Regarding carry capacity.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

In teaching stat - we teach a couple of decision/risk cutoffs.

The dreaded .05 or .01 level - standard stuff.

It seems we have two common levels here:

1. The J frame and that's it.

2. The semi and a mag or two.

The J with a speedloader is kind of .025, it would seem

So pick it and call it a night.

[Chindo18Z]

My .02 from a recent thread about the same topic:

Personally, I like to carry at least one reload (whether revolver, pistol, rifle, or shotgun). On the rare occasions I haven't, I've had a nagging feeling of unease akin to driving without my seatbelt fastened. It's a personal thing and not a hard and fast rule.

However, I'll throw this out with regards to semi-auto pistols...

I have been in a ground fight where the magazine in my CCW holstered pistol was ejected onto the pavement and out of reachable recovery. At that point, I was down to one round (in the chamber), which I briefly considered using.

For that reason alone, I always carry at least one extra magazine (and refuse to carry any semi-auto with a functioning magazine disconnector).

Might that single round have sufficed? Maybe...maybe not. Is a grappling match statistically more likely than a gunfight? I think so.

I prefer a reload. YMMV.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Good point - Chindo - but someone will say - when has that ever happened to a civilian?

I had a polymer holster for my Glock and it had a touch of flex in it. I'm left handed and the gun moved enough when I sat down in the car sometimes that the edge of the holster pressed the mag release and ejected the mag down under the seat.

The holster is now in the box o' holsters in the closet. Wasn't a fight but I could see moving out or in to the car and the mag flopping away or even unseating for nonfunctioning and dropping out.

[Brian Pfleuger]

For that reason alone, I always carry at least one extra magazine (and refuse to carry any semi-auto with a functioning magazine disconnector).

Good point - Chindo - but someone will say - when has that ever happened to a civilian?

Won't be me. That's a completely different scenario. Different, at least to me, than "having enough bullets" After all, in such a situation it wouldn't matter if your magazine held 6 or 600 rounds, what you need is a new magazine not more bullets.

If there are ANY legitimate reasons to be concerned about carrying an extra magazine, the reasons of clearing a jam or losing the primary are far and away the best reasons.

The question is whether or not the odds of needing it are enough to make me care enough to do it. For me, it's not. It's STILL about the odds.

[Hkmp5sd]

It's STILL about the odds.

Then why do you bother carrying a gun at all? The odds are drastically stacked against you ever needing to have a CCW to protect yourself. You are more likely to be hit by lightning.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I've been hit by lightning and so I will carry extra ammo. That's as sensible a reason as those postulated in rationalizing why they don't.

[Brian Pfleuger]

It truly blows my mind how much trouble people have understanding this.

It's not JUST the odds.

It's not JUST the stakes.

It's not JUST the convienance, or lack thereof.

It's ALL of those things.

I carry a gun because:

1) I have one.

2) I can.

3) I want to.

I fully expect to never need it. Fully. I don't get scared if I leave the house without it. I don't wonder if today will be the day.

I don't carry reloads or a bug or a flashlight or a tazer. Why?

1)Dont want to.

2)Don't have a bug or a Tazer ( I know, how do I sleep at night?)

3)Don't want to buy them.

4) I see no need.

I don't live in some inner city slum. I don't live even remotely close to anything resembling a "bad neighborhood". I don't even live in a place where a simple burglary is common. I know, lots of people on TFL just live "near" some bad areas, or travel through them. Maybe some people live in areas where these things "sometimes happen". I don't, and it seems like some people don't realize that there even ARE places where crime is exceedingly rare. Murders, muggings, robbery, rape... These things are measured by the decade here and if they weren't I'd leave.

So, you see, not everybody thinks in terms of SHTF scenarios. Could it? Might I die from my appalling lack of preparedness? Yep. I'll take the chance because... really, there are some things that are just beyond the probabilities I care about. Even carrying a gun. Yep, really. I don't carry because I think I'll need it. I carry because I can.

Maybe, someday, I'll be one a the VERY few people who have lived through a situation that will have me saying "Damn, I need a BUG from now on." then again maybe I won't live through it. I'll take my chances.

[Doc Intrepid]

We all take chances every day, just by rolling out of bed each morning.

I carry two J-frames on a Harley, one in the outside left pocket of my riding jacket in a DeSantis pocket holster, the other in the left inside pocket. Same sort of approach - it works both ways:

1. I own two J-frames.

2. I can.

3. I want to.

I don't dick around with reloads for J-frames because when I'm wearing riding gloves they're like 5-shot derringers - reloading them with gloves on under fire would be a freak show. I carry two because

1. It's a lot faster to just pull a second J-frame than try to reload the first.

2. Ten rounds of .38 Spl is preferable to five rounds of .38 Spl.

3. I might drop one.

4. I want to.

On the bike I'm rarely in one neighborhood twice, so previous environmental parameters don't mean squat.

I don't ponder probabilities because from my POV they're irrelevant. I've lived long enough to recognize that sometimes crap just happens.

I carry because no one else is more responsible for my own safety than I am. Additionally, incidents in my life have made it clear to me that there are some serious morons in the world, and they move in random patterns, and you don't know when your path may intersect one of them.

And you get further with a kind word and a .38 than with a kind word alone!



So most of us have our own reasons for why we do what we do; they are not the same; and they may not make sense for other guys - but they make sense to us. And that's really all that matters.

[JohnKSa]

It truly blows my mind how much trouble people have understanding this.

As it's a free country, "Don't wanna." is sufficient reason for choosing not to.

Of course in a discussion like this one, personal preference is pretty much pointless. It's silly for ME to make my decisions based on what you do or don't prefer. If I'm going to make a decision based on preference it will be based on my preference--or more likely on the preference of SWMBO.

Which means that the issue under discussion is really not whether or not person X should do Y, but rather it is WHY it might be a good or bad idea for person X to do Y.

Most people, if they're truly honest about it, would have to admit that they do the things they do mostly or entirely because they simply want to--because of personal preferences. The problem is that they also then typically rationalize the heck out of their "do/don't wanna" choices to make them seem like scientifically based, logically conceived and statistically sound choices instead of just preferences.

[The Terminator]

Peetzakilla said it the best that I have seen it put.

[Hkmp5sd]

Peetzakilla said It's STILL about the odds.

Peetzakilla said It's not JUST the odds.

The Terminator said Peetzakilla said it the best that I have seen it put.

No, Peetzakilla finally got POed and admitted that is was his personal preference that determines what he carrys, not the odds he may need it. The same thing being said by many others since the beginning, as currently said best by JohnSa:

JohnSa said It's silly for ME to make my decisions based on what you do or don't prefer. If I'm going to make a decision based on preference it will be based on my preference--

[Brian Pfleuger]

No, Peetzakilla finally got POed and admitted that is was his personal preference that determines what he carrys, not the odds he may need it.

No, he didn't. He said it's not JUST the odds, which is what he has always said. It most certainly does, and should, include the odds. Anyone who makes any decision about something important without some idea of success vs failure, life vs death, win vs lose is pretty foolish. The part that is "personal preference" is where you draw the line, what event is unlikely enough that you choose to ignore it. Make no mistake, we are all choosing to ignore events beyond some magnitude. For me, it's any event that requires more than 10 rounds. For others, it might be 20 or 30 or 50 rounds but there's still some threat that remains unaddressed. Why? The "Why?" is because, consciously or not, the guy who carries 50 rounds and a BUG has decided that threats that are unlikely enough to warrant force beyond that level are not worth preparing for.


It is interesting to me on one other level also. I wonder, out of all the guys who carry such a significant level of weaponry, do you also have 5-point harnesses and racing seats in your cars? Truth is, you are MANY magnitudes more likely to die in a car crash because the typical factory restraint system is not adequate to protect you than you are to ever need all those bullets. Racing seats and 5-point restraints are no more expensive than a gun, they require no continued expense (like target practice), they virtually never need to be replaced and they take only a few more seconds than a regular belt to fasten and unfasten.
I know we can all name some people who have been injured in car crashes, most all of us can name people that would have been injured less with a better restraint.

So:
1)Not prohibitively expensive.
2)Not too inconvenient, especially considering the "stakes".
3)Far more likely to be needed than a spare mag, high cap gun or a BUG.

If those three things are what it's about (which has been the general argument) then how many people have those installed in their cars?

If it's about "choice" then why would you choose to ignore something that is so astronomically more likely to help you than carrying all that gear, which you do not choose to ignore?

[Hkmp5sd]

For me, it is easy. It is called laziness. I am willing to undergo a certain amount of discomfort and inconvenience to carry a firearm for the off chance I may need to defend myself. I do not carry extra magazines, CS gas, tazers, batons or other non-lethal weapons, not because I think I may not need them, but because it would be a pain in the butt to carry those concealed in Florida with 100F weather. I do carry extra ammo in my vehicle.

[The Terminator]

I basically carry 3 calibers, and keep a box of each in the vehicle. I always have some type of large knife, and another in my BUG. I keep an extra magazine for the autos. I have some speed strips for the revolvers. I don't always have an extra mag or speed strips on me. I do keep 2 cans of US Army tear gas, it is mixed with capsicum, and whatever else is on the label. One fits on a key chain, the other I keep on the console of the van.

It is my idea that my handgun is for fighting my way back to my vehicle in a big confrontation, and for self defense when needed. In any type of civil unrest, riots or breakdown, if I can get back to my BUG, I have a better chance. When the Rodney King riots came to Atlanta, I carried my BUG, with food and water in it, into the office and back every day. I also had a shotgun with me, everyone else knew exactly what it was, and nobody ever said a word about it. We don't have riots and looting every day in my area, but it seems that some folks are always looking for a chance to have them. I am on the wrong side of town when driving often enough to keep extra things in the vehicle. I usually feel safe when in the building or other area that I am going to work that day. Like pk says, it is a mixture of convenience, calling the odds, and being happy with what you want to do.

[MLeake]

Sorry to ask a stupid question, but are we discussing BackUp Guns, or bug out kits? At least one post seemed to be in regard to a crisis kit of some sort. Not sure everybody is on the same page.

[The Terminator]

Since I started this thread, I think I am on same page as the op. Threads kind of morph into their own. We are talking about what we carry every day, how much or how little. I stated that I carry very little, but keep more things in the vehicle.

[MLeake]

... but wasn't sure if BUG had more than one common usage in firearms. Does BUG commonly refer to anything else?

Example of other acronyms that could mean multiple things: CDC

Center for Disease Control if you are a medical type.

Combat Direction Center if you've worked in operations on an aircraft carrier.

Climate Diagnostics Center if you work at NOAA.

Connected Device Configuration if you are a software engineer.

So how's that for a diverging thread?

[The Terminator]

Hey, you know what, I just miss typed my word. I was thinking BOB and typed BUG. Well... it happenes don't it.

[Deaf Smith]

http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2...0286-16889_ITM

In Lance Thomas's first gunfight he had just a J .38 revolver. He missed two rounds and stopped the attacker with another shot to the face.

In his second gunfight he had 4 revolvers. The same J Smith .38, a Colt Python, a Smith & Wesson Model 19 Combat Magnum, and a Ruger Security-Six.

He stashed them around his business within easy reach. The three thugs opened fire on him without warning. He went through three of the revolvers. The Security Six, the J .38, and another .357. He fired 19 shots!

After that he went to simi-autos stashed around his business and two other gunfights.

Now if he had just the 5 shot .38 and no reload guess how gunfight number 2 would have ended?

So I suggest it's better to have and not need than to need and not have.

[Donn_N]

Now if he had just the 5 shot .38 and no reload guess how gunfight number 2 would have ended?

So I suggest it's better to have and not need than to need and not have.

First, I don't think that using someone who runs a business with a high robbery risk as an argument for carrying multiple reloads is valid. That is a totally different situation. Personally, in that situation, I'd be more likely to have shotguns stashed rather than handguns.

Second, in point of fact, he had no reloads. What he had was multiple loaded guns. I suspect that if he had a single gun with reloads that the outcome of those engagements where he used multiple weapons might have been different.

[Brian Pfleuger]

I don't ponder probabilities because from my POV they're irrelevant.

Yes you do. Everybody does. When you pull up to a stop sign and there's a car coming, how do you decide to go or wait?

It's the "chances" of getting hit by the car. If the cars is 500 yards away, your odds are darn near zero, so you pull out "without thinking about it", except you most certainly did think about it, it's just nearly instant, almost sub-conscious. Now, as that car gets closer, at some distance, you will eventually decide that you shouldn't pull out. Why? Because the "chances" of getting hit are too high. As the car approaches, the odds climb, 1%-2%-5%-20%, until eventually the car is in such a place that it could not maneuver or stop before hitting you. The odds are now 100%. Your brain automatically inputs any number of "fudge factors", you don't know if the driver is paying attention or half asleep, a 16 year old on their first lone drive or Jeff Gordon. So you don't "know" the odds, as in "the odds are now 20.38% that I'll be safe." but you most certainly do "know" the odds, you know when it's safe and when it's probably not safe.

We all do this every day, all day, pretty well non-stop. To deny it is to deny reality.

It applies equally to what you choose to carry. If you know nothing about crime, nothing about where you are, nothing about history, then you are operating on an entirely made up set of odds. You may think your safe when your not, and place yourself in real danger as a result, or you make think there's a real chance that you need to go through life with a kevlar helmet and flack jacket, looking like an idiot because your made up "chances" have you believing that you might need such things.

There is a truth somewhere in between.


We can simply ignore the odds entirely and carry whatever the heck we fancy, and that's all well and good, go right ahead, but we could be severely over burdening ourselves, and being way down the road of "diminishing returns". That's what the whole discussion is about, really, how far down that road of diminishing returns will you go?

Do nothing and be oblivious: prepared for 95% of every day life.
Pay attention and stay out of bad places: prepared for 99% of every day life
Pay attention, out of bad places, away from bad people: 99.5%
2 and 3 and carry pepper spray: 99.9%
2,3 and carry a gun: 99.99%
2,3,4 and carry reloads or a BUG, whatever: 99.999%


We could also choose to ignore or never learn the odds and be on the "oblivious" side of the argument. Believing that bad things don't happen to us, the police will protect us, guns are "scary", whatever. Then we could do stupid things like be in neighborhoods we shouldn't be in, hanging with people we shouldn't be with, doing things we shouldn't do... whatever, it's a long list of dangers we could put ourselves in.

We all use "odds". It's beneficial to have the right set.