One in the chamber…

During the Zimmerman trial a witness postulates that it is not normal practice for a citien to keep a round chambered? Huh what?

“Osterman agreed with De La Rionda when he said it’s normal for a police officer to keep a bullet in the chamber of their gun, but it is not normal practice for a citizen to keep a bullet in the chamber.”
I think almost every civilian carrier I know keeps one chambered when carrying. While few may keep one chambered when the firearm is at rest. Most all concealed carriers keep their firearms at ready or at ready + safety on.

Why? Because racking a slide to chamber a round, is for the most part, a two handed operation. And you never know if you’re going to be able to get two hands on your firearm.  Had Mr. Zimmerman been carrying his firearm without a round chambered, it is doubtful he would have been able to free both hands, rack the slide, and defend himself.

Published in: on July 9, 2013 at 10:29 am  Comments (5)  
Tags: ,

The URI to TrackBack this entry is:

RSS feed for comments on this post.

5 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. I think that’s a misrepresentation of what was actually said. From what I can tell, it comes from a “live blog” account of what was going on. I’ve actually been watching and listening to the testimony and that’s not what I heard.

    Osterman had testified that [not only is it standard practice but (this was not stated but was implied)] it is standard police policy that all LEOs carry their firearm with a round in the chamber. De La Rionda tried to imply that there were different standards for LEOs and non-LEOs by clarifying that there is no legal responsibility or policy demanding that non-LEOs carry a round in the chamber, that Osterman was testifying about police policy.

    That’s what Osterman agreed with, to my recollection. Not that non-LEOs SHOULDN’T carry a round in the chamber, just that they’re not REQUIRED to.

    IIRC, O’mara had Osterman clarify on redirect and Osterman verified that his recommendation to non-LEOs would be to carry with a round in the chamber, that it is standard practice and is perfectly safe and normal to do so.

    If I have time today, I’ll go back to that day’s testimony and verify my recollection.

    There are several outlets archiving the video of testimony so if you have time, you can verify these things yourself…although it’s a pretty tedious thing to find one nugget of information within the hours and hours of testimony, I’ll admit.

  2. My recollection was correct. Three separate videos of the testimony which means you have to tolerate three different ads at the beginning, but:

    Osterman Testimony: start at the 6:35 mark and play until about the 8 minute mark (1.5 minutes)

    Cross Examination: start at the 4:57 mark and play until 5:24 (30 seconds).

    Redirect: start at the 15 second mark and play until the 1:12 mark (1 minute).

    Whoever wrote the summary that you saw, heard what they wanted to hear, not what was actually said.

  3. First Link didn’t work for some reason. Let’s try it again.

    Osterman Testimony: start at 6:35 mark and play until about the 8 minute mark (1.5 minutes)

  4. The comment with the other links is in moderation (probably because it had three links).

  5. Glad to hear…as I was really hoping a law enforcement officer wasn’t implying that civilians shouldn’t chamber a round in their carry gun.

    And man, was the prosecutions closing argument filled with false implications and just illogical statements. Here’s to hoping jurors aren’t THAT STUPID!!!!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: