How much is enough?

[MTT TL]

any non LE or military situation where more than 5 rounds was required for self defense

The Tyler Court House shooting comes to mind. That started as a SD situation that turned into a LE shooting with more than 200 rounds fired between civilians, LEOs and the actor. So I would posit that any shooting with an armored target would likely require more than five rounds, as head shots are difficult under duress and may not be apparent as necessary until after the target has been hit ineffectually.

Another aspect is that most HD/SD shootings are covered so poorly it is often difficult to tell if the defender needed more ammo to continue fighting. For example in the Vernon Forrest robbery/ murder the gunmen exchanged shots with VF, but the number of shots, and the status of magazines are unknown at the completion of the gun fight. Still I would posit that any fight with more than one actor will require more than five rounds to end the threat. Whether or not you survive long enough to shoot more than five rounds is another question all together.

[ZeSpectre]

Here's what I know from personal experience.

1) "The odds" are super high against ever needing your firearm, let alone needing several shots or even a reload or two.

2) The consequences of "winning" (losing) the "bad luck lottery" are as severe as it gets.

3) Handguns are, at the present time, still one of the best portable options out there for stopping a threat. However, to put it bluntly, handguns SUCK in terms of flat out stopping power.

4) Humans are, in fact, fairly tough and psychological elements aside, it takes some specific things to stop a human (bleed out, central nervous system trauma, skeletal structure breakdown).

So combine #3 and #4 and you wind up with a situation where reliable self defense requires that everything meet at a point where your accuracy, the caliber/energy of the round, and damage to the specific vulnerabilities of a human being all intersect.

If (Maker Forbid) I were ever to be in a situation where I shot someone, and that first shot "intersected" perfectly and stopped the threat...well great! But under the stress of a self defense situation I know that I, personally, would like to have as many chances as possible to hit the previously mentioned "intersection" and that means regular personal training, and having a fair amount of ammo with me when I carry.

This, of course, must also balance out with my physical capabilities for carry because at some point (and this is different for each person) it's all just too much.

[Mello2u]

I find that many of the foregoing posts have addressed all of the salient points to the O.P.'s question, so I offer this slight tangent for consideration.

Pondering the underlying level of convenience when making a choice of what to carry in self-defense is a slightly different proposition than the OP proposed.

First, a handgun is a compromise in size, weight, and power. It is what we choose to carry because it is smaller than a long arm, can be concealed, and frees our hands to do work. Yet it is readily available at a moments notice to use in self-defense.
Second, all defensive handgun cartridges are under-powered (part of the power compromise).
Third, each individual is not only unique in what they will tolerate at the upper end of size, weight, and power for carry; but circumstance change and what may be tolerated for those changing circumstances change.

As has been often stated, at a minimum "bring a gun to a gunfight". Stated differently, any handgun is better than none.

Fortunately, in the U.S.A. we have options in what we choose to carry. Each of us must make that personal decision each time we prepare for the day whether we will carry or not, whether to carry the 15 ounce sub-compact or the middle sized what-ever, or the full sized two pound hunk of steel and whether to carry extra this or an additional that.

I have been carrying concealed for about 30 years and have not needed to use my handgun in self-defense. That does not mean that I will stop carrying a concealed weapon. I carry because I can and want to. Having a concealed handgun gives me options that I would not have if I chose to stop carrying concealed. I like to keep my options open.

So choice becomes a function of the personal analysis of risk assessment combined what amounts to that person's tolerance level for carrying a handgun of whatever size and power and perhaps extra stuff.

this probably does not need to be said: I suggest that everyone, at a minimum, should maintain condition yellow when out and about; or anytime that one is carrying a weapon.

[jontz]

I am NOT going to wear thunderwear!!!

Awwww, come on. What's wrong with the old assault diaper?

In Indiana, you could probably wear a jacket for almost half of the year (at least if you wer a thin blooded Floridian). With a thick winter coat, I could probably full sized handguns on both sides with mag holsters all the way around! I'm not sure how comfortable that would be, but it sure would be a workout. Heck, with a trench coat, you can even conceal rifles and shotguns, though it might be just a little much for self defense purposes. Heck, with a heavy winter coat, you can even conceal body armor!

I hate wearing coats, and I rarely do, even in the winter. I like it cold, what can I say? I do have a black trench coat though...hmmm You are right though, in general it is easier to conceal up here.

[whip1]

I find that many of the foregoing posts have addressed all of the salient points to the O.P.'s question.

I was looking for actual examples of needing more than five rounds.

MTT TL, I'm not sure what you're referencing. Do you have a link?

[45Gunner]

I was looking for actual examples of needing more than five rounds

I don't know how to say this without it sounding like a smart alec so understand that I am not: The only way to give actual examples of needing more than five rounds is have been in a firefight.

I have been in many, many firefights and no matter the amount of rounds we carried, it seemed like it was never enough. My biggest fear was running out of ammo. Those were the fun days in the jungles of South Vietnam.

With than being said, I normally carry a 1911 locked and loaded with a full 7 rounds in the mag well and another two, 7 rd magazines. That should be adequate unless I am stopped by a heavily armed gang of outlaws at which point, no amount of rounds is going to be enough as I am totally out gunned.

For Stephen426:

I heard it causes spring fatigue and possibly causes jams in some guns.

My friend, someone fed you wrong info. What causes a spring to fatigue is work. While a spring is compressed, it is at rest. It is built to be compressed. Excessive wear will weaken your mags, not keeping them fully loaded. Some mag and spring manufacturers sell springs that are about 5% stronger than original issue which makes feeding more reliable, in most cases. Why short change yourself a couple of rounds because you don't want to wear out your springs? If you ever do find yourself in a position where you need to draw and use your gun, I bet you would pay $100 a piece for each extra bullet. And to think that a $5 spring could make the difference between enough and not enough ammo...Cowabunga Dude.

[whip1]

45Gunner, Links to stories that required more than five rounds would suffice.

[ZeSpectre]

I was looking for actual examples of needing more than five rounds.

Well, folks who've been in a firefight don't tend to want to talk about it so unless you want to go searching official records yourself I suspect you are going to have a hard time unearthing records for the types of cases you are looking for.

This might be a good start though... http://www.thearmedcitizen.com/

[Stevie-Ray]

For me, living very near a large urban jungle, my 3" 1911 in .45 ACP along with a .32 backup is enough. If things get to where the criminal activity is ratcheted up significantly in my area, I carry a spare reload also. If, God forbid, I need to go into the inner city, my BUG becomes a Glock 26 and there's spares all-around. I spend as little time as possible in big cities. As I move to a rural area, I'll see what I feel comfortable with, but old habits will be hard to break.

To my knowledge, none of the gunfights in my area required more than I carry.

[Glenn Dee]

Many of us have trained with one or two guns over a great many years, some of us were even paid to do it. As .45 Gunner put it so well. When the feces hits the oscilating blade... you never have enough ammo. What I believe trumps a dumpload of ammo is confidence in your skills, and confidence in your weapon. Ya gotta believe. Hiding behind bravado wont cut it.

Dont misunderstand my statement. It's always good to have more ammo, and an extra gun never hurt. But I look at them as the icing on the cake. My self I feel most comfortable with a blue steel model 10 and 12 rounds of extra ammo. But when I go out on night calls I take my G-Lock 19, and a spare mag.

Well It's like this... I'm especially watchfull at night and in the area of the challanging, to check out all persons on or near my personal space, keeping always on the alert and observing every that takes place within sight and hearing (LOL)

[Deaf Smith]

Recently I've read a few discusions about how much "gun" is enough. A few people have said they feel underguned with a 5 shot revolver. I'd like to know about any non LE or military situation where more than 5 rounds was required for self defense.

Since one does not have a crystal ball to predict just how 'much gun' one will ever need (might not need one at all!), we have to sort of decide how much gun we HOPE to need.

Sure some get by with a J .38, some get by with a FIE .25 ACP! Some die even after using a .44 magnum.

So we all look for a compromise. I have several students who pack Bersa .380s. They like the size and weight of the gun. One lady loves her Colt .25 Vest pocket model and carries it.

Another gent, who was one of my students, actually packs a Smtih & Wesson Lew Horton .41 Magnum N frame with short 3 inch barrel! Yes, and he uses Silvertips. Did I mention he was in his 60s?

I pack a Glock 26 with Winchester +p+ 127 gr loads. Of course I've never had to use it so I guess I 'get by' with it.

You pay the price and take your choice. But there is no set 'one gets by' defensive weapon.

But I can assure you of this. No man, while in combat, has wished for a smaller gun, nor less ammo.

[Deaf Smith]

The Tyler Court House shooting comes to mind. That started as a SD situation that turned into a LE shooting with more than 200 rounds fired between civilians, LEOs and the actor. So I would posit that any shooting with an armored target would likely require more than five rounds, as head shots are difficult under duress and may not be apparent as necessary until after the target has been hit ineffectually.

Mark Wilson, the civilian who died trying to stop the killer, had a Swedish K submachine gun in his apartment overlooking the court house. It was locked and empty. If only he had a rifle, even a M1 Carbine or 30/30 (he knew quite well how to shoot them) he would be alive today.

So I guess he didn't have 'enough gun' that day.

Like I say, you pay the price and take your choice.

[FM12]

Carry what your comfortable with. When you're out and feel the need for more (either guns or ammo) carry more thenext time. JMO, YMMV.

As a full time LEO, with all the crazies coming out of the woodwork, IE the 4 officers ambushed in Washington State , mall shootings, etc. I've started carying two main handguns a sig 226/40 S&W and a springer in 45 ACP. Makes ME feel better.

[WW2]

In statistics 101 you learn four important numbers:

- Mode: This is the number you get when taking all data, sorting it from lowest to highest and then select the data item is the exact middle of the data collected. This number avoids the error caused when an average is taken with an unusually high or low value skewing the result. For Defensive Gun Use (DGU) the mode is 0!

-Average: This is the number you get when taking all data, adding it together, and then divide by the number of data points. From what I can determine, for DGU the average is 1 or 2.

-95th percentile: This is the data point where 95 percent of the data is higher or lower (depending on what you are defining) than the point being selected. This point is used in non-life critical areas. For DGU the 95th percentile on the low end is ZERO. For the high end, it is difficult to determine but appears to be in the 5 to 7 range.

-99th percentile: This is the data point where 99 percent of the data is higher or lower (depending on what you are defining) than the point being selected. This is the point used in life critical areas. For DGU this number appears to be 7+.

So, from my understanding of statistics, you should be selecting the 99th percentile level of the number of shots used on the high end of the curve since this is a life critical decision. For me, that implies that a capacity of at least 7 rounds is needed, so a revolver is out of the picture. Additionally, similar statistical analysis can be used on bullet size, weight, speed, and other characteristics. Finally, I live in California where the maximum capacity allowed is 10 rounds, so anything with higher capacity is out of the question.

The result, for me, is to use a 10-round .45 ACP semi auto handgun for defensive purposes. No model or brand is stated as I currently use a Remington 870 12 gauge. Soon I will get the handgun. Yes, I have a mag extension giving me 6+1 capacity.

[bmxslyguy187]

The answer to life is 42.







And at that. I feel the amount is what you're comfortable carrying. Me, two full mags at 14 .40S&W, is MORE than adequate, but i'm comfortable carrying it so I do.



My good friend carries a glock 26 and a LCP in the pant leg. Both have 2 mags. Overkill? Probably, but if they came into play, I must say I'd be glad to have him there. Me, I'm never going to be that comfortable.

[qcpunk]

I definately have to agree with ZeSpectre in his 8:30am post.

We all know that the "one shot=dead" mentality is mostly just hollywood acting. Not saying "one shot kills" are impossible, just that in many circumstances it takes more than one shot. As for how many rounds are required? As stated all over this thread, nobody has a magic crystal ball, peaking into the future.

Personally, select my firearm and amount of ammo based on what I'm doing or where I'm going. If its a quick run to the gas station, i might grab my LCR; going to south phoenix for something and I'll have my P99 and an extra mag. When im just running errands locally, P99 and no extra mag. And what am I wearing on that particular day? If I'm dressed up, I'm carrying as little as possible while retaining my personal safety. Point is, there is no magic number for every person in every possible situation. Just my feelings on the topic.

Cheers!

[Drummer101]

It is looking like after reading the posts that 6-8 is a nice number and if you need more you would not carry enough.

[cracked91]

For me at least, its not a matter of do I think im good enough.

I know for a fact I will never be able to mentally construct a gunfight unless I am actually in one. Which means that while I can practice and get very efficient, I can not predict EXACTLY how my body will react to the massive amounts of adrenaline being pumped into me. It seems like most real life gunfights I have seen in videos show the shooters (depending on what kind of weapon they have) firing multiple shots at their target very rapidly before stopping to assess the outcome.

And why shouldn't they? All its gonna take is for the BG to flick up his wrist and squeeze that trigger to end your existence. I am pretty sure than in an SD situation once I started firing it would be 2 shots a second until something happened that let me know the threat was over. With that said, I think an extra mag/speedloader, even with a 5 shot snub, is going to be more than enough. I think that the first time the gun clicks its going to be a reality check on your ammo situation.

[MTT TL]

MTT TL, I'm not sure what you're referencing. Do you have a link?

Tyler court house shooting, a very bad day at the office now with it's own Wikipedia page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyler_courthouse_shooting

(although the page is only about 80% accurate)

Murder of Vernon Forest, junior welter weight WBC/ IBF champion, and all around great guy in car jacking gone wrong:

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/box...ory?id=4356715

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/ob...d-1774452.html

Note the precognitive(?) dream in the second posting

[zukiphile]

Recently I've read a few discusions about how much "gun" is enough. A few people have said they feel underguned with a 5 shot revolver. I'd like to know about any non LE or military situation where more than 5 rounds was required for self defense.

Central Park jogger.

I personally had a problem with the klan a few years ago. At the time, I regretted not having a longarm. It was resolved without me needing to present a firearm, but I was alone and had many more than five potential problems.

I suppose there will always be situations that a single individual will have difficulty in resolving even if he is amply armed.

[ATW525]

I'd like to know about any non LE or military situation where more than 5 rounds was required for self defense.

Lance Thomas has already been mentioned, so I'll link to Massad Ayoob's article "The Retired Marine and the Robbers". Seven rounds of .45 ACP fired against two robbers in a Subway sandwich shop.

[Skans]

20 rounds in one magazine/chamber is enough. That's just my opinion.

[whip1]

Thank you for the links.

Would V Forest have been better off just letting them have the wallet and car? Unless I'm mistaken, self defense is only when life and limb and in danger.

The marine story is a great example of needing a lot of ammo in a SD situation.

[qcpunk]

Whip1, That is my understanding of the SD laws as well. When it comes down to simply material possessions, let em have it. Thats why we all have insurance anyways right? Don't get me wrong, I dont let ANYONE drive my truck. But I would much rather deal with the insurance company than spend thousands of dollars on lawyers, court fees, and trouble that comes with any questionable SD case. Just my thoughts on the topic.

[MTT TL]

Would V Forest have been better off just letting them have the wallet and car?

Possibly but not likely. They were trying to steal his car and he did not let them have it, losing a car is one thing, losing your identity as a person is another altogether. VF was a warrior and a defender of the weak so his code would not allow armed robbers to continue to prey on innocents and possibly let them hurt or kill another.

So, I guess it depends upon who you are and kind of world you want to live in. Most people prefer the long healthy life of a coward to the hard shorter life of a warrior and defender of the weak. But if you go the other way you don't really have much choice about your actions, it is how you live your life.

Unless I'm mistaken, self defense is only when life and limb and in danger.

Yes, they were using deadly force, (guns) to try and steal his car.