On having three

As we wrapped up our purchases Saturday afternoon, Mrs. KintlaLake and I were asked about magazines. The LCP and the P22 were supplied with just one apiece, so we bought two more for each pistol.

That decision, like many others we make, came down to a single fundamental principle of preparedness:

"Two is one, and one is none."

It's a truism closely related to Murphy's Law, "shit happens" and "best-laid plans" -- having a tool or a plan is essential, but having a backup can save your life.

My wife and I view magazines as consumable items, arguably the weakest mechanical link in the armed-defense chain. Being prepared with two loaded mags is a no-brainer, really, and for us that means three, assuring us of two -- which is, in principle, one.

Beyond this case-in-point are myriad other examples of our pattern of three-fers, notably:

Starting a fire (matches, lighter, firesteel);
Purifying water (boiling, chemicals, filtration);
Communication (mobile phone, GMRS, CB); and
Evacuation (three escape routes, three shelters).

It's less versatility than contingency. Nessmuk and Kephart advocated their trios, a concept evolving from the need to accomplish multiple tasks, not from a wish for redundancy. Their approach is instructive, however, if not quite parallel, and it can be useful when extended to the rest of a preparedness scheme.

It's a mindset thing.

And so, whenever possible, we prefer to have three. Actually, specific to magazines, we consider it wise to have ten (at least) for each firearm -- but that's another story for another day.