In this thread we advocate at least 10 round capacity

[Lohman446]

Based on responses, some have a fairly lackadaisical mindset:
"If I can't get it done with 5-7 rounds, then I'm done...."

What is the scenario where 5-7 rounds does not create an avenue for escape or otherwise end the confrontation that 14 does? I'm really curious as to the scenarios people envision when they argue less than X (10, 14, 17 plus Y spare magazines) is not adequate. I accept there is a limit to my skills and there is no purpose in outfitting myself to be Jason Bourne.

Earlier a scenario was mentioned involving four attackers with knives. There is a limit to distance at which I can engage an attacker AND claim self-defense. Let's just assume that distance to be about 7 yards. By the time I have engaged the second attacker with a firearm (assuming they are determined and semi-competent attackers) I better have a plan for engagement at hand to hand distance.

As to my parsing of law enforcement from my discussion: it has little to do with perceived skill level and more to do with duty. I have no duty to engage those four attackers with knives in any way. In fact if I see them down the street I can simply make a turn and walk away. Law enforcement operates on a different duty.

The best argument for large capacity, is, IMO, the idea that it is better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it. However this is not necessarily a cogent argument in itself. After all the same argument could be made about a M1A1 tank in one's garage.

[Tactical Jackalope]

In this thread I advocate carrying a gun.

If every American carried a 5 shot revolver or 7 shot pocket 380 crime would be cut by 90% tomorrow.

Yes, there are much better guns than the options above for carry/fighting. But, the best gun in the world is the one you have on you.

Boom.


Go with an HK USP 9 Compact or HK P2000.

Glock 43 or 42 is good.

Smith and Wesson J-Frames are awesome too.

[HiBC]

In this thread people that rationalize less than 10 rounds hijack my thread advocating more.

I don't think it works quite that way. There are two sides to every story.Feel free to express your thoughts or opinions,but to then state "Only those who agree or think the same way I do may post" is unrealistic.

A different point of view generates dialogue and discussion.

I myself have observed and AGREE! (particularly since Orlando) that our world has changed,and our need to be armed has gone well beyond the armed robber at the convenience store.

I have a very nice 45 ACP Commander clone.I myself wanted something more as an option.I actually bought a 38 Super slide and was debating getting a Limited 10 80 % receiver,vs a Caspian double stack,vs an STI.
Practical reality invaded my brain,and for a whole lot less money I bought a much lighter M+P 9 C.
I did choose a double stack 9mm,for the reasons You agree with.

Part of why I made a case in opposition(to the OP) is the way you disrespected the 1911 gunners." This thread ain't for your kind". It rubbed me a bit wrong,and brought out my contrary side.

If I started ANY thread that said " This is a (xxxxxx gun) thread,and you (yyyyy gun ) guys can go pound sand" I would be very disappointed if the yyyyy guys remained silent. How about " Kel Tecs Rule!! You Glock guys find another thread" Really???

Whether a 1911 or an 8 shot Shield,first rule is having a gun.

YES,I agree,ABSOLUTELY, Jerry Miculek exists. And yes,I agree,a skilled,diciplined shooter with a 21 rd mag can put 2 COM and one to the head at 7 targets with one mag .Shades of " Now I know you boys was just funning a little,but my mule don't see it that way.So if you'll just apologise to my mule,like I know you will"

Doot doo doo doo doo doot. 7 coffins.

Yeah,I get it.Light the little cheroot.

No denying,mag capacity is good,But be careful not to over rate it.

Surely you are aware of a tendency for LEO's packing double stack 9's to do an ineffective cyclic rate mag dump with almost no effect on target.

How often have you heard of "Police fire 56 rounds at ....."

We had a situation like that near my town.Hostage situation in a restaurant.Bad guy started killing.An old man,innocent,attemped to escape out a rest room window.Multiple cops mag dumped double stack 9mm's at him.
They did hit him enough to kill him.

There is plenty of old Viet Nam footage of GI's holding an M-16over their heads and burning a mag full auto at space.I even understand that may have some military value.Till they assess that the ammo situation is down to less than one magazine per man.

Yes,with skill and discipline,magazine capacity will be an advantage.

But the single stack guy who fires 5 rounds,then MOVES to COVER as he hits the magazine release and puts in a full one,still with one in the chamber,

Is in a far superior position than the guy who relies on mag capacity and is standing still blazing away.

You are absolutely right,a shooter CAN have the same skill and discipline with a High Cap,but observation of human behavior tells me it is seldom so.

Its easier and a lot more fun ,and feels powerful to fire 20+ rounds.

Meanwhile,the guy with the Charter Arms Bulldog finds his sights,shoots one,and puts one 44 spl slug through your sternum.He still has 4 more in the wheel.
And,he disappeared behind cover so you had time to gurgle away.

[dgludwig]

QUOTE: "...You are absolutely right,a shooter CAN have the same skill and discipline with a High Cap,but observation of human behavior tells me it is seldom so..."

There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that what you allege is true. As a fellow keen observer of "human behavior" I am left with the opinion that ammunition capacity has no bearing whatever on the efficiency of rounds expended by a shooter. It's the same old, hackneyed hyperbole that some use to make the argument that semi-auto rifles in the hands of hunters leads to a "spray and pray" mind-set.

Balderdash! As I opined earlier in this thread, sound training and much practice is what determines a shooter's skill set and discipline, whether you're armed with a machine-gun or a single-shot derringer.

QUOTE: "...But the single stack guy who fires 5 rounds,then MOVES to COVER as he hits the magazine release and puts in a full one,still with one in the chamber,

Is in a far superior position than the guy who relies on mag capacity and is standing still blazing away..."

The single-stack guy who fires 5 rounds, then MOVES to COVER as he hits the magazine release and puts in a full one, still with one in the chamber (the infamous "tactical reload"),

Is in a far inferior (tactical) position than the guy who is armed with a double-stack magazine, who fires 5 rounds, then MOVES to COVER and still has 10 rounds left in his magazine, one round still in the chamber and a spare magazine, loaded with 15 rounds at the ready.

Again, all else being equal in terms of training and ability, there is simply no downside (other than maybe ease of carry and/or concealment issues) to carrying a pistol having a large capacity pistol if you ever have to survive a gunfight-and this opinion is coming from a man who, earlier in this thread, conceded that his usual carry piece is a six round revolver.

[SocialAnarchist]

Advocate whatever you like, carry whatever you like. Honestly what anyone carries is their business.

I feel adequately protected with my .45 acp XDs with 5 and 1 in the chamber and a spare 6 round magazine. But then again I really have no intention in engaging in an OK corral style shootout. I intend on shooting just enough to end the threat or to allow me to withdraw. I'm not a cop so I have no obligation to stay engaged with the bad guy if I and my friends and loved ones can escape.

[dgludwig]

QUOTE: "...Advocate whatever you like, carry whatever you like. Honestly what anyone carries is their business..."

Most of the threads on the forums encourage discussions of issues and that's why most of us engage. The op invited same. I don't think any poster has tried to force anyone to adopt their point of view and some of us, certainly myself, hope to learn a little something along the way. So what pistol some choose to carry and their reason(s) for doing so becomes other peoples' "businesses", if only by default.

[jglsprings]

dgludwig

dgludwig QUOTE: "...Advocate whatever you like, carry whatever you like. Honestly what anyone carries is their business..."

Most of the threads on the forums encourage discussions of issues and that's why most of us engage. The op invited same.

I disagree. The O/P has pretty much not encouraged discussion...

CDW4ME
Senior Member

Join Date: March 18, 2009
Posts: 703

Those that rationalize less still feel obligated to reply, predictable.

CDW4ME In this thread people that rationalize less than 10 rounds hijack my thread advocating more.

CDW4ME
If someone has rationalized a pocket pistol as sufficient, me providing examples or logic contrary to their belief is likely a waste of my time.

No disagreement tolerated...

[Nanuk]

Sometimes I carry my S&W model 69 44 magnum and a few speedloaders. I feel that the sheer violence of the 44 magnum makes up for a certain amount of capacity. And yes I can make nice follow up shots.

[SocialAnarchist]

dgludwig

"...Advocate whatever you like, carry whatever you like. Honestly what anyone carries is their business..."

Most of the threads on the forums encourage discussions of issues and that's why most of us engage. The op invited same. I don't think any poster has tried to force anyone to adopt their point of view and some of us, certainly myself, hope to learn a little something along the way. So what pistol some choose to carry and their reason(s) for doing so becomes other peoples' "businesses", if only by default.

I think you need to read the OP's original post and his follow ups. he pretty much doesn't care what anyone has to say that doesn't buy into his minimum 10 round magazine viewpoint.

But let me add this, I don't advocate for anyone else to do anything. Carry what you want to, it impacts me absolutely zero. Similarly, what I carry impacts everyone else absolutely zero. Frankly, I would rather have fewer .45acp rounds than a ton of 9mm rounds. It always amazes me that people rave on about 9mm being very close to .45 acp in the imaginary stopping power debate but then have to carry a pistol that carries between 10 and 20 rounds and then one or 2 spare magazines. Why? If it is so close why do you need enough ammo to take down 2 football teams?

[CDW4ME]

I think you need to read the OP's original post and his follow ups. he pretty much doesn't care what anyone has to say that doesn't buy into his minimum 10 round magazine viewpoint.

You're right.
I admit in the initial post that many times the best I can do is a pocket pistol 9mm or 380.
If I am not restricted by work clothes, then I carry at least a Glock 19/23 size pistol with spare magazine along with the pocket pistol.

If I had started a thread that said, "In this thread we advocate carrying a revolver" I am confident that someone would post about how a semi is better, especially if I said, semi folks this thread is not for you.

[45_auto]

Originally Posted by cdw4me

especially if I said, semi folks this thread is not for you.

It seems that you envision yourself as the "boss of the internet". What leads you to believe that you have any control over who posts on a forum not owned by you?

[Old Bill Dibble]

See what happens when you disrespect the 1911 guys out the gate?

[Pianoguy]

The world has changed but the extreme scenarios that make the news are still very very rare. For the vast majority of people if you aren't involved with illegal drugs in any way, can leave other people's women/men alone and can stay off the streets alone in the middle of the night the chance of you being involved in any kind of violent encounter is pretty close to nil. Maybe that's not good enough for everybody (and I pity anyone that is that afraid of the world) but for me (and most people if they're honest) the reality is that I'm in more danger of being killed by a distracted/drunken driver on the way to the range or falling down the steps in my house than I am of ever being harmed by the stereotypical bad guy that apparently is waiting behind every corner for some people.

As far as gun capacity, it still comes down to what you 1) will carry consistently and 2) can shoot well. Non-LE people are not responsible for engaging every threat and LE doens't want you to unless there is no other option - CC is meant to provide personal protection and if the only gun you can CC consistently is a j-frame revolver that is what you use and with proper training it will probably be all you need. What you want to do is end the threat and part of that is being aware and staying out of problems and if that isn't enough being ready to get your butt out of there - the gun is a tool to enable you to do that, not a means to win every possible fight you can imagine. If a full-size service pistol works for someone, go ahead and carry it but not because you feel the danger to yourself has somehow increased to the point you feel you have it or you're dead. It's not that bad out there.

[seeker_two]

Question: How is a 7-rd. 9mm pocket pistol ballistically and tactically different than a 7-rd. .45ACP pistol?

[DubC-Hicks]

Seeker-two,

He isn't saying that it is. What he's saying is that he only limits himself to 7 rounds when absolutely necessary, when clothes don't allow him to wear a double stack.

Think about it, the two really aren't a comparison though. A 6-7 round pocket pistol is only for times when you can't carry a full size. But when carrying a 7-8 round 1911, you'd easily be able to carry a 15 round G19 instead and have double the amount of rounds, and less weight to boot. It's a win win. More ammo, less weight. There's no negatives of having more rounds with you.

[K_Mac]

It's not that bad out there.

That really depends on where "there" is. While the risk of most of us ever needing a gun in a self-defense situation is small, the consequences of needing and not having are dire. There is no way of avoiding all situations where the danger of being attacked is well above "nil" unless you live in a fortress, and even that comes with its own risks.

I hear constantly from folks that, "It's not that bad out there" and I am better leaving my safety and the safety of my family to the professionals. Even if that were true, it disregards my right to protect myself from violent crime. I am not afraid of a bad guy behind every bush or around every corner. I am more afraid of people who think they know what is best for me.

[Dashunde]

I advocate for carrying whatever you like.

I do not advocate for living a life of discomfort, compromises, paranoia, and a "gun lifestyle" in general.
Repeatedly slicing-n-dicing the nuances of caliber, capacity and so on... then arguing about it?
Its all a huge waste of time and mental energy.

[dgludwig]

QUOTE: "... I am not afraid of a bad guy behind every bush or around every corner. I am more afraid of people who think they know what is best for me."

Well said and so very true. And on the other side of the coin, there are those who would have you believe that they don't care what you carry and that, likewise, you shouldn't care what they carry-and then go on to elaborate what they carry and why; as if anyone should care.

I'd like to think that these forums promote and encourage a free interchange of ideas without always stepping on each others egos (though, thanks to the dark side of human nature that each of us is cursed with, that's bound to happen from time to time). For the most part though, I think The Firing Line members benefit greatly from having a large number of informed and well-intentioned posters who bring much good to the table in terms of knowledge and expertise. I know I have benefitted from the much good advice I've received over the years and try to always keep an open mind along the way (though that's not always easy...).

[CDW4ME]

It seems that you envision yourself as the "boss of the internet". What leads you to believe that you have any control over who posts on a forum not owned by you?

That's funny and inaccurate.
I expect some of the people carrying low capacity will feel obligated to hijack my thread, may as well call it up front.

[sig-gunner]

I've always thought a thread was hijacked when the subject of the thread was not being discussed.

It's all been about mag capacity.. even though the thread title has the "advocate 10 rounds" in it.. it's still on the same subject.

Just my 2 cents.

[amd6547]

Ok. If terrorists strike while I'm carrying my 6 shot GP100 357mag, I run for my life...
Now, if I happen to be carrying my 14 shot Beretta 84F 380acp, I go on the attack.
BTW, who is the royal "we" of the thread title?

[Dashunde]

Now, if I happen to be carrying my 14 shot Beretta 84F 380acp, I go on the attack.

Your joking, right?

[sig-gunner]

Ok. If terrorists strike while I'm carrying my 6 shot GP100 357mag, I run for my life...
Now, if I happen to be carrying my 14 shot Beretta 84F 380acp, I go on the attack.

Well maybe it depends on what the terrorists are using in their attack. If it's knives, as they often do now days, mag capacity might not be so important if you're a good shot.

If it's AK-47s then you still need to be a good shot no matter your mag capacity.

It's all about timing and aim and the all important circumstances.

A 7 round clip or a 12 round clip.. seems moot. Just my opinion.

[P5 Guy]

If we need more than five rounds it is most certain we are dead.

[K_Mac]

If we need more than five rounds it is most certain we are dead.

Nonsense. This is no more true that saying carrying 2 pistols, of any caliber, and 3 or 4 reloads will certainly assure survival. Our skill level, and the circumstances of the encounter will decide our fate. 5 rounds may be more than enough, or "a ton" of ammo may be few pounds short.