More than one gun???

"The concealed handgun permit that you have applied for authorizes you to carry a handgun concealed on your person. It does not authorize you to use that handgun."

This is the introduction to the laws pertaining to a CCW permit in Louisiana. Other states will differ.

Please note it specifically states "a handgun" and "that handgun" as in a single gun. It does not state multiple guns. It does not say "weapon" Yes, it is a play on words but the court says the letter of the law must be followed. In this case, it also covers the intent of the law. A local attorney learned that while carrying a Springfield .45acp and a baby Glock at the same time. Fortunately the case was dropped as there was no shooting involved. But it shows what can concern a person after a shooting in Louisiana.

I cannot say what the law states in other jurisdictions but I would like to know what each state says in their concealed weapons law.
 
I carry two everyday.

Too many folks worry about getting sued or going to jail. While I share those ideals, I don't let it stop me from one important fact. I want to LIVE! I will do everything I can within the limits of the law to go home to my family or protect them. If I have to go to jail, so be it.

Actually a little preplanning will most likely keep you out of jail.

The biggest difference between us average gun carriers and law enforcement is that we don't have to chase and apprehend bad guys.

But I urge to stop and think about this......
We don't have body armor.
We can't call for back up.
We don't have a long gun or dog in the cruiser.
Some of us don't carry a stun gun and/or pepper spray.

I can and will always carry a backup or second gun. I need every advantage I can get.

See the links about what Mr. Ayoob has to say on the matter.


Ayoob on Handguns lessons from the past: Three reasons to carry backup - Handguns | Guns Magazine | Find Articles at BNET

2010 Shot Show: Massad Ayoob talks about carrying a second firearm
 
The fact is you did not need to draw one gun, much less two.
No, but the one I thought of as #2 was the logical choice and i'm not willing to give up the range and power #1 offers.
A person carries in the attempt to gain the upper hand. Carrying two guns is a personal choice that may work to a disadvantage.
....or an advantage.
In the shootouts you refer to did not involve private citizens. It happens in LE work but not with civilians.
That's not always the case. Lance Thomas wasn't a cop.
I practice with multiple guns. I also switch guns I carry, depending on the clothing, the weather, the need and the assignment I am on. I go into the worst of the worst areas and deal with those that will kill in a heart beat. A man I dealt with late last year has been convicted three different times of murder and I had to go after him on his turf with his buddies around him. I still have never felt the need to carry two weapons and I have lived over 40 years of doing so.
God bless you for doing this work. I love what you do, but disagree with your doctrine.
We will have to disagree on this issue and I wish anyone well that feels the need to carry two guns.
I'm more than willing to cordially disagree, wish you well and thank you for your service! :)
As to the wear on clothing, I have shirts that are worn thin in areas due from rubbing against guns. My seat covers in two vehicles are ragged from gun rubs.
Not my experience, but our needs, clothing and equipment obviously differ.
My belts are worn from holster wear.
Mine too.
My back pockets get holes in them from my cuffs.
Not a cop, don't carry those. ;)
Much of the replacement clothing allotment officers receive is to replace clothes worn thin by guns.
Wish I had an allotment working in a tool shop. Battery acid from the hi-lo and my omnipresent 10" adjustable wrench have taken their toll. :)

Best wishes, sir. Stay safe!
 
I carry two everyday.

Too many folks worry about getting sued or going to jail. While I share those ideals, I don't let it stop me from one important fact. I want to LIVE! I will do everything I can within the limits of the law to go home to my family or protect them. If I have to go to jail, so be it.

Actually a little preplanning will most likely keep you out of jail.

The biggest difference between us average gun carriers and law enforcement is that we don't have to chase and apprehend bad guys.

But I urge to stop and think about this......
We don't have body armor.
We can't call for back up.
We don't have a long gun or dog in the cruiser.
Some of us don't carry a stun gun and/or pepper spray.

I can and will always carry a backup or second gun. I need every advantage I can get.

See the links about what Mr. Ayoob has to say on the matter.


Ayoob on Handguns lessons from the past: Three reasons to carry backup - Handguns | Guns Magazine | Find Articles at BNET

2010 Shot Show: Massad Ayoob talks about carrying a second firearm

Again, with all due respect to Mr Ayoob, follow his line of work. Each time I testify in a trial, my credentials are offered in order to be properly qualified as expert. Once my testimony has been given, one side or the other and possibly even the Judge will ask what I have written that supports my opinions offered in court. Mr Ayoob is no different. He hs to support his position in writings prior to a trial.

Many police officers retire and go into private investigation and I support this. Others want to become experts in some field but lack the educational background so they make up for it in experience. The more articles they can write for magazines, trade publications, websites and such gives them a basis for qualifying as experts. I know a wrecker driver in another town that is a high school dropout but he got qualified as an expert in accident reconstruction based on his experience in seeing auto accidents in post collision position as well as the vehicle damage. He now gets $240 per hour for his testimony, which has been proven incorrect many times but he still got paid.

The difference between a police officer's pay and an expert witness is several hundreds of dollars a day. One of those I admire in my field holds a Ph.D in the work but gets $475.00 per hr from the time he leaves on a case until he gets back. This includes travel time, sleeping and charges from portal to portal. During a typical three day invesitgation he can earn $30,000. I keep my fees less than that so the working person can afford my services but I have to have some background basis for my testimony before I can be hired.

Where one expert may have one opinion, another will feel exactly the opposite. Both sides get heard in court.

And we have, being nice here, prostitutes in the business that will say one thing in one trial and say the opposite in another. In short, they say what the person hiring them wants them to say.

My opinion may not be the popular one but it is the one I maintain. People often do not like what I say so they attack the messenger. I have been attacked severely in court about my beliefs and opinions. I have also been attacked in court for being a member of the NRA. It is a fine line that we have to walk.

I also have to say because a person writes a book does not make them correct. No book, magazine article or trade paper is any better or any more accurate than that of an opposite opinion. There is a thing called situation ethics. What is right today may not be tomorrow. But there are people that take both sides. They get paid well but are not stable in their opinions.

I want to say again that I am a fan of Mr Ayoob and have long admired his work. We may also disagree on some points but I certainly respect his work and am not directing this post against him or any other individual. It is simply to point out the differences in viewpoints.
 
Oldman45- Not to be offensive or cause an argument here but were you just touting Masad Ayoob to back up your point earlier? And if I read this correctly you are saying he'll take either side?
 
Oldman45- Not to be offensive or cause an argument here but were you just touting Masad Ayoob to back up your point earlier? And if I read this correctly you are saying he'll take either side?

Not in the least. I spoke of a great article Mr Ayoob wrote in a gun mag. He has my respect and admiration. It takes a lot of hard work and long hours to get a good reputation and a following. He has done both.

At some point, we all have to reverse comments we made earlier in life or testimony. Different circumstances will give different opinions. If a single fact changes in an incident, it can change the entire opinion. Each case is different even when the actions taken are the same. Maybe some one is intoxicated, maybe they misread the degree of risk or many other factors.

I rendered an opinion a while back in a major accident but at the time, all I had was one witness statement and the damage done to the vehicles involved. Once I had the correct facts, my opinion was 180 degrees different. The one witness I interviewed had the vehicles travelling in the wrong direction. A week later after speaking with three others, I learned the proper direction and it changed the outcome but not the speeds.

A shooting case I was working a couple yrs ago needed an immediate opinion and I gave one. Later, after toxicology reports were in and trajectories had been established, my opinion changed. I always state that additional information may change the opinion.

In the case of the current oil leakage in the Gulf, you will hear experts in the field having different opinions but their opinions are getting closer together as more factual information is learned.

Many years ago a great attorney named Gerry Spence tried a case where a LEO fatally shot a man in a bar that he had been following. The problem is before the shooting, the officer had his back to the man and was watching the man in a mirror. The LEO spun and fired his gun killing the man. His defense was he saw the man's eyes and could tell the man was about to shoot him in the back. The defense was a success when experts on eye movements said it was possible to determine a person's future actions. It did not hurt that the man was found to be armed. Yet if I had been told the officer drew his gun and shot the man while not seeing the man reach for a gun and having his back to the man, my opinion would say the shooting was not justified.

Opinions change based on the total known and proven facts.
 
I always carry at least two guns when carrying.I like to carry back up ammo as well for my primary gun.Most of the time the bug is in the weak side rear pocket and the primary is at 4:00 in a holster.
 
Many years ago a great attorney named Gerry Spence tried a case where a LEO fatally shot a man in a bar that he had been following. The problem is before the shooting, the officer had his back to the man and was watching the man in a mirror. The LEO spun and fired his gun killing the man. His defense was he saw the man's eyes and could tell the man was about to shoot him in the back. The defense was a success when experts on eye movements said it was possible to determine a person's future actions. It did not hurt that the man was found to be armed. Yet if I had been told the officer drew his gun and shot the man while not seeing the man reach for a gun and having his back to the man, my opinion would say the shooting was not justified.

Just got to say that argument is weak. The LEO here at best showed poor judgement. But I guess that isn't a crime. Eyes showing future movement??? This ain't poker. I'm sure I have looked at people at time with my eyes saying I would kill them. However I never have. I am certain everyone here has. Be terrible to be judged on that alone.

I'm seeing 2 sides here. 1 that wants to survive an encounter 1 that worries about what might happen. I understand both.

I will say this. In GA we are fortunate to have very good laws in regard to this issue. For the most part. And they have been made clearer lately.

Personally the most coherent argument IMHO for or against it was the mention of being shot in the hand. This fits human reaction. You fixate on the gun when it is pointed at you. Makes since even a criminal would do this and you end up getting shot there in the hand disabling your gun and the hand. Makes sense to have a weak hand gun.
 
.

Personally the most coherent argument IMHO for or against it was the mention of being shot in the hand. This fits human reaction. You fixate on the gun when it is pointed at you. Makes since even a criminal would do this and you end up getting shot there in the hand disabling your gun and the hand. Makes sense to have a weak hand gun.

That is the best reason in the world for training to use either hands. I shoot best with my right hand but almost as good with my left. Maybe 30% of my shooting is done by the off hand.

But if you are getting shot in the hand, you have already lost any advantage you went in with and will likely lose the fight in the end. If shot in the hand from a distance is not the same. Few gunshots disbale the gun. Granted it has and does happen but very seldom.
 
That argument still leaves one thing left out.

If you are shot in the hand chances are you are not going to hold onto the gun. So do you hunt for the gun you just lost or do you pull your second with the off hand??? Logically there is one answer. You waste time and energy during the middle of a crisis hunting for anything. So you will revert to the second gun if you have one.

If you need one gun why not 2?
 
That argument still leaves one thing left out.

If you are shot in the hand chances are you are not going to hold onto the gun. So do you hunt for the gun you just lost or do you pull your second with the off hand??? Logically there is one answer. You waste time and energy during the middle of a crisis hunting for anything. So you will revert to the second gun if you have one.

If you need one gun why not 2?

Sorry but I do not buy this defense for at least two reasons.

1. When shot in the hand, guns will not fly away. Most of the time they are dropped right below where the hand was when hit. The same happens when you are burned while holding something. It falls more or less downward. It is also possible and likely that a hand strike would also penetrate the torso so the hand injury becomes secondary. People sustaining gunshots I have spoken with said they did not immediately know they were shot.

2. Not knowing which state you are located, I cannot say if carrying two guns would be illegal. I was notified this morning that in VA, the law is the same as LA. The CCW calls for a single gun and VA is worded much more direct than LA. I was emailed a copy of VA law and read it. While it has a lot of provisions I wish LA had, it is very specific in the carry of a single gun. A person carrying two might be charged for that violation. I have never heard of a person being convicted of such but the potential is there. There have been some charged but the charges were dropped before it went to court. Even the legal community understands that such a conviction ruins a person's life and is not ready to cause such.

Then again, I have yet to see a tough sentence for a felon in possession of a firearm either.
 
Look...this all boils down to the fact that it is "Oldman45's" home state of LA that specifically states that you are only "allowed" to carry "one handgun" on your person.
Where I live I am legally able to carry as many "weapons" on my person as I wish.
With that said...and listen carefully here...no matter how many guns we are packing, we are always going to be at a disadvantage when the bad guy comes-a-calling. He's the one who'll be making the first move on us. We will have to react to his actions that he was probably planning ahead of time. He's the one that's hunting us...watching and waiting for the moment when we're most vulnerable.
I believe most, if not all, LE agencies have changed the way they train their officers? Too many were training them to draw and fire on a perp that was already pointing a gun right at them! They were essentially being trained to "square-up" and outdraw a trigger squezze.
Now they know that the best thing to do is to train to take some kind of cover as a first reaction. "Taking Cover" can sometimes be as simple as dropping down low, of course.

Bottom line is...if a cop sometimes needs a BUG, then I sometimes need a BUG. There are times when I carry a BUG...and there are times when I don't. There are even times when I don't carry at all.
Carrying a firearm is nothing more than a form of insurance. The more insurance I have, the better.
 
One gun or two? Ot three?

I'm fixing to walk down the street for lunch at a local drugstore lunch counter. Couple hundred yards in one of the safest neighborhoods in town.

How many guns and how much ammo should I tote?

Just to answer the question in advance - I'll carry a 5-shot smith j-frame and likely as not no extra ammo.

Am I living dangerously? If I am, tell me now -I'm getting mighty hungry.
 
Oldman45- Sorry. I know a lot of people who have been involved in LE shootings, Military, and even one who defended himself against a mugger with a knife. Sheer statistics are against that argument. To believe that argument one must have never shot a can or in fact any object weighing less than a person. I've been a hunter all my life. A 22 LR will carry a squirrel out of a tree (sideways not dropping). A squirrel weighs more than a loaded J frame. Now move that into a 9mm or 45. Your argument doesn't stand up on this issue.

I agree with a lot of what you have said EXCEPT that is the weakest argument. No way around it.

I really had no idea this would turn into a he said she said opinion on legally what it means to carry more than one. All I cared about was who carried more than 1 and how.

The arguments for this are far more reasonable than against it. So I must say I am considering the fact that 2 guns is a solid idea. At least here for me.
 
I'm fixing to walk down the street for lunch at a local drugstore lunch counter. Couple hundred yards in one of the safest neighborhoods in town.

How many guns and how much ammo should I tote?
I don't have a crystal ball.
Just to answer the question in advance - I'll carry a 5-shot smith j-frame and likely as not no extra ammo.

Am I living dangerously? If I am, tell me now -I'm getting mighty hungry.
Do what you want. It's your butt, not mine. Living dangerously? Doesn't sound like it, but if you need to defend yourself, a five shot J frame ain't a lot of firepower. At the same time it's big time better than nothing, and formidable in the right hands.

Myself, I don't subscribe to the notion that a gun is a talisman, so I pack with the realization that BGs don't always work alone and there are people called "bullet sponges" for a reason. I also don't base my thinking around the flawed notion that bad gunfights happen in bad areas, but the shootouts in good areas aren't as nasty.

This isn't a flame, do what you want. You will bear the consequences, whether that means carrying a little more weight, or less weight and having a greater likelyhood of running out of ammo.
 
Oldman45- Sorry. I know a lot of people who have been involved in LE shootings, Military, and even one who defended himself against a mugger with a knife. Sheer statistics are against that argument. To believe that argument one must have never shot a can or in fact any object weighing less than a person. I've been a hunter all my life. A 22 LR will carry a squirrel out of a tree (sideways not dropping). A squirrel weighs more than a loaded J frame. Now move that into a 9mm or 45. Your argument doesn't stand up on this issue.

I agree with a lot of what you have said EXCEPT that is the weakest argument. No way around it.

I really had no idea this would turn into a he said she said opinion on legally what it means to carry more than one. All I cared about was who carried more than 1 and how.

The arguments for this are far more reasonable than against it. So I must say I am considering the fact that 2 guns is a solid idea. At least here for me.

Do as you want. I am not going to tell anyone what to carry or how. Just as I am not going to tell someone else how to live their life, I am not going to tell you what is best for you and where you go.

That said, I have been within 10 feet of three people that were shot. Neither moved. Hollywood has given people the idea guns go flying through the air and they will when hit directly and with a large caliber weapon. We can blame the movies on people flying backward and cars blowing up or turning over when struck by handgun bullets. It does not happen in life.

I have at least five car cam videos here showing what happened when people were shot. I posted the website to one shooting in the area during a discussion here recently and it shows a man being hit 11 times by .40 cal guns from no more than 15 feet. He never flinched but fell almost straight forward, landing on his face. Also he continued to walk a few feet after being hit but did not walk far. You never saw him act like he was hit other than falling.

R. Cecil Williams was outside the drivers side of a car and I was by the passenger side. He was shot in the left bicep and still asked me who fired the shot. He did not realize he had been accidentally shot by a neighbor until he went inside his house. I did not notice he was shot until he told me he was bleeding. I drove him to the hospital and saw the direct entry wound. It was not a graze and he died many years later with the bullet still in his arm. His neighbor was sorry it happened and paid a fine but it was an accident.

I went through the military in the Ninth Infantry Army and saw a few shot but they were away from me and I did not and was not looking for their actions but I heard of at least one not knowing he was shot. But I also believe if someone is using the right caliber, a hit will get your attention even though you may not know you are hit.

Do as you will and I will support your right to do so. All I can do is say what I have experienced or saw in training. My best to you and I am sure you will be fine no matter how you chose to carry.

I might urge you to get a copy of the July-Aug issue of American Handgunner and read the great article by Massad Ayoob on what happened to a brave LEO named Jared Reston. In the officer's own words, he told of how he was injured by multiple hits but did not know it at the time even though he had lost a lot of mobility and a lot of his face (he thought he had been struck in the face with a fist). This is a real life example and not Hollywood hype. This is a story not embellished by those wanting to have their wounding more dramatic. Very well written and a good read for anyone.
 
Oldman45- That was the first post that offended me.

Please do not be so bold as to condescend because someone disagrees with you. Disagreeing with you (and there are thousands of articles who will) is not hollywood hype. At the same time you quote and give your experiences there are thousands of examples of every other type of reaction.

The problem I must say with your argument is that it is based solely on being afraid of protecting yourself. Or what "might" happen afterward. The only thing we can control is what we do. We need to be prepared. We need to be educated on our laws. Yours are obviously much different than ours here. In my opinion you need to spend more time trying to change yours than speaking that way to the rest of us. You must first survive the encounter before worrying about what might happen. If your dead what freakin difference does it make.

Like I said until that exchange I was not offended. I thought that was rather condescending and just hurt your argument.
 
Oldman had good stuff in there. There is an interview with Jared Reston at proarmspodcast.com .

Also check out Bob Stasch, Bill Allard and Keith Jones. All advocate multigun carry and all are veterans of multiple gunfights.
 
Last edited:
I don't have a crystal ball.Do what you want. It's your butt, not mine. Living dangerously? Doesn't sound like it, but if you need to defend yourself, a five shot J frame ain't a lot of firepower. At the same time it's big time better than nothing, and formidable in the right hands.

Myself, I don't subscribe to the notion that a gun is a talisman, so I pack with the realization that BGs don't always work alone and there are people called "bullet sponges" for a reason. I also don't base my thinking around the flawed notion that bad gunfights happen in bad areas, but the shootouts in good areas aren't as nasty.

This isn't a flame, do what you want. You will bear the consequences, whether that means carrying a little more weight, or less weight and having a greater likelyhood of running out of ammo.

Flop Shank - Good point - Just cause it's low crime area doesn't mean something can't happen.

Carrying a reload is never a bad idea and I do have both speedloaders and speed strips available.

Probably should take your advice and ALWAYS carry at least 5 extra rounds, even around here.
 
Last edited:
Oldman45- That was the first post that offended me.

Please do not be so bold as to condescend because someone disagrees with you. Disagreeing with you (and there are thousands of articles who will) is not hollywood hype. At the same time you quote and give your experiences there are thousands of examples of every other type of reaction.

The problem I must say with your argument is that it is based solely on being afraid of protecting yourself. Or what "might" happen afterward. The only thing we can control is what we do. We need to be prepared. We need to be educated on our laws. Yours are obviously much different than ours here. In my opinion you need to spend more time trying to change yours than speaking that way to the rest of us. You must first survive the encounter before worrying about what might happen. If your dead what freakin difference does it make.

Like I said until that exchange I was not offended. I thought that was rather condescending and just hurt your argument.

First, I did not and do not mean to offend anyone. Never intend to do so in the future here either. I can offend and be condesending to those I have to deal with on the streets but I remain unshot in doing so. If I have offended you or anyone here, I sincerely apologize.

Where did I say anyone was afraid to protect themselves? Sure there are ramifications afterward and if you talk with those that suffered those ramifications, you will hear their remorse. I feel all needs to be prepared for anything. But I also feel and I will repeat it, Hollywood has changed the way people act with guns. Watch those on shooting ranges and see how some will turn their guns sideways. If you are young, you will not rememebr when CCW first came out. people carried a revolver and no extra ammo. Hollywood and gang members changed that way of carry.

As was mentioned in another post, those serving life sentences for defending themselves wish now they had done differently. When the heart is pumping and a person is under stress, they do things that may not be to their best advantage. Unarmed people, and you have read of it, are often shot by those thinking they were armed and about to injure them.

The laws are fairly constant across the US. Granted LA is under Napoleanic law to some degree but the laws are very close from state to state. The problem is that people either does not read the law or else reads into it what they want to be there. I must ask you if you have read the ccw laws of your state. Most have not. People break laws unintentionally but the law is still broken. When caught, the penalty is going to be paid. I broke TX law last December. It was inadvertant and with cause but the State of TX could have prosecuted me. Had I been made aware of the law in advance, I would have done things differently.

You have your life and I hope it is a long one. I also hope you never encounter a problem in life. I have lived my life and have very little left but I stayed fairly much trouble free and made a good name for myself in courts in several states. People call me wanting me to help them often from other places out of word of mouth from others that I have helped in court trials. In two instances I was able to get people in high places to change state law simply because I felt the accused got a raw deal in the law. If I cannot help someone, I certainly do not want to hurt them. But I will also say I have stood in more courtrooms presenting evidence in both criminal and civil cases than many attorneys. Others can gain from my experiences just as I gained from the experience of others.

Again, if I said anything that offended you, I am deeply and genuinely sorry. But I stand by what I said.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top