Do we need Hi-Capacity in everyday Carry?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I recall the story of an officer at an event that had a credible threat against it. When two gunmen assaulted the place armed with rifles he created his own cover fire and closed the distance. I’m not engaging in a running gun battle. Capacity is an issue and if my aggressors are incompetent (they have fired multiple rounds and I’m still capable of resistance) and there is no reasonable means of escape I will close distance. Most pistol rounds, absent a somewhat lucky hit, are not going to quickly create a physiological stop and I think many defensive lines of thought fail to prepare for the chance of hand to hand combat even if you have managed to score good hits. I frankly prefer my chances in close quarter combat to a pistol duel.

There are holes in my plan. Some of these holes may be filled by more capacity though not all. Oddly enough when hiking with my kids I opt for more capacity because I worry about aggressive coyotes where making a standing defense becomes more likely. That aside I think the situations where more ammo would be the difference are unlikely given my lifestyle.

Could I come to a situation where I wished for more ammo? It’s possible though chances are I will have wished for a long gun first.

I get the rationale for bigger and more. It’s not without reasonable premise. In the end though even when my G19 was primary “EDC” it started to become selective day carry which has bigger holes.
 
I have to agree that use of the word 'need' is loaded...and probably hard to really nail down. To me, it's no different than someone asking me "do you really need to carry a weapon?". Nope, sure don't 'need' to...in the sense that I believe the likelihood of me ever needing a weapon ever for any reason in the remainder of my days is very, very close to zero. So to ask "do I need more ammo" is about as meaningless a question. I don't need *any* ammo...the firearm and the ammo is my last defense against a situation that statistically isn't ever going to happen, and that I hope to avoid entirely by the exercise of all my other defenses.

But, the consequences of this event "that will never happen" are, or could be, rather severe if it *does* happen. While statistically I'm never going to win the lotto--even if I play--people DO win the lotto. Carrying costs nothing, really, and I have no reason NOT to carry. I also have no reason not to carry 10+1 in 45 Auto, or 12+1 in 10 mm Auto...so I do. Is that 'high capacity'...well, to some people it is, to others, no.

I feel as well-prepared...or unprepared...carrying my 6+1 Kahr in 40SW as I do carrying 12+1 in 10. Nothing I think is going to happen is going to, nor is it going to go down the way I think it might. I'm likely not going to have the weapon drawn in time to use it, nor will I likely have a first shot, nor will I likely hit my target if I do, nor will I have the opportunity for any follow up shot that so many seem so concerned about.

But I'm optimistic. :D

I happen to think more than one magazine's worth is getting into the hero drama fantasy scenario--but if that magazine holds the legal limit, I've got no reason to think that's "too many".

Avoiding Walmart on Saturdays is probably a better defensive strategy than more ammo.
 
Last edited:
For years I carried an M1911 with 8 rounds on tap and I never felt under gunned. As I've gotten older, I find the weight of the M1911 more than I want to carry all the time so I went with a pistol that is small and light enough that I won't ever leave it behind.

At one time I had a Colt Detective Special. I hated shooting it and it was a chunk to carry. When funds got tight, I didn't feel bad about letting it go. It's best attribute was it was pretty and that wasn't good enough. However I never felt unprotected with the 6 rounds of .38 special it held...

Tony
 
In reading the incredible survivable of Officer Stacey Lim, of the LAPD, I declined to follow with a similar occasion that entering into the USA, from Canada that happened to me. So now below.

Long before 911, and the restrictions that followed, I obtained a Florida Concealed Carry License. By the simple expedience of taking an online Hunting License, and using that legal method of applying for, and receiving a Florida CCW License, mailed to my then Canadian address, in Toronto.
The renewal was from my Sons address in Florida.

As we Canadians, providing we had registered our pistols in Canada, on a little card. (Sole purpose to prove we had left Canada with the Pistol we were bringing back) now in my case, I could with my Florida License, holster up, and proceed down the I 75 legally all the way to my Sons house in Florida.

One such occasion, my pistol of choice, was a Browning High Power, with a spare magazine, both of 13 round capacity, translating to 14 rounds of 9mm Black Tallon in my holstered BHP! After filling the tank on my V8 Impala and a bathroom visit, the holstered BHP ended up under my right thigh.

A method the SAS in Northern Ireland prefered in their plain clothes usage.

Road works in Detroit, after crossing the bridge, had me lost! Driving down a not so nice looking street, I saw the (I thought was the I75 above me) and a well-dressed figure, complete with a suit and briefcase standing at the corner.

I lowered the passenger window 4" or so and asked for directions to the I75.

He smiled, grabbed the window with his left hand and tried to grab the unlocking button, with his right! Through that 4" gap. The muzzle of my pistol, a few inches from his nose dissuaded that manoeuvre, and in stepping back, he apparently fell over his briefcase, onto his AXX!

I drove off! Window up, and after a few false starts, found the I 75!

Then my right thigh started to clench up! Bouncing so to speak, I had to use my left foot for a few miles.

I don't know what poundage that finger would have released the hammer
(the nice hammer with the hole in it!) but I think a couple of pounds might have been already pressed.
Now as a US Citizen, as the Aussies would say "No worries"

The Glock 43X is a lot lighter combination, but at the loss of 3 rounds, no not black talons. Is that enough? We will see (or not!)
 
Lohman446 said:
There are holes in my plan. Some of these holes may be filled by more capacity though not all. Oddly enough when hiking with my kids I opt for more capacity because I worry about aggressive coyotes where making a standing defense becomes more likely. That aside I think the situations where more ammo would be the difference are unlikely given my lifestyle.
Click to expand...

You've cited another reason I've decided to choose a different carry weapon rather than the .380 pocket pistol I recently acquired.

Coyote's are common in the outskirts of town, and I saw one last year in the middle of the day while driving, about a mile from my house on a busy street. Winston-Salem proper has about 250,000 residents and the surrounding areas aren' t farmland, but there is enough open undeveloped land that wildlife prospers. (I live a bit more than 3 miles from the center of town in a neighborhood made up of condos, single family homes, and apartment complexes.)

We've also had several serious dog attacks involving small children, older walkers, a UPS driver and a mail carrier over the past several years.

Putting down an attacking coyote or a mean dog would likely be a challenge with any handgun, but it's certainly going to be a greater challenge with a .32 or .380 handgun with only 6 or 6+1 rounds.
 
Last edited:
“Trained” is a very loose term though technically correct as there was a course and qualification. I get hit rates in combat are not tremendous but referencing police officers in general as a benchmark in training sets a really low benchmark. The cross section of firearm competence in a police force basically runs the spectrum.
 
giaquir said:
trained police officers have an average 18% hit rate.
Click to expand...

While there are likely exceptions (my son, a state trooper, and some of his friends are clearly exceptions) most trained police officers probably shoot less than the typical member of this type of forum.

A lot of them shoot only when they are required ato requalify with their weapons, maybe once a year.

My son and his friends (from work) -- I've shot with them -- would likely do a lot better than 18% in a real-world exchange of gun fire.
 
Last edited:
I find it quite interesting that a discussion about how someone might prepare for a situation that, in the absence of prescience, is impossible to predict in either location or condition (i.e. how many attackers and armed/capable to which degree), & will differ based on individual members’ skills, age, fitness and experience, has gone on for almost 200 posts, not to mention restrictions around local laws, finances and circumstances.

I mean, it’s taken me 7 lines just to summarise the parameters that might be considered.

This, for me, suggestions a few things about the psychology at play. (Resident psychologists feel free to correct me)

People seem to be reluctant to accept that others may assess a given situation differently to how they have, even if the situation is hypothetical.
People, on some level, seem to treat carrying a firearm as a guarantor of safety and victory.
People seem to think that there is this ”golden ratio” of calibre and round count that can cover all eventualities.

The sad truth is that there is always going to be the outlier that bucks the trend.

The very same reality is responsible for the anti gun movement’s attempts to ban guns.
This was certainly the case in the UK and Australia where outlier events meant drastic restrictions on all.

Given that most agree such sweeping bans are counterproductive and illogical, it follows that thinking that there is a one-size-fits-all carry formula for all people and all circumstances is equally illogical.
 
Last edited:
Reading some of these aforementioned scenarios, be they hypothetical, imagined, real and or somewhat embellished :rolleyes:, I suddenly feel inadequately armed with my old fashioned six shooter. I think I will stay home today instead of going to town. Too dangerous out there in the real world! :D
 
Yeah, I agree in not citing police officers as the benchmark of the "trained".

Way too many gun enthusiasts, yes, gun enthusiasts. Not even training junkies. Your regular gun enthusiast has better marksmanship than most police officers.
 
Accuracy in conflict certainly has some relation to but is hardly defined by marksmanship on a square range. I've seen people that burned tight holes in targets on the range miss at distances they'd normally scoff at when they were in force on force, myself included, and that's not the same level of stress and potentially confusion as a real fight. I don't disagree that the average firearm enthusiast likely shoots as much as if not moreso than the average police officer. But that isn't the only factor in that ~20% hit rate, so looking at that percentage and saying, "But I'm a better shot", and waving away that concern isn't the best choice, imo.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
 
Speaking only for myself if I have given the impression I am waiving the concern of low hit rates then I have failed to communicate effectively. My concern is time related. If the situation is not resolved quickly skill becomes more and more important and in a gun fight the longer it continues the more my limited skill works against me.

I may be able to hit the same amount of three point shots as Steph Curry in one second. Maybe two seconds. But given more than that my lack of skill would overcome luck.
 
I would say that a LEO has more experience with keeping a clear head in a high stress situation, with or without a firearm, than most civilians.

That will have some bearing on how they perform.
 
I would say that a LEO has more experience with keeping a clear head in a high stress situation, with or without a firearm, than most civilians.
Click to expand...

Fact. Training *sometimes* helps with that. Nothing beats raw experiences and I've had several. With each time it gets more and more clear. You learn to breath, which starts off as a conscious decision at first.Then the next instance you're calmer, then the next you're even calmer, then the next everything is different because of a circumstance you haven't encountered yet.

That why it baffles me when people just carry yet claim this certain level of wokeness in regards to mindset. Which is paramount following skill, tactics, and then gear. In that order.

Granted, not saying you have to always be in life and death scenarios to train your mind. Even getting in a boxing or MMA ring and have an unofficial spar/fight with someone can tell you a lot about yourself.
 
"trained police officers have an average 18% hit rate"

Giaquir, I wonder how much better YOUR hit rate would be if a drug infused, sociopathic punk was shooting at you, or running at you with a knife?? :D Remember, those same LEO's you are insinuating are such poor shots, were likely in a life or death, adrenaline fueled shootout.
Lets be fair. They previously shot well enough on the range to qualify and be certified / badged, & most LEO qualifications I am aware of are at least 40 out of 50 shots (or 80% accuracy), FAR higher than the 18% you stated.
Comparing a person's (LEO or not), target shooting scores on a range, to the hit ratio of a Lawmen under fire and or otherwise lethal attack is disingenuous at best.
I doubt many on this forum would shoot as well as they do at paper targets either... if the target was suddenly shooting back. :rolleyes:
Don't underestimate the "Pucker factor" and its ability to hamper ones marksmanship skills.
 
Last edited:
It told me I might have had an excellent career as a sprinter...
Click to expand...

LOL!

Well, good. At least you know about yourself. So you know you don't want to be in a physical altercation. Given that we carry concealed, we should make it a point not to be anyway! lol. That was hilarious. Thank you.
 
If you score hits as well in a highly volatile situation as you do on paper you are either “as cool as a cucumber” or a sociopath. Maybe those are not mutually exclusive. There is a valid point. Equipment and skill set on paper is lost to some people in high stress situations. The saying “see how they react to getting hit in the mouth” exists for a reason
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top