Loaded firearms in vehicles.

[Statkowski]

I like to compare an carrying an in-chambered weapon to driving around without a seatbelt and thinking
"Well if I am going to crash I will have time before impact to properly put my seatbelt on"

The crash will be over with before you can even say, "Oh, shit!"

Not unlike driving down the road, minding your own business, obeying the speed limit, going with the flow of traffic, and suddenly some bozo passes you in the breakdown lane doing well over the limit, with a state trooper hot on his tail, also in the breakdown lane, and then another state trooper blasts past you in the left lane. Trust me (been there, experienced that), it all happens so quickly you don't even have time to mutter anything, except after the fact.

Shit happens, and all you can do is hope you're prepared beforehand.

[Berncly]

The crash will be over with before you can even say, "Oh, shit!"

Not unlike driving down the road, minding your own business, obeying the speed limit, going with the flow of traffic, and suddenly some bozo passes you in the breakdown lane doing well over the limit, with a state trooper hot on his tail, also in the breakdown lane, and then another state trooper blasts past you in the left lane. Trust me (been there, experienced that), it all happens so quickly you don't even have time to mutter anything, except after the fact.

Shit happens, and all you can do is hope you're prepared beforehand.

Sometimes there is just enough time to soil your shorts.

[Carnes]

You need to look into tolerance for opposing views, it would look better on you.

Also, a gun with a loaded magazine is not an "empty gun", in fact it counts as "loaded" for purposes of 18 PaCS 6102.

In practice, carrying a gun in a car without an LTCF (or a long gun with an LTCF) requires you (among other things) to have it actually "empty", no rounds in the gun, no rounds in a magazine in the same compartment.

Practically speaking, a pistol with a loaded magazine and an empty chamber is more useful than a combat knife in a sheath. The people who say "an unchambered pistol is as useless as a brick" are welcome to engage in a duel with themselves holding a brick and their opponent carrying a 1911 with empty chamber and loaded mag. Guess who wins that one.

There's room for divergent views among adults. If you carry 24/7 for 50 years, at Walmart and the doctor's office and pumping gas and mowing your lawn and watching TV and using the toilet and getting into your car, the odds that you will someday have an ND are about the same as you needing to defend your life, and greater than the odds that you will need to do so without the time or ability to chamber a round.

I don't dismiss the possibility that you may be attacked by an assailant who grabs your left arm and you'll have to draw and shoot one-handed with your right. Of course, if he grabs your right arm you're still fucked even with a chambered round. And if 2 attackers grab both your arms, you'd better have brought an armed buddy. Maybe the safest plan is to always carry it in your hand, safety off, hammer back, just to shave that extra 0.1 second off your response time.

I also don't dismiss the fact that EVERY reported ND involves a chambered gun, 100% of them. You have zero risk of an ND if you have no round chambered (unless you carry a MAC-10, and maybe you should.) You can't dismiss the reality of the relative risks without looking like a fool, so let's drop the pretense of holding the moral and intellectual high ground, if you're willing to create a higher risk of accidentally shooting your kid in the face, just to maximize your chances in that hypothetical gunfight under the worst case scenario.

Life is complex, it's about more than being ready for a surprise gunfight on a moment's notice.

If you were kidding about this, if you are sophisticated enough to grasp the concept of balancing multiple risks over long time periods, then I apologize.

I miss when I had more time to throw-down here.

Unfortunately, I don't have time to engage in the typical pattern of us insulting each other up to the brink of what's allowed, and using all manner of rhetoric and logic to win points.

I really would like to help you make an argument that dosen't support, "commonsense gun restrictions." I think highly enough of you that I like to think you see hard debate as a means to sharpen your sword. I'll try to find some forging time soon.

[Didnotcomply89]

I appreciate your thoughts Phil and the input you have provided here- but I intend to continue carrying with a potato in the pipe and my booger hook off of the bang switch.

[Berncly]

I don't speak for Phil obviously, but I don't think he is advocating for un-chambered carry.
I think it was an academic exercise.

[Emptymag]

I appreciate your thoughts Phil and the input you have provided here- but I intend to continue carrying with a potato in the pipe and my booger hook off of the bang switch.

If you don't carry at all, then there's greater than 100% chance of never accidentally harming anyone.

[Emptymag]

I don't speak for Phil obviously, but I don't think he is advocating for un-chambered carry.
I think it was an academic exercise.

You must new here. LOL

[marinville]

I don't speak for Phil obviously, but I don't think he is advocating for un-chambered carry.
I think it was an academic exercise.

I don't speak for him either, but he has taken this position many times before.

[GunLawyer001]

I don't speak for Phil obviously, but I don't think he is advocating for un-chambered carry.
I think it was an academic exercise.

I'm pushing back against the very snowflakish mob that demands that everyone think and speak exactly like they do. You're free to carry chambered or unchambered, and there are intelligent and fact-based reasons for both options, so maybe the adults in the room can stop sneering at either choice.

If you don't carry at all, then there's greater than 100% chance of never accidentally harming anyone.

If I recommended that you wear a seat belt while driving, would you say "if you don't drive at all you'd be even safer"? Or would you do a sane cost/benefit analysis to compare the options of seat belts vs no seat belts?

Nobody would have an ND while carrying if they carried loaded but unchambered. Nobody would lose a winnable gunfight by 0.1 second if they always carried chambered. Show me how often either thing happens in the real world.

[free]

Isn't it Indiana that has an impossible-to-comply-with law forcing people to keep a handgun off of their persons while in the car, but must be concealed when on foot. Read where trying to transition to on person with one foot on the ground while remaining unseen by others gets pretty challenging.

Put the gun in a bag. Leave house, get into car. Now gun is in a bag, in a car. It is not on your person.

Now get out of the car. Grab the bag. Gun is concealed the whole time.

Not that challenging.