Number of rounds used in defense going up?

[The_Quartermaster]

In years past 1 assailant would attack you, 6 shots were likely sufficient. Lately in Chicago, a car will pull up and 3-4 “youths” will jump out and attempt to rob/carjack you. 10 rounds is now the new minimum, 12 to 15 is better. They adapted to us, we must adapt to them.

I don't live over there, however you adapt to where you are. I'm good over here but you're not over there, see the difference?

 

[StrykerByte.45]

High capacity is only desired by those who lack the confidence in their own shooting skills and reinforced by a lack of hand fighting and critical thinking skills. They will be in the same crowd as those who will draw a firearm with questionable reasoning.
By all means, it is everyones right to defend themselves as they see fit. They should also be prepared to defend themselves in court.
It is your choice to carry what you wish. Smaller caliber/higher capacity or larger caliber/lower capacity or a balance in between, all according to the confidence in your own ability to fight with or without firearm. By this, I mean that a smaller and less capable person such as a woman or elderly benefit from high capacity, while larger or men more capable of hand to hand fighting can benefit from a larger caliber with less shots fired.
Lets not forget the cowardly and trigger happy, they will love their higher capacities. They will have their day in court.
All of the actions of others are meaningless, for you dont know their circumstances nor their taste for blood.
The way you defend yourself will be judged, not just by men, but by GOD as well.

 

[CDW4ME]

High capacity is only desired by those who lack the confidence in their own shooting skills and reinforced by a lack of hand fighting and critical thinking skills. They will be in the same crowd as those who will draw a firearm with questionable reasoning.

Here are six examples where 5-6 hits were insufficient to quickly incapacitate a single attacker.
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/do-examples-incidents-matter-to-you.902897/
Who is pulling the trigger doesn't matter to me, the take away is there are people that can take multiple hits and not be incapacitated.
Me carrying a Glock with 16-18 rounds in it does not equal me lacking confidence.
In 1992 I was hired as a cop; I was already "into" shooting. A guy that was already a cop use to work at a gun store and I knew him from there. He carried a revolver had a "Top Gun" lapel pin; I said in complete seriousness and confidence, "You know I'm going to win that", which I did with a Glock 17 and did again the next year with a Glock 21.
30 years later I can still keep double taps on a 6 inch circle at 10 yards consistently, with .25 - .33 splits. Lack confidence, I do not.
And in 27 years of civilian concealed carry I've never drawn my handgun.

 

[trackskippy]

In years past 1 assailant would attack you, 6 shots were likely sufficient. Lately in Chicago, a car will pull up and 3-4 “youths” will jump out and attempt to rob/carjack you. 10 rounds is now the new minimum, 12 to 15 is better. They adapted to us, we must adapt to them.

Some people just dont get the continuing education thing. Yet, even in their ignorance, they are somehow right on top of things, anywhere they might go, and with whatever they might carry. Ignorance is bliss I guess.

I don't live over there, however you adapt to where you are. I'm good over here but you're not over there, see the difference?

The whole point is, be good "everywhere, and with "anything" you might encounter, to the best of your abilities, not just what you condition yourself to deal with, in you're little part of the world. If you never leave your house or yard, and never practice beyond what you're comfortable with, and only always do, you just limit yourself to that. Versatility is a good thing, not a detriment.

But youre right, you do you, I'll do me, and whatever it is you might get, is what you get. Hopefully, its nothing at all.

The whole point here is, to be prepared for what ever it is you might get, not only what you think you might get. There is no way of ever knowing that, and no matter where you are.

High capacity is only desired by those who lack the confidence in their own shooting skills and reinforced by a lack of hand fighting and critical thinking skills. They will be in the same crowd as those who will draw a firearm with questionable reasoning.
By all means, it is everyones right to defend themselves as they see fit. They should also be prepared to defend themselves in court.
It is your choice to carry what you wish. Smaller caliber/higher capacity or larger caliber/lower capacity or a balance in between, all according to the confidence in your own ability to fight with or without firearm. By this, I mean that a smaller and less capable person such as a woman or elderly benefit from high capacity, while larger or men more capable of hand to hand fighting can benefit from a larger caliber with less shots fired.
Lets not forget the cowardly and trigger happy, they will love their higher capacities. They will have their day in court.
All of the actions of others are meaningless, for you dont know their circumstances nor their taste for blood.
The way you defend yourself will be judged, not just by men, but by GOD as well.

I have a pretty high confidence in the way I shoot, and I work hard to continually improve and maintain that. And because of that, Im now carrying a high cap gun, because of what Ive learned actually shooting in regular training and practice.

Its been a couple of decades now since I quit carrying a lower cap gun too, so this isnt something new. It didnt take me any time at all either, to see the benefits of added capacity, especially when you expand/increase the difficulty of the problem, and even by just a little bit.

And I fully agree with having some hand to hand skills, which probably 99% of people really dont, but this is a "package deal", and that is part of the package. So Im assuming here that youre keeping yourself fit and up to being able to physically deal with some basic things? Just keeping fit is a major benefit and in all directions too. Shooting is a physical thing, and the more fit you are, the better off you will be there too.

I dont know about you though, but personally, especially these days, Id prefer to have the extra ammo in the gun, than to find out I didnt have enough, and now have to go hand to hand with someone, or worse, a group of someones, because things took a little more than Id conditioned myself too expect and plan for and now Im in a spot.

What makes you think a "larger" caliber will require less rounds fired? All the major service handgun calibers perform to the same basic standards, and the main advantage to the smaller calibers is, they are just easier to shoot well with, and give you added capacity in the same size gun.

Why would you choose a caliber that requires more work from you to shoot it well, and forces you to carry a gun of the same basic size or larger, with less rounds? Im not seeing the pluses here.

Court is going to be court, no matter what the capacity of your gun is. If you did the right thing, youll be better off than if you did the wrong thing. Maybe.

 

[Kleanbore]

High capacity is only desired by those who lack the confidence in their own shooting skills and reinforced by a lack of hand fighting and critical thinking skills.

That assertion can be easily disproven.

while larger or men more capable of hand to hand fighting can benefit from a larger caliber with less shots fired.

Why would using a larger caliber result in firing fewer shots?

Lets not forget the cowardly and trigger happy, they will love their higher capacities. They will have their day in court.

Meaningless.

 

[aaaaa]

What does an elderly person who does not have the ability to rack a slide nor the ability for hand-to-hand fighting do? Seems a revolver may be their only choice.

 

[WYO]

High capacity is only desired by those who lack the confidence in their own shooting skills and reinforced by a lack of hand fighting and critical thinking skills. They will be in the same crowd as those who will draw a firearm with questionable reasoning.

What is your authoritative source for those nuggets of wisdom? CNN? Chuck Schumer?

 

[The_Quartermaster]

What does an elderly person who does not have the ability to rack a slide nor the ability for hand-to-hand fighting do? Seems a revolver may be their only choice.

Be told that they should be an operator and then have someone else able bodied doing the racking for them and then leaving you to be set up for failure later should it jam and not a hard object around to try to clear it with.

Everyone who suggests this strongly, should also be willing to pay for classes for the elderly and join them there to get a life lesson in things that sound good, but does not work that way in person.

 

[trackskippy]

What does an elderly person who does not have the ability to rack a slide nor the ability for hand-to-hand fighting do? Seems a revolver may be their only choice.

Find something that they can shoot and work reasonably well and go from there. Nothing wrong with revolvers if that's all you've got, but a DA trigger can be a challenge just like a slide, if you dont have the strength to work it, and aren't willing to work on your muscle tone to address it.

If they are that bad off, they probably arent going to be shooting a whole lot in practice, practicing reloads, etc, so it is what it is. Then again, that isnt an "old" thing altogether either.

 

[spraay]

I haven't noticed a trend that indicates more rounds fired in self-defense scenarios. I carry a 7+1 shot .45 and a 15+1 shot 9mm with equal enthusiasm. If I'm in a self-defense situation that requires a reload I normally have a spare mag.

 

[StrykerByte.45]

View attachment 1112948

Here are six examples where 5-6 hits were insufficient to quickly incapacitate a single attacker.
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/do-examples-incidents-matter-to-you.902897/
Who is pulling the trigger doesn't matter to me, the take away is there are people that can take multiple hits and not be incapacitated.
Me carrying a Glock with 16-18 rounds in it does not equal me lacking confidence.
In 1992 I was hired as a cop; I was already "into" shooting. A guy that was already a cop use to work at a gun store and I knew him from there. He carried a revolver had a "Top Gun" lapel pin; I said in complete seriousness and confidence, "You know I'm going to win that", which I did with a Glock 17 and did again the next year with a Glock 21.
30 years later I can still keep double taps on a 6 inch circle at 10 yards consistently, with .25 - .33 splits. Lack confidence, I do not.
And in 27 years of civilian concealed carry I've never drawn my handgun.

The only example that applies to this conversation is the first video. Being women, they absolutely needed capacity in their firearm. If they were men, I guarantee the assailant would not have been so aggressive. The other reason to a higher capacity needed is that they are running a business, just like one of the other videos with multiple attackers, a revolver as your only firearm is not a good idea in a risky business. Having the revolver, albeit a powerful one, on his person at all times is a good idea, but a backup hi cap should have been what he should have been trying to get to in that situation. Fending off multiple attackers with only a revolver tells the attackers one simple thing, "I have nothing else". He could have at least pretended to be going for something else, the attackers would have fled immediately.
All the other videos are irrelevant because they involve law enforcement. They all should, and did, have hi cap firearms and just goes to prove that caliber matters. Self defenders are not law enforcement, self defenders do not go on the offensive. I can tell you a Walmart story where a courageous man went on the offensive and didnt get a shot off. A woman with a high caliber revolver, 1 shot him single handedly. That man lacked the critical thinking skills.
On the other videos with law enf, the officers showed restraint for one reason or another. That must never be done as a self defender. Once the gun is out you will use it, or suffer the consequences like the man fighting multiple attackers.
I notice no one brought up my argument for critical thinking skills. Drawing up a plan under stress seems to be a quality that is unbelievable, and the unbelievers choose to compensate with circumstantial training and capacity. By circumstantial training I mean running what if drills, usually on inanimate targets, in scenarios that may be likely. But a wise man, and critical thinker knows, nothing ever goes according to plan.
Tactics are for police, and criminals alike. The criminal chooses the time, place, and tactics. The police choose a tactic of response, their numbers and their radio and training are their strongest tools, not the gun.
A self defender has one job, Live and protect those near you. Property is next priority, and the defender must know what value is at stake and arm themselves appropriately.
A wise man, and critical thinker, will know how to make maximum use of their firearm, low or high cap, can count rounds, the other shooters rounds, know when to fight or retreat and also use environmental tactics that no one, NO ONE, could have ever trained for.

 

[StrykerByte.45]

I understand most people believe 9mm is just as good as larger calibers. Many also believe energy is an actual factor in effectiveness. Well, they have their sources to believe. Who are those sources, by the way? Most people are not wise, much less have critical thinking skills. It is so easy for most people to take the word of others, even of those who have questionable integrity. There are those who seek to disarm, or at the very least, under-arm the public, but we should believe the data that they so kindly make public.
Think for yourselves. Its your funeral.
In regards to high capacity, spare mags, backup firearms, simple solution. What you need is a plan, not more ammo. Use what you shoot best and concentrate on a plan.

 

[CDW4ME]

The only example that applies to this conversation is the first video. Being women, they absolutely needed capacity in their firearm. If they were men, I guarantee the assailant would not have been so aggressive. The other reason to a higher capacity needed is that they are running a business, just like one of the other videos with multiple attackers, a revolver as your only firearm is not a good idea in a risky business. Having the revolver, albeit a powerful one, on his person at all times is a good idea, but a backup hi cap should have been what he should have been trying to get to in that situation. Fending off multiple attackers with only a revolver tells the attackers one simple thing, "I have nothing else". He could have at least pretended to be going for something else, the attackers would have fled immediately.

All the other videos are irrelevant because they involve law enforcement. They all should, and did, have hi cap firearms and just goes to prove that caliber matters. Self defenders are not law enforcement, self defenders do not go on the offensive. I can tell you a Walmart story where a courageous man went on the offensive and didnt get a shot off. A woman with a high caliber revolver, 1 shot him single handedly. That man lacked the critical thinking skills.
On the other videos with law enf, the officers showed restraint for one reason or another. That must never be done as a self defender. Once the gun is out you will use it, or suffer the consequences like the man fighting multiple attackers.
I notice no one brought up my argument for critical thinking skills. Drawing up a plan under stress seems to be a quality that is unbelievable, and the unbelievers choose to compensate with circumstantial training and capacity. By circumstantial training I mean running what if drills, usually on inanimate targets, in scenarios that may be likely. But a wise man, and critical thinker knows, nothing ever goes according to plan.
Tactics are for police, and criminals alike. The criminal chooses the time, place, and tactics. The police choose a tactic of response, their numbers and their radio and training are their strongest tools, not the gun.
A self defender has one job, Live and protect those near you. Property is next priority, and the defender must know what value is at stake and arm themselves appropriately.
A wise man, and critical thinker, will know how to make maximum use of their firearm, low or high cap, can count rounds, the other shooters rounds, know when to fight or retreat and also use environmental tactics that no one, NO ONE, could have ever trained for.

That is gold, rarely is there so much in one post.
-sexist: women perceived to need more capacity than men
-business owner perceived to need more capacity
-attackers that are expected to flee
-examples where multiple hits failed to quickly incapacitate deemed irrelevant because they involved LE - as if that could not happen if a civilian was pulling the trigger.

If you believe that stuff is is extremely unlikely that anything I post will change it, IME.

 

[trackskippy]

I understand most people believe 9mm is just as good as larger calibers. Many also believe energy is an actual factor in effectiveness. Well, they have their sources to believe. Who are those sources, by the way? Most people are not wise, much less have critical thinking skills. It is so easy for most people to take the word of others, even of those who have questionable integrity. There are those who seek to disarm, or at the very least, under-arm the public, but we should believe the data that they so kindly make public.
Think for yourselves. Its your funeral.
In regards to high capacity, spare mags, backup firearms, simple solution. What you need is a plan, not more ammo. Use what you shoot best and concentrate on a plan.

I smell a rat!

If you think your .45 is the Sword of Todd, Id suggest you get to looking around at the more recent failures to stop and high round count gun fights with it, and thats with supposedly "trained" individuals, using high cap guns.

Its not the round that wins the fight.

I totally agree about having a plan, and part of that plan should be, regular, realistic and diverse training, with what it is you choose to carry, and from how you carry it.

And by all means, do think for yourself, just dont be narrow minded in your thinking.

 

[Kleanbore]

Being women, they absolutely needed capacity in their firearm. If they were men, I guarantee the assailant would not have been so aggressive.

I can accept that predators might be more likley to attack women, but what would make more injury necessary to stop the attacks?

He could have at least pretended to be going for something else, the attackers would have fled immediately.

How would one "pretend to be going for somehing else", and why would that cause anyone to flee?

All the other videos are irrelevant because they involve law enforcement

How so? LEO's may employ deadly force only to defend themselves and others, same as civilians. They are expected to pursue suspects, and it is helpful to not have a need to reload, but that does not lead to a need to shoot attackers with more rounds.

Once the gun is out you will use it,

Not if conditions change after drawing.

 

[Tcruse]

Every missed shot could be another liability case. Most are not cops with insurance and immunity from most things. I will never spray and pray because that's not how I was trained. Suppressive fire is not the same and your in control. Surviving is important, but so is not serving life in prison. Our current environment has far to many ichy trigger fingers.

Yes, you have a point. However, understand that revolver shooters are typically less accurate than people using modern handguns and that the time required for the first hit is probably the number indicator as to who is alive after the event.

 

[AJC1]

Yes, you have a point. However, understand that revolver shooters are typically less accurate than people using modern handguns and that the time required for the first hit is probably the number indicator as to who is alive after the event.

Revolver being less accurate is a false statement.

 

[Tcruse]

Realistically though, 4 armed thugs does a revolver vs 9mm really matter?

Yes, it matters.
Now, why would someone carry a revolver with 5 shots when they could carry a modern handgun with 10 to 20 rounds and better ammo for the same cost/effort? It is like would you choose to drive a 1970 Pinto as your family car or something else if the cost was the same?

 

[Tcruse]

Revolver being less accurate is a false statement.

Not the firearm but the user. I am sure that if you locked the firearm in a vise the revolver would be in general as accurate as a quality 1911. However, at least on the ranges locally, the individuals that bring revolvers are much less likely to be on target than even the first-time shooters with modern firearms. (There are exceptions, but not the rule)

 

[trackskippy]

Revolver being less accurate is a false statement.

It is, but he said "revolver shooters" are typically less accurate, which I believe in this context, and most cases, is probably correct.

 

[AJC1]

It is, but he said "revolver shooters" are typically less accurate, which I believe in this context, and most cases, is probably correct.

Well less than 10% of people at an actual range in Memphis can shoot. All of them have autos. The old guys have revolvers and if there was a ok corral shootout I'd know which team I'd want to be on.

 

[Tcruse]

One thing I have noticed from watching recent police shooting videos on YouTube is that a cop usually tries NOT to shoot as long as he reasonably can. ...but when he DOES shoot, he empties the gun all at once; they don't often wait to see the effect of the first round.

One example I can't find now is the one where the perp, a tall white guy, whacked out on PCP or something was pulled over by a cop. (chunky white guy) The perp gets agitated at being hassled and picks up a big branch, wielding it at the cop. The cop drew his gun then.* The perp walked toward the cop, wielding the branch. The cop repeated "put it down" and/or "put it down or I'm gonna shoot you." Finally, the cop was backed up to his car, the perp broke the branch on the cop, and the cop emptied his mag into the perp's chest at probably 2-3' range. The perp kept coming until (we guess) his spine was hit and he went down like a sack of potatoes.

If this is the police tactic, then carrying a higher capacity gun means more rounds will be fired. We didn't have YouTube, police car cams or chest cams in the revolver days, so it's hard to know what the tactic was if you weren't a cop. We DO have some retired cops here; maybe they can shed some light on it? Did cops in the 50s-80s empty their cylinders into a perp as soon as they decided they had to shoot?

My grandpa was a cop in the 50s. He said if he had to shoot someone, he would've shot for the legs, if he could. I can't see him emptying his gun into a perp all at once.

* Some might ask: "why not draw a taser or pepper spray against a man armed with a branch?"

OK, the correct question is did firing more rounds result is a faster stop or not? We all know that one well-placed round from even a very small caliber will kill, but the point of defensive firearm use is not to kill but to stop the threat quickly.

 

[LiveLife]

Repost from another thread on same topic of round count for carry -
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...nough-for-defense.912223/page-2#post-12455266

I was a medic in the Army and believe me, people don't get "blown back" like Hollywood movies when they are shot and will keep shooting until they realize they were shot and/or see blood ... Add influence of drugs/sleep deprivation/adrenaline/suicidal and homocidal tendencies and it won't matter that they were shot and bleeding.

These are "real world, real life" videos of actual shootings and how different people react to being shot ... some attackers don't care they are shot and will keep attacking - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/is-six-still-enough-for-defense.912223/#post-12455078

And some care and go "crap, I got shot" and run/fall - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/is-six-still-enough-for-defense.912223/#post-12455090

Mental and emotional responses are powerful in influencing whether attackers stop attacking but usually being shot evokes fight or flight response that triggers release of hormones that can hyper-enhance human body functions until blood pressure drop causes body to slow down ... which is an eternity in a gun fight.

Keep in mind the mentality of attackers in 2022 as what we were taught in the 60s-70s may no longer be applicable in 2022.

This is what older generations saw growing up to think/believe 6 rounds of .357 Mag will do. And how many attackers and robbers now in their 60s and 70s are going to shoot you? Not many

​

And this is what current generations saw growing up to think/believe about shooting ... Yes, you can get shot and still move around and shoot back ... until you bleed out and can't move ... And this is the reality we must factor when considering how to arm ourselves against threats in 2022.

​

 

[The_Quartermaster]

The only example that applies to this conversation is the first video. Being women, they absolutely needed capacity in their firearm. If they were men, I guarantee the assailant would not have been so aggressive. The other reason to a higher capacity needed is that they are running a business, just like one of the other videos with multiple attackers, a revolver as your only firearm is not a good idea in a risky business. Having the revolver, albeit a powerful one, on his person at all times is a good idea, but a backup hi cap should have been what he should have been trying to get to in that situation. Fending off multiple attackers with only a revolver tells the attackers one simple thing, "I have nothing else". He could have at least pretended to be going for something else, the attackers would have fled immediately.
All the other videos are irrelevant because they involve law enforcement. They all should, and did, have hi cap firearms and just goes to prove that caliber matters. Self defenders are not law enforcement, self defenders do not go on the offensive. I can tell you a Walmart story where a courageous man went on the offensive and didnt get a shot off. A woman with a high caliber revolver, 1 shot him single handedly. That man lacked the critical thinking skills.
On the other videos with law enf, the officers showed restraint for one reason or another. That must never be done as a self defender. Once the gun is out you will use it, or suffer the consequences like the man fighting multiple attackers.
I notice no one brought up my argument for critical thinking skills. Drawing up a plan under stress seems to be a quality that is unbelievable, and the unbelievers choose to compensate with circumstantial training and capacity. By circumstantial training I mean running what if drills, usually on inanimate targets, in scenarios that may be likely. But a wise man, and critical thinker knows, nothing ever goes according to plan.
Tactics are for police, and criminals alike. The criminal chooses the time, place, and tactics. The police choose a tactic of response, their numbers and their radio and training are their strongest tools, not the gun.
A self defender has one job, Live and protect those near you. Property is next priority, and the defender must know what value is at stake and arm themselves appropriately.
A wise man, and critical thinker, will know how to make maximum use of their firearm, low or high cap, can count rounds, the other shooters rounds, know when to fight or retreat and also use environmental tactics that no one, NO ONE, could have ever trained for.

^^ nailed it.

 

[trackskippy]

Well less than 10% of people at an actual range in Memphis can shoot. All of them have autos. The old guys have revolvers and if there was a ok corral shootout I'd know which team I'd want to be on.

Its not the guns fault if you cant shoot it, revolver or auto.

I know a lot of "old" guys, I wouldn't trust with an empty gun.

I want to be on the team who takes this seriously and works hard to be at their best.