So another irony in the 'smaller mags' debate is the natural move to larger bullets. If you can carry 20 in 9x19, it's a tradeoff for many people over a larger bullet, say the .45 ACP in a smaller capacity.
However, IF we are limited on capacity in some way, say you can only have 10 rounds, then it makes sense for some to switch from their smaller calibers to larger ones.
If YOU could only carry 10 or less, would that impact your decision to switch calibers in your gun? Or do you already carry a gun that carrys 10 or less? If you carry a wondernine, for instance, would you continue to carry it with only 10 rounds, or would you switch to a larger caliber?
I understand and endorse the argument for shot placement btw...
Some years ago, back when CA was first preparing to enact their magazine capacity restrictions, I listened to everyone discussing this subject of caliber priority versus magazine capacity. I almost leaned toward the caliber-superiority group. Almost.
The first several years of my LE career were spent carrying an issued 6-shot revolver as a duty weapon. I carried the issued .357 Magnum, although .38 Spl, .44 Magnum/Spl and .45 Colt/ACP revolvers were authorized, and some older guys carried them. I carried similar 6-shot revolvers off-duty, as well as a Colt Commander (with 7-rd magazines).
When they gave me a hi-cap 9mm back about '90, I did miss my Magnum service revolver, and I still thought my .45's were better than 9mm's.
Everybody had been talking about the Miami-Dade FBI shooting for a few years by that time, as well as the 10mm for LE usage ... and then S&W went and developed the .40 S&W with Winchester. Now it started to get a bit murky ...
Now, after having spent more years in LE, and retiring (but still keeping my hand in things as a firearms trainer/instructor), I don't give the same priority to caliber as a number of other folks.
Nowadays I carry & use 9mm, .40 S&W and .45 ACP pistols, and carry one or another of my 5-shot .38's (and every once in a while I may carry one of my 5-shot .357's actually loaded with .357 Magnum).
I don't see how either caliber or capacity can successfully "offset", or make up for, lack of attention to skillset, recurrent training/practice, mindset and attention to equipment maintenance.
Only one of the full-size pistols I presently own uses hi-cap mags ... and that's only 12 round mags, at that. (I have some 10-rd mags for that pistol, and I'll occasionally find myself using them.) The rest use 6, 7, 8, 9 & 10 rounds mags.
I'm fine with that.
While I carried one or another issued hi-cap 9 or .40 during the "middle" of my career, when I retired I was carrying an issued 7+1 .45 pistol ... but I'd have been fine (happier, in fact) if they'd let me carry a 3913TSW (8+1 capacity) on-duty. Lighter & smaller than the .45 compact I was given ... and I shoot the 3913's rather well.
Whenever one of our folks is looking to argue about the differences in pistol calibers or magazine capacities, I ask them to reflect upon their demonstrated performance & abilities during their qual course-of-fire ... and ask them if they didn't feel they might put their attention to better use by trying to improve their skillset & mindset.
It's just a handgun ... chambered in one or another of the commonly used calibers used for defensive purpose.
