BUG really needed?

I watched the unforgiven with Clint Eastwood the other day and there was a scene where the deputies was a gettin ready to go get english Bob. One had one arm and was loading up several guns .He was asked did he need so many guns.He said he didnt want to die from lack of shooting back. Sounds good to me.
 
Dave, with all respect there are two BIG differences. The average police officer can expect to be sent into a potentially dangerous situation, whereas the average citizen will not be dispatched to a dangerous situation. Second, the average police office once aware of criminal activity must take actions, the average citizen should retreat if all possible.
Click to expand...
These represent differences in the intent and purpose behind potential encounters, and situational dispositions (i.e. offense v. defense), and speak only to tactical advantage or disadvantage going into the confrontation. Neither factor has any bearing on mechanical reliability factors that might lead to the need for a BUG, and I see no way that being surprised and on the defensive puts the private citizen in a safer disposition, and in less need of a back-up gun. If anything, it would seem just as likely to increase the possibility that he might need one.

ADD: Also, your opinion that the private citizen should first try to run is, thankfully, shared by fewer states now than a few years ago. Trying to run when there is no way out merely to satisfy the letter of that legal requirement can be a dangerous waste of time that would be better spent mounting a good defense. If escape is possible, and the victim of the attack is physically capable of outpacing the attacker, sure. Absolutely. If not, that is what the gun is on your hip is for. The private citizen's first course of action should be the best course of action to safeguard his or her life in that particular, unique situation. That might be running. It might be fighting. It is up to each of us to maintain the best possible situational awareness in order to be able to make the right decision. Choosing one of those two as a default beforehand is a fruitless attempt at clairvoyance.
 
Last edited:
Spacecoast
Trying to control your daughter with one hand and fire accurately with your other (weak) hand sounds like a dicey proposition at best. You might want to get her some earmuffs and practice that before you need to do it for real.
Click to expand...

She is still at the age where she is either in a cart, stroller, or being carried. So, practicing it right now is probably a bad idea. Exposure to lead and the report of a handgun might be unwise.

Practicing with my off hand is as close as it gets right now. As she gets older we will practice and plan as is age appropriate.
 
If you want to carry a BUG, and it makes you feel better, then fine, go ahead and do it.

However... My personal opinion is it's not necessary for civilian carry.

How likely is it that I'll EVER need to use my CCW? There's a very slim chance. There's a better chance I'll need home protection instead of while shopping. So... How likely is it that I'll experience a failure when I need it? Again, very unlikely. I practice with what I carry. I maintain the handguns well. They are clean, lubed properly, and inspected often. I don't carry anything that has been experiencing failures.

To me, carrying a BUG is paranoid. I believe many people carry backups because "it's cool". For others, maybe there's a valid reason.
 
Folks might want to keep the personality evaluations out of commentary and stick to reasonable analyses.

If you disagree, doesn't make you Dr. Freud. :)
 
ghaleen


I'm sure that you're basing this opinion of paranoia on your own personal lifestyle, and experiences. Thats cool. I'd like you go back to my origonal post
and critique my logic. I am admitedly paranoid under certain conditions. But that dont make it a bad idea. I dont always have the option to, as the song says " Run through the jungle, and dont look back" And I am a civilian.

Glenn Dee
 
I'm a big guy ( not bragging... just saying that puts in in a lower percentile of victems ) I have a room full of trophies for karate sparring ( again not bragging, just that I'm not just a big old fatty, I can pretty much handle myself )... I'm not the guy your average bad guy wants to mess with... yet I still carry a gun nearly all the time, for "whats at stake" I live a pretty tame lifestyle, yet still carry an antique revolver, with no reloads, mostly for nostalgia... if I'm going "inner city", I'll carry a high cap "Nine" or a "Ten"

you guys can carry as many as you want, but as "big" as I am, I'm pretty content with just one... sometimes one is too heavy to have strapped on with my active lifestyle, let alone 2... but if I lived in a more dangerous neighborhood, & was a smaller guy, I might want to carry two... but I'd probably just move ( because of "what's at stake" )
 
I subscribe to my fathers philosphy..."it's better to have it and not need it rather than to need it and not have it". Some may call it paraniod, and that is their perrogative, but I choose to call it being prepared. During normal, daily carry, I don't carry a BUG but I always carry two reloadsfor my Rossi 462. When I'm doing my securty/protection gig, my Rossi becomes my BUG and I carry two reloads for it and two reloads for my primary, XD40 service.
 
2 is 1
1 is none
Always have a back up. Its easier to grab another gun instead of sticking a rod down the barrel to clear a broken case or stuck bullet.
 
Depends...

Some guys work in high risk occupations where a gunfight is a real possibility. Others are targets because of their status or resources. If I was in that position, I'd definitely want a BUG in addition to a primary. But I'm just a worker bee. I'm not a wealthy celebrity, either. I carry quite a bit, but mostly because I'm a former Boy Scout and try to live by the motto: "be prepared."

I'm bigger than average and don't look like an easy target, either. So, I never get approached by dirtbags. Still, I have a pocket pistol handy, just in case. But a BUG? Not for me.

If you're in one of those situations I mentioned above, I'd expect a BUG would be a real consideration, though.
 
But, like you say, it's not about the odds, it's about the stakes.
Click to expand...

Not really. It's about the odds, or put another way it's about reasonable precautions. If it were really about the stakes, you would be wearing a bullet-resistant vest in addition to carrying a BUG, with maybe a vehicle outfitted with bulletproof glass and panels, and some long weapons. Oh, don't forget the automatic defibrillator, as the odds of your having a cardiac event are probably greater than ever getting into a gunfight. And leaving the house would be a rare event-it's safer inside.

Carrying a gun can be looked at as a reasonable precaution, but carrying several on the off chance that your primary will blow up at the exact time you need it, or that you may need to throw everybody a gun is overkill. Or the stuff of Bruce Willis fantasies. Add a good can of pepper spray or a Kimber Lifeact instead: then you have expanded your options for dealing with a situation, and in a pinch you could still use it as a backup weapon.

Also, if you get stopped by a LEO, or face a jury in the aftermath of a shooting, one gun may be seen as a reasonable precaution. Two or more might give the impression that you were out looking for trouble. You may not like it and it may not be fair, but that's the way people think.
 
Not really. It's about the odds, or put another way it's about reasonable precautions.
Click to expand...
Reasonable precautions are actions based on odds weighed against stakes.
Carrying a gun can be looked at as a reasonable precaution, but carrying several on the off chance that your primary will blow up at the exact time you need it, or that you may need to throw everybody a gun is overkill.
Click to expand...
Of course, carrying a single gun can also be looked at as overkill, as millions upon millions of Americans do. On the other hand, going to all the trouble to carry concealed only to stop at a single primary with no back-up in case a multitude of plausible complications arise can be seen as a complacent half-measure. Preparedness is a continuum. It starts somewhere around "naked and hungry" and runs well past "locked in a windowless concrete bunker."

If we all got together, we could undoubtedly build a pretty strong consensus about what constitutes either wacky end of the spectrum. However, since the spaces in between those two points are made of opinion, we should try to be less damning of the differing beliefs therein, especially when our patch of the continuum resides so close to theirs. After all, to those who don't care for the practice of concealed carry in the first place, arguing over carrying one gun or two sounds like squabbling over which is the right way to break an egg.
 
Last edited:
To the original poster, I'm from West Virginia (Princeton) and as a result of the thread a while back about how dangerous Orlando, Florida, was, I used a link posted in that thread to do a little research. It turns out that my hometown had a higher crime rate than where I live now, which is in a suburb of Washington, DC. So I think people's perceptions of crime might be just a little skewed. I do lock my doors, however.
 
Carrying a gun can be looked at as a reasonable precaution, but carrying several on the off chance that your primary will blow up at the exact time you need it,. . . .
Click to expand...

Rule number one of audio engineers and live sound techs: Your gear hates you and will eff up on you the moment you need it the most.

I've found this to be true time and again.
 
If having a bug with you makes you feel secure go for it, but I really don't see the need for most to carry one.
Click to expand...

This same arguement is used by many for not carrying at all.

They simply don't see the need for the average citizen to carry a gun at all.

The vast majority of the time, I don't carry a BUG. I carry a primary with or without a spare magazine, depending on where I'm at and what I'm doing.

We had a serious shootout in my town a couple of years ago in the parking lot of our -only- hospital. Two rival gangs were going at it pretty hard, and my sister (a nurse) was out there (unarmed) advising people to leave if they weren't seriously ill. Things happen.

When I'm in an area where I doubt I'll need a gun, I carry one. When I'm in an area where I feel like I MAY need a gun, I'll usually carry two.

And I don't much care what anyone else thinks about it.

;)

Daryl
 
One of those, "I'd rather be on the ground, wishing I was in an airplane. Than in an airplane, wishing I were on the ground." scenarios.
 
I'm not going to weigh in on the relative advantages/disadvantages of carrying a secondary weapon as either LE or non-LE.

I will, however, offer an observation that I've seen at least my fair share of folks over the 20 years I've been a firearms instructor experience problems accessing, drawing and firing their holstered primary handguns ... and that was under controlled range conditions where the targets weren't shooting back or punching, kicking, stabbing, cutting, wrestling or anything else during an unexpected, chaotic, rapidly evolving situation.

Now, imagine how much more difficulty a number of those folks experienced when trying to access, draw and fire a smaller weapon they carried as either a secondary or off-duty weapon.

If many of those folks weren't spending the time to practice safely, properly & effectively drawing and using their primary handgun, what are the chances they invested the time & effort in doing so with their secondary weapons?

Having the weapon is one thing. Being trained and experienced in retaining the presence of mind and ability to draw upon the practiced skill in safely and quickly accessing it is something else again.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top