A thread to advocate not downgrading carry based on location.

Status
Not open for further replies.

CDW4ME

Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2009
Messages
3,427
Location
Florida
Premise:
A lethal force situation that happens in a "good" area merits the same caliber and capacity as required in a "bad" area.
Criminals are not restricted to "bad" places and may show up in "good" places.
A pocket gun is better than nothing, but probably not the handgun of choice if fighting for your life.

Therefore:
If a Glock 19/23, 1911, _____ is what one would carry going into a "bad" area, perhaps that is what one should carry everywhere.
Always strive to carry the gun you would carry if going to a "bad" area, lethal force situations can happen whenever and wherever; one can't defend themself with a Glock 19/23, 1911, .... if all they have is a pocket gun.
 
Some back-of-the-envelope math based on rough guesses; the numbers/ratios are obviously not precise.

Likelihood that you will have a dangerous encounter where having a gun is useful: X.

Likelihood that you will have a dangerous encounter that escalates to the point where you actually discharge the weapon: x/20. (I.e., most encounters are ended as soon as a perpetrator realized the victim is armed.)

Likelihood that you will have a dangerous encounter develop into a situation where you are shooting a determined attacker who will only stop when physical damage compels them to stop: x/200. (The overwhelming portion of the of the time, a criminal shot, or merely shot at, will leave as soon as it is clear that the victim has the capability and willingness to use deadly force against them).

Does this explain to you why someone's calculus of X (which DOES vary by location/time/behavior) might influence their calculus of whether it's worth carrying something they deem more inconvenient?
 
Works for me, and pretty much always has, and Ive been doing it for over 40 years now.

I carry what I shoot best with and what gives me the most options. The smaller guns are normally back ups and very rarely, primaries.
 
While I understand your point, there are a few things I think warrant consideration.

The assumption that the same cartridge and ammo capacity is needed in a "bad" area vs a "good" area is not necessarily true in my mind. Crime statistics can shed light on that as far as numbers of attackers in gang inhabited areas vs. Beverly Hills CA type area. I believe you are more inclined to encounter multiple attackers in the "hood" than an upscale residential area, or a nicely groomed downtown. So cartridge is the same, but capacity needs may not be.

When you look at the average number of shots fired in a self defense situation, it is pretty low I believe, as in like three shots per incident. So there is a flaw in the logic in general that more than a pocket gun or five shot revolver is needed. It's an average though, and there will always be extreme cases, so in general having more ammo is a good thing of coarse.

While criminals are not restricted to "bad areas', it is IMO erroneous to think that carrying a larger gun with more capacity is the answer when in a "bad area". It isn't. Avoiding the danger in the first place is the answer. If it's unavoidable, then you need to make life changes to avoid said areas, not firearm choices.

While a pocket gun is never the preferred defense weapon, it is often the size gun people choose because they know they will actually carry it. There's a lot of folks out there who don't want to carry a full size gun, or who have physical limitations restricting it. So one could easily make the argument that it is the preferred weapon, based on availability.

Always strive to carry the gun you would carry if going to a "bad" area, lethal force situations can happen whenever and wherever

Again, don't go into the bad area to begin with. It's a cliché on THR for a good reason. "Never go anywhere you wouldn't go without a gun".

one can't defend themself with a Glock 19/23, 1911, .... if all they have is a pocket gun

This is like saying you can't drive a race car if you don't drive a race car, and makes the assumption that everyone needs a race car, when they may not.

My personal opinion is that a person should carry whatever that person is comfortable with, and that is convenient enough that they will make carrying a gun a habit. That doesn't necessarily mean it will always be the same gun every single day. You just need to be familiar enough with that gun and cognizant of what gun you are carrying so use is automatic. For me that's a six round 45 acp. I carry it in every situation, not just in "bad areas". When winter is here and heavier clothing makes carrying a larger gun more convenient, then I carry it with an extended magazine because I do acknowledge that more ammo is better than less.

Who's correct here? We both are, and neither of us are. That's always the case with philosophy and opinions, because we are all different.
 
When you look at the average number of shots fired in a self defense situation, it is pretty low I believe, as in like three shots per incident. So there is a flaw in the logic in general that more than a pocket gun or five shot revolver is needed.

This is a very dated often quoted statistic that may no longer hold true.

I have see it published since LEO primary handgun was the revolver. Since revolvers at the time only held 5 or 6 rounds the low round count is due in large part shooting the gun dry.

I love the K-frame Model 10. It is the handgun I shoot best and for many years I consistently shot near perfect scores on qualifications (I always sandbagged a point or two).

Like it or not our society has changed and it is getting much worse. The S.B. CA. shooting has proved that there are terrorist sleeper cells in the country. (I have not seen any reports about the FBI catching the other 6 people regularly visiting the shooters home and garage).

Then just to prove it's not a East / West coast thing terrorism came to Smallville, Kansas last week.

Nowhere in America is safe. Our politicians embrace open borders and no checks on immigrants coming illegally into our county.
 
Last edited:
As our esteemed friend Kleanbore likes to say, it's not the odds, it's the stakes. You probably won't ever need a gun, but if you do, you'll really need it - so carry as much gun as you can.
 
The assumption that the same cartridge and ammo capacity is needed in a "bad" area vs a "good" area is not necessarily true in my mind.

Where is a "good" area and "bad" area?

Certain parts of town and businesses such as a biker bar are be argued as bad and to be avoided.

But what in the workplace such as in S.B. CA. and driving down the street in Newton, KS. and the parking lot and workplace in Hesston, KS.?

Schools should be considered "good" areas and yet time and time again they have been targeted by "bad" people.

I want to feel safe when I leave my house but the reality is much different.
 
Where is a "good" area and "bad" area?

Certain parts of town and businesses such as a biker bar are be argued as bad and to be avoided.

But what in the workplace such as in S.B. CA. and driving down the street in Newton, KS. and the parking lot and workplace in Hesston, KS.?

Schools should be considered "good" areas and yet time and time again they have been targeted by "bad" people.

I want to feel safe when I leave my house but the reality is much different.
That's a valid question and one that was left undefined by the OP. I guess I would look at it as an area that traditionally has more reported crime, or perhaps where gang activity is prevalent. You're definition may be very different though. Territorial criminals, groups, or organizations may not appreciate people different than them entering what they perceive as their neighborhood, or territory, or whatever. In those types of situations, you likely have a higher risk of confrontation by multiple attackers. Thus, perhaps more ammo is warranted if an outing is required in an area as described. But that again brings up the merit of actively avoiding such scenarios, when possible.

I do agree with you that so called "good" areas are subject to multiple attacker situations also, I just feel they are a bit less likely. Though gun free zones have been subject to many of the worst homicidal sprees in history. I'm not saying it can't happen. I'm not saying it won't happen. I'm not saying people shouldn't carry as much ammo as they want. All I am saying is people should carry what they're comfortable with. If that's a full size gun all the time, that's cool. I think society would be a lot better if every single law abiding citizen open carried a gun of their choosing. I just don't feel it needs to be the same gun all the time or the same capacity.

I really do feel bad that you don't feel safe leaving your home. I mean that too. I feel very safe leaving my home, and live in a good community. I still carry a gun of coarse, and violent crime does still occur, but I do feel safe, most of the time. I am very aware of my surroundings though at all times. There's never a reason to let your guard down.
 
This is a very dated often quoted statistic that may no longer hold true.

I have see it published since LEO primary handgun was the revolver. Since revolvers at the time only held 5 or 6 rounds the low round count is due in large part shooting the gun dry.

I love the K-frame Model 10. It is the handgun I shoot best and for many years I consistently shot near perfect scores on qualifications (I always sandbagged a point or two).

Like it or not our society has changed and it is getting much worse. The S.B. CA. shooting has proved that there are terrorist sleeper cells in the country. (I have not seen any reports about the FBI catching the other 6 people regularly visiting the shooters home and garage).

Then just to prove it's not a East / West coast thing terrorism came to Smallville, Kansas last week.

Nowhere in America is safe. Our politicians embrace open borders and no checks on immigrants coming illegally into our county.

Regarding this, Yeah, ok, I can accept that that is an old stat. I don't have more recent numbers to argue the point, but I haven't seen any indicating otherwise either. So I guess it's moot really. Do you have any, because I would like to read them? It's an interesting topic. A Google search didn't yield anything good for me, but it was fast.

I do read the NRA articles though that state that violent crime is down on average in America, so I guess I don't necessarily agree that things have gotten worse. It probably depends on where you live a bit.

Regarding terrorists, well, I don't view any handgun as being a contender with a well armed person on a mission to kill. If presented with an opportunity to stop an attack, I'd take it. But in those situations I feel my handgun is going to be used as a means of getting my loved ones out of the situation, and let the police do their job.
 
Last edited:
I carry the biggest thing I can conceal in a given situation. If it's no more than an M&P Shield, so be it.

It's been said that a .22 you carry is better than a .45 in the safe. I agree 100%. Carry the biggest thing you're comfortable concealing.
 
Yeah, I'm with Candyman on this one...I think the premise is flawed in that my reason for going with a lighter/smaller gun isn't that I think an area is safer, but that I don't think I can successfully conceal a larger gun.

I once carried a long-slide 10mm 1911 in circumstances where
I thought my actual likelihood of needing a gun was as close to zero as can be found. At the same time I wouldn't carry anything bigger than a p3at to work because work is close proximity for very long timelines and the odds of an accidental failure to conceal go up with time.
 
I carry what I carry and carry it all the time and everywhere I go.

If we knew where an attack would happen we wouldn't go there. I know that has been said over and over but that doesn't make it wrong. I have also never heard anyone I know choose which gun to carry by where they were going. I have however heard of some adding a BUG in some instances.

Carry the gun you are used to shooting and carry it in the same place on your body every time.
 
Again, don't go into the bad area to begin with. It's a cliché on THR for a good reason. "Never go anywhere you wouldn't go without a gun".

Yes, avoid "bad" areas.
However, any place is potentially at least temporarily bad if bad people show up.
(Heath, Columbine, Lubys, Aurora, San Bernardino, Chattanooga, Sandy Hook)
 
Reminds me of the Texas Ranger parable:

An old lady at a Texas BBQ saw the 1911 on a Ranger's hip and quipped, "Expectin' trouble?".

The Ranger replied, "No, Ma'am; If I was expectin' trouble, I'd have brought my rifle."
 
IIRC, violent crime has been decreasing since 1991 or so.

Maybe society has been getting worse lately (as in poor manners and general lack of courtesy), but that doesn't necessarily mean that crime has.
 
If I have to go to a known trouble spot, the pistol I carry usually stays the same. The amount of ammo I carry and the presence of a back up gun may change.

The recent terror attacks have made me think, but it has not changed much in my training or equipment. I try not to rely on the "rarity of occurrence" factor because this can lead to complacency (Situational Awareness can be a valuable tool). There are no illusions either. You are more than likely out gunned and out manned, but your certainly not defenseless.

I read a report some time ago (around 2004), from the FBI, that there were over 400 possible terrorist cells in North America. Definitely concerning.
 
If legally permitted to carry in an area or during an activity, I do. If not, I don't. Good/bad has no bearing.
 
All I am saying is people should carry what they're comfortable with. If that's a full size gun all the time, that's cool. I think society would be a lot better if every single law abiding citizen open carried a gun of their choosing. I just don't feel it needs to be the same gun all the time or the same capacity.

While I think a armed society is a safer society we need to move past just have a gun. We need to carry enough gun.

A common question on forums is what kind of small gun should I choose to slip into my pocket when going to convenience store at night? Convenience store are among the highest target for armed robberies. Therefore it would make more sense to be well armed rather than just having a small low powered gun chosen just on how well it fits the pants pocket.

I really do feel bad that you don't feel safe leaving your home. I mean that too. I feel very safe leaving my home, and live in a good community.

So is Hesston and Newton, Kansas. Hesston has a population of 3,700 people. It has a college, two large manufacturing plants, low unemployment and low crime. It is a town where parents can turn their kids loose on the street to ride their bicycles.

Newton, Kansas is larger with a population of 19,000. It has shed it’s past as a rough Cowtown and railhead for the Santa Fe railroad. They had a officer involved shooting a year or so ago. This is their first shooting involving a LEO for at least 40 years.

You are entirely missing my point. It is not possible for you to be free of harm outside of your home. Our society is too mobile. Our perceptions often don’t match reality. It is easily to ignore the California shootings as weirdos, hippies and other crazies live there. This leads to the question how many weirdos, hippies and crazies live in Newton? Well, we can count Ford as one.

What makes you think your community and neighborhood is any different?

We are learning here that Ford abused alcohol and meth. He had a long violent criminal history and a lot of personal problems. Yet he live a apparently normal life with two children and a good paying full time job. He began his shooting spree by shooting a motorist that was on a public street.

How many people are there like that are living in your neighborhood? We had a serial killer living less than 1/2 mile away from us. It will hit when the reality of violent crime comes to your community.
 
While a pocket gun is never the preferred defense weapon, it is often the size gun people choose because they know they will actually carry it. There's a lot of folks out there who don't want to carry a full size gun, or who have physical limitations restricting it. So one could easily make the argument that it is the preferred weapon, based on availability.
That's me, I'll likely never carry (on a regular basis) a full sized gun again. It's just to inconvenient, and I'm to lazy. If I'm going to an area I'm not familiar with I may step up with a bug and throw an extra mag in my pocket, but usually it's the one pocket pistol and one mag for me.

And if the next decade is like the last, even that's a waste of time for me.
 
IIRC, violent crime has been decreasing since 1991 or so. Maybe society has been getting worse lately (as in poor manners and general lack of courtesy), but that doesn't necessarily mean that crime has.

Crimes committed by individuals have been going down but organized attacks by heavily armed individuals or small group of individuals are on the increase.

I am no expert just a opinionated guy but much of this is because of high ranking government officials simply don’t care about the welfare of American citizens. Refusal to enforce immigration laws, deporting illegals after being convicted of crimes sends a message that committing crimes doesn’t have a penalty. All the while we have sat back and watched terrorism hit Europe and the Middle East.
 
My theories:

-If I think there is a higher probability of needing a gun at a location, I do my best not to go there...avoidance is usually possible.

-OP is spot on, if you need to use a firearm in lethal self defense you need everything you can muster, because some serious stuff is on the line. Doesn't matter when or where.

-You never know when or where you may need to defend

-If what you normally carry is not what you would want when you need a gun, it shouldn't be what you normally carry


Now, that said...I do change what I carry based on things such as where I am going. I might just have a 10+1 round smaller pistol (G26) at any given time during the summer but if I had to go, say, into the city of Atlanta, I would be far more likely to have the 15+1 G19 that day, maybe even a spare mag or a BUG.
 
While a pocket gun is never the preferred defense weapon, it is often the size gun people choose because they know they will actually carry it. There's a lot of folks out there who don't want to carry a full size gun

There is a rather large gap between a pocket gun and a full size gun.

Pocket gun generally meaning a small single stack .380 or maybe a slim single stack ~6 round 9mm or a 5 shot snub nose revolver. Full size being a semi auto duty type pistol that probably holds about 17 rounds with a significantly longer sight radius, barrel, and grip.

Lots of compact and sub compact pistols in between those. A Glock 26, Sig P320sc, M&P9c, P30sk, etc whatever...much easier to carry and conceal than a pocket gun, but shoot much more like a full size, and can take full size magazines


IOW...pocket gun or full size gun is a false dichotomy
 
Wow, most of this thread has been preaching and doesn't answer the OPs question. It seems there are many who have opinions but not about the question asked.
 
But what in the workplace such as in S.B. CA. and driving down the street in Newton, KS. and the parking lot and workplace in Hesston, KS.?

You think you're really better prepared to take on two people ARs or one guy with an AK because you carry a G19 instead of a G42?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top