Do we need Hi-Capacity in everyday Carry?

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Brit

New member
Capacity has been a focus of mine. Since I became a board member of IALEFI.
The International Association of Law Enforcement Firearms Instructors.
In 1984 for 20 years till 2004. When I joined, 800 members, now?
The firearm of choice mostly was the trusty S&W 6 shot double-action revolver.

In 1980, 3 other FireArms Instructors and I, formed the IPSC Ontario branch of IPSC. And as the weapon of choice was the Colt .45 1911 pistol. I bought one.

Quite the disappointment at first, the magazines available to us, up in Canada, were ex mil-spec, not the best. And the stock out of the box Colt .45 at that time, had problems feeding, in some cases, even hardball!
One of the 4 was a Gun Tinkerer, Bob, and he managed to fix the problems we were having. And smoothed out the triggers also.

A little gun company we formed, two friends and I and Practical Pistols Inc.
Purchased 10 Glock 17s, from an Austrian Manufacturing Company, and had them shipped directly to us. Of course in Canada, concealed carry was only allowed for Criminals! (A joke, but you know what I mean, not for us!)

I competed and taught even, at some of the IALEFI Annual Conferences. With a Glock 17 (with night sights! Replacing those terrible plastic factory sights)
To transport a pistol into the USA, you first declared it at Canada Customs, then were issued a card, with the details of the pistol on it, then used that card, to show Canada Customs, you owned it, and did not aquire it in the USA! coming back in. Once I obtained a CCL in Florida, carrying my Glock 17, became easy, when the Glock 19 came out, I carried one of those.

And that is where the high capacity story begins! I am not a small person, and toting the G19 was easy enough, and my feeling was, in a gunfight, 16 rounds sound good!

When the Glock 43X came on the market, I bought one, with Ameriglow night sights, fitted at the factory.
As I had pointed guns at people, but never shot anyone! And being a lot older now (84 on the 27th, tomorrow!) Weight and bulk was a consideration.
But was 11 rounds of Federal 147g HST hollow points, going to be sufficient?

I finally hit the title, above. Do we need Hi-Capacity in everyday Carry?
As law-abiding citizens, in our everyday life?
 
I do not. I carry a micro 9 that I can hit extremely well with, a J frame 38 and sometimes. A LW officers ACP in 45. All 3 have CT grips. I am totally comfortable with any of these. I only take the 45 if I feel the need.

I live in NY where there is a 10 round limit. Does not affect my decision at all.

David
 
For several years I carried a compact 1911 with 6 round mags. I never felt like I was short on ammo; on occasion I brought along a second mag, but typically I considered that simply more weight unless I was in a larger city environment known for more violence than I typically faced. I was not one to make sure I chambered a round and then added to the mag so as to have 6+1. I still don’t. I no longer carry the 1911 (though I could) because I do not desire the extra weight. I carried a sub-compact XD Mod. 2 chambered in .40 S&W for a few years, and the lighter gun afforded me 9 rounds of ammo. Last year I converted to a Sig P365. In the last couple years I have undergone some pretty tough abdominal surgeries and I am not comfortable carrying much weight, the P365 is a blessing in this regard. I do not carry with the optional 12 round mag, 10 is more than enough. As you can see, over about a decade I have reduced firearm size and weight and yet gained in round capacity, though capacity was not my primary goal.
I think the desire for more rounds is often blown a bit out of proportion, and the manufacturers for sure take advantage of it. Seldom is the average civilian going to fire more than a few rounds, though it could happen that more ammo is needed. The likelihood of needing 20 - 30 rounds is, I think, pretty slim. That said, a person needs to do what makes them comfortable. If they feel the need for a 15 round mag with a second mag...okay. Me, I feel just fine with 10 rounds, or even less.
 
Last edited:
I never felt that more than 6 or 7 rounds was needed. Nevertheless, I carry a hi-cap 9mm with a 15 round mag.

A few more rounds are probably not neeed, but having them doesn't hurt anything.
 
Ben. Sounds good, I seem to have stepped into that area, with my slim, lightweight 43X.

Keep Safe.
 
My carry guns for the last 15 years have been a compact 1911, condition 1, with one 6 round mag in the gun, 7 rounds total. A Ruger SP101, 6 rounds total. And an NAA mini .22 mag, 5 rounds total.

I don’t carry extra mags, speed loaders, or extra loose ammo in a pocket.

I’m not law enforcement or military. I don’t carry enough ammo to carry on a prolonged fire fight. I carry enough to hopefully get me out of a bad situation, without be too cumbersome/uncomfortable, but still have some level of protection.

I know plenty of people that carry high capacity pistols, with multiple extra mags, some that carry multiple pistols. If it works for them, I won’t say it’s wrong, it just doesn’t work for me.
 
My main carry gun is a S&W Shield 9c. Carry's 8 rds and that's plenty. If your in a fight and need more than that, I doubt it's about self defense but rather an assault! I do carry one spare loaded magazine but doubt I'll ever need to fire the weapon at anyone!
 
No.
But it's a good idea.
You may need it, but you almost certainly won't.
All other things being equal, it'd be kind of dumb for a guy to carry a magazine half empty, but carrying a gun with low capacity is a different kind of choice altogether.
It's not a stupid choice to carry a ten round pistol, but it's just not rational to carry only six rounds in a 15 round capacity handgun.
Choose your defensive pistol. That is what is most important to most people. Carry it at full capacity. Five rounds of ammo is an impossibly small weight to discern when carrying two pounds of handgun.

A person who chooses to carry only ten in a high capacity magazine is making a mistake (imo) but a person who chooses to carry a single stack low capacity magazine, as long as he has a good, rational reason behind it, has made a very good decision. He made his purchase based on practical issues (sized and weight) instead of far less important issues (extra available ammo).
 
It is a personal decision based on risk factors and comfort level.

Personally most of the time I CCW my Walther PPS with 7+1. However if I go out after dark or farther from home to places I am less familiar with I CCW my Glock 19.
 
Principle vs. Technology

I am hearing two ideas here related to the question at hand.

When we think about want or need for capacity, we are talking about principles or values that we are mentally applying to a scenario that hasn't happened yet. Questioning if we "need" high capacity appeals to one's sense of efficiency, thriftiness, perhaps not wanting to get caught up in the latest greatest craze or commercialized trend.

The other force I see at play is simply development of technology. If things can function the same or better but with lighter weight, less cost to manufacturer (and hopefully less cost to user) they can be touted as "improvements". And "improvements" sell.

Whether these "improvements" actually help people defend themselves would take a detailed study that probably won't happen.

Whether or not we need them, I think the gun manufacturers are going to keep making these "improvements" as long as someone is there to buy it! Imagine what if would be like if the firearms industry was held to the same standards as pharmaceuticals or medical care. Randomized controlled trials to prove that your product is significantly better than others on the market, and that outcomes of users are significantly improved before being allowed to sell. Then it wouldn't be any fun anymore
 
I think in some places situations have changed in the last several years. I feel quite safe in areas near my home, and antiquity armed with my LCP, of Kahr CM9. But in other areas not all that far away it seems that often muggers, thieves, car jackers, or just thugs that want to hurt people are traveling in packs.
So just running errands, or dining out close to home, I usually carry only a 6+1 mouse gun. Or sometimes a Springfield XD40 Subcompact with 9+1 capacity.
However when traveling beyond, or on the edges of my "safe" zone I have given up a little caliber, but added capacity with a Sig P320 Carry holding 17+1 in 9MM.
 
I go between my 10 +1 shot G43x & my Ruger 327 6 shot revolver. Just depends on the weather here in Fl. & where I'm going. At this time I prefer
to carry my G43x. But as usual, things change. So I guess I'd say that high capacity isn't that important for my needs.
 
Do we need Hi-Capacity in everyday Carry?
Click to expand...

As the question is framed, the only honest answer is "no".

The problem is the use of the word "need". The word "need" carries connotations and impressions that, for some people influence the discussion in irrelevant directions.

The first point is the difference between not having a constant, demonstrated use, or an occasional and theoretical use, and having a need.

The next point is that the same standard will NOT be applied my most people when the term "need" and firearms are used together.

As soon as someone declares there is no "need" for something firearms related, some very vocal people immediately demand that "since there is no need" the item, or feature should be prohibited. Banned outright, or at least heavily restricted, because there is no "need" for it.

Yet at the same time these same people, in an incredible display of a double standard, DEMAND that we have seatbelts and fire extinguishers, life jackets, and other safety items.

No one had a NEED for a seatbelt, until you get into an accident. No one has a NEED for a fire extinguisher, until there is a fire. No one NEEDS a life Jacket, until they fall into the water.

No one NEEDS high capacity in a defensive firearm, UNTIL THEY DO! And when they do, they need it, badly.

Is there a USE for high capacity in everyday Carry? Not usually. Just like the other things I mentioned. There is usually no use for such things, but there is a NEED to have them available, for those (rare) times when they are actually needed to be used.
 
1. Nobody knows what we will need. If we could know ahead of time, no one would carry except when they needed to, and no one would ever run out of ammunition in a gunfight. In fact, there would probably be very few gunfights as it would be much smarter to just take a "sick day" on the days when you knew a gunfight was upcoming.

2. Tom Givens, in his analysis of the shootings his students have gone through (I think it's up to around 60 so far) distinguishes between shootings (a defender uses a firearm against a legitimate threat, but one who is not armed with a firearm) and gunfights in which both the defender and attacker are armed with firearms. I have tried to find a supporting link but can't at the moment. So I'm working from memory. He says, as I recall, that "shootings" involve a relatively low number of rounds fired--perhaps 3. Gunfights, on the other hand, often empty the gun.

The bottom line is that NOBODY knows what your defensive encounter will look like or how many rounds you will need to live through it. They might be able to tell you what the AVERAGE encounter of a certain type might require, but that's hugely different. Your encounter (if it ever happens at all) may be a "shooting" or it may be a "gunfight", it may be close to average, or it may be very different from average.

I just talked to a guy whose wife needed two spare tires for her car in a single day. Is that AVERAGE? Not at all, but the fact that it was far from average didn't stop it from happening, nor did it magically somehow allow her to deal with the situation using only one spare.

Don't get confused between the different types of encounters.
Don't get confused about what happens MOST of the time vs. what CAN happen.

Most of all, make your decision based on the evidence instead of looking at the gun you want to carry, or that is comfortable to carry, and then trying to come up with arguments to support what you already want to do or have already decided to do.
 
What's in your weapon isn't the only ammo you can have on hand. Even if you're gun holds 6 or 7 rounds, there's nothing to keep you from also carrying a spare magazine or two.

I think we all probably practice mag changes from time to time, if we don't we should. Having the mag(s) someplace on your person that is easily accessed isn't hard.

I'd suggest that spare mags -- something that isn't always mentioned -- can take this discussion in a slightly different direction.
 
No, but then again, you don't really need to everyday carry at all because the odds of you need a firearm everyday or anyday at all (depending on where you live) are slim.
However, the point of everyday carry is to always be prepared for the worst case scenario.

At the the end of the day, it's a personal decision, and only YOU can choose what you think you might need to have to make it through a worst case scenario in which your life is threatened and the only way to get through it is to go straight through whoever is threatening you.

Personally, I only carry high capacity firearms in cold weather, and mostly because I'm capable of doing so. Otherwise, I carry a Ruger LCP with a spare magazine and a knife.
 
Well this is certainly the exception rather than the norm but it's happened twice last month (Sept. 2019) here in the Twin Cities.

Probably everybody has seen these videos of the gang beat down cell phone robberies but I'll post the link anyway.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RZX0e05NuU

Would a victim or good Samaritan want a hi-cap mag? Like someone else said nobody after a gun fight has ever been heard to say they wished they had less ammunition
 
Well, if you are in a situation where you needed a high capacity handgun and didn't have it, you will probably never need one again.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top