Capacity ? Article

[Remington1911]

It is all a big circle. In the late 1980’s-early 1990’s people got sick of crime and voted to hold people accountable. Then people forget about it and relax accountability. Now, in a dozen more years when people get fed up with crime start voting out the woke crowd, the cycle will repeat itself and violent people will be held accountable again. And thirty years after that, people then will say, “crime is down xxx% over 2030 levels, so now we need to….”

Stay safe.

That assumes voting actually matters.

 

[CDW4ME]

I carry 15+ capacity in my "good area" where I don't expect to need to defend myself.
I'd rather have extra ammo I don't need than run out, that simple.

 

[Remington1911]

This is a great spare mag

View attachment 1119957

I am really big on a revolver for I guess I will say "less skilled people". I have a feeling we have all seen someone limp wrist an automatic, my wife is really bad about it. I would think with the stress of having your future to the point you are going to shoot someone you are likely to be pretty stiff and amped up, but I don't want likely, I want it to work.

A revolver (baring mechanical issues) will go bang 6-8-10 times as long as you pull the trigger. There is no safety to worry about, you just pull the trigger and go, not one other thing to think about. For the "non gun people' needing self defense weapon it does not get any better. They are not "cool" or "modern" but they do work and have less things that can go wrong from a users stand point or mechanically.

I never really understand the reasoning behind the auto argument....they just seem so thin to me.....but that is just me. We are all different.

 

[Remington1911]

I carry 15+ capacity in my "good area" where I don't expect to need to defend myself.
I'd rather have extra ammo I don't need than run out, that simple.

And I agree with this as well. I have a feeling more people have not been shot at then those that have. It can be a stressful deal, and if you are alone and not with your "buddies" I think that stress will go higher. It is not like target shooting. Some people just can't get to the point of taking a life, and there is not one single thing wrong with that at all.

But you do need to know you, I really think doing different "games" is about as close as you can realistically get for the average Joe. It is stressful, you must move and shoot, shoot from different positions, I do think it will help you should the need ever arise, god forbid. It sure as hell is not going to hurt.

 

[The Night Rider]

Sure. And similarly, if you happen to live in just about any large city, your chances of being murdered increase compared to the person who lives in the sleepy little country town. Of course, there are certainly more examples of people being murdered in sleepy little country towns than people being struck by lightning on calm sunny days. Continuing with the analogy, there is just no guarantee that you won't find yourself forced to walk around in a thunderstorm at some point in your life even if you have previously never experienced anything but bright sunny days.

Things can change and permanently limiting your options to protect yourself in an uncertain future just because your past has been pretty certainly uneventful is a bad plan. There should be a very good reason for such a bad plan but there isn't. There's only a bunch of specious arguments and outright prevarication which only makes me more inclined to resist the measure.

And it isn't as if we're just talking about magazine bans when we talk about magazine bans. There's a lot more that is being attached to the magazine ban, like a ban on semi-automatic rifles for example. More deceptions. Hell no to any of this.

ETA: and it's even more ridiculous when you consider that you're not only limiting YOUR ability to defend yourself in an uncertain future, you're arguing to ireevocably reduce your children's options and your grandchildren's options to deal with an uncertain future.

Nobody in this discussion is talking about magazine bans. I'm certainly not. The topic of this discussion is Masad Ayoub's video and whether or not it's valid.

I've even said in my post that if I can conceal a Glock 19 into reloads I do just most of the time I can't

 

[The Night Rider]

That woman in the Colorado church used 10 rounds to end a church shooting spree.

Jeanne Asaam didn't stop the shooting spree, the shooter did when he killed himself. He could have just as easily shot her.

In these two cases, I believe that 10 rounds was all they had in the magazine.

You believe wrong. At least at NLC they never stated the capacity of JA's magazines.


And while we're on this topic she has stated EMPHATICALLY in several interviews that she doesn't think you're qualified to carry a gun for self-defense. You certainly shouldn't have an "assault rifle" either. Only the police are qualified to carry those

 

[redcon1]

Nobody in this discussion is talking about magazine bans. I'm certainly not. The topic of this discussion is Masad Ayoub's video and whether or not it's valid.

When we argue about the validity of high capacity magazines, we are using and supporting the same specious arguments used by those who are unabashedly in favor of magazine bans and everything that gets banned along with high capacity magazines so I don't see a clear distinction here. It's close enough to the same argument. But honestly, what I'm most interested in now is this new WC pistol he's promoting and so I'm about to spend some time checking that out. A 9mm high cap 1911 is exactly the right answer.
ETA: and it's only $3,145, I'll be sure to buy two at that price.

 

[.455_Hunter]

That guy in Indiana used ten rounds to stop the mass shooter. And, probably would have used more if it were required.

That guy's story is actually a pretty valid example of getting to 10 rounds fired for John Q. Citizen. Eight hits on the perp was probably more than immediately required to neutralize the attacker, but he did what he needed to do. Quite the amazing story, actually. DING! DING! DING! We may finally have one legitimate data point for a higher capacity engagement! Not 18, 17 or 15 rounds fired, but 10! At this point, I will take what I can get.

That woman in the Colorado church used 10 rounds to end a church shooting spree.

Not a good example because she was preforming overwatch duties as a de facto security guard for the church. As a church attendee, yes, it may have been a valid example.

And, because cherry picking the data will always get you the win, right?

If you mean selecting data that matches the circumstances of the vast majority of John Q. Citizens public concealed carry time, then yes. John Q. Citizen is NOT performing LE functions, serving as part of a planned venue security team, or operating/working at a high-risk business.

 

[.455_Hunter]

When we argue about the validity of high capacity magazines, we are using and supporting the same specious arguments used by those who are unabashedly in favor of magazine bans and everything that gets banned along with high capacity magazines so I don't see a clear distinction here. It's close enough to the same argument.

Actually it's not, but that's OK. The scope of the discussion is concealed on-your-person EDC, and the basic level of tools necessary to be successful if the balloon goes up based on real examples. It is not a discussion of what the citizen keeps for home defense, store defense, road trips, adventures into the boonies, societal SHTF or whatever. All of the later have fully-justified reasons for high-capacity platforms, if so desired.

 

[Terry G]

Did you ever hear in the aftermath of a gunfight the victor complaining he had too much ammunition? 32 round of 9MM for me, Fifteen rounds in the CZ P:01, and a 17 round magazine on the belt.

 

[mcb]

Did you ever hear in the aftermath of a gunfight the victor complaining he had too much ammunition? 32 round of 9MM for me, Fifteen rounds in the CZ P:01, and a 17 round magazine on the belt.

Why not two spare magazines? or even three spare magazines?

 

[.38 Special]

I've certainly heard people complain about back pain from having to carry around a bunch of stuff on their belts all day.

 

[theotherwaldo]

The only time that I actually used a short gun to defend myself and my family, I only fired two shots.
I would have loved to have a speed-loader or larger-capacity magazine, but they don't really make them for black-powder revolvers... .

 

[.455_Hunter]

That's a terrible plan. Revolvers are harder to defend your self with than a Glock, especially if you're inadequately trained. I watched my wife jam a revolver as a matter of fact. She pointed it at the ground when she ejected the empties and got unburnt powder underneath the ejector star which locked the revolver up tight and rendered it useless. That's just not going to happen with a Glock and a high cap magazine.

That's a true gem right there! Millions of gun owners will absolutely disagree, including my wife, who is pretty much revolver only for serious duties.

 

[Bfh_auto]

That guy's story is actually a pretty valid example of getting to 10 rounds fired for John Q. Citizen. Eight hits on the perp was probably more than immediately required to neutralize the attacker, but he did what he needed to do. Quite the amazing story, actually. DING! DING! DING! We may finally have one legitimate data point for a higher capacity engagement! Not 18, 17 or 15 rounds fired, but 10! At this point, I will take what I can get.



Not a good example because she was preforming overwatch duties as a de facto security guard for the church. As a church attendee, yes, it may have been a valid example.



If you mean selecting data that matches the circumstances of the vast majority of John Q. Citizens public concealed carry time, then yes. John Q. Citizen is NOT performing LE functions, serving as part of a planned venue security team, or operating/working at a high-risk business.

That is a valid point. I had forgotten about that incident as an example. For me, I still well enough armed with my 5 shot 38. But I am not in the same situations 90% of the general population is. It violent crime rate is relatively low. Population density is low. Even the tweakers are generally polite.
When I lived in North Tulsa I had 10 +10 in my 40S&W. But that was a completely different lifestyle.

 

[Mosin77]

I feel pretty strongly that as a civilian I probably won’t need a reload, provided my mag has more than 6 or so rounds. Most civilian self defense encounters seem to resolve themselves in 1-10 shots (based on my highly unscientific survey of YouTube surveillance footage.)

Would I rather have a belt fed and 700 rounds? Absolutely. And I’m sure most well-armed army units would like an M1A1 Abrams or an A-10 Warthog as backup, too. But I figure that most likely, I won’t need a gun at all. And if I do need one, odds are good the situation can be defused just by presenting a firearm. And should I need to fire, odds are very good that a mag’s worth will suffice. By that point the extra effort involved in habitually carrying a second mag makes it not really worthwhile.

But I’d much rather the mag hold more than less, all things considered. The extra effort in carrying a gun that holds 11-16 isn’t much more than the effort involved in packing a smaller gun with notably lower capacity.

 

[.38 Special]

There are instances of CCW carriers needing more than a revolverful - and there probably are examples of CCW carriers needing to reload, though I can't think of any off the top of my head - and so the desire for more rounds is perfectly legitimate. It's one of the key reasons why I've made the switch from revolvers to autos for carry.

But it's also perfectly legitimate for a fellow to decide for himself that he doesn't need more than five or six rounds, or doesn't need a spare magazine, or doesn't even need a gun at all.

I may have some cognitive bias going on, but it seems to me these threads usually degenerate into one side saying they don't feel the need for xx number of rounds for their own personal use, and the other side trying to prove them wrong.

 

[redcon1]

That's a true gem right there! Millions of gun owners will absolutely disagree, including my wife, who is pretty much revolver only for serious duties.

It is a terrible plan. Revolvers pretty much suck in the age of semi-automatic striker fired polymer pistols. Snubby revolvers are the absolute worst and especially for beginners, you might as well give them a percussion cap pistol and a bowie knife to more completely put them at a disadvantage. Mind you, they have their place in self defense for sure but that place is absolutely not in the hands of an inexperienced and/or marginally trained individual. That is reality. If you wish to remain obstinately blind to that reality, you go right ahead and do that but don't expect me to follow suit or the millions of other Americans that are sensible enough to carry a reliable, no drama semi-automatic pistol as a primary self defense weapon.

 

[.455_Hunter]

It is a terrible plan. Revolvers pretty much suck in the age of semi-automatic striker fired polymer pistols. Snubby revolvers are the absolute worst and especially for beginners, you might as well give them a percussion cap pistol and a bowie knife to more completely put them at a disadvantage. Mind you, they have their place in self defense for sure but that place is absolutely not in the hands of an inexperienced and/or marginally trained individual. That is reality. If you wish to remain obstinately blind to that reality, you go right ahead and do that but don't expect me to follow suit or the millions of other Americans that are sensible enough to carry a reliable, no drama semi-automatic pistol as a primary self defense weapon.

Sigh... We will just let that slide for this thread.

 

[GBExpat]

What if a large group of retired Navy SEALs gone bad who are carrying AK47's, wearing body armor, and on cocaine walk up to your table at Olive Garden and try to steal your breadsticks? These days, it is likely to happen anytime, anywhere, to anyone... <SNIP>

... the BEST post that I have read in a long time.

Thanks for that, Simple Shooter!

 

[The Night Rider]

Not a good example because she was preforming overwatch duties as a UNIFORMED, PROPRIETARY security guard for the church.

FIFY

The difference being she had volunteered to specifically perform that function for the church. She was under their insurance rider.

 

[Plan2Live]

I take nothing away from Massad's experience and knowledge but the bottom line is, Massad is going to do what makes him feel comfortable, I'm going to do what I feel comfortable doing based on my location and threat assessment, you should do what makes you comfortable.

Massad would disagree with my daily carry and I'm okay with that.

In closing I'll also mention there are numerous videos and interviews out there where Massad explains, in eloquent detail, why it makes sense to carry a traditional 1911. Just sayin'.

 

[TomJ]

What if a large group of retired Navy SEALs gone bad who are carrying AK47's, wearing body armor, and on cocaine walk up to your table at Olive Garden and try to steal your breadsticks?

Olive Garden gives free refills on the breadsticks. I'd let the Navy Seals have them and order more. In all seriousness I haven't seen anyone talking about these kinds of extreme examples. One of the points made in the video is that attacks and car jackings by multiple attackers is now not uncommon, especially in many cities. Whether at home or if you're out and about, if forced to defend yourself against multiple attackers with no means to escape it's not unreasonable to have a gun with 15 rounds plus a back up magazine. The failure of DA's in some cities to prosecute violent criminals and issues such as the pending no bail law in Illinois have made criminals bolder. As I mentioned before we moved from the Chicago area to a small town in Wisconsin and I understand both sides of this debate. I understand the odds of firing 15 rounds, having to reload and firing more rounds is incredibly small. I just don't see the upside of belittling someone living in a high crime area that carries a higher capacity gun than I do.

 

[Terry G]

Olive Garden gives free refills on the breadsticks. I'd let the Navy Seals have them and order more. In all seriousness I haven't seen anyone talking about these kinds of extreme examples. One of the points made in the video is that attacks and car jackings by multiple attackers is now not uncommon, especially in many cities. Whether at home or if you're out and about, if forced to defend yourself against multiple attackers with no means to escape it's not unreasonable to have a gun with 15 rounds plus a back up magazine. The failure of DA's in some cities to prosecute violent criminals and issues such as the pending no bail law in Illinois have made criminals bolder. As I mentioned before we moved from the Chicago area to a small town in Wisconsin and I understand both sides of this debate. I understand the odds of firing 15 rounds, having to reload and firing more rounds is incredibly small. I just don't see the upside of belittling someone living in a high crime area that carries a higher capacity gun than I do.

Why would you move from lovely Chicago to a backwards small town in Wisconsin? Just because there's no waiting period to buy a gun? Because getting a CCL is a matter of just taking a Hunter's Safety course or none at all if your a Veteran? Because the likely hood of you being robbed or burglarized is very low? Because criminals generally get locked up not released with no bail? I moved from Illinois some forty years ago and it was the smartest thing I've ever done.

 

[Styx]

I carry a 6+1 Kahr K40 and a S&W model 686+ 7 shot revolver. I don't feel like my life is going to end at any moment or that I am at a disadvantage. They are what I carry outside and inside my home for self defense.

The facts are violent crime is the lowest its been in decades, and murders are lower than it was in the 1970, 1980s, and 1990s... While murder rates rose sharply in 2020 after everything started to open back up, violent crime (assaults, rape, robbery, etc) was still low.

I don't live in the ghetto, hood, or high crime drug and gang infested area. I am not a drug dealer, in a gang, or live a life of crime. I also don't have to stop, detain, and imprison deadly criminals who are intent on keeping their freedom and not spending a significant amount or the rest of their lives behind bars.

People have been carrying revolvers, 1911s, and single stacks for well over a century now respectively. Even though they aren't as popular today as they were in the past, over approximately one million revolvers are still sold annually (ATF satistics), and many people still carry them for self defense. During most of the revolvers tenure and even during the hight of it's popularity in the 1900s, higher capacity double and single stack magazine feed semiautomatic pistols existed as did the possibility for there to be multiple attackers.

People have been EDCing revolvers and low capacity mouse/micro pistols for years. Many don't even carry a reload. I've always asked this same question whether threads like this come up: Can anyone cite an anecdotal incident where a law abiding civilian ran out of ammo in a self defense situation, and was found dead near their empty firearm? That question is ALWAYS ignored or gets deflected.