I now carry a 365XL because it came out as the most reasonable when you plug in all the factors i deemed important and based on recommendations from a few of you. The gun fits my hand well, it holds a reasonable amount of rounds and in a caliber that bullet technology has now made it acceptable for self-defense. Never been involved in a gun fight and I don't want to be, but there are literally REAMS of data out there validating all kinds of factors.
The Glock 19 is about as good as it gets, but the 365 is a LOT easier to carry and conceal and round count is more than adequate when you consider statistical data on guns used for self defense (not gunfights by LEOs) the situation is settled with five rounds or LESS. Sure more is always better, I remember during the Gulf War aircrews were loading up their survival gear (Browning Hi-Powers were the "de rigueur"weapon of the day but I carried a 1911) with multiple magazines, combat knives, etc., in the hopes of "trading lead" with a truck full of Iraqui soldiers with AKs bearing down in your position. "That is the fight you get" and unless the RESCAP A-10s, gunships and extraction teams were overhead, that Browning was as useless at tits on a boar hog. For the everyday citizen like most of us are, personal choice, based on one's risk assessment works for me,but after reading some comments, the only thing that would satisfy some of you guys are belt-fed, crew served weaponry.
I think that Mackay is correct in his assertion that better armed is generally better. But I think that he misses the point that a lot of guys work in an environment where carry of any weapon at all is strictly prohibited. If they do decide to carry, they gotta weigh the potential of losing their employment, if caught doing so. And in some cases, some places, they might even lose their freedom for being armed.
And this is a real thing. I know a guy personally who worked in such a place. Company man, on the executive team.
In the years before Illinois passed their concealed carry law, he commonly carried a pocket .380. A talisman, in Mackay's estimation. He used that talisman to shoot one of 3 armed attackers who accosted him while he was out of the office at lunch time. The fight ended when he shot, but his battles had just begun.
He was never charged with unlawful carry. The only criminal charges he ever faced were misdemeanors. But the company he worked for decided that his services were no longer required. He fought his termination in court and won. But his time there, and his success with them was clearly a thing of the past.
Today he raises funds far various non-profits, and makes more money than when he was on the "A" Team. He eventually was awarded his concealed carry permit, but had to go through the appeals process to get it.
As to talisman guns, almost every case of self defense I hear of, where I here anything about the weapon used, involves them. I think Mackay is wrong on that point. Guys choose to carry what they are able to, in order to give themselves a chance to influence what happens around them when things turn [bleep].
Been that way forever...
