Standardizing calibers is often a popular topic at various preparedness and firearm forums all over the ‘net. The belief is by limiting the number of calibers that your firearms are chambered as well as possibly having common calibers between firearms – you can minimize the chance of running out of ammunition for one gun – thus making it an ill-designed paperweight.
Picture this: You arm yourself with a 9mm carbine and enter a defensive position protecting your property from a few brigands with nasty plans for you and your family. The fence line close to 90 yards away gives way to these thugs. As they fire a few aimless shots – you engage and remove one threat, and then another. The third is now 50 yards away and when you pull the trigger – there is a click. Problem – your 9mm carbine has malfunctioned. You pull your 9mm pistol from its holster – and know that not only do yo have 4 spare 17 round magazines for it – but you also have several 30 round magazines for your carbine that will fit the pistol as well. You are glad that you have in excess of 160 rounds available for you pistol.
For most of us – including me – that carbine or rifle malfunction would suddenly leave me with only the 4 spare 17-round magazines for the pistol.
I am not ready to trade my Stag AR for a Beretta 9mm Storm Carbine and a Beretta 9mm pistol – but I understand the benefits of the concept.
Here is my issue: The pistol is a back up and hopefully NEVER is needed nor used. It is strictly a “just in case” tool. The rifle/carbine is the main battle tool and is far more qualified for the job of protecting property and loved ones than the pistol.
Now – I have worked to minimize my own calibers to a large extent. Standardizing my calibers include focusing on .223/5.56, .22LR, 9mm, and 12 gauge.
How about you?