An example for the endless is 5 enough, I can't handle more than one opponent

[OhioGuy]

If survival is the end game -- and it is, I think -- you could probably make a case that wearing concealed body armor is statistically more likely to keep you safe than 5 or 10 or 500 rounds of ammunition in any caliber. It may sound silly (of course, carrying a gun sounds silly to a large number of people), but I guess I'd rather be armed with 5 rounds in a snubby while wearing armor, than 50 rounds and two Glocks while not.

Carrying "too few" rounds really means...what? The risk is that you run out of ammo before you've stopped the threat, right? Possibly multiple threats (likely, if you need that much ammo). I agree with all who say that training and vigilance are the most important parts to survival. If I have only 5 rounds and there's still another bad guy left, I'm screwed. If I have a 30 round magazine but lack the skill to engage two targets, I'm screwed. If I'm careless enough to walk into a blind alley where muggers are likely to hang out, I'm screwed.

Since everyone seems to come down on the answer "there is no answer, so carry what you believe keeps you prepared," why do we continue to perpetuate these threads?

I've chosen a compact semi-auto with a 15 round magazine. A spare magazine is easy to carry, and honestly it balances the load on the front of my belt and is actually more comfortable. I've chosen that particular gun because I shoot much better with it than I do with single stack guns. I shoot single stack 9's better than pocket .380s, so my "backup" is a single-stack 9. I tried out a .357 revolver with a 2" barrel, couldn't hit crap with it, and my hand and forearm were tingling after 20 rounds.

So through reasons having nothing to do with needing lots of ammo, my setup ends up being a normal sized 9mm with 30 rounds of ammunition. Does that make me any more prepared than the guy who does carry the 5-rd .357? There's no way to answer that. If we both are accurate, and both only manage to get off one shot, his one .357 may well save him faster than my one 9mm. But even that is unanswerable. There's always the guy who was dropped by a single round, and always the guy on meth who took a dozen rounds to the chest and still ran a mile before dropping.

So there's my answer. Carry what you're comfortable with, and wear body armor everywhere :-P

[OldMarksman]

Carrying "too few" rounds really means...what? The risk is that you run out of ammo before you've stopped the threat, right?

Right.

Possibly multiple threats (likely, if you need that much ammo).

Not unlikely, if you are attacked, regardless of how much you end up needing.

I agree with all who say that training and vigilance are the most important parts to survival.

Yep.

Since everyone seems to come down on the answer "there is no answer, so carry what you believe keeps you prepared," why do we continue to perpetuate these threads?

To help people wit the decison-making process.

..., my setup ends up being a normal sized 9mm with 30 rounds of ammunition. Does that make me any more prepared than the guy who does carry the 5-rd .357?

Gives you a greater chance of survival, all other things being equal.

If we both are accurate, and both only manage to get off one shot, his one .357 may well save him faster than my one 9mm.

When it comes to wounding effectiveness, "accuracy" is really a matter of statistical chance, and one has a greater chance if one can fire more controlled shots quickly.

[briandg]

I look at the people who stockpile thousands of rounds and dozens of weapons in case of civil unrest, and I can only wonder how many people does that guy really think that he's going to have to kill? How many will be reasonably be willing to kill? How many could he kill and still stay sane?

Would that person actually be able and willing to pull the trigger when the time comes? When he catches somebody taking the apples from his trees, going through his pantry?

I can't even come close to imagining a scenario in which forty mosins still in cosmoline and twenty thousand rounds would really contribute to survival, but the cost of the prep could have been spent on a bit of remote land and some equipment and a motor bike to get around with.

Survival isn't about fireworks, it's about clever planning and actions. A swat team will sometimes use gas or flash bangs instead of bullets.

[OhioGuy]

Originally Posted by briandg

I look at the people who stockpile thousands of rounds and dozens of weapons in case of civil unrest, and I can only wonder how many people does that guy really think that he's going to have to kill? How many will be reasonably be willing to kill? How many could he kill and still stay sane?

Would that person actually be able and willing to pull the trigger when the time comes? When he catches somebody taking the apples from his trees, going through his pantry?

I can't even come close to imagining a scenario in which forty mosins still in cosmoline and twenty thousand rounds would really contribute to survival, but the cost of the prep could have been spent on a bit of remote land and some equipment and a motor bike to get around with.

Survival isn't about fireworks, it's about clever planning and actions. A swat team will sometimes use gas or flash bangs instead of bullets.

It's simple! When the grid goes down, just eat some of the stockpiled ammo and burn the rest to stay warm!

[briandg]

That is a much better plan than some of them that I have heard.

A guy who runs a survival blog that I used to follow shared everything he did, what he owned, and if a person paid attention, gave away where he lived. Why in the world would you open a box and post a picture of the new toy, and show the address to the entire world!? Good luck when the grid goes down, there will be locusts at your fencerow.

Don't wear a Rolex out slumming, don't flash a C note when you buy a coke, don't be oblivious when you are standing at an atm with a gold chain on your neck at a bad part of town.

Magazines in every pocket are handy but the weapon isn't the dangerous part, it's the brain. High capacity magazines don't kill bad people, smart guys who have what they need kill bad guys.

[BOOGIE the oily]

I look at the people who stockpile thousands of rounds and dozens of weapons in case of civil unrest, and I can only wonder how many people does that guy really think that he's going to have to kill? How many will be reasonably be willing to kill? How many could he kill and still stay sane?

Maybe none.
Maybe the guy is just a gun nut, and that's his excuse so that "the boss" won't be nagging him to hell every time he goes crazy at the LGS.
"No, honey, I'm not buying all those guns just for my pleasure, I'm doing it to protect you, in case an army of flesh eating zombies land right in our backyard, you know...?"
Besides that, what makes you assume the guy is sane, to begin with?

[OldMarksman]

Starting to veer off topic....

[Nanuk]

If survival is the end game -- and it is, I think -- you could probably make a case that wearing concealed body armor is statistically more likely to keep you safe than 5 or 10 or 500 rounds of ammunition in any caliber. It may sound silly (of course, carrying a gun sounds silly to a large number of people), but I guess I'd rather be armed with 5 rounds in a snubby while wearing armor, than 50 rounds and two Glocks while not.

Have you ever worn "concealable" body armor?

Carrying "too few" rounds really means...what? The risk is that you run out of ammo before you've stopped the threat, right?

Absolutely.

Possibly multiple threats (likely, if you need that much ammo).

More likely than a single threat.

I agree with all who say that training and vigilance are the most important parts to survival. If I have only 5 rounds and there's still another bad guy left, I'm screwed. If I have a 30 round magazine but lack the skill to engage two targets, I'm screwed.

That is all easily preventable, like keeping good tires on your car.

If I'm careless enough to walk into a blind alley where muggers are likely to hang out, I'm screwed.

Robbers are where victims are.

Since everyone seems to come down on the answer "there is no answer, so carry what you believe keeps you prepared," why do we continue to perpetuate these threads?

Not everybody, only those ignorant to the truth of violent crime.

I've chosen a compact semi-auto with a 15 round magazine. A spare magazine is easy to carry, and honestly it balances the load on the front of my belt and is actually more comfortable. I've chosen that particular gun because I shoot much better with it than I do with single stack guns. I shoot single stack 9's better than pocket .380s, so my "backup" is a single-stack 9. I tried out a .357 revolver with a 2" barrel, couldn't hit crap with it, and my hand and forearm were tingling after 20 rounds.

Sounds like the beginning of a plan.

So through reasons having nothing to do with needing lots of ammo, my setup ends up being a normal sized 9mm with 30 rounds of ammunition. Does that make me any more prepared than the guy who does carry the 5-rd .357?

Depends on the skill level with the guy with the 357 and does he carry reloads?

There's no way to answer that. If we both are accurate, and both only manage to get off one shot, his one .357 may well save him faster than my one 9mm.

Depends on what is accomplished with that one shot.

But even that is unanswerable. There's always the guy who was dropped by a single round, and always the guy on meth who took a dozen rounds to the chest and still ran a mile before dropping.

And there is always the guy that is just that mean he refuses to stop. There is an answer, carry the most powerful gun you can conceal and shoot well. I carry a Glock 31C 357 Sig or a S&W 44 magnum with reloads and a BUG.

So there's my answer. Carry what you're comfortable with, and wear body armor everywhere :-P

What someone chooses to be comfortable with based on ignorance or bad information is at best a bad decision. If you are not known to be armed (concealed) you do not need body armor. If you are made as being armed (body armor) I can pretty much guarantee that you will be shot in the head.

[briandg]

I don't like the idea of wearing body armor as an amateur. Do we want people to have a false sense of security? It will happen in many cases.

" I wear armor, carry a big gun, lots of magazines, speed holster, heck, I can't possibly lose!"

A guy in England bough plastic "sporting" armor and let his buddy fire a shotgun at it.

Cricket chest plates stop balls. Not bullets.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

What someone chooses to be comfortable with based on ignorance or bad information is at best a bad decision.

Well, said - unfortunately, the gun world tends to have folks that favor that point of view. It seems to come about when your choice is not praised. Since, IMHO, your EDC gear is sometimes imbued with symbolic meaning of your skill and for men - manliness, it becomes a touchy issue.

[briandg]

amen. i dont share that information face to face. I've gotten tired of the endless blathering by people who decide with something other than their brains and base their decision on not so bright ideas. I met a guy who carries a g19 everywhere with three magazines. He thinks that nobody can see them stuck in his pants while he wears his tee shirts. He told me that he walks up and down the mall for hours and nobody has noticed it.

there is something really messed up here.

[shurshot]

Briandg; I agree. Far too many form their perceptions based upon TV shows and movies.

[pete2]

5 is enough unless you need more.

[DMK]

That was an amazing story and definitely an eye opener. I appreciate you sharing that Glenn. I will keep the actions of that officer in mind while I plan my training. Specifically, repeated firing of accurate shots until the target is down. That officer efficiently maximized all the firepower he had at his disposal. He surely wished he had more, but effectively used what he had.

However, one important fact comes to mind here. He was in a location likely to be a terrorist target. As a peace officer, he could not have avoided being there and thank God he was.

However, as a civilian with no more responsibility or obligation than the security and safety of myself and my immediate party, I have the choice to avoid such a dangerous location. Not being where such a violent attack may take place increases my chances greatly.

This thread talks about this officer having been briefed on intelligence about the threat. This story and others like it (Mall attacks, dance club attacks, public school shootings, etc), are in fact intelligence about these attacks that we all can use. Use this intelligence wisely. The best way to survive a gun fight is don't show up. Avoid targets of opportunity.