How Many Spare Mags?

[mavracer]

Where did I say that? I said the odds are so ridiculously remote that you will never need it in a hundred lifetimes. That is what the data indicates.

I would point out that your data says 3 out of 482 DGUs required reloads.but we already established you don't think required means required.
and while I hope your right and I never even use my gun for defense I'd rather be prepaired.besides I actually leave town sometimes durring normal days and BGs are not the only things that need shot.

[onthejon55]

Originally Posted by David Armstrong

Again, it is a matter of cost versus benefit.

Your right this obviously doesnt mean that you think carrying an extra mag is too costly to justify any benefits.

Originally Posted by David Armstrong

There is a world of difference between "slim" and "virtually never."

That difference could mean losing your life so if you are willing to risk that than by all means go for it

[David Armstrong]

Where would a civilian run to if the bad guy he needed to defend himself from took all the rounds of his one magazine and kept coming?

The same place he would run to if the BG he needed to defend himself from took all the rounds of his two magazines and kept coming? Of course, first we need to come up with a legitimate scenario where a BG kept on attacking in such a manner as described. Note that even in the Soulis incident the BG did not press an attack until Soulis confronted him, kept him from leaving, and gave the BG reason to believe he was going to be arrested, as I see it.

[David Armstrong]

Your right this obviously doesnt mean that you think carrying an extra mag is too costly to justify any benefits.

No, of course not. My point is that we all pick a point at which we compromise our defense. For some to try to argue that there is need to compromise at the 99.9999 mark as opposed to the 99.999 mark just strikes me as rather silly. The cost factor of the extra mag is minimal. The benefit factor is also minimal.

That difference could mean losing your life so if you are willing to risk that than by all means go for it.

Not keeping that .416 Rigby by your chair could mean losing your life when that tiger leaps through your window. Only having 2 magazines instead of 3 could mean losing your life. Only having 32 rounds with you instead of 58 rounds could mean losing your life. Having 2 magazines loaded with 7 rounds of .45 instead of 1 magazine with 17 rounds of 9mm could mean losing your life. Lots of things could mean the difference, but I don't think one should worry much about it.

[BuckHammer]

Originally Posted by mavracer

I actually leave town sometimes durring normal days and BGs are not the only things that need shot.

+1.

Originally Posted by David Armstrong

Not keeping that .416 Rigby by your chair could mean losing your life when that tiger leaps through your window. Only having 2 magazines instead of 3 could mean losing your life. Only having 32 rounds with you instead of 58 rounds could mean losing your life. Having 2 magazines loaded with 7 rounds of .45 instead of 1 magazine with 17 rounds of 9mm could mean losing your life. Lots of things could mean the difference, but I don't think one should worry much about it.

Much of your examples are not convenient for most. For many, the carrying of extra magazine(s) is easy and convenient. Also, we're drifting back to talking about different weapons, as opposed to reloads, which is what this thread is about, at least IMHO, although I have noted that you disagree.

Why don't we just get into another 9mm vs .40 vs .45 while we're at it?

And it all still boils down to:

Originally Posted by BuckHammer

Basically, if carrying extra magazines is easy for you, and/or you want to do it, by all means do it. Even though your chances of survival in general have BARELY improved, they have improved nonetheless. If carrying magazines is trouble for you, or you just don't want to, that's FINE, your survivability increase of carrying an extra mag would have been negligible anyway.

[David Armstrong]

Much of your examples are not convenient for most.

Keeping a large caliber rifle by the chair seems convenient, at least as convenient as doing the spare mag routine. is carrying 2 spare mags really any more inconvenient than 1? And is it less necessary (since many seem to be arguing the necessity point) if it is more inconvenient?

For many, the carrying of extra magazine(s) is easy and convenient.

And for others it is not so easy or so convenient. Again, cost versus benefit.

And it all still boils down to:....

+1

[mavracer]

And for others it is not so easy or so convenient.

wow! how lazy or incompentent do you have to be that throwing an extra mag in your pocket is difficult or put you out enough to be inconvenient?

[right winger]

I carry two 15 round magazines with JHP

[SilentHitz]

wow! how lazy or incompentent do you have to be that throwing an extra mag in your pocket is difficult or put you out enough to be inconvenient?

My thoughts exactly...can't believe this has gone on for 9 pages for such a simple question by the op.

Guess a lot of folks just like to argue...excuse me...debate.

[David Armstrong]

wow! how lazy or incompentent do you have to be that throwing an extra mag in your pocket is difficult or put you out enough to be inconvenient?

You assume that one must be either lazy or incompetent to feel that carrying a spare mag most of the time is not worth it. How lazy or incompetent do you have to be not to carry a large rock around in your pocket? How lazy or incompetent do you have to be not put a red, a blue, and a green Sharpie in your pocket evey day before you go out?
Often it has nothing to do with lazy or incompetent, it has to do with realizing that there is no need. I guess the counterpoint could be how paranoid and delusional do you have to be to think you need a spare mag with you all the time. Of course that would be a gross mischaracterization of the "extra mag" position, just as "lazy and incompetent" is a gross mischaracterization of the "not needed" position. Strange how one side here keeps resorting to trying to insult the other personally rather than discussing the position on the factual merits and issues. Might make some wonder about how weak their position actually is.

[Capt. Charlie]

...can't believe this has gone on for 9 pages for such a simple question by the op.

Nor can I. It was harmless most of the time, but, as is the case with most long threads, it's going 'round and 'round, and tempers are starting to flare.

Probably time to put this one to bed.

Closed.