Is a single stack enough?
- Thread starter Jacket67
- Start date
OldMarksman
Staff
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.
How?
Start with a service caliber weapon. Try some different ones.
Try shooting, very fast, and see where one hits. Shoot at realistic ranges, concentrating on short ranges.
If one can, engage in some realistic FoF training, and validate the results of one's tactics and shooting exercises. Test the holsters. Vary the scenarios.
Study anatomy and wounding effectiveness, and try to evaluate how often those hits would have been likely to suffice.
OldMarksman
Staff
????
I have stated I prepare for a lesser situation and been pretty well reamed on my explanation. Probably fairly.
So I have offered one of those "grave" situations. 15 terrorists, with body armor and rifles, specifically targeting you as an individual. Perhaps it takes the argument to hyperbole but it seems a pretty grave situation that I am going to guess even those who would argue my approach is unreasonable are unprepared for.
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?
SocialAnarchist
Moderator
OldMarksman
Quote:
How about this, carry the pistol, in the caliber, and quantity of rounds that you feel confident, comfortable, and accurate with.
If your only objective is to "feel comfortable", etc. that's okay.
Dude chill. 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. It means I am comfortable with my choice of firearm and caliber and magazine capacity.
Frankly, the point I am trying to make is you might feel comfortable with 3 pistols on your person and 200 rounds of ammunition and an Uzi in your brief case. I don't find that necessary where I live and travel. So I am comfortable with my choice of a .45acp XDs with 2 magazines and 13 rounds.
But if your objective is to train and equip yourself adequately to respond effectively in the gravest extreme, there is mush more to it than that.
If I was preparing for the gravest extreme I would never leave my home without a ballistic vest and helmet, my AK-47, and spare mags for that. I prepare for the circumstances I am likely to face, not an all out riot. Because frankly if I know protests are occurring I stay the heck away from there. And around here we haven't had 3 to 15 attackers robbing the convenience store.
Quote:
Carry the number of spare magazines that you feel comfortable carrying.
If you like. How would you intend to use tham?
I would intend to use them as follows. To stop an attacker IF possible. Or more than likely as a means to allow my family to escape by providing protection, including firing at the attacker. I do not under any circumstances plan to stand fast and engage in a running gun battle.
Quote:
Because no matter what you do someone will tell you you are undergunned, under capacity in ammo, and anything else they can think of. Or they will tell you you have too much gun, too many rounds, and anything else they can think of.
It really doesn't matter.
It obviously matters because you disliked my opinion enough to dissect it bit by bit.
Quote:
How about this, carry the pistol, in the caliber, and quantity of rounds that you feel confident, comfortable, and accurate with.
If your only objective is to "feel comfortable", etc. that's okay.
Dude chill. 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. It means I am comfortable with my choice of firearm and caliber and magazine capacity.
Frankly, the point I am trying to make is you might feel comfortable with 3 pistols on your person and 200 rounds of ammunition and an Uzi in your brief case. I don't find that necessary where I live and travel. So I am comfortable with my choice of a .45acp XDs with 2 magazines and 13 rounds.
But if your objective is to train and equip yourself adequately to respond effectively in the gravest extreme, there is mush more to it than that.
If I was preparing for the gravest extreme I would never leave my home without a ballistic vest and helmet, my AK-47, and spare mags for that. I prepare for the circumstances I am likely to face, not an all out riot. Because frankly if I know protests are occurring I stay the heck away from there. And around here we haven't had 3 to 15 attackers robbing the convenience store.
Quote:
Carry the number of spare magazines that you feel comfortable carrying.
If you like. How would you intend to use tham?
I would intend to use them as follows. To stop an attacker IF possible. Or more than likely as a means to allow my family to escape by providing protection, including firing at the attacker. I do not under any circumstances plan to stand fast and engage in a running gun battle.
Quote:
Because no matter what you do someone will tell you you are undergunned, under capacity in ammo, and anything else they can think of. Or they will tell you you have too much gun, too many rounds, and anything else they can think of.
It really doesn't matter.
It obviously matters because you disliked my opinion enough to dissect it bit by bit.
Spats McGee
Administrator
If I knew I was going to a gunfight, I'd go somewhere else. If I couldn't go somewhere else, I'd take a rifle. And friends. With rifles. Since that's really impractical when one holds an office job that requires a suit, I have to make compromises, and I hope they're based on some reasonable assessment of the real world around me. Even with the violence going on in my city right now, the odds of my being attacked by 15 automatic-rifle-wielding meth addicts is relatively low. The odds of being attacked by 2-3 pistol-wielding ruffians is significantly higher.
With all of that said, I've generally been comfortable with something between an LCR (5 rounds, Saturday morning grocery shopping) and a G19 with an extra mag (30 rounds, expecting to work late downtown and walk 3 blocks to my car).
Pretty soon, I expect to be moving to a S&W Shield. 8 rounds in the gun, and I'll be ordering a double mag pouch, so I'll have a total of 24 on hand. Will that be enough? My crystal ball doesn't work very well but I sure hope so.
With all of that said, I've generally been comfortable with something between an LCR (5 rounds, Saturday morning grocery shopping) and a G19 with an extra mag (30 rounds, expecting to work late downtown and walk 3 blocks to my car).
Pretty soon, I expect to be moving to a S&W Shield. 8 rounds in the gun, and I'll be ordering a double mag pouch, so I'll have a total of 24 on hand. Will that be enough? My crystal ball doesn't work very well but I sure hope so.
Ride Madone
New member
Again!
Let me answer this once and for all with the only correct answer. There is no answer to this question! If you feel safe with a single stack it is enough, if you don't, then it isn't.
All kidding aside, I will give you my honest opinion. I will give my answer in the form of questions and answers.
What are the odds you will ever need to pull the gun? Slim
What are the odds you will ever need to fire the gun? Slim to none
What are the odds you will ever need to fire more than six rounds? Almost nonexistent.
So there you have it. A single stack is enough. I usually don't but you could always carry a spare mag if you feel under gunned. Also and probably most importantly, buy a high quality gun not a piece of junk. I would rather have a Glock 380 than a 9mm Keltec or Taurus.
Having said all of this, with prior military and 30 years in law enforcement, every time I was forced to pull my handgun, which was a full size Glock 21, I wished I had a bigger gun. I still however, stand by my belief a single stack is enough.
Let me answer this once and for all with the only correct answer. There is no answer to this question! If you feel safe with a single stack it is enough, if you don't, then it isn't.
All kidding aside, I will give you my honest opinion. I will give my answer in the form of questions and answers.
What are the odds you will ever need to pull the gun? Slim
What are the odds you will ever need to fire the gun? Slim to none
What are the odds you will ever need to fire more than six rounds? Almost nonexistent.
So there you have it. A single stack is enough. I usually don't but you could always carry a spare mag if you feel under gunned. Also and probably most importantly, buy a high quality gun not a piece of junk. I would rather have a Glock 380 than a 9mm Keltec or Taurus.
Having said all of this, with prior military and 30 years in law enforcement, every time I was forced to pull my handgun, which was a full size Glock 21, I wished I had a bigger gun. I still however, stand by my belief a single stack is enough.
stephen426
New member
The original poster said he is 5'9 and 150 lbs. with an athletic build. That is pretty lean. I'm a 5'7 and 160. Based on what I normally wear for work, I can comfortably carry a single stack. I went from a Glock 26 to a Kahr PM9. Did I miss the 4 extra rounds? No, but I did start carrying 2 extra (7 round) mags in the back of my non-dominant hand. That brought my round count to 20. Two mags balances better and looks more discreet. The Kahr can be pocket carried, but it is slower to draw from and can still print. I got the slip that goes on the slide and pull my shirt over it. While it is less comfortable than wearing a holster, it is as thin as it gets and very discreet.
Basically, carry what you can carry comfortably. It is better to carry less rounds than to carry no rounds. Carry reloads and practice reloading.
Basically, carry what you can carry comfortably. It is better to carry less rounds than to carry no rounds. Carry reloads and practice reloading.
OldMarksman
Staff
Simple. Very simple.
As I said, I intended for "the gravest extreme" to describe situations in which the use of deadly force is immediately necessary to defend against an imminent threat of death or great bodily harm.
Risk management involve a few simple steps:
- Identify the risks.
- Analyze the risks.
- Evaluate possible mitigation stategies.
- Decide whether tho accpet the risks unmitigated or to mitigate them.
- Select and implement a strategy.
For our purposes here, the risk is that of violent attack.
When we analyze it, we look at likelihood (probably every remote here) and the severity of consequence, very high indeed.
When we evaluate potential mitigation techniques, we decide first upon what situation we would most likely face should the risk materialize (i.e., what would be reasonably probable, should the situation occur), what it would take to address the risk, and how to most reasonably do that.
I would decide, among other important things, to carry a gun, and to carry it in such a manner that I could use it.
Your hypothetical scenario of fifteen armored terrorists is obviously far outside the range of any reasonable assessment what would be reasonable probable should the risk occur.
Why not prepare for it? Very simple. You really could not reasonably do so.
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.
We can reasonably prepare for that.
Got it?
OldMarksman
Staff
That is irrelevant to the choice of firearm.
That is irrelevant to the choice of firearm.
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?
OldMarksman
Staff
Yes, of course. Whehher you can (and will) carry your firearm comfortably is very important.
I did not mean to imply otherwise.
That is one reason why I carry a single stack 9MM when I would prefer a larger capacity.
What I meant to say, and perhaps I missed your point, is that simply "feeling comfortable " with a particular choice does not, in an of itself, make it a good one.
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.
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.
So I need my opponents to be less competent and / or less determined than I am so I can overcome the advantage if numbers and control of time and place. 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.
OldMarksman
Staff
Good thinking, assuming that you "see it coming" timely and are able to avoid a confrontation.
That's the way it is.
So I need my opponents to be less competent and / or less determined than I am so I can overcome the advantage if numbers and control of time and place. Unfortunately, those are things that are beyond your control.
Have you tried any realistic FoF training to test your confidence?
How should you expect to reload in the midst of a violent attack?
Ride Madone
New member
Quote:
What are the odds you will ever need to pull the gun? Slim
That is irrelevant to the choice of firearm.
Quote:
What are the odds you will ever need to fire the gun? Slim to none
That is irrelevant to the choice of firearm.
Quote:
What are the odds you will ever need to fire more than six rounds? Almost nonexistent.
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?
It is not irrelevant at all if you are talking about purchasing a concealed carry gun. 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. A small gun is easy to conceal and easy to carry, therefore you are more likely to carry it. As far as "if you need more, what do you do." What if you need more than 15 or 17 or 34. Everyone needs to decide how many rounds is enough. 30 years in law enforcement and I never once went to the scene of a concealed carry person shooting someone. Could it happen, sure but it is not very likely. Be ready, but for gods sake, backup guns and 3, 4 or 5, mags, get real.
And just for the record, I am not telling anyone what to do. Carry what you want and feel safe. I guess part of my point is, "People" feel like they need to be heavily armed, then they get into their cars and don't put on their seatbelts. You are ten times more likely to be killed in a car accident, but it is not safe to go outside without 17 rounds in the gun and two spare mags.
What are the odds you will ever need to pull the gun? Slim
That is irrelevant to the choice of firearm.
Quote:
What are the odds you will ever need to fire the gun? Slim to none
That is irrelevant to the choice of firearm.
Quote:
What are the odds you will ever need to fire more than six rounds? Almost nonexistent.
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?
It is not irrelevant at all if you are talking about purchasing a concealed carry gun. 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. A small gun is easy to conceal and easy to carry, therefore you are more likely to carry it. As far as "if you need more, what do you do." What if you need more than 15 or 17 or 34. Everyone needs to decide how many rounds is enough. 30 years in law enforcement and I never once went to the scene of a concealed carry person shooting someone. Could it happen, sure but it is not very likely. Be ready, but for gods sake, backup guns and 3, 4 or 5, mags, get real.
And just for the record, I am not telling anyone what to do. Carry what you want and feel safe. I guess part of my point is, "People" feel like they need to be heavily armed, then they get into their cars and don't put on their seatbelts. You are ten times more likely to be killed in a car accident, but it is not safe to go outside without 17 rounds in the gun and two spare mags.
OldMarksman
Staff
The likelihood that you will ever have to draw and fire is not at all germane to the selection of a firearm.
The things that will be germane are the factors that come into play if and when the handgun must be used.
It is a matter of conditional probability.
No argument. The likelihood of occurrence is very remote indeed.
The reason that most citizens who have looked at the question from the standpoint of risk management is that the potential consequences of not being able to denfend oneself, should the need arise, are extremely severe indeed.
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.
An AR would most probably exceed the requirements for handling any reasonably probable incident, and it certainly would be inconvenient to carry one all the time.
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%.
Some years ago, when I first ran the numbers for typical subcompact capacity and reasonable hit rate percentages, I was dismayed at how unlikely it was that one could prevail against two determined attackers with 5-7 rounds...
stephen426
New member
How about we just say carry what you reasonably can, practice reloading, and practice shooting as much as possible. While we know that the odds of a violent crime being committed against us are low, we do know that it is a possibility. Pretty much all of us have decided to carry a gun so that we have the ability to protect ourselves. How about we stop judging each other for what others decide is "enough gun" or "enough ammo"? Hopefully, most of us are here to learn from one another, especially those who have "been there and done that" rather than using this as a soap box.
Rant off
Rant off
Ignition Override
New member
As many muggers can Not be heard when they sprint towards you (in running shoes) from the huge blind spot, you obviously won't feel the need for a gun, and IF a gun or knife is already pointed at you (within reach), most of us realize that Then pulling our gun out would be stupid. Another member at MSSA told me that this happened to him. You want a back-up?
Well, as most threats give no warning.....
Study some Krav Maga for a good while in a martial arts school etc, and if the threat looks worse than a simple robbery, you might have a chance of disarming a weapon, if held against your body, or Very close.
My school is in Bartlett TN and I just began tng. this summer, at age 62.
Well, as most threats give no warning.....Study some Krav Maga for a good while in a martial arts school etc, and if the threat looks worse than a simple robbery, you might have a chance of disarming a weapon, if held against your body, or Very close.
My school is in Bartlett TN and I just began tng. this summer, at age 62.
Last edited:
I assume if I'm ever having to defend myself, my attacker(s) are armed, likely psychotic, sociopath, drugged, or combination of those undesirable traits.
Think your attacker(s) likely be a "normal" person on the way to work that suddenly decides to mug someone, I think not.
Someone(s) attacking another with lethal force likely going to be psycho, high on meth / bath salts, or criminally motivated and they show up at that place
"where nothing ever happens" unexpectedly; such individuals may not be easily incapacitated or deterred from their lethal actions.
I infer from a couple of replies in this thread that they basically anticipate a lone, anemic, undetermined attacker, not on drugs (not even caffeine in them) who will run away at the sight of a pistol, or be quickly incapacitated after a couple rounds.
Think your attacker(s) likely be a "normal" person on the way to work that suddenly decides to mug someone, I think not.
Someone(s) attacking another with lethal force likely going to be psycho, high on meth / bath salts, or criminally motivated and they show up at that place
"where nothing ever happens" unexpectedly; such individuals may not be easily incapacitated or deterred from their lethal actions.
I infer from a couple of replies in this thread that they basically anticipate a lone, anemic, undetermined attacker, not on drugs (not even caffeine in them) who will run away at the sight of a pistol, or be quickly incapacitated after a couple rounds.