Israeli carry effective ?

[Erik]

"Israeli style" is a hold over from days gone by, and has been disavowed as viable weapons doctrine by most everyone. Anyone care to list the high speed low drag entities which rely on it circa today?

It is fine so long as you'll never need your support hand for something else, will never need to fire from #2 from the holster, will never need to fire immediately from the #3 while driving the gun forward, will never have an injury preventing the use of the support hand, will never fumble because of a variety of factors, and are willing to compromise speed for... for what exactly? Well, then go for it. The rest of us wish you well.

[dwatts47]

Can you chamber around with gun in the holster? Thus having a loaded gun , but avoiding the crime of having 'drawn' it.

[EEL92fs]

What holsters? do you have to use the company holsters or can you use something like this.

http://www.smartholster.com/howto.html

[alizeefan]

I have to agree to disagree. As erik says your support hand may be injured or being used to fend ( remember we are not just talking about threats from guns but knife attacks at close range etc. ). Also , in terms of obtaining a solid firing grip as soon as possible, and therefore getting on sights early etc it simply is less efficient than carry chamber loaded. I am sure you practice a lot and are quite proficient but I can't practice enough to make it an automatic response.

[ddelange]

alizee,
This thread has spawned a lot of spin-off venting about the unfortunate firearms policy of your company (which is probably mandated by its insurance company) and the firearms laws of Australia. All of those issues are worthy of discussion, but not to the ultimate decision you have to make: does the compensation you will receive outweigh the consequences you will face as a security guard forced to carry C-3 and not allowed to wear body armor.
At the security firm I serve as legal counsel (among other duties) for we require all security officers to carry chamber loaded with a reliable pistol between 9mm and .45 of the security officer's choice. We also give a significant reimbursement for body armor to the officer after he successfully completes his preliminary term of employment.
I just had to pipe in and also emphasize that you are facing a very difficult and personal decision that only you can make. In the States, our Security Officers and LEO's are still tragically underpaid - I can only guess that the situation is the same or worse in Australia.
Do you think you would have the adequate operational tools and training to face the risks of the job?
Good luck, ALD

[alizeefan]

alizee,
This thread has spawned a lot of spin-off venting about the unfortunate firearms policy of your company (which is probably mandated by its insurance company) and the firearms laws of Australia. All of those issues are worthy of discussion, but not to the ultimate decision you have to make:

You are right sir, we have wandered off topic. My question was, given the full spectrum of possible threats, was this type of carry viable and the overwhelming view appears to be no. I believe in being as profesional as possible and I am NOT going to jepardise my safety for the sake of feel good politics. Excuse me gentlemen as I have to tell my new employer what I think of his B.S policy .

[Perldog007]

I can sympathize with the OP. While I have elected to use I.C. on occasion for my own reasons, it was never when I was guarding a bank or on a "money run".

IMHO a company that uses such a boneheaded policy is beneath contempt. To tell applicants about it means the baddies will find out about it too. Stupidity on stupidity.

Once I took a job with a pretty nifty looking outfit in Northern Va that required all officers to purchase a Glock .40 I opted for the 23 as I already had a ccw permit. (pretty kinky requirement for a company that doesn't supply the weapon in the private guard game)

I had qualified with a Beretta 96 and about a bazillion other handguns. - In Virginia you qual'd with caliber and action. The law then allowed you to carry any weapon of the action and caliber you qualified with.

When I showed up for work I was told to leave my gun in the car and walk my beat uniformed and unarmed until the company president saw me qualify with "his" Glock. My response was less than professional.


While I would back up the O.P. no matter how he handled the communication with the employer, hindsight indicates temperance. If you can.
I still think my guy was an unabashed :censored: but years later if I could do it over I would have been more professional.

[orionengnr]

Exactly what is the problem, here? I've carried a G-21 in C-3 for the past 5 years. During practice sessions I always draw and fire using a Mossad draw. I do dozens of practice Mossad draws every week. Before I start any range session I'll empty a magazine full of A-Zoom snap caps from Mossad; and, thereafter, I switch to live rounds and do the same thing all over again.

Did you fail to comprehend the part about him being unable to practice except for requal? And then from C1, no draw and rack.

You do it every day of the week, perhaps many times? Great. Since he does not have the options you do, what you do is immaterial.

What he does, is allowed to do, and his likelihood of survival as a result, is the subject at hand.

To the OP--get out now; come on over. You already have plenty of friends here

[David Armstrong]

Nightwatch pretty well covered the high points, but I'll toss my $.02 in. Israeli Carry, despite all the naysayers, has a history of successful and effective use behind it, and despite all the hysteria about what might happen, in reality we just don't see it. Chamber empty carry of autoloaders was the dominant model of carry for most of the 20th Century around the world, and is still the preferred method of carry by a lot of people who have seen a lot of action in a lot of places. Is chamber loaded better? For most people, in most situations, yes, it probably is. But are you significantly handicapped with the Israeli method? No, you are not. The overall presentation time is not decreased to any significant degree in comparison to all sorts of other factors that nobody gets too worried about. The only really legit issue is the "one hand" problem, and that issue just doesn't seem to have been much of a factor over the last 100 years.

"Israeli style" is a hold over from days gone by, and has been disavowed as viable weapons doctrine by most everyone. Anyone care to list the high speed low drag entities which rely on it circa today?

I'd suggest that rather than "who uses it today" the better question is "who has successfully used it in the past?" Given the huge number of agencies and entities who have done just that (and some still do), it seems questionable to deride the concept as bad.

[alizeefan]

To the OP--get out now; come on over. You already have plenty of friends here

Fill the fridge with fosters and load the magazines, I'm on my way .

[Chindo18Z]

David Armstrong:

I'd suggest that rather than "who uses it today" the better question is "who has successfully used it in the past?" Given the huge number of agencies and entities who have done just that (and some still do), it seems questionable to deride the concept as bad.

Who are some of the agencies/entities who either did use or continue to use the Israeli method?

Night Watch:

The entire nation of Israel carries in C-3 and uses a Mossad draw. The British Secret Services and SAS, also, did exactly the same thing for decades.

I'm intrigued. When did the UK SAS use this method?

[Night Watch]

Erik,

Your comments seem to reflect more of a gamesman’s mentality than the carefully acquired conclusions of a genuine pistolero. Please don’t take offense, though. This is, after all, the internet; and that’s OK!


Alizeefan,

In my opinion, you should be more careful about basing all your conclusions on what the majority thinks. (Remember what Socrates said about popular opinions?) While I suspect you have more than one reason for not accepting this position, I'll hang in there with you for awhile longer.

Apparently, you’ve never kicked a man off you in CQB? (Not even in HTH practice?) There are 4 different ways that I know of to rack a slide with one hand: off the edge of your belt, off your thigh, from under your arm, or from between your knees; however, as David Armstrong has sagely pointed out, the Mossad draw does NOT have a history of disadvantaging anyone in CQB; and, such ancillary one-handed techniques have been, at best, rarely needed.

On another one of your points, I’m just going to have to ask you to take my word for it: Neither my grip, nor my aim, has ever been hindered by the use of a Mossad draw. The final stage of the Mossad draw does, in fact, drive the pistol into the target – Sometimes while using unsighted fire, too.

I’m not saying - nor do I mean to imply - that unchambered carry is a superior method of engagement. It is not! However unchambered carry offers advantages to: my family, myself, and to my neighbors as well that I find more useful than being constantly locked and loaded.

In the past 5 years I’ve had to draw a pistol from Mossad, exactly once, during a hostile confrontation. On the other hand, there have been many hundreds of times when others around me might have been placed at risk by my fully-charged pistol. (Including several other gunmen with less than perfect weapon handling skills.)


Orionengnr,

Yup, looks like there’s a problem all right! Yes, I got the message the first time around. That’s why I pointed out the usefulness of snap caps and regular dry fire practice to the OP. The fact that I’m heavily practiced should in no way reduce the usefulness of my opinion. I’ve offered that opinion for whatever insight it might produce. Admittedly I’ve expressed a minority viewpoint; but, you don’t really mind – Do you?

As far as, ‘survival potential’ goes, again, I thought I made my position clear; but, for the more obtuse, I’ll repeat myself: A Mossad carry requirement would, in no way, prevent me from taking that job. No vest? Yes! No regular live fire practice? Yes! But NOT Mossad carry. This wouldn’t stop me anymore than it’s stopped 100’s of 1,000’s of other gunmen from doing exactly the same thing; and, I might add, doing it well.


David Armstrong,

Thank you! As far as this gunman is concerned your reply was, ‘spot-on’!


For those who have more open minds and less of a tendency to rant, here, you might want to take a look at the following video. It illustrates several of the points I've attempted to make: (You’ll need QuickTime installed on your computer.)

http://defensereview.com/1_31_2004/kareen.mov


Chindo18Z,

The SAS’s use of unchambered carry has always been common knowledge to me. Why don’t you take the time to google it; I’m sure something will come up.

That's it! Thank you all for your time.

[alizeefan]

In my opinion, you should be more careful about basing all your conclusions on what the majority thinks. (Remember what Socrates said about popular opinions?) While I suspect you have more than one reason for not accepting this position, I'll hang in there with you for awhile longer.

While i'm not sold on israeli carry, particularly when fending off knife armed offender ( a BIG possibility here ), I must admit my misgivings probably have more to do with not being able to train enough more than the type of carry. BTW that was an interesting video- thought provoking.

[TexasSeaRay]

Alizeefan,

I was working with some South American federales who carried old Smith & Wesson Model 10's with a hodgepodge of various ammo in the cylnder--basically whatever rounds they could get their hands on. One federale even had a couple of lead wad cutters in rotation with his lead SWCHP.

Being a "prestigious American federale" myself and much more impressed with my badge and importance than I ever had a right to be, I made some disparaging remark about them not even having the same ammunition in their unit, let alone in their guns.

One older cop just looked at me and remarked, "A dull knife will still cut better than no knife."

Point is, these guys were horribly underfunded and scrounged ammunition anywhere and anyway they could. I arranged for some Federal Hydrashok +P to be expedited to me and when I presented my federale friends with this gift, I had friends for life.

Sounds like you're in a similar situation. Faced with the prospect of carrying with an empty chamber or carrying with an empty holster, for me, the choice would be obvious.

What would concern me is the inability to become and then remain proficient and confident with the weapon you're expected to carry. THAT can get you hurt (or worse) a lot quicker and more often than having an empty chamber.

I agree with the others--COME TO THE U.S. Hell, immigrate to Teas and we'll feed you all the barbecue you can eat.

Jeff

[Chindo18Z]

Night Watch: Having trained with or served in combat zones with UK, AUS, and NZ SAS off and on since 1977 until present (Cold War, Gulf War, Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, and Iraq), I guess I must have missed the whole "common knowledge" thing...

Interestingly enough, when I was CQB trained by SAS Princess Gate assaulters (Iranian Embassy Raid, London) they forgot to mention the technique.

As you mentioned...it's just the Internet. Good luck with your next deadly encounter.

[alizeefan]

What would concern me is the inability to become and then remain proficient and confident with the weapon you're expected to carry. THAT can get you hurt (or worse) a lot quicker and more often than having an empty chamber.

I agree with the others--COME TO THE U.S. Hell, immigrate to Teas and we'll feed you all the barbecue you can eat.

Absolutely the major dilemma is lack of training rather than specific carry mode. I guess I just wanted a few thoughts from people who can train more and may have good things to say about israeli carry. BTW I think my wife's company has it's US base in Dallas so I'm crossing my fingers.

Interestingly enough, when I was CQB trained by SAS Princess Gate assaulters (Iranian Embassy Raid, London) they forgot to mention the technique.

That's +1 for me. I can't speak for UK sas but I live in Perth where australian sas are based and know a couple of them. They carry loaded chamber.

[Night Watch]

Chindo18Z,

OK, tough guy, then how come you don't know any better?

[JohnKSa]

I'd say to make the best of what you have. It's not ideal, but it's not a disaster either.

Practice drawing and chambering a round so that it's second nature. It won't be as fast as a simple draw, but if you practice, you can get pretty fast. The key is that it needs to be a natural motion so you don't have to think about it.

Replace the rear sight with a steel sight having a profile that will allow you to rack the slide by catching the rear sight on your belt or the edge of your holster and pushing. Practice that technique until you can do it proficiently. If your other hand is wounded or occupied with something important you will need to be able to get your gun into action rapidly one-handed.

[Don P]

For JohnKSa, that is alizeefan main problem as he cannot have the weapon at home to practice. Unfortunate set of circumstances. As we all know practice will build speed and make one more confident in handling his weapon in a tense situation.

[BPCustomShop]

I have to agree with Night Watch. I carry C-3 all the time. I train with the Mossad draw all the time. I teach it to people who want to learn self-defense combat pistol shooting. Once learned and incorporated into your style, it's no slower than running loaded. That's my opinion, but my results back it up, too.

[David Armstrong]

Who are some of the agencies/entities who either did use or continue to use the Israeli method?

Let's start with a whole bunch of Israelis, who did, and still do. Toss in the U.S. military, who mandated chamber empty carry on handguns for most of the 20th Century, and still do so in many areas. The Russian police and military. The British South African Police. The Shanghai Police. The OSS. The SAS. Police all over Europe. Dozens, perhaps hundreds more.

The point is that for a long time, chamber empty was THE NORMAL WAY to carry autoloaders for EVERYONE, and is still the norm for lots of people and organizations.

I'm intrigued. When did the UK SAS use this method?

The ones I knew in the 1970's all carried BHPs with empty chambers. This was also the default for the Rhodesian SAS at the time.

[jabotinsky]

I’m not saying - nor do I mean to imply - that unchambered carry is a superior method of engagement. It is not! However unchambered carry offers advantages to: my family, myself, and to my neighbors as well that I find more useful than being constantly locked and loaded.

+1

[Creature]

This debate between "C-1 and C-3 carry: who does it and who doesn't" doesnt need to be a who's better debate. Who gives a rat's patooty what agencies carry in C-3? Most everyone here chooses C-1 as the preferred method of carry TODAY...because most present day firearms can be carried safely and effectively this way.

So, basically, it comes down to the company policy as described by the OP: if C-1 carry is unauthorized, then C-3 carry will have to do...alizeefan will just have to ensure that chambering a round with one hand is somehow practiced routinely.

[JohnKSa]

The point is that for a long time, chamber empty was THE NORMAL WAY to carry autoloaders for EVERYONE...

There's a significant difference between the organizations you list and "EVERYONE". It was certainly more common in times past, particularly before the advent of firing pin safeties, but "EVERYONE" is definitely an overstatement.

BTW, you mentioned the Shanghai Police as an organization that advocated/practiced chamber empty carry. There's a little more to that story...That organization's trainers (Fairbairn & Sykes) were advocates of deactivating any and all safeties on a pistol.

It is better, we think, to make the pistol permanently “unsafe” and then to devise such methods of handling it that there will be no accidents. One of the essentials of the instruction courses which follow is that the pistols used shall have their side safety-catches permanently pinned down in the firing or “unsafe” position.”

I think that makes it a little more clear why they mandated chamber empty carry.

[BillCA]

According to an acquaintance who lives in Israel, their method of carry is mandated by Israeli law. Semi-auto pistols (the most common sidearm) are carred in C-3; Magazine inserted, chamber empty, safety off.

Three reasons exist for this policy.
1. Prevention of AD/ND's, especially in high density cities.
2. Muggings & robberies are surprisingly few (guns are open carry)
3. In the event of a shooting event, any unarmed Israeli can pick up the sidearm of an armed Israeli who is down, rack the slide and fire. He does not have to figure out the safety mechanism if he is unfamilar with the model. This policy works well, too.


I don't know beans about civil law in Oz, but you might be able to open some civil liability against the employer by sending a letter outlining the hazards of a guard carrying a money bag and trying to chamber a round when attacked. At the very least, he might spring for some Level II vests.