Is 6 Shots Really Enough?

[joeschmoe]

Originally Posted by PabloJ

The ONLY purpose of sidearm is that one does not have to beg for their life. That is why as private citizen no matter how many rounds you have the only smart thing to do is to run AWAY from sound of gunshots.

You try to outrun bullets while I return fire with a carbine.

[Stress_Test]

Originally Posted by joeschmoe

The purpose of a handgun is to fight your way to your carbine.

I was going to write a long reply to that statement, but the short version is:

I'd say it's one of those oft-repeated statements that sounds good but just isn't reality when you stop and think about it.

I think the original intent of the statement was to emphasize the rifle (or shotgun) superiority to a handgun.

[Armchair Warrior]

BUY A SHOTGUN JUST BUY A SHOTGUN
Guess I need to buy another shotgun. I wouldn't want to be out of lockstep with the VP.

[PabloJ]

Originally Posted by joeschmoe

You try to outrun bullets while I return fire with a carbine.

No.

[joeschmoe]

Originally Posted by Stress_Test

I was going to write a long reply to that statement, but the short version is:

I'd say it's one of those oft-repeated statements that sounds good but just isn't reality when you stop and think about it.

I think the original intent of the statement was to emphasize the rifle (or shotgun) superiority to a handgun.

I disagree. I think it's the opposite. It emphasizes the inherent weakness of the handgun and the need to keep a carbine near by. So I keep a carbine near by because of that motto. A hand gun on me, and a carbine near by.
It answers the question. If six shots is not enough then you should be fighting your way to a carbine. That's the direction I'll be running.

[David E]

Originally Posted by joeschmoe

I disagree. I think it's the opposite. It emphasizes the inherent weakness of the handgun and the need to keep a carbine near by. So I keep a carbine near by because of that motto. A hand gun on me, and a carbine near by.
It answers the question. If six shots is not enough then you should be fighting your way to a carbine. That's the direction I'll be running.

A rifle is better than a handgun. It has more range, power and accuracy. But it lacks convenience whereas the handgun does not.

I, too, have become jaded when I read the "purpose of a handgun is to fight your way to your long gun," schtick as it's just silly in most circumstances.

If I am faced with an immediate threat that requires deadly force, THAT is my focus, not trying to get to any other gun. If I'm in the parking lot 10 feet from my car that has an AR in it when I am confronted by two crazy guys with knives, I'm handling the situation with my handgun.

[Stress_Test]

It also depends on whether you're at home or out and about.

At HOME, yes, a long gun nearby makes perfect sense. I keep my Mossberg 590 ready to go at home, upstairs, and keep a pistol at hand. If at all possible, I'll fall back to the 590 instead of trying to fight with the handgun.

However, out and about, at best I'd have to keep the shotgun in the car. Then, as David says, actually getting to the long gun in the car isn't likely to be an option. If I had time to do that then I'd have time to drive away and skip the gunfight.

[CajunBass]

The purpose of a handgun is to fight your way to your carbine.

So, I'm supposed to fight my way all the way back home? Because that's where my carbine is.

To the OP. No one can answer your question. You just have to draw a line somewhere. Only you can decide where that line is for you.

[jad0110]

Also, way I look at it, if you've got three guys shooting at you, you're not likely to live long enough to expend all the ammo in a 15-17 round mag anyway...

Trick is, to increase the odds that the other BGs will flee, you've got to very, very quickly determine who the leader of the pack is and plug him FIRST. Seeing the rabble rouser go down first hopefully will result in the others scattering, but as always, there are no guarantees. But I do agree, if you end up in a situation with 3+ determined, suicidal attackers armed with guns themselves and there is no cover or even concealment in sight you are likely screwed, regardless of the handgun you carry. I read a statement years ago that in such a dire situation (outnumbered, 3+ attackers with guns not backing down, no cover, no where to run), the additional rounds in a hi cap semi auto aren't going to save you, but you'll at least be able to take more of them with you.

It is the indian, not the arrow. As always, a skilled handgunner that can keep their wits more or less intact can make about any gun that is mechanically sound work for them. The opposite is also true. I've heard some opine that the most common failure in a gunfight is running out of ammo. Others say it is running out of time. I tend to agree with the latter, which is indicative of a lack of training, proper mindset, etc. "Software" failures, in other words.

IMHO, landing that first shot is critical. Not only will the fight hopefully end sooner, but you won't be spraying bullets all over the landscape (I'm in a fairly urban setting, so to me, missing is NOT an option). I therefore prefer handguns that are good point shooters in my hands. For me, those handguns happen to be S&W K Frames with 3" or longer barrels, L Frames, N Frame, the Ruger Six Series and 5" 1911s. For the next guy it might be Glocks.

[jmr40]

With your setup you actually have 17 rounds on hand. While 6 is usually enough, no one who ever survived a gunfight has ever said afterward that they wished they had had less ammo. Shots miss, hits don't always put people down and there may well be more than 1 attacker. If I were in your shoes I'd lose the revolver and just carry the G-26 and 1 spare mag. You will be better protected, and be carrying a lot less weight.

[420Stainless]

Originally Posted by PabloJ

Common sense dictates that when faced with major riot one should JOIN the rioters until safe exit from the crowd is possible.

Certainly true. I was thinking of the odd situation in which Reginald Denny found himself in, or anyone could possibly find themselves in if visiting an area away from home when the spark ignites. I don't worry about it, but it could happen and I might end up wishing I had more than six in that circumstance.

[Tcruse]

The number required is dependent on the threat and your skill. You have to answer those questions for yourself every time you pick up your gun. Most of the people that I know have different choices from day to day. I have different choice when going I in the RV than when going to Walmart for coffee cream.

[TonyDedo]

until I started reading other opinions on the internet

As my mechanic likes to say, "well there's your problem!"

[allin]

Just reading through this it occurred to me that it depends . Are you a LEO or serving overseas? If so you probabaly need max firepower. Are you a reg citizen who lives in a fairly decent neighborhood and are concerned about personal protection? If that is the case, how often have you needed your weapon and was it sufficient? I have a ccw and multiple choices for carry, I am lucky enough that my wife hasn't totalled up all of the guns I have purchased. I have mutiple length revolvers (38 spec & 357) and a good selection of 9mm and 45acp semis. I tend to carry a 3 " snub j frame 38 spec. It is comfy and I feel confident with it. I shoot it regularly and can hit fairly well out to 15 yards. Not an expert shot by any means but just OK. I follow a lot of internet threads and read many mags pertaining to this subject. I do think there are a lot of "mall ninjas" out there who may be a little over the top?
Just my 2 cents.

[vito]

Personally I think a two round derringer is probably enough, but I prefer my 5 round J frame snubby. Consider this: everyone who participates on this and other gun forums are much more involved in the gun culture than the average citizen, and despite all the theorizing about what is needed for self defense, few posts every mention actually having to do so. And when you recognize that so much of what is posted on these threads is just bragging b***s***, its even more amazing how rarely a post talks about actually having to fire rounds in self defense. What that tells me is what I really already know, that the likelihood of me EVER needing to use a concealed handgun is EXTREMELY low. I also recall some FBI statistics from years ago stating that most shooting incidents involve 1-3 shots total. Sure, its nice to have dozens of rounds at the ready, and if it makes you feel better you might want to carry a BUG, and maybe a third gun to back up the back-up gun, plus a knife, a bull whip and some rope, etc. but I tend to believe that having any firearm with any amount of ammo is probably enough for 99.999% of us. Even a 2-shot 22LR derringer is probably enough. I like my Ruger LCP with 6+1, and my S&W J-frame snubby with 5, and have never felt helpless or under-armed. I also have a Ruger sr40c with 9+1 for concealed carry, but any of these guns gives me the sense of security that I am seeking: it is not dependent on the number of rounds.

[C0untZer0]

I've known people who drove pick up trucks, and in the time they owned the truck they never used it to haul materials, furniture or anything like that. The things they bought at Home Depot the few times they went there would have fit into the regular trunk of most cars. I never told them they shouldn't have purchased a pick up truck.

Everyone one is different. I've seen people's EDC setup ups that include a full size 40 S&W, a mag pouch for two 15rd mags, two knives, a bug and two flashlights.

Some people have only a tiny .22 magnum revolver.

I plan on carrying a Rohrbaugh R9 in a pocket holster. I'm not going to equip myself to be 100% prepared for 100% of possible scenarios ALL the time.

I am using the 7 & 2 approach.

If I can't resolve something with 7 rounds I'll resort to 2(feet).

And don't forget when you're running away SERPENTINE !!!

[seeker_two]

Any time the "multiple assailant" question comes up, a lot of factors get argued. One factor that doesn't get argued enough is TIME. Will you have time to get hits on multiple assailants before one of them gets hits on you? If I'm attacked by three BGs, I might....MIGHT....have time to get one shot into each assailant before one of them gets shots on me. If one shot each is enough to stop them, problem solved. If not, I won't have time to worry about the next problem.

This might be a situation where something like a Taurus Judge/PD could come in handy. Firing 3-4 000Buck with each trigger press into each assailant could tilt the odds in your favor.

[scaatylobo]

To all that have never had a round sent their way - I PROMISE that should you ever be so unfortunate YOU WILL BE VERY SORRY THAT YOU DID NOT HAVE A BAZOOKA IN YOUR POCKET.

That being my observation,please to the O.P.,note all who have been under attack or even seen a REAL attack about to happen - they dont walk lightly and dont bother about the extra few ounces either.

I wore a gun belt and ballistic vest for almost 30 years,and yes a BUG too.

And many was the time I was THRILLED for all that I had.

And as an offduty I tried to go light,but scared the 'you know what' outta myself on a few close calls.

Now I am a civilian and yes,I can see that 99% of the time all you need is your car keys to enjoy the day.

Its that 1% of the time that you will be VERY sorry if you were not as prepared as possible.

the truly sad part is,NO ONE can tell you when or where that will or could happen.

If I lived in rural Wy or anyplace such as that,I would go lighter than I do.

But I live in a very small city in a very residential neighborhood,and I have seen what can happen in any place people reside and go wackadoodle [ on the news ,and in my own hood ].

So I look very respectable and dress like a retired old man, DO NOT BE FOOLED.

Hope you never find out,but sounds to me that if you have a BUG, your ready.

[Droid noob]

Originally Posted by rcmodel

Boy, me too!

I carry an umbrella when it isn't raining, in case it does.

And I attach copper ground strap on the umbrella when it is raining, just in case I might get hit by lightening.

But I'm not a risk taker.

I carry a 6-shot .380, or 5-shot S&W along with the umbrella too.

rc

I know, I know.

But I don't think any victim knew they were going to be attacked when they went out that day.

[witchhunter]

I don't think I will ever be attacked by more than 5 or 6 at once! But, where I live we all carry, I should get some help or offer some if we get attacked by a mob (I hope). Around here, I carry my LCP or a J frame almost always. 1911 or 66 in the truck. Spare ammo or mags in the truck. When I first got my CCW, I carried "battle ready", now quite a little less.

[Stress_Test]

Well it's almost a moot point for me because the question becomes "what can I hide under my clothing" rather than how big a gun (or guns) can I carry.

And I can't hide much unless I'm wearing an overcoat, and living in the southeast that's not a year round thing anyway.

Hence the snubnose .38sp I often carry.

I'd like to try a Glock 26 but good luck finding one now at any reasonable price!

[spm]

It seems we have strayed from the OPs original query; six shot revolver vs a higher capacity auto. I have alway believed Col. Cooper's comment speaks volumes ..."If you can't solve the problem with six shots, you probably can't solve the problem." I carry a Colt DS am confident that is enough. Having said all this, I acknowlege that everyone is different. There are no wrong anwers, only differnt perspectives. Best to all.

[Certaindeaf]

Yea, a spine breaker through the spine will.. break the spine, if you can hit it. the goal with anything is to hit it

[Youngster]

6 shots in of themselves may be sufficient, but the relatively slow reload of a typical revolver could cost you at at time when multiple attackers and high capacity firearms are common.

I'm loathe to give up my 686 and its "makes the hit for you" trigger and handling, but feeding it quickly under andrenaline dump stress is not something I'd want to do.

A New York reload is about the only way I'd want to go if I had reason to shoot a revolver empty, and that's not really weight/bulk efficient.

[Snakeshift]

Originally Posted by Youngster

6 shots in of themselves may be sufficient, but the relatively slow reload of a typical revolver could cost you at at time when multiple attackers and high capacity firearms are common.

I'm loathe to give up my 686 and its "makes the hit for you" trigger and handling, but feeding it quickly under andrenaline dump stress is not something I'd want to do.

A New York reload is about the only way I'd want to go if I had reason to shoot a revolver empty, and that's not really weight/bulk efficient.

I find this message to be a little misleading.

If you carry a revolver...PRACTICE reloading with a speedloader!

I carry both auto's and revolvers and the difference in reload time for me is maybe 1.5 seconds with a revolver.

I always hear how "slow" revolvers are to reload, It's all about muscle-memory. Just keep practicing.