I grew up in a small rural town in Western Montana called Paradise, about six miles east of Plains, on Hw. 200. My childhood school had kindergarten through eighth grade, and the largest population of students it ever had was barely over 50, and that included kids from the surrounding area. The sign said "pop. 300," but everyone there knew that was a bit optimistic. There were 300 dogs, but probably not 200 people.
I spent much of my childhood on my grandpa's property outside St. Regis, an area so remote they don't have electricity and have only had phone service for about ten years or so. Much of my childhood they've lacked even that, and they have always run on generator power. My grandpa has plenty of guns and can practice with them in his backyard. To this day, it's a .357 Mag revolver on his bedstand, and either a pump action .30-06 hunting rifle or lever action .44 Mag that gets his attention when he suspects prowlers are about. Most prowlers turn out to be about 15 pounds and furry. Sometimes a black bear will wonder down off the mountain. One time he had some lost campers pull into his driveway at 2 in the morning. He confronted them, naked, with his handgun, and they couldn't seem to get out of the driveway fast enough.
When I moved from there at age 13, we moved to a small community outside another small town in NW Montana. Once my grandma (mom's side) fell and broke her hip. Even with the address, it took the ambulance almost an hour to find the house. There's definitely some weird characters out there. My house is less than 30 miles as the crow flies from Ruby Ridge, ID. I am a scenic two hours or so from the Canadian border. We've got the crazy anti-gov types, the so-called militias (none of which I am a part of, despite my handle).
My whole life I have lived in these small, poor, rural Montana towns. I've seen third world conditions in the richest and most powerful country the world has ever seen. I've seen people living year round in crude, uninsulated lean-tos constructed of plywood and tarps. I've bared witness to the effect of depression that comes from poverty, the unemployment, the alcoholism, the domestic abuse. Some of these towns have among the highest per capita drug use in the country. Meth is a huge problem. The loss of much of the mining and lumber industries has hit this part of the country hard, the economy is failing, and people are desperate, esp this time of year.
Thing about the crazies is, most of them live out in the sticks for a reason--they just want to be left alone. The rural crazies are mostly harmless. The best way to avoid confrontation with them is to keep your head up when you're wondering through the woods. If you stumble into the wrong pot field or find the wrong disgruntled Vietnam vet, there can be problems. We've been chased out of the woods before. We've had them approach us with guns drawn. I've had my share of hairy situations out in the woods with these guys. But by and large, they all just want their privacy. They'll push back, but most of them would rather you just went the hell away. My grandparents are arguably among these crazies. I have yet to see a one of them go looking for trouble. Most avoid people outright to the extent possible, and mostly mind their own business and keep to themselves, asking only the same from you. That is the beauty of Montana.
With the growing meth problem and other problems associated with the desperation of poverty, we do have our share of home break-ins. Few of them turn violent. All the normally contributing factors of violent crime are present. But Montana remains a pretty safe place to live. IIRC, we scored 18th on the per capita violent crime charts (year 2005 on the chart I saw, IIRC).
Does this mean violent crime doesn't happen? Absolutely not. And just because it hasn't happened doesn't mean it won't. I accept the fact that help in the country is a lot farther away than in more urban areas, and I believe in being prepared. But being prepared for me is a matter of mindset, prior planning and tactics, and training--not capacity.
I believe the effect of my rounds, not their volume, will determine the opponent's reaction. I believe only hits count, because I've seen the effect of misses, and been unimpressed. I believe sights exist for a reason, and every professional on the planet who goes into harms way and trains to fight and win, uses them, again, for a reason.
Spray and pray is not a trained technique. It is a technique born from the lack of adequate training and an improperly conditioned, weak, undisciplined mind. Twelve-year old children with AKs in Africa spray and pray. Sixteen-year old boys with Glocks in our inner cities spray and pray. Nineteen-year old boys in Iraq spray and pray. The nineteen-year old American men they franticly spray rounds in the general direction of reply with coordinated (loosely) aimed (quickly) fire. And they win because of this. This is because the accuracy more than the volume of their fire is superior to their enemy's. And this is why the 4x ACOG(RCO) has been called the Marine Corp infantryman's largest firepower advantage since the introduction of the Garand.
Marines use suppressive fire, which still isn't spray and pray as even with the SAW, my fire was always aimed. But these tactics rely on coordinated fire and maneuver by an entire team. One fire team gains fire superiority, which again, is a matter of not only volume but, as distinguishes the winners, accuracy while the other fire team "locates, closes with, and destroys..." the enemy by flanking the position and assaulting with grenades and rifle fire. But suppressive, a.k.a cover, fire is only ever effective when you can fire and maneuver, and this requires teammates. By yourself, suppressive fire results only in two opposing forces "pinned down" in positions of cover or concealment unable to move or gain tactical advantage.
The OP clearly has never had professional training, and clearly hasn't thought through what he believes is a logical thought process. If spray and pray is valid, and volume of fire wins the day, and if we are outnumbered 2 or 3 to 1, then all the enemy would have to do is spray and pray as well, and there'd be no way we could win. If the enemy is spraying and praying, and "moving tactically," then that is three sprays and prays to my one spray and pray, giving them the advantage in volume of fire, and therefore assuring victory regardless my own magazine capacity. In every example I have read of one man achieving victory over a numerically superior force in a gunfight, his tactics and accuracy, not the volume of his fire, was the deciding factor.
So capacity is not a bad thing. Using it as a crutch to make up for poor marksmanship and inferior tactics is a bad thing.
With eight rounds of .45 in the mag and one in the pipe, nine rounds will be enough for me to fight my way to a long gun barring any scenario short of a full out Red Dawn style Spetsnaz assault on my living room. It will allow me to neutralize the effectiveness of the first one or two assailants and allow me to get to a rifle, because the tactics I use are designed to do so, and because I have planned and placed said rifle in such a manner as to put me close to it and between it and the enemy from any conceivable entrance from which an assailant could gain entry into my domicile.
Spray and pray is as ridiculous as it looks on the movies...
.