How Much Ammo/Magazines Should You Carry?

• Nobody ever walked away from a gun fight saying, “All that extra ammo was worthless, and I wish I wasn’t carrying it.”
• The only times when you can have too much ammo are when you are on fire or you are drowning.
• You should always have extra ammo and magazines because you never know when you will get the urge to go to the range and get in some practice.

The Debate

All quips aside, there is actually a debate in the industry about the amount of ammo that you carry and whether you should have an extra magazine. I find this very interesting for a few reasons, which I hope I can articulate well enough to make you confused.

Starring in this discussion are two people that I respect, immensely. There are others that weigh in on one side of the other, but these two do a great job of explaining their positions.

In one corner, we have John Correia of Active Self Protection. He proposes not carrying extra ammo or an extra magazine.

In the other corner, we have Massad Ayoob who needs no introduction. He proposes going the extra step and being prepared by carrying an extra magazine with extra ammo.

I have my opinion, and my opinion matters more to me than John’s or Massad’s. Your opinion may or may not change after reading this, but please, just make sure you at least carry. What you do beyond that is a personal decision.

John Correia

I will summarize John’s stance, here, and I am paraphrasing:

• Stats say that while we may be required to defend ourselves from violent crime over our lives, the stats say that it is almost zero chance you will need to reload or you will be able to reload before the gunfight is over.
• Our mission is to disengage from the threat, not to apprehend the criminal.
• It is better to carry other tools that you will need more often like a light, a less lethal, and a medical kit.
• Carrying an extra magazine is emotionally driven, not statistically driven.

Please watch John’s videos on this subject. He is very articulate and very comfortable with his view. It is important to note that John has analyzed 10’s of thousands of videos of private citizen gunfights.

John does a great job of presenting the stats. Please watch his videos for those stats. I am not going to regurgitate them for you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0tst9-_pPs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EOYLSvg5hqE

Massad Ayoob

If you don’t know this name, then you haven’t been doing a good job of keeping up on the self-defense industry.

Massad’s point of view is pretty clear, and he isn’t concerned with statistics. His view is easily summarized (again, I am paraphrasing):

• The gun is an emergency response tool. It must function when it is needed.
• The gun is a temporary tool unless you can reload it.
• If you need your gun, you may need every round available.
• You should prepare for the worst and hope for the best.
• Three are three very clear reasons why you should have an extra magazine:
1. Shooting might go high volume. It is possible that you will be on the extreme end of the statistical curve and you will be in an extended gunfight. You don’t want to run out of ammo.
2. Magazines fail. You should have another or you may be on the short end of the gunfight if you can’t continue in the event of a magazine failure.
3. You might have to struggle to retain your gun from somebody trying to take it from you. In that struggle, your magazine can be ejected, or it could be knocked out of battery during the struggle.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BsfGQASU3W8

My Opinion

Like I stated, previously, my opinion matters more to me than John’s or Massad’s. I came my opinion over many long periods of thought. Your opinion should matter more to you than mine, but my opinion is the right one.  

John kind of tries to shame people into his view by saying that those that carry an extra magazine do it out of emotion and comfort. I don’t ever accept that kind of pressure. However, stats say you won’t ever need an extra magazine.

While many people may say that carrying a magazine is starting down the slippery slope, I am absolutely fine with deciding where my line is at, and again, I will not be shamed into making a decision that doesn’t fit with my perspective on the value of innocent life.

However, if you do need an extra magazine, and you don’t have one, I hope you are right with your God.

I, like Massad, don’t care about the stats. It isn’t about the small odds, it is about the stakes. What is at stake is my life and the lives of my loved ones. I will take the extra step of carrying an extra magazine when I consider what can be lost.

The decision to carry an extra magazine is based upon risk (odds), but it is also based upon the individual’s risk appetite. My risk appetite is extremely conservative, and it involves innocent lives which have great value.

Will I ever need an extra mag? It is highly unlikely. Will I ever even need my carry gun? Well, so far, I have only needed it once while away from home, and the draw was all it took to eliminate the threat. The only time I had to use it in self defense (as a private citizen) was in my home where extra mags are easily accessible and don’t need to be carried on my body.

How important is your life and the lives of your loved ones? Can I compare the importance of those lives to a stat? Yeah… No. No, I can’t make life decisions based on a stat. Can you?

Press Check

First, our apologies for taking so long between posts. We have been extremely busy, and we have been dealing with the loss of some family and some friends. Then there are the many chores, plus training time… You get the idea, we get busy just like everyone. Life happens.

Anyway, with the release of series, The Terminal List, we have been hearing all sorts of people saying that press checks are stupid and that anyone performing them doesn’t know any better. 

Another apology, the guns shown in these pictures came right out of their holsters and were not cleaned just to take these pictures. If you see dust, oh well, we are sorry,  but we aren’t sorry enough to actually clean up every speck of dust.

What is a Press Check?

Simply, when you load your gun, and you chamber a round, how do you know that the round chambered? The answer, you can perform a press check to make sure. A press check is done by slightly pulling back on the slide of a pistol enough to see into the chamber and see if there is a round in the chamber. For example, this picture shows the slide being pulled back enough to see the silver of the nickel plated defense round in the chamber. When done, make sure that the slide is all of the way forward and in battery.

Alternatives

There are always alternatives to doing a press check.

Trust

You can trust that you chambered the round properly. Here is where the problem comes in. Many people get too casual about chambering a round and they will often short stroke the slide when chambering the round before it goes into the holster. It happens. Result? No problem, unless you actually need to use your defensive firearm, and when you pull the trigger, you just hear the loudest sound in the world, which is the click of a Type 1 Malfunction. Does anyone want to start a gun battle with a malfunction? Not us, that is for sure.

Peep Hole

Some guns have a small peep hole where you can peer into it and see if there is a round in the chamber. The picture to the right shows and example of a peep hole that is available on some guns.  If it is there, you will see the round, like in this image. You may need to look closely, but you should see the nickel plated defense round in there.

Loaded Chamber Indicator (LCI)

The LCI is a common feature on many pistols. It pops up to show that there is a round in the chamber. What is really nice about this feature is that you can feel the LCI in the dark. The last picture shows the bump of the LCI on the extractor.

Summary

Please make sure you have a round chambered in your gun, and please don’t just trust that it is in there. Everyone makes mistakes, but the Press Check allows you to make sure you didn’t make one of the most common mistakes made by people that carry guns.

Function Check for a Semi-Automatic Pistol

Too many people do not understand the need to run a Function Check on their guns prior to breaking them down for cleaning or maintenance to check them again after cleaning or maintenance. On the surface, it makes sense that you need to know that your gun works before you tear it down, even if it is just a field strip. You should also check it after cleaning or maintenance.

You Need

• Your pistol
• A magazine for guns that use a magazine
• Dummy rounds
• A safe area

The Basic Steps

Load the gun using dummy rounds, if none are available, you can still perform most of the steps with an empty gun.

Insert the magazine into the gun. If you don’t have dummy rounds, you can still do the other tests besides 1 and 3. Please do NOT run any function tests with live ammunition.

1. Chamber a round – Rack the slide to chamber the dummy round. This step verifies that your chamber is not obstructed and that the slide will pick up a round out of the magazine and will, using its springs, drive the round into the chamber.
2. Test the trigger – With all safeties disabled, pull the trigger and verify that the trigger activates. You should hear the click of the hammer hitting the firing pin or the striker being released.
3. Test the extractor and the ejector – Rack the slide, again to eject a dummy round and chamber another dummy round. This step verifies that the extractor and the ejector are working property to pull the round out of the chamber and to eject it out of the ejector port of the gun.
4. Test the trigger reset – With the safeties disabled, pull the trigger, hold the trigger back, rack the gun while continuing to hold the trigger back, then slowly release the trigger. You should hear a click from the trigger resetting. Pull the trigger again, just after you hear the reset click, and verify that the trigger activates again.
5. Test the firing pin – Remove any dummy rounds. Rack the slide again with the chamber empty and nothing in the chamber after racking the slide. While pointing the gun straight up, insert a pencil, a pen, or a dowel of some time into the barrel. Pull the trigger again while watching the pencil or pen to see if it jumps when the firing pin hits it. This verifies that the pin isn’t broken and isn’t obstructed.
6. Test the trigger safety (if one exists) – See the top picture. Rack the slide, and, without depressing the trigger safety, pull the trigger. The trigger should not activate.
7. Test the grip safety (if one exists) – See the middle picture. Rack the slide, and without depressing the grip safety, pull the trigger. The trigger should not activate.
8. Test the manual safety (if one exists) – See the bottom picture. Rack the slide, engage the the safety, and pull the trigger. The trigger should activate.

It is important to understand the current condition of your gun before cleaning or performing maintenance, then run the function checks again after cleaning or maintenance to make sure your gun is functioning before putting it away or putting it back in its holster to be carried.

 

Rittenhouse Verdict

The verdict is in, and the protests are about to go into full swing.

In a previous post, the actions of Rosenbaum, Huber, and Grosskreutz were discussed. In all three cases, plus the other cases with unknown assailants, they took aggressive actions that could be reasonably interpreted as meant to cause death or serious bodily injury to Rittenhouse, and he defended himself by using deadly force. His defense was justified.

The trial was very interesting. We saw how the prosecution tried to make a case, and violated Rittenhouse’s rights in the the process, where they didn’t have evidence to meet the standards required to convict him of the charges that they brought. We also saw how the prosecution’s witnesses backed up Rittenhouse’s defense case.

The Simple Facts

• His actions met all of the elements of self-defense and use of deadly force in self-defense.
• Rittenhouse was over charged.
• The prosecution, responsible for the over charging, was also malicious and should be officially reprimanded for malicious prosecution, and violations of law in their interactions with Rittenhouse on the stand and by failing to provide the defense with evidence.
• The prosecution failed to even come close to meeting the standards of any of the charges that they brought, except the possession by a minor. The possession charge was thrown out because of the poorly written law.
• Mainstream Media failed in their duties to report the facts, and instead, inserted their opinions that were not supported by the facts in the case. Multiple lawsuits should be expected, soon, against members of the media and their employers for failing to meet the standards of the press and for their malicious actions and defamation of character.

The Arguments

Rittenhouse should not have been there

This is the worst argument that people can make. Rittenhouse had a legal right to be there. He is a citizen and has the same right to assemble as the rioters. These same people seem to think that the protestors had some kind of higher-level rights than others. In fact, many of the supporters of the rioters have even claimed that they had the right to steal and destroy private, as well as public, property because they were protesting. There is no such right.

Rittenhouse should not have been open carrying an AR-15

As covered by the trial, Rittenhouse was not old enough to own and carry a pistol, much less conceal it legally. There was no law violated.

Rittenhouse instigated the violence

Nope. Not the case. He was there, at the invitation of property owners, to help protect their property, but never instigated anything. He was chased by the crowd, he was accosted, and he defended himself to prevent his death or serious bodily harm. This was made very clear in the trial.

Summary

Bad decisions were made by all parties. However, those that were killed or injured by Rittenhouse made worse decisions when they chose to attack an armed person.

Buying a Non-Production Gun

There are many guns that have been produced over the years, and many models are no longer in production. However, there are situations where it is not a problem that a gun is no longer made because there is a really large market for replacement parts. Some example would include the earlier versions of the Colt snake guns and the Browning Hi-Power. There are several others.

Recently, Honor Defense went out of business. They made great 9mm handguns designed for the concealed carry market. The problem is that they did not sell a large number of guns, so there is no third party market for key parts like extractors and springs. Magazines are also difficult to find.

Is it a problem that you can’t find replacement parts for repair? Well, yeah… duh! Speaking from first hand experience, it sucks to own a great gun when you can’t even get a replacement recoil spring for it.

The lesson? While it is tempting to buy a quality gun that is no longer in production, make sure you can get parts.

Distance

We hear about the 21’ rule, which really isn’t a rule, all the time in our community. Distance is more of an issue than most of us realize. Let’s break distance down into a few areas of concern.

1. Reaction Distance – The Tueller Drill, 21 foot rule, is a measure of reaction time. The idea, a general rule, is that 21 feet is the distance where an attacker can reach you and use an impact or bladed weapon before you can react, draw, and fire your gun. Inside that range, a defender needs to increase awareness and preparedness to ensure they can defend themselves. There are two ways to improve our reaction time, the first is to identify the threat as early as possible, the second is to practice our draw and our initial controlled pair to center mass to make it as quick as possible.
2. Striking/Hands-on Distance – This is the distance where an attacker can hit you and grab you to engage you in hand-to-hand, or empty-handed, combat. It is very clear that most us that carry a gun have not dedicated enough time to learn how to defend ourselves when we have somebody grabbing us, or striking us with punches and kicks. This distance is also the distance where an attacker can attempt to grab your gun. This is another area where most of us need to improve our skills. A good weapon retention class would be a huge benefit for most of us.
3. Shooting Distance – One of the most common questions in gun forums is what distance everyone should practice at when shooting on the range. The answer is ALL distances. We can’t dictate, or control, the distance that an attacker is at when they decide to attack somebody. We need to be able to engage an attacker at any distance where they might be a threat to us or our loved ones.

Distance is just one more area of concern for defenders. Think about it.

Ammo and Gun Taxes = Elitist Rights

It appears that with Biden’s election, legislators are feeling emboldened and are proposing more and more flawed legislation that won’t make any difference when it comes to the illegal use of firearms by criminals. What really is clear is that these legislators are being overtly discriminatory in their pushing what appear to be racist policies.

To set the tone, let’s look at a couple of terms.

• Poll Taxes – Laws requiring a fixed amount of money required to register to vote were in place until 1965. Many states had poll taxes, many did not. The point is that a poll tax was an impediment on the poor and working classes to prevent them from voting. Poll taxes are clearly discriminatory. Should policies requiring money to be spent to exercise a right, like voting, be considered to be similar to poll taxes that are meant to control individual rights?
• Elitist Rights – This term is a little more vague, but it is fair to say that many rights are not available to poor and working classes because they do not have the discretionary income. It isn’t that the rights don’t exist for everyone, but that those rights are less available to those without money, power, or membership in a certain group. For example, home ownership might be a right, but when it comes down to it, the right to own a home is hard for many people to exercise because of their income level and credit history, which is also a function of income to a large extent. Do we, as a community, want to prevent certain segments of society from being able to defend themselves?

Thanks to Congressional Representative Sheila Jackson Lee and her proposed legislation, we see that legislation is being proposed that would require:

• Psychological Evaluations – Please note that this would include other members of the household, not just the person wanting to purchase a firearm for their own defense. Let’s not even get into the biases of the evaluators as it would clearly make this a non-starter is many cases.
• Insurance Payments – What level, for what guns, for what areas, and so on, are not clear, but what is clear is that there were would be ongoing payments to an insurance provider to protect yourself and your loved ones. The argument that insurance is needed for cars doesn’t hold up, as self defense is a right.
• Government Training Courses – Certainly, these courses would not be free, and they would require people to take time away from work, as well as paying for the courses. Who would establish the requirements for passing is a whole other discussion.
• Multiple New Licenses – The bill requires all new levels of licensing for different types of guns. Yet another cost to exercise the fundamental right to self defense.

However, let’s not forget all of those other proposed laws around the country wanting to charge increased taxes on ammunition as well as guns, making it impractical to train and making gun ownership even more of an elitist right. It is fair to assume that those that can’t afford to practice will be more likely to miss their targets and fail to be as safe as those that would be able to practice. Yes, let’s sacrifice safety to prevent people from buying ammo. We already know from the failed Seattle laws that these laws do not lead to increased tax revenue and do not lead to money invested in gun safety.

Goals?

It is clear that the goal is not increased gun safety, it is the establishment of personal safety as an elitist right and the requirement of paying the equivalent of a poll tax to prevent poor and working classes from exercising their rights.

Ammo Hoarding

Clearly, ammunition availability is really low, right now. This is a very common concern, and it isn’t anything new to those that are shooting enthusiasts.

What causes hoarding?

The answer seems obvious. Of course it isn’t easy to explain. It really comes down to confidence in the stability of the world around us. This year, we have seen Government officials, and police, stand aside and not take action against looters and rioters. We have seen Government, at all levels, try to control a pandemic by taking away the rights of individuals and crushing our economy, too. The response, of many, has been to buy guns and buy ammo.

New guns, generally, means a new group of gun owners that need ammo for their guns to train and practice. Ammo is also needed to defend ourselves and our loved ones. This is especially true when we see the police fail to protect the community.

Gun owners have seen hoarding when it comes to guns and ammo for a long time. We see it every time there is an election year and we hear politicians riling up voters by saying they plan to confiscate guns and implement new laws infringing on the Second Amendment. We also see hoarding every time there is a mass shooting that is used to try to take away rights.

What should we do, now?

There are several parts to this answer, and options. Basically, there isn’t much we can do when it comes to the lack of availability of ammo. These are the obvious options:

Suck it up. It happens during election years, and other times of instability. It is like everyone that is a gun owner, or potential gun owner, suddenly realizes that they need more ammo.

Wait. Eventually, the manufacturers will catch back up, and people will get enough stock to stop them from feeling the need to buy more. The problem with waiting is not having ammo. 

Pay. The market drives price, and when there is very little ammo available, the price goes up. Way up. If somebody needs ammo, they will probably just need to pay what the market is demanding. Right now, it is a pretty high price.

Reload. Learn to reload. Normally, this is a good answer, but this year, we saw the key components for reloading also suffer a huge hit. In particular, primers have become incredibly hard to find, and they have also become incredibly expensive. Other components have also become scarce.

What should we do in the future?

Buy. This means buy when ammo is available, and stock up, and also buy when the price is a little high. Dollar cost averaging is the term. It means you set aside a certain budget and buy what you can every month.

Stock up.  When prices are reasonable, buy, buy, and buy. during good times. Don’t be afraid to be called paranoid. It is called being prepared for the worse of times.

Reload. Normally, reloading is the way to go when it comes to have availability for ammo. However, components must be available. The nice thing about having the components, and the skills, is that you can build your favorite rounds when you need them. The components can be stored for a very long time, and some of them can be found for free or close to free, even during shortages.

Kenosha Riot (Yes, RIOT) and Rittenhouse

Where to start… Let’s start with the summary.

Summary

Dumbfuckery is as dumbfuckery does.

The Players, Dumb Fucks, in this case

Rittenhouse

Bad decisions often happen from those without experience in the real world, and Rittenhouse made some bad decisions. The biggest bad decision was being at the riot.

Of course, that same bad decision was made by each of the people that were shot during the riot.

From a legal perspective, Rittenhouse was on private property and protecting that private property. How and why really don’t matter. However you view the decision making by everyone involved, Rittenhouse had a right to be there, and he had a right to defend himself from others, in this case, three violent convicted felons.

Police

From all accounts, Rittenhouse has interactions with multiple LEOs during the evening. Of those officers, a total of NONE questioned whether Rittenhouse, reported as being about 5’3” and about 135 lbs, is old enough to be open carrying a firearm. What is wrong with them? If at least one of them had said, “Hey, how old are you? Do you have some identification?” then the shooting would never have happened.

Rioters and Media

Multiple idiots were in attendance here. We have the main players:

Unknown Rioter #1 – He fired his gun in the air while chasing Rittenhouse. Basically, he threw gas on the fire. Rittenhouse was in full retreat and trying to get away from the crowd that was chasing him. There was absolutely no reason to fire a gun in the air and provoke other reactions.

Rosenbaum – He chased Rittenhouse. Even though Rittenhouse was clearly trying to leave the scene and get away from Rosenbaum, Rosenbaum continued chase. He tried to grab and take the AR-15 from Rittenhouse. I will assume that Rosenbaum had nothing but ill will in mind based upon his history as a convicted felon and sex offender and also based on his actions of throwing an object at Rittenhouse. Rosenbaum was shot and died. Lesson? Don’t chase somebody with an AR-15 that is clearly trying to retreat. Don’t chase them if you are not armed, at all.

Unknown Rioter #2 – He tried to kick Rittenhouse in the head, but missed. Rittenhouse shot at him, but missed, and unknown rioter #2 ran away.

Huber – After Rittenhouse fell down while trying to run away from the crowd, and another unknown rioter tried to kick Rittenhouse in the head, Huber hit Rittenhouse in the head with a skateboard and tried to take the AR-15 away from Rittenhouse. For all of the people out there that think a skateboard swung by an adult male is not a deadly weapon, I ask you to let us know so we can take a swing at you and see how quickly you go down. Of course, it is a deadly weapon when it was swung like it was. Of course Huber, not exactly a stellar citizen with multiple convictions including assault and domestic violence, is not exactly a brilliant person. Attacking somebody that has an AR-15, and that has demonstrated that they know how to use it, is just not an intelligent move.  Huber was killed.

Grosskreutz – He rushes at Rittenhouse with a drawn handgun. Let’s not gloss over that this is another convicted felon and that he was carrying a firearm, illegally, Grosskreutz approached Rittenhouse with his hands up (with a gun in one) then lunged at Rittenhouse. Grosskreutz was shot in the arm, which took a very large piece of his bicep off. Intent to cause harm was clear. If Grosskrueutz had just kept his hands up and backed away, he probably would not have been shot, but instead, he became aggressive.

Media – While not all of the media, the vast majority reported about what great people Rosenbaum and Huber were, and the Grosskreutz is also a wonderful person that was there as a volunteer paramedic. It took a good while before any of the media dared to tell the truth about these three individuals. Big kudos to Richard McGinnis, though, as he did a very good job of reporting the incident as an eye witness.

Hankison Compared to Sessoms

I saw this meme on the Internet, today. I started to see red. To compare these two, in the same breath, in the same light, is completely irresponsible.

I decided to step back, and gave it some thought. I decided to share my thinking.

Definitions

There are three different, for the most part, definitions regarding crimes involving the killing of others.

Murder in the First Degree – There are three elements to be convicted of this charge. They are:

1. Intent – You intended to cause the death of the other person. it was your plan. This is where modifications might come into play as the prosecutor tries to prove intent.
2. Deliberation – Also known as premeditation, you have to have had time to consider it and make the conscious decision to commit the murder. Generally, this means that you had time to reconsider and second guess yourself.
3. Death – The person must actually be killed.

Murder in the Second Degree – The elements are a bit different. The main difference is that there is no deliberation involved

1. Intent – You intended to cause the death of
   the other person. it was your plan. This is where modifications might come into
   play as the prosecutor tries to prove intent.
2. Death – The person must actually be
   killed.

There is no deliberation if in the heat of passion, instigated by a serious and highly provoking act of the victim, and there is not a sufficient time between instigation and the act for second guessing and reconsideration.

Manslaughter – The difference between Murder in the Second Degree and Manslaughter is that in Manslaughter, the act is not knowingly committed, but it is committed recklessly. In other words, there is no intent, but there is negligence.

Intent

Intent is a very important part of the formula. But, it makes no difference to the victim, as they are no longer with us. I agree to that point, but let’s compare the two cases involving the death of an innocent person.

Breonna Taylor

In the Breonna Taylor case, we saw:

1. A no-knock raid. These scare the fuck out of me as law enforcement officers make mistakes. Hankison, was not the one that made the mistake on the address. There was no intent on his part to kill Taylor.
2. Walker, Taylor’s boyfriend shot at the police. I get why that happened, see #1. It was a horrible mistake, but again, not made by Hankison. At least I don’t remember him being the one that submitted the warrant request to the judge using the wrong address. Hankison was not one of the officers, from what I have read, that went into Taylor’s residence.
3. Officers returned fire. Again, I get why. Again, a horrible result going back to #1. The officers returned fire from Walker. They did not act inappropriately in this case.

To be clear, Hankison’s irresponsible firing of his firearm, by shooting blindly, was way outside the realm of what should be expected from anyone carrying a gun. I would say a charge of manslaughter is appropriate for Hankison.

Cannon Hinnant

In the Hinnant case, we saw:

1. Clear intent to kill the child.
2. Clear premeditation of the crime.
3. Death of an innocent child.

Comparison

To compare the Breonna Taylor case to the Cannon Hinnant case is UNACCEPTABLE, and to think that they are even close to being comparable is disingenuous on a scale that I have never seen before. The comparison infuriates me, it is very inappropriate. Sessoms committed a horrendous crime.

Racism?

Neither case appears to have involved racism.