Need some advice. I live in the commonweath of Virginia(aka free america), and we can open carry whenever we damn well want, which for me is each and every day. Being as I live in unoccupied america, people generally don't freak out about me carrying, but at least once a week, i get the same comment from some well wishing bystander. I carry a cz-75, but carry in condition 1, hammer back, safety on. And someone will invariably come up to me and remind me that my hammer is back. I don't wanna be 'that guy' who turns people off of guns, so help me out. What's a good line to come back with? "The safety is on", just doesn't seem to cut it, and again, i'm trying to avoid being rude. Thanks for all the help!
I actually saw a little bit of this after the Open Carry non-event, where I was asked if I knew that the hammer was back on my Colt 1991A1. Now, when talking to gunnies - or at least folks who tolerate gunnies - a quick discussion of the 1911 (or CZ-75) mechanism should suffice. I explained that the 1911 is meant to be carried in that manner, that there three safeties in place on the modern 1911 (grip safety, thumb safety, and firing pin block) and that an accident would be statistically impossible.
But what about when the folks asking the questions aren't gunnies, and you're trying to act as the ambassador for open carry?
It gets a little tougher, doesn't it? "BECAUSE I CAN" is a perfectly valid response to "Why are you carrying that gun with the hammer back?" - but it's sure as hell not going to win you any style points. To the untrained observer, a firearm has the hammer back only when it is about to be fired - think about the number of times Hollywood inserts the "hammer cocking sound" to indicate imminent danger or threat. Now look at a pistol carried in condition 1. Hammer's back. That means danger, right?
Going into a lengthy dissertation on the different methods in which one can carry a single action semi-automatic might be a possibility if the person asking the question is genuinely interested in hearing how the gun works. Or you might bore them into a stupor and they'll forget about the cocked hammer... Personally, a smile and something along the lines of "Actually, it's designed to be carried that way" with perhaps a nod to the safeties involved would most likely do the trick. If they show further interest, then by all means get into the nitty gritty.
How else could one response to that question and still be the smiling ambassador for open carry?
That is all.
24 comments:
Whip it out throw it on the ground and Yell SEE IT's SAFE NOT SHUT THE HELL UP AND MIND YOUR DAMN BUSINESS!!!
Oh wait were trying to make friends.
Uh don't OC when in a fit of rage.
I would respond with "Actually, the manufacturer's owners manual says that it is designed to function in that manner, and that's why I carry it that way."
Second Bubblehead Les. "It's designed to be carried that way" is the correct response.
If they insist, you can ask them what they're basing their thoughts on. Would many admit Hollywood is their source?
Saying "It's designed to be carried that way" has the added advantage of being true. :)
How about: "Due to the design of the pistol, that's the safest way to carry it".
Safest for whom doesn't need to be specified.
+1 I only carry my 1911 cocked and locked because that's the way they're supposed to be carried.
The CZ-75 can be carried safely either cocked-and-locked, OR hammer down safety off.
You're doing it right, they're being ignorant, educate them.
BTW I get the same thing from people not familiar with the M1911.
CZ-75 is a cool gun BTW.
The sentence fragment "Best that way" would be appropriate for Virginia.
"It don't work if the hammer is down," is my typical response to things like that.
"Yep, it was designed to be carried that way." I've found even non-gunnies are interested that a pistol designed over 100 years ago is still considered a top of the line design. The history angle works well.
Thanks weerd. You have no idea how hard it was finding a holster, as my cz is 'pre ban'. the gun is over 30 years old, but fires like fresh from the factory. And after a few days, i find the weight of an all steel pistol reassuring on my hip
Thanks weerd. You have no idea how hard it was finding a holster, as my cz is 'pre ban'.
I own a Pre-B CZ75 myself, and while the holster selection isn't comparable to what's out there for Glocks, it's by no means sparse. Galco, Bianchi and BladeTech all make holsters for the 75.
I've seen gunny people react in similar vein as well. Hollywood likes the 'cocking the gun to show I mean business' moment. I've even seen it done with 1911 models, usually when held up to the head of a kneeling opponent. No mention of how that 1911 came to be 'hammer down/live round,' which is the most stupidly dangerous moment for that design. I agree with the 'designed that way' line. It shows a knowledge of the arm, and a safe a practical attitude. It has been my experience that an attitude of competence is very reassuring to people when they comment in public. For record, I also try to use neutral language, and avoid use of the term 'gun' in public discussion. It may seem like kid-gloving it, but my goal in these instances is to present as a calm, friendly, and competent user. In my observation, it helps the dialog. I OC regularly here in NW Oregon.
I'd go for the short-and-honest way, "It's designed to be safely carried that way. There are multiple, redundant safeties to prevent any unintentional firing."
Stick 'safe' in there twice, plus a short explanation. It's also a good leading reply in case they want more information.
You could remind them that nearly every pistol out there without an exposed hammer - cops and Glocks included - is being carried with the hammer back... you just can't see it.
Just because I think it's worth pointing out; you could always count up the number of times you've carried that gun Condition 1, determine the number of those occasions when you have also been required to draw said pistol in a "condition one" situation, and then make the entirely reasonable decision to carry the thing Condition 3 instead.
How we each choose to carry a gun is, and ought to be, a personal choice based upon our individual evaluation of our circumstance and locale. One aspect not given enough consideration IMO is the intended application we each prepare for. If that is "personal defense, again IMO, Cond 3 is the more appropriate general state of readiness, since actually shooting the gun ought to be well down the action option selection list in a confrontation (behind such choices as leave for example).
It's not at all difficult to transition from Cond 3 to 1, even discretely, should your situational circumstance seem to make that appropriate. Added to that, your typical day suffers fewer interruptions while you try to promote good gun ownership from an initial position of defense and justification.
The 2nd Amendment is all about individual choice and responsibility, and I'm not going to fault anyone else's decision (until circumstances make it obvious they chose wrong at least :)), but I hope we are each making the effort to consider all the influencing factors before we settle on an action that can be considered a presumption of intent, because a presumptive expectation of shooting another human being ain't defensive. And we all know that we (or our estate) are going to have to justify in court every aspect of our use of a gun, so how isn't that a legitimate consideration going into the decision making process.
Oh, and just to be pedantic; the 1911 is "made" to be carried in Cond 3 too, it all depends on the circumstance it's being carried into, doesn't it?
I agree that the 1911 is designed to accommodate Condition 3. My personal arm is a striker fired with thumb safety, so it lives on my belt in the equivalent of Condition 1. Bedside, it is reduced to Condition 3. In a social situation, however, I would be uncomfortable with operating the slide to move from 3 to 1. If mine ever comes out, it will be when all other avenues are unavailable, and the application of force is needed to end the situation.
The question was more regarding what to say, and less convince me to change my carry.
If you want to come off as less of a snob about it than simply "It's designed that way," say the same thing differently: "It's a pretty neat design feature*, but this gun is safe to carry two different ways. This is one of them."
And just to pop into nitpick mode for a minute, because I seem to be slowly turning into That Guy about CZ-75s, and That Guy just *has* to do it, the difference between the CZ-75 and the CZ-75B has nothing to do with any sort of ban.
Cosmetically, the non-B has a rounded trigger guard and a spur hammer compared to a more squared off trigger guard and a commander-style hammer on the -B. The -B also has reflection-reducing lines along the top of the slide. The stock grips are also slightly different, but good luck tracking down correct ones. I won't even get into the short-rail CZ-75 lest even Jay start snoring.
The main difference however, because there are some pre-B guns with some or very occasionally all of the -B features, is that the -B model has an internal firing pin block that the pre-B does not. There are also a bunch of fiddly little internal machining differences once you get to the -B model, since after they started catching on in the states, CZ was not prepared for the American habit of modifying the bejesus out of any gun to cross through, but tracking those takes a That Guy a couple of belts up from me.
Finally, on holsters, since the only external difference between a pre-B and a B that comes into contact with the leather is the trigger guard, unless you're running some super-ninja kydex hyper-molded atomicly-tuned setup, a pre-b will almost always fit into a holster for a -B. The reverse is not necessarily true.
*Because it's a CZ-75. Damn right it's neat.
Despite knowing striker fired guns work better for me I still want a CZ pattern to share safe space with my 1911. They are great looking guns.
Make mine an 85 combat without the pin safety though.
I keep it in condition one, all the time for a very simple reason. thats how i train. if its on my hip, in my hands, its in condition one. muscle memory. I find its what works for me. and yet another +1 for a cz. probably the best pistol i've ever owned.
The question was more regarding what to say, and less convince me to change my carry.
Change the mode of carry, change (or avoid) the question outright.
I have to say that Stingray's suggested response,
"It's a pretty neat design feature*, but this gun is safe to carry two different ways. This is one of them.", has great merit for both 1911 and CZ-75 pistols.
+1 Stingray.
Just tell the the Hammer is all the way back cause you never leave the house "half cocked"
As another VA resident with a preference for open carry(a 1911 in condition 1) I would say that question is either coming from a korea veteran, or someone looking to learn more about guns and carry. In the former case chat up the vet, in the latter explain in some detail, but make sure their eyes don't glaze over too much.
AE
My regular response is "Thank you".
Tone of voice can either invite further conversation or suggest several anotomically difficult exercises. I carry business cards that review the gun laws in Virginia and provide the web addresses of OC and RKBA organizations. I also carry application forms for VCDL www.vcdl.org the Virginia gun rights group, and hand them all to most everybody who I talk with about my openly carried handgun and about gun rights in general.
stay safe.
My favorite response came from a Gunsite instructor / career AZ LEO. A youngster approached him in public, and asked, "Your hammer is cocked. Isn't that dangerous?" He grinned and replied, "VERY." Sadly, the kid no doubt misunderstood the "to whom" part.
Me, I'd stick with, "yep, it's designed to be carried this way" and perhaps offer a wee bit of new knowledge to go with it.
Post a Comment