Hello, Double Naught...
Archie said:
I think it very unlikely to be confronted with a reinforced battalion of Red Chinese regulars in the daily course of commerce. The least amount I carry is for a S&W M36 - with one reload. If I haven't solved my problem in ten rounds, I'm in way over my head.
DNS said:
So because you are in way over your head, you give up or quit?
Not exactly... Presuming every time I fire a shot I hit an opponent and every time I hit an opponent he (she/it?) falls incapacitated... How many am I going to get prior to be overwhelmed? Ten? Fifty? Three? I hate to be the one to break this to you, Double, but sooner or later, it's going to be your turn. Perhaps from evil action, perhaps from a bad ticker, but it will be your turn sooner or later. As it will be mine. I can't see carrying a Government Model and six extra magazines (total of fifty rounds) every step of my life and dying with the better part of six magazines unfired. It's just - wasteful.
Archie said:
I cannot foresee a situation calling for suppressive fire. Then again, I consider 'suppressive fire' a well aimed and delivered shot to suppress the problem.
DNS said:
You may get in over your head more easily than you my realize.
Yes, I may. Or I may not; I'm pretty observant as a rule. One pays one's money and takes one's choices - and chances.
DNS said:
Waters' "The Best Defense" has a great story on how suppressive fire was used by a guy on his first trip back to a gun range after open heart surgery. It was a gun battle that took place in traffic outside of Houston where he used suppressive fire to keep bad guys from doing further harm to a trooper they had already downed.
So how many other people did he wound, terrorize or endanger with his 'suppressive' fire? Like I said in my first posting, I consider suppressive fire to be a well aimed shot (and hit) to suppress the attacker.
For every instance of self-defense suppressive fire used to solve or stay a problem, I can show you several instances of poor marksmanship and unreasonable danger to the community at large arising from too high a magazine count. For instance -
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_341036.html
Two undercover policemen and a shooting suspect fired at least 103 rounds during an early morning shootout ...
or
http://www.luoamerican.com/baldilocks/2005/05/bright_lights_b.html
The deputies, however, were no less of a hazard to the health of the neighborhood. They fired 120 rounds at the guy, but he barely gets scratched. Plenty of collateral targets, like houses and windows belonging to same are hit, however. One of the deputies even stops one of his buddy's bullets with his vest; 'friendly fire.' (The phrase sounds so benign, doesn’t it?) And no gun was found on the suspect.
I think there's an argument to be made that large magazine capacities decrease marksmanship.
DNS said:
You may find you need your suppressive fire to egress from a situation where you are in over your head.
The old 'fire a bunch of wild shots and run like heck' trick? Not my style. If I have to shoot, I shoot at a specific target.
Archie said:
Perhaps I'm over optimistic. Yes, I have the cell phone for back up.
DNS said:
If you think a cell phone is back up, you are overly optimistic. I can hear it now....
"Don't come another step closer or I will call someone!"
And again, you misunderstand the technology and the tactic.
Punch in the speed dial setting for 911; give location and best avenue of approach - in between gunshots - finishing with "I'm the scared looking fat guy with the revolver". Not hanging up, place cell phone on deck or other relatively protected place and continue with immediate problem.
Currently, I live in a fairly densely populated urban area. Suppressive fire - pray and pray tactics - are ill advised.
But I'll tell you what, Double Naught; you do what you like. Please don't kill my dog or me in the process.