I believe that the honest answer is yes and no.  Consider two examples; If as you pull out of the car dealership with your new hundred thousand dollar sports car a gentlemen screws a .22 zip-gun into your ear and tells you to get out of the car you’ll promptly hop out of that car.  The assessment being that by your own standard a .22 caliber zip-gun “is enough gun.” Alternatively if that same gentlemen breaks into your home at 2 AM and tells you to get out of his way so he can reach your sleeping children I think we can both agree that he will need to be carrying something substantially larger than a .50 caliber Barrett to get you to just step out of the way. So now by your new standard a .50 caliber Barrett “isn’t enough gun.”  The learning point here is that “enough gun” is has little to do with “the gun.” There is in reality two factors that affect the matter of “enough gun” and each is determined not by the guns but by the involved parties. The first is how much “fight” are you (the would-be victim) willing to bring to bear to protect the thing you are defending? The second is how much “fight” will your attacker be willing to commit to to take from you the thing you’re defending? We need to note that you will have no control over his degree of commitment to the fight. The good news is that he will have no control over your level of commitment to the fight. And there should be no upper limit to the level of righteous, moral and mechanical violence you will be prepared to respond with when violently assaulted. What you need to do is prepared ahead of time to commit to “bringing enough fight”– not necessary “enough gun” – to the fight. You need to be able to turn on one hundred percent commitment within the literal blink-on-an-eye. To tap into a level of force that Ed Lovette once called “hell in a small place.” The snub is often more than enough gun if you posses enough fight. Not everyone will agree with this but I believe that this proposition tends to be true more often than not.

X