PDA

View Full Version : Multiple Firearms in Same Caliber.



triplem
02-21-2004, 09:07 AM
This question is for Mr. DiFabio and others on this forum that know much more than me.

In another thread Mr. DiFabio made the comment "..9mm is the absolute lowest caliber gun that I will carry as my primary sidearm and when I do it is often in pairs."

I interpret this to mean if David is carrying a 9mm as a primary, he will carry a 2nd 9mm firearm at the same time (and quite possibly identical firearms based on another thread where he mentioned a pair of Kahrs).

Why carry a pair? I would think it would be easier to simply carry an extra reload / magazine.

Thanks to all who respond.

Neal

V42
02-21-2004, 09:22 AM
The fastest reload is a second gun.

triplem
02-21-2004, 10:10 AM
V42, while your response is probably correct, it is not on point. Your statement makes sense "across the board" and would apply to any caliber, whether it be .45acp, 10mm, etc.

David was making specific reference to carrying two 9mm vs. carrying two firearms of different calibers (i.e. a .45acp and a .38).

With the premise that 9mm would be the minimum caliber for a primary, why carry two?

Thanks, Neal

Al Lipscomb
02-21-2004, 01:22 PM
I just finished up "Wild Bill Hickok, Gunfighter" by Joseph G. Rosa. While there is no doubt that Mr. Rosa is a supporter of Bill Hickok, he does seem to have produced a balanced account of several real gunfights. While the law and the dynamics of a gunfight have changed over the years some things have not.

One example is that even though handguns have become much more reliable than the cap and ball revolvers of history they are still not perfect. A autoloading pistol gives you many things but perfection is not one of them.

Knowing you are going to enter a bad area I can understand having a backup firearm. Having identical firearms gives you advantages in training and interchanging magazines and ammuniton.

Having a backup firearm in the secondary shooting hand, along with the training to use it would make sense as threats can appear from anywhere in the 360 degrees we live in. Getting behind someones back is a very old tactic that is still going strong today. Not having to rotate 180 degrees to pick up a second target seems to make sense.

triplem
02-23-2004, 08:24 PM
Thanks to those that replied.

David, no apology necessary. Rather, thank you for taking the time and effort to provide a very thorough and well thought-out reply. I appreciate those that make a sincere effort to provide others with knowledge and insight.

Learning from the life experiences of others is enlightening. The more I glean from this forum the more I realize that being a "paper marksman" is a rather narrow skill-set.


Neal


I used to be indecisive but now I'm not so sure.