If it isn't what?
If its not the situation you prepare for. For instance if you prepare for a lesser situation: why the lesser?
If it isn't what?
Very true, but we can make reasonable, fact-based judgments about what would be unlikely to suffice, and about what would likely serve better in varying circumstances.We never know what we'll encounter, There's no point arguing on what's best because it will never be resolved.
????If its not the situation you prepare for. For instance if you prepare for a lesser situation: why the lesser?
????
Simple. Very simple.And I am wondering, since one should prepare for the gravest situation and most are probably not even prepared for one this grave, why they are preparing for a less grave situation?
That is irrelevant to the choice of firearm.What are the odds you will ever need to pull the gun? Slim
That is irrelevant to the choice of firearm.What are the odds you will ever need to fire the gun? Slim to none
The odds may be on the low side, but the contention that they are "almost nonexistent" if you do need to shoot is not a foregone conclusion. And if it turns out that you do need more, what do you do?What are the odds you will ever need to fire more than six rounds? Almost nonexistent.
Yes, of course. Whehher you can (and will) carry your firearm comfortably is very important.Comfortable doesn't mean sitting in a recliner drinking an adult beverage. It means things like I can carry this without being overburdened and physically uncomfortable all day.
But you can decide on what would be reasonably probable. In my evaluation, it might be two or three armed attackers attacking violently without warning at close range.
Good thinking, assuming that you "see it coming" timely and are able to avoid a confrontation.I assume anyone who attacks me is as competent as I am. Since I will favor retreat if possible and will likely be defending my family my main asset will be determination. My greatest chance is, met with determined and competent resistance, my opponents will seek easier prey.
That's the way it is.If this fails my opponents, being equal in competence and determination, have the value of numbers and the value of determine the time and place of attack. Those are major advantages.
Have you tried any realistic FoF training to test your confidence?As risk assessment does not favor preparation for a situation that is unlikely or unable to be overcome I am comfortable that the most likely worst case scenario that I could overcome could be handled by a single stack pistol (or revolver) and one reload.
The likelihood that you will ever have to draw and fire is not at all germane to the selection of a firearm.It is not irrelevant at all if you are talking about purchasing a concealed carry gun.
No argument. The likelihood of occurrence is very remote indeed.I never once went to the scene of a concealed carry person shooting someone. Could it happen, sure but it is not very likely.
The issue is twofold: (1) what kinds of encounters would be reasonably probable should something serious occur, and (2) what kind of mitigation would be reasonable.If it is not irrelevant, why don't you carry and AR everywhere you go. If you need maximum firepower, a handgun is never going to be enough.
The problem, of course is that people tend to miss a lot when they're getting shot at. Police hit rates tend to average under 50%.Playing with the numbers some, if you can get your accuracy up to 66% from 50%, you go up to a 93% chance of getting at least 6 hits out of 12. You have to go up to 17 rounds with a 50% hit ratio to achieve a similar percentage (92.8%).
Sounds like better shot placement beats more rounds. Which is pretty much what everyone knows, but it's interesting to turn the dials on the statistics variables and watch them prove that point.