Is 6 Shots Really Enough?

[David E]

Originally Posted by tomrkba

Once again, people confuse target shooting skills with gunfighting skills.

Not at all. It's amusing that EACH TIME someone posts a drill to practice at the range, you or someone else jumps in, dismissing it as worthless because, you claim, it has nothing whatsoever to do with "gunfighting."

The static test proposed merely demonstrates the shooter's ability to safely handle a gun from the holster.

Curiously, that's all it was intended to do, with a time and accuracy requirement. You inexplicably hate the drill for what it isn't.

Still, I would think you'd agree that a shooter finding himself in a gunfight damn well better be able to "safely handle a gun from the holster." Or do you disagree that's a good skill to have? I would also think you'd agree being able to put several rounds on target in a short time is also a skill that might prove handy in a gunfight......or do you disagree again?

The test I proposed demonstrates the basic level of gunfighting.

Your "test" is worthless for 95% of the people reading this because they cannot easily practice it at any range they have access to. Further, in the interest of the realism you seem promote, there aren't any real people downrange while you're firing real ammo and no one is shooting back for real, either.

The static shooting does nothing to evaluate the shooter's gunfighting skills.

Again, that wasn't the intent. The intent, as you clearly missed, was simply to define a level of "above average" handgun skill, not gunfighting skill. That those skills may come in handy in a gunfight, to whatever degree, is a bonus.

[tomrkba]

Again, that wasn't the intent. The intent, as you clearly missed, was simply to define a level of "above average" handgun skill, not gunfighting skill.

The context of this thread is gunfighting.

Not at all. It's amusing that EACH TIME someone posts a drill to practice at the range, you or someone else jumps in, dismissing it as worthless because, you claim, it has nothing whatsoever to do with "gunfighting."

I did not dismiss it as worthless. It is a stepping stone to be able to learn how to fight using guns. "Warp" mentioned that it is not an end state (I should have said more than safety in my response; I was in a hurry).

Unfortunately, most people never get past static drills in their training. Somehow the drill proposed became the end state for training. I am not sure why the gun culture latched onto that; perhaps it is because of the typical range setup and associated rules.

Your "test" is worthless for 95% of the people reading this because they cannot easily practice it at any range they have access to. Further, in the interest of the realism you seem promote, there aren't any real people downrange while you're firing real ammo and no one is shooting back for real, either

This can be trained using Airsoft pistols (downloaded to the capacity of a real gun) starting with static targets and migrating to moving targets. Additionally, there are places you can train like this. Any range that can do CAS, 3 Gun, IPSC or IDPA can handle it (place the target on a four wheeled roller stand and move with ropes). Ranges such as Echo Valley Training Center in High View, WV have "snail shell" bays that permit 360 or near 360 degree fire.

[David E]

Originally Posted by tomrkba

Somehow the drill proposed became the end state for training.

With who? I'm not aware the drill I posted as being a standard anywhere, much less an end point "latched onto by the gun culture." Two comments followed my post, one agreeing it defined an above average skill level and you saying it was worthless.

This can be trained using Airsoft pistols

Totally worthless, since theres no recoil, no loud noise and everyone involved knows they're not going to die. Oh, wait, you mean that's just another piece of the puzzle to add to the overall picture? Then why is drawing and firing 5 shots on a sheet of typing paper at 5 yds in 3 seconds not considered part of that same overall picture as well?

Any range that can do CAS, 3 Gun, IPSC or IDPA can handle it (place the target on a four wheeled roller stand and move with ropes). Ranges such as Echo Valley Training Center in High View, WV have "snail shell" bays that permit 360 or near 360 degree fire.

So the local gun range where many practice their shooting would not suffice. Instead, one would need to travel to specific places, pay money and bring several friends to practice...uh, I mean train, wait.....I mean....

You're confusing practicing with training. You lash out at a drill that's not your favorite piece of the puzzle to the point of forgetting the more puzzle pieces in place, the better.

[tomrkba]

David E please refrain from being nasty. James Yeager has challenged people to duels for less. Perhaps you should call him for training.

[David E]

Nasty? I sure don't see where I said anything that qualifies as "nasty." Factual, yes, nasty, no.

Isn't there a video that shows James Yeager running away from a firefight where some of his comrades got killed? Nah, I'll spend my training dollars elsewhere.

[Sav .250]

Keep in mind there is a certain of drama on forums. Some think if their weapon doesn`t hold 200 rounds (over stating of course)
they think they`ll come out second. Nobody stands toe to toe with anybody firing away
till your waepon is to hot to hold. In fact,a very few of the countless folks that own a hand gun really ever use it against somebody. HD wise..... etc.
If your hand gun fills your hand....stick with it. Think for yourself.

[tomrkba]

Isn't there a video that shows James Yeager running away from a firefight where some of his comrades got killed? Nah, I'll spend my training dollars elsewhere.

That video was pretty funny. He recently managed to lose his carry permit due to bombastic comments, though the retribution by government is cause for concern.

[Certaindeaf]

It's not really a rocket.. unless it's a Gyrojet! lolz

[jim243]

Gryojet???? I haven't seen one of those since the 70's. I didn't know the Gryojet came in a revolver configuration, this is the revolver forum??

Jim

[Certaindeaf]

Jim, yes it is and that's true. Many people are talking about six shots here, not six-shooters. I was joking around.. a play on words.. rocket science and all.. kinda a joke. thanks for noticing though

[Rexster]

I think that a 4" S&W Model 19, teamed with a G26, or other compact auto, is a very well-thought-out combination for carry, for the person who believes in carrying two guns. It is normal for me to tote two handguns, and I do not bother to designate either as a "primary" or "secondary" gun; I just carry two. I shoot a medium to medium-large S&W revolver, or a GP100, better than any other handgun, period. This makes those six shots more likely to be effective shots. That might well STOP a fight!

I could go back to carrying such a sixgun as a duty handgun, and not lose any sleep over it, provided I also toted a second weapon. I ride night shift patrol in one of the USA's largest cities; I am presently required to carry a double-column .40 auto-pistol on the duty belt, but conceal a Ruger SP101, too.

As for concern about the capacity of the revolver in one's hand, well, I believe that one does not survive a gunfight against multiple opponents by standing in the open and shooting until empty; that is a way to lose a gunfight, whether the ammo reservoir is a six-round cylinder or a 33-round G18 magazine. If caught in the open, without cover, MOVE! Preferably, lateral or oblique moves, if feasible, make one a more difficult target. I particularly like the idea of an oblique that flanks my opponent(s).

[David E]

The Gyrojet was/is the only handgun cartridge that goes faster once out of the muzzle.

Tom, I love ya, man. I think we agree that more puzzle pieces in place is a good thing. There's a time for practice and there's a time for training.

If one only carries 5-6 shots in their gun, they better be able to hit with them.

[jim243]

If one only carries 5-6 shots in their gun, they better be able to hit with them.

That's true no mater what you use. My Taurus Tracker was a 7 shot 357 Mag and my Bersa 45 UC pro is also a 7 round mag, granted I can carry one in the chamber as well, but that is not a lot different than a revolver. Yes you can carry an extra mag, but you can carry speed loaders as well as speed strips for the revolver.

I feel no more under gunned with a 357 than I do with a 45.

Jim

[2zulu1]

Originally Posted by LouisianaGunner12

My daily carry is a S&W Model 19 blued with a 4" barrel, loaded with 125 grain loads, with a Glock 26 as backup.


I used to never second guess that 6 shots was enough until I started reading other opinions on the internet

Now I'm not so sure. I love my revolver and have shot so many thousands of rounds through it that it feels like an extension of my hand, something that I've never felt with higher capacity semi autos. I am confident that I can make meaningful hits with my 19 in a self defense situation. But what about if there are multiple attackers? What if I miss? What if, what if, what if?That's why I started carrying a G26 as backup, as much as I dislike the plastic little thing. But what if I don't have enough time to draw my backup? The uncertainty is maddening.

Am I just letting this (and the internet) get to my head? Should I not be concerned with my 6 shots?

I haven't read through all the pages, but back in the day when we carried the mag, I never felt under gunned. There was one situation, in the early morning hours, that four guys intent on doing me harm chose not to learn about their earthly mortality.

If, for any reason, I were to do LE related activities like the Arizona Rangers, the mag would more than likely be on my hip. Most of my training is with 1911s, but when I go to the range with my Smiths, it's a coming home feeling, plus, after all these years, I still shoot the Smiths better.

[PabloJ]

With G20 you would be packing 16 cartridges of 10x25. Gee, I would not feel any less armed then with .45 or .357.

[weisse52]

12 pages (so far) and all I got out of this is a headache...

I have at various times carried everything from a .22 mag NAA up to my beloved Colt 1911's. At the moment I have gone back to carrying revolvers and do not feel the least bit under gunned. YMMV. I do not have enforce the laws and am not an avenging angel so I feel good about what I carry and how I shoot it.

Carry what you want for your environment and practice to make sure you are proficient. THAT is all any of us should be doing.

[460Kodiak]

Depending on your circumstances 6 shots is plenty..... or too few......

This is an impossible question to answer.

[Kleanbore]

Posted by weisse52: At the moment I have gone back to carrying revolvers and do not feel the least bit under gunned. ... I feel good about what I carry and how I shoot it.

That idea has already been well addressed here in response to the same comment from someone else:

Posted by David E: No disrespect, but how you "feel" about your choice matters not one whit.

[4thHorseman]

The question I would ask my self in your case if 5 or 6 rounds are enough, what are going to use it for.
If you are going to use the gun for self defense...meaning prevent harm to yourself and others and then fall back to a safe place to summon assistance, then yes. (strongly recommended in most cases)
If you mean to use it for tactical entry and securing a compound, then I would say no.

[HKGuns]

But when the target is closing in fast and you have to draw in a hurry, that is easier said than done.

Kleen, I can think of very few situations where, if the target were closing fast, I wouldn't be retreating just as fast to keep a relatively safe distance. Drawing on the run or from behind cover once reached are both valid options in this scenario. The last thing I'm going to do is stand my ground hoping to draw in time, no matter how well practiced.

BTW: I'm faster than 99% of the bad guys out there, even though I may be a bit older than them.

[Warp]

Originally Posted by HKGuns

Kleen, I can think of very few situations where, if the target were closing fast, I wouldn't be retreating just as fast to keep a relatively safe distance.

Most people, IMO and IME, can not run backwards, safely, as quickly as a young male attacker (or attackers) can run forwards.

And, personally, I can think of very few situations where, if the threat were closing fast, I would turn my back on the threat in an attempt to outrun it.

[Tony_the_tiger]

Six should be enough but bring some reloads. For my personal needs, 5 is enough for comfort in an urban environment.

[pezo]

I usually carry a five shooter. Usually an lcr xs with .38 +p lswchp. I carry two hks speed loaders. Total 15 shots. I practice fast reloads. Also carry a .22 mag mini in an ankle holster. For just an every day citizen I'm good. Any higher risk and ill tote my 12 gauge pump.

[David E]

Originally Posted by HKGuns

If the target were closing fast, I wouldn't (think you meant WOULD) be retreating just as fast to keep a relatively safe distance.

If possible, maybe. If you're with your wife or kids, that's not an option.

Drawing on the run or from behind cover once reached are both valid options in this scenario.

Drawing on the move is. I can't see any reason to wait until I'm behind cover to draw my gun outside if an ill-conceived IDPA stage.

The last thing I'm going to do is stand my ground hoping to draw in time, no matter how well practiced.

Last option or not, it well may be your only one.

BTW: I'm faster than 99% of the bad guys out there, even though I may be a bit older than them.

Me, too....if both parties start at the same time. Problem is, they get to start first and I, and you, must play catch up.

[smle41]

I must ask some persons as to why they think like does not matter.. if a person likes something, they are likely to spend more time with it, to enjoy it, to get better at it. I can't help but think that one consideration for public employees miserable marksmanship is that they are issued one gun out of the rack, whether they like it or not, and must simply cope with operating something that someone else orders them to have, and not something that fits them. The gun has no connection to them, and vice-versa.
One reason I am gravitating back towards revolvers is that I am discovering that due to my hand, the K frame Model 15 and N frame 28 are joys to shoot, and shoot quickly, and shoot well. For some people, they love Glock 17s and prefer that platform because of a 'like' factor that I will not disparage. Some people 'like' the 1911 / Hi-Power / CZ-75, and I will not tell them they are wrong for having a personal preference that they indulge in. After all, why would a person 'date' another if they were not 'attracted to' (or, 'like') that person. Any relation in which one person dislikes the other is doomed. A gun that a person likes is more likely to be around when they need it, and more likely to be used well. Who do we know buys and drives cars they detest, rather than one they "like"?
I recently asked a friend to time me in draws and such and he noted that I am, in fact, faster and better with a Model 15 than I was with other systems, much as I enjoyed them, I really enjoy these revolvers, enjoy shooting them, handling, having them around... practicing and training and just wistful plinking is fun...
On a different note, I have to concur with Easyg, that perception played a large role in in governmentally funded groups going to larger ammunition reservoirs, rather than actual fact. I do not have the official stats in front of me, and I could use the help of others in researching this, but I do not recall governmental officers using dozens or hundreds of rounds in running gunfights in many instances at all prior to the switch from 6 to umpteen rounds. I honestly don't know.. some internet research indicated that when police carried wheelguns, before the 'high capacity mentality', the rounds fired were two, and the hit rate 80%, now that 'spray and pray' seems to have come in vogue, the number of rounds fired is much higher and the rounds hit much lower.
It reminds me of a police instructor, young fellow, who instructed us to begin firing the second the weapon left the holster, walk our fire into the threat and feel free as we had a lot of bullets and using them would put the odds in our favor. I am not in agreement with his philosophy, and I think a number here are not either, but there are those who exercise it..
Personally, I think I trust more to skill than to knowing I can miss x number of times, (I am not saying anyone is advocating missing) as a factor to be considered is that we private citizens are accountable for the rounds we fire, and we don't have a publicly funded legal office to defend us. What we spend on lawyers does not come from the taxpayer, it comes from our personal bank accounts. With stray bullets may come stray lawsuits.
Let me run a little though expirament, a small fancy, that comes to my mind when thinking about the capacity issue, especially in the light of some comments about potential adversaries armed with standard (standard for the weapon) capacities (15 for a Beretta M9, 30 for an AK-74, etc, as opposed to 30 for an M9 or 75 for an AK-74)....
Let us suppose we were situationally unaware (it happens), or were unprepared (also happens), and we are armed with, oh, a handgun of some sort...
Now, consider there are 3 attackers who are determined to kill or die, and are armed with Beretta M9s, and they begin firing at us (in this case, we are alone). Using JohnKSA's percentage of hits (30%), we are hit in the first volley, or, second, of firing. Assuming the criminals are hitting not 30% of the time, but 10%, we are hit in the third second, and third volley of fire. Assuming it takes about a second to get one aimed shot in defense against our determined 'kill or die' opponents, and using JohnKSa's analysis posted on another forum from some state's CCW's stats as the best case, we hit twice on one of three assailants, leaving two of them as they continue firing, not retreating at the sight, knowledge, suspicion, that they are being resisted, or consider that their comrade just got his virgin quota in heaven and want their own...
We are, at this point, already wounded or dead at the 3 second (third volley of three rounds each, or, 3 wounds in three seconds, depending)
Continuing on, we proceed to use our large ammunition reservoir to engage target #2, as they continue to fire on us, two rounds per volley, this time we somehow, as we are wounded, are able to use nine seconds to land two hits on target, in the time they fire 18 rounds and scoring from 1 to 6 more hits on us...
You see how this thought line is going..
Hence my thought that if we are indeed facing the 'Mumbai Jihad' attack, no matter the handgun, our odds are not good, and 6 or 60 will be of little avail.
However, if you are just facing down or defending against the common vermin, 6 or 60 will be more than enough, even using JohnKSa's CCW stats from another forum, which indicated that even with a norm of 2 or 3 attackers, less than 5 rounds was enough to 'win'.
My grandfather, from just after WWII till he passed on, carried a Smith and Wesson revolver, daily. Not once did he ever use it, yet carried it, day after day.. he had a presence about him, and was always perfectly willing to protect his wife and kids, house and business. Think about that in terms of the values of mindset and skillset and toolset. The common vermin know that body language, and avoid it. The Mumbai Jihad that some (including, to some extent, me) consider, won't care because they want to die. 2zulu1 is right about the usual opposition not wanting to learn about mortality....
Thanks to all