How many rounds minimum are borderline sufficient in your semi auto pistol?


PDA






el Godfather
November 12, 2013, 02:59 PM
Dear THR:
What do you all think about the minimum desired capacity of semi auto? Before selecting a gun for a self defense, do you have any minimum capacity requirement?

Any studies that elaborate on this subject?

I personally lean towards higher capacity pistols - thinking better be safe than sorry.

Or do your circumstances of travel dictate the capacity of the firearm chosen for the day? I know it does influence me sometimes. When going to a country side, I am partial to a double stack magazine with 12+ capacity, irrespective of a caliber. May they be a Glock 23 (in near future Glock 20 and Glock 29 might replace it), H&K USP 45 or even the big boy Mk 23 placed next to the car seat or on the floor mat (but mostly a gun on body with Mk23 handy).

I am not a firm believer in loads of magazines unless I want to be fortified some where and expecting a drawn out gun fight, in which case I wont be relying on pistols. I rather have two pistols than one with 3 mags. I, somehow, have the feeling that gunfights don't last long like hollywood movie scenes. Instead they are sudden and are over with quickly, not leaving much time for magazine changes. Just some non-expert thoughts. Therefore, two guns ready to go bang when trigger is pulled is what I like - also it minimizes disasters due to an unexpected jam/malfunction in a gun. I mean the chances of two quality firearms jamming on the same occasion have to be pretty low.

What do you think?

If you enjoyed reading about "How many rounds minimum are borderline sufficient in your semi auto pistol?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
allaroundhunter
November 12, 2013, 03:02 PM
I think that your logic for not having a spare magazine, is flawed. Carrying a spare magazine because of the additional rounds is not why you should be carrying it. That magazine is there in case of malfunction in which your first magazine needs to be removed from the gun and not used anymore. It is easier for me to clear a malfunction than to go back to my car and grab a second gun.

Anything with 7 rounds+ is good for me, and always with a spare magazine.



I also think that you have asked this before...

el Godfather
November 12, 2013, 03:07 PM
I think that your logic for not having a spare magazine, is flawed. Carrying a spare magazine because of the additional rounds is not why you should be carrying it. That magazine is there in case of malfunction in which your first magazine needs to be removed from the gun and not used anymore. It is easier for me to clear a malfunction than to go back to my car and grab a second gun.

Anything with 7 rounds+ is good for me, and always with a spare magazine.



I also think that you have asked this before...
My logic may be flawed as I am no expert, but it works for me. However, I think your reasoning is also not quite spot on as well because I rather have second pistol ready to go than figuring out if malfunction is due to magazine and change it to clear it- no thank you Sir.

decoy562
November 12, 2013, 03:09 PM
I voted 6+1 since I carry a Beretta Nano. Basically, anything that carries more than a revolver is fine by me.

allaroundhunter
November 12, 2013, 03:13 PM
My logic may be flawed as I am no expert, but it works for me. However, I think your reasoning is also not quite spot on as well because I rather have second pistol ready to go than figuring out if malfunction is due to magazine and change it to clear it- no thank you Sir.

If you are having to think then you have not practiced. You really should add that in to your practice sessions. If you any clear a malfunction quickly while determining the problem by feel then you aren't properly prepared to defend yourself. I would rather have the option of a magazine change than find myself with a malfunction that I don't know how to clear, wetting my pants in the middle of the mall because my "Plan B" is back in the car :rolleyes:

gunsablazin
November 12, 2013, 03:18 PM
If I were an LEO I would be much more interested in a high capacity sidearm, as a civilian HCP holder, my .45 with 7+1 and a spare mag of 8 has been 16 rounds more than I have ever needed. That being said, although I will, when circumstances dictate carry a 5 shot snubby, I am more comfortable with the .45

el Godfather
November 12, 2013, 03:21 PM
If you are having to think then you have not practiced. You really should add that in to your practice sessions. If you any clear a malfunction quickly while determining the problem by feel then you aren't properly prepared to defend yourself. I would rather have the option of a magazine change than find myself with a malfunction that I don't know how to clear, wetting my pants in the middle of the mall because my "Plan B" is back in the car :rolleyes:
1. Rather shoot the next gun than waste time clearing a jam. However, thank you for the advice I will try to add it to routine.

2. Mall? I hardly go to any Malls where people are shooting at each other. Not to mention Glock or H&K is just fine with magazine loaded. I rather not go to a Mall than going there with quad magazine pouch and a BUG strapped to my each ankle.

3. The plan B you to refer to was for a specific situation "country side" not for hanging out local the target store. Read my post please.

Fiv3r
November 12, 2013, 03:32 PM
It depends entirely on the caliber. If it's a 9mm, I generally prefer 10 at least. If it's .45 then I'm good with 7 or 8. I always carry a reload with me just in case.

It also goes the other way for me too. I don't carry a chunky 14 shot .380. I can pack a 9mm/40/45 in the same package. However, I do carry an LCP when I can't carry anything larger. For me, the micro .380s fit roles that even the smallest 9s can't fill.

So in short, it depends on the platform. If it's a striker fired 9mm, I want extra rounds. A hammer fired .45 is just fine with 8. I have 5 shot .357 on my hip as I type with a "reload" of 5 loose rounds in my pocket and I'm not really worried about my general safety. I just make sure that I am capable with whatever weapon I select to arm myself.

Robbins290
November 12, 2013, 04:13 PM
Im not fighting a war. My p220 compact is 6+1. And i dont add the extra round. If i need more then 6 rounds, i need more then a carry piece.

TestPilot
November 12, 2013, 05:09 PM
10 rounds minimum magazine capacity for me, for a primary pistol, but higher the better.

I wanted to be able to react to 2~3 opponents before having to reload. That is under the assumption that it would take about 3 rounds or less to deal with each opponent. Of course, that is not guaranteed in real life.

I have done research and read studies, but no study at the moment can produce a definitive number of rounds any person would need to deal with each opponent, so I just had to make my own assumptions.

CWL
November 12, 2013, 05:44 PM
7+1 or 8+1 is good enough for me. I'm a M1911 shooter and although I've collected high cap guns like the G17 since they first came out, but I prefer platform over capacity.

Be realistic, most SD gunfights end after the first 2-3 rounds exchanged. It is better to work on accuracy, technique, tactics and situational awareness rather than feel security because you are carrying X-quantity of bullets.

cor_man257
November 12, 2013, 05:57 PM
I said 8+1. I think carrying that many rounds of 45 is well armed. I didn't feel like I needed more gun with my 220.

I now carry a G17 with 10 round magazine. Not because of the capacity, because of the price of ammo.

I carried a spare magazine with the Sig, and still do with my Glock.

Hometeached1
November 12, 2013, 06:07 PM
My minimum magazine capacity depends on the size and caliber of the pistol. If given the choice between a compact 1911 in .45ACP with 7+1 or a glock 19 15+1. I would almost always choose the 19, the almost being if I had good JHPs on hand.:D If given the choice between a Para P14 14+1 of .45ACP or a glock 34 17+1 of 9mm, I'd go with the p14. As far as a second pistol or a spare mag I choose.... Both!:neener: that way I would have spare ammo just in case I ran out or had a malfunction, same for the second pistol. It is ALWAYS good to have optoins. It is better to have and not need, than to need and not have. But that's just MHO.

IdahoHk416
November 12, 2013, 11:57 PM
For CCW, I carry my Springfield XDs .45 with 5+1 capacity and a spare 7 round magazine.

If I were to carry a pistol to use as a duty weapon, I would want the highest capacity possible.

For CCW, it is not as much of a concern for me. The average SD shooting is over in 2 rounds or less, according to the statistics out there.

el Godfather
November 13, 2013, 12:10 AM
I said 8+1. I think carrying that many rounds of 45 is well armed. I didn't feel like I needed more gun with my 220.

I now carry a G17 with 10 round magazine. Not because of the capacity, because of the price of ammo.

I carried a spare magazine with the Sig, and still do with my Glock.
It is sad to see people restricted to 10 round magazines. Beats the entire evolutionary phase in the handgun history.

Would somebody repeal these stupid acts and put behind bars these neo-politicians before they force us to use only 7 round 1911 with .22 short. :)

Rock185
November 13, 2013, 12:39 AM
I guess my minimum must be 7+1, since I carried a pistol of this capacity 40+ hours a week for several years. FWIW, I did have a quality pistol malfunction during a close range interpersonal confrontation over a decade ago. I was carrying a very well known polymer 15+1 .40 Cal. pistol at the time. I can sure appreciate the value of a "New York Reload," but was not carrying a second weapon at that time. Probably 99.9% of people will never need a second weapon, I never had before, and I thought I never would. I was wrong. I still have the scars. Afterwards, I started carrying that traditional 7+1 capacity American pistol designed by JMB, which, to this day has never failed. I also carried two extra magazines a second weapon with that 7+1 pistol until I retired...ymmv

tarosean
November 13, 2013, 01:55 AM
I rather have second pistol ready to go than figuring out if malfunction is due to magazine and change it to clear it- no thank you Sir.

Where do you keep the second pistol? Are you going to call a time out while you reach for an ankle holster?



Minimum desired for me would be 5...

csa77
November 13, 2013, 02:04 AM
im more then comfortable with a 5 shot 357 j frame. for a pistol, 6+1 is icing on the cake.

CWL
November 13, 2013, 02:15 AM
I guess my minimum must be 7+1, since I carried a pistol of this capacity 40+ hours a week for several years. FWIW, I did have a quality pistol malfunction during a close range interpersonal confrontation over a decade ago. I was carrying a very well known polymer 15+1 .40 Cal. pistol at the time. I can sure appreciate the value of a "New York Reload," but was not carrying a second weapon at that time. Probably 99.9% of people will never need a second weapon, I never had before, and I thought I never would. I was wrong. I still have the scars. Afterwards, I started carrying that traditional 7+1 capacity American pistol designed by JMB, which, to this day has never failed. I also carried two extra magazines a second weapon with that 7+1 pistol until I retired...ymmv

Nah man, that can't be correct! Everybody knows that Glocks never fail and 1911s are always unreliable!

(Glad you're OK and still with us!)

RetiredUSNChief
November 13, 2013, 04:02 AM
Dear THR:
What do you all think about the minimum desired capacity of semi auto? Before selecting a gun for a self defense, do you have any minimum capacity requirement?

Sure I have a minimum capacity...7. Because that's the magazine capacity of my Colt 1991A1, the smallest capacity sidearm I own.



I am not a firm believer in loads of magazines unless I want to be fortified some where and expecting a drawn out gun fight, in which case I won't be going there.

There. I fixed that for my case. Part of situational awareness and risk management: avoid trouble wherever possible.

:neener:

(Yeah, yeah...I know there are exceptions to this...)

Inebriated
November 13, 2013, 05:31 AM
10+1 is the minimum for me. I'm comfortable with just a 5-shot revolver, but practically, 10+1 is the lowest I care to go.

Why? Because my G26 is just so easy to carry and shoot, that going to anything smaller isn't going to carry or conceal any better, and it's going to be harder to shoot as well.

Old Guy
November 13, 2013, 05:57 AM
Any way, carrying a pistol, for legal self defense, as most of us do, on this forum, is depend on were you live, and what you do.

So living in the Communist states of New York or California, fixes your Magazine capacity! Hence Florida for ever.

The Glock 19 I carry, and use in IDPA competition, not much competition of late.
Has 16 rounds ready to go, and a G17 magazine, as a spare, or in the case of a malfunction.

Up to now, I have not had a stoppage with my Glock 19.

As a retired person, I can carry all the time, only do not, when visiting the Sheriffs Dept. as a Volunteer.

When dragged into a fight, with guns, that has not happened to me, but has others. I never heard any one say, "Oh these extra rounds are too heavy, I think I will leave the magazine just half full?"

Have any of my fellow free Citizen's felt this way?

el Godfather
November 13, 2013, 06:07 AM
^in CA and NY the mag restriction applies to magazines previously owned as well or the new purchases? How do LEAs make distinction when enforcing this law?

tarosean
November 13, 2013, 06:32 AM
in CA and NY the mag restriction applies to magazines previously owned as well or the new purchases?
NY banned previously grandfathered magazines. CA as far as I can recall still allows "pre-ban" magazines.


How do LEAs make distinction when enforcing this law?

Generally there is a manufacturing stamp/mark or revision/model that will tell the age..

tarosean
November 13, 2013, 06:36 AM
I now carry a G17 with 10 round magazine. Not because of the capacity, because of the price of ammo.


:confused:

I do not understand this statement.. Can you further explain?

bannockburn
November 13, 2013, 07:37 AM
My minimum would be 7+ as over the years I have become so accustomed to carrying Colt Commanders in .45 ACP. If it were a 9mm. then it would probably be the standard capacity mag of my Ruger SRc, along with the extended mag as a spare.

Phaedrus/69
November 13, 2013, 07:59 AM
I voted 8+1 but more is always better. My minimum CCW is a Beretta Nano which has 6 round and 8 round mags. If I carry the Nano I'm usually running it 8+1, but when I can't risk any printing at all I run it 6+1 with an 8 rounder carried weak side. Most of the time though I'm running an HK P30S 15+1 with a spare mag carried weak side.

huntershooter
November 13, 2013, 08:25 AM
You have GOT to be the reigning "King of Polls" E.G..........

RBid
November 13, 2013, 10:50 AM
2. Mall? I hardly go to any Malls where people are shooting at each other.

This line absolutely set me to boiling. Not out of aggression or desire to see bad things happen. Quite the opposite. The anger I am pushing down right now comes from a frustration that people seem to refuse to learn.

Let me explain.

Clackamas Town Center is NOT a mall "where people are shooting at each other". It is clean, quiet, and (statistically) very safe. I've been going there since we moved to the area when I was 10, and am now 36. In that time, it has always been a good mall to shop at. The Clackamas County Sheriff's office is literally across the street.

...and then, a sick individual stole a weapon and put that mall in national headlines, immediately before Sandy Hook. Nobody was shooting there, until they were.

Understand this:

You can not predict crazy.

If we could, there would be no victims. This, "I wear/carry _____ when I'm going somewhere I'll need it" practice is based on the lie of "safe" or "dangerous" areas.

In a place where you are 26% less likely to be a victim of murder, you still have the possibility of getting 100% killed. The situations are not 26% less lethal. Less likely, sure. Less deadly, NO. These places are "safer" in terms of likelihood, not lethality.

You have no idea where, when, or if you will need a firearm. All you can do is prepare yourself as best you can (or are willing to), and appreciate every wonderful, crappy, or boring day of life. We never know when our day will come. I, for one, make it a point to create laughs and fun every day, and if I ever need my firearm (again!), the cause for that need will find me armed and as prepared as I can be to continue living and laughing.

/rant over.

RBid
November 13, 2013, 10:55 AM
I suppose I should address the topic, too.

I'll accept 10rds, I'm comfortable with 12, and I carry 15+1+15. My spare mag is an insurance policy for failures or statistical zeroes (situations so rare that they can almost be said to "not happen"). I'm perfectly comfortable carrying my Glock 19 Gen 4 plus a spare, so I have no reason to not do so.

PabloJ
November 13, 2013, 10:59 AM
:confused:

I do not understand this statement.. Can you further explain?
He meant to say he uses 10 round magazine because he does not enjoy wearing his pants around or below his knees.

Mike1234567
November 13, 2013, 11:12 AM
The more the better. If 3-4 guys break in my home intending to hurt me then I want several rounds per bad guy in every magazine. Even if I don't have the chance, or need, to use them all I'd rather have and not need than need and not have.

Walt Sherrill
November 13, 2013, 11:20 AM
I do not understand this statement.. Can you further explain?

I think he's referring to the cost of 9mm vs. .45, not capacity issues. Might be a state law limiting him to 10-round mags? (Doesn't New York limit mags to 10 rounds?)

el Godfather
November 13, 2013, 11:26 AM
NY banned previously grandfathered magazines. CA as far as I can recall still allows "pre-ban" magazines.




Generally there is a manufacturing stamp/mark or revision/model that will tell the age..
So in NY, the previous magazines are collected and destroyed? What's the penalty for this law?

el Godfather
November 13, 2013, 11:34 AM
RBid
You are right that crazy cannot be predicted. The entire point of the post was to show that how I do risk assessment. I don't want to sound snobbish, but I go out very little and to very limited number of places. This is not to advocate not carrying. I do carry but just one mag in that situation. If going to a place that is inherently more risky, I would change accordingly. This does not suit everyone or even the most- however it suits me and it works for me. There is always a line one draws on how much is enough in routine. I don't foresee myself in mall shoot out scenario where I might need numerous amounts of mags. Most my guns are 12+ rounds. I think that is enough for me. If my days are numbered even a rocket launcher and Ak47 won't help because first bullet rightly placed will end my story. PERIOD.

AND that may happen without my drawing the weapon. How sad that it ends like that. All the ammo and collection won't help. Enjoy life for what it is.

tarosean
November 13, 2013, 11:35 AM
What's the penalty for this law?

Heck if I know... I live in a free state...

I would imagine death and dismemberment though.:evil:

or the striping of your gun rights through a felony charge. Which is exactly what the powers to be want in NYC. (Unfortunately they decide what is ""best"" for the entire state)

el Godfather
November 13, 2013, 11:40 AM
You have GOT to be the reigning "King of Polls" E.G..........
Do I even have to post a poll for that!

:)

tarosean
November 13, 2013, 11:40 AM
I think he's referring to the cost of 9mm vs. .45, not capacity issues.

perhaps your right.


I know one thing.. If I was faced with some stupid 7rd Mag limit like NY.. I would be buying every 8rd N-Frame I could get my hand on.. Just to give their Gov.the proverbial middle finger...

el Godfather
November 13, 2013, 11:43 AM
I would campaign against these clowns and dislodge them from their public offices and repeal the ban!

aarondhgraham
November 13, 2013, 11:44 AM
If it holds 6 or less,,,
I would rather have my J-Frame revolver. ;)

But I just ordered an LC9,,,
It has 7+1 capacity,,,
I'm fine with that.

Aarond

.

riceboy72
November 13, 2013, 12:03 PM
Well written, RBid. Some of EG's replies also have me a bit offset. If he's going to run a poll and end his original post with, "What do you think?" then he needs to allow for people to say what they want and not immediately discredit them by reminding them to read the post. He asked for opinions, and he's getting them.

Some of us do go to malls and Target stores. Some of us don't like thick, double stack guns and don't own them. If carrying two pistols works for you, then do it. For me, it's almost always dependent on how I'm dressed and what I'm doing. Of my guns, I only own two full size pistols anymore, but I do not carry them. My highest capacity gun is a Glock 19, and my lowest is a 642. I carry at least one reload no matter the gun, and feel comfortable going to the woods, the mall, and everywhere in between with either gun, or any variant in between.

I'm not one to carry a second gun because a) I don't like extra weight, b) I don't like things in my pockets or strapped to ankles, etc, and c) the spare magazine and my training suit me just fine in my daily activities.

BSA1
November 13, 2013, 01:07 PM
What do you all think about the minimum desired capacity of semi auto?

This topic can be viewed from many angles but in your case I think your question is how much do other THR members fear going out in public. In post 35 you state that “The entire point of the post was to show that how I do risk assessment. I don't want to sound snobbish, but I go out very little and to very limited number of places.”

You expand your fear with your comments in post 1 that “When going to a country side, I am partial to a double stack magazine with 12+ capacity, irrespective of a caliber.” and “I rather have two pistols than one with 3 mags…two guns ready to go bang when trigger is pulled is what I like.”

I cannot comment about what meets your needs best. In my little part of the world I have little fear of other folks I encounter when I go out in public. In fact I have so little concern I don’t even go armed and I deal with the public daily. On the other hand I know very well that other communities have much higher crime rate and I have a higher chance of being a victim of crime. However my chances of being a victim of crime is much lower if I use common-sense tactics just like using my seatbelt, obeying traffic laws, watching out for the other driver improves my chances of not being involved in a auto accident.

For me I do not assign a arbitrary number for my personal security. As you state do a risk assessment and use tactics appropriate for the situation which is also a great reason to own more than one type of handguns.

Nickb45
November 13, 2013, 01:12 PM
I'm comfortable with 7+1 in a 1911. When I'm not at work if I'm out and about I have 2 more 7 round mags on my weak side.
At work I have a few mags in the shop, there are also spare mags in the desk (the boss is a 1911 guy as well)

In the woods is a different story, I had a shoulder rig made for my Springfield hi-cap 1911, it was so heavy on my left side I had a double mag pouch made for my right side to balance out the weight a little. So it's 14+1 +14+14.

el Godfather
November 13, 2013, 01:26 PM
Riceboy and BSA
Good opinions/posts.

riceboy72
November 13, 2013, 01:49 PM
Thanks, Godfather. Now you know the rules: Pic of your MK23 or it didn't happen!

shafter
November 13, 2013, 02:03 PM
I am comfortable with a 1911 with a 7 round magazine although I usually use 8 rders. I'd also feel just fine with a Glock with 15 rounds. Since my usual carry is a 5 round snubnose revolver any auto is going to give me better capacity.

OilyPablo
November 13, 2013, 02:11 PM
I am comfortable with my XDs.

But I wanted to post if 7+1 is good enough for JMB, it's good enough for me.

Both in .45ACP.

Teachu2
November 13, 2013, 02:19 PM
10+1 is the practical limit here in CA, and what I prefer. Circumstances can dictate less, and I have been known to carry a G36 or a Shield. My J-frame days are over, even though I still own an Airweight. It goes in my pocket in snake season, loaded with shotshells...

TarDevil
November 13, 2013, 02:33 PM
I'd carry less than 10+1 only when work/required attire dictates. In all honesty, I can't think what that situation might be because I've never been unable to carry my SR9c anywhere legal.

Well... the above described scenario at least gives me an excuse to buy another gun whether I carry it or not, right?

Walkalong
November 13, 2013, 02:44 PM
I think my Seecamp holds five plus one. My NAA revolver holds five.

verb0s
November 13, 2013, 02:55 PM
I'm comfortable with a revolver or a semiauto. my revolvers only hold 5 or 6 rounds, if that is enough capacity for me then a semiauto with 6+1 is fine.

Most situation only last a mag, only in movies would there be a gunfight that involves reloads and putting dozens of rounds at threat(s).

fastbolt
November 13, 2013, 03:01 PM
How many rounds minimum are borderline sufficient in your semi auto pistol?

I prefer not to go below 6 round magazine capacity for a pistol. (I didn't feel under-equipped when I carried a 6-shot service revolver, FWIW.)

That's a minimum, though. Several of my retirement CCW pistols (formally off-duty weapons) have 7-8 round mags, which I tend to prefer, all things considered. (I spent enough years carrying my 70's vintage Commander with 7-rd mags, after all.)

Then, there are my higher capacity pistols that have 9-10 round mags.

I even have a hi-cap pistol similar to an issued one I used to carry on-duty, which has a 12-rd mag.

All of that said, as a long time revolver owner & user (on & off-duty) I'm certainly comfortable carrying one or another of my 5-shot snubs. ;)

I've carried a weapon with a badge & ID for over 30 years, and I spent a good portion of my career working in the capacity of a firearms instructor and armorer. I have a passing familiarity with firearms and the need to develop & maintain proficiency with them. I'm not unaware of the potential for unexpected dangerous circumstances to arise in the course of our otherwise normal lives.

I focus more on training, practice, awareness of the laws, experience, awareness and mindset than I do on how many rounds any particular handgun may carry before it has to be loaded again.

I once reflected on the fact that I began my LE career carrying a 6-shot revolver ... and then went through that whole hi-cap phase where we were carrying issued pistols with mag capacities 12, 14 & 15 rounds ... and I finished my career carrying an issued pistol with a 7-rd mag capacity. Full circle, so to speak.

el Godfather
November 13, 2013, 03:28 PM
It did happen so did 18 Cz Auto and many.

I dont usually show pics on someone insinuating that I am a liar. Isnt there a rule regarding that as well- may be.

tommy.duncan
November 13, 2013, 03:31 PM
I carry 1911s, P226, USP, 92fs, etc.
I usually carry a higher capacity pistol, but a 1911 with an extra mag works just fine.

riceboy72
November 13, 2013, 03:40 PM
Relax, Godfather. I am not calling you a liar whatsoever. It's a catch phrase and I'd assume you'd be familiar with the phrase considering how long you've been on this board.

I just wanted to see the big boy. Not too many of those floating around and I think it's cool you have one. Always wanted to shoot one, but never have.

allaroundhunter
November 13, 2013, 03:43 PM
Thanks, Godfather. Now you know the rules: Pic of your MK23 or it didn't happen!

Holy cow.... You got him to post a picture.

NEAL39
November 13, 2013, 03:44 PM
When on patrol, I carried a six round revolver and never felt I needed more. Of course, I had a very large partner with the same side arm, a 12 gauge shotgun, and his dog that helped ease my feeling of being under armed. Neal39

lpsharp88
November 13, 2013, 04:09 PM
I voted 10+1. My G26 Gen 4 with a spare mag is my EDC, and I'm very comfortable with that.
When in the woods, I prefer my M9 with a reload. I like the added weight and capacity that it offers.

el Godfather
November 13, 2013, 04:25 PM
Yea its a great shooter. My bad on misconstruing tour statement, but it sure sounded like that.

Its not that rare. Lots of boys here have it. Now g18 stichken and Cz Auto they are rare. Working desperately to get 93r. One is locally available in my part of the woods but demand is 22000$. My offer was 12000$. Lets see where is going to happen.

Back to the subject.
Carry on.

el Godfather
November 13, 2013, 04:26 PM
Holy cow.... You got him to post a picture.
Why do you sound so surprised?

allaroundhunter
November 13, 2013, 04:52 PM
Why do you sound so surprised?

Because of all the talk we get of your collection of this and that without ever a single picture to show off...

Madcap_Magician
November 13, 2013, 05:11 PM
I think he's referring to the cost of 9mm vs. .45, not capacity issues. Might be a state law limiting him to 10-round mags? (Doesn't New York limit mags to 10 rounds?)

Seven rounds, now.

tomrkba
November 13, 2013, 05:19 PM
You forgot 7+1, so I voted 8+1.

However, the real question is "What is the minimum semi-auto capacity for the purpose?" I'm willing to put up with 5+1 or 6+1 in a pocket pistol, but not in a semi-auto carried on the belt.

JohnBiltz
November 13, 2013, 05:24 PM
But I wanted to post if 7+1 is good enough for JMB, it's good enough for me.
You do realize he is also the guy who designed the BHP?

OilyPablo
November 13, 2013, 05:26 PM
You do realize he is also the guy who designed the BHP?

Of course I am.

I also wanted to post that I only need one round and I am a good shot.

Phaedrus/69
November 13, 2013, 05:30 PM
A lot of good points. "Risk assessment" is a dicey proposition; if we merely looked at the odds most of us wouldn't CCW at all. There are very few armed robberies or carjackings where I live, but as another pointed out a mall shooting is a true "Black Swan". The gun is a lot like the parachute- if you need one and don't have one you'll probably never need one again. I expect that the families of the victims of the Sandy Hook shooting had never experienced a mass shooting in their area. Predicting the next is problematic at best.

Years ago when first started to CCW I would often have just my BHP and no spare mag. Mag carriers weren't as common as they are now and they cost money. Heck, I often carried in a $10 Uncle Mike's back then!

I tend to think that a spare mag might be more important than mag capacity. From what I've read people in gunfights tend to shoot the gun dry no matter how many rounds it holds. So 15 or 5 you better have a spare. What if you shoot it out with a BG in a stop-and-rob and he goes down only to have his accomplice walk in with a shotgun a few seconds after? You need a reload.

Many people have survived gunfights with just a J-frame, and of course we've all read about the gunfight where the cop nearly exhausted the 45-40 rounds of .45 ACP he had for his Glock. The point is you never know.

There's no magic formula to be sure. Simply having a loaded gun on your person puts you in 'rare air' and gives you an edge that most people don't have.

I will confess to a small amount of...trepidation is probably too strong a word...but maybe 'unease' when strapping on my Nano with just the 6 round mag carried +1. I shoot the gun well, even with the flush mag, but I'm acutely aware that seven rounds from a 3" auto is not a lot of firepower. In those circumstances I always have an 8 round mag as backup. With the 8 round mag in the gun (carried +1) I feel like I have a few more options.

But I won't lie- I feel better carrying the P30S with 16 rounds in the gun.

Mikhail Weiss
November 13, 2013, 05:42 PM
My criteria seem dictated by the role the firearm, first, and the number of rounds, second. That is, if the primary purpose is utmost concealability, then I'm fine with fewer rounds. If that is not the primary purpose, then a greater number of rounds proves more appealing.

In the first instance, utmost concealability, five rounds is the number sported by a number of popular pistols I'd carry. In the latter, as many as 19 rounds are carried by pistols I'd be happy to tote. Day-do-day, however, I carry a Glock 19, with 15+1 rounds.

F-111 John
November 13, 2013, 08:18 PM
I carry a Glock 26 with a Pearce +1 baseplate, that is actually +1 in .40, but +2 in 9mm. However, I also feel just fine carrying a 5 shot J-Frame, so I wouldn't feel any differently with a 6+1 semiauto.

browningguy
November 13, 2013, 10:58 PM
Some days I carry a 6+1 .32 ACP, some days a 19+1 9mm, just depends on where I'm going and what I'm wearing.

RetiredUSNChief
November 14, 2013, 12:59 PM
So in NY, the previous magazines are collected and destroyed? What's the penalty for this law?


If you want a soda, then you have to turn in a magazine-coupon to get it. Otherwise, you don't get to have soda at all, regardless of whether or not it's over 16 ounces.

This way Bloomberg gets to kill two birds with one stone.

:neener:

NewGuy1911
November 14, 2013, 01:29 PM
In the 9mm Compact, I would like 14 rds. Seen right and the pistol was designed around that.

In the 45 acp, now that a problem. 7 rds maybe more reliable, at least 8 rds, 10 rds may not function.

Suburban Redneck
November 15, 2013, 04:07 AM
ok, so I started counting. 2 mags on me, one rd. in the pipe, and 30 rds in the mags. So that's 31. (P95) It takes me about 3 sec to swap mags.

savanahsdad
November 15, 2013, 05:02 AM
he asked for the minimum but starts the pole at 6+1 hummm ? I think a 2 shot O/U Derringer would be better than nothing , and there are a lot of pocket revolvers out there with 5 rounds

I voted 6+1 as most of us did but I carry a full size 1911 8+1 but when it is cold out and I can wear a heavy coat I carry a S&W K-frame 357
























=

Old Guy
November 15, 2013, 08:25 AM
When the Clinton ban first went in to force, I was at a match (USPSA) asked what would happen if you picked up an "ILLEGAL" magazine off the ground?

The Competitor (LEO) said he would hand it over to the guy who dropped it!

Looked at me like I had two heads! Him American, me visiting Canadian.

Fixed that, I am now an American Citizen, living in Florida, still carry Glock19. Plus a spare G17 magazine. Again why? Because I can.

David E
November 26, 2013, 11:37 PM
My logic may be flawed as I am no expert, but it works for me. However, I think your reasoning is also not quite spot on as well because I rather have second pistol ready to go than figuring out if malfunction is due to magazine and change it to clear it- no thank you Sir.

So your plan in case of a jam or running your gun dry is to run back to the car for Gun #2?

.

el Godfather
November 26, 2013, 11:58 PM
So your plan in case of a jam or running your gun dry is to run back to the car for Gun #2?

.
? Read entire thread plz.

David E
November 27, 2013, 12:49 AM
? Read entire thread plz.

I did. The same question remains, but my curiosity does not.

Carry on.

GaryP
November 27, 2013, 08:22 AM
I went with 8+1 and feel that is adequate in my Colt Combat Commanders for Concealed Carry. On occasion I will carry two extra Wilson - Rogers 10 round mags. The 10 round Wilson - Rogers Mags function flawlessly in all my Colts, but they do need to be broken in.

:evil:

Mike1234567
November 27, 2013, 11:08 AM
It appears that folks are voting according to what they already own. So the question is; Are they voting that way because they already have firearms with those size magazines or did they buy them because they have the size mags they prefer for self-defense? If the former and not necessarily the latter, then what are their "real" 'druthers?

benzy2
November 28, 2013, 02:48 AM
It would depend on what you see as a realistic threat. I don't personally have visions of hoards of gang members knocking on my door.

The better question to me is what do I give up by increasing my capacity for any caliber? I'm willing to accept what a 9mm will do and have settled on it as a carry pistol. In 9mm, I don't find a double stack more intrusive than a single stack. With that, 12+ is easy to get in a small package. 15+ is easy to get in a full sized option. I don't see where I'd benefit from a 45 and I don't see where I'd be better off from today's options of single stacks in 9mm or larger. So, give me a double stacked 9mm with something around 12-17 rounds.

tomrkba
November 28, 2013, 10:45 AM
I don't personally have visions of hoards of gang members knocking on my door.

Train for the worst, hope for the best.

We do not train to fight a 90 pound weakling, though we certainly may end up doing so. A group of gang members performing a violent home invasion is a possible threat. I believe capacity is important, but carrying any gun at home is more important.

A quick search reveals:

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/t/video/30k-home-invasion-philadelphia-caught-camera-15978347

http://kfor.com/2013/10/24/gang-pistol-whips-91-year-old-ww-ii-veteran-after-breaking-into-his-home/

http://youtu.be/CAnIU--1m_o

87jeep
November 28, 2013, 12:03 PM
I only think about home.
All I need is 7+1 (sig P-220), That gets me to the AR(loaded with V-max).

"They all leave with the blanket covering their head"

brutus51
November 28, 2013, 12:29 PM
I voted 6 but the way I figure it if the job ain't done after two I probably won't need the other four.

tomrkba
November 28, 2013, 12:41 PM
I voted 6 but the way I figure it if the job ain't done after two I probably won't need the other four.

This is very poor thinking. The problem with it is that handgun terminal ballistics are not very good. An attacker may absorb multiple hits over many seconds before being incapable of continuing the attack. He can continue to attack you during that time. Relying upon typical criminal cowardice is also not good strategy. What if they decide to fight? Are you going to give up because you already fired two rounds? I believe you'll do the very best you can with what you have, but improving performance requires critical and honest thinking.

That gets me to the AR(loaded with V-max)

Maybe so, but maybe not. You do not know where you'll be in the house at the time. You may be surprised and they're already in close proximity. What if they follow you to the rifle and you don't have time to deploy it? The handgun you have on you may be all you have time to retrieve. Your shots will likely break them and cause them to flee, but it's no guarantee.

I think this all comes down to what you will carry daily in and out of your home. If you won't carry a 1911 or Glock mid-frame, then carry the largest gun you can get away with, even if it's only a pocket pistol. But, have it with you and not on the counter.

Always remember you can do everything right and still lose.

Thompsoncustom
November 28, 2013, 12:51 PM
This is very poor thinking. The problem with it is that handgun terminal ballistics are not very good. An attacker may absorb multiple hits over many seconds before being incapable of continuing the attack. He can continue to attack you during that time. Relying upon typical criminal cowardice is also not good strategy. What if they decide to fight? Are you going to give up because you already fired two rounds? I believe you'll do the very best you can with what you have, but improving performance requires critical and honest thinking.


The thing is that even a heart shot to a person not on drugs can live and fight anywhere from 1 to 8 secs on average. So one round to the heart or five doesn't matter if it's not beating.

Tho I carry a gun with 8 or more rounds I can't say I would fell less armed with a gun that carries 2. What I think it comes down to is even if you can make your shots count every time you don't know the situation you will be in and if there's 3 people and you have a 2 shot gun...well good luck.

fastbolt
November 28, 2013, 01:56 PM
FWIW, the last 4 experienced cops I know who have been in shootings, 2 of whom are firearms instructors, still include 5 & 6-shot revolvers among their off-duty weapons. They understand the risks and the potential trade-off's of their decisions. I've listened to other cops who have similar experiences and still include smaller off-duty and/or retirement weapons among their daily choices.

While studying & listening to other cases where "low capacity" 5-shot .38's and little .380's had been used to good effect to save the lives of cops, the disadvantage of their lower capacity seemed fully recognized, but their small size & weight still made them desirable for use as secondary & off-duty weapons.

I don't have anything resembling a crystal ball, but I'm still willing to choose when & where I'll carry diminutive versus larger handguns as retirement weapons.

The thing I consider important is that if a smaller CCW/off-duty/secondary/retirement weapon is employed, the owner ought to be just as skilled and experienced with accurately, rapidly & effectively using it as when using their larger one(s). Choosing a smaller weapon doesn't mean having to settle for less capability on the part of the owner/shooter.

Capacity is just one of the considerations. The ability to make fast and numerous misses isn't an advantage.

Vern Humphrey
November 28, 2013, 06:47 PM
I am not a firm believer in loads of magazines unless I want to be fortified some where and expecting a drawn out gun fight, in which case I wont be relying on pistols
The flaw in that argument is that it assumes the defender gets to choose the time, place and mode of attack. And that ain't so --an attack is like an automobile accident, a heart attack, or a house fire, it happens at its own choosing.

The reason for carrying a spare magazine is the magazine is the Achilles heel of an automatic pistol. It doesn't matter how big your magazine is -- if it packs up on you, you need a spare -- fast!

brutus51
November 28, 2013, 07:06 PM
The point of my comment was based more on the fact that 90% of all firearm altercations have less than three rounds fired, ergo shot placement is by far more important than available round count. Look at the history of the greats, Wild Bill Hickock, Wyatt Earp, Bat Masterson all did it with five rounds , with my level of efficiency a 50 round drum magazine might not be enough. :scrutiny:

Vern Humphrey
November 28, 2013, 08:04 PM
Actually, Bat Masterson, for one, never did it at all -- he never killed anyone that historians can locate. And he was once in a gunfight where he was nearly blinded by sand kicked up by a near miss as he was "lying down to reload."

Bobson
November 28, 2013, 08:23 PM
Didn't vote. I can't bring myself to arbitrarily select a number for "minimum acceptable capacity." I chose my EDC based on a number of factors. Capacity wasn't one of them.

CA Raider
November 28, 2013, 09:16 PM
"It is better to work on accuracy, technique, tactics and situational awareness"

+1

CA R

RetiredUSNChief
November 29, 2013, 02:39 AM
It appears that folks are voting according to what they already own. So the question is; Are they voting that way because they already have firearms with those size magazines or did they buy them because they have the size mags they prefer for self-defense? If the former and not necessarily the latter, then what are their "real" 'druthers?

A good question.

Since I own more than one handgun, I answered based on the one that I use for carry, which is my Colt 1991A1.

I have a higher capacity Beretta 92FS. But since I rarely carry it, it didn't figure into my answer.

:)

Bobson
November 30, 2013, 01:27 AM
It appears that folks are voting according to what they already own. So the question is; Are they voting that way because they already have firearms with those size magazines or did they buy them because they have the size mags they prefer for self-defense? If the former and not necessarily the latter, then what are their "real" 'druthers?A good question.
You didn't answer it.

Do you carry your Colt 1991A1 primarily because it has a capacity you trust, or is there a more significant reason? And if there is a more significant reason, which seems very likely, what is your minimally acceptable capacity?

I think most people pick a firearm because it's a specific platform (such as a 1911 or a Glock), or maybe because it has a certain reputation (like an Hk or a SIG), and then convince themselves that whatever their gun's capacity happens to be is the number they can "minimally" tolerate. That's exactly what happened with me with my Glock 19. Now I can't see carrying a gun with less than 15 rounds... why would I? And in the future, if I suddenly take a liking to 1911s and start carrying one, it will be easy to quickly convince myself that a capacity of 8+1 is acceptable, because reloading is quick anyway, and hey, this will make me focus more on accuracy!

Reading through this thread is proof enough that this is true for a great majority of us. Nothing wrong with that. Capacity just isn't important enough to be a primary factor, for most people, in an EDC or nightstand firearm - nor should it be. There are numerous more important factors without even getting into mere preference points (such as manual of arms): ergonomics/fit, recoil impulse (will you actually practice with it), build quality, size (will you actually carry it). Throw manual of arms preference in there and the average person isn't going to answer those questions and find that two guns - one with 17+1 capacity, and one with 6+1 capacity - both meet all the criteria equally well. It just isn't going to happen.

Mike1234567
November 30, 2013, 10:05 AM
It's been stated many times that the more important concerns are our firearm's reliability and our own ability to consistently operate it/them accurately and that we keep ourselves trained. I'm not as well trained as many folks here but I'll do okay in most situations, I think. Still, for me, I want as many rounds at my disposal as is practicable. I don't want a 30rnd mag sticking several inches below my grip but a Ruger SR9c has 16+1 and it fits nicely in my hand. I'm as accurate with it as any other and I'm not the type to panic. I don't really lust after too many firearms and consider them tools so I have no pricey 1911's... though I do like and respect some. I do assure that my SD forearms meet the more important standards first but then I choose one or more of the hundreds available based largely on magazine capacity too. It's just logical to me. In other words, if I had a beautiful/sexy 1911, I probably wouldn't rely on it for SD. More power to those who do and, yes, it probably has enough capacity. However, I don't want to be caught in fire exchange with three bad guys in my home with only three rounds to shoot back at each one.

Vern Humphrey
November 30, 2013, 11:42 AM
In my humble opinion, the ideal self defense gun has five characteristics:

1. Reliability. It's got to go BANG! every time you pull the trigger. If it doesn't, it's just a funny-looking club.

2. Shootability. Given that it went bang, I have to be able to hit with it.

3. Power. Given that I got a hit, it has to have enough juice to do the job.

4. Reasonable capacity -- if I don't hit, or it doesn't do the job on the first hit, I want a do-over.

5. Concealability -- the law requires it not be visible to a casual observer.

The M1911 fills those for requirements admirably.

kbheiner7
November 30, 2013, 03:44 PM
I carry a 5" 1911 with fully loaded Wilson 47Ds, 8+1. I've read about guys not liking the 8+1 option, but I've successfully run hundreds of firing drills without a hiccup. 8+1 plus 2 extra mags works for me.

Zerodefect
November 30, 2013, 03:57 PM
Any way, carrying a pistol, for legal self defense, as most of us do, on this forum, is depend on were you live, and what you do.

So living in the Communist states of New York or California, fixes your Magazine capacity! Hence Florida for ever.

The Glock 19 I carry, and use in IDPA competition, not much competition of late.
Has 16 rounds ready to go, and a G17 magazine, as a spare, or in the case of a malfunction.

Up to now, I have not had a stoppage with my Glock 19.

As a retired person, I can carry all the time, only do not, when visiting the Sheriffs Dept. as a Volunteer.

When dragged into a fight, with guns, that has not happened to me, but has others. I never heard any one say, "Oh these extra rounds are too heavy, I think I will leave the magazine just half full?"

Have any of my fellow free Citizen's felt this way?

I've tried it. Downloading my G23 to 7+1 like my 1911's to save weight. Not really a big difference,but I didn't feel less prepared either. Most of the time, I feel that a single 1911 gives me a decent advantage in the senerios I'm most likely to get stuck with.

If I can't get the job done with 8 rounds and need to reload......then I figure I'm about to die. But in an "urban senerio", I do prefer to carry my G23 (14rds) with a 15 rnd reload over my 1911's (8+10).

el Godfather
November 30, 2013, 04:24 PM
Why compromise and be stubborn against technological improvements that gives us better capacity than pistol decades back. I chose 12+ because its where most calibers can be found in modern platforms.

saturdaynightpolitics
November 30, 2013, 04:25 PM
Like most things it's subjective. It's been said before 'If you knew your were gonna be in a fight you'd bring a rifle {or a tank, or an M61 Vulcan, or the best option:avoid the fight all together}, not a handgun'.

Truth be told, I find myself carrying small 5 shot revolvers more than my autos, they work better for me and I have been training with them more lately, so the capacity argument is lost on me!

But that being said, I have never felt in-adequatley prepared whether armed with my 5 shot LCR or my 7+1 PF9, even when my work takes me to some of the highest crime rate areas in the city.

dondavis3
November 30, 2013, 04:35 PM
The more the better for me.

But I carry a M&P .45 compact that has 6 + 1 and when I do I just carry a second mag.

:cool:

ExTank
November 30, 2013, 08:53 PM
Neat poll, and not shaking out how I would have expected (live and learn!).

I worry a bit, though, about some anti-gun group citing this poll and saying, "See? Even the vast majority of gun owners are okay with with 7-round magazine limits!!!" :banghead:

el Godfather
December 1, 2013, 08:51 AM
Neat poll, and not shaking out how I would have expected (live and learn!).

I worry a bit, though, about some anti-gun group citing this poll and saying, "See? Even the vast majority of gun owners are okay with with 7-round magazine limits!!!" :banghead:
:) one more reason for 12+. I learn something new everyday as well.


On serious note this is not a scientific poll that any anti or pro can rely on.

ExTank
December 1, 2013, 10:32 AM
On serious note this is not a scientific poll that any anti or pro can rely on.


:rolleyes: Since when as that stopped any of them?

Whoops! Hit submit too soon. Just editied to say I'm real surrised 6+1 is such a strong leader. I voted 15+ myself. Not that I'd reject any pistol that doesn't have that much capacity; I have 2 1911's and a 40 that holds 12+1, and a .22 that holds 10, and I like shooting them all

Hometeached1
December 1, 2013, 11:48 AM
This is the least amount of rounds I will carry! Just kidding:neener:, but would not mind having one if I need to fight with a pistol.

RetiredUSNChief
December 2, 2013, 05:29 AM
You didn't answer it.

Do you carry your Colt 1991A1 primarily because it has a capacity you trust, or is there a more significant reason? And if there is a more significant reason, which seems very likely, what is your minimally acceptable capacity?

I did answer it.

The OP asked "What do you all think about the minimum desired capacity of semi auto? Before selecting a gun for a self defense, do you have any minimum capacity requirement?"

My answer was: "Sure I have a minimum capacity...7. Because that's the magazine capacity of my Colt 1991A1, the smallest capacity sidearm I own."


My minimum desired capacity is based on the smallest capacity gun I own. If I didn't own that gun, then the next smallest capacity would be 9, and if I didn't own that one, then it would be 15.


I carry my Colt because, out of the three handguns I currently own, that one has the best combination of concealability and capability. My Beretta, though superior in magazine capacity, is not as concealable, nor is the safety as ideally situated as it is on my Colt. My Automag II, though a fine handgun and slim enough to be easily carried concealed, would not be my first choice in defense calibers as a .22 WMR, as compared to my .45 or 9mm.


If I should, in the future, add another handgun to my collection which would significantly alter my choices for concealed carry, then perhaps I'll change. But that's for a future discussion.

:)

Mike1234567
December 2, 2013, 10:41 AM
So, for some of us, our vote has more to do with which firearms we already own rather than what we believe about minimum capacity? And if we owned a two-shot Derringer our vote for minimum capacity would be two? :)

fastbolt
December 2, 2013, 04:12 PM
So, for some of us, our vote has more to do with which firearms we already own rather than what we believe about minimum capacity? And if we owned a two-shot Derringer our vote for minimum capacity would be two? :)
Interesting observation.

In my case, I only buy revolvers and pistols which have "standard" capacities which I find acceptable for their intended roles (which has typically been as either off-duty or retirement CCW weapons).

This means I accept the inherent 5 & 6-rd revolver capacities ... and the 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 & 12-rd pistol magazine capacities ... as acceptable for the various roles for which I bought them.

If I were still active full-time, I'd carry the same 7+1 rd compact .45 I was carrying at the time of my retirement ... or, I'd not be averse to again carrying a 6-shot medium frame revolver. I could see a little advantage to carrying one of the large frame Scandium aluminum 8-shot revolvers, though. Lighter on the hip, and the extra couple of rounds puts it up in the same "capacity range" as the 7+1 .45 pistol. ;)

I really liked the issued 6906's I carried for several years, though, and their 12+1 capacity made it easier to run through the longer qual courses-of-fire without reloading.

All of that said, while I'm presently driving/traveling out-of-state, I brought one of my 5-shot J's and my LCP as LEOSA weapons (the LCP for those times when it slips into a pocket holster in some jeans better than the J-frame). I remember the days when I used to carry my 3913 (8+1), or a G26 or G27 during my out-of-state driving trips.

Jim NE
December 2, 2013, 11:55 PM
6, 7 or 8 round semi-autos have less appeal to me because they are in revolver territory. They do have the advantage in that they load quicker, but that's negated by drop dead reliability of a good quality revo.

I do own some semi-auto's with that capacity, but for specific reasons, which are:

Ruger LCP - smallest viable defense handgun out there (or one of them)
Ruger P345 - 8 rounds is adequate for .45acp, or so say the 1911 guys
Hi Point .380 - $139 for a brand new reliable semi-auto is too amazing to pass up!

Beyond those, 10 rounds is kind of my minimum. But giant 20 round guns aren't practical for me, either.

CleanHarry
December 3, 2013, 09:17 PM
"That would be 1" ~ Barney Fife

Hunter2011
December 3, 2013, 11:31 PM
I like to get as high capacity as possible. It does not hurt to have more rounds than you will need. You never know what could happen.
But if you want a small compact single stack pistol that is easy to carry, unfortunately you are limited to very few rounds.
I sold my Vektor CP1 that could hold 13 rounds and bought a Taurus PT709 that can hold only 7 rounds. I did not do that because I don't want a high capacity pistol, but only because I wanted a more compact pistol that prints less etc while carrying it. I bought it to shoot at a shooting range mainly, but do want to carry it on me while going to the range etc, as grab thieves can easily take the pistol in its case out of your hands.

I believe you should buy whatever is your needs. Here in South Africa on farms, they come in packs of 5-6 or more. Then my PT709 will not be good enough. You need a high capacity pistol on a farm. Something like a G17 with a happy stick.
But I myself, I live in a complex. 99% of the time there are there no more than 2 bad guys at a time. And they go for soft targets. The moment you shoot back at them, ie you are making noise, they fled as fast as they can. They don't stay around and shoot. So then you don't need high capacity really.
It all depends on your own needs and where you go and where you live.
I am still going to buy a Glock G34 next year with lots more capacity than the Taurus but I don't feel that I need it. I am only going to buy it for sport shooting and I am not going to use it for SD. But I'm sure if ever there are intruders in my house, I will rather grab the G34 than the PT709. But I don't feel unarmed with only 7 rounds of 9mm.

Warp
December 3, 2013, 11:46 PM
I voted 10+1. However, on rare occasion I carry a 5 shot snub nose .38spl+P, you know, when I can't effectively carry a real gun. And round count is round count, regardless of whether it is a pistol or revolving pistol.

Nite Ryder
December 4, 2013, 12:18 AM
Presently I'm carrying a 386PD S&W revolver with a 2.5" barrel, and seven rounds in the cylinder, I have two speed loaders for this gun also. My reason for carrying this particular gun is it's extreme light weight and my ability to shoot it well off hand out to 50 yards. In the past I carried a Kimber Ultra Carry which had a single stack magazine and depending on which magazine I used held either 6, 7 or 8 rounds. I always carried two extra magazines with me. I had a double stack Para Ordnance that held 14 rounds, and also a commander sized Para that held 12 rounds in the mag, I never did carry either of those two guns. Presently I have a Rock Island 1911 that holds 17 rounds of either 9 MM or 22 TCM, I don't consider either of these two calibers to be a good self defense round. I have a Glock model 30 and also a model 20, they both hold quite a few rounds in the magazine, but I'm happy with my choice of a revolver that holds 7 rounds. I know this gun will go bang every time I pull the trigger. I would rather depend on my own ability to use a handgun effectively than depend on a high magazine capacity to get me by.

savanahsdad
December 10, 2013, 02:50 AM
Neat poll, and not shaking out how I would have expected (live and learn!).

I worry a bit, though, about some anti-gun group citing this poll and saying, "See? Even the vast majority of gun owners are okay with with 7-round magazine limits!!!" :banghead:
well the poll did ask for your minimum , now if the poll asked for you max , I think most of us would have said 15 , 20, or 50 , just because we can ,

Warp
December 10, 2013, 09:31 AM
Poll. ;)

RetiredUSNChief
December 10, 2013, 11:12 AM
Poll. ;)

Unless, of course, the OP is a Pole posting the poll...

(I know...bad Chief...bad Chief...)

;)

benEzra
December 10, 2013, 11:27 AM
I'm not sure how to answer, because home defense and very-discreet CCW are vastly different niches, and a very small CCW pistol that throws away decent capacity in exchange for concealability and portability will definitely be less than ideal in the HD role.

For me personally, my EDC is a slim S&W 3913LS with a capacity of 8+1, but at home or any other time concealment is not the primary requirement then the 3913 will be in the safe and the S&W 5906 (17+1 or 20+1) will be out. So while I might put up with a minuscule capacity in a certain limited niche (discreet CCW of a small pistol), a full-size 9mm with a capacity that small would be unacceptable to me.

WYO
December 10, 2013, 11:44 AM
I couldn't play because the poll did not go low enough to accommodate the Springfield XDs .45 standard capacity magazine.

savanahsdad
December 10, 2013, 01:00 PM
poll

Deaf Smith
December 10, 2013, 01:27 PM
Dear THR:
What do you all think about the minimum desired capacity of semi auto? Before selecting a gun for a self defense, do you have any minimum capacity requirement?

One.

Deaf

Walt Sherrill
December 10, 2013, 01:35 PM
The vast majority of self-defense related confrontations I've read about -- confrontations that result in the use of lethal force, seldom take more than 3 rounds. But what about the rest of those confrontations -- when 3 wasn't enough? I'm not to plan for the best case...

I carry the guns I shoot best that are easily carried. When that includes a Kahr CM9 or a Kel-tec PF9 I always carry an extra mag... and hope I never have to use it. I have also carried a Glock 23, and a SIG 228. If often carry an extra mag for those guns, too. (With the SIG and Glock, the extra mags are more in anticipation of malfunctions, than concern about running out of ammo.)

mavracer
December 10, 2013, 01:37 PM
X+5 where X= the number of rounds expended in the gunfight.

km101
December 10, 2013, 09:27 PM
Since most gunfights are at 3 ft or less, in 3 seconds or less and fire 3 shots or less, I will have to go with 6 + 1.

You don't need 15 round magazines if the first 2 shots do the job. Practice shot placement rather than depending on magazine capacity.

If you need more than 7 rounds, you have pissed off way too many people. Or you are some place that you should not be to begin with!

Warp
December 10, 2013, 09:36 PM
Since most gunfights are at 3 ft or less, in 3 seconds or less and fire 3 shots or less, I will have to go with 6 + 1.

You don't need 15 round magazines if the first 2 shots do the job. Practice shot placement rather than depending on magazine capacity.

If you need more than 7 rounds, you have pissed off way too many people. Or you are some place that you should not be to begin with!

On average only 18-20% of handgun rounds fired defensively by private citizens or LEO's strike their target.

Handguns are weak and ineffective as a general rule.

The world is not perfect, it is impossible for every person to always avoid being somewhere they shouldn't...or avoid the place they shouldn't be coming to them.

The fact that you have addition rounds does not mean you are depending on them in place of shot placement.

Mike1234567
December 10, 2013, 09:40 PM
Since most gunfights are at 3 ft or less, in 3 seconds or less and fire 3 shots or less, I will have to go with 6 + 1.

You don't need 15 round magazines if the first 2 shots do the job. Practice shot placement rather than depending on magazine capacity.

If you need more than 7 rounds, you have pissed off way too many people. Or you are some place that you should not be to begin with!

"Most" isn't "all".

mavracer
December 10, 2013, 09:49 PM
You know by definition if you prepare for the average gunfight half of the time it won't be enough.

Warp
December 10, 2013, 09:58 PM
You know by definition if you prepare for the average gunfight half of the time it won't be enough.

Pretty much.

Well, not technically. Distribution curve and outliers and what not could mean that being prepared for the average means you are prepared for 70%. Or 30%. More info would be needed.

Old Guy
December 11, 2013, 06:34 AM
The one thing that governs what you carry, for CCW, is the package, does it fit you, in your normal dress. In my case, a Gen4 Glock 19, with a G17 spare mag. Plus the not often talked about, my LED Surefire light.

The chance of needing more than 3 rounds, is about even with needing more than 3 rounds, hence, 16 is my choice.

Mike1234567
December 11, 2013, 11:06 AM
My answer of "more" was for home defense. For concealed carry (after I get my license) it'll be "at least 6" because, for concealment and comfort, I like very small/thin 9mm pistols like the Ruger LC9.

benEzra
December 12, 2013, 09:47 AM
Since most gunfights are at 3 ft or less, in 3 seconds or less and fire 3 shots or less, I will have to go with 6 + 1.

You don't need 15 round magazines if the first 2 shots do the job. Practice shot placement rather than depending on magazine capacity.

If you need more than 7 rounds, you have pissed off way too many people. Or you are some place that you should not be to begin with!
The NYPD SOP-9 data showed that at least one in ten gunfights required more than 7 rounds to stop the threat, and the average number of rounds fired per confrontation was 10.3.

And unless you habitually sleep fully dressed or wearing a mag carrier, firing 7 rounds out of a 7 shot pistol leaves you unarmed at a very, very bad time.

The point of a 17- or 20-round magazine isn't being able to shoot an assailant 17-20 times, or to shoot without aiming; the point is reserve capacity. To use a mundane analogy, if it takes me 7 gallons of gas to make a trip, I'm going to put more than 7 gallons in the car rather than try to figure it so the car runs out of gas in the driveway of my destination. Having 15 gallons in the tank doesn't mean I have to waste gas to burn all 15 gallons; it just means I'll probably arrive at the destination with 8 gallons unburned in the tank, and there's no real downside of that. It also means that unlikely contingencies such as bad weather, traffic, and detours don't leave me and my loved ones in a bad place.

Mike1234567
December 12, 2013, 03:29 PM
^^^ I like the travel/gasoline analogy. What about having six months supply of food to get you through a rough winter in those areas that are inaccessible for four winter months?

Vern Humphrey
December 12, 2013, 03:58 PM
The point is well taken -- as Jeff Cooper said, "There is such thing as enough ammunition. There is such a thing as not enough ammunition. There is no such thing as too much ammunition."

RetiredUSNChief
December 12, 2013, 06:40 PM
The NYPD SOP-9 data showed that at least one in ten gunfights required more than 7 rounds to stop the threat, and the average number of rounds fired per confrontation was 10.3.

Fascinating...

So the NYPD SPO-9 data shows that at least 10% of gunfights required more than 7 rounds to stop the threat, with an average number being fired to be greater than 10...

Yet the NY law only allows private citizens to own 10 round magazines which may only legally be loaded to 7 rounds.

Things that make you say "Hmmmm..."

:scrutiny:

Vern Humphrey
December 12, 2013, 06:42 PM
The mayor and power structure of New York City does not give a big rat's bazoo about the average citizen. They are mere serfs to be taxed and regulated as the elite choose -- how dare they think they have any rights!

Old Guy
December 13, 2013, 03:43 PM
Hence they have a Police Squad each to look after them.

The Constitution of these United States, is made by the People, for the People. And for the last two years I have Been a Citizen, still armed before then, Green Card gave me that privilege, now as a Citizen, it is my Right!

Ever since I started teaching, in 1980, researching actual shootings, gun fights, murders, what ever, have been my interests, two of my Security Officers (in Canada) have shot people, doing just what I taught them to do.

No they did not go to Jail, one was charged, his attacker only had a broken Pint Beer Glass (Too bad) not convicted.

One thing I can not see any were, any time, is any kind of evidence that points to having less rounds is good!

Also no question of any pistol caliber being a magic formula! The ballisticians in S&W/Hornady, etc. have seen to that.

First, what you shoot/hit, is more important than what you shoot it with.

When you shoot an other human being, the only way to stop the activity that PSSSSS you off in the first place, destroy the Central nervous system, brain stem, top couple of inches of the spine.

Or a little longer way, bleed out. A shot that destroys the heart, can have 15 seconds or so, of total mobility, still enjoyed by the B.G.

Think like a Boxer, he does not punch once, then wait around to see how that went!

Same with shooting, keep shooting!

The nice Police Man is not your Priest, or your friend, do not say to much!

You hear all these recordings on the TV, 911 calls? I did this, I did that? NO!

One of, if not the most important phone calls of your life. Speak to an experienced Criminal Lawyer, at any experience you get. Read the books.

Soon be Christmas, what a lovely time.

Health and Happiness to all.

Rexster
December 13, 2013, 07:23 PM
Well, you forgot "7+1" as a poll choice. ;)

I do not worry excessively about mag capacity. I do not feel less comfortable when out and about with a 1911 pistol, with its single-column magazines, than with a G17, with its large-capacity mag. In either case, I carry spare mags in quantity to fit the environment, and a second gun is normal, too.

At home, when I may not be dressed for a gun battle, I do appreciate the double-column mag in the G17. Again, it is not a particular number of rounds that I have in mind, as much as the ability to continue the fight for a longer period of time when I may not be wearing a carry rig. My original reason for acquiring the G17 was for "orthopedic" reasons, not magazine capacity. (My right wrist is not aging well; the Glock has light recoil, and is a better lefty gun for me.)

Hokkmike
December 14, 2013, 08:32 AM
I agree with decoy562.

420Stainless
December 14, 2013, 01:02 PM
Can't vote. Mine is 5 + 1.

If you enjoyed reading about "How many rounds minimum are borderline sufficient in your semi auto pistol?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!