Why so many rounds?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bottom line is carry is always a compromise between comfort and capability. If it was possible to have a 25 shot, light recoiling, .45 caliber pistol that was the size of a Shield that is what we would carry and we would not be having this conversation. But physics being what it is, we don't. So we make compromises. We compromise on caliber so we can have more rounds or a bigger bullet and compromise on capacity, the classic 9mm or .45 debate. We find a Desert Eagle a bit much to conceal and carry so we carry smaller.

Why are so many people so upset that someone is carrying a bigger gun or more rounds and have to argue with people who say they are comfortable with carrying larger and having more rounds?

You should carry the largest gun you can conceal comfortably with as much ammo you can carry comfortably. Is there anyone who disputes this?

For some people this is a bigger gun than other people will carry. For some people it is more ammo than other people. I don't know about other people but carrying uncomfortably is a grind over a long period of time every day. You start to try to smooth it out as you go along. You try holsters, generally a lot of different holsters. You try different guns trying to find your balance point. You put magazines in pockets or on the belt or just leave them home. I'm a minority, I'm still carrying the same gun I first bought for concealed carry. But most people change guns several times. Been through holsters, I've carried no spare magazine, one spare magazine and am currently carrying two spare magazines on my belt and have found its more comfortable than one magazine in a pocket with better access. So am I now supposed to get rid of a magazine because its unpopular and some guy on the internet says its excessive? I don't think so. I've worked it out for myself. Everyone has to work it out and their choices are not going to be mine necessarily either.
 
Of the few gunfights I've been involved in, I got to choreograph none of them. And when I have that ability, I'll just avoid them entirely.

Until then, I'll conceal whatever I comfortably/practically/legally can. Some days that's a G19 with an extended mag, others an LCP in the pocket, and often no gun at all.

And after all that, I go on living my life.
 
loneviking said:
Ok Browning, lets take a look at the video's you posted and see how many rounds were fired.

Uber driver---I count one round with one bad guy down. I think I saw a second round fired, so I'm counting two rounds unless you have other information.

Waffle House---very weird deal. Two guys eating while a third plays maniac in a corner? In any case, good guy put three rounds into bad guys stomach. So, three rounds.

Store clerk, can't see well enough to tell. One guy in pink shot, so that's one round. A second guy in black acting like he took one round. So, I'm counting two.

Sucker punch is one of those rare cases where you wind up in a mob. The problem is that a high cap isn't going to save you. You'll fire off three or four rounds and they'll either run or swarm you or kill you. But, I will concede that this is a situation that a guy going about his daily life could encounter.

Three thugs attack is mislabeled. There were two, a man and a woman. Unknown how many shots were fired---at least two.

Mugging victim Akron---four guys, two rounds fired. One round, they went away and then came back. Second round they ran for good. Two rounds.

From the NRA link of Ohio shootings:
Pizza Shop robbery, one bad guy shot seven times.

Road rage, one bad guy, no shots fired.

Newspaper ad, one bad guy. Good guy fires six rounds, bad guy three. Good guy not injured.

Robbery victim, shot three times, one round fired back.

Car Thief, one bad guy, one round--one dead bad guy.

Lunch wagon driver, two bad guys attempted robbery. Good guy--one round from a .45 into BG's leg.

Robbery Victim #2 three bad guys,one round fired by the good guy into the stomach of a bad guy.

Gun store owner, robbery. Unknown number of BG's or rounds.

Talk show host--- interesting one where ten men surrounded the bad guy. Looks like two rounds, two hits.

Hotel Manager--multiple rounds, exact count unknown.

Crime Stoppers president--defensive display, no rounds fired.

Dog Walker, four rounds into a single attempted robber

Homeowner--two rounds into one BG.

Pizza deliveryman is interesting. Held by four BG's, he got to his gun and fired three rounds, stopping the attack.

Family businessmen---one armed robber. Good guy fires four shots, BG ran.

Small business owner---one robber,two rounds and BG runs.

Elderly cancer survivor--one BG, survivor fires five rounds.

Music store owner--one robber, two rounds by the good guy and robber runs.

Electronics buyer---four BG, good guy fires one round hits two BGs, stops robbery attempt.

The most rounds that can be counted with certainty is six rounds. Even against multiple attackers, two to four rounds gets the job done.

And again, I don't care what you carry but let's be realistic about the need for 12, 14, 18 or 20 rounds. The goal is to carry everyday, and carrying the single stack autos and smaller revolvers is a lot easier than carrying a full size duty weapon.
Click to expand...



But on the last page you said 1-3 rounds.

Moving on to this page.....:


Using your analysis, 5 of the 20 incidences were 4 or more shots equaling 25%.

I'm sure you'll want to ignore this as you did the last time I pointed out the statistics of your posts,...


Again, while 25% doesn't pass the threshold to become 'usually', 25% is a pretty significant #, don't you think?

So lets recap, using your data and your analysis, 30% of the time it will be 2 or more attackers. Of multiple attacker situations, 25% of the time 4 or more shots occurred.

:thumbup:
 
My 2 cents:

Successful self defense encounters are not determined by the number of bullets you have, as much as the correctly executed second-and--half decision whether or not to shoot (1), drawing the weapon onto the target (2), and pulling the trigger without jerking the gun (3). Any mistake in these three parameters results in huge and immediate problems (physical, legal, emotional and financial). This is simplistic, but I believe they are the core issues. Variations of the hypothetical situations are infinite and need to be addressed at the particular moment they present themselves. Always thinking about potential problems and possible responses may be more important than shooting thousands of bullets at targets. I don't shoot that often, but have never had a problem hitting acceptably close to center of mass at 10' when I do shoot, however, I constantly evaluate potential scenarios. The game is in the mind first and foremost. The first shot (as opposed to the 7th,17th, or 27th) is critical, as you may not get another one.
JMHO.
 
Last edited:
danez71 said:
But on the last page you said 1-3 rounds.

Moving on to this page.....:


Using your analysis, 5 of the 20 incidences were 4 or more shots equaling 25%.

I'm sure you'll want to ignore this as you did the last time I pointed out the statistics of your posts,...


Again, while 25% doesn't pass the threshold to become 'usually', 25% is a pretty significant #, don't you think?

So lets recap, using your data and your analysis, 30% of the time it will be 2 or more attackers. Of multiple attacker situations, 25% of the time 4 or more shots occurred.

:thumbup:
Click to expand...

100% of the time the number of rounds found in a six shot revolver or a nine shot single stack are enough.
 
JohnBiltz said:
Bottom line is carry is always a compromise between comfort and capability. If it was possible to have a 25 shot, light recoiling, .45 caliber pistol that was the size of a Shield that is what we would carry and we would not be having this conversation. But physics being what it is, we don't. So we make compromises. We compromise on caliber so we can have more rounds or a bigger bullet and compromise on capacity, the classic 9mm or .45 debate. We find a Desert Eagle a bit much to conceal and carry so we carry smaller.

Why are so many people so upset that someone is carrying a bigger gun or more rounds and have to argue with people who say they are comfortable with carrying larger and having more rounds?

You should carry the largest gun you can conceal comfortably with as much ammo you can carry comfortably. Is there anyone who disputes this?

For some people this is a bigger gun than other people will carry. For some people it is more ammo than other people. I don't know about other people but carrying uncomfortably is a grind over a long period of time every day. You start to try to smooth it out as you go along. You try holsters, generally a lot of different holsters. You try different guns trying to find your balance point. You put magazines in pockets or on the belt or just leave them home. I'm a minority, I'm still carrying the same gun I first bought for concealed carry. But most people change guns several times. Been through holsters, I've carried no spare magazine, one spare magazine and am currently carrying two spare magazines on my belt and have found its more comfortable than one magazine in a pocket with better access. So am I now supposed to get rid of a magazine because its unpopular and some guy on the internet says its excessive? I don't think so. I've worked it out for myself. Everyone has to work it out and their choices are not going to be mine necessarily either.
Click to expand...

Nope, I don't dispute your statement at all. But, how do you work out what's enough? Internet guru's? Vehement assertions on gun forums? Or real life.
 
I think we all agree that being involved in an armed encounter, particularly as a CHL holder is a statistical anomaly in and of itself. Similar to being struck by lightening. To then attempt to establish "odds" about the actions that may be required to survive such an anomaly is mathematical folie. The decision to be armed is a very personal one that is hard to articulate for many. Precisely what you arm yourself with may based on any number of factors including your life experience, life style, physical capabilities, economic situation, choice of reading materials and professional defense training to name a few. The original question "Why so many rounds in the magazine?". The answers to that question is by definition unique for each of us. One size does not fit all. If you decide to go armed, I recommend becoming a student of this martial art. Learn everything you can, get all the training you can afford and practice as often as circumstances allow. Whatever weapon system you choose, however many reloads you carry; if it contributes to your sense of well being and confidence that you can protect you and yours, then our common goal is met.
 
loneviking said:
Nope, I don't dispute your statement at all. But, how do you work out what's enough? Internet guru's? Vehement assertions on gun forums? Or real life.
Click to expand...
Its actually pretty simple, try to carry it and see if it works for you. If you can carry it then continue to carry it. If you can't then don't. Why accept limitations placed on you by someone on the internet you never met on what you are capable of doing. There is a correct answer for individuals there is not a correct answer for the masses. The individual needs to find and define his own answers. He can only do this by pushing and finding his own limits and answers.

There are people on this forum who will tell everyone that it is not possible to carry a double stack, its not possible to carry a couple of magazines. At the same time there are numerous people doing exactly that and are quite happy with their choices. If you don't try how do you know?
 
Browning said:
So you went through and painstakingly reviewed all those gunfights, how many of those shots missed?

What were the guns used?

Since small concealable low round count pistols and revolvers are popular would any of the CHL holders have fired more rds if they had been available to them?

Those are also a small snapshot of CHL'ers defending themselves in a very narrow set of circumstances.

Which leads me to my next point, the really narrow criteria you imposed asking for examples of armed robberies (but only on the street, apparently no store owners), car jacking and kidnappings (but not in certain higher crime States with higher rates of gang membership and higher crime rates) are generally going to be short and fast affairs with low rd counts. If not tied to the scene in some way both the attackers and the victim(s) will immediately leave the area once the victim or victims resist with a gun (or guns) and shots are exchanged.

Many criminals flee at the mere sight of a gun, are we to be limited merely to unloaded guns because that sometimes happens?

You're excluding data right into coming up with a conclusion without first examining or even attempting to examine all of the data or even asking questions like "Under great stress where their life is in danger of being taken how often will people miss?"

You're also purposely excluding the many of the other situations that gun owners sometimes find themselves to push the idea that there's little point to have a moderate or high capacity pistol (as presumably no one will use those rds anyway).

Racially motivated mob assaults, gang related violent crimes, some sexual assaults, active shooters and armed robberies by crews of professional armed robbers are all going to have either many attackers looking to hurt or kill or they'll be really well armed.

There aren't many things that you can choose about an attack or a potential gun fight. You can't choose the place because you aren't initiating the attack. You can't choose the time. You can't choose the number of people who will attack you, their size, their armament, the terrain as well as a huge number of other factors. However you can choose how well you're trained and you can choose what you carry with you every day.
Click to expand...


AND ,NEVER has a victim ever said " gee,I wish I was carrying LESS rounds and a smaller gun".

That is the only FACT that I need to know.

I would be ever so grateful if I knew when [ if ever AGAIN ] that I will need a gun to save myself.

It would be much easier to dress and wear 'fashionable' clothing [ Like I actually would ].

And carrying a gun is NOT supposed to be "comfortable = its COMFORTING..

If you have never been anywhere where that matters,good for you.

PLEASE,all who read these missives ----- choose for yourself,and live [ or do not live ] with the outcome.
 
loneviking said:
Posts with questions like yours are why I started tracking and looking at self defense shootings. I was curious as to whether what so many on the gun boards claim (carry lots of ammo, lots of misses, need lots of training) matches up to reality. I was surprised to find that it really doesn't, at least not here in America.

How many rounds is enough? I'm having a hard time finding a reason to worry with somewhere between six and ten. And yes, usually one hit and the bad guy and his friend run away---there were examples of that in my reply to Brownings video post.
Click to expand...

Loneviking, how many gunfights have you been involved in? I've had the misfortune of experiencing several, both stateside and in other venues. I can tell you this, I never, ever, walked away upset with having too many rounds.
 
coyotehitman said:
Loneviking, how many gunfights have you been involved in? I've had the misfortune of experiencing several, both stateside and in other venues. I can tell you this, I never, ever, walked away upset with having too many rounds.
Click to expand...
However, the question on the table is how many rounds are used in defensive shootings, not how upset you are or how many rounds you had left over. In reading this thread one can see the answer is 5-50. The answer varies depending on how big the target is on your back.
 
I don't really understand what the big deal is about this. Many people don't carry guns-that is their choice & it doesn't bother me a bit. Some guys are comfortable with a 5 shot 38. Some of us prefer autos & different levels of capacity. Personally I generally carry a polymer pistol of some sort that is 9mm or larger in caliber with a double stack magazine & a spare mag. I tend to think if I am going to go to the trouble to carry a pistol it is very little more trouble to carry a spare magazine. Once in a while I even carry a 1911 with 7 + 1 in the pistol & a couple of spare mags. It does depend on where I am going & what I am doing.
 
loneviking said:
100% of the time the number of rounds found in a six shot revolver or a nine shot single stack are enough.
Click to expand...


False. Or at least 50% false.

One of those cited was 7 rounds shot so a 6 shot revolver wasn't enough which accounts for about 5% of the time.


Aside from that, do you have any evidence to support your claim above?
 
Browning said:
Why ask for it then (under the pretense that such a number of incidents couldn't be found ... when obviously they can)?

Next time skip the drama and just say 'I carry X ... because I don't believe that such an event will ever happen to me'.
Click to expand...

Presumably as a point of discussion where people express their viewpoints and their logic behind them.

The thoughts of the OP seem to center around the bulk of the extra ammo as being an overall detriment to the shooter's ability, as well as contribiting towards what is euphamistically termed "spray and pray":

"My thoughts are that for the realistic threat faced by the vast majority of us, non-professionally involved in violent action, there are more disadvantages than advantages to the trend of more-is-better."

Now, granted a great many of us here on THR have participated in this type of discussion before, and certainly we have quite a spread of personal beliefs on the matter. But the OP in new to this site and he's likely not encountered such a diversity of viewpoints and reasonings.

We're not here to create a "drama" over the issue. In this thread, we're supposed to address and discuss the concerns the OP has brought up.
 
Last edited:
So tell me, do you have a gang that you've pissed off? Do you only carry to one location? Are you targeted for revenge? Because if you can't yes to these questions then there's a big difference between you and Lance.
Click to expand...
You're still focusing on the strawman of the increased chances of an attack and throwing in a bunch of other red herrings to try to confuse the issue. The real discussion is about how many rounds required to address a particular number of attackers, not the chances of being in a gunfight in the first place.

Of course there's a big difference between me and Lance, but there's no reason it should take him more rounds to address a given number of attackers effectively than it should take me. Therefore, the number of rounds he had to fire to neutralize a given number of attackers definitely does count.
Ok, here's a summary of Lances shootings so you can get your facts straight.
Click to expand...
My figures are taken from Paul Kirchner's book "The Deadliest Men". Kirchner, in his book provides the following stats for the Lance Thomas shootings. Rounds fired/hit numbers are from Lance's gun.

1st shootout: 2 attackers, 3 rounds fired, one hit, 0 BGs killed, 1 BGs wounded, 1BG fled. Lance hit 0 times.
2nd shootout: 5 criminals (4 attackers, one driver), 18-19 rounds fired, 2 BG killed, 0 BGs wounded, 3 BG fled. Lance hit 4 times.
3rd shootout: 2 criminals (male with a female accomplice), 8 rounds fired, 1 BG killed, 0 BGs wounded, 1 BG fled. Lance hit 1 times.
4rth shootout: 2 attackers, 10-11 rounds fired, 2 BG killed, 0 BGs wounded, 0 BG fled. Lance hit 0 times.

Ayoob provides similar figures for the encounters indicating that Thomas faced 11 criminals in 4 shootings; shooting 6, killing 5, while being shot 5 times in the process. Ayoob states that Thomas fired 10 shots per encounter on average.
100% of the time the number of rounds found in a six shot revolver or a nine shot single stack are enough.
Click to expand...
Only if you studiously omit/ignore any incident where they aren't enough.
 
Last edited:
loneviking said:
But that's not the point!! Following your logic, I'd be carrying a Glock with four or five 33 round mags and an AR15 with another 7 or 8 mags---because you can never have enough ammo.
Click to expand...

Is that what I said? The OP was about 'high capacity' (SIC) magazines in a pistol; a reductio ad absurdum argument is inappropriate when there's already context for my reply, isn't it?


Larry
 
I really don't care what the 'average' rounds per encounter is.

It's better to have and not need than need and not have. If my weapon can hold 18 and still be concealable and reasonably powerful, sure go that way.

But I sure would not carry a gun with just x number of rounds cause some silly study says the 'average' number of rounds fired is x.

Deaf
 
I carry a 1911, it's a single stack with seven rounds on board. I also carry reloads for several reasons. In short, I have never read an AAR that concluded it was better to have a smaller firearm and less ammunition.
 
RetiredUSNChief said:
Presumably as a point of discussion where people express their viewpoints and their logic behind them.

The thoughts of the OP seem to center around the bulk of the extra ammo as being an overall detriment to the shooter's ability, as well as contribiting towards what is euphamistically termed "spray and pray":

"My thoughts are that for the realistic threat faced by the vast majority of us, non-professionally involved in violent action, there are more disadvantages than advantages to the trend of more-is-better."

Now, granted a great many of us here on THR have participated in this type of discussion before, and certainly we have quite a spread of personal beliefs on the matter. But the OP in new to this site and he's likely not encountered such a diversity of viewpoints and reasonings.

We're not here to create a "drama" over the issue. In this thread, we're supposed to address and discuss the concerns the OP has brought up.
Click to expand...

This is what I've been trying to do. Thanks for hopefully getting the thread back on track.
 
DT Guy said:
Is that what I said? The OP was about 'high capacity' (SIC) magazines in a pistol; a reductio ad absurdum argument is inappropriate when there's already context for my reply, isn't it?


Larry
Click to expand...
Nope, it's not , because by your logic there would never be enough rounds--either in the gun or in any extra mags.
 
loneviking said:
Nope, it's not , because by your logic there would never be enough rounds--either in the gun or in any extra mags.
Click to expand...

And....it may not be! I carry 27 rounds total on my person, because that's what I deem reasonable for my circumstances. Others choose less, some opt for more. I'm okay with that. Who are we to second guess the perceived needs of others?
I hope I never need that 28th round that I don't have on me....I probably won't, and will have wasted my time.

A lot of times, merely presenting a firearm is enough to dissuade a would be attacker.....
Should I leave my iron empty? That'd save me some weight, and would still save me from your "typical" lowly gutless criminal.

This whole debate is silly.
 
Ironicaintit said:
And....it may not be! I carry 27 rounds total on my person, because that's what I deem reasonable for my circumstances. Others choose less, some opt for more. I'm okay with that. Who are we to second guess the perceived needs of others?
I hope I never need that 28th round that I don't have on me....I probably won't, and will have wasted my time.

A lot of times, merely presenting a firearm is enough to dissuade a would be attacker.....
Should I leave my iron empty? That'd save me some weight, and would still save me from your "typical" lowly gutless criminal.

This whole debate is silly.
Click to expand...

I have zero expectation of presenting a firearm when attacked and not discharging it. When I do, it will be multiple rounds. I train for three rounds which is half my capacity. Therefore, at least one cylinder or magazine reload seems prudent. By the time I pull a weapon, all other means of settlement and negotiation have been exhausted and only a split second or so remains before I am in jeopardy. This is based upon my experiences.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

E
  • Locked
Any "double-stack/hi-capacity" .22lr handguns?
2
Replies
27
Views
19K
bobotech
B
H
  • Locked
How many rounds are adequate capacity for DEFENSE?
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
139
Views
8K
Slaytera666
S
C
  • Locked
Are we too obsessed with speed?
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Replies
181
Views
7K
Vern Humphrey
V
M
  • Locked
Load up all your handguns! How many rounds ready to go?
2 3 4
Replies
98
Views
4K
modifiedbrowning
M
H
  • Locked
Why no high capacity .22LR pistols
2
Replies
31
Views
6K
Pete D.
Pete D.
Back
Top