No reason to be dumbfounded I think. The OP did not mention load balancing. Clearly the intent was to improve his firepower.
Given the specific circumstances mentioned by the OP: 1) driving a vehicle 2) having difficult access to the gun for which the extra magazines were ordered but easy access to
another gun some comments were made on the soundness of the tactic. This followed a very precise question from the OP, let's not forget it, who asked:
Do you guys think I'm going into overkill here?
Given the circumstances described by the OP, my answer is a clear "yes".
______________
As to the other point you make, that
Any why on earth are you willing to allow some DA or lawyer to make your decisions for you?
I don't let anybody make decisions for me, and I don't ask if I am going into underkill or overkill; I carry a 9mm with 15 rounds in the mag and one in the pipe, and that's that.
I also respect the law, and there are limitations as to when civilians can use firearms in self-defense. It's not some DA, it's the law I worry about. Read Massad Ayoob's book, inform yourself on the legal costs of defending yourself after a shooting and read on the various angles DA's use to prove the vigilante angle. Two guns? Modified spring on a Beretta 92 even if it has absolutely NOTHING to do with defending yourself, any modification to a gun might be used in court to prove you were looking for a confrontation and asking for it. Is it fair? Not at all.
Are you dumbfounded that I try to illustrate the point to somebody who risks to be described as trigger happy ("my 38 is a mean to reach for my Glock 22" or something along those lines)? I found it responsible to do so, maybe I worry too much.
As an instructor, I always stress the extreme gravity of pressing a trigger in self defense. It's a life changing event, and even though is better to still have a life that can be changed as opposed to being dead, the consequences from an emotional and financial point of view are staggering.
Recently, I read this post from Mas Ayoob's Self Defense forum on GT (his is the most interesting sub forum there by far) and took comfort:
I've gone in and testified a couple of times for advanced competitive shooters who were involved in self-defense shootings, and both times it was made clear to the triers of the facts (grand jury in one case, regular petit jury in the other) that this was a person who went above and beyond in living up to his responsibilities by making personal commitments to skill to make sure no mistakes would be made if the gun had to be used for real.
The grand jury case was an officer-involved shooting, and resulted in no true bill, effectively exonerating the officer. The same grand jury hammered and indicted the guy who attacked him and forced the cop to shoot him. The full-blown trial was a murder case, and the armed citizen defendant was acquitted on all counts.
I shoot competition wherever and whenever I can, and don't feel it will be a detriment at all if I'm ever the defendant in a use of force case.
Notice that he says that the full blown trial was a
murder case: can you imagine what a wrecking thing is having to defend yourself in a murder case in the first place? How many thousands it will cost? It might be necessary to take that risk, but let's not pretend is some sort of joke.
