Number of rounds used in defense going up?

[Tcruse]

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.

Well, racking the slide is actually a onetime effort prior to holstering the firearm and not necessary again until time to clean your firearm, so not a requirement but certainly desirable ability. (Especially with guns like the S&W Shield EZ) In my experience, the effort to smoothly pull the long heavy trigger (or cock the hammer) found on most revolvers is more of an issue for elderly.

 

[The_Quartermaster]

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.

lol, so not true and typically said from a semiauto or die shooter who doesn't understand what he's talking about. There's a reason so many have clung to their revolvers and definitely not for it's capacity either.

Here is one sampled instance from a semiauto primarily shooter: The GP100 was my first revolver, and it was easily my most laser like shooter. I was easily hitting plates at 100 with just irons and not missing. I couldn't say the same with latest and greatest or old and venerable.

 

[Tcruse]

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.

OK, that may be true at the Memphis range you refer to. So, are you saying that the 10% that can actually shoot in Memphis all have autos? Now, actually binging an "old guy" it would be hard to not be on the "old guy" team, but age really does not have much to do with ability to defend yourself or other innocents. Other factors like experience, training, practice, right mindset and having the right tools matter more.

 

[The_Quartermaster]

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.

​

Decaf, we are not cops either. Well I am not at least and know my lane. Force protection as a civilian is not offensive and is more retrograde without clearing by fire and not mag dumping suppression either.

Have a plan. Train for it and other contingencies. No one in here has mentioned a word about primary and weak hand only drills if one of the arms becomes incapacitated. No one has mentioned lifesaver skills. Yet every loudmouth trying to force and superimpose their way or the highway crap has not mentioned anything else of pertinence other than uselessly trying to extrapolate muh capacities; which tells me all I need to know that they should not be listened to.

 

[The_Quartermaster]

Well, racking the slide is actually a onetime effort prior to holstering the firearm and not necessary again until time to clean your firearm, so not a requirement but certainly desirable ability. (Especially with guns like the S&W Shield EZ) In my experience, the effort to smoothly pull the long heavy trigger (or cock the hammer) found on most revolvers is more of an issue for elderly.

Until there's a malfunction, and you just set them up for failure. Being able to manipulate the slide yourself and without fixed objects is the goal here.

 

[The_Quartermaster]

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?

This is just a fallacy argument counter. have you ever done timed drills where you have to do shots to each? Are you confident that you could John Wick your way through before at least one of them got to you first?

His argument is not wrong and he has a point.

 

[The_Quartermaster]

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)

If it's the user then if they cannot shoot one accurately then they will not be able to shoot the other accurately either. Fundamentals don't change.

 

[jar]

If it's the user then if they cannot shoot one accurately then they will not be able to shoot the other accurately either. Fundamentals don't change.

But lots of rounds lets you shoot lots of rounds and who knows, maybe one will be accurate.

Go to any range. Look at the walls, floors, ceilings, target carriers. Know fear.

 

[trackskippy]

lol, so not true and typically said from a semiauto or die shooter who doesn't understand what he's talking about. There's a reason so many have clung to their revolvers and definitely not for it's capacity either.

Here is one sampled instance from a semiauto primarily shooter: The GP100 was my first revolver, and it was easily my most laser like shooter. I was easily hitting plates at 100 with just irons and not missing. I couldn't say the same with latest and greatest or old and venerable.

They are clinging for some reason, what that is sounds more like nostalgia and lack of experience with other things, than anything else.

Your sampled instance can easily go either way. Whatever the shooter is accustomed to shooting, is likely going to be "the choice". Then again, some shoot both equally well, so what then?

If it's the user then if they cannot shoot one accurately then they will not be able to shoot the other accurately either. Fundamentals don't change.

Fundamentals dont change, for the most part, but the handling of different weapons certainly can and do.

Most auto shooters dont usually do well with DA revolvers, especially if they are not familiar with shooting one, and shooting them as they are meant to be shot.

You just got done a post or two back telling us some guy with a GP100 could consistently hit a target at 100 yards with it, but couldnt say the same with the latest and greatest or old and venerable. Now youre telling us if you cant hit with one you cant hit with the other. Which is it?

 

[Kleanbore]

Force protection as a civilian is not offensive

Same for law enforcement.

...without clearing by fire and not mag dumping suppression either.

Applies to law enforcement.

If it's the user then if they cannot shoot one accurately then they will not be able to shoot the other accurately either. Fundamentals don't change.

The fundamentals do not change, but many people find the double action trigger pull of many revolvers makes it more difficult for many shooters to hit the target area repeatedly with sufficient rapidity of fire.

 

[trackskippy]

But lots of rounds lets you shoot lots of rounds and who knows, maybe one will be accurate.

Go to any range. Look at the walls, floors, ceilings, target carriers. Know fear.

LOL, Well, shooting in practice under those conditions does help you handle shooting under stress.

 

[The_Quartermaster]

But lots of rounds lets you shoot lots of rounds and who knows, maybe one will be accurate.

Go to any range. Look at the walls, floors, ceilings, target carriers. Know fear.

We do have an exceedingly high amount of clueless persons, which is why seasoned folks always recommend training. One or the other isn't going to be easier than the other if they don't know the starting fundamentals and at least the four rules of gun safety.

 

[The_Quartermaster]

Same for law enforcement.
Applies to law enforcement.
The fundamentals do not change, but many people find the double action trigger pull of many revolvers makes it more difficult for many shooters to hit the target area repeatedly with sufficient rapidity of fire.

Redundant replies for both one and two. I was speaking to another veteran in a language that the other veteran would understand.

Ya, I don't know many who use the DA on either semi's or revolvers either so your argument is with those who do like them, making my argument unchanged still.

 

[WYO]

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.

Critical thinking skills are important. But, without a combination of knowledge, training and experience to complement them, they are applied in a vacuum and, therefore, great to have but not optimal. Your posts sound binary in nature, such that if you have or do one thing you can’t have or do the others. (You either have critical thinking skills or compensate for the lack thereof with “circumstantial training” and capacity.) You can have it all. In addition, ascribing characteristics, motives and/or intent merely because people you haven’t met possess a certain type of firearm or act in a certain way is not critical thinking. It is making assumptions that could turn out to be untrue.

I didn’t watch the videos, but I did read your summaries of them. There are a lot of assumptions. You can “guarantee” that a man would not be as aggressive against another man than against a woman. You know that attackers will go after a man armed with “only” a revolver but immediately flee if the victim pretended to be going for something else. Only police (and, apparently, shopkeepers) need high-capacity firearms because they get to go on the offensive while non-police should only be on the defensive, notwithstanding that the legal standard for self-defense is the same for everyone. Finally, the implication that you should fire a gun just because you drew it is a good way to get in trouble. The determination of whether firing a firearm at another is legal is judged at the time you pull the trigger, not when you pull the firearm. (OTOH, if you wait until it’s time to pull the trigger before pulling the gun, you are behind the curve, which is the antithesis of critical thinking.)

I do commend you on your ability to count everyone’s rounds in a gunfight, because that is the farthest thing from the minds of the gunfight survivors I have known. I also have never heard anyone say “I wasn’t worried because s/he only had a ____ firearm.” In fact, most non-police who have a gun pointed at them will tend to describe the gun as a big one, even if it was not a large firearm.

Circling back to the topic, I do not perceive that the number of rounds fired in self-defense is on the increase. CCW laws appear to have resulted in many becoming more aware of legal ramifications. The police certainly are, notwithstanding the higher capacity of their firearms.

 

[WYO]

Wow, while I was typing my last reply I see a lot of assumptions being posted by many! As far as I have seen, both good and bad shooting is not limited to particular demographics or firearm type.

 

[AJC1]

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.

Beyond the scope of this particular thread but the same group of people get turned away in large numbers for coming to the range to practice with no sights on their AR pistols and rifles. My range let's me observe the skill and preparation of any foe I may encounter... #Memphis

 

[Kleanbore]

Redundant replies for both one and two.

Replies to different questions.

I was speaking to another veteran in a language that the other veteran would understand.

Not helpful.

Ya, I don't know many who use the DA on either semi's or revolvers either

For a number of reasons discussed attlength here in the past and in the literature and espoused by trainers, attorneys, and during revolver days, by law enforcement, persons who carry revolvers for self defense should shoot double action, except under very limited circumstances.

 

[AJC1]

LOL, Well, shooting in practice under those conditions does help you handle shooting under stress.

I will say that I get to practice often with 8" sbrs on either lane next to me. I can't lie it does effect my score but probably the most realistic non engagement stress one can practice in.

 

[AJC1]

Wow, while I was typing my last reply I see a lot of assumptions being posted by many! As far as I have seen, both good and bad shooting is not limited to particular demographics or firearm type.

Skill with a pistol is limited to those that practice. No other factor is as meaningful.

 

[trackskippy]

Ya, I don't know many who use the DA on either semi's or revolvers either so your argument is with those who do like them, making my argument unchanged still.

If you were going to carry a DA gun, auto or revolver, why wouldnt you know how to shoot it properly? And if you cant, you know whos fault that is.

Beyond the scope of this particular thread but the same group of people get turned away in large numbers for coming to the range to practice with no sights on their AR pistols and rifles. My range let's me observe the skill and preparation of any foe I may encounter... #Memphis

I guess Im lucky I dont shoot there then. I shoot a couple of my AR's without using the sights all the time, and do quite well shooting that way too I might add.

I think a lot of the problem here is, a lot of people just dont do much beyond basic shooting when they do shoot, and anything they dont do, must not be possible oor plauseable.

And there in lies the rub. If you dont work at pushing yourself in practice and doing things that are out of your comfort zone, you just limit yourself to what you might do..... that and "hope".

Skill with a pistol is limited to those that practice. No other factor is as meaningful.

Ill agree with that.

 

[The_Quartermaster]

Replies to different questions.
Not helpful.
For a number of reasons discussed attlength here in the past and in the literature and espoused by trainers, attorneys, and during revolver days, by law enforcement, persons who carry revolvers for self defense should shoot double action, except under very limited circumstances.

Still redundant and doesn't change then status quo between us further still.

I agree, you were certainly not being helpful.

I really don't care what law enforcement does, not my lane and not my job to emulate like they do.

 

[trackskippy]

Once the shooting starts, whats the difference?

 

[Kleanbore]

Still redundant

Nope. Two different things. The latter is more important: "suppressive fire" by "mag dumping" is a military tactic, unlawful. for civilians and LEO.

and doesn't change then status quo between us further still.

What?

I really don't care what law enforcement does, not my lane and not my job to emulate like they do

We may not be paid to enforce the law, and we may not not have a sworn duty to do so, but those of us who carry for defense are limited by the same constraints regarding the use of deadly force objectives as LEO: defending ourselves and third parties when immediately necessary, using the minimum force required.

Law enforcement went to DA-only revolvers because of civil liability, (that's also ) the reason for the pull weight specifications for semi-auto service pistols). That is one reason why many civilians have done the same thing. My defensive revolvers have concealed or bobbed hammers, for good reasons. One reason is to prevent plaintiffs from being able to assert that a shooting resulted from a single-action trigger pull. The other, which is peculiar to concealed carry, is to eliminate the possibility of snagging.

 

[AJC1]

Once the shooting starts, whats the difference?

I think the real discussion is trained vs untrained and how beneficial is extra rounds when untrained. This is obviously three levels removed if you can't avoid conflict then your presentation of a deadly weapon and then escalating past the first shot and then how many shots till empty. Are we debating a situation really requiring a full tactical loadout...

 

[trackskippy]

I think the real discussion is trained vs untrained and how beneficial is extra rounds when untrained. This is obviously three levels removed if you can't avoid conflict then your presentation of a deadly weapon and then escalating past the first shot and then how many shots till empty. Are we debating a situation really requiring a full tactical loadout...

Regardless of skill, experience, or whatever, how many rounds does "any" encounter take?

The question will be answered at the end of the quiz. The real question is, were you prepared for the quiz.