Poll: 8+1 in 1911, Is It Enough?

Is 8+1 in 1911/45Acp Enough/Poll

  • 7+1 is enough

    Votes: 123 54.9%
  • 8+1 is enough

    Votes: 68 30.4%
  • 10+1 is the way to go

    Votes: 7 3.1%
  • 13+1 for High Caps Is The Real Deal

    Votes: 26 11.6%

  • Total voters
    224
Status
Not open for further replies.
7+1 is plenty. Does anyone know of any self-defense encounter anywhere, anytime, involving anyone in which a total of 8 rounds in the gun was not enough?
Do you have a repository of write ups of self defense uses by concealed carry people? I sometimes see a writeup of where ccw'ers have used their guns but I seldom see any reports on the number of rounds fired. The ones that were killed because they ran out aren't very vocal either. :evil:

Seriously though I've never seen a good compilation on the data of concealed carry weapons use, I'd love to see it if you know where to find it.

That said to answer your first question a 1994 robbery of beverly hills jewelers in richmond virginia where the owners had 11 snubs, 1 .44mag, and a 12ga. I believe the owners fired something like 30-40 rounds during the robbery defending themselves against 2 attackers. Thats certainly the extreme scenario, but I'd personally like to see numbers. What percent would we be comfortable with? 85% don't require more than 9 shots? 90%? 95%? We're already preparing a very unlikely event.
 
He wouldn't have needed 30-40 rounds if he could hit what he aimed at.

BTW, protecting a store which has high value merchandise is totally different than SD CCW.
 
Apparantly the L.A. riots dont count here, but I promise it counted for the folks that were carrying in L.A. when those riots happened. Numerous citizens fired dozens or even hundreds of rounds during the four days of rioting, in defense of self and others. What? No other riots will ever happen any where in the US again? Right!

Ever heard of being attacked by a gang? It is more common than some of us sheltered folks may understand.

Lets assume that only 3% of all civilian shootings require more than 4 shots. Heres the problem. If you have to draw and fire your weapon, we've already established that you are having a bad day. So, can we not further establish that if things are not going your way, they may continue to deteriorate and you may find yourself smack in the situation of needing more ammo? If you find yourself in the 3% minority, it will be 100% odds for you at the moment!!

If you are responsible/concerned enough to carry a gun in the first place, why not consider the POTENTIAL need for more ammo???? This is a fair and reasonable question, no?
 
More ammo can never be bad.

But, at what price, i.e. thicker, wider gun, etc. If you can live with it...no problem. If not, I would have no problem carrying a J frame if the odds are 97% that you never need more than 4 rounds. You live with "odds" all the time with everyday life.

Of course, it depends on your environment, job, etc which "alter" the odds in the slim chance that you will ever need to use a gun for self-defense.

Both "issues" to me, are greatly "piece of mind" issues like insurance as oppossed to real life...given the odds.
 
Apparantly the L.A. riots dont count here, but I promise it counted for the folks that were carrying in L.A. when those riots happened. Numerous citizens fired dozens or even hundreds of rounds during the four days of rioting, in defense of self and others.

This claim really needs a citation. I would be particularly interested in the people who were out in the streets carrying hundreds of rounds on a daily basis.

Ever heard of being attacked by a gang? It is more common than some of us sheltered folks may understand.

Again, let's have a citation with some multiple assailant attacks. I'd be particularly interested in the ones where single person with lots of ammo successfully held off a gang. Do these common gang attacks include gang members running in one or two a time so a qualified marksman can pick them off?

Lets assume that only 3% of all civilian shootings require more than 4 shots. Heres the problem. If you have to draw and fire your weapon, we've already established that you are having a bad day. So, can we not further establish that if things are not going your way, they may continue to deteriorate and you may find yourself smack in the situation of needing more ammo? If you find yourself in the 3% minority, it will be 100% odds for you at the moment!!

You may find yourself in a position where you wish you had body armor and a long gun as well. Do you recommend we all carry those at all times?

If you are responsible/concerned enough to carry a gun in the first place, why not consider the POTENTIAL need for more ammo???? This is a fair and reasonable question, no?

Sure, it's worth considering. However, as it is obvious here, many of us have considered it and decided against it. It isn't fair and reasonable to keep beating us over the head with this "LOOK AT THE LA RIOTS" hysteria to try to prove your point.
 
I don't think I'd trust many opinions in this thread seeing as so many people are wrong about the basics of how magazines work.

It's kinda sad that it took till post 41 before Black Majik mentioned that springs don't wear out simply from being under tension, and then Dustinthewind turned right around and told him he was wrong.

Putting more tension on a spring simply doesn't make it wear out faster. At least not in a remotely significant way. There are plenty instances of people having fully loaded magazines left over from WWI and WWII which operated perfectly. There are also plenty pistol mags with good springs that get worn out after a year because they are constantly cycled. Rotating magazines simply means that all your magazines will get worn out equally.

I beg people like Dustinthewind to try their little "leave a loaded mag in a safe" game again and try to pay a little more attention and you'll see that the mag doesn't wear out in any noticable way unless you have a faulty mag that was actually loaded beyond its design limit.

As far as the actual poll, it's definitely more about training. The saddest thing I've seen in reports over and over is when a police officer shoots the standard double-tap and then the 3% of the time that the perp doesn't drop, he doesn't just keep shooting.

It's pretty easy to squeeze off 8 or more shots in 2 seconds, and it's going to take someone that long to hit the ground a lot of times even if the first shot did the trick. Obviously predicting another L.A. Riots or Katrina is a little out there; it's not totally absurd, but statistically your chances of running into a problem with one or two people is much greater. It's that possibility of a second person that would concern me. When I think of situations where I felt like things could go bad quickly, I can only think of one with a single steroid-crazy skinhead pounding on my car. The others all involved multiple people, whether it one guy trying to start something up with his friend, or one guy trying to start something up with a car loaded with four friends who looked ready to back him up.

So I'd like to have a solid eight shots to empty quickly, and not be worried about conserving ammo should a second assailant decide amazingly that he feels like sticking around.

There's always the Manchurian thing, where you shoot twice then go for the headshot, but I'm just not sure what I think of that. I'll practice that kind of thing at the range some, but if I'm full of adrenaline, I'm not sure I would want to stop shooting at a guy's chest to take an aimed shot at his head. I also worry a little about actually having to point the gun up shooting in any kind of public place. Who knows where that bullet's going to land?
 
:D For normal defense cituations it is more than enough. But if your in a full blown shootout I would perfer something else. Glock 34 anyone?
 
Gun capacity and the # of rounds that you have immediately available for reload are two different things, there's no reason why someone with a single stack 1911 couldn't carry a like total # of rounds as someone with a double stack pistol. In fact I find the 7 round mags so easy to carry I'd rather pack 3of them for every double row mag.
 
"Police always carry two extra magazines for their guns, why shouldn't you?"

Because I practice more than the average police officer? There must be a reason, no?

Oh, I remember now. It's because I don't have to go around with a target pinned to my chest.

John
 
I voted for 8+1 because if I have to feed anyone some lead, I give them a double expresso. I don't count my shots but I can count engagement(s) per threat and if I reach 4 engagement I can reload with 1 more still ready-to-go.
I perfer shooting double stack guns over single stack(just my preference). But I'll always love to have more rounds than I need when I go to combat.
 
I voted seven plus one even though I carry ten plus one in my Mil Pro PT145. The reason is the PT145 is smaller and conceals easier than my full size 45s do and it just happens to carry ten plus one. If I had it to do over again I might even buy the PT745 which is a true seven plus one in an even smaller package. If you need more than three or four rounds to stop a situation you have violated the situational awareness doctrine.
 
Jorg,

I dont need a "citation". Crud, do you think I kept notes from that long ago in order to convince uniformed peopel 17 years later? I dont give a rip if you believe me or not, but you may want to pay attention, cause it all happened.

I was in CA when those riots erupted. The local news carried scenes that the national news didnt. I remember two guys that broke into a gun shop to protect themselves from a gang and fired many hundreds of rounds at that gang and survived. I cant and wont give a needless citation, but I watched it on TV as those two guys shot it out for over an hour with about 15 armed gang members. A news helcopter was filming.

I remember a large firearmes/ammo distributor in LA that was hit by looting mobs. All the buildings around them were set on fire from the mobs. They, on the other hand, placed about 10 men with AR 15s' on the roof of their building and held off the mobs. This was also filmed by a news reporter in a helocopter.

I remeber news footage (this one aired nationaly) of Reginald Denny being drug out of his truck in a riot caused traffic jam. He was beaten, had his skull crushed with a brick and was left to die in the streets of LA and no one intervened. After he was left for dead, some gang banger walked up and shot him at point blank with a 12 gauge. At the time this was happening, I commented to my wife how different the out come would have been if I was driving that truck instead of Reginald.

I remember news footage of several neighborhoods that barricaded their streets off with cars and with armed men--and saved thier neighborhoods in the process.

These riots werent the first deadly riots in LA. 20 years earlier, they had the Watts riots, in which more people were killed than in the Rodney King riots. I belive similar riots have occured in NY, SF, and Detroit over the years. Never mind Katrina.

My point certainly isnt that a riot is comming to your town soon, far from it. My point is that too much ammo is better than too little ammo. Any attemtp on our part to rationalize or figure what will or wont happen to us in this life, is a feeble, at best, attempt. Being ignorant of the facts certainly wont help. At least we can be informed. Heck, most folks choose not to carry any form of protection at all--they can have it.

Public unrest and civil disobenience is a greater and greater reality as this society with all its moral problems deteriorates more an more. Just wait till a big earth quake comes to an urban area near you. I'm not going to "cite" that either, believe it or not, your choice, wont effect me. Each person will make those decisions for themselves. Since you asked, this thread was about how much ammo to carry, not body armor and long guns.
 
Well since I am not in SWAT or in Iraq I figure If I cannot take care of the situation with 8+1 or even 7+1 I am probably in bigger trouble than I can shoot my way out of.

If you have emptied you mag and the attacker is still advancing:
1st. your a terrible shot and 14 misses is no different than 1 or 7.

2nd. You had better be prepared to go hand to hand (depending on distance between you and the attacker) at 7 yds you have like what 3 seconds to aquire fire before he is in your face!

3rd. If you are greatly outnumbered the gun is intended to be a deterrant and or used to buy time to escape. If you think just cuz you have a gun you can stand your ground no matter what circumstance you are facing. You will probably end up dead or have a major ego/anger problem.
I carry to avoid not confront. If confronted I pray I make the right choices and am able to defend myself/family. We can talk all we want but until it really happens we just don't know.

As the old TV sitcom says "8" is enough
 
sb350hp,

I vividly remember watching the Reginald Denny thing over and over and wondering how I would have got out of that situation.... If I did everything correctly and quickly, I'll bet I could have delivered myself with 8 rounds of ammo. In those days, I was carrying a Para Ordiance P14 and I normally carried two spare mags. with it. I'm pretty sure that the 40+ rounds I was carrying would have given me a better advantage than 8.

I am not an alarmist, but I'm not an ostrich either.
 
8+1 is enough if you say it is...

Having said that, for some wierd reason, If I carry my 1911(7+1), I ALWAYS carry an extra mag. If I carry my Glock 23(10+1), with only a 3 round difference, I don't always carry the extra mag:confused: . What can I say, I'm quriky like that.

Still 2 Many Choices!?
 
I voted for 7+1 is enough.......

5 plus another 5 in a speed strip has gotten me and the family this far....

I'm responible for three kids and a wife plus who ever the kids drag along. My first objective is to get them safety AWAY from the threat. I don't have any bussiness starting a "shootout" with a minivan full of little leaguers.

But, and its a big but, I get caught in St Louis or Paduach during a "bad situation", I hope I have enough AWARENESS is get to the van and get the hell out of there. In the van, I've got supplies and weapons better than a handgun. I've got ALOT of ammo for them!

As far as gangs, I've worked correction for 15 years. "Gangsters" are alot like wild animals. They are VERY dangerous in packs, but when you kill the first one or they "realize" you are going to fight back and are not an easy target, they retreat. Why did the Koreans ond other folks who armed themselves during the RK Roits not lose property, because they stood their ground and SHOWED they were NOT an easy target. I doubt they were walking around with longguns waiting for the day to use them. They had them ready WHEN NEEDED and IN REACH.

Carrying a handgun is compermise (sp?) AT BEST. I would rather have a good carbine in ANY centerfire caliber over a handgun during anytime of the day. If I'm only allowed eight rounds, give me a Garand! I but those eight rounds stop a BG! But we can't do that. We can't secure or 30/30 on the rifle rack on the shooping cart at WalMart while we get some fishing worms and snacks. We have to walk around with a weapon hidden so some sheep doesn't freak out and pee on themselves. And if the we feel the threat is real enough, we do it illegally.

Yep, I think 7+1 is enough, enough to get me to some real firepower!

Jerry
 
Hi Cap Mag's

My primary home defense weapon is a Springfield XD .45acp 5 inch barrel 13 shot mag one in the chamber. The back-up gun [always loaded] is a Taurus 24/7 .40 cal 15 in the mag one in the chamber. Having 29 shots of high power ammo on hand probably seems like over kill. But the variables none of us can control, are how many perp's may threaten our lives, and how well armed they may be. So to sum it up, if I am going down, I'm going down fighting! Hope everyone has a nice evening!

The Best to all!

Frank
 
tostada

Since I brought this up:uhoh: I have a friend that is an engineer, the mechanical and structural kind, not the train kind, and this is what he told me. A spring held at maximum compression will relax more over time than a spring that is cycled between high stress and low stress. The reason being that the spring spends more time at the higher stress level. Also humidity and temperature factor into spring relaxation. He also said that a springs failure rate is directly related to the tempering process when the spring is manufactured. My experience is that I have had several magazines that have been loaded for extended periods of time and the springs have weakened significantly, not to the point of malfunction but enough that I would not risk my life with them. Your experiences with magazines may differ from mine as may your opinions.
 
If you have emptied you mag and the attacker is still advancing:
1st. your a terrible shot and 14 misses is no different than 1 or 7.
I'm not sure that I'd agree and even if I did I'm not sure it'd matter. I think the NYPD study I saw was something like 20% of all their shots were hits, the rest misses. We all have our own opinions of our skills and confidence, but there's some people with a little training who miss with 7-8 of those 9 shots. Maybe its the stress, maybe its the problem of hitting a moving target while moving, maybe its the difficulty of being accurate while shooting behind cover...either way. I'm feeling pretty confident with stationary practice and hitting a bullseye, but I would like more shooting and moving practice and I just can't do that every time I go to the range.

That aside you're counting on a couple hits to be a stopper. You can certainly get hits and still have a person bleedng and attacking for another 30 seconds. I'd rather be able to keep putting holes in an attacker that isn't ready to quit before he loses enough blood. It doesn't necessarily mean you're a bad shot, just that handguns aren't amazing man stoppers and your attacker hasn't decided to quit yet.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top