Aguila Blanca
Staff
Several posts in this discussion are getting overly personal. Please keep your comments addressed to the topic, leave personalities out of it, or this thread will have to be closed.
Well, that's because we know the outcome. In the scenario itself, we don't.
That'd all have to be gauged while in it. (Unfortunately)
My point is if you have to go live and fight, would you be better off with a higher capacity weapon like a Glock 19 at 15+1 or a 5-shot revolver?
Yes or no. Better off with which one? In that scenario. G19 or Snub nose.
That is completely irrelevant to the question at hand.Chances are the majority of us will need exactly zero rounds of ammunition to make it through life as civilians.
I interpreted the question as having to do with need, not "comfort".So if the question is how many rounds do we need to be comfortable given our perceived....
I interpreted the question as having to do with need, not "comfort".
Right here in Miami Florida a few months ago. A man was walking to his car at around 8:30/9:00pm and a car pulled up. Out of it, 2 guys came out from the back doors. One had a 33rd stick mag in a Glock and another had the 50rd drum in his Glock. They both pointed guns at him, he got down, they put a knee in his back and robbed him of all his belongings.
I actually don't think it is irrelevant to the question at hand, despite personally choosing to carry a higher capacity firearm myself. Defining "need" isn't necessarily easy. Obviously we can and people have defined scenarios in this thread. How likely are those scenarios? When you assess risk you look at the potential implications of failing to mitigate that risk and the likelihood of that risk.That is completely irrelevant to the question at hand.
I interpreted the question as having to do with need, not "comfort".
Assessing a number is not the same as defining a need,So how do we define need
I proposed the number 5, noted that was unique to me, and it has been fairly poorly received
I get that some here are seemingly frustrated that others won't accept that more capacity means more capability
How many rounds of ammo a person decides to carry must remain his business and only his business.
I get that some here are seemingly frustrated that others won't accept that more capacity means more capability, but at a certain point in a conversation maybe you just agree to disagree.
I actually accept the statement but within a limit and that limit would be, if simply added to the above, “within the ability of the user”.
Jackalope is too concerned in proving something he accepts as true to a person/people that are going to keeping doing what they've been doing regardless
I wasn't aware that gangs have taken over south-central Louisiana. Do you have links to any articles discussing this issue?SATRP said:If I were unable to avoid traveling to gang claimed areas (South Central LA), ...