How many shots is enough

[Esox]

Depending upon the time of year and the days activities my carry can be anything (all 9mm) from a 6+1 pocket pistol to a 15+1 "compact". No matter what, it is always complemented with a spare mag of at least similar capacity if not one or two more rounds larger.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

If we had real data on enough defensive shootings - I doubt it would be a bell curve - so I like the box plot idea. That would give us a handle on the asymmetry. It would anchor at zero - the most likely outcome in DGUs - no shots fired as we have deterrence.

A box plot of when shots are fired would be interesting.

One has also to look at the total number of shots fired incidents. We may not have that as they may not be all reported. Then, we could see if a small percentage translates into an absolute large number if the total number is large. That's the way medical research looks at it - a small percent change over a large number of possible cases can be quite cost effective.

In some neighborhoods, defensive shots fired are not reported and wounds are treated by kitchen table medics if the wound is not life threatening. Kleck mentions this as do reports from sociologists who embedded themselves in gang/poor neighborhood life.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Here's the extreme end of the distribution for the folks who say the average is ....

http://www.policeone.com/patrol-issu...me=Exclusive_3

In this free-for-all, the assailant had, in fact, been struck 14 times. Any one of six of these wounds — in the heart, right lung, left lung, liver, diaphragm, and right kidney — could have produced fatal consequences…“in time,” Gramins emphasizes.

[Chaz88]

It would anchor at zero

Glenn,

I was thinking more about this and if we were to box graph the data for this kind of discussion I think it would be more useful to leave the zeros out or give them some very small fraction of one.

If the discussion is about if the statistics say to carry at all then you need the zero. But I am assuming that everyone is going to carry and is going to carry a minimum of five rounds.

It might also be useful to evaluate some of the upper end numbers for shots needed versus number actually fired. It is often stated that people empty the gun without realizing it. Did they need that many rounds?

I understand this would skew the hard data but I think the idea is to arrive at more of a qualitative answer, how many rounds should I carry, than a hard data quantitative answer.

I am probably missing a number of factors that should be considered. But, what do you think?

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Good ideas - we would have to have a good data set. We would also have to factor out hits vs. misses.

Getting rid of zero and stating that the analysis is for when shots are actually fired is a good idea also.

The question isn't usually asked that way but I think most assume it's for when you are really in a gun fight.

Since ever estimate is going to be probabilistic - I think that the best answer is a pragmatic and heuristic one. One gun and a reload or two.

The good neighborhood argument is bogus and the average being 3.94932 doesn't do you any good.

The deterrent argument argues that a J frame and 5 does it fine for the no shots fired.

Interesting discussion.

[PawPaw]

Answering the question: How many shots is enough?" I'm reminded of testimony in Court about a young police officer who found himself in a fairly stiff fight one evening with a doped up suspect and finally subdued him with the baton. At trial, it came out that the officer had struck the suspect seven times, all good hits, just like he was taught in the academy. No bad hits in lethal areas, the young cop fell back on his training and won the encounter before anyone was seriously injured.

At trial, the defense attorney tried to make an issue of the number of hits. "Why seven? Why did you have to hit him seven times?"

The officer thought about it for a minute and replied "Six strikes weren't sufficient, and eight would have been excessive."

The Court agreed with the officer and the suspect went to jail. The officer was fully vindicated in that six strikes was not sufficient given the totality of the circumstance. Seven strikes was sufficient, and eight would have been excessive.

We can extend this metaphor to handguns. If six is not enough, and seven would be sufficient, then eight would be excessive. It all goes to the totality of the circumstances and the scenario at the time.

[imthegrumpyone]

Only one if your any good !

[Bart Noir]

grumpy, what if there is more than one attacker?

Bart Noir

[RBid]

Originally Posted by imthegrumpyone

Only one if your any good !

This is probably my favorite BS sentiment, ever.

[Tactical Jackalope]

Originally Posted by RBid

This is probably my favorite BS sentiment, ever.

I didn't want to say it like that, but I agree.

This my "at least" carry...

[DannyB1954]

Each round has a legal liability involved. If you spew out 17 rounds and only one hits the threat, that means that 16 rounds hit something / someone else.

Get a gun that you shoot well, and practice with it.

[EnoughGUN]

"grumpy, what if there is more than one attacker?"

Bart, obviously you just wait till they are in line

[Cosmodragoon]

The first step in self defense is to have a gun that you can and will carry (along with any special pieces of paper demanded by a government that is violating your rights). The second step is to get sufficient practice and training to be proficient with that gun.

These two steps are the most important. They automatically help you sort out what's too big or what's too powerful for your personal needs or abilities. A distant third step is to find the right balance between capacity and caliber for you, and that might end up being more psychological than anything else.

For instance, I have this quirk about wanting a regular carry revolver to never be less than a six-shooter. Five shots just feels funny to me but that's how most small-frame revolvers come. So I naturally fell in love with the .32 magnum. It trades a little mass for energy, letting you pack an extra round in the chamber while matching or exceeding the power of a .38 special. In reality, the biggest function served by that extra round is psychological. It makes me happy and more confident in my ability to defend life, limb, and property. I hope to never be in a situation to do that but I suppose the extra round might come in handy if I am. On the other hand, for every situation where I'd need the sixth round; I'd need a seventh, eighth, ninth, or hundredth. The point is that we aren't talking about being a combat-ready soldier and there is always a potential situation that is more than we can handle. What we are talking about is using inherently limited concealable handguns for self-defense in the worst reasonable case. So, back to steps 1 and 2...

[HiBC]

I only read the first page of posts.My reply has likely been covered.I have no resume,I am not a Veteran,or former LEO.I've never been in a gunfight.

From a civilian standpoint,after an initial few shots,getting to cover might be better than standing and empying a big magazine.

I'm assuming the bad guys have guns and will shoot me.If Im not behind cover when 7 rds is gone,I am likely being hit myself.

I'm not saying 14 to 21 rounds is not a good thing,I'll take it!

I'm saying time exposed is dangerous

[SansSouci]

I have no idea how many round are required, for I have no idea how many bad guys might confront you.

Here's a better question: how would you avoid gunfighting?

[Nanuk]

Here's a better question: how would you avoid gunfighting?

Don't carry a gun, then you will never be in a gunfight.

The thing many miss is we are discussing what happens after all the verbal judo and de-escalation skills have been exhausted. Many states have a requirement for you as a citizen to retreat from a fight if safe to do so.

With that in mind, I am in agreement with Constantine, at a minimum I have a Glock and an extra mag, that is 31 rounds of 357 Sig HST in my case. That is quite a bit more than I carried on duty with a revolver, but I am not complaining. It's not just about having enough to finish the fight, but to remain in the fight if more BG's show up before the Calvary gets there.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Avoiding gun fights isn't really the topic.

It is the ever popular number of rounds, if you actually have to use the gun.

The modal number is zero - so let's get pass that to mass attacks and you are the sole defender.

I think - having read a zillion of these threads - the sensible answer is at least one mag for a semi and a speed loader for revolvers (or strip or two).

[Brit]

The Officer who was in the Gun fight, with a .45 ACP Glock Pistol? He changed to a 9mm Glock 17, an 18 round capacity, before he has to change.

I would like to listen to his rational in this change?

I find the Glock 17 is that wee bit too big pistol (a not real thought maybe, not much bigger than my Glock 19) but the spare magazine is a Glock 17 one.

I have shot thousands of rounds through my Glock 19s, a lot of these, actually most, in IDPA matches, with drawing from a concealment holster, movement, close, and far distances, I am very comfortable with carrying my Gen4Glock19.

[jolly roger]

All the time..638 or 642 J frame with 158 plus p lead HP and two speed loaders of same in pocket. Like the combo, practice with them too...

[FloridaGuy]

I carry 5 rounds of .357 Magnum 158gr hp. If I can not eliminate the threat with that then I should not have fired my weapon.

[Sharkbite]

Id rather have extra ammo and not need it then NEED it and not have it.

I would have thought that on a board like this the 1960 thinking that a 5 shot snubbie was all thats needed would be long dead (pun intended)

Im not saying you need 47 mags strapped to you. But 1 or even 2 reloads seems prudent.

We carry as a last ditch "oh crap!" "Im in trouble, and gotta help myself" kinda thing. At times like that i dont want to WISH i had better prepared. No do overs... No reset buttons

If you fire 3 of those 5 shots into your attacker... That only leaves you 2 shots to protect yourself from all his buddies/homeies/gangmember Id want a little more fallback then that to insure my loved ones and i got outta there.

Just sayin....

[stmichps]

In my past life when I had the need to researched such information. The average was 3 shots were fired during a self-defense shooting.

The unfortunate truth is that even if you're in the right in your use of deadly force. You must also justify your use and a good prosecutor will ask such questions like; how many and what type of ammo were you carrying at the time?" If you carry a double stack and have 2 or more magazine backups (15rds per magazine x 3 = 45rds + 1 = 46rds) , they might imply before a jury that you were looking for the trouble you found.

Seeing that your objective is to end/stop hostilities directed towards you and stay out of jail while you do it. I would say it depends on how many rounds you feel you need to meet both objective.

Personally, when I carry a revolver I have one speedloader reload, a single stack auto one magazine backup, and for a double stack none...

[Brian Pfleuger]

Originally Posted by Sharkbite

Id rather have extra ammo and not need it then NEED it and not have it.



I would have thought that on a board like this the 1960 thinking that a 5 shot snubbie was all thats needed would be long dead (pun intended)



Im not saying you need 47 mags strapped to you. But 1 or even 2 reloads seems prudent.



We carry as a last ditch "oh!" "Im in trouble, and gotta help myself" kinda thing. At times like that i dont want to WISH i had better prepared. No do overs... No reset buttons



If you fire 3 of those 5 shots into your attacker... That only leaves you 2 shots to protect yourself from all his buddies/homeies/gangmember Id want a little more fallback then that to insure my loved ones and i got outta there.



Just sayin....

The cliche of "need and have" is quaint but really has no basis in reality. What's the rationale for stopping with 30 rounds? 40? 75? 200? It's better to have it and not need it.... Right?

The facts of SD don't change because it's 2014 and the Internet instead of 1960. The vast majority of everyone will live and die without ever needing a firearm. A large percentage of those who need the gun will draw and never pull the trigger. A large majority of those who pull the trigger will either fire 2 or 3 shots or simple fire until empty.

Will some need 10, 30, 50? Maybe, but I have yet to see a SINGLE example outside the home.

Somebody WANTS to carry 30, 40, 100 rounds? Super, but realize it's a WANT because it's an area of interest and the "need" is about as likely as getting struck by lightning while getting bit by a shark after a shipwreck.

[Tactical Jackalope]

I still carry as many rounds as I possibly can. Sometimes it's 3-4 spare mags and sometimes it's one. It's just how I'm wired.


I respect everyone else's decisions as long as they respect mine.


Different strokes...

[crashxl]

13+1 in the gun and an extra 17 round mag. The extra mag isn't for the ammo. The number one cause of malfunctions in a semi auto pistol are magazine related.