Discussion in 'Handguns: General Discussion' started by CDW4ME, Aug 17, 2021.
I do give you some credit for the topic. But, as I see it....
1) Life is about risk management and I'm responsible for that. I dont wear steel toe boots around the house but I do in other areas that present greater risks. Risk assessment, risk management.
2) This is the dumb one, imo. No one volunteers to let me flick boogers at them either.
3) Something is better than nothing. I wear shoes/flip flops around the house instead of steel toe boots because stepping on something small and sharp bare foot is not something I want to risk (carpet fuzz too) and it is much greater chance than having my toes smashed. Risk assessment, risk management.
4) Thats just plain false.
True, but it's one of those potato potahtoe type things. One person's sensible option is another's rationalized option.
So I do what fits for me, explain my reasons, and largely don't worry about what others say/think.
Of course, my choices are completely sensible and perfect and anyone who disagrees is being irrational and, frankly, wrong
Try as you will you won’t change it and for 80 years it’s been kind to me.
I see how you rationalized this.
If you truly believe you're rationalizing carrying it because it makes zero sense...to you.
I just don't believe that weighing out options, finding the right balance amongst pros and cons (trade offs?) is the same as rationalizing.
Rationalizing would be me carrying your DE "in case I'm confronted by a grizzly on the mean back roads of southern Ohio"
If he doesn't carry these items daily I'd like to hear his rationalization. Obviously anything short of full kit is subpar.
They upped their carry piece when they were in an area of greater anticipated threat. Funny thing is that no one seemed to care there or then. It was just what was done.
People may not know their caliber &/or capacity lacks, so I will tell them.
It's a message board for discussing such things.
It's a unique question; give credit for that.
I am just playing devil's advocate.
Somebody, somewhere might see the error of their ways.
I sort of care about the respondent's life and health.
Even if I say "made you respond" - it's not trolling.
Obviously a lot of people don't take defense sufficiently seriously.
I won't be there when the chips are down.
I don't have to buy anybody's CCW.
I don't have to feed anyone's gun.
What works for others may not work for me and vice versa.
I just want to stir the pile just to smell it.
My mind is made up. This isn't really a good-faith discussion.
This thread will be allowed to stand and flourish because reasons.
At least I use pocket holsters, and I'm fairly proficient with those particular handguns.
But if I'm attacked by a gang of armed ruffians, my laziness will be my doom.
I'd venture to guess that such an attack would result in the doom of many of us, regardless of our carry choices.
That's not the truth OP wants to hear about.
If I post a video where the bad guy takes hits and comes back for more would you not post that again?
Risk assessment: I assess that if defending against a risk (threat) I'd prefer at least Glock 19 in hand and that doesn't change cause I'm in a nice spot.
Risk management: I avoid stupid people, places, live in a "good area" ect... that does not override preferred in hand... Glock 19 (wherever, whenever)
We agree, I think its dumb too; yet, I've seen that rationalization posted multiple times over the years.
You're welcome. FWIW, I lean toward agreeing with your sentiment on this but it's not a simple binary issue.
For example, in reply to your comments....
Risk assessment: So do I (but not glock). I prefer/choose 9mm in various handguns which vary in size and capacity. Keeping concealed is very important to me. By my assessment, the risk of exposure (etc) is more likely to happen than needing to use it and the consequence can be severe.
Risk management: Due to the likelyhood risk of needing it and not having it and also the likelyhood risk of having it and exposing it, somehow a balance must be found to give myself peace of mind. Not your mind. Its my livelihood; not your mind.
As such, Attire and activities will largely be the influential factor which one I choose.
A smaller lighter 9mm with less capacity is far easier to ensure staying concealed in some attire & during some activities.
Some rounds are better than more rounds if having more rounds/larger gun increases the risk of exposure beyond my peace of mind. My mind, my life; not yours.
Youre free to disagree. And I welcome your input for what works for you. And I'll consider if/how I can apply it to myself as it's in my best interest.
But assuming that what works for you will also work the same for others is just another form of rationalizing & not being truthful in of itself.
As a light hearted exaggerated example, some people may be lucky? to have enough spare room in thier speedo to pack a Glock 19 while playing beach volleyball (like a sloth) and not print.
Others may only have enough spare room for a NAA mini revolver. Something is better than nothing.
It would be disingenuous to argue that you could conceal a Glock 19 in tight short shorts and crop top as effectively as you could a NAA and its not realistic to show up to a beach volleyball game in over sized 5.11 cargo pants to hide a Glock 19, spare mags, and ankle holster with the Glock 26.
Also, risk factors associated with area can play a part in your decision. For example, in LA, DC, NYC it seems groups of perps is becoming more common. I can speak in regards to LA, it's more common to have multiples in east LA than in Eastvale 50 miles away. I can't remember a single instance in Eastvale. I wouldn't be surprised if it was weekly in east LA.
Somewhere there is a balance that is right for the individual responsible for thier own self.
Dale Alan is correct; the OP was poorly written. The confusion was evident in the following discussion.
Not to be rude, but I simply carry what I want, regardless of other people's opinions, or standards.
FACT- a 32ACP or a 22LR, used properly, can be very capable firearms.
FACT-in many rural neighborhoods you are far more likely to be struck by lightning, than be required to defend yourself with a firearm.
Opinion-this isn't Beirut, and while I carry something larger on the farm, to handle pest control, my carry in town is considerably smaller.
What migtht that have to do with a choice of defensive weapons?
In practice, I’ve found that I draw, shoot, and reload the 26 very well.
It’s my edc. Maybe there’s better but I don’t care. I’m running with my 26 with zero plans to change. Whatever happens, happens.
Lets assume you carry in those rural neighborhoods, you are likely not carrying for people typically encountered.
Odds are if you have to defend yourself the threat(s) came from elsewhere. FACT- "bad" people are mobile.
For threats that left their "bad area" on a potentially murderous field trip to a "good area" 32acp/22lr is the preferred caliber to incapacitate them ASAP?
That right there we can agree on ... and that would be telling it like it is.
Certainly not my choice.
Separate names with a comma.