OldMarksman posted:
I've listened to all manner of perspectives on this subject over the years. Not often is there a definitive right or wrong "side" to it.
Where I often have a bit of hesitation making blanket statements about "arming another individual" is wondering whether or not someone has carefully considered that it might not be a good idea in the circumstances, let alone a lawful one, to "arm another individual" in some fast, fuzzy and chaotic situation.
How well trained to act within an evolving emergency set of circumstances is the individual?
Are they going to become an additional problem to the one that already exists?
Am I creating an unnecessary exposure to liability by handing them one of my firearms, and perhaps buying into whatever it is they think (under panic) is the 'right thing to do'?
Knowing the status, capabilities and ability of close family to function under stress is one thing, but a stranger? Even some friends and acquaintances? I know a bunch of folks who are non-LE gun owners, and I'd be unwilling to hand over a gun to most of them in the elevated stress of some emergency situation.
I know it sounds altruistic to discuss arming responsible individuals to assist in some emergency, but it's the "responsible" part of the sentiment that makes me hesitant.
Even thinking about leaving a firearm in one of my cars, and leaving my wife in the car, makes me a bit apprehensive thinking about some set of circumstances unfolding in which an eager, young cop might decide that my wife is in sufficiently constructive possession of the firearm which is no longer under my immediate control. Then, having to deal with the fallout of her being charged with some violation of unlawful possession of a loaded firearm in public.
It's the "good intentions" cobblestones that pave the way to unpleasant places that sometimes gives me pause.
On a somewhat related note, I've also made no secret of the fact that it's not a "given" that I'd even share compatible pistol magazines with someone else in some deadly force incident. This has often come up whenever someone tries to make the argument that compatibility of guns, magazines and ammunition is "a common sense must" in some discussions. Not hardly. Context matters.
I've told a number of folks (other cops) that if they've burned through their magazines without achieving good effect, not to assume I'm going to give them any of mine when I arrive, even if we have the same guns, just so they can spray more ineffective rounds hither and yon.
The ability to unobtrusively access a secondary weapon can be a handy option. This has sometimes been listed as an consideration when some agencies have been known to require a specific manner & method of carrying an approved secondary weapon. When I used to wear a rain coat in my plainclothes assignment, and I carried my older 649 Bodyguard, there were situations when it didn't look (to the people around me) like it was unusual for me to have one of my hands in an outside pocket, and that was the pocket in which my 649 nestled.
Bill DeShivs posted:
Nicely phrased. It can carry at least a couple of meanings, too, not the least of which is that once circumstances have forced you to resort to one, a secondary/backup weapon becomes your primary. Also, circumstances (and policies) might allow for a secondary/backup to be accessed and employed before (instead of) the primary. Depends.
Constantine posted:
Dude, don't mistake disagreement, or questioning, as necessarily indicating someone is "mad at you", especially me. Words don't bother me. I've spent too many years having to be objective and impartial whenever someone decided to make me the focus of their anger and tirades ... and raising my own children to adulthood ... to let words get under my skin. Besides, this is just an internet discussion forum, not high school (where the emotions, angst and the drama of youth can run often run rampant). 
I know it's difficult to only communicate via text, especially when you consider that more than 95% of actual human communication occurs at the level of visual interpretation of body language, postural signs, micro-expressions, and then also being able to hear and try to interpret vocal nuances.
Now, sometimes polite discourse seems to get left in the dust of some heated thread topic, and someone might ignore the rules of conduct when it comes to enjoying the hospitality of some hosted forum, and receive some caution to be mindful of the rules regarding polite conduct. Doesn't mean sometimes someone "makes enemies", though.
Not among adults, anyway, you'd hope.
Probably why some internet forums offer the hint of how to handle some consistently annoying folks by being able to use an "ignore" feature, don't you think? I don't even know if this forum offers such a feature, though, as I've not yet been thin-skinned or annoyed enough by someone to think to see if one is even offered.
BlueTrain posted:
Not an unfair question.
Might be like asking if you're overdue for a flat tire, though. No way to know. Things can happen.
Over the years of having served as a LE firearms trainer, and having volunteered to work with non-LE folks for approx 10 years, I've seen at least my fair share of magazine-related stoppages occur.
The typical causes have seemed to include - weakened/worn out mag springs; damaged/worn followers; damaged magazine lips and/or bodies; and contamination by heavy fouling or debris (congealed oils, fur-ball colonies, sand, metal shavings, and general grit).
Well-maintained magazines seem to offer much fewer potential problems than neglected and abused magazines. Big surprise, right?
On the other hand, magazines are at the very heart of reliable semiauto pistol functioning. They're "assemblies", being an assembly of assorted parts that must properly work together in order to provide optimal feeding & functioning as a whole assembly.
Sometimes, as assemblies, they may require attention, such as replacement of any of the "wearable" parts, damaged parts, etc.
In the event it's the magazine body, or when replacement of worn/damaged parts still can't restore a magazine back to normal operation, then it's time to discard that one and replace it with a fresh magazine.
Sometimes a holster/carry method may result in the loss (or dislodging) of a primary magazine, too.
It's not like it's especially "rare" for someone carrying a belt holstered pistol to discover that they've had the magazine become dislodged by the inadvertent depressing of the magazine catch. Sometimes the mag may be in the car/truck seat, or on the veh floor, or in the driveway, parking lot, etc, and it can be retrieved.
Or, the butt/floor plate of the magazine is knocked against hard surfaces (car & building door jambs, chair arms, etc) enough times that it becomes damaged, and may release the mag's ammo load at a most inopportune moment.
In such unexpected and unwanted instances, having another magazine is pretty much the only way to restore the pistol to operational readiness.
I've listened to all manner of perspectives on this subject over the years. Not often is there a definitive right or wrong "side" to it.
Where I often have a bit of hesitation making blanket statements about "arming another individual" is wondering whether or not someone has carefully considered that it might not be a good idea in the circumstances, let alone a lawful one, to "arm another individual" in some fast, fuzzy and chaotic situation.
How well trained to act within an evolving emergency set of circumstances is the individual?
Are they going to become an additional problem to the one that already exists?
Am I creating an unnecessary exposure to liability by handing them one of my firearms, and perhaps buying into whatever it is they think (under panic) is the 'right thing to do'?
Knowing the status, capabilities and ability of close family to function under stress is one thing, but a stranger? Even some friends and acquaintances? I know a bunch of folks who are non-LE gun owners, and I'd be unwilling to hand over a gun to most of them in the elevated stress of some emergency situation.
I know it sounds altruistic to discuss arming responsible individuals to assist in some emergency, but it's the "responsible" part of the sentiment that makes me hesitant.
Even thinking about leaving a firearm in one of my cars, and leaving my wife in the car, makes me a bit apprehensive thinking about some set of circumstances unfolding in which an eager, young cop might decide that my wife is in sufficiently constructive possession of the firearm which is no longer under my immediate control. Then, having to deal with the fallout of her being charged with some violation of unlawful possession of a loaded firearm in public.
It's the "good intentions" cobblestones that pave the way to unpleasant places that sometimes gives me pause.
On a somewhat related note, I've also made no secret of the fact that it's not a "given" that I'd even share compatible pistol magazines with someone else in some deadly force incident. This has often come up whenever someone tries to make the argument that compatibility of guns, magazines and ammunition is "a common sense must" in some discussions. Not hardly. Context matters.
I've told a number of folks (other cops) that if they've burned through their magazines without achieving good effect, not to assume I'm going to give them any of mine when I arrive, even if we have the same guns, just so they can spray more ineffective rounds hither and yon.
The ability to unobtrusively access a secondary weapon can be a handy option. This has sometimes been listed as an consideration when some agencies have been known to require a specific manner & method of carrying an approved secondary weapon. When I used to wear a rain coat in my plainclothes assignment, and I carried my older 649 Bodyguard, there were situations when it didn't look (to the people around me) like it was unusual for me to have one of my hands in an outside pocket, and that was the pocket in which my 649 nestled.
Bill DeShivs posted:
Nicely phrased. It can carry at least a couple of meanings, too, not the least of which is that once circumstances have forced you to resort to one, a secondary/backup weapon becomes your primary. Also, circumstances (and policies) might allow for a secondary/backup to be accessed and employed before (instead of) the primary. Depends.
Constantine posted:
Dude, don't mistake disagreement, or questioning, as necessarily indicating someone is "mad at you", especially me. Words don't bother me. I've spent too many years having to be objective and impartial whenever someone decided to make me the focus of their anger and tirades ... and raising my own children to adulthood
... to let words get under my skin. Besides, this is just an internet discussion forum, not high school (where the emotions, angst and the drama of youth can run often run rampant). I know it's difficult to only communicate via text, especially when you consider that more than 95% of actual human communication occurs at the level of visual interpretation of body language, postural signs, micro-expressions, and then also being able to hear and try to interpret vocal nuances.
Now, sometimes polite discourse seems to get left in the dust of some heated thread topic, and someone might ignore the rules of conduct when it comes to enjoying the hospitality of some hosted forum, and receive some caution to be mindful of the rules regarding polite conduct. Doesn't mean sometimes someone "makes enemies", though.
Not among adults, anyway, you'd hope.
Probably why some internet forums offer the hint of how to handle some consistently annoying folks by being able to use an "ignore" feature, don't you think? I don't even know if this forum offers such a feature, though, as I've not yet been thin-skinned or annoyed enough by someone to think to see if one is even offered.
BlueTrain posted:
Not an unfair question.
Might be like asking if you're overdue for a flat tire, though. No way to know. Things can happen.
Over the years of having served as a LE firearms trainer, and having volunteered to work with non-LE folks for approx 10 years, I've seen at least my fair share of magazine-related stoppages occur.
The typical causes have seemed to include - weakened/worn out mag springs; damaged/worn followers; damaged magazine lips and/or bodies; and contamination by heavy fouling or debris (congealed oils, fur-ball colonies, sand, metal shavings, and general grit).
Well-maintained magazines seem to offer much fewer potential problems than neglected and abused magazines. Big surprise, right?
On the other hand, magazines are at the very heart of reliable semiauto pistol functioning. They're "assemblies", being an assembly of assorted parts that must properly work together in order to provide optimal feeding & functioning as a whole assembly.
Sometimes, as assemblies, they may require attention, such as replacement of any of the "wearable" parts, damaged parts, etc.
In the event it's the magazine body, or when replacement of worn/damaged parts still can't restore a magazine back to normal operation, then it's time to discard that one and replace it with a fresh magazine.
Sometimes a holster/carry method may result in the loss (or dislodging) of a primary magazine, too.
It's not like it's especially "rare" for someone carrying a belt holstered pistol to discover that they've had the magazine become dislodged by the inadvertent depressing of the magazine catch. Sometimes the mag may be in the car/truck seat, or on the veh floor, or in the driveway, parking lot, etc, and it can be retrieved.
Or, the butt/floor plate of the magazine is knocked against hard surfaces (car & building door jambs, chair arms, etc) enough times that it becomes damaged, and may release the mag's ammo load at a most inopportune moment.
In such unexpected and unwanted instances, having another magazine is pretty much the only way to restore the pistol to operational readiness.
Last edited: