How Many Spare Mags?

[mavracer]

But that ignores WHY the reloads were needed.

because the gun was empty.now go ahead and try to tell me how many people are doing tactical reloads.

Again, nobody is saying don't do it, some are saying don't try to tell us how important it is to do it.

Again 3 out of 482 poeple might disagree how important an extra magazine is when a reload is required

[David Armstrong]

because the gun was empty.

And as noted, at least one of those incidents the gun was empty because the shooter was trying to go after an escaped lion. Thus the "why" can be an important factor if one is trying to figure out if it was needed for SD or if it was done for some other purpose.

Again 3 out of 482 poeple might disagree how important an extra magazine is when a reload is required

Or they might not. Hard to tell with the info provided. Of course, you are also assuming they were using an autoloader, and/or that the weapon was fully loaded at the time of the incident, and all sorts of other things. Whether those are reasonable assumptions or not is something we could discuss, but we should not ignore them. If Joe Cool grabs his empty revolver from the drawer, loads one round into it and fires, scaring the badguys away, then reloads and goes out on his porch and shoots at their car 3 times as they drive away it is quite a reach to say that indicates that carrying an extra magazine with you is very important.

[BuckHammer]

Originally Posted by David Armstrong

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 have narrowed the options to create a bias for your point. What about the guy with the glock 17 with the 17 round magazine and two spares? Sorry, I didn't hear anything about him. I wonder why. Anyway, the guy with the glock and two spares is the most prepared out of those, assuming those are the only variables. So please stop posting that same scenario, we got it the first time, and I assure you that I am not the only one who is tired of reading it.

It's like a condom, I'd rather have one and not need one, then need one and not have one. I don't see how that opinion ignores facts.

1. If you don't carry spares, congratulations, there is better than a 99% chance that you will NOT die in a DGU scenario.

2. If you carry spares, congratulations, there is a better than 99% chance that you will NOT die in a DGU scenario. Furthermore, your extra mags will almost certainly have made no difference in a potential DGU scenario.

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.

Neither side is right, neither side is wrong. So please, stop arguing about it, unless you are just arguing for fun, in which case, go ahead.

[mavracer]

Of course, you are also assuming they were using an autoloader,

no I figured you were smart enough to substitute speed loader or even loose rounds in the case it was a revolver.

If Joe Cool grabs his empty revolver from the drawer, loads one round into it and fires, scaring the badguys away, then reloads and goes out on his porch and shoots at their car 3 times as they drive away it is quite a reach to say that indicates that carrying an extra magazine with you is very important.

I'm sure thats exactly what happened, what a way to loose credibility grasping at straws.

[Brian Pfleuger]

Originally Posted by mavracer

first it would seam you do care otherwise you would quit telling me what I need to do.

Actually, here's what I've told you and others to do:

...and I've said, more than once, that any one who feels it is necessary should go ahead and do it.

If you want to draw the line at an extra mag, go ahead. If your line is an extra mag and a bug, fine.

Bottom line: Carry your extra mag, really, I don't care...

It's really simple. Carry your spare mags. Really, I don't care

Why do you confuse my expressing my rationale with telling you what to do? I don't think you're telling me what to do by saying that you think carrying a spare is a good idea. I don't understand why this is being taken so personally.

Data is provided. We're asked "Where is the data?"

I (and others) provide the data again.... Answer: We don't care about your data.

I (and others) ask "Where is your data?" What's the reply? We don't need no data, it's opinion!

I (and others) say "Go ahead and carry if you want." We're accused of telling people what to do and potentially putting them in danger... "How would you feel..."

I don't think we even need to discuss how many times we went over the "Odds vs. Stakes" debate.

Shall we go around the circle again or are we done here?

[mavracer]

Why do you confuse my expressing my rationale with telling you what to do?

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

IE you don't NEED to carry an extra reload.

I (and others) say "Go ahead and carry if you want." We're accused of telling people what to do and potentially putting them in danger... "How would you feel..."

then answer this one simple question.
How many times will somebody survive the DGU that REQUIRED a reload without one?

[David Armstrong]

You have narrowed the options to create a bias for your point.

No. I've pointed out a flaw in the reasoning that is being tossed around here. Hard to claim there is a bias when my point is that it doesn't matter either way. The problem becomes one of figuring out what some are talking about, reloads or ammunition.

So please stop posting that same scenario, we got it the first time, and I assure you that I am not the only one who is tired of reading it.

Then don't read it. I tend to post items like that because they serve a purpose. And I think you have helped that purpose by being unable or unwilling to answer the question posed.

[David Armstrong]

no I figured you were smart enough to substitute speed loader or even loose rounds in the case it was a revolver.

Oh, OK, I see. What you said was not what you meant. Nice to know that.

I'm sure thats exactly what happened, what a way to loose credibility grasping at straws.

You might note nobody said that's exactly what happened, or even that it was close to what happened.

How many times will somebody survive the DGU that REQUIRED a reload without one?

How many times will somebody survive a tiger attack in their living room that required a high-power rifle without one? How many times will somebody survive a meteor falling on them that required a meteor shield without one?

[mskdgunman]

For CCW, I carry one extra mag. Truthfully, I carry that more in case of a malfunction which would require me to strip the old mag and replace it with a fresh one then any anticipation that I'll need 10 or 15 extra rounds. Malfunctions happen at bad times (Murphy is a B#*ch). If, while in the capacity as an armed citizen, I run into a situation where I need more then two mags, they probably won't help me much anyway as it's apparently a REALLY bad day.

As a LEO, thats a different story. Basic load for me is one in the weapon (Glock 21) and three spares. My SHTF rig ads three more plus long gun ammo

[mavracer]

How many times will somebody survive a tiger attack in their living room that required a high-power rifle without one? How many times will somebody survive a meteor falling on them that required a meteor shield without one?

I'm gonna go with NONE.
Having extra ammo=never a bad thing
not enough ammo=dead
I'd recomend carrying one more round than you need.
so if you'll tell me exactly what that number is I'd love to know.
Heck since you and peet know exactly how my next gunfight will go down,tell me when and where and I'll stay away.

Thanks in advance.

[Creature]

One thing I did learn in Statistics 101...if you plan around the odds, Murphy will send a meteor shower your way. No matter what the dice have been rolling, there is ALWAYS a chance that you will roll all snake eyes for the rest of the day. Previous DGU's have absolutely nothing to do with the DGU that is waiting just around the corner with your name on it.

[David Armstrong]

I'd recomend carrying one more round than you need.
so if you'll tell me exactly what that number is I'd love to know.

You can't know, and that is the point. You have to make a decision to play the odds at some point. But you will always be playing the odds. Suggesting your odds are much better at 99.99999% as opposed to 99.9999% is sort of silly.

No matter what the dice have been rolling, there is ALWAYS a chance that you will roll all snake eyes for the rest of the day.

Yep, just like there is ALWAYS a chance a man-eating tiger will jump through your window and eat you today, and there is ALWAYS a chance a shark will attack you while you are swimming in a farm pond in Kansas. However, that doesn't mean one should devote much energy or effort to preparing to survive those incidents.

[starshooter231]

I carry 1 spare loaded with the same JHP as my firearm, and I have an extra spare in my car with FMJ.

starshooter231

[Brian Pfleuger]

How many times will somebody survive the DGU that REQUIRED a reload without one?

Many people have survived situations that "required" a fire arm but they didn't have one.


How many times will you survive a meteor strike? Do you prepare for one? An attack by a pack of wolves? Airplanes crashing into your house? Nuclear Holocaust? They probably all have higher odds than needing a reload.

Let's make a new song! (To the beat of "The Farmer in the Dell")

It's the stakes and the odds, the stakes and the odds, high ho the dairy-o the stakes AND the odds!


I'll ask again, since the question has been ignored at least twice. Can you name a SINGLE incident that the defender in a SD situation was killed or even injured because they did not carry a reload? One single incident? 700,000 DGU per year. Can you name one incident that resulted in a fatality or even injury to the defender due to not having a reload? Surely there would be SOME documentation of such a thing. There are tens of thousands of incidents documented where a reload was NOT necessary.

[mavracer]

Many people have survived situations that "required" a fire arm but they didn't have one.

obviously you don't understand the definition of "required"

Can you name a SINGLE incident that the defender in a SD situation was killed or even injured because they did not carry a reload?

why do you have some kind of sick need for somebody to die before you'll admit that having too much ammo is better than not enough?
why don't the 3 out of 482 that "required" a reload count?
how about a case where several guns were emptied
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...g=content;col1
or do you really need sombody to die

[Brian Pfleuger]

obviously you don't understand the definition of "required"

So, you would say that a situation where an innocent was beaten and raped in an alley didn't require a firearm? I'd say it did require one and yet people survive those incidents on a daily basis.

If you honesty believe that only situations that resulted in the death of an unarmed person actually count as "required" firearms situations then it is you who does not understand the word. I'm allowing for injuries in my question. If there was not at least an injury, what was the requirement for a reload? So, once again, do you know of a situation where a reload was required, resulting in the death or injury of the defender due to not having a reload? Even in the data provided on the 3 reloads (let's face it, 2 reloads, the lion shot with a .32 doesn't count) there is no evidence that the reloads were actually "required". If you fired until empty and the BG was nowhere to be seen, would you reload? Well, yeah. Is it a "required" reload? NOt unless you have to pull the trigger again. Fact is, if you fired until empty what is needed, 99.99% of the time, is a little trigger control, not a reload.


Back on topic, I'm actually comfortable telling people that they don't need to carry a firearm at all if they don't want to do so. Oh my God! What if they get killed!! I'm also comfortable explaining the reasons that they should consider carrying, if they want to hear it. Either way, it's their decision, not mine.

I've spent 32 years of my life without a firearm on my person and never needed one. I have one now because I want one. I seriously doubt I'll ever need one, much less a reload. So, if somebody says "Hey, I carry a XYZ handgun. Do you think I need a reload?" I'll say no, I don't think you do because..." If they choose to carry one anyway, great. If they choose not to carry one, that's great too. I'm pretty comfortable knowing that the odds are very high they'll never need the gun at all and if they do need it, they'll probably not need to fire a shot and if they do fire a shot, it will probably be 1 or 2 and if they fire more than 2, they will probably not need a reload. Also, if they do fire a single shot in SD it will be all over the news. See, things like that are EXTREME rarity (read, has never happened here except between small time drug dealers which doesn't count in my book) where I live. If they weren't, I wouldn't live here, but that's a topic from another thread.

As for your example above, I'm talking about reloads carried on your person. I have reloads available at home and work because there's no reason to not have them. I'm talking about taking reloads out on the street.

[Nnobby45]

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........

Ok, I get it. If all the people who were in gunfights had altered their behavior prior to the fight, they wouldn't have been in the gunfight they ended up in.
Chances are, some of us have avoided gunfights by deciding on one course as opposed to another and never new we avoided the gunfight, car accident, etc.

And if Reggy had had the information that he didn't have access to, he could have taken another route.

David, someone who ignores other peoples' questions and launches into piece by piece rebuttle of every point, shouldn't be demanding that people answer their questions.

However, I'll answer your question anyway. He/she who has the means to recharge one's pistol, without respect to it's initial capacity, is better armed than one armed with the same pistol, who wasn't forethoughtful enough to carry a reload.

Is one better armed with a G17 and no reload than one with a J-frame and two speedloaders? Yes, as long as a malfunction isn't encoutered that requires jettising the magazine on the ground and replacing it from the mag pouch. But not as well armed as with carrying a reload.

What makes for interesting analysis, is that the reasons some have given for not carrying a reload is time saving convenience. I know people who will toss their J-frame in their coat pocket to head for the store, and never think to carry a reload. Better than nothing, but a couple of speedloaders in the opposite pocket, or a mag. for the Keltec, etc. would be my choice.

After I've climbed into my IWB and holstered my pistol, nothing is easier than clipping on my Bladetech mag-flashlight combo (I use the Teklock rather than paddle) and being on my way.

[mavracer]

I'm talking about reloads carried on your person. I have reloads available at home and work because there's no reason to not have them. I'm talking about taking reloads out on the street.

and yet the only reason to not have them on the street is you don't want to.
It's not about need, til you need it.

So, you would say that a situation where an innocent was beaten and raped in an alley didn't require a firearm?

no it did't necessarly require a firearm.maybe just better situatoinal awareness,pepper spray or a stun gun.having a gun is not a magic "talisman"
also I don't concider the criminal fullfiling his act an acceptable outcome even if they let you live.

Even in the data provided on the 3 reloads (let's face it, 2 reloads, the lion shot with a .32 doesn't count) there is no evidence that the reloads were actually "required".

other than they clearly stated 3 incidences "required" reloads.

[azredhawk44]

In the summer, I carry a 5 shot revolver. I might or might not have a speed strip of .38's with me.

Closer to winter, I carry an autoloader. I have more clothing to conceal it. I also notice folks' tensions are higher in winter.

April historically has been a time of mad clown insanity. VT, Columbine, the American Revolution, many other events. Always in April. I'll carry an extra magazine in April.

Then May comes and I get to carry my little 16 ounce snub again. :-)

[horatioo]

Couldn't you say that you might need 4 extra magazines so why not have them just in case? But why stop at 4 you could be in a situation where you required 5 extra magazines. Why not carry them? But what about if you are attacked in some type of extended situation that lasts for days, say a hostage situation like "Die Hard" mightn't you need more than 5 extra magaizines of ammunition? Better carry 6 extra.

[David Armstrong]

Ok, I get it. If all the people who were in gunfights had altered their behavior prior to the fight, they wouldn't have been in the gunfight they ended up in.

While that is a distinct possibility, it has nothing to do with the Denny situation. Let's try it this way...if you were driving the truck, and heard on the radio there was a riot in progress and the rioters were throwing bricks at vehicles and beating people up, would you have driven into the riot or found a different route?

David, someone who ignores other peoples' questions and launches into piece by piece rebuttle of every point, shouldn't be demanding that people answer their questions.

If I have missed a non-rhetorical question of yours and did not answer, if you will point it out I will be glad to respond.

However, I'll answer your question anyway. He/she who has the means to recharge one's pistol, without respect to it's initial capacity, is better armed than one armed with the same pistol, who wasn't forethoughtful enough to carry a reload.

That is a nice answer, but it doesn't answer the question asked.

Is one better armed with a G17 and no reload than one with a J-frame and two speedloaders? Yes, as long as a malfunction isn't encoutered that requires jettising the magazine on the ground and replacing it from the mag pouch.

Seems such a simple question, yet so hard to get a straight answer to it. Again, the question does not include any "as long" consideration.

What makes for interesting analysis, is that the reasons some have given for not carrying a reload is time saving convenience. I know people who will toss their J-frame in their coat pocket to head for the store, and never think to carry a reload. Better than nothing,....

Far more than "better than nothing" it is actually sufficient for virtually any realistic SD DGU incident.

[Creature]

Far more than "better than nothing" it is actually sufficient for virtually any realistic SD DGU incident.

So how come you don't arm yourself with a single-shot Derringer...or even a double-shot Derringer (for those really dangerous situations) and call it day? Realistically, its all you're ever going to need, right?

[David Armstrong]

how about a case where several guns were emptied

Looks to me like you gave us a case where nobody carried a reload on them yet it worked out fine. Hard to see how that supports the idea of carrying spare mags on you.

[David Armstrong]

So how come you don't arm yourself with a single-shot Derringer...or even a double-shot Derringer (for those really dangerous situations) and call it day? Realistically, its all you're ever going to need, right?

I would suggest there is a big difference between a 1 or 2 shot derringer and a 5 or 6 shot revolver. First, note that the normal numbers in a shooting tend to hover around the 2-3 mark for average and mean, thus there is good evidence that you would need 2 rounds or more. Second, the derringer is far less ergonomic (for me) to shoot well. Third, I did carry a Hi-Standard .22 derringer (2-shot) quite often in the past and did not feel particularly endangered.

[Brian Pfleuger]

no it did't necessarly require a firearm.maybe just better situatoinal awareness,pepper spray or a stun gun.having a gun is not a magic "talisman"
also I don't concider the criminal fullfiling his act an acceptable outcome even if they let you live.

I didn't say it was "acceptable." In fact, I implied quite the opposite, using it as an example of a "gun required" situation. So, from your perspective, the mythical person who DOES need a reload, actually might NOT really need a reload because they may not have needed the gun in the first place if they'd been more aware or had pepper spray or a stun gun? So what you should be advocating is better situational awareness and then you wouldn't have to worry about a reload OR a gun. NOW we're talking about playing the odds! If you're REALLY aware, you probably won't need a gun at all. Hm, I don't like those odds.

and yet the only reason to not have them on the street is you don't want to.

I think that's been established multiple times. The opposite is also true. The only reason to have a reload is because you want one. The statistics do not bear out a reality that makes reloads a "requirement". You either have one because you want to or don't because you don't want to.