Backup guns

I have had a few "adventures". If you are ccw and encounter the local gendarmie, a BUG will not help your cause. If you are an armed security officer and have occasion to produce a BUG your life has become about explaining yourself, even if you had your paperwork in order.

If you are LEO and not authorized, reactions vary depending on which way the political wind blows. Have talked to lots of folks, those who know say carry a back up if you need to carry a gun. One gun when you don't "need a gun" .

All guns break. But that mass between your ears and a genuine effort to avoid trouble are better than a BUG. Have I / Do I carry a BUG? yes I have/will.

But I know what I am in for if it is discovered or produced. For me If I feel the need to go armed, a BUG is faster than a reload. Also you could pass your spare magazine to an officer or trusted civilian who needs a bang stick, but a whole gun would likely do more good.


A blade and a less lethal option? Most definitely before the BUG. Cell phone? always. Buy a crack phone and an activiation card if you must. You do not want to stand in front of a court and explain your decision to carry a gun costing several hundred dollars (and a BUG) without being able to spend 30 bucks on an emergency phone.
 
A jury

can not be manipulated indefinitely, if they are intelligent and look at provided facts. Is it interesting if a person hauls 50 rounds of ammo if only two rounds were used to kill the attacking criminal? It was not like the defendant took down a whole town of good-natured nuns with the remaining 48. Should I leave my back up handgun at home so that reality-loathing Democrats can feel good about them selves in the jury, in case I am attacked? Narrow-minded people really piss me off. "You were carrying a tactical folding knife in your pocket, along with two handguns concealed and a backpack full of ammo, so it was you who anticipated the criminal in the dark alley, you had him set up and there fore he should be able to attack you in defense and you should go to jail for what ever reason, because we on this jury are American Democrats and we like to look at reality differently. Next case."

People who do not understand the benefit of a back up handgun will not live to learn when the **** hits the fan.

Stupid criminals can not think ahead. That is why they do not carry a back up handgun. Instead they come ten and ten when they attack you. But that just means they are sociable fellas, in the eyes of the average Democratic jury...
 
Avenger11 wrote:

Paranoia is an irrational response to a perceived threat.
Click to expand...

There we go again. No, paranoia has to do with the "perception" part of the issue, not the "response" part of it. Paranoia, or lack of it, is what factors into the acknowledgment of the possibility of a threat, and the likelihood of encountering it. The person carrying two guns doesn't think that he is likely to meet more or worse threats than the person who carries only one - he simply wants to be better equipped to deal with the same threat(s) as that encountered by his lesser-armed counterpart.

From an earlier post of mine:

Given that "paranoia" is defined by the New Oxford American Dictionary as "suspicion and mistrust of people or their actions without evidence or justification", it should be clear that we all must be paranoid even if carrying only one gun, since the presence of any weapon at all indicates the acknowedgment of danger. That's where paranoia, if any, enters into the equation, and if such an acknowedgment of danger equals being paranoid, then you must admit we're all guilty of it, whether we carry one weapon or several.

After the possibility of needing a weapon has been established, the question merely becomes one of preparedness. How prepared do you wish to be?
Click to expand...

Again, Avenger11 wrote:

For the average person, carrying multiple weapons is overkill, and the need, not supported by the odds of an encounter. If, you end up in court, you will look like a fanatic, commando type that's looking for a fight.
Click to expand...

I've got to hand it to you, you've got courage :rolleyes:.

There's that phrase again, "looking for a fight". In answer, let me ask you just a couple things, and if you can give me a logical response that supports the above statement, I'll bow out and go nurse my wounds in a corner somewhere.

Consider someone packing his usual carry gun, a Glock 23. In addition to this everyday carry, he has a Kel-Tec P3AT .380 in a pocket holster in his pants pocket. Are you actually saying that, with the addition of the little Kel-Tec .380 to his defensive wardrobe, his "image" suddenly went from a that of a concerned, peaceful citizen to that of a "fanatic, commando type"?

If so, that is plain crazy. How many "fanatical commandos" going on the offensive will want to equip themselves with a pipsqueak firearm such as this? Go look at the cases of all serious, armed troublemakers through the years, whether they were career criminals, terrorists or zonked-out weirdos massacring innocents in malls, churches or schoolyards, and tell me what you find. What did they use? What would common sense tell you they used if their missions were to inflict damage on their enemies, real or perceived? Did they strap on their Seecamp .32 in a low-leg rig and stride out to meet the day?

Maybe in some cases, yes. But you and I both know that the majority of times(which majority is, after all, what determines the "image" of a particular group), serious weaponry was involved, the kinds of guns that are easy to operate under stress and deliver a lot of bang for the buck - longarms in many cases, and where handguns were used, usually those chambered in major calibers.

Columbine: sawed-off 12 gauges, a 9mm carbine and 9mm pistol-thingamabob:D

Michael McDermott, Edgewater Systems shooting in Wakefield, MA: 12 gauge shotgun, AK clone in 7.62 x 39, and yes, a .32 pistol IIRC

FBI Miami shootout, Michael Platt and William Matix: Ruger Mini-14, among other guns

And soon to be added: John Q. Carrier, any-mall -church or -schoolyard shooting, whose P3AT helped him kill another 1/3 person after his primary weapon ran dry, got lost or malfunctioned.

:confused:
 
New to CCW

I'm still very new to CCW, less than a year.

I have often thought about this after reading posts on this forum and BS'ing with the guys at the local gunshops. I carry either a .40 or 9mm (14 rounds in either) with an extra mag or a .380 with an extra mag if I'm in a hurry and wearing sweat short/pants and a T-shirt.

I might have remarked once or twice about "paranoia" in some of these tactical and general forums...I think in this case it's about what makes you feel comfortable. I think it's way too much but we have a lot of "doomsday survivors" here who plan on encountering multiple BG's and maybe being shot in their strong side and needing access to another weapon with their off hand...there's nothing wrong with being prepared, even if it is a little unrealistic...probably depends a lot on where you are located at.

I also think people make too much of what a jury will think...I'd rather be judged by twelve than carried by six is something I've seen posted many times on this board. Ultimately I carry to protect my family and myself, if something goes bad I'm willing to face any penalties that come my way if I have protected me and mine, if I've completely failed in that mission I won't care much about the aftermath anyway. If you're afraid of jail or a jury I'd re-examine if I should be carry a weapon...that fear might be more harmful than being unarmed in the heat of the moment.

I will usually have one weapon IWB, and another readily accessible in my car...that's about as close as I come to having a backup...I only have the car gun because it's too awkward to draw while seat belted should the need ever arise (realistic threat to me).

I read another post that said something about buying light weight body armor instead of another expensive weapon...that's something else I've thought about but until they make light weight vests in 3XLT I'm out of luck : ).
 
C'mon J-framer, why would the average citizen need more than one gun to protect themselves? Imagining scenarios and dreaming about your response may be fun, but not realistic! I think that the average juror today would consider a multi-armed defendant as an irrational commando. If not in the criminal case, then certaintly in the civil case that's sure to follow!
 
I have to respectfully disagree with that assessment. Opposing counsel will TRY to make you look paranoid and overprepared, but Hell, they'll do that if you were carrying ONE gun.

Had this come up in a trial in the Tampa area a few years ago. Took about two minutes on the witness stand to explain why two handguns made sense for ordinary guy with CCW. Jury found him not guilty.

If you carry backup for logical reasons, others will understand the logic once it is explained to them.
 
^^^

From my first post (#23) on page 1:

If you ever have to deal with people so irrational as to consider the carrying of multiple weapons as an indication of hostile intent, guess what? Those are the same people who are going to blame you for carrying a single weapon, too. If the jury has a scrap of common sense or honesty, you will be fine in the end. If not, then you're finished anyway.
Click to expand...

No hard feelings, Avenger11, I guess the two of us merely have very different viewpoints and priorities.

Carry on, in whatever form you choose to do so. At the end of the day, we're all on the same side.
 
One winter I went plinking out on the public grasslands in TX. A female LEO pulled up, told me to unload the pistol, set it on the tailgate of my 4runner and come over by her. After unloading it and placing it on the tailgate, I pulled another out from under my coat and did the same, and then another and another... for a total of seven handguns (most them decent sized). You see, when I went plinking, I wanted to shoot all of my handguns. Nothing seemed more convenient than loading them all up and cramming them in my belt under my coat. I walked over to her and showed her my CHL just so she wouldn't get too concerned since they were all concealed. She checked me out, gave me some canned lecture about being careful, checking my back stop and cleaning up my brass before I left. Then she went on her way.

For me, I felt sort of embarrassed that I was packing all of those weapons. I've always wondered what she thought about the situation (or me). Good thing Texas Concealed Carry Law doesn't seem to put a limit on the number of weapons you carry.
 
Most of my Instructors/Mentors have been LEO. Fact is most of them teach, or taught since some are retired, Officer Survival. They all strongly encourage everyone that carries LEO or otherwise to carry at least 2 guns.

For the reasons that have been mentioned in this thread: Weapon retention (having BUG to deploy while fighting over primary has saved many LEO), Unable to reach primary (because of seat belt, injury, etc.), Primary fails (jams, out of ammo, mag fell out during contact fight with badguy, etc), Arm someone who knows how to use gun but doesn't have one with them (could be SO that works in Courthouse/School & even though they have permit and carry can't have one at work, active military friend/family on leave, out of state LEO, or someone your picking up from airport, have to say real friends meet you at airport with an extra), .

If it was ever made a question in court, I would point to all these people that taught me. Most of these LEO have also been in multiple gunfights: Massad Ayoob, Bill Allard, Jim Cirillo, Keith Jones, Ed Lovette, & Evan Marsall.

I have books written by all of them, except Keith Jones (he hasn't written one yet, though he wrote some chapters in Evan's books and is mentioned in others), and Bill Allard (don't think he has written anything for general public, but do have podcast interview Mas & Gail did with him).

These books would show that these LEO instructors are encouraging people to carry BUG and also show specific reasons why. Can point to cases were it saved good guys life based on these sources. I have also documented much of what I learned and feel I am able to articulate reasons for carrying BUG. That seems like a pretty strong argument, if you need one, in court.

Now if you don't want to carry a first or second gun for your personal reasons I am okay with that. All my instructors have made the point that carrying is NOT for everyone. I just don't want people making decision based on the faulty logic that you can't defend WHY your carrying a BUG.
 
I never leave the house with less then to guns on me. Most often Colt gov't or combat commander strong side and usually a J frame or a sp101 crossdraw. But occationally i carry sub compact autos in that roll as well.
 
I carried a back up on the job for 27 years ,now that I'm retired I gotta go with
ooreach. If I'm going somewhere I may need a second gun, I really need to rethink if I need to go there.
 
There's been a lot of talk about "paranoia" on here. Let's not forget this PROFOUND modern proverb:

"Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean you aren't being followed!"

(And just being paranoid doesn't neccesarily mean you don't need two guns either.)
 
I always have ONE handgun on me. On the rare occasions I felt I wanted another one with me, I would have one of my .45's as my primary and a KelTec PF9 in a jacket pocket.

Other than going to the range and always having a handgun on me while I'm shooting other weapons, I very seldom carry more than one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top