YOU didn't, Dreadnaught. You shouldn't apologize.

Nice little EDC setup you have there. The Kel-Tec is a great little gun. I used to have the P11 (9mm). I also have a Spyderco Salt (4") that lives in an often wet tackle box with a bunch of rusty lures and not a spot of rust on it. Also that ArcAAA... well I don't even need to mention that one. <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> Here's what I would add (if anything)... A beefier multitool like a leatherman wave/charge or a SOG powerplier (I myself am guilty of not EDCing one though I realize I really should) and a firestarter of some type (ferrocerium, zippo, mini bic, etc).

BTW: The functioning of the mechanism in the Kel-Tec surpasses all applicable SAAMI safety standards.

Hghvlocity,

I believe that it was I who posted regarding the ban on kitchen knives. Sad. You should check the British blade forums online to see how far they've gone.

Bee,

'Why does he carry?', maybe he wants to have CHOICE. In his NY experience even if he CCW'ed he probably would have done the same thing, no need to get on a fast draw contest against a drawn gun. Still what if the BG thought he looked at him funny, or that one round was not enough to slow a big guy down. Without a CCW he would then have NO CHOICES LEFT TO MAKE.

Dreadhnough,

Have you looked into Swiss Army Knives.

. . . Gotta go, just ran out of uppercase letters.

Edit to add: No it was not my post on Kitchen Knives Ban, it's Groo's. Ooops, my bad.
Kitchen Knives Ban

I agree! <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

.

I would like to mention that gun "experts" often say that a .22, .25, .32 caliber bullets are not good man-stoppers but I can tell you that .25 caliber round put this 300+ pound guy right down to the ground. Just thought I would mention it as I am a living "guinea pig"
------------------------------------------------
When reffered to man stoppers, picture someone hiped up on drugs, rushing at you with a knife.
They wont feel the fact that they have been shot, so law enforcement etc. use these type of senario's to judge effectivness of weapons.
They also train for the fact that if they haven't pulled the trigger by the time the offender has reached 10-12 feet away, it is too late for their own safety.

This is brief, and I am sure others will be able to give more details/ corrections, but it is interesting when talking to guards/police/military personel etc about threats they have to deal with. It makes you think of situations with a completely different view.
I am sure after being shot, you would have similar feelings.

I would suggest that you do get some training (if you haven't already done so) because it might end up being used against you one day if you cant control the situation.
I dont mean pull the trigger training, I mean situation training.

A few thoughts about a gun in your situation. What if you did have a handgun when you were mugged? What would you have done? Unless you saw it coming and were able to quickdraw (not likely), you would still be at a disadvantage until the mugger was walking away or somehow distracted to give you time to draw your handgun. The latter doesn't seem plausible for most situations. If you had pulled out a gun during the incident, you might be dead today. So that leaves shooting the mugger while he is walking away from you...as in..you were really no longer in continued danger when you took revenge and shot back. Any thoughts? I am not judgeing...just wondering.

Many of us who carry on a regular basis have gone through training for these types of situations. Carrying of a firearm is not a casual process. We don't carry a gun in the bottom of a bag where it is as useful as one that is unloaded in a safe in a house. Rather, it is "available". We don't "quickdraw" like in the movies. Please, don't believe anything you see about guns in the movies. If I am in a situation that may warrant a use of force, I will be more ready and more able than my assailant.

Well put, Malpaso. As is so terribly common, most of those who think they know why a gun is "useless" don't have the training or experience to make an informed opinion. Usually they are at the bottom of the competency ladder: those who don't know that they don't know. This is like the U.S. legislators who crafted the 1994 "assault weapons" ban. They figured that if a rifle had a flash suppressor or a collapsible stock, it must somehow be more deadly. They had no idea that such accessories could easily be removed, while the rifle still shot the same cartridge. They were incompetent to judge, and worse, they were unaware of their incompetence.

Just using the term "quickdraw" reveals a lot.

Training is a very big factor. Think about a LEO they are well trained and can handle this type of situation, don't assume that if you carry a weapon that you will be able to act/react as someone trained in the use of deadly or non-deadly force.

Adam

Don't kid yourself. No offense intended to LEOs out there, but just because someone has a badge and an issued firearm, doesn't mean they are well trained. Some only shoot once a year at qualification. I shoot with many LEOs, and the ones who shoot regularly are few and far between. They will tell you that themsleves.

At our club, civilians usually win both combat pistol and rifle competitions, both individually and team competitions.