I know it's all relative but . . .

[Prof Young]

I know it's all relative, but if all other factors were equal and you had to choose between an HD handgun that you shot well but only had six rounds, or one that you didn't shoot well but it held 15 rounds . . . which would you choose.

[JoeSixpack]

The one I did not shoot well and then I'd learn to shoot it well :P

[FITASC]

6 rounds that hit the target beat 15 misses every single day.

[turkeestalker]

Fifteen possible missed marks in a home defense situation?
I'll stick with my consistent six.

[BarryLee]

I suppose "didn't shoot well" is open to interpretation, but unless a gun is not functioning properly mechanically the difference between shooting good and bad is often just a few inches. So, for me I'd probably choose the additional capacity.

[Cheapshooter]

6 of what works well for you. As statistics point out you will most likely have three or four left. 15 is unnecessary for a civilian SD situation.
15 bullets flying around in hopes of getting those one or two hits. No way. Accuracy by volume is never a good idea.

[Carmady]

or one that you didn't shoot well but it held 15 rounds

Hitting fifteen unintentional targets is a very bad thing.

[Sevens]

I have a number of handguns that are a complete JOKE compared to the handguns I have that I consider genuinely accurate and guns that I can shoot very well.

But as others have stated... accuracy for the purpose of defense with a handgun is no tough task that requires special grade equipment. Functional durability and build quality, YES! Accuracy? No. Not worried at all.

All else being equal (ha! Impossible...) give me the extra ammo, please.

[TXAZ]

I'll take *1* precision shot any day of the week (vs. NYPD's habit of spraying the area and missing the bad guys but hitting good guys.)

So to your question, 6 please.

[Onward Allusion]

The one I did not shoot well and then I'd learn to shoot it well :P

Well played

[Rangerrich99]

I look at things like this in terms of confidence level. I know that I can hit what I want with my GP-100; one-handed, left-handed, whatever. I know I can put 6 rounds in the space of a baseball quickly at any distance inside my house, and I have a very high confidence level with that gun. And I can do it repeatedly, without needing to warm up or focus or whatever.

On the other hand, there's my J-frame or my Glock 19. I can shoot accurately with either, but both require more focus, and if I had to call a shot with either, especially without any warm up, I don't have the greatest confidence I'd make that shot. I'd hit somewhere close, say within 4 inches or so, but there always seems to be a bit of 'Kentucky windage' necessary with either of those weapons.

So when it comes to my HD gun in this hypothetical situation, I'll stick with the guns that I know I can get good hits with, and sacrifice a few rounds of capacity.

[Aguila Blanca]

I own a couple of single stack 1911s, and a couple of double stack 1911s.

I carry one of the single stacks, with a spare magazine. The double stacks are for competition.

[slaf4u]

More and more home invasions are done by groups of 4-5 or even more individuals. Unless you're as fast as Jerry Miculek in reloading the wheeler, you should be either like Yosemite Sam with a gun in each hand or have something with bigger capacity.

Sent from my Lenovo K50-t5 using Tapatalk

[44 AMP]

Ammo capacity is a good thing. Its very comforting to have. It's like fuel, as the pilot's saying goes, "you can't have too much fuel, unless you're on fire!"

Trouble is, many people, if they have the capacity, will USE it, when they don't need to. The military and the police have a degree of legal immunity. You and I, DON"T.

We are legally responsible for every round we fire.

The most common "training method" today is action movies and TV. It is BAD TRAINING, but its free 24/7 on tv, and it does have an effect on people.

Action stars shoot a lot, provide their own cover fire. They also don't face legal consequences (and they're not even firing live ammo).

As a private citizen, one should, as Mas Ayoob put it, "shoot only in gravest extreme". That does NOT mean shooting to keep the bad guy's head(s) down like one sees on TV. There are rare situations where it might be the right tactic, but its not the right "attitude" for personal legal self defense.

SO, having 15 rnds doesn't, or rather shouldn't mean you have to USE 15 rounds.

The undertrained (and this all too often includes the police) who have a lot of rounds onboard tend to use a lot of rounds. Sometimes, they even hit the intended target. Sometimes.

Those with fewer are often more prudent about ammo expenditure.

When it comes to stopping a determined attack, only hits matter. Afterwards, to the law, every shot matters.

Home invasion by a group (4-5)? yes, our worst nightmare. But, are you facing a banzai charge to the death? Or are you more likely to face people who lose their enthusiasm for attack after you shoot holes in the first one or two?? if you even have to shoot??

Every time this kind of thing comes up, I am reminded of a standoff scene from a comedy movie. One good guy, facing about a dozen bad guys...

Head bad guy says "what you gonna do?? you think you can shoot all of us??"
Good guy: "No, but I can shoot YOU!"
the head bad guy pauses, then says "oh, yeah, I always forget that part!"

I realize every situation is different, but from listening to the news all my life, it seems to me that most of the time, if a bad guy or two get shot, the rest usually find a good reason to be somewhere else, as fast as possible.

Hope for the best, plan for the worst and you are seldom disappointed. I'd be good with a revolver that I was good with, over a hi cap semi that I couldn't hit the broad side of a barn with. Equally good with both? then having more rounds available can't hurt. Using them without need, might.

[Aguila Blanca]

Remember the mall shooter in Salt Lake City a few years back? The shooter was ultimately taken out by a team of responding police officers, but he was initially stopped and pinned down by an off-duty officer from another jurisdiction. That officer was carrying a Kimber compact, single stack 1911. That means he had, at most, 8 shots -- if he was loaded with 7+1 (might have been 6+1). He commented afterward that he wished he had had a spare magazine, but the single stack with one magazine was enough to do what had to be done.

[Skans]

I rank capacity one of my highest factors in purchasing a HD handgun. I can shoot just about any gun well enough and accurate enough for distances of up to 20 feet. I can't imagine a situation where I would be firing a pistol more than 20 feet in my own home at someone I believe to be an intruder.

In fact, My old 2nd Gen Glock 17 is my HD gun. I hate the trigger (yes, I've tried to make it better) and I've never been particularly accurate with it. But, it holds 20 rounds, can handle hot 9mm cartridges, is rugged, reliable and makes a good HD gun.

At 20-30 feet I shoot well enough with my Glock 17. It will never be a Sig X-Five, a Hi-Power, an STI 2011 race gun, or even a Tanfoglio Stock or CZ 75B. But, it gets the job done and I don't have to baby it.

[Wyosmith]

Hits are the only things that matter in a real fight.
We have been misled by being told that more misses is fire power.
15 missis in NOT firepower.

One his it firepower

[rep1954]

Sweet and short "6".

[Cheapshooter]

Remember the mall shooter in Salt Lake City a few years back? The shooter was ultimately taken out by a team of responding police officers, but he was initially stopped and pinned down by an off-duty officer from another jurisdiction.

LIKE I said, for civilian SD.
My obligation is to protect my life, and that of my close by relatives if there are any. Anything else is Hollywood based Mall Ninja reaction.

[Hal]

15 all day/every day.

Easy for me to say that though since the only thing I own that holds that many is a CZ75b.....

That plus the fact that the only gun I own that I don't shoot well is a Ruger .357 Blackhawk.
That thing is a real mystery to me......

[g.willikers]

If a six shooter is the one you shoot the best, but you would only feel safe with a higher capacity weapon, you could always carry two six shooters.
You would hardly be the first person to do it that way.

[T. O'Heir]

You shooting well with 6 rounds trumps not well with 100. Never mind 15. Mind you, shooting well does not mean MOA groups with a hand gun.
"...NYPD's habit of spraying..." Isn't just the NYPD.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I'm sorry to say - I don't buy the OP premise. I have 5 to 6 shot guns and higher cap ones. I practice with each of them. Thus, I carry with the highest capacity that dress or circumstance allow. However, I feel comfortable with all of them and their/my performance overlap such that the choice wouldn't come up on that dimension. In two matches designed to test you with lower cap guns, we did a one head shot at distance of about 15 yards. I made both with a 642 and G42. Now that's not to say, I could do it under stress or would not miss with a G17. However, the point being I try to be competent with each gun I have to carry.

[Prof Young]

Like my OP, it's all relative. Truth is I pondered the question because I have a 38 special that I am dead on with at seven yards. Six shots, of course. I have an 18 round mag (yes 18) for my 9mm Beretta 92fs, but at seven yards I am still down and to the left of my aim by six to eight inches. Have been thinking about putting the 38 in the HD quick access safe.

Life is good
Prof Young

[Model12Win]

I'd take the 6 shots you can shoot well and use that ANY DAY.

And get some speedloaders for your revolver and practice, and also look up the "Harries Method" for flashlight usage.