How Many Spare Mags?

[Nnobby45]

Again, what is the likelihood of that mattering?

Same likelyhood as for the people for whom it has already mattered, and for those it will in the future..

You know, David, I really wonder if you're telling us with a straight face, that after a SD shooting, not being able to reload your pistol is an acceptable tactical philosophy just because it's unlikely you'll need to.

With that kind of odds making, one would load their revolver with 3 rds. and figure to have 1.5 rds. more than they need.

[Brian Pfleuger]

since then you have made 15 post trying to prove your right.

Um, and a fair number of others have done the same trying to prove I'm wrong, including yourself. Isn't that what a discussion is? That's why this thread is 6 pages long, yes? I'm not talking to myself. Geesh.

how will you feel if you get sombody killed because they listen to your opinion.

Ok, can you (anyone) provide an example of a civilian killed in a SD situation specifically because they didn't have a reload?

[Whirlwind06]

retracted

[David Armstrong]

Same likelyhood as for the people for whom it has already mattered, and for those it will in the future.

OK, I'm always open to some facts. If you have any indicating the need for a reload making a difference in the outcome of a non-LE or military SD CCW encounter I'm open to looking at them. Again, you have not answered the question of if the issue is one of having a reload or having plenty of ammo. Who is better equipped, the guy with a Glock 17 and one 17-round magazine or the guy with a 1911 and two 7-round magazines? Or is it the guy with the J-frame and 2 speedloaders?

You know, David, I really wonder if you're telling us with a straight face, that after a SD shooting, not being able to reload your pistol is an acceptable tactical philosophy just because it's unlikely you'll need to.

I wasn't and haven't been discussing any type of tactical philosophy, I've been discussing actual necessity and likelihood of events. Very different animals there. Perhaps you could share with us an actual example of a non-LE or military SD shooting where, after the shooting was done, you then needed to have your gun reloaded to engage another BG? I've researched over 10,000 shootings to one degree or another and I have never run across a single incident like that.

With that kind of odds making, one would load their revolver with 3 rds. and figure to have 1.5 rds. more than they need.

If I load anything other than a single-shot I figure it will have more rounds than I will need. But the cost of having those rounds available is minimal so it is not a big deal, just as having a reload isn't a big deal.

I agree with what Buzz said about carrying what you want, but from the looks of this thread, it isn't the no-extra-mag folks who are disparaging the others...

Yep, pretty obvious, isn't it.

[protectedbyglock]

I have not had to fire in defense (thank god). Unless you count that ****** off groundhog that one time....
Oh, and that deer I snuck up on. That wasn't too funny. I didn't know deer would run at you like that! I didn't even have a gun on me...just snuck up on her from behind a building and jumped out and yelled "Boo!" Bet she got a good laugh out of that one.
Oh, back on subject.....
I like to carry 7 reloads. Two in a double mag pouch. One on each calf, one in each back pocket (those ones hurt sometimes), and one taped just under my private parts where no bad guy will ever find it.
Grand total of 105 rounds of .45ACP with one in the hole. Without one chambered, though, that's only 104 rounds. Too light for me. Just don't feel comfortable...

[Creature]

Peetzakiller wrote:

My opinion is not fact but it most certainly is based on .

I am still waiting to hear your historical fact and statistical data. And not just those made up numbers you keep trying to advance as fact. And what about your so called expert...where is this person? At least share what this person has shared with you...I am sure he/she wont mind.

[Brian Pfleuger]

I am still waiting to hear your historical fact and statistical data.

I am awaiting the data supporting your opinion. The data supporting my opinion was, largely, supplied by Mr. Armstrong a couple of pages ago. No one questioned those numbers at the time. So far, the only reason any one has given for carrying a reload is essentially "I think I might need it." Where is the data to support that assertion? The closest any reload proponent has come to data is using the data provided by Mr. Armstrong to basically say "See, there's a chance, so I carry."

Here's some evidence from above (page 6):

Originally Posted by David Armstrong

Perhaps you could share with us an actual example of a non-LE or military SD shooting where, after the shooting was done, you then needed to have your gun reloaded to engage another BG? I've researched over 10,000 shootings to one degree or another and I have never run across a single incident like that.

Here's some more (page 4):

Originally Posted by David Armstrong

Using Kleck, for example, the lifetime probability is about 1 in 200. Then it starts getting into wilder numbers. Actually needing to shoot the gun is about 2% of 1 in 200. That not working and the BG presses on his attack and you need to shoot him goes to about a 6% of the 2% of the 1 in 200. Multiple shots being needed tosses it down to maybe 3% of the 6% of the 2% of the 1 in 200. Needing to reload then is about 2% of the 3% of the 6% of the 2% of the 1 in 200.

and my analysis of those numbers from page 4:

Originally Posted by Peetzakilla

That means a reload is necessary in 36 out of every 10,000,000,000 cases.

I believe I saw an estimate that there are 700,000 instances of firearms used in SD annually (fired or not). If both those numbers are correct, it would be an average of 396 years before ANY of those 700,000 individuals would need a reload in a SD situation. In other words, the odds that YOU will need a reload in your own personal case are 700,000 times less likely than 1:396 years.

I'll ask again. Can ANYONE provide an example of a civilian in a SD situation that was killed because they did not have a reload? The odds supporting my position have been provided. If you question those odds, why? Please provide the correct numbers if you do not believe those are correct.

[Hondo11]

I carry two spare 8rd mags MOST of the time. Why? To be honest, it's not because I think I'll need them. I probably won't need ANY from the gun itself, much less all 9 and then some.

I carry them because, MOST of the time, it's just as easy to carry them as it is to NOT carry them. Whatever I'm wearing that will conceal a pistol will conceal 2 magazines. They aren't heavy, they aren't in the way of anything, they go on the same belt as my pistol, etc. There isn't anything extra I have to do to carry them, so why NOT?

Now, if I had to do anything extra to carry them, then and ONLY then, would I go to the next level and ask if I NEEDED to. Unless that's the case, then I just do. Because, absent anything negative from carrying them, why NOT?

[Glenn E. Meyer]

my private parts where no bad guy will ever find it.

Depends if the BG is glad to see you and what he has in mind. Ever see Deliverance?



I think we are going in circles. Most DGUs are very low fire intensity situations. One can conceive of being in an intensive situation as in a terrorist or rampage. But they are rare. Despite all the uproar about Virginia Tech - there have been only about 14 college shootings.

Non-leo interventions in rampages have usually been low fire situations.

1. Tyler courthouse - civilian screwed up
2. Tacoma mall - civilian screwed up
3. Colorado church - ex-cop but civilian saved the day - BG suicided.
4. UT Austin Tower - then you get lots of civilian rounds but they were long arms.

I know lots of professionals who feel ok with the J frame for most situations in real life. As I said before, a gun and a reload is reasonable and doable without discomfort.

I do admit that sometimes I will Bat Belt up but that's like dressing-up.

[Wagonman]

Hondo that was a very reasoned and logical post.--------------Knock it off

[Creature]

I am awaiting the data supporting your opinion.

Oh for Pete's sake...what part of "opinion" requires supporting data? It's an opinion!

You, on the other hand, have been citing historical facts and statistical data non-stop...without actually providing any. So let's see them. As they say in the facts business: put up or shut up.

[Wildalaska]

I carry them because, MOST of the time, it's just as easy to carry them as it is to NOT carry them.

No its not. You have made a consious decision to carry spare mags, despite the extra work and unecessariness (hey is that a word). You can't justify it by saying it's "just as easy". You have extra stuff on your belt or in your pocket or whatever. Extra stuff ya got to put on and take off. Extra stuff ya got to worry about dropping, showing, cleaning, snagging on seatbelt or whatever.

Easy: Put on pants. Seecamp in pocket holster back pocket, wallet and money in pocket. Go
Not so easy: Begin to put on belt. Run through holster loops, adjust. run through mag pouch loops, adjust. Put gun in, adjust. Put mags in, adjust. Put on cover garment, adjust. Go. Modify for carry method of your choice.

Me...lifes too short to be adjusting guns, draggin my pants down etc. I'm a grab my pants and go guy. I'll save the firepower for times my hinkymeter picks up penumbras and emanations in the fabric of space/time

WildialreadyhavemycoffeewhileyouarestillgettingdressedAlaska TM

[Creature]

What about those of us that dont own a seecamp which slips oh so easily into the back pocket?

Of course its an effort...but it is an extra 4 or 5 seconds worth of extra effort. I still have to holster my weapon and then slip it onto the waistband of the pants that I happen to be wearing that day. So I disagree with the premise that it is far too much effort to carry an extra mag...simply because the effort required to slip my magazine holster with it belt clip onto my waistband is virtually nil.

[Wildalaska]

What about those of us that dont own a seecamp which slips oh so easily into the back pocket?

Get a kelTec. An NAA mini. Call me I'll get ya one.

Of course its an effort

There ya go....so the logic is the same as wearing a lightning rod on your head.

WildyourtimeyoureffortyourchoiceAlaska TM

[Hondo11]

From WildAlaska:

No its not. You have made a consious decision to carry spare mags, despite the extra work and unecessariness (hey is that a word). You can't justify it by saying it's "just as easy". You have extra stuff on your belt or in your pocket or whatever. Extra stuff ya got to put on and take off. Extra stuff ya got to worry about dropping, showing, cleaning, snagging on seatbelt or whatever.
Easy: Put on pants. Seecamp in pocket holster back pocket, wallet and money in pocket. Go
Not so easy: Begin to put on belt. Run through holster loops, adjust. run through mag pouch loops, adjust. Put gun in, adjust. Put mags in, adjust. Put on cover garment, adjust. Go. Modify for carry method of your choice.

Me...lifes too short to be adjusting guns, draggin my pants down etc. I'm a grab my pants and go guy. I'll save the firepower for times my hinkymeter picks up penumbras and emanations in the fabric of space/time

WildialreadyhavemycoffeewhileyouarestillgettingdressedAlaska TM

Nothing in my post said anything about YOU. It didn't say what YOU should do, but rather what I personally do and the reason why. I decide what is "extra work and unnecessariness" for ME. You decide that for YOU.

When I am in track pants or something, the 642 goes in my pocket. Rigging up a 1911 and spare mags in that case WOULD be extra effort. When I am putting on my jeans, belt, and belt holster, throwing on a mag carrier is not extra effort. Maybe 2 seconds worth...round that down to ZERO.

I'm not arguing FOR carrying extra mags. I'm making an argument why you can't argue against carrying it. I could also make an argument why you can't argue FOR carrying. Because it's personal choice. You do what you want. I'll do what I want.

These threads get stupid real quick...right about the time it goes from "This is what I do and why...why do you do what you do and why?" to "This is what I do and you should do it to because it's the only way and you're an idiot if you don't."

Hondoiprobablygetdressedfasterthanyouanywaywhichmeansicanwearextramagsandstillhavemycoffeebeforeyou11 TM

[Deet]

I hate the fact that so far everyone seems to be ganging up on creature. He has a valid point, the rest of you are attacking him needlessly. I will offer some facts to help support creatures argument. (he doesn't need my help, nor did he ask for it) It is seven times more likely that you will get hit by lightning in your lifetime than winning the state lottery, yet I still see people winning the lottery all the time. See figures don't lie, but liars can figure. Data won't save me when I reach for my spare magazine and I realize I took all your sound advice and left it at home. If you don't want to carry a spare magazine fine, just don't call the rest of use paranoid because we like to be prepared. Please don't cut and paste parts of my post, these are purely my opinion, and a little support for a fellow member who makes sense to me.
+1 for creature.

[Creature]

Call me I'll get ya one.

If its not for free, its not worth the effort.

There ya go....so the logic is the same as wearing a lightning rod on your head.

I expend more effort rolling out of bed in the morning than putting on the mag holder. Should I not get up in the morning either?

[dabigguns357]

Say we all live in florida and all of a sudden the national weather service came on the tv and said that a hurricane was nearing the florida coast and there was a 20% chance that it will hit your town/city.Would you start sealing things up and making plans or would you just sit back with a beer and sandwhich.Me,i'de start planning and be prepared,others wouldn't.

It's a personal choice that we all have to make.I don't know who said it but i like it,"it's better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it".

As i have said before i keep extra with me when i'm on the go.When i carry in the summer i carry a snubbie .357 and an extra speed loader in my pocket.

[Nnobby45]

I wasn't and haven't been discussing any type of tactical philosophy, I've been discussing actual necessity and likelihood of events. Very different animals there.

Anyone so silver tongued as to even attempt to seperate real events from the tactics created to deal with them, in order to win an argu...er, debate, is a man to be admired. That in itself is a bold tactical philosophy.

David, you need neither a gun nor a reload. You could talk 'em out of it. You'll never lose a debate or a gunfight.

Quote:
I agree with what Buzz said about carrying what you want, but from the looks of this thread, it isn't the no-extra-mag folks who are disparaging the others...

How could it be. Why would you disparage those who make sure they have the capacity to better deal with come what may. Whether it's to merely recharge their pistol or keep fighting.

Reginald Denny didn't go to work one day figuring to be dragged out of his truck and brain damaged to the point of (much later when he could speak again) say he had nothing against the folks that did it to him. I guess what counts is that the odds were in his favor that day.

Don't confuse disparaging someone personally with criticizing their tactical philosophy. All philosophies are a target to criticism because all are in opposition to someone elses.

[Wildalaska]

I expend more effort rolling out of bed in the morning than putting on the mag holder.

You could say the same about a head mounted lightning rod

WildandbotharestillawasteoftimeAlaska TM

[Wildalaska]

would you just sit back with a beer and sandwhich

Depends...if it was PB&J with a Bud I'd start duct tapin!

But perhaps if I was offered a rare roastbeef, russian dressing, jalapeno pepper jack cheese on dark rye with a schmeer of chopped liver pate and a kosher dill, together with a belgian lager I'd be cloud watching

WildjustlikeitakeasparemagwhenthereareaspateofgangshootingsonceayearAlaska TM

[Brian Pfleuger]

Originally Posted by Creature

You, on the other hand, have been citing historical facts and statistical data non-stop...without actually providing any. So let's see them. As they say in the facts business: put up or shut up.

Actually, I outlined the data in my last post. I guess you're saying you don't believe that data, so I'll do two things:

First, where is the data that provides the reasoning for your not believing what has already been provided? If you say you have none, that's fine, but it establishes the point that I have been trying to make. Namely, my opinion is based on data, yours is not. You can choose to not BELIEVE that data or say that you frankly don't care what the data says but it doesn't make it NOT data or wrong data because someone chooses not to believe it.

Second, I'll provide you with some more data from a neighboring thread (Armed Citizen Analysis):

There were 482 incidents available for inclusion in the analysis....Overall, shots were fired by the defender in 72% of incidents. The average and median number of shots fired was 2....Reloading was required in only 3 incidents. One of those involved killing an escaped lion... When more than 2 shots were fired, it generally appeared that the defender's initial response was to fire until empty.


Let me point out the significance of this data:
482 incidents, an average of 2 shots were fired and when it was more than 2, the defender appeared to be simply emptying their gun and STILL only 2 (discounting the lion incident) needed reloads. That tells us that the VAST majority of incidents MUST have, by the rules of statistics, included no more than 2 shots fired. Also meaning that by those same rules, a large number of incidents must have been 1 shot fired or the average would be considerably higher than 2. It also seems likely to me that the two incidents needing reloads would correspond to the "firing until empty.", meaning that, in actuality, NO reloads were needed had the defender not decided to fire until empty. I admit that is conjecture but it seems logically consistent with the data.

How much more data must be provided?

Bottom line: Carry your extra mag, really, I don't care but carrying that extra mag is a decision based on want, not need. All the data shows that fact over and over.

[David Armstrong]

Anyone so silver tongued as to even attempt to seperate real events from the tactics created to deal with them, in order to win an argu...er, debate, is a man to be admired. That in itself is a bold tactical philosophy.

Again, philosophy is cool. However, philosophy is not always reality. It is just a simple concept---what are we talking about, reloads or ammo? You keep dodging that question--Who is better equipped, the guy with a Glock 17 and one 17-round magazine or the guy with a 1911 and two 7-round magazines? Or is it the guy with the J-frame and 2 speedloaders? No reload, one reload, or two reloads? And can somebody provide any instance where the reality reflected the philosophy? To me it is much like the dreaded "tactical reload." Sounds great as a tactical philosophy, but in reality it turns out not to matter.

David, you need neither a gun nor a reload. You could talk 'em out of it. You'll never lose a debate or a gunfight.

Never say never, but so far you are half right. I've lost debates. I've never lost a gunfight.

Reginald Denny didn't go to work one day figuring to be dragged out of his truck and brain damaged to the point of (much later when he could speak again) say he had nothing against the folks that did it to him. I guess what counts is that the odds were in his favor that day.

No, the odds were not in his favor that day. He did not have all the information he needed to make an informed decision. If he had the information he might have decided to drive another route. That is the point, IMO. Use the best information to determine what you are going to do. If one wants to do a cost versus benefit, it helps to know what the cost actually is and what the benefit actually is.

[mavracer]

I admit that is conjecture but it seems logically consistent with the data.

not really it seams quite bias to me.
if three incidents required reloads. it's logical that shots were fired after the reload.If they shot to slide lock and threat was gone it wouldn't require a reload.

I don't care but carrying that extra mag is a decision based on want, not need.

first it would seam you do care otherwise you would quit telling me what I need to do.
second 3 out of 482 that required a reload might disagree.

[David Armstrong]

if three incidents required reloads. it's logical that shots were fired after the reload

But that ignores WHY the reloads were needed. I've got cases where people reloaded, but they were not in a normal SD mode any more. They shot at somebody and then chased them down the street, for example. Again, nobody is saying don't do it, some are saying don't try to tell us how important it is to do it.