The so-called “Israeli” Draw is a technique advocated by some for presenting a pistol from the holster. The gun is carried with an loaded magazine but no round in the chamber. As the gun is drawn from the holster, the shooter racks the slide to load the gun.
The question is not whether it’s humanly possible to draw an unloaded gun and get off a shot. The question is whether for a given amount of time, effort, and money you’ll be better doing it one way, or the other.
- Racking the slide takes time. Anyone who disputes that is intellectually dishonest.
- Racking the slide quickly takes two hands; drawing a loaded gun is no slower when I have to work with just my strong hand if a round is chambered already.
- Racking the slide quickly and properly makes noise. There may be times when you want the gun in your hand but don’t want to draw attention to yourself. So now you have to practice multiple things: rack as you draw, rack one-handed as you draw, draw then rack as you present the gun later, draw then rack one-handed as you present the gun later …
- Racking the slide is just another opportunity to induce some kind of stoppage in your gun, especially under stress.
A simple system for vetting new ideas, techniques, and gear from Dale McClellan, former Navy SEAL and instructor for Special Tactical Services:
- Does it work?
- Is it necessary?
- Can you do it under stress?
I try to apply that thought process to everything I do and everything I teach. Carrying in Condition 3 definitely fails the second criteria, and is questionable for the third.
Train hard & stay safe! ToddG
I agree with Todd. There may be very specific, special circumstances where this technique is applicable, but on the whole I don’t see any net benefit from it.
I know of a few organizations that run their pistols this way. I hardly agree with it, but at the same time, those who I have seen use it are extremely proficient at it, knowing they are starting a little behind the power curve, they practice more than the average person is willing to.
Seems there is quite the phenomonen of people seeing/hearing/reading about various techniiques that are used by certain people in certain organizations, and without a true understanding of the 5 W’s and H, you end up with an armchair commando making errors in judgement when selecting techniques that are used by specialized people in specialized circumstances.
One of the guys in a combat pistol league I shoot in (sort of an informal IDPA type setup) carries Israeli, and does all of his training and gaming that way. While I agree that I’m not willing to give up that extra time, I’ve been impressed at how well he performs. Due mostly, I’m sure, to diligent practice; he is consistently one of the top shooters in the group.
Recently, we had a stage that involved starting with a cup in your weak hand and required engaging a target with a Failure to Stop drill before you could drop the ice cold cup o’ dirty brass and move on. (I christened it the Milwaukee Mozambique). At the buzzer he drew, charged his Glock on his holster and ran the stage. If I remember correctly, I believe he finished 3rd.
I’ve never twisted his ear to find out his exact reasoning behind carrying as he does, but I’m impressed by his commitment to the concept and his dedication to making it work for him.
Joe
I hope this isn’t too long as a comment here, but it may be of interest.
Although many people have heard of the Israeli method, there is little available information about how much time the extra step of racking the slide requires. When they guess, most people cite figures of a second or more. Some time ago I decided to answer the question for myself by conducting an experiment.
The experiment consisted of a series of timed trials in which I drew and fired one shot at an IDPA target at a distance of 5 yards. I used a standard DA/SA 9mm P229 in a Galco “Concealable” holster under a medium-weight jacket. Timing was with a shot timer set for a random delay start. A shot was counted for the test if it hit the 0 or –1 chest zone of the target. The times of missed shots or fumbled attempts using the Israeli method because of a problem with cycling the slide were not included in the data.
After a brief warm up, a series of 20 valid trials were conducted in which the gun was drawn from concealment and one round fired using the double action mode each time. Then a series of 20 valid trials were conducted in which the gun with an empty chamber was drawn from concealment, the slide racked manually, and one round fired using the single action mode. After the first 40 trials, two additional 10-trial series were fired, first with the standard technique and then with the Israeli method. During the two 10-trial series, a conscious effort was made to reduce the times as much as possible. The effort to reduce times resulted in a significant increase in misses using both methods and many more fumbled attempts at manually cycling the slide.
The results were as follows:
Standard method, first 20 trials: average = 1.52 sec, standard deviation (S.D.) = 0.05 sec.
Standard method, all 30 trials: average = 1.48 sec, S.D. = 0.06 sec.
Standard method, last 10 trials: average = 1.43 sec, S.D. = 0.04 sec.
Israeli method, first 20 trials: average = 1.81 sec, S.D. = 0.11 sec.
Israeli method, all 30 trials: average = 1.80 sec, S.D. = 0.10 sec.
Israeli method, last 10 trials: average = 1.77 sec, S.D. = 0.08 sec.
The data indicate that manually cycling the slide cost me about 0.3 second per trial, or about 20 percent more time than using the standard method. That was true of both the trials in which I didn’t try for maximum speed and those in which I made an effort to get the shot off as quickly as possible while still maintaining a reasonable level of accuracy. (Of course, the 20 percent figure is valid only for this particular test which was conducted at a shooting distance of 5 yards; longer ranges would increase average shot time and reduce the percentage that 0.3 second would add, and shorter ranges would increase the time delay percentage.)
Another important issue for me was the number of misses and fumbled attempts to get a shot off using the Israeli method. As already noted, misses and fumbled attempts were not included in the above times, but fumbles were much slower than successful trials—often at least two to three times as long. I did not include them in the data because someone who was more practiced with the Israeli method would obviously make fewer mistakes when using it. One thing that the Israeli method must always involve, however, is the necessity of making the transition from cycling the slide with the support hand to achieving a good, two-handed grip on the gun for the shot. The standard method allowed me to achieve a proper supported grip very early in the process. During the initial 20 trials of each method, I had no misses with the standard method and five with the Israeli technique. Again, of course, more practice with the Israeli method would help eliminate the accuracy problem, but it’s obviously still a factor to consider and cope with.
——————————————-
A disadvantage of the Israeli method I haven’t seen discussed before is the third one on Todd’s list. I have, however, actually read claims by some people that if they draw a gun, they will shoot automatically and without hesitation. As bizarre as this philosophy is, it would eliminate the problem of when to rack if drawing a pistol with an empty chamber: Don’t draw until it’s time to shoot and then rack and shoot immediately. It’s nevertheless very difficult to imagine any sensible person’s deliberately handicapping himself to such a degree. (It’s also difficult to even take such a claim seriously, but I’ve read stranger claims, so ….)
I have read many reasons to justify using the Israeli method. I have yet to encounter one that made the slightest sense. It’s interesting to read of highly-accomplished practitioners of the technique. Every time I do, however, I can only wonder how well they would do if not for that self-imposed disability.
There’s an old observation about the dancing bears that were once a common feature of traveling carnivals: “What’s remarkable is not how well the bear dances, but that it dances at all.” If I’m ever in a gunfight for my life, I hope to fight as well as I possibly can, and not as well as possible despite a severe handicap. If someone describes it later, I’d want him to say, “He fought well and won,” not, “It’s amazing he was able to fight at all.”
I served in the IDF during the 1980’s. At that time the rational for the condition 3 presentation seemed to be the low level firearms safety among the Israeli’s. Israel does not have a gun culture like the USA. The technique originated with a retire Marine who has having trouble training Israeli security forces in the use of handguns.
One-handed racking?
There are a variety of techniques taught to rack the slide of your gun when you only have one hand available.
So, how often does it cause the Israelis to loose gunfights? If it decreases NDs, and isn’t getting people killed, maybe that’s why it sticks around?
MSO — how many of the Israelis who today carry a pistol as their primary weapon are carrying chamber empty? From what I can determine, the answer is very few. That’s the problem with the technique. Many people think it’s superior because they have no concept of who is using it, when, or why.
I agree w/ LSK – I thought this technique was employed to mitigate danger from large numbers of moderately to poorly trained individuals carrying firearms on a daily basis.
As a technique I think it is inferior to Cond 1. As a safety procedure for an armed society, I really don’t know.
Upshot is, I don’t think this originated w/ people trying to figure out what the most effective way to quickly employ a handgun was.
168,000 active duty persons comprise the IDF’s land, air, and sea groups, which also have reserve members. Conscription of both sexes occurs at age 18. Their condition 3 handgun policy appears to mirror the U.S.’s policy on carrying the 1911 .45. Did not this policy change with the adoption of a SA\DA auto pistol with a decocker/safety feature? I seriously doubt that the Israelis would consider any other policy with the B Hi-Power.
The student who returned fire at the library and killed the AK shooter. Was he carrying chamber empty? Is everyone required to carry that way (my impression) or just the IDF?
Not the best way to carry, but not as bad as some are making it out to be either.
MSO — Just because it wasn’t a problem in one circumstance doesn’t mean it’s a smart way to carry. Wasn’t there a school shooting years back here in the U.S. where the hero of the day retrieved a weapon from his truck in the parking lot? I don’t think that one instance should teach us that keeping your weapon in your truck is not so bad …
Look at the DEA shooting report for 2007. How would chamber empty carry have made a difference? How about NYPD?
A quick draw/shot is rarely the _real_ difference between life and death. Rarely is a quick reload. Or a bigger bullet. Or more bullets…
When the are, they are really important, but they rarely are.
Not saying it’s smart, or dumb, or worse or better. It’s a way to carry, and there are good and bad reasons to go there. Or not.
I don’t go there, but if I had to, I wouldn’t lose any sleep over it. Just some free time practicin’.
I have lived, shot, and served in Israel for many years, and I am very familiar with the “Israeli Carry”. It is certainly not the fastest way to get into action, but it is the safest for barely-trained civilian carry in the usual crowded Israeli civilian environments (schools, busses, streets, malls, etc). A dropped gun will not fire, and a lost or misplaced gun found in cond 3 is safer than in cond 1. It had its roots in the early days of Israel with the many polyglot arms available–all with their own particular safety systems and Manual of Arms. Visualize an odd hodge-podge of worn-out BHPs, 1911s, Lugers, P-38s, PPKs, Steyrs, Webley autos, Rubys, etc, and you get the idea. The only fast and safe way of training and carry for those non-gun folks was cond 3 and rack on the draw. This out-moded cond 3 carry has carried over till this day–even tho there are much better and faster methods now available–I certainly do not use it and rely on cond 1 in all of my EDC guns–dmd
I now carry a DAO with one in the chamber, but I used to keep a 1911 as an Israeli carry. I kept the 1911 in a dresser drawer cocked and locked until one day I found that it had become unlocked, maybe by sliding around in the drawer. With a todler in the house, that was not acceptable. I reasoned that a todler wouldn’t have the knowledge or finger strenth to throw the slide until he reached a teachable age. So a little slow to get into action trumps a dead child.
I have three boys. I began carrying w/o a round chambered for the same reason. I still am responsible for not leaving the gun where they can
pick it up. But we have begun shooting it and they enjoy it as much or maybe more than I. My 11 yr old can chamber a round in my Glock and he is very safety conscious. My 6 yr old is still too immature. Now that I have a Ruger LCP .380 which is too much “like a toy”. Even with it unchambered, I’m taking extra precautions and adding a safe. I feel keeping the chamber empty is one more safety precaution with a small price of needing an additional half second to make live. If it weren’t for my children, I’d carry it ready to fire.
A Quick and Dirty Summary
Chamber or unchambered is a choice. The professional will often (but not always) prefer the former. The inexperienced CCW user will often (but not always) prefer the latter.
Choosing requires consideration of risk/reward. In any gunowner’s life the likelihood of being hurt or killed, or of killing a loved one by accidental or negligent discharge is far, far, FAR higher than than by being unable to draw or fire in a hand-to-hand situation. Keep in mind the professional is FAR more likely to engage in close combat: he/she seeks out BG’s, stops them, touches them. LE seeks out trouble, and often finds what he’s looking for.
Not true for the common CCF carrier, who just wants “pretty good protection”. He/she is NOT going to approach trouble, in fact will work very hard to have awareness and get away, call 911. In almost all cases, he/she will have time to retreat, draw and brandish if they must. And will find the Israeli method effective 99% of the time.
OTOH, AD/ND – which does happen to professionals too – is a VERY big deal for the new, casual CCW carrier. The chance of accidentally being shot or shooting an innocent with your gun is so much higher that it’s not just not in the same ballpark, it’s not even in the same universe. The risk is relatively huge in comparison and that is of great and legitimate concern to the common carrier.
The Israeli method – with its unchambered gun – is a VERY safe alternative to locked and loaded insofar as AD’s/ND’s. Here’s what I’d say to the common carrier:
“In all truth, you will probably never even have to draw your gun on a human being. Most of the time you’ll be able to avoid trouble and walk or run away. But if even in that very rare case you do feel forced to draw your gun, it is highly unlikely you will have to fire it. And even if you do have to shoot your gun in true self defense, it is highly likely that you will have the time to do. ”
“Now I must be honest, there is a very, very small chance you may be surprised and end up in actual or immediate hand-to-hand combat where you can’t draw or fire your gun. You are not really prepared for this. If you draw your gun there’s a big chance it will be taken away from you, and the first thing the BG is gonna do is to pull the trigger. This might be the one time you don’t want to expose your gun. Better to escape somehow, then draw it”.
“The bottom line is this my friend. By using the Israeli method you will be protected in all but the rarest circumstance, a circumstance you are little prepared to handle anyway, and in a situation where any weapon you use may well be used against you. At the same time you will greatly reduce the very real, incredibly more likely tragedy of an accidental discharge that will hurt or kill you, or a loved one.”
“And another thing: if you ever do have to draw and fire, you will suffer a level of stress and panic that you can’t imagine. You may feel faint, pee your pants, your hands will shake and you will lose fine motor skills – the kind that activating a safety requires. You will be confused. Is it on, is it off? Which gun am I carrying, the one where it’s up, or the one where it’s down? Is the safety already off? Did I forget to actually load the chamber? This is a time where you don’t want to be concerned with safeties or whether the chamber really is loaded.”
“The Israeli draw is a good alternative that you should consider.”
“It uses gross motor skills that are not likely to fail under stress. You will not have to fumble with safeties. You will simply draw, load and fire, just as fast. Best of all, this is a simple skill that has been taught to millions of ordinary citizens – men and women – and that is known to be fast, safe and reliable under stress.”
“A professional is different. What you may never face, he faces everyday. And he is trained to take the risks. He may well have to draw and fire in a close combat situation. He knows how to retain his gun. He has a backup gun. He has Mace. He has a fighting knife. He has a comealong. And often even a bulletproof vest.”
“He is paid and trained to take risks that you do your best to avoid. He goes forward when you go back. As it should be. He may choose to carry locked and loaded – take the risks of an AD/ND – because is he paid and prepared to do so. You are not and probably will never, ever be.”
“My friend, this is not a pretty picture. With your inexperience you may choose to carry “locked and loaded” cause that’s all you’ve heard from the forum gunslingers. You may choose to risk fumbling under stress, plus the GREATLY increased chance of an accidental discharge. If you do draw your gun in close combat and even manage to make it off safe, you face the very real risk of being disarmed and being shot with your own gun.”
“Or you can choose the Israeli method, which greatly improves your chances of survival overall, accidental or intentional. Do know that you’re not alone – although the method was designed for easy and reliable use by ordinary citizens, more and more professionals carry this way too.”
“If you hear that “locked and loaded” is the ONLY way, you have been badly misinformed. Don’t be intimidated into a practice that for the inexperienced CCW carrier is intimidating in itself. Some of you – rightfully – are bothered by the increased accidental risks of “locked and loaded” to the extent that you don’t carry, and choose to leave your gun at the bedside for HD.”
“Don’t let this intimidation stop you from carrying!”
“The Israeli method will allow you to carry in relative safety from accidents, but still retain the ability to engage your gun very quickly, reliably and effectively in all the conditions in which you choose to use it. It is forgiving and safe even when you may be scared. A great relief! If you choose this method you will be in good company.”
A couple final thoughts:
1. The Israeli draw is just as fast as a regular draw. The well known Summit school (Texas/New Mex/SFO) routinely teaches new shooter to draw and fire three to the head in 1.5 seconds or less. Experienced practioners often find it faster, as the Iraeli draw tends to be more powerful and forceful.
2. This draw has been used for decades by literally millions of people, and is still being taught to polics and SWAT here in the US. It is an entirely rational choice, particularly for the common CCW carrier.
3. You give up very little – nothing if you realize hand to hand is for professionals – and eliminate the MUCH higher probability of shooting yourself or a loved one.
Either method has it’s advantages and disadvantages. Both are valid options, despite the backyard commandos hysteria.
Evela
Very very well said.
I agree that the Israeli draw may have a slight technical disadvantage in that extremely rare event that a law abiding average citizen does actually need to draw.
But (provided the operator practices the correct technique regularly) the advantages in terms of safety and practicality out-way the disadvantages.
It’s my choice to carry this way and to apply the Israeli Draw is not just about drawing/ racking and shooting. It’s a different mindset as well.
The Israelis don’t muck around- if something didn’t work they would have ditched it years ago!
If I may, the main disconnect IMO is the two camps (C3 vs C1) go at the question from very different contexts. If you are a dedicated gun guy the only context you might view a technique in is the actual gunfight. In that context, chamber-empty seems a strange choice, since it appears to confer few advantages.
If, on the other hand, you are the typical CCW holder with limited training and experience your context may be all the risk factors that go with having the gun. That context might view things from the thousands of administrative operations performed and the safety issues revolving around that concept.
In other words, we are balancing some possible slight delay in presenting the firearm against all the other risk factors. C1 might give some slight advantage in an actual gunfight, C3 gives an increased layer of safety during all those time you are not in a a gunfight.
As with so many things in the gun world, there are advantages and disadvantages to each type of carry. Different people with different equipment in different situations might find that a different solution better addresses their needs. C3/Israeli technique has met those needs for decades, and still does meet them in many situations. More importantly, the different advantages and disadvantages rarely matter in a DGU. The real trick is figuring out what your situation is and what advantages give you the best results.
I don’t see the disconnect. The Israelis don’t carry for show any more than we do; in fact, it’s fair to say that the active risks they face, and the level of public self defense and readiness is MUCH higher. They are tough and determined.
Because most of their citizens must be and are armed, and must serve in the military, they have gone to great lengths to achieve both effective defensive measures AND public safety. No disconnect.
With not much practice, the Iraeli Method/Draw has been found to be at least as fast, if not faster and with almost no accidental or negligent discharges. They are all trained and possess excellent situational awareness, and can bring a gun to bear on target and ready to fire very, very quickly.
Personally I prefer this method. Believe me in condition three, holstering and drawing can be done with no real risk, and gun handling is safe. The statistics I see show that wounding yourself or other incidents is a huge risk (in comparison to intentional discharges) and is part of the program.
Carry hot and the chances you will suffer an ND goes way up, with no significant improvement in intentional effectiveness for the common carrier.
How can doing more things be faster, than doing fewer things? That seems to be physically impossible. Also how sure are you that most Israeli citizens are armed? Their gun laws appear to be far stricter than nearly every U.S. state.
cj — Not sure what you’re basing some of that on.
If Israeli was “faster” than carrying a loaded gun, you’d see it used in competitions. It’s not. Now, maybe there are Israeli Method advocates who are faster doing it their way than the normal way, but that’s a function of not doing a good practiced normal draw.
And as joshs pointed out, the image of the average Israeli being a trained warrior or gun-toter is simply off base. The mere fact that a carry method is named “Israeli’ doesn’t make it somehow blessed…
Good questions, really wish you knew more about the method and you’d understand. The draw is seen at competitions, usually by those that are already committed to it. Surely you don’t expect those that don’t use it to change their draw just for competition.
One of the common misconceptions is that the Israeli draw requires an “extra step”, namely the “racking”. This is because racking for most people is (a) overhand or saddle and (b) requires drawing the slide to the rear before proceeding to aim point. Truly an extra step.
The ID wastes no motion. The draw/rack is one continuous motion, and quite powerful and aggressive. After the gun clears the holster, it is moved forward where it is joined by the support hand – and keeps moving forward. The support hand merely restrains the slide as the gun continues to be thrust – quite forcefully – forward.
If anything, the draw is more powerful and sudden – by design – than a typical draw and there are no real pauses, no reversal of motion. The C3 condition requires less care, and is free of fear of AD’s,thus practioners tend to be much more assertive.
Try drawing your own gun – unloaded – just as fast as you can. I mean really, really go for it – max out! Then cock and chamber one and do it again. Guess what – for most, your times will be slower.
Accordingly the draw is at least as fast, and with practice faster than the more careful, less forceful traditional draw.
Oops…
Yes, most are armed. All men and women are drafted and serve, and all are issued guns. The Glock is common as it is simple, effective, reliable and has no safeties or other impediments to the system.
This practice seems to be 1) a substitute for care and training 2) a response to less safe firearm designs 3) an acknowledgement that one will screw up some time and having an chamber empty will save you from an AD.
Cond 3 draw and presentation is ok 2 handed but 1 handed is a lousy option especially for a major caliber in a shorter barrel. I challenge anyone to rack a Ruger LCP with one hand. What if you have something in your hand that you dont want to put down?
Also, what is the practice with revolvers?
cj — I do, in fact, understand how “ID” is taught. The idea that it’s faster is simply false. Punching the gun forward with one hand then needing to acquire your two-handed grip at extension, then aiming, then firing is slower than doing a proper press out.
In ten years of serious competitive shooting, I’ve never once seen a shooter start from a chamber-empty condition voluntarily.
I am not a firearms novice, But I carry Condition 3. This is not to say that I have not carried C1, as I have done this on the job.
I have also carried concealed for years in several states. I agree that C1 is faster, especially with a Glock. I don’t find C3 to be enough of a disadvantage not to carry this way.
I use a IWB style holster for a G19. The main disadvantage I find with C3 is that employing the gun requires shots to be fired one handed, where C1, shots are fired two handed.
Here is what I mean. When C1, I draw, the gun meets the support hand and the gun is pushed forward to the target and shots are fired with two hands.
With Israeli Draw, at least the way I do it, my support hand lifts the shirt and remains mid chest high. My firing hand pulls the gun to mid chest just as if I were C1 and meets my support hand. My support hand, already at mid chest from pulling the shirt up grabs the slide over the top as the firing hand pushes the gun forward onto target. The forward push racks the slide and the fast shots are taken one handed as my support hand remains tucked into my chest.
I practice this with double taps. It is pretty damn fast and a single motion. The drawback is firing with only one hand. This type of draw/fire is going to take place on close or advancing BG’s
If you carry C3 do you clear the gun every time before holstering? In a single training session I probably holster my gun about 50-100 times. Clearing the gun first would add a significant amount of time to my practice sessions with no real added value.
I load two in the mag, shoot, reload mag and do it again. The time involved for me is not a factor. I shoot 1 mile from my house in the desert night or day.
I can train, shoot AK’s, and hunt coyotes at night if I want just one mile from home. I like it!
Let’s remember when we are talking “faster” we are frequently comparing apples and oranges. Yes, the C1 folks that we meet are pretty darned fast. They should be. They practice that method a lot. I bet for most U.S. shooters their total practice time for C3 is less than 1% of the time spent learning their C1 draw. I would expect C1 to be significantly faster for them. For a more accurate comparison we should proably look at novice shooters. I have, and find the differences to be negligible, and it is not uncommon to find students that are shooting C3 faster than C1 when given similar levels of instruction.
And as mentioned before, speed of presentation is only one small part of the overall CCW paradigm.
p30man asks, “What if you have something in your hand that you dont want to put down?”
I just can’t think of anything I would have in my hand that I would not put down if it meant the difference between living or not. I suppose the ancillary question to ask you would be “what if you have something that requires both hands to hold that you don’t want to put down?”
Truth is, nobody is perfect.
No human can be 100% sure that he will never have a ND.
You just have to consider the odds according to your needs.
What’s the probability of being kiled because of a ND?
What’s the probability of being killed because of a .2 second delay in your first shot?
It all depends on your profession and your training.
“I just can’t think of anything I would have in my hand that I would not put down if it meant the difference between living or not. I suppose the ancillary question to ask you would be ‘what if you have something that requires both hands to hold that you don’t want to put down?'”
The I in the statement is the key point. Some here are advocating this for others. Maybe you are a single guy with no animals. There are many who posses and will use a gun to protect their family. There are situations where: 1) you may need to control, assist, or retreat with a family member/friend. If you’ve done enough IPDA you’ll get to these scenarios and it will cause you to think. Others here could come up with additional ideas I’m sure.
One also wonders if some enterprising lawyers could also make a case against you for converting a DA/SA to SA and incur “liability” due to this act. The process of loading could also be construed as treatening. You may be in a case where you would like a loaded gun in your grip but it doesnt make sense to “brandish” it to load it–because you may never need it.
I agree that for newbies that have zero training or knowledge that concealed carrying a loaded glock is not the best place to start in making sure you are safe enough. For everyone what I call the mental DSO drill must be done all the times on all guns: Decock, Safety, Obstruction (on the way to and going into the holster). Remember there is almost never a need to reholster a gun quickly so take you time.
In addition the nonloaded initial condition still will be very challenging on “mouse” and other shorter barreled guns.
Also what do you do with a revolver???? Keep it empty on the hammer down cylinder and the next one in line and wind up with a 3 or 4 shooter?
Joshs point,
“If you carry C3 do you clear the gun every time before holstering? In a single training session I probably holster my gun about 50-100 times. Clearing the gun first would add a significant amount of time to my practice sessions with no real added value” still stands. Also, most importantly, one could not follow an RO instructors orders using empty carry and the RO would get pissed and send you home. Todd, what would you do to an Israeli carry student in your class?
P30man — I can’t imagine anyone showing up to one of my classes and working from C3. However, I’ve had competitive shooters who clear their guns after each run of drills. No problem. The way I run students, they’re not slowing things down by clearing and loading on their own time. The only thing I wouldn’t allow is for the student to be bending down looking for his dozens and dozens of ejected rounds while other people were firing on the line.
“The I in the statement is the key point. Some here are advocating this for others.”
Yes. Some, it seems, are advocating that there is only one way to do something, and it has to be their way, in spite of an extensive history of success doing it another way. That is the basic and insurmountable flaw with those who argue against C3 on the basis it doesn’t work or that the problems it creates are very extensive…history shows us otherwise. Rather than looking at what “might” happen, or what somebody made up for an IDPA match, or what a lawyer “could” do or what “could” happen, let’s look at what actually has happened for nearly 100 years. For about 100 years C3 carry has been used. It has been used across the world, in a wide variety of circumstances, by a wide variety of people. It has been successfully used by the military, it has been successfully used by law enforcement, it has been successfully used by civilians, it has been successfully used by those with little training, it has been successfully used by those with extensive training. The system works, it works well, and AFAIK nothing has changed with good guys, bad guys, or guns that would make it not work.
“Also, most importantly, one could not follow an RO instructors orders using empty carry and the RO would get pissed and send you home. Todd, what would you do to an Israeli carry student in your class?”
One can easily follow RO orders with C3 carry. I’ve run IDPA matches where some shooters carried C3, I’ve ran training programs based on C3, and so on. FYI, when a shooter comes to the line and is carrying C3, it works just like a shooter who has come to the line and forgets to load the chamber, or who has a misfire on the first round, etc. You just rack the slide and continue on with the shooting.
Again, it goes back to that disconnect I mentioned earlier between the different contexts of looking at CCW. Stefan sums it up quite well, I think, with his comment: “What’s the probability of being killed because of a ND?
What’s the probability of being killed because of a .2 second delay in your first shot?
It all depends on your profession and your training.”
My last thoughts on the topic, then you guys can have at it all you want. 😎
This past weekend I taught a class in Louisiana. The beginning and end of each day was the FAST drill, used as a test to measure improvement, etc. The number of students — most of them previously trained and practiced shooters — who fumbled draws and reloads, and/or missed shots on a target just 7yd away under the minor stress of a shot timer, was huge.
Adding another step to the process which is required to enable the gun, especially a step which can be performed improperly without adequate practice, seems like a problem waiting to happen. It’s all well and good to say that a couple tenths of a second isn’t worth carrying a round in the chamber, but what about when things don’t go as planned due to stress, movement, etc.?
If we really want to give in to the “a loaded gun is more dangerous to its owner than to a criminal attacker” mentality, why carry — or own — a gun at all?
I think one can recognize the various issues involved in C3 without going to the “a loaded gun is more dangerous to its owner than to a criminal attacker” mentality.
As for your issue, given that the Israeli technique was specifically designed to work with those with little training opportunity perhaps those trained in that discipline would fumble draws and reloads and miss targets LESS than those who are focusing exclusively on trying to wring every last fraction of a second out of their performance. One might ask if previously trained and practiced shooters have trouble using their methods with this emphasis, perhaps those with less training and practice are better served by a different technique? Perhaps that 2/10 second would reduce the fumbling and missing?
And what are you doing teaching a class in LA without letting me know about it!
“And what are you doing teaching a class in LA without letting me know about it!”
Well, dang, David, I found out about it…and was there…and was among the fumblers as well. 😎
So, you knew about it and didn’t tell me either, hmmm? Methinks there is conspiracy afoot!
David
So what about mouseguns and revolvers? How do the israelis handle that?
Mouseguns don’t present any unusual problems that I’m aware of. Rack the slide as part of the presentation. No big deal. That was the norm for most everybody until the 1970s. In fact, a large number of the mouseguns made back then are unsafe to carry in C1. For me, one of the guns I prefer to carry C3 is the Walther PP design and its various off-shoots and clones.
Revolvers utilize a very different manual of arms and do not lend themselves to same C1, C2, C3 consideration as an autoloader.
Again, it is not just “Israelis” contrary to the common belief. As I’ve mentioned elsehere, until fairly recently most people in most places have decided C3 was the best way to carry at some time or another. The Israeli use of the technique has been popularized in the media, but it has been pretty universal, be it military, law enforcement, or personal protection. And apparently it has worked out quite well for decades. I have found nothing to suggest it suddenly is no longer an effective alternative to other carry methods.
I made a video demonstrating my “Israeli draw” style. My consistency/accuracy with it is better than anyone I knows calm, pistol in hand taking their sweet time slowly squeezing trigger. Might just be me I’m ambidextrious.
This is for demonstration only and it only took me about 20 tries to nearly perfect my speed vs accuracy.This is not for CCW this is basically a practice drill but it is quite impressive.
I’m an Amateur new to defensive pistol competitions. I was skeptical about the “Israeli” style pistol draw myself after hearing about it from a friend overseas.
The issue isn’t how quickly you can enable the weapon and get on target. The issue is that you have to enable the weapon at all. In close courters you may only have the use one hand, and are unable to shoot from a defensive position under duress.
I have practiced in an effort to overcome the DA shoot, however since I have been using the press out. I am able to place my first shoot much faster. I would focus on the press out drills, unless your use of the draw is motivated by safety.
Todd stopped me from going down this path a couple of weeks ago.
We have become a society of gunfighters. I’m 68 years old and have never had a break in or have been assaulted on the street in all those years. I may be more aware of my surroundings than most and avoid conflicts. I also avoid people who I do not trust or who do not have an imagination. When we become so aggresive about protecting ourself then I will guareentee there will be accidental discharges and innocent people will die. When I served in Viet Nam I saw many accidental discharges. I never put a round in he chamber in Viet Nam and we were ambushed several times. I know, most of us were under the age of twenty, but still.
When you carry every day the odds increase for an accidental discharge or that you will shoot a inocent person. When you carry locked and cocked your mind is also locked and cocked and thinks worst case all the time. We are all human. So, I’ll give up that second that I might lose for safety reasons. I heard someone write: its not the size of the bullet or the size of your balls or how fast you become. The Israeli draw is a safer way to carry, period. There also may be an alternative than using the gun but it becomes suppressed by our agressive training. The alternatives do not occur to us. I think about a recent incident of a man who shot his girl friend because he thought she was a burgler.They were to be married in three days. I do carry the Israeli way.
carrying no gun at all is even safer if you’re scared of them.
True, but the Israeli method is not based on being scared of the weapon, it is based on understanding the DGU process from a perspective other than the extremely rare quick-draw analysis.
The Israeli method is all well and good. I had a teamate that used it and was effecient with it. My personal opinion is that is a best case scenario way of addressing the threat. It is only efficient if you have both hands in action and/or the time to present. While there is no replacement for training, It dosent matter how much you train if you have to do a strong or weak hand draw and rack the slide on your belt or any other method. You are going to be sucking hind tit in a gunfight with someone who is locked and cocked.