TexasCHLforum.com

KHickam wrote:I currently carry and shoot a M&P45 - I really like it. But, thinking of getting another gun - pistol because everyone should have two pistols I think - pretty much decided on a Sig P320 Carry in 9mm but still wondering whether I should actually get one or just keep shooting the 45 - IE spending the money on ammo not guns - because I can and do shoot the 45 extremely well -

Do you think one gun is enough? Pistol wise I favor larger pistols - because I truly believe if you have to use it the larger more capacity pistols are better - IE most compact 45s carry 7 rounds my M&P45 carries 10 rds with a magazine capable of going to 14 rounds.

Also politically speaking if the election goes (like it looks to the democrats) I see multiple challenges in the Supreme Court going against gun owners and at the very least I see magazine capacity limits - so 10 rds of 9mm (as opposed to 15 and 17 in the various models of P320 I am looking at) makes little sense to me. My philosophy is more bullets is better - but if limited to 10 rds - bigger bullets are better.

Scott B. wrote:...
If there's another Democrat in the White House, I suspect we'll see an expansion of gun rights (at the state level) rather than a contraction, despite what the evil queen will try. She'd have to gain control of both chambers to do anything other than administratively.

TXBO wrote:

Scott B. wrote:...
If there's another Democrat in the White House, I suspect we'll see an expansion of gun rights (at the state level) rather than a contraction, despite what the evil queen will try. She'd have to gain control of both chambers to do anything other than administratively.

She won't need control of both chambers. All she has to do is appoint one liberal justice to the Supreme Court and she has jeopardized 2nd amendment rights for a generation or more.

TXBO wrote:

Scott B. wrote:...
If there's another Democrat in the White House, I suspect we'll see an expansion of gun rights (at the state level) rather than a contraction, despite what the evil queen will try. She'd have to gain control of both chambers to do anything other than administratively.

She won't need control of both chambers. All she has to do is appoint one liberal justice to the Supreme Court and she has jeopardized 2nd amendment rights for a generation or more.

FastCarry wrote:I believe you should have multiple firearms for many reasons. Some fill some roles better than others, and you will need a backup in the event yours needs repair.

I also believe in having ammo at the ready in magazines as well. Im opting for the same platform to keep the diff mag types to a minimum. I keep mags in my car, mags in a belt carrier, mags in the range bag and the gun case - all for 1911's. No matter which 1911 i grab, whether its the decked out night stand/a problem arises gun, carry gun, or range plinker, the mags in various locations will work in it. This mindset may be due to the capacity limitations of the 1911, but you get the idea.

I would get at least one back up.

Soccerdad1995 wrote:Let's look on the bright side, last night Hillary said that she has my back. I'm sure we have nothing to worry about.

Ryan wrote:

FastCarry wrote:I believe you should have multiple firearms for many reasons. Some fill some roles better than others, and you will need a backup in the event yours needs repair.

I also believe in having ammo at the ready in magazines as well. Im opting for the same platform to keep the diff mag types to a minimum. I keep mags in my car, mags in a belt carrier, mags in the range bag and the gun case - all for 1911's. No matter which 1911 i grab, whether its the decked out night stand/a problem arises gun, carry gun, or range plinker, the mags in various locations will work in it. This mindset may be due to the capacity limitations of the 1911, but you get the idea.

I would get at least one back up.

This is my philosophy. I am in the process of selling every pistol I own that isn't chambered in .45
My wife and I both shoot the 1911 platform extremely well, and that's what both of us carry. I'd like to consolidate pistol ammo to one caliber since neither of us shoot any of the other pistols we have.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

Ryan wrote:

FastCarry wrote:I believe you should have multiple firearms for many reasons. Some fill some roles better than others, and you will need a backup in the event yours needs repair.

I also believe in having ammo at the ready in magazines as well. Im opting for the same platform to keep the diff mag types to a minimum. I keep mags in my car, mags in a belt carrier, mags in the range bag and the gun case - all for 1911's. No matter which 1911 i grab, whether its the decked out night stand/a problem arises gun, carry gun, or range plinker, the mags in various locations will work in it. This mindset may be due to the capacity limitations of the 1911, but you get the idea.

I would get at least one back up.

This is my philosophy. I am in the process of selling every pistol I own that isn't chambered in .45
My wife and I both shoot the 1911 platform extremely well, and that's what both of us carry. I'd like to consolidate pistol ammo to one caliber since neither of us shoot any of the other pistols we have.

I went the opposite route, from carrying/shooting .45 only, to adding 9mm carry options to my stable - on the theory that if you can't find one caliber, you'll be able to find the other......and both are easy to reload.

I don't think there really is a right answer on the OP's question. I'd think more about the platform than the caliber, and then take caliber into consideration after that. If the OP is currently carrying a M&P45 (a good gun) and is comfortable with the platform, why not just get an M&P9?

FastCarry wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:

Ryan wrote:

FastCarry wrote:I believe you should have multiple firearms for many reasons. Some fill some roles better than others, and you will need a backup in the event yours needs repair.

I also believe in having ammo at the ready in magazines as well. Im opting for the same platform to keep the diff mag types to a minimum. I keep mags in my car, mags in a belt carrier, mags in the range bag and the gun case - all for 1911's. No matter which 1911 i grab, whether its the decked out night stand/a problem arises gun, carry gun, or range plinker, the mags in various locations will work in it. This mindset may be due to the capacity limitations of the 1911, but you get the idea.

I would get at least one back up.

This is my philosophy. I am in the process of selling every pistol I own that isn't chambered in .45
My wife and I both shoot the 1911 platform extremely well, and that's what both of us carry. I'd like to consolidate pistol ammo to one caliber since neither of us shoot any of the other pistols we have.

I went the opposite route, from carrying/shooting .45 only, to adding 9mm carry options to my stable - on the theory that if you can't find one caliber, you'll be able to find the other......and both are easy to reload.

I don't think there really is a right answer on the OP's question. I'd think more about the platform than the caliber, and then take caliber into consideration after that. If the OP is currently carrying a M&P45 (a good gun) and is comfortable with the platform, why not just get an M&P9?

Ill agree with but i think my point is being slightly misunderstood. I should have clarified, my preference for multiple firearms inside the defense genre is that they take the same mag.

So if I had an MP 9, my second gun might be an MP9 SC. different gun, but the 2 spare mags in the glove box or my back pack would fit either gun. If i was limited to owning two guns, and both needed to be defense minded.. thats what I would do. Now, venture outside of defense and its fair game on what platform/system it is.

For a few years, i would have 2 .45 mags in the car and 2 9mm mags. but that limited me to two reloads depending on what I carry. Now, i have 4 .45 mags in the car, and i can pick up any 1911 to carry with 4 reloads ready.

Scott B. wrote:

TXBO wrote:

Scott B. wrote:...
If there's another Democrat in the White House, I suspect we'll see an expansion of gun rights (at the state level) rather than a contraction, despite what the evil queen will try. She'd have to gain control of both chambers to do anything other than administratively.

She won't need control of both chambers. All she has to do is appoint one liberal justice to the Supreme Court and she has jeopardized 2nd amendment rights for a generation or more.

And the pendulum will swing back, at least I have to hope it will.

One the lawyer types could chime in, but they'd have to get a case headed their direction and override the court's own precedents. I'm sure that' a goal. The expansion of 2A rights at the state level helps. And I agree, it will only get worse in the unfortunate minority of anti-2A states.

Soccerdad1995 wrote:

TXBO wrote:

Scott B. wrote:...
If there's another Democrat in the White House, I suspect we'll see an expansion of gun rights (at the state level) rather than a contraction, despite what the evil queen will try. She'd have to gain control of both chambers to do anything other than administratively.

She won't need control of both chambers. All she has to do is appoint one liberal justice to the Supreme Court and she has jeopardized 2nd amendment rights for a generation or more.

The impact of this will be much worse for those residing in anti-gun states and cities. Hopefully, the Texas legislature will remain gun friendly.

But yes, moving the Supreme Court further left will be a very bad thing long term.