Ammo capacity in CCW firearms: Getting a little carried away?

[OldMarksman]

School of hard knocks.

I do not buy it.

Effectively stopping violent criminal actor with one shot from a handgun is a most unlikely proposition.

In the real world, several hits "per perp" are usually required.

And an "accurate shot" that results in an effective hit on a rapidly moving target is an unlikely result.

 

[zxcvbob]

After years of reading this forum, it is hard not to notice the trend towards higher capacity CCW firearms. But is a 17+1 9MM pistol really much better than an 8+1 .380 ACP or sub-compact 9MM pistol, or even a 6 shot revolver?

I've always felt perfectly safe with a 6 shot revolver, or with an 8+1 pistol. But then again, I've never subscribed to the spray and pray school of shooting that many people here do. I know Hollywood makes us think that a self-defense encounter will require a 20 minute firefight in which you will spend 7 magazines full of ammo, culminating in hand to hand fighting....but the reality is that bad guys don't like to meet resistance, and the mere sight of a gun will terminate most encounters. And if you can't hit the bad guy on the first shot or two, ammo capacity will be the least of your worries. Unless you are a law enforcement officer, gangster, or soldier, who might encounter 5-6 people determined to die trying to kill you....do you really need that much ammo?

How do you feel about this? Do you carry a single stack pistol or a revolver with 1 cylinder full, or are you the type that carries a 16 or 17 shot pistol. Or perhaps you are the type of person who carries a 17+1 pistol with 4 spare magazines in your pockets?

Is this a real question, or is it rhetorical and you're just pontificating? It's kind of hard to tell. Let's assume it's a real question.

More ammo is always better until it start weighing you down. But for instance, 10 rounds isn't twice as good as 5; it's only slightly better -- unless you really need that 6th shot. (in economics it's called the law of diminishing returns)

If you are carrying a bottom-feeder, regardless of its capacity, you really ought to carry a spare magazine. But that's a totally different issue; you might need it in case of a jam or misfeed.

I usually carry a 6-shot revolver and a speed strip with 6 more rounds. The speeds strip is not so much to reload in the middle of a gunfight but to reload afterwards.

 

[Seaman]

" I do not buy it. "

Way back on the farm I shot bottle caps tossed mid-air. Some of us are good shots.

Bill Jordan was known to shoot aspirin tablets tossed mid-air. Now he was real good.

 

[OldMarksman]

Way back on the farm I shot bottle caps tossed mid-air. Some of us are good shots.

Bill Jordan was known to shoot aspirin tablets tossed mid-air. Now he was real good

And from what Bill Jordan could do, and from your having shot bottle caps "way back on the farm", you are confident that a single shot fired from a handgun will effectively stop a violent criminal actor?

 

[Seaman]

All I can tell yah is I can't stop a 230 gr bullet between my eyes and get back up.

 

[Deja vu]

I typically Carry a S&W J-Frame with 5 rounds of 357 magnum (125 grain Cor-Bon) with a speed loader in the other pocket.

If I am going in to a rough area I will put on an over shirt and Carry my Coonan Classic with 7+1 and 2-3 extra mags in addition to my J-Frame. I like that I can use the ammo in either weapon I carry if some thing happens to either gun.

So that would be 10 shots from the J-Frame and 29 shots from the Coonan.

 

[Glenn E. Meyer]

It's the Black Swan problem. You can probably scare away the single mugger with a J. If you are at Mumbai, probably want some more ammo.

So do you carry for the extreme situation or the mundane? It's really like a statistical decision model.

Of course, if you can curve your bullets in mid-air like Angelina Jolie - then you could handle Mumbai with just a J.

BTW, IIRC folks were taught to shoot bottle caps in the service and then it took 80000 rounds on average per kill in some wars.

 

[MikeNice81]

After years of reading this forum, it is hard not to notice the trend towards higher capacity CCW firearms. But is a 17+1 9MM pistol really much better than an 8+1 .380 ACP or sub-compact 9MM pistol, or even a 6 shot revolver?

Ask Officer Soulis. It took 22 shots of .40S&W to stop one guy. Seventeen of those shots hit the chest. No the guy was not drunk or high. He was just looking for a fight and determined to win.

You could ask the gentleman that I recently seen wheeled in to the ED. He was shot six times with .32acp and .38spl rounds and barely survived. He shot the two guys that attacked him with 7 rounds of .380. He had no reload and they kept firing. He became a running sponge. (Both attackers survived as well.)

No bullet is going to stop the attacker on the first shot unless it destroys the brain or upper spinal cord. Even if you hit the heart the brain has enough oxygen to keep the perp fighting for 15 to 20 seconds. Barring a hit to the above mentioned areas a one shot stop is a psychological stop. I don't bank on the person knowing they are supposed to stop.

but the reality is that bad guys don't like to meet resistance, and the mere sight of a gun will terminate most encounters.

Most is like many, it only leaves you guessing. Remember that the bell curve has two sides. You can fall on either.

I have pulled in SD scenarios multiple times and never had to fire a shot. However, like the stock market, past performance is not indicitive of future results. The next guy might be the one that believes he has nothing left to lose.

if you can't hit the bad guy on the first shot or two, ammo capacity will be the least of your worries.

Please read the FBI report Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness. It isn't about aim, it is about the fact that handgun bullets are weak. It is also about the fact that in a true SHTF situation proper stance, grip, and sight picture are hard to obtain. When you've been backed against the trunk of a car, and tried to get your gun on target while arched backwards on the balls of your feet you'll understand.

Read PDF page 6 carefully and understand that civilian shoots aren't much different.

How do you feel about this? Do you carry a single stack pistol or a revolver with 1 cylinder full, or are you the type that carries a 16 or 17 shot pistol.

I carry 16+1 with an extra mag incase of malfunctions.

 

[RETG]

What I find amussing is that one or two is all that is required. The first time you get into a situation where you have to fire your weapon, I'm betting the first few rounds are not going to go anywhere near the target. Big difference in shooting a paper target and a human shooting at you, or threatening to shoot at you.

And, two rounds of .50 might not take down a person.

 

[MikeNice81]

And I have yet to see or hear of more than 3 assailants in a typical mugging or robbery.

Actually there has been a trend, in the city where I work, torwards groups of four.

There was one group that would drive up and the guy in the passenger seat would fire one or two shots at the victim. The guys in back would jump out and rush around to complete the robbery and pistol whip the victim.

There was another group that was rolling up in a van. They would jump out attack the victim and kidnap them. They would take them to an ATM and force them to withdraw money. Then they would beat the victim, drive them to a deserteed location and dump them off.

It isn't common but things like that do happen. The trend towards groups is growing.

criminals will not stick around when they see you are willing to shoot them and defend your $20 and your life.

Here is the thing that most people don't know. These younger guys feel they have nothing to lose. They are fatalist that believe the next day isn't a promise. Even if it comes it probably won't be any better. So, why worry about surviving. That is the new mentality of many young criminals. They rob, sell drugs, and then blow the money as fast as they made it.

I dealt with them in the music business and I deal with them now that I work for a PD. I remember one 19 year old saying, "I don't make plans. What is the point? There is no way I'll live to see 25. Life doesn't work that way for people in my 'hood." He didn't plan to live and didn't mind getting killed. To him it was the inevitable outcome.

 

[daliff89]

If someone is on top of you, meaning you're lying on the ground and in physical contact with the person, you may very well have no choice but to take a contact shot. A semi-automatic handgun requires a ceratin abount of empty space for the slide/bolt/toggle to operate in in order to be able to cylce. While we may not do certain things by choice, circumstances beyond our control may force us to anyway.

unless the guy has my hand pinned against the ground with the gun pushed into his body, there is no situation where you'd be 'forced' to take a contact shot

a close shot? sure....but not a shot where i HAVE TO shove the pistol in his gut

It is equally nonsensical to plan for one very remote bad situation while ignoring another equally bad situation that you are more likely to find yourself in. I am far more likely to have to take a contact shot against an extremely large opponent than I am to have to engage multiple attackers, so the former situation takes priority in my plans over tha latter.

is it nonsensical to plan for a very remote bad situation or does it just not fit your idea about what is 'right'? because there's a difference....

i'm not 'ignoring' anything, there's no reason to believe that a big guy jumping on me is going to render me unable to use a semi-automatic weapon and not do the same if i was carrying a revolver

That is not to say that I'm completely helpless against multiple attackers, because I'm not. I have no intention of standing static blazing away like Wild Bill in the streets of Deadwood because that's poor tactics. If a gunfight is so prolonged that I have time to expend the five or six shots in my revolver, I need to be retreating, seeking cover, seeking a more substantial weapon (i.e. shotgun or rifle), and/or reloading (and I do carry spare ammunition). While a moving, shooting attacker is quite difficult to hit, so is a moving, shooting defender.

nobody said you were totally helpless, i said you were at a disadvantage, because you are

that's not an opinion, it's a fact.

if you have 3 targets to hit, you're more likely to hit them with 10 shots than with 5 shots

this is evidenced by the fact that you carry more ammunition, in case you need it, which is a good thing

although it's illogical that you acknowledge that you may need more rounds than what are in your weapon but say that you feel no need to carry a weapon that holds more rounds

you're planning for the fact that you may need more than the 5-6 your weapon holds, but denying that you may be better suited to use a weapon that holds more than those 5-6 shots because of one remote situation where someone pushes the slide back with their love handles

As I said before, no one gun can adequately prepare you for every possible situation. This is why we have so many different types of firearms: different tools for different jobs. We can fantisize about remote Hollywood-like situations to ad nauseum, but that's not nearly as useful as examining our own lives and choosing a firearm accordingly. A high-capacity semi-auto is not the best gun for everyone and neither is a revolver, it depends on the person and his/her circumstances.

and as i said before, if Gun A gives you a great advantage over Gun B in Situation A, and is at a slight disadvantage in Situation B.......while Gun B is at a great disadvantage in Situation A, and is at a slight advantage in Situation B, how is Gun B a better choice for any kind of carry option?

should i carry a 33 round magazine because there's a remote possibility that i may be attacked by a mob of rabid baddies? probably not...........a rocket launcher in case a Terminator begins stalking me? no........a nuke in case the entire Israeli Air Force descends on my position? i think that's excessive.....

but you guys are acting like needing more than 5-6 shots is this super remote situation that never ever happens and that carrying a pistol that can serve you in a situation where that happens is a completely absurd option

the only logical reason to limit yourself on the amount of rounds is size/weight....

i can understand someone saying 'that Sig is too big for me to carry, this J-Frame isn't'....that's justifiable, because it needs to be comfy for you to carry it constantly, and carrying 5 rounds is better than carrying 0 rounds

but to say that 5 rounds 'better suits your needs' doesn't make much sense, it's always better to have extras

 

[m&p45acp10+1]

I almost never carry a spare mag. Unless I am only carrying one gun.

My usualy carry is a Glock 26 Loaded 10+1 with premium SD ammo. My back up is a P64 loaded with ball rounds. Sometimes if it is just miserably hot I will carry the p64 with a spare mag. It has better range than my fist, a knife, or a pinted stick.

 

[SwampYankee]

If you have a CCW, the point of having the weapon is self defense. If someone is "assaulting" you from 50 feet away, you are not acting in self defense. Valid self defense shots should be at extremely close range, when no other options exist (you cannot flee) and you cannot miss. Anything else is likely to get you convicted of manslaughter. A carry permit does not make you a law enforcement officer. Your job is to move away from danger at all costs, not into it. In that context, 6 bullets should do you. If you get attacked by 4 people, you should not have been where you were. Your mistakes were made well before you ever had to pull a weapon. I do not need 100 rounds of ammo because I am smart, I avoid danger and dangerous situations. I am submissive when need be, I move away from trouble. If you think you need 100 rounds of ammo, you are looking for trouble. And if you put 16 rounds into someone, you're going to look like a maniac when the jury decides your guilt.

 

[armoredman]

Leave it at this - carry whatever fills your comfort zone. If you are happy with it, have a great day. Whatever works for you is what works for you.

Edit to add, SwampYankee, that advice might be good for your area, but out here we have more options and less restrictions, such as no need to retreat, Castle Doctrine, etc. Sometimes you might need to shoot longer range - I practice at 50 yards juuuust in case, not that I am looking to duel it out that far. Pack attacks have happened at WalMart; should I never go to WalMart? Pack attacks have occured at shopping malls; should I never go to shopping malls?
If you're comfortable with 6 rounds only, great for you, glad you're carrying something. Don't run down my choice, and remember the laws are different all over the place.

 

[MikeNice81]

If you have a CCW, the point of having the weapon is self defense. If someone is "assaulting" you from 50 feet away, you are not acting in self defense.

Bull. If somebody is firing at me from 50 feet it is self defense.

If somebody is in my house it is self defense according to the law in NC as of 12-1-2011. In my house there is a clear shooting distance of 35 feet that may be required because of my child's bedroom location.

A gun for self defense is not just for use at bad breath distances. I have posted here about a friend that was fired at by his girlfriend's ex boyfriend. The guy pulled in to my friend's driveway and started firing from further than 7 yards. I believe it was actually closer to 45 feet. The cops cleared my friend after he shot the guy multiple times.

If you get attacked by 4 people, you should not have been where you were.

So a college kid shouldn't be one block away from their campus getting a pizza? The truth is criminals have cars and they like targets that actually have something. They can and do strike even in the best neighborhoods.

And if you put 16 rounds into someone, you're going to look like a maniac when the jury decides your guilt.

Yeah, because all criminals run when they see a gun or fall down after the first shot. Oh wait, that isn't true. Neither is the fact that the number of bullets determines guilt. It depends on the totality of the situation. If fifteen didn't do the trick then the perp gets sixteen. If you can articulate the reason, and evidence bears it out, then chances are you won't see a jury. The DA is not required to press charges.

 

[zxcvbob]

Re: Getting a little carried away?

It's the Black Swan problem...

 

[daliff89]

at around 1600 yesterday afternoon i heard a commotion outside the house

there was a group of probably 7-8 teenage boys talking fairly aggressively another teenage boy ('you better get the f*** down the street punk' and 'don't say a word unless you want to get f***ed up' type of stuff)

the lone boy is a kid that lives at the end of my street, he was walking to his house

i had been outside around 1200 when he was walking down the street away from his house, he was talking on the phone to someone and said 'yea, i'm on my way up there now, mom said it's fine as long as i come home right after the game'

presumably he had been watching football at a friend's house up the street and was simply walking home when he was approached by those 7-8 boys

is it his fault that he didn't 'avoid danger'?

should he have 'not been where he was' walking down the street he lives on because that's where his parents choose to pay a mortgage in broad daylight?

you can't always avoid danger, no matter how smart you think you are....if you think you're smart enough to avoid danger, you're not as smart as you think you are

i can't tell you how many people i've seen get jumped in my life, you can't live your life planning how to be 'safe' at all times because you're NEVER safe at all times

just by carrying a pistol with you, you're admitting that you're not always able to avoid danger and dangerous situations, so how can you say with absolute certainty 'i will never encounter a threat i cannot stop with 6 rounds'?

i heard a story from a correctional officer the other day about a hunter.......the guy was in the woods hunting something last season (i think he said turkey, but it doesn't really matter) when a brown bear charged him.......he pulled out his sidearm and shot the bear, the bear fell to the ground and died.......it wasn't bear season, the man who shot the bear was sentenced to a 1-10 year sentence in prison

i tell that story because his words about that situation perfectly describe the way i feel about the possibility of doing time in prison because i shot a guy that was trying to hurt me

'i would rather spend 10 years in prison than spend eternity in a grave'

 

[AZAK]

All I can tell yah is I can't stop a 230 gr bullet between my eyes and get back up.

Be careful, there is almost always exception to the rule:
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/23914...n-survives-gunshot-between-eyes/#.ToF4vBztgbE

And note that three shots were fired, with only one striking her right between the eyes (probably a .44 according to the article). So, two misses, one solid hit between the eyes and only resulting in stitches; 0:3 when purely considering the physical results of the actual rounds out of the barrel.

All it takes is 1 accurate shot....per perp.

And therein lies the rub.
Reminds me of, "It is always in the last place that you looked." (Who would keep looking after...?)

I routinely practice out to 100-125 yards with pistols with great success, yet I am not inclined to carry 3 rounds only in keeping with any "statistical norm". (After all as a male in the United States I've got until 75.6 when I will succumb to heart disease, along with all of the rest of you guys. Gals, you get an additional 5.2 years, sorry ladies heart disease also.)

I personally carry anywhere from 7-18 in a pistol; and always with at least a spare magazine, "weak link" and all, at the minimum. I have also "standardized" all of my carry pistols to having the same battery of arms.

 

[AK103K]

Way back on the farm I shot bottle caps tossed mid-air. Some of us are good shots.

Those bottle caps are scary things when they suddenly stop acting like bottle caps, and start shooting back, aint they? How was your hit rate then?

All I can tell yah is I can't stop a 230 gr bullet between my eyes and get back up.

How many lucky shots do you get in a lifetime?

One thing Ive noticed over the years is how people who claim to be great shots, and even have targets with tight little groups on them to prove it, fail to replicate it "on demand" when you ask them to do it again, right now. No warm up, no "best out of five", the first try is for the record.

I wont even bother to push it, and tell them they cant do it how they are used to doing it, and they have to draw, move and shoot.

If your whole game is to shoot once and call it good, you might as well put the gun to your own head and pull the trigger. That way you'll be right. Even then, under stress, it'll probably get screwed up.

If you have a CCW, the point of having the weapon is self defense. If someone is "assaulting" you from 50 feet away, you are not acting in self defense. Valid self defense shots should be at extremely close range, when no other options exist (you cannot flee) and you cannot miss. Anything else is likely to get you convicted of manslaughter. A carry permit does not make you a law enforcement officer. Your job is to move away from danger at all costs, not into it. In that context, 6 bullets should do you. If you get attacked by 4 people, you should not have been where you were. Your mistakes were made well before you ever had to pull a weapon. I do not need 100 rounds of ammo because I am smart, I avoid danger and dangerous situations. I am submissive when need be, I move away from trouble. If you think you need 100 rounds of ammo, you are looking for trouble. And if you put 16 rounds into someone, you're going to look like a maniac when the jury decides your guilt.

99% of whats been said here is a load of tripe.

 

[OldMarksman]

Posted by SwampYankee: If someone is "assaulting" you from 50 feet away, you are not acting in self defense.

You are if he or she is firing at you and you have no alternative. There is an example cited in Tom Givens' Lessons from the Street, which also provides discussion of ammunition capacity.

Get yours here.

Toms' advice is to "carry a real gun" with adequate capacity.

Valid self defense shots should be at extremely close range, when no other options exist (you cannot flee) and you cannot miss.

Self defense encounters usually occur at relatively close range; the use of force is justifiable when there is no alternative; the requirement to retreat, while retreat if safely possible is always wise, does not exist in all jurisdictions; and anyone who believes that one "cannot miss" at self defense ranges is untrained and naive.

Let me expand upon that. One's skills will likely be very much impaired if one is attacked; the attacker will likely be moving very fast; there will be little time to get a proper grip, and one will have to fire instantly when the front sight is somewhere on the torso. One is not likly to hit any vital part of the attacker with a single shot under such circumstances.

Classes such as the first two listed here will provide that understanding and help develop the skills one would want to survive; they are available in various parts of the country. The first thing one will learn is that when acquiring targets and firing at self defense speed the beginner will miss even at short distances; the rest is about skill development.

A carry permit does not make you a law enforcement officer. Your job is to move away from danger at all costs, not into it.

Very true.

In that context, 6 bullets should do you.

That's what the discussion is about. I decided some years ago that I did not believe that (I had been carrying five). Part of the reason is that "should" and "will" are not synonymous. The other part came from what I learned in training.

In the training I took (the first class linked above) we loaded with six, fired at three targets, reloaded with six more, and repeated the cycle, for most of a nine hour day. Better training is available in some places--the targets turn to you without notice, or perhaps actually move.

If you get attacked by 4 people, you should not have been where you were. Your mistakes were made well before you ever had to pull a weapon.

One could argue the same thing if one is attacked by one person, but we all know that that may not be true.

It is also quite meaningless.

I strongly suggest getting appropriate training. I also suggest following Mike's advice:

Please read the FBI report Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness. It isn't about aim, it is about the fact that handgun bullets are weak. It is also about the fact that in a true SHTF situation proper stance, grip, and sight picture are hard to obtain. When you've been backed against the trunk of a car, and tried to get your gun on target while arched backwards on the balls of your feet you'll understand.

Read PDF page 6 carefully and understand that civilian shoots aren't much different.