sig with no safety pointing at the family jewels. I've considered buying a frame with the safety cutout and factory safety for a bit of added mental security.
Sometimes I get worried about my sig with no safety pointing at the family jewels. I've considered buying a frame with the safety cutout and factory safety for a bit of added mental security.
It always so funny that we as men are like “I’m not muzzling my junk.” Meanwhile there are major veins and arteries in the thigh also being muzzled. Even with other carry position it can happen while holstering/unholstering. And we’re all just like, “nope, junk first, death second.” We all do it.
I do not. I carry a 12rd capacity sidearm, to me the +1 provides no value worth the safety risk of topping off. The share of NDs that are accounted for by reholstering a striker fired gun is surprisingly high.
I make it a habit never to unholster a chambered sidearm unless it will see imminent use. And likewise, I want to holster that chambered weapon (especially with a striker gun) only once if possible.
It's not that you cannot draw or reholster a chambered sidearm safely. For me, it's that this is a needless risk in light of the vanishingly low probability that 12 vs 13 rounds will make a difference. Why worry about another round when another mag gives you 12 (or 19 in my case)?
When I carried my P-07, I had no qualms topping off although I felt it was still a needless action. Hammers with thumbs on them do not surprise you the way an internal striker can.
What safety risk exists in topping off?
Removing and inserting a magazine doesn't present any risk beyond that of loading the gun in the first place.
Removing and inserting a magazine doesn't present any risk beyond that of loading the gun in the first place.
My comment wasn't about the "junk" - it was about femoral arteries, bones, muscle tissue, as well. I just don't like where the muzzle is pointed when seated with appendix carry.
What gun do you have - and how do you “put one in the pipe”?
No more risk really than loading to begin with, yes. But any manipulation of a loaded gun introduces the risk of operator error. Which has a higher probability of an accident. More so than a mechanical failure of safety mechanism that is. It’s a trade off. Do I want this additional round vs do I want to manipulate this gun more. For me that depends of how many rounds I have on board. I’m not standing a post in the military or law enforcement on patrol. My weapon is only needed to break contact from the threat/situation. No one will ever know how many rounds they will “need” but for civilian purposes that usually is not many. That said I don’t fault others for wanting more ammo on board. Sometimes I want more too. It’s all subjective. My Shield not topped off (only 10) is still more than a standard 1911 topped off (7 +1.) I consider both situations adequate.
Well, how do you accomplish an initial load safely, then?
Why would the reload (inserting the magazine with another round) not be equally safe?
I don’t “operator error” the initial load. I’m careful about trigger, muzzle, safe direction, etc. A bit of equal discipline makes the reload equally safe. I am careful.
I know some guys advocate a “clearing barrel” made from a 5 gal Home Depot job bucket filled with sand. Good for loading and unloading, but I haven’t gone that far. Still, a bucket of sand is easier to replace than that bookshelf I use…
I don’t share your reticence for the second manipulation in a controlled, deliberate, situation.
And, while your Shield topped off gives you more shot opportunities than the 1911, I will still take the 1911 - something about that 230g projectile.
Opinions on carry caliber vary, but the .45 ACP is a great round, and I shoot a 1911 better than a pocket gun. I can put more rounds on target faster with that 1911 than I can with a Shield ( I tried and considered the Shield, but went with the Sig P365).
What I think we can agree on is this: having the gun and needing it is better than not having the gun and needing it.
Why would the reload (inserting the magazine with another round) not be equally safe?
I don’t “operator error” the initial load. I’m careful about trigger, muzzle, safe direction, etc. A bit of equal discipline makes the reload equally safe. I am careful.
I know some guys advocate a “clearing barrel” made from a 5 gal Home Depot job bucket filled with sand. Good for loading and unloading, but I haven’t gone that far. Still, a bucket of sand is easier to replace than that bookshelf I use…
I don’t share your reticence for the second manipulation in a controlled, deliberate, situation.
And, while your Shield topped off gives you more shot opportunities than the 1911, I will still take the 1911 - something about that 230g projectile.
Opinions on carry caliber vary, but the .45 ACP is a great round, and I shoot a 1911 better than a pocket gun. I can put more rounds on target faster with that 1911 than I can with a Shield ( I tried and considered the Shield, but went with the Sig P365).
What I think we can agree on is this: having the gun and needing it is better than not having the gun and needing it.
It’s the same. It’s just an another admin manipulation that I don’t see the need for (expect with my LCP 380.) All the same rules and risks are applicable.
Fair.
I’ve never thought about having one. But I might now.
Also fair.
I can also shoot the 1911 better. The best shooting handgun I have ever shot was a 1911. Carrying one is my problem though. I’m not lugging one of those around daily.
I wouldn’t call the Shield a pocket gun per se. But either way it’s shootable for the size. It’s definitely a compromise on portable vs shootable.
No issue with 45 ACP - it’s a proven and readily available pistol caliber.
Yep.
If you drop the mag and reinsert it while staying holstered, then probably zero additional risk.
But I'm guessing most Bubbas don't do that.
Whoa, whoa, I resemble that remark.
Similar threads
