quote:

Originally posted by sns3guppy:
Two; one for malfunctions, one spare. It depends on the occasion however. And the pistol.

A revolver; a couple of speed strips.

A subcompact like the G43; a couple of spare mags.

G32; one or two spare mags. Sometimes just a spare G31 mag.

Full size like a G31...one or two spare mags; often one for the weight and comfort. If a fight goes on longer than that first spare mag, I probably won't be around to use a second, anyway.

I'm going to carry all that crap a whole lot more than it's ever going to get used, and I have a bad back. And knees. And just about everything else, so less is less, but more is a chore, if you see my point.

I can emphatize with you sns3guppy, I have 2 very bad knees, bad back, arthritic neck, both shoulders operated on, and tendernitis in both hands. However, I carry a SIG M11-A1, 2 loaded mags in my jacket or vest, pepper spray, a BUG on my non-dominant side - Ruger LCR 22 WMR, plus my phones, flashlight and other personal items. I leave my AR-15 home. Happy Shooting!

Two spare sets of feed lips and as much ammunition beyond that as may seem prudent whenever more ammunition seems prudent.

quote:

Originally posted by SSAreGreat:

I can emphatize with you sns3guppy, I have 2 very bad knees, bad back, arthritic neck, both shoulders operated on, and tendernitis in both hands. However, I carry a SIG M11-A1, 2 loaded mags in my jacket or vest, pepper spray, a BUG on my non-dominant side - Ruger LCR 22 WMR, plus my phones, flashlight and other personal items. I leave my AR-15 home. Happy Shooting!

Often I can't carry a firearm. Or a knife. Presently I have a polymer cold steel impact tool in my pocket, for use on pressure points.

I do have a cell phone, but not much confidence I can throw it hard enough to do damage. Fortunately, eyes, throat, groin, knees and a few other places don't take a lot of force at all, and it only takes a few ounces of pressure in the right direction to dislocate any joint or disable.

Unfortunately that only happens at arms-length, or closer.

So one or two magazines, depending on the occasion, when able to carry.

One in the loaded weapon and a spare in case of failure or more than one assailant.

Wait...I'm confused.

quote:

Originally posted by bendable:
mags ? its not the mags, its the number of rounds.

30 minimum

then you post

quote:

Originally posted by bendable:
you can have 12 mags if you want ,
no one cares,
as long as you can provide at least 30 rounds to your aggressor

2, 3, 5 , you pick the number of mags in what ever caliber

You seem to be focused on having a specific number of rounds...I'm not sure how you arrived at that specific number but I won't question your personal choice, but you seem to disregard the (extreme) example I used to illustrate the point that carrying additional mags is not just about total round count.

Do you not agree that having a semi-auto that is dependent on functioning mags is at least as important as the total number of rounds...or do you place a greater importance on the total round count?

In addition to a multitude of threads over the years here discussing various stoppages that may have involved magazine related issues, I can recall at least one member's account about a complete magazine failure in which he was competing and fired the first round of his match and the mag in the gun suddenly spontaneously failed and ejected all remaining rounds on the ground, and a second account in which a forum member during the course of his day, discovered that his carry gun magazine had the floor plate plunger recessed sufficiently that only the tiniest amount of engagement kept the floor plate in place. After considering his movements that day he attributed this to the fact that as he was exiting his vehicle his carry gun had bumped sharply into the door and he suspected that even a mild bump or vibration would have been all that was needed for the magazine floor plate to completely let go and dump all his rounds.

30 rounds don't do you much good in a defensive situation if they are all rolling around on the ground...having those same 30 rounds contained in more than one mag means you have a better chance of keeping the gun functioning even if a floor plate lets go, a mag tube gets dented and spring binds, a follower gets grooved or nose dives, or feed lips get damaged.

One mag topped off and one in the chamber and a BUG. The bug is not so much because I am concerned about running out of ammo or the gun failing me as it is that life comes at you from many directions and it may be that your secondary gun is the one you need first. Seat belt on, seated in a chair other than in the car, my BUG is often easier to acquire than my primary.

quote:

Originally posted by hrcjon:
30 minimum
OK bendable make some rational argument about that. really. its silly.

no,
I don't argue,
there are a dozen different reasons why people choose their guns, ammo's, mags and carry choices.

one won't be correct for all three dozen people ,
there is no argument to be made.

ask a dozen trainers , professional teachers and L.E. people about what is perfect about 9 aspects of carrying a gun and they will ask you a 1/2 dozen qualifying questions

When i'm on duty I carry 45 rounds mandated by policy. 1 in the weapon,2 spares on my belt. Same off duty unless I'm carrying a smaller pistol then I might carry a 3rd magazine I usually have at least 1 or 2 more spares in my suv.

James

I voted 2. 1 in gun and 1 spare. I live in South Texas and it is shorts weather most of the time, so that's how I roll. I have a Shield in .40 so I'm not going to carry a bunch of rounds, but I think I have enough so I can get the Heck out of Dodge if things start going south.

If I think I do need a little extra I can always carry my duty gun. It's a H&K P2000 in .40 cal.

quote:

Originally posted by SSAreGreat:
For example, civil disturbances, riots, looters, gang attack,

I know, anything can happen anywhere but I try to make it a point to avoid areas where these type of things might happen.

I am a J-frame Hero. (Sometimes)
I don't understand the question. (Sometimes)

I hope the folks read Rocky River's post.
In a serious SD situation many will be lucky to even bring their firearm into action. And if and when you do it's going to be fast and close.
(Been their) Any idea of getting off what's in
your fire arm .....Extra mags?
Here's something some may want to do with their wife. Have her stand ten feet from you. Ready?
Now RUSH her! How long did it take? And...that was ten feet.
Rocky River, you're on to it.
Stay safe
Poli Viejo

I rarely have spare magazines on my person, but they're generally within reach.

quote:

Originally posted by Horn:
In a serious SD situation many will be lucky to even bring their firearm into action. And if and when you do it's going to be fast and close.

This is a yet another nice example of an assumption that a defensive (or other) situation will occur just as someone’s limited imagination pictures it. And coincidently, this particular assumption is exactly what an old acquaintance told me was the reason why it was useless to carry a gun for self-defense: “You wouldn’t be able to get to your gun if you were attacked by a gang of teen-aged men.” Well, I guess that settles it. She lives in an expensive townhome in Washington, DC, has never owned a gun, has perhaps fired one a couple of times, and has no doubt seen teevee shows about how evil guns are, so she should know—right?

Here’s a couple more: If I’m walking down the street and a Japanese ninja swordmaster sneaks up behind me and strikes me in the neck with a 18th century katana, will my gun do me any good? How about if a Spetsnaz sniper infiltrates the mountains of Colorado and targets me from 1500 meters with a ORuzejnyje SIStemy T-5000 rifle during my morning constitutional?
Alas, no; I’ll be dead meat in either case, and I guess I should just save myself the effort and trouble of trying to defend myself.

An important aspect of anything serious we might do in life, and that includes our self-defense measures, is to consider and analyze the factors bearing on the matter. Although it’s obviously not possible to think about countering every possible threat that might present itself, such as Spetsnaz snipers or anti-Trumpers jumping out from behind the cash register at the local coffee shop, we should at least try to anticipate the ones that are most likely.

There is of course a tendency for us to think about things from our own perspectives and interests. Law enforcement officers tend to think about them from a police officer’s perspective. Long range rifle competitors tend to think about them from the perspective of what’s necessary to hit small targets at great distances, etc. Limiting ourselves in that manner (yes, it’s manner, not manor, BTW) is, however, an unwise habit at best, and dangerous at worst. As I’ve mentioned before, if we look at self-defense measures from the standpoint of what’s likely, then the vast majority of us shouldn’t bother with guns at all. Keeping one’s gas tank full and paying attention to what other drivers are doing will go much further to keeping us alive and well.

It’s therefore true that if having a gun is very unlikely to ever be necessary, then any other caveat makes it even less likely. High capacity pistol versus a five-shot revolver: not really necessary. Holster that permits a lightning draw: not really necessary. Glock versus Hi-Point: not really necessary. Extra ammunition: not really necessary.

But what if we want more than what’s likely to ever be absolutely necessary? I’ve never needed a seatbelt in my cars, but I still use them. I’ve never needed a fire extinguisher, but I still have them. I’ve never needed to lock my doors (as far as I know), but I still do it. If we look at how non-LEOs defend themselves with firearms, it’s almost never from a crazed ax-wielding Democrat jumping out from behind a dumpster and attacking random people on the street.
People need to defend themselves more often when they happen to be present in a convenience store during a robbery, if they’re being stalked by a former lover, or during something like an active shooter incident. Most commonly, however, non-LEO defensive situations occur when they’re at home during burglaries or other invasions. Would we need extra ammunition and magazines in such situations? Again, probably not. Might we? Possibly, especially in certain types of incidents that are happening more frequently. But the decision is ours alone. Don’t want to do it, don’t.

But we should base our decisions on realistic evaluations of all likely scenarios, and not merely on the ones we hope will happen, or even on those that are no-win situations.

While it's extremely rare that a reload, or malfunction that will required a mag exchange to clear, will be necessary, they can happen, so a spare magazine should be carried. Also, one should practice proper reload, and malfunction clearance, with the mag concealed the same way you conceal it when carried. If you only practice open top, or with your "IDPA vest," you're not going to get it done under stress with an untucked shirt, or out of a pocket, or any other way you carry it.

When off duty I carry one spare mag on my person. On duty I carry two, as I have a slightly elevated chance of being in an incident that I can't disengage, when on duty.

Magazines fail. 1 extra mag is a mandatory tool in case you have to fix a broken gun. Yes, I have occasionally been guilty of leaving the house without one, but it never feels right.

Bruce

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:

quote:

Originally posted by Horn:
In a serious SD situation many will be lucky to even bring their firearm into action. And if and when you do it's going to be fast and close.

This is a yet another nice example of an assumption that a defensive (or other) situation will occur just as someone’s limited imagination pictures it. And coincidently, this particular assumption is exactly what an old acquaintance told me was the reason why it was useless to carry a gun for self-defense: “You wouldn’t be able to get to your gun if you were attacked by a gang of teen-aged men.” Well, I guess that settles it. She lives in an expensive townhome in Washington, DC, has never owned a gun, has perhaps fired one a couple of times, and has no doubt seen teevee shows about how evil guns are, so she should know—right?



It’s therefore true that if having a gun is very unlikely to ever be necessary.

Nailed it. Statistical commandos always want to make the unfounded claim of “close and fast”, but totally ignore the statistic that says that they’ll likely never need a concealed carry firearm.

quote:

Originally posted by 46and2:
I rarely have spare magazines on my person, but they're generally within reach.

Even when you are walking around? They follow you in public?

For me, its all about risk assessment. As much as you can, anyway. What do you do and where do you go on a daily basis? What can occur while you are there? Then train and carry for your reality. Of course, the argument can be made that threat events are unpredictable in nature.
But daily life is the governing factor for me. Since I am retired, I no longer ride to the sound of the guns. Crime is low here in the Yoop. My daily travels and activities, even in the bush, are such that one in the gun and one on the belt are a good choice for me.

Whoever carries less than you is an idiot and anyone who carries more than you is a psycho.

Thread.