[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

Yes, you read that right. This could go either here or S & T.

Suppose you're being attacked by say, 3 or 4 contact-weapon-armed thugs bent on robbing you (and/or other intentions unknown to you), and they get the jump on you to some extent to where you have a few seconds to draw and shoot after determining it's definitely an aggressive attack, but they are determined enough that continue attacking after the first shot and beyond, and frankly you have no chance to hit them all in CNS, even if you can hit them all *somewhere*, so you have no chance to completely stop the attack - they quickly overwhelm you physically and of course, take your gun.

If you have a 5- or 6-shooter, you've had enough time to empty the gun into the multiple assailants. When they overwhelm you, they take an empty gun. They can then only attack you with the contact weapons, which are typically more survivable and you have a greater chance of having someone intervene before you bleed out.

If you have a wondernine or similar, after 6 shots, you have 11 shots left that these very-PO'ed thugs can use to shoot you in the CNS - game over.

Thoughts?

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

Of course, there's the counter-argument - which movie was it that had a line that went something like this:

"Cripessake, Bubba, you ain't got but one arm, and you got two revolvers!"

"Well, if I die, I just don't want it to be on account of not shootin' back."

:eek: :D :D

Tombstone?

[freakshow10mm]

I do not agree.

I carry a gun to stop deadly threats. If you try to kill me, I will kill you.

Anything worth shooting once is worth shooting twice.

Tactics with a low capacity weapon against multiple assailants definitely come into play. My training would remind me that while I am drawing my weapon to MOVE out of the line of attack and hopefully put the assailants in a line so their attack is blocked by the criminal in front of them. If they have to move around their buddy to swing at me, that's an additional second I have on my end to defend myself.

Since your scenario involves attackers with impact weapons (bats, clubs, etc) the action will be close. With a low capacity weapon at that distance, I'm going for headshots on at least the first threat, maybe second.

The first attacker being shot will cause a small delay as you get on the second target and eliminate that threat. Hopefully the others will run at that point but if not, shoot them too. KEEP MOVING.

I will never, ever count on someone coming to my aid. How many times are their eye witnesses that just witness and never help? I carry a gun because I cannot trust anyone else with my safety and sure as hell the last thing on my mind is trusting someone else with my life.

In a situation like your description is not the case for low capacity but for high capacity. If you have a group of 3-4+ assailants moving in on you and you know the attack is coming, the best defense is a barrage of fire into the group. 10 shots into 3-4 thugs is more effective than 5-6 into the same.

The thing that troubles me the most about your scenario is that you are admitting defeat and handicapping yourself by the weapon you choose to carry. You are planning on not stopping the threats so you wish to have this end by you running dry and them beating you with bats and clubs until your knight in shining armor comes to rescue you. That is a defeatist attitude.

This is the reason I carry a semi auto and an extra magazine. I have 9+1 rounds of 10mm (1911) with a 9rd mag as backup. It is effective, it has a respectable amount of capacity, and is faster to reload. I do not have the time to dedicate nor the will to practice reloading a revolver. In fact I do not own a single revolver. They are not my idea of a defensive arm that I would trust with my life.

[lions]

But what if you would have had enough time to fire off a couple more shots and potentially stopped the threat?

It just seems like there are an awful lot of things that have to go just like you laid them out for this to be possible. Such as: number of thugs, weapons they carry, distance and time when they choose to attack you, and someone is to intervene before you die.

I'll take my chances with more ammunition.:)

[Jim Watson]

M. Ayoob once had a study of capacity versus effectiveness. He concluded that a single stack auto with 7-10 rounds was a worthwhile improvement over a revolver with 5 or 6. But it seemed that a high capacity magazine tended to promote spray and pray shooting with fewer and poorer hits.

[General Geoff]

I carry a gun to stop deadly threats. If you try to kill me, I will kill you.

I'd rescind or edit that post if I were you. Statements like that have a nasty habit of coming back to bite you in the arse later on if you ever ARE involved in a shooting.

[General Geoff]

They can then only attack you with the contact weapons, which are typically more survivable and you have a greater chance of having someone intervene before you bleed out.

That's a really bad assumption to make. With blunt contact weapons, you have much greater probability of massive internal trauma, as well as shattered bone. You might live, but the question is, what kind of quality of life would you have afterwards?

Getting shot is NOT the worst thing in the world.

[freakshow10mm]

I don't care.

[ArmedBear]

In a situation like your description is not the case for low capacity but for high capacity. If you have a group of 3-4+ assailants moving in on you and you know the attack is coming, the best defense is a barrage of fire into the group. 10 shots into 3-4 thugs is more effective than 5-6 into the same.

http://i88.photobucket.com/albums/k190/simplyrugged/internet-soldier.jpg

(Lord, I apologize . . . and be with the starving pygmies in New Guinea amen.)

[Robert]

The head is too small a target to hit in a high stress shooting environment. I am aiming center mass, or shooting from retention if they are too close, and having faith that my .45 Hydra Shocks do their job. Hoping that someone comes along before I bleed out is not an options. I will win the fight, no other thought enters my mind. At the time.

The movie you quote is Unforgiven.

[GRIZ22]

Suppose you're being attacked by say, 3 or 4 contact-weapon-armed thugs bent on robbing you

There is a fallacy in your scenario. Criminals are not all that stupid. They are attacking you because it will be fun. When they hear the loud noise and see one of their group shot, it isn't fun anymore.

You do say that they continue to attack you (not likely after one of them is shot) but let's say they do. In that case my efforts will be to try to hit them anywhere. If them overwhelm they will take your gun. If you have the time to empty your low capacity gun the only result would be you get beat to death with their contact weapons. How would that be better than being shot with your own gun? As another response noted, conceding and accepting defeat is no attitude to survive any confrontation.

I'm going for headshots on at least the first threat, maybe second.


Using this tactic would most likely result in more than a few misses. It is easy to say headshots while sitting at a keyboard. Center mass hits are much easier to do fast. You may not stop them but you can sure slow them down.

I would go to ground and use my ammo trying to stop my assailants.

[heron]

This scenario needs an assigned probability . . .

What did/would you do to cause that many people to continue pressing an attack after you open fire on them? Sounds like an LA riot/EOTWAWKI situation.

Avoidance may not be an option (you could get surprised) but how about flight? Maybe shoot the closest one and then high-tail it outta there? Remember, defending yourself is not the same thing as fighting (see "No-Nonsense Self-Defense").

[wuchak]

The chances of the rest of the group continuing the attack after one or more are shot is IMHO unlikely. Most criminals are not brave nor do they have a high level of group cohesiveness in the face of gunfire. They are looking for easy prey and once they find out you are able to defend yourself they're gonna run.

I'm reminded of the made for TV move "The Gambler" with Kenny Rogers. When confronted with a group of (I think) 7 thugs Kenny drew his derringer. The lead bad guy said, "He only has two shots in that thing and there are seven of us." Kenny replied,"But the question is which two of you are going to take the bullets to leave the other five to do the fighting?" There were no volunteers to take the bullets.

[freakshow10mm]

ArmedBear, are you saying that 10 rapid fire shots into your attackers is not more effective than 6 rapid shots into the same?

Two things that count in a gun fight: hits and speed. Hit your target and hit them often. This isn't slow fire competition this is your life. Shoot as fast as you can and still get hits. Yes I've been in a gun fight and I survived. He missed, I didn't, and I shot back a lot.

[Dravur]

Ya know....

I guess if fewer rounds means you won't get shot with your own gun....

Then why keep it loaded at all?

Why not just carry an empty gun and at the first sign of trouble, toss it to the bad guys and scream out..."AHA, you shant kill me with my own gun!"

I dunno, seems kinda silly.

[psyopspec]

You're scenario is built on a series of assumptions that lead to a conclusion that's highly unlikely, even as far as defensive uses of a firearm go.

1) You're counting on being in a neighborhood full of thugs that won't back down after presentation/firing/wounding.

2) You're counting on being in this neighborhood in condition white, such that you will be surprised without cover, mobility, or a plan.

3) You're counting on getting your gun taken from you.

4) You're counting on being at the mercy of four gangbangers who wouldn't back down after one of them is hit. How do you see this ending in a positive way?

5) Suppose you empty the revolver and have about two seconds for a reload. Are you saying you would purposely not reload because you're counting on your gun being taken from you and you want it to be empty when they do? If so, why not just open the cylinder at the first sign of trouble, dump the rounds on the sidewalk, and then toss it to them?

[Gunfighter123]

Hello Dr. T,
Interesting -- BUT -- if I place myself in the BGs shoes , you have shot/killed some of my "homeys" --- now you are out of ammo and at my mercy ???

It MAY HAVE BEEN BETTER to have saved the last round for killing yourself !!!!

One good smack with a ballbat to the head = game over. Now "he/them" are standing over the person that shot/killed pals of theirs. I am not a betting kind of person , but I would bet that you will not be shown any mercy.

If , on the other hand ---- you have a hi-cap type of firearm , and you find yourself getting the boots put to you , YOU MIGHT hit the mag release button and fire a last shot { at yourself} ????

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

Good discusssion all - I ain't giving up my wondernines & wonder.45, that's for sure - wanted to posit the theory out there however.

[Hawk]

Granting a scenario where multiple assailants continue to advance I would guess we're dealing with a dedicated lot. Since you've shot one or more of their number prior to your weapon being taken I'd submit there's nothing that can happen to you with them holding any of your remaining rounds that contact weapons wouldn't accomplish just as handily.

People survive gunshots all the time. They also die at the ends of contact weapons all the time.

In fact, I'd view your scenario as an advertisement for carrying more rounds - if they used the rounds it would likely hurt less than the beating to death they're about to administer.

I thought I had heard it all in the "fewer rounds have advantages" parade. Clearly I was wrong - this is the most imaginative yet.

[ArmedBear]

All other things being equal, there's no case for less ammo capacity.

All other things are not equal.

If I really expected to find myself in the position that aptly-self-named freakshow10mm described, I would not want his gun. 10mm in a 1911 has costs: capacity and rapid-fire accuracy.

I'd take a gun that's quicker on followthrough, and easier to keep on target, in rapid fire -- and one that holds more rounds. A 19+1 round 9mm would be a far better choice. In each hand, with two more in holsters.

I'd also only travel in a heavily-armed group of ten or more people.

I don't even like 9mm, but if I'm going to "spray and pray", then that would probably be my best option.

Everything is a trade-off in the real world.

[Deanimator]

These zombie attack threads get old after a while...

[Captain Kyle]

Sounds like too many what ifs to me. I will take high capacity :D

[Funderb]

makes me wonder who would keep attacking under that volume of fire?

[crebralfix]

The solution, in such a situation, probably does not involve only the gun. It's probably a gun-knife-hand combo solution. Also remember movement to cover is important...going to a door to funnel the attackers is a good idea.

Also, don't forget an empty gun can be used as a bludgeon. Combine that with some knife skills, the will to win and I think things won't go as badly as you envision. The main thing is to not give up and fight through them.

Too many people neglect their knife and empty hand skills...as well as physical fitness.

[ArmedBear]

The solution, in such a situation, probably does not involve only the gun. It's probably a gun-knife-hand combo solution.

It also probably involves getting cocky and going somewhere really stupid, unless you're wearing a uniform of one sort or another.

[Funderb]

I think it involves a hand grenade. I mean, as stated, they intend to kill you, and there is nothing you can do about it. Banzai anyone?

[UKJ]

Dr. Tad,

I do so enjoy reading your posts. :) I take it from this scenario, that 3 or 4 guys have got the jump on you and you only have time to pull your gun and fire a few unaimed shots before they start beating the snot out of ya?

As I'm not a bionic ninja with spider sense and a magic gun that always hits (unlike others on this forum), I'd have to take them down 'Three Stooges' style -

Basically fall to the ground in a ball with my left arm protecting my head and spinning round with my feet firing all 15+ rounds in a panicky circle of destruction whilst screaming like a girl.

Who knows, I might even survive.

[Vern Humphrey]

As Jeff Cooper said, "There's such a thing as enough ammunition, and there's such a thing as not enough ammunition. There's no such thing as too much ammunition."

Or to put it another way, when the chips are down, fight to win, not to tie.

[Just One Shot]

(UKJ Dr. Tad,

I do so enjoy reading your posts. I take it from this scenario, that 3 or 4 guys have got the jump on you and you only have time to pull your gun and fire a few unaimed shots before they start beating the snot out of ya?

As I'm not a bionic ninja with spider sense and a magic gun that always hits (unlike others on this forum), I'd have to take them down 'Three Stooges' style -

Basically fall to the ground in a ball with my left arm protecting my head and spinning round with my feet firing all 15+ rounds in a panicky circle of destruction whilst screaming like a girl.

Who knows, I might even survive. )


Thanks,
I laughed out loud when I read your post!
:D

[fastbolt]

I generally bypass these "What if?" hypothetical thread topics.

However, I thought I'd offer a comment this time ...

More often than not, it seems that a single attacker offering a victim the imminent threat of serious bodily injury or death has been more than 'enough' of a threat to tax the skills, abilities and mental/emotional/physical capabilities of someone defending themselves, either LE or non-LE.

I'd further offer that being the potential victim of a sudden, unexpected unlawful attack is something for which LE is generally offered some type of training and preparation for encountering, considering the inherent dangerous situations which come with the job. Much less so for the average non-LE person who is strictly going about their normal activities and not being actively sent to intervene in, or looking to find and intervene in, potentially dangerous situations every day.

Yes, 'multiple threat target' courses-of-fire are often included in the training & qualification courses-of-fire provided to many civilian LE and regular civilian folks during some training venues.

I suspect, however, that spending a lot of time involved in conjecture about the best methods to successfully defend against the concerted efforts of several attackers in a 'multiple attacker scenario', especially to the point of determining appropriate weapon capacity issues, borders on fantasy for most folks ...

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

As I'm not a bionic ninja with spider sense and a magic gun that always hits (unlike others on this forum), I'd have to take them down 'Three Stooges' style -

Basically fall to the ground in a ball with my left arm protecting my head and spinning round with my feet firing all 15+ rounds in a panicky circle of destruction whilst screaming like a girl.

Who knows, I might even survive.

Hee hee, good one. :D :p


I guess the theory has been quashed as more than a little hare-brained. Particularly in light of the idea that 99% of thugs are looking for the soft target and are gonna scatter like cockroaches when armed resistance shows itself to them. Personally, I like capacity, and I'm going keep carrying ma nines, and shooting as long as I can continue to shoot, if being attacked, before running like hell, and I can dump a 17 round mag lickety-split. But it was worth throwing it out there for discussion.

One *could* even posit the same theory for a SINGLE attacker - "use up your ammo before he gets to you, or he's gonna use the gun against you". (which is really a variation of the anti's argument "you won't use the gun at all, and the guy will use it against you). But this is far less likely than with a multiple-attacker scenario, given that most of use are gonna go for a Mozambique and likely put the single attacker out of commission in short order, and even if we can't, I sure as hell most likely can "out-wrestle" ONE guy to retain possession of the still-loaded handgun, given that I HAVE the all-important *initial* possession, and he's trying the grab it from me, from the end that makes a bo-bo when you get in its way.

Interesting -- BUT -- if I place myself in the BGs shoes , you have shot/killed some of my "homeys" --- now you are out of ammo and at my mercy ???

It MAY HAVE BEEN BETTER to have saved the last round for killing yourself !!!!

One good smack with a ballbat to the head = game over. Now "he/them" are standing over the person that shot/killed pals of theirs. I am not a betting kind of person , but I would bet that you will not be shown any mercy.

That is also a most excellent point. You're screwed blued and tatooed regardless in that scenario, so may as well at least try to stack the odds a bit more in your favor for a decisive win, by having more ammo rather than less.

[ArmedBear]

Hell, I apologize, freakshow.

I'm a dumbass and didn't read the OP.

I thought you made up the scenario.

Sorry.

[novaDAK]

My primary carry gun is a S&W 2nd-gen auto that includes a mag disconnect. If I fear my gun is going to be wrestled away from me I simply drop the mag and now the gun's a paperweight. Meanwhile while they're fumbling with my now disabled firearm I'm going at them with my knife.

However I don't let strangers get that close to me, especially if I sense they're a threat.

[Deaf Smith]

Dr. Winslow,

To limit one's weapon due to a specific scenario is very unadvisable. You may be attacked by multiple assailants with just contact weapons, or one or two with contact weapons and another with a gun, or no telling what combination.

So instead, one carries what they can reasonably conceal. If it’s a 5 shot snub, well I suggest two of them. Or a 8/9 shot simi-auto, or a 15 shot Glock, etc…

But I do not advise someone to carry a very limited capacity weapon based on one hypothetical incident.

[Thingster]

This isn't totally out there, but the continued attack might be.

There was a spat of situations like this in St. Louis this past summer. A large group of people (10-15) would descend on a seemingly easy target, all with blunt force instruments and knives. They wound up killing a couple people, putting others in a hospital.

After the first time somebody opened on them with true resistance, they scattered and that was the end of these mass attacks.

Making solid contact with the first attacker is probably the most important thing you can do, not so much as worrying about your too much or too little ammunition situation.

[Dan Crocker]

...whats the point? If they were suicidal enough to charge a guy with a gun and you are worried about them taking it and shooting, then what's stopping them from just beating you to death anyway after you run out of rounds?

[MrCleanOK]

This is a seriously flawed reason to carry a revolver. I'm a fan of "more bullets is a good thing." If somebody tries to grab your gun, pull the trigger, homey. Pull the trigger, and don't release it until you have positive control of the weapon again. After you have pulled the trigger, engage death grip and let go for nothing. When you pull the trigger while a baddie has his mitts on your gun, one of two things will happen. He's going to let go with a big ol' owie, or he's going to keep hold of the gun. Either case will probably result in a malfunction that will need to be cleared.

They are going to let go unless they are really highly motivated. If they are that highly motivated, they're probably using two hands, and have no defense against you landing repeated strikes to their head and neck with your weak hand.

I think it's safe to say that if some thug tries to pull a drawn gun out of your hand, he wants to kill you with it. No reason not to fight back with everything you have then.

[crebralfix]

...whats the point? If they were suicidal enough to charge a guy with a gun and you are worried about them taking it and shooting, then what's stopping them from just beating you to death anyway after you run out of rounds?

The guy holding the gun, that's who! Hit them with the gun...it's a solid chunk of metal.

Sheesh...people seem to have the idea that only guns can be used for fighting.

[Dan Crocker]

Okay, I'll give you an empty gun and 4-5 guys with clubs who are going to kill you. Good luck.

[James T Thomas]

"Doc:"

I'm tempted to reply XXF?

Your scenario should be moved to the THR threads of "then the bad guy will disarm you and use your gun on you!"

"The Case" might be rethought to "at contact distance" -the semiauto function of your pistol will be rendered into a jam from interference with the slide. The attackers swarming and being upon you.
Now the attackers must be versant in clearing the jam before shooting you with your own gun.

Hey Doc. With the steel revolver; you have a fine "contact" weapon, similar to a blackjack, in your hand.
Since your bullets did little to disuade the attack, a heavy hunk of steel slamed into their skulls will put the lights out quickly and surely.
It might be that you should have used the "wounding" time, not to shoot, but more effectively slap them up side the head with your "sap" -revolver in the first place.

Sorry, but I don't think your premise of a limited amount of shots available via a revolver versus the higher capacity auto has validity, except perhaps in some bizzare circumstance as you state.

[ArchAngelCD]

5 or 6 rounds should be plenty with at least 1 round left over if 4 bad guys attack you and you can shoot well.

Shot placement is the name of the game, not how many shots you can fire before you empty your gun.

[mgregg85]

I'll do my absolute best to empty my magazine if they are still coming. If they get to me after all that then I'm probably dead anyways.

Even if I couldn't empty it, I'd rather be shot with my own gun than beat to death, at least that would be quick.

[Dan Crocker]

5 or 6 rounds should be plenty with at least 1 round left over if 4 bad guys attack you and you can shoot well.

Shot placement is the name of the game, not how many shots you can fire before you empty your gun.
And if you miss in this high-stress, multiple-assailant scenario? This isn't a case for less capacity, it's a simple argument for more. If there are 4 guys that don't back off when you pull your gun and start shooting, they are likely going to kill you even if you shoot your gun empty. Might as well keep pumping bullets into them as long as you can.

[Revolver Ocelot]

generally (atleast from my own expierience) when there are more then 2 its usually one guy with some sort of saturday night special leading a group of 3 (who are there primarily as an in timidation tactic).

however if there where more guns involved I'll just hope my odds are better for carrying a second revolver.

[blkbrd666]

Basically fall to the ground in a ball with my left arm protecting my head and spinning round with my feet firing all 15+ rounds in a panicky circle of destruction whilst screaming like a girl.


I always watched the Stooges and never knew, 'til now, that was a defensive move by Curly...Ha, learn something new every day!

[JohnBT]

"Suppose you're being attacked by say, 3 or 4 contact-weapon-armed thugs"

How do you know they only have contact weapons? Do you also know their nicknames, what they had for breakfast and what's stuffed in their waistbands?

Unless you can send me a crystal ball like yours, I'm not returning my new FNP-45 with the 15-round mags.

John

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

I think we pretty well debunked the hypothesis back on page 1. :) :p

[ArmedBear]

All told, when I'm found dead, I'd rather be found with this:
http://www.smith-wesson.com/wcsstore/SmWesson/upload/images/engraving/cus/150338_large.jpg

than this:
http://www.enemyforces.net/firearms/glock17_4.jpg

[Vern Humphrey]

Why?

Whatever you're carrying, the toads will probably run off with it.

[ArmedBear]

Well, that's true.

Sigma, then?

[Deaf Smith]

If they run off with mine, it will be cause it's empty and I gave them the contents thereof.

And if I'm deceased, well I really don't care what happens to my gun. I mean it's a Glock. Whopee.

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

And if I'm deceased, well I really don't care what happens to my gun. I mean it's a Glock. Whopee.

Can I use that for my new sig line? I really like it. :)

[jad0110]

Sigh.

In the end, it reallly doesn't matter what platform you are carrying, assuming it actually works of course. What matters most is your attitude, will to survive, instincts, training etc etc. And most importantly, IMO, you situational awareness. Software, not hardware. Whatever you choose to carry, be as proficient as you are able with your chosen implement and stay alert. If you are paying attention, you might even be able to avoid said 3-4 punks in the first place, or at least deter them.

If not, well, I doubt the type of gun you are carrying will determine the outcome. That will be up to you. A person armed with an 1873 SAA who is well prepared and is ready to fight to live will likely fare much better than another armed with a wondernine that has only put 50 rounds through the gun in the last 3 years.

I mainly carry S&W revolvers because I draw and shoot them better than any other platform I've tried. I know their limitations, but I also know that in my hands a Glock or XD is even more limited because I'm not going to be nearly as accurate or quick on the draw with them. I do like carrying my 1911, in fact I'm carrying it right now. But I feel even more confident when I'm packing my trusty S&W Model 15.

Carry whatever gives you confidence, cuz you'll probably need that confidence if it really does hit the fan.

Those are my thoughts, probably worth exactly what you paid for them. :o


If I really expected to find myself in the position that aptly-self-named freakshow10mm described, I would not want his gun. 10mm in a 1911 has costs: capacity and rapid-fire accuracy.

I'd take a gun that's quicker on followthrough, and easier to keep on target, in rapid fire -- and one that holds more rounds. A 19+1 round 9mm would be a far better choice. In each hand, with two more in holsters.

Actually, I was thinking of a bayonet-equipped AR carbine myself :neener: .

[Clarence]

I'll take my chances with the higher capacity weapon.

[Erik]

"Thoughts?"

I have never yet heard a valid argument for having less ammunition available for immediate use with the exception of being on fire or while drowning. This thread included.

That not to say that high capacity is a must, but to purposely limit capacity? No thanks.

[LibShooter]

Hoping to fire your last round just as the thugs descend on you seems like a bad way to choose which gun to carry.

Here's a better recipe:

Any gun is better than no gun.

A lot of rounds are better than just a few rounds

A lightweight gun is better than heavy gun.

Find your personal compromise between these criteria, choose the firearm you're comfortable with, carry it with a warm fuzzy feeling of security.

And try to stay out of neighborhoods frequented by gangs of club wielding thugs.

[logical]

Why not carry an empty gun and rule out all chance of being shot with it?

[jackdanson]

He concluded that a single stack auto with 7-10 rounds was a worthwhile improvement over a revolver with 5 or 6.

Just a thought, maybe this is because most 7-10 round single stacks are 1911s. In my experience most of the people who carry 1911's are a little more into firearms/practice than those that carry snubbies or glocks. I don't know, it's just a guess.

Why not carry an empty gun and rule out all chance of being shot with it?

How about a mag disconnect? I really don't think that they are a bad idea... despite what most here believe.

[Kind of Blued]

"Shootin' on the move." That's all.

[ArchAngelCD]

I would like to hear from just one person here other than a LEO or military who have been attacked on the street by 4 or more bad guys with contact weapons, just one person... :p If you find yourself in that situation you weren't paying attention to what was going on around you in the least. I know the words "situational awareness" get overused but really now, you walked into 4+ bad guys??? For that alone you should get a smack! ;)

[Kayback]

Again with the people expecting badguys to bug out when confronted by loud noises.

Seriously people. If these guys are out to kill you, even killing one of them might not send them running. It might even egg them on.

Fight or flight works for badguys who have their OODA loop disrupted as well. While they might run away, they might also fight back. They are now trying to defend themselves from YOU.

In almost every thred someone says "The badguys will run away". That's assuming a LOT.

If I've emptied my 13 shot 9mm, well that's why I carry contact weapons as well.

[possum_128]

With what you are saying, would you not be better served to carry a gun with just one round in it that you know will blow up when shot? That way when the bad guy takes it from you he gets his hand blown off. Doesn't make much since does it? You do what you wish, me, I'll carry enough fire power to get me through another day. By the way I do sometimes carry just a J frame but, most other times I use that for a back-up to a .45.

[alde]

I carry a J-Frame 90% of the time and will continue to do so. Heck, I don't even carry a reload most of the time. If I need more than 5, well I guess I'm going down.

[Gunfighter123]

I would like to hear from just one person here other than a LEO or military who have been attacked on the street by 4 or more bad guys with contact weapons, just one person...


I guess I was ALMOST that one person !!!! Was fishing for salmon off a govt. pier in Waukegan , about 20 min. north of Chicago ------ left my house a bit after midnight and got to the pier & set up around 1:00AM ---- this was a Friday night and there is usually at least 4-8 other fisherman there at night. BTW -- the pier/ lighthouse is between 1/4 and 1/2 mile from shore.

As luck would have it , I was the ONLY person there , well untill about 2:30 AM ---- I heard voices but as there are NO Lights --- I couldn't see who was coming out but I knew that there was WAY more then two people. It turned out to be a BUNCH of gangbanger wannabe's --- there were 7 Hispanic males and 4 females.
They come all the way out to the lighthouse , where I'm at , and at first everything was cool. They asked if I was getting fish etc. --- they then went to the other side of pier/breakwall and I could see they started to smoke something { not pot} and were drinking out of paper bags that held bottles.
After maybe 15/20 minutes , they started to get "rowdy" with each other and then they started to throw the glass bottles near where I was on the other side.
After two of the bottles hit within 4 or 5 feet from me -- I said something like " hey , be cool or you will scare off the fish " ---- thats when it started to get tense as they yelled to me " we'll scare you off and your fish MFer etc"
The pier there is maybe 30 feet wide , one part is around 15/20 ft. wide , then a raised "walkway" around 5/6 feet high X 3 ft. wide , and then on the lake side a smaller area about only 3 feet wide.
Then 3 or 4 males come over to the wide side where I'm set up fishing and start with me. First I try to calm them down and reason with them --- that ain't gonna work. So,I jump over to the "skinny side" and back up to a part of the seawall where I know they can't get behind me. Two of the bigger guys jump over and have something in their hands { sticks/clubs } ---- at that time , I pull BOTH of my fillate knifes and tell them that it ain't worth it for us to be killing each other for nothing. Things got even more tense after that --- another 2 or 3 guys jump over to my side and start to try to get me inbetween them.
There are two , at least , almost in arms length away and I'm thinking " OH SHxx" ---- one of the girls starts yelling at her "mate" to leave me alone etc. ---- another girl starts yelling at her "homies" to go to their car and get a gun !!!
I then start to yell " go get your F-ing gun cause I already got mine " -- at this time the "leader" calls his guys back and tells them it's time to leave !!!! I was NEVER so happy to hear words like that in my life.

They leave and I'm on full alert untill the sun starts to come up --- I get back to my car and leave.

MORAL of the story ---- you can have ALL the Awareness in the World and STILL FIND yourself in danger.

Now , I ALWAYS take a handgun and my cell phone out there with me. I also make it a point to have two hundred dollars for bail if need be. It is a shame I MAYBE breaking the law -- BUT , better to be tried by 12 then buried by 6 !!!

[mrt949]

When i was a young man .My dad told me if there is more than one threat .SHOOT THE FIRST ONE .THEN RUN RUN RUN.

[thorazine]

Disagree -- just because.

[jaydubya]

I recall an episode involving an off-duty policewoman who found herself in the middle of a "stop and rob" episode, involving three assailants with blunt instruments. She identified herself, drew her Airweight snubby and ordered them to the floor. They charged her. As she was trained, she put two shots into the first one, two in the second and the remaining round in the third. The first two were out of it, but the third one -- even though seriously wounded -- just about killed her.

Against multiple assailants, I want an Uzi. So I guess I fall into the "more rounds is better" group.

Cordially, Jack