The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Tactics and Training

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old May 19, 2010, 08:20 PM   #76
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,791
Quote:
Originally Posted by threegun
How can anyone pooh pooh having high capacity? All other "more important things" being equal, high capacity has zero negatives.

So the only reason I can think of for anyone to argue against high capacity is to justify (as if it needed justification) their choice of low capacity.

My choice of low capacity is dictated by NY state. As such, my option is not high-cap or low cap but spare mag or no. I don't carry a spare mag because:

1)More weight
2)More money for a magazine holster
3)more and different practice
4)Another thing to hide

Also, (and by far the biggest reason) the necessity of such is of such miniscule probability that I simply choose not to prepare for such an unlikely event. For those who choose to, have at it. Some people don't carry a gun at all, and that's just fine. Some people carry 2 or 3 guns and spare mags for all of them, and that's just fine.

However, as demonstrated (again) in this thread. There is simply no realistic probability of ever needing 18 or more shots in a SD scenario. It simply does not happen, at least any more often than do alien abductions... which is another thing that I choose not to prepare to defend against.

Anyone who does, great. Anyone who does not, great. Either way, the NEED is demonstrably absent.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old May 19, 2010, 09:51 PM   #77
johnwilliamson062
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Posts: 6,827
I can't ever remember seeing an actual video of a civilian shooting using pistols where at least one person didn't seem to empty their gun or come close to it.
I haven't seen a ton of videos though, just a few.
It always seems one person, usually the one who walks away, just rapidly unloads their gun on the other person.
I also can't really remember seeing a shooting where anyone fired 15-20 times.
There was the California ?drugstore owner? who went and got another gun to shoot someone.

Looking at surveillance cameras of such things seems the best way to tell in my mind.

I carry 11+1 and feel pretty comfortable with that.
__________________
$0 of an NRA membership goes to legislative action or court battles. Not a dime. Only money contributed to the NRA-ILA or NRA-PVF. You could just donate to the Second Amendment Foundation
First Shotgun Thread First Rifle Thread First Pistol Thread
johnwilliamson062 is offline  
Old May 19, 2010, 10:11 PM   #78
Crosshair
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 16, 2004
Location: Grand Forks, ND
Posts: 5,320
Quote:
How can anyone pooh pooh having high capacity? All other "more important things" being equal, high capacity has zero negatives.
Larger, bulkier, less concealable.
__________________
I don't carry a gun to go looking for trouble, I carry a gun in case trouble finds me.
Crosshair is offline  
Old May 20, 2010, 08:36 AM   #79
indykappa
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 8, 2010
Location: charlotte, nc (but indianapolis is home)
Posts: 100
Crosshair (not trying to call you out but), I disagree with that reasoning. My S&W 5906 is 15+1 and I have no problem concealing it. It is probably a little heavier than your run-of-the-mill 1911 (low capacity), but is not bulkier nor any more difficult to conceal. I would venture to say that today's hi-cap guns (the XDM for example) have the ability to be smaller (3.8in barrel vs my 4in barrel) and still pack more in the mag (19+1 vs my 15+1)
indykappa is offline  
Old May 20, 2010, 09:51 AM   #80
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,798
If you decide to conceal a reasonable size semi on a belt holster, then you probably have a garment that would conceal an extra mag on your opposite side.

So that argument really doesn't hold once you commit to the gun.

But like I said before, there is no black and white answer, it is all your view of risk level and the cut off point for that risk.

You can go through most days without a gun at all.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old May 20, 2010, 12:19 PM   #81
threegun
Junior member
 
Join Date: March 1, 2006
Location: Tampa,Fl
Posts: 4,000
Quote:
Larger, bulkier, less concealable.
Than what? Glocks, XD's, M&P Smiths etc. are all competitive if not easier to carry than their steel framed single stacked counterparts.

Peetza, Hi capacity is of even more potential benefit to those like you who don't carry a spare mag. High capacity simply cannot hurt to have.........to those who are legally allowed to do so.

A friend of mine use to have a gun sales pitch that basically said to the customer.....you will probably never need this gun to save your life, however should the day ever come that you did need it, at that exact moment, you would give all your money, valuables, and even the shirt off your back for this gun (holding up the gun the customer is looking at). Then he would say why not buy it now for cheap.

The point is as mentioned above better to have and not need than to need and not have.
threegun is offline  
Old May 20, 2010, 08:29 PM   #82
FireForged
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 4, 1999
Location: Rebel South USA
Posts: 1,185
Speaking just for myself.. As Joe Citizen, I never really considered capasity a big issue when selecting a firearm. I bought what suited me, what fit my hand best and what I felt I could be proficient with. I have carried a Jframe Model 36 6 shot 38special more often than anything else. When I dont carry a revolver, I carry a sig P239 8-shot 9mm. I have never felt underpowered and I am certainly better off having 6-8 shots rather than zero.

With a fire extinguisher I went the exact opposite. I got the biggest baddest sucker I could find.
__________________
Life is a web woven by necessity and chance...
FireForged is offline  
Old May 20, 2010, 09:30 PM   #83
Catfishman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 10, 2009
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 691
New Jersey State Trooper Philip Lamonaco may have been better off if he had had more than 6 rounds to protect himself from the garbage that shot him.

If memory serves the Trooper had a .357 magnum and the thug had some kind of 9mm. I couldn't find an article with a quick search. I may have misspelled his name.
Catfishman is offline  
Old May 21, 2010, 01:28 AM   #84
ranburr
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 17, 2006
Location: TX
Posts: 1,278
Peetzakilla, what are you going to do when your one magazine craps out?
__________________
ranburr
"There are no stupid questions, just stupid people asking questions".
ranburr is offline  
Old May 21, 2010, 02:28 AM   #85
ATW525
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 14, 2005
Location: Concord, NH
Posts: 2,684
Quote:
Larger, bulkier, less concealable.
+1

I can make my Glock 36 invisible in ways that I could never accomplish with large capacity double stack pistols. While I've carried some pretty big guns in the past, I've gotten sick of dressing around them and enjoy the greater wardrobe flexibility I have these days. Cargo shorts and neatly tucked in polo shirt? No problem.
ATW525 is offline  
Old May 21, 2010, 02:41 AM   #86
Nnobby45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2004
Posts: 3,150
Quote:
However, as demonstrated (again) in this thread. There is simply no realistic probability of ever needing 18 or more shots in a SD scenario. It simply does not happen, at least any more often than do alien abductions... which is another thing that I choose not to prepare to defend against.

Anyone who does, great. Anyone who does not, great. Either way, the NEED is demonstrably absent.
__________________
Well, that sure takes a load off my mind. Here I've been concerned that when Bubba comes calling, he might have buddies with him. At home or on the street.

Now I know that if I'm standing there in my shorts (if even that) guarding the hallway, fighting for my life, there's no realistic probability that I'll need enough shots to justify a high capacity magazine.

And, of course, nobody could ever find themselves in a similar situation as Reginald Denny in the peaceful serene world we live in today.
Nnobby45 is offline  
Old May 21, 2010, 03:30 AM   #87
ClydeFrog
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 1, 2010
Posts: 5,798
Multiple rounds fired LE-citizen events....

This is an interesting topic and I did not read every post yet so my details may have been repeated..

I'd suggest researching the North Hollywood AKA; Bank of America shooting in 1997. This shoot-out involved the LAPD & 2 violent criminals. It was made into 44 Minutes, www.IMDb.com .
The older CHP(Newhall CA) event is worth bringing up. The brave CHP troopers used DA revolvers but it was a big firefight.
The south FL Platt-Matix shoot-out in 1986 involved FBI agents and 2 violent felons(who were well armed & military veterans). A few FBI agents had S&W 9 mm pistols(59s/39s).
More recent shooting events included a young UT LE officer who ended an active shooter mall incident with the last(8th round) of .45acp. The young cop had no spare mag for his 1911a1 pistol. Another veteran cop from Las Vegas NV shot his small caliber off duty pistol at armed robbers who later wounded him. The LEO lived and now uses a full size weapon all the time(with 2 full mags). In the metro Orlando Florida area about 4 years ago, county patrol deputies got into a huge gun battle in front of a "grow house". A few sworn LE officers were shot and the subjects were arrested. The deputies had M4s, 12ga and Glock 21 .45acp weapons.

ClydeFrog
ClydeFrog is offline  
Old May 21, 2010, 11:06 AM   #88
OldMarksman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 2,021
The actual firing of a firearm by a civilian in self defense happens very infrequently. To base one's risk assessment on variations of what has actually happened in very rare events is really not a preferred method.

Rather, one would be better served by simulation and role playing, or by pure analysis such as failure mode and effect analysis (that's a structured way of analyzing "what ifs"), coupled with some realistic training.

The questions I would ask are three: (1) do I need to worry about only a single attacker, or two or maybe even three (personally, I don't think one guy is likely to take me on, except maybe from behind); (2) how many hits on each will be sufficient to stop them (two plus, probably); and (3) if things unfold in the blink of an eye, and they are moving very fast and not in a straight line, how many shots will it take to get those hits? Add to that that I do not really want to be left with an empty gun....

On television, there's always time for the hero to get his gun ready and aim carefully--how else could you appreciate the danger? The assailant is always standing still--all the better for the dramatic effect. One shot always stops the action instantly.

Of course, if you do have a lot of time, are you really in imminent danger; why on earth would anyone expect an attacker to present himself as a stationary target, and how would he endanger you by so doing; and is it at all realistic to expect that one shot to save your life if an attacker can continue his evil doing for ten seconds after a shot in the heart? I think we should forget what we've "learned" from television.

Todays tactical training is, I think, much more realistic: A couple of very rapid shots on each of two or three short range targets, maybe fired while running. In a course I took recently, the drill involved two shots on each of three torso targets at seven yards, followed by a reload and by two more shots at each of the thee targets. Elapsed time for the skilled participants was just over four seconds for twelve hits. Eye opening, thought provoking, and worth while, I think.

How big a magazine? I don't know. Personally , I don't think I need to carry 19 or 17+1, but I have come to appreciate that one should probably have more than 5 shots....even though he or she is most unlikely to ever shoot even one shot in self defense.
OldMarksman is offline  
Old May 21, 2010, 02:41 PM   #89
threegun
Junior member
 
Join Date: March 1, 2006
Location: Tampa,Fl
Posts: 4,000
What I find extremely comical is how some can prepare for such a rare event (as having to shoot someone in self defense while out in public) by carrying a firearm, only to then say they won't need the extra rounds because the event for its need is rare LOL.

Last edited by threegun; May 21, 2010 at 02:47 PM.
threegun is offline  
Old May 21, 2010, 03:10 PM   #90
Edward429451
Junior member
 
Join Date: November 12, 2000
Location: Colorado Springs, Colorado
Posts: 9,494
I don't have anything against hi cap mags. More ammo can always be a plus. Besides, the hi cap designs usually make the guns bigger and bigger guns are easier to shoot well than smaller guns.

Viva big guns with bottomless mags
Edward429451 is offline  
Old May 22, 2010, 12:57 AM   #91
Nnobby45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2004
Posts: 3,150
This isn't just about Hi-Cap magazines-- which should actually be called standard magazines that the guns were designed for. Hate to see an antigun media term used so much by shooters.

Seems like those opposed to the idea of a "hi cap" on the grounds it won't ever be needed are also the ones (like Pizzakiller (no offense) who shun a spare mag. for the same reason.

Let's see: As Threeguns points out--- The shooting could happen, but the need to reload just can't.

Last edited by Nnobby45; May 22, 2010 at 01:29 AM.
Nnobby45 is offline  
Old May 22, 2010, 01:33 AM   #92
ClydeFrog
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 1, 2010
Posts: 5,798
More high volume US law enforcement incidents, spare mags...

The big Lakewood WA police shooting where 4 police officers were murdered, the Oakland CA event where a few LEOs got shot and the big Pittsburgh PA shooting where a group of 3 LE officers were killed by a nutcase with a AK.

To me it's a smart move to carry at least 1 full mag with any type pistol. 17/19 rounds may be more than needed but you could also have a jam, problem or issue with the pistol magazine. When most weapons/tactics trainers check pistols 90-95% of the problems are mag-related.

As for the "panic" issue, I can agree with part of it. In the early 1990s I was through a training class with a early version of the FATS(a big video/CGI type use of force system). I was in a traffic stop with a beat up old sedan. The trunk started to shake and I raised my M9/92F type weapon. In a flash, a big fat guy holding a sawed off shotgun jumped out of the trunk. I fired off about 9 shots at the subject. In the review, 8 of the 9 pistol rounds hit the subject.
My MP squad leader got mad and started to chew me out for the response but I honestly did not feel my shots would be that big of an issue in a real after action review/investigation. The criminal had an illegal 12ga pointed at me and was at CQB/point blank range. It was valid to question the methods(9rds) but that is more of a tactical rather than legal issue.

In 2008, my armed security class instructor(a combat veteran and member of the state's security regulations-training panel) told us we should fire our pistols or revolvers with many rounds to create a "shotgun like pattern". This plan or tactic may have some merit but in a remote or rural area or job site an armed guard or PI may need to make every single round count. Even a 18 or 20 round 9mm/.45acp/.40 duty pistol could be used in a critical incident.

Clyde
ps: If any TFL members think that some PIs/armed security officers should work in groups or pairs I say; not bloody likely.
Most security clients and contracts would give you a kidney or a lung before paying for 2 or more armed officers.
ClydeFrog is offline  
Old May 22, 2010, 07:39 AM   #93
threegun
Junior member
 
Join Date: March 1, 2006
Location: Tampa,Fl
Posts: 4,000
Quote:
In 2008, my armed security class instructor(a combat veteran and member of the state's security regulations-training panel) told us we should fire our pistols or revolvers with many rounds to create a "shotgun like pattern". This plan or tactic may have some merit but in a remote or rural area or job site an armed guard or PI may need to make every single round count. Even a 18 or 20 round 9mm/.45acp/.40 duty pistol could be used in a critical incident.
What happens if the bad guy gives up after the first shot?
threegun is offline  
Old May 22, 2010, 09:22 AM   #94
jhenry
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 27, 2006
Location: Ozarks
Posts: 1,813
Personally I am an advocate of aimed fire, or in the case of point shooting, deliberate fire. Spraying lead is bad form anyway. After reading every response here, I am still not convinced that there is any real downside to carrying a higher capacity magazine and/or a spare. All other things being equal.
__________________
"A Liberal is someone who doesn't care what you do, as long as it's mandatory". - Charles Krauthammer
jhenry is offline  
Old May 22, 2010, 10:06 AM   #95
BGutzman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 4, 2009
Location: Frozen Tundra
Posts: 2,414
IMHO carrying 2 spare mags gives me flexability to deal with whatever may come should it ever be needed. I have one loaded clip of gold dots and a spare of gold dots and then maybe some corbon or another premium round.

This last clip I look for rounds that have a somewhat greater penetration than even the gold dots and yet a still a JHP, just in case...

Would I ever carry more clips? Sure but there would have to be a good reason to do it like zombie hordes or some really serious situation that for whatever reason I had to endure or venture into. I just don't see it happening but who knows may one day I might find a reason... Certainly I wouldnt seek out such a thing.
__________________
Molon Labe
BGutzman is offline  
Old May 22, 2010, 10:28 AM   #96
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,798
Firing a shotgun like pattern with a handgun - never heard that one before. Being a combat veteran doesn't make that suggestion reasonable in a civilian environment.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old May 22, 2010, 11:05 AM   #97
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,791
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldMarksman
The actual firing of a firearm by a civilian in self defense happens very infrequently. To base one's risk assessment on variations of what has actually happened in very rare events is really not a preferred method.

Rather, one would be better served by simulation and role playing, or by pure analysis such as failure mode and effect analysis (that's a structured way of analyzing "what ifs"), coupled with some realistic training.

The questions I would ask are three: (1) do I need to worry about only a single attacker, or two or maybe even three (personally, I don't think one guy is likely to take me on, except maybe from behind); (2) how many hits on each will be sufficient to stop them (two plus, probably); and (3) if things unfold in the blink of an eye, and they are moving very fast and not in a straight line, how many shots will it take to get those hits? Add to that that I do not really want to be left with an empty gun....
Not the preferred method? I agree that everyone getting some solid training would be highly preferable, regardless, but if your decisions are not based on the likelihood of the event then what is it based on? If you must take into account ALL variations without consideration of the probability of variation actually happening then the only possible course of action is to spend all the money that you can spend preparing for every possible eventuality.

Such a mentality would result in all of us driving armored cars, wearing kevlar vests and helmets, carrying 3 guns with two spare mags for each and moving around in squad formation with our buddies covering the flank.

OF COURSE, you have to prepare for events based on the probability of their occurrence. The only question is where do you stop.

There is a certain probability of being accosted by an aggressor.

There is a certain, much lower, probability of the situation being serious enough to warrant drawing your firearm.

There is a certain, much lower, probability of the situation being serious enough to warrant SHOOTING your aggressor.

There is a certain, MUCH, much lower, probability of your needing to fire more than one full guns worth of rounds.

There is a certain probability of your firearm jamming and requiring a spare mag to clear the jam.


See? Probability. If your decisions are based on logic then they ARE based on conclusions about probability. Where you get the information on which you base those decisions is another matter, but they're either based on logic and probability or fear and emotion. Special note: The actual level of preparation is no indicator either. You could carry NO firearm at all and still have it be based on fear.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.

Last edited by Brian Pfleuger; May 22, 2010 at 11:11 AM.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old May 22, 2010, 11:35 AM   #98
ScottRiqui
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 27, 2010
Location: Norfolk, VA
Posts: 2,905
I think what OldMarksman was saying was that you shouldn't use the worst-case/low-probability scenarios as some kind of scientific risk assessment. As you pointed out, that leads to armored cars and flak jackets (basically, the whole "mall ninja" scenario.)

I do the same thing in aviation - when we're doing the ORM portion of the mission brief, no one asks "what if we're out on station and we get jumped by a division of MiG-29s?" Of course it *could* happen, and it would certainly be a high-severity event, but it's also such a low-probability event that it doesn't even earn a spot on the ORM matrix.
ScottRiqui is offline  
Old May 22, 2010, 11:39 AM   #99
DanThaMan1776
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 2, 2010
Location: Illinois
Posts: 395
Here's the way I think of it: by simply carrying a firearm throughout daily activities, you are defying the odds. Because the odds of needing to use the gun in the first place are slim (very slim). Ergo, why not take those odds a step further and defy the slim odds of being attacked by multiple assailants or being ambushed? If I am willing to prepare for the highly unlikely chance of needing to shoot someone (I am), then I will also prepare for the possibility of having to use several magazines.

Of course, one could argue that my logic can be stretched further. Why not defy the near null odds of the Russians invading with tanks and planes in the middle of the work day? Why not have a few RPGs on hand in the office?

Point being, you need to draw the line somewhere. I draw it at several magazines filled with top-line ammo. Some draw it at one magazine, and I respect that. It's all about what you're comfortable with.
DanThaMan1776 is offline  
Old May 22, 2010, 12:34 PM   #100
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,791
Quote:
Ergo, why not take those odds a step further and defy the slim odds of being attacked by multiple assailants or being ambushed? If I am willing to prepare for the highly unlikely chance of needing to shoot someone (I am), then I will also prepare for the possibility of having to use several magazines.
Then why not prepare for the much more likely event of getting shot yourself? You are more likely to need a kevlar vest than 2 spare mags, and the consequences of not having either of them when they're needed is the same: You die.

There is ALWAYS that next level of threat where someone can say "You've gone this far, why not one step farther?"

The answer is because the odds do not justify the cost. In some estimations, they do. In my world, they do not.

You simply can not prepare for every eventuality.

In the end, I suppose what it's really about is how easy is it? Truly, if I could don an invisible bullet and explosion proof energy shield that could protect my whole family and I could get it for $25, it weighed 3 ounces and no one would know that I had it, then I would.

So, really, it's about the effort and cost. More than a loaded gun is too much effort, too annoying and too much cost for me.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Closed Thread

Tags
1911 , ccw , handgun , high capacity magazine , self-defense

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.15143 seconds with 7 queries