too much magazine capacity?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Too much ammunition? Well when you get right down to it I haven't needed any ammunition so far, but then I am only 24 years old.

Figure if I ever do need ammunition the last thing on my mind is going to be that I am carrying too much. If I don't make it its not like people are going to say to themselves at my funeral "if only he hadn't had so much ammunition".

Remember; there is no such thing as one shot stops. We have all heard the many stories where there thugs and criminals weren't even stopped by having a revolver unloaded into them. That said I am reasonably confident in 15 shot stops. I figure with two reloads and a loaded Glock 19 I am prepared to stop up to three attackers as I flee for my life. I am being a bit tongue-in-cheek but I think you all get my point.
 
The original question and intent of this thread seems to have gotten lost in the fray, so I will reformulate it: Does anyone know of any situation or has even heard an account of a (non-LEO) person needing (as in used in an actual situation) more than say 15 rounds of ammo? Everyone has their own idea of how much is enough and no one is going to change anyone's mind. And, I can think up scenarios where 15 guys with 50 long guns all end up dead so I'm not really looking for hypotheticals either. At least no one has mentioned how 20 rounds of .45 compares with 20 rounds of 9mm.;)
 
I know some knock the J frames with scenarios about 6 attackers, but 18?

It used to be the military and LE advocated a double tap as the minimum response. Now it's a double tap and a third to the head for some organizations. A J frame simply doesn't have the capacity for that kind response. Besides, I'd rather have too many rounds than not enough.
 
If I were the victim of a home invasion involving three armed perps, I'd want more than five rounds to defend myself.

If three armed perps attempted to waylay me in a parking lot, I'd want more than five rounds to defend myself.

Remember the Liberty City (Miami) riots of 1980, and the 1992 Los Angeles riots? A combined death toll of over 70 in both cities, and many more people badly beaten up. Many were innocent people who were walking or driving in the wrong place at the wrong time, when attacked by violent mobs. The riots were spontaneous, there was no advance warning.

If I were caught in the middle of an urban riot with violent mobs roaming the streets, I'd want more than five rounds to defend myself.

Better safe than sorry, I say.
 
After spending many months with my 642 and thinking about various situations, I have trouble envisioning needing another 12 rounds. Do any of you fine folks know of or have heard tell of a civilian needing 17 shots? Geez that seems like a lot. I know some knock the J frames with scenarios about 6 attackers, but 18?
Some people buy the smallest fire extinguisher for their kitchen, garage, etc and regret it later.

People absorb rounds of various pistol calibers and drive or walk themselves to hospital ERs. Gangs, major robberies - being at the wrong place at the wrong time, civil unrest ... feral dog packs - I would not want to stake my life universally on five rounds from any pistol.

There are a thousand and one scenarios you may find yourself in where five rounds is gone in a couple of seconds and you might wish you had a box of fifty in your pocket.

There are risks with a low probability and those of a higher probability. There are those of very low risk - with very high consequences. Dismiss the ridiculous - like the hippo breaking out of the zoo enclosure - and address the general risks of city, urban, rural and some wilderness travel.

I do not think that a pistol with 17 rounds charged and a spare mag or two of 17 more is anything but a good idea.

----------------------------

http://searchronpaul.com
http://ussliberty.org/oldindex.html
http://www.gtr5.com
http://ssunitedstates.com
 
Posted by Harvster:
Does anyone know of any situation or has even heard an account of a (non-LEO) person needing (as in used in an actual situation) more than say 15 rounds of ammo?

Liberty City (Miami) riots of 1980.
Los Angeles riots of 1992.

Many innocent people killed or badly beaten by roaming mobs.
 
Posted by Sage of Seattle:
I think that was his point. If the reason you don't have your gun with you is because of the extra weight and bulk of 18 or 19 rounds plus the extra weight and bulk of a spare mag or two, then the amount of ammo is quite relevant.

If ANYBODY finds two magazines of ammo too heavy to carry, I would like to make the friendly suggestion that they immediately check themselves into a facility that provides care for the physically infirm. :)

I carry three full ones whenever I CC, one in my weapon and two extras, and the weight doesn't bother me a bit.
 
Liberty City (Miami) riots of 1980.
Los Angeles riots of 1992.

Many innocent people killed or badly beaten by roaming mobs.

I don't think this really fits the bill unless you know of situations within this where someone expended all their ammo and was attacked anyway.
 
Posted by Harvster:
I don't think this really fits the bill unless you know of situations within this where someone expended all their ammo and was attacked anyway.

Well, if you think that five rounds of ammunition is adequate protection against roaming bands of up to 25 or 30 armed thugs, there's probably not a situation in the world that could convince you otherwise.

I'm glad you have an intelligent wife. ;)
 
Well, if you think that five rounds of ammunition is adequate protection against roaming bands of up to 25 or 30 armed thugs, there's probably not a situation in the world that could convince you.

One person against 25-30 armed thugs? I don't think this happens too often, and, if it does 1 vs. 30 armed people is a losing situation no matter how many rounds you may have, short of sitting in the cockpit of an A-10.
 
Posted by Harvster:
One person against 25-30 armed thugs? I don't think this happens too often, and, if it does 1 vs. 30 armed people is a losing situation no matter how many rounds you may have, short of sitting in the cockpit of an A-10.

It happened in Liberty City. It happened in Miami. It happened in other major riots in American history.

I carry three magazines on my person and two extras in my car, for a total of 66 rounds.

Anybody with common sense would agree that 66 rounds against 30 thugs, sure beats the heck out of 5 rounds against 30 thugs.

Even if I was attacked while I wasn't in my car, I would still have 40 rounds on my person. If I'm attacked by a mob on the street, I'll have a heckuva lot better chance with 40 rounds than 5.

It's simple common sense.
 
Some people buy the smallest fire extinguisher for their kitchen, garage, etc and regret it later.

Interesting analogy. Do I have to carry it around with me?
 
Does anyone know of any situation or has even heard an account of a (non-LEO) person needing (as in used in an actual situation) more than say 15 rounds of ammo?
I dont have a link to a news report of an actual shooting, if thats what you are looking for, but even if you eliminate the multiple BG scenarios, it isnt to hard to imaging 15 not being enough against just 1 BG in a SD scenario. In spite of how good a shot we all think we are, and how we can draw and point shoot dead on everytime at the range, a real gunfight is going to be nothing like the range. If the BG is shooting back, and especially if he shoots first, you will be having to move A LOT very quick, and do it while shooting. Thats going to make missing, or hitting non-stopping body part a LOT more likely. 2 people running, ducking, diving behind things, etc, all while firing at each other, you are going to have a LOT of misses, and start to quickly run low on ammo. I would suspect this is why you do often see LEO shootouts with them emptying a full mag each, if not more before its over. It may not be that they are just horrible shots, it could be, that in a surprise, life or death, panic stuation, hitting your target, or even getting to do much in the way of aiming or thinking, is going to be VERY hard, if not nearly impossible to do.

We all like to think we'll just double tap the BG from the hip and be done with it, but I'm willing to bet that only happens in the movies, in our heads, and when we practice at the range with a target that isnt running, jumping, diving, and actively trying to kill us.

I wouldnt know, as I have never even had to point a gun at someone, but I suspect that a real gunfight, possibly in the dark, against a person trying very hard to kill you, makes hitting you target EXTREMELY difficult in reality, and ammo will go VERY quickly.

I suspect the reality is a lot more sceaming like a little girl, with blurred vision, in a total panic, while diving and squeezing the trigger as fast as you can. (I know, we are all to manly, well trained, and to well practiced for that, right :p)

Just my .02 cents on how it may really go down for most people (not me though, I'm a true operator and only need 1 round for betwen his eyes, but....) :neener:
 
I'll have a heckuva lot better chance with 40 rounds than 5.
No one is disputing that. But in dealing with what if scenarios it's easy to just keep going. For example: What if you are facing 90 armed thugs? suddenly your 66 rounds seems a little inadequate. It really is a question of statistics. Many of us will go our entire lives without ever needing to use our guns in self defense. Of the small number that do need to draw their weapon, many won't even fire a shot. Of the even smaller number that need to fire a shot even less will need multiple shots. Of the ever diminishing remainder only a tiny fraction will ever need to reload. So as I have said, carry all you want and think you need, as will I. The fire extinguisher thing got me thinking, I've got five smoke detectors in my house. I feel that is adequate. I could put up another ten or so in case some of the batteries die or sensors malfunction because I'd rather have em and not need em then need em and not have em, but at some point everyone draws their own line at their own risk assesment level.
 
Off-duty, I usually carry a G27. Loaded, I have 10 rds. I have two mag holders, one that holds one mag and the other holds two. Those stay in the car along with two extra mags. Depending on where I'm going, I vary what I grab when I get out. Some times, I'm out of the car with just what's in the gun, sometimes with one extra for 19 rds, sometimes with two for 28 rds.

If I'm going somewhere I think is shaky, I may grab two G23 mags to carry so I have 36 rds. If it's really shaky, I will usually carry a G23 and two mags so the count is 40 rds. Once, I even swapped the mags out for two G35 mags because I was really "afeered" about where I was going. I doubted I'd seriously need 44 rds, but it did give me a warm feeling knowing I had them.

On duty, my bag has two extra mags for my handgun and two extra 20 rd mags for my AR. I think there's five extra slugs in there too for the 12 ga. Since I carry 40 rds of handgun ammo on my belt and there's a 30 rd and a 20 rd mag with the rifle, I guess I have enough without the extra in the bag. And, if I have the shotgun in the car, I have 11 rds of slugs and four 00 buck so the other 5 slugs are probably not necessary.

I probably have too much ammo. But, there is that warm feeling I alluded to previously. I like that feeling.
 
There is a saying in aviation that you can never have enough fuel. While that may be true, sometimes you need to make trade offs depending upon, weight and range. I think this is true for ammuntion as well. I think 17 is a LOT of ammo to be carrying around everyday. There's a lot of weight in ammo, a 642 probably weighs less than just that ammo. For me 9 rounds is a pretty good compromise and is usually what I carry in a single stack 9MM or .380. A good compact, double stack 9MM can usually carry around 15 which is my personal max in a concealed weapon. As a private citizen, I don't realistically seeing me in prolonged gun battles with multiple assailants. If between 9 and 15 rounds can't do it for me then I'm really in the wrong place and have broken my first rule. Stay out of dangerous places if at all possible.
 
it would be a very bad day when a civillian would NEED 17 rounds of handgun ammo. unless you live or frequent a VERY BAD neighborhood often, i would wander around with the magazine about 1/2 empty. i, would feel pretty comfortable with 8 rounds of ammo. but that is me, for my lifestyle. HOWEVER, i would keep more ammo, or at least the other clip FULL and in the car for back up. you may never need it. but if you do, it would not be to far away. and if you do end up in one of those bad neighbor hoods, it would be pretty handy to just swap out the full clip for the 1/2 full clip.
 
Last edited:
it would be a very bad day when a civillian would NEED 17 rounds of handgun ammo. unless you live or frequent a VERY BAD neighborhood often, i would wander around with the magazine about 1/2 empty.
How is it a GOOD day if you need "only" FIVE rounds?

ANY neighborhood can get REALLY bad, REALLY fast. It just takes the "right" person or persons deciding to pay a visit, as that doctor, his wife and two daughters found out in Connecticut a while ago.

Saying "nobody" needs 17 rounds because the neighborhood is "good", is only a hop, skip and a jump from saying nobody needs a GUN for the same reason.
 
Seventy-eight-year-old Mattie Lou Sherman was prepared when she set out one Friday night to investigate a loud noise at the back door of her house. Before she could get that far, she met a man, already inside, advancing toward her. According to police, she fired five times from her .38-cal. handgun, sending the man fleeing. Later, officers found the intruder near a local elementary school with wounds to the head, neck, and shoulder. They said he would face first-degree burglary charges. (Greensboro News & Record, Greensboro, NC, 4/28/98)
While not 17 shots, this does demonstrate that five shots, and apparently three hits including the head and neck did not put this guy down. While he fled, had he been armed he could have killed this lady even after taking these hits.
In a vicious attack, a 100-pound Japanese Akita knocked down Ellen Justice in front of her home in Plymouth, Massachusetts, when she attempted to collect her mail. As the dog tore at Justice’s limbs, several neighbors tried to intervene. That’s when Vincent Mallozzi, the brother of the dog’s owner, shot the animal with a 20-ga. shotgun. Remarkably, though, it continued its rampage, attacking a police officer who had arrived to pursue it. Patrolman Kenneth Rood eventually fired nine rounds from his .40-cal. handgun before the dog fell dead. Rood and Justice were both treated at a nearby hospital. Police said Mallozzi did the right thing. (The Patriot Ledger, Quincy, MA, 3/27/98)
One hit from a 20 gauge shotgun, and still attacking. Then nine .40s to kill it. What if Mallozi had only a five shot .38, no reloads, and Patrolman Rood had taken 10 minutes to get there?

Found those two on kressworks.com.

From:
http://www.claytoncramer.com/weblog/2004_02_01_archive.html

Wednesday, February 04, 2004

Feral Dog Packs & High Capacity Magazines

Here's an interesting item from the Los Angeles Times about feral and wild dog packs:

Steve Jenkins was jogging on the outskirts of Palm Springs on New Year's Day in 2002 when he was surrounded by a gang of 20 dogs. The hounds tore chunks of flesh from his arms and legs, pulling him down each time he tried to stagger to his feet.

Predatory dog packs like the one that attacked Jenkins, a Pasadena drummer, are emerging as a threat to wildlife and humans nationwide. In Montana and Colorado, dog mobs routinely kill deer, antelope, moose and elk. In a Colorado Division of Wildlife report, one department says they field reports of dogs chasing big game almost daily.

In January 2003, in a forest preserve in Chicago, a 48-year-old woman was killed by a dog pack. And in Daly City, Calif., last October, 20 wild dogs killed 13 sheep at a 4-H club and stalked students at a neighboring elementary school.

In Southern California, more and more wildlife workers are reporting run-ins with dogs.

"It's a significant and very important threat in the urban fringe areas," says Jill Heaton, principal investigator for the University of Redlands Desert Tortoise Project.

Heaton herself was recently charged by six dogs while doing fieldwork on the Twentynine Palms Marine base.

There is no central clearinghouse to track assaults by dog packs on either humans or wildlife, so the scope of the problem is not known. But because of the unpredictable nature of the attacks, some outdoor workers now fear dogs even more than classic predators such as cougars.
Now, in other parts of America, they have these sort of problems, but not being in California, they are allowed to defend themselves. This story appeared in one of the Tampa Bay, Florida papers February 1, 2003, on the tbo.com site (it's not there now):
TAMPA - Teresa Castellano knows that some folks saved her life. She just doesn't know who they are.

Castellano, 25, her daughter, Alysa McBride, 6, and her daughter's friend, Kaitlyn Green, 8, survived a recent attack from two Rottweilers and a pit bull.

It is an amazing story of horror and heroism.

Castellano said it began while she was watching the girls at Kaitlyn's home on Jan. 18. Kaitlyn's father, Sean Green, had stepped out for 10 minutes to run an errand.

...

The dogs attacked.

"When [the Rottweilers] saw the fear, one of them started biting Kaitlyn,'' Castellano said. "I told them to stop screaming because they were making the dogs upset.''

Castellano said she laid on the girls to try and protect them from the dogs. She then tried to block the dogs to give the girls a chance to escape to a bedroom.

Nothing was working. The Rottweilers were going wild.

So Castellano and the girls bolted outside the house at 8126 Bay Drive. The girls ran to safety in a neighbor's house while Castellano distracted the dogs. The pit bull, Petey, joined in the attack.

The commotion outside attracted the attention of neighbors and a motorist passing by.

...

Anderson, 22, was about to get out of his car when he looked over his shoulder and saw a man toting a pistol. He kept honking his horn and sped away to get his friend, Justin Turner, who lived nearby.

The man with gun was Winston H. Harr, a next-door neighbor. He had heard screaming outside and grabbed his Kimber .45-caliber pistol. His wife, Deborah, came, too.

Harr said he saw Anderson's car moving back and forth in the driveway, and three dogs attacking a woman. Harr fired three shots into the ground to try and scare the dogs. They screamed at the dogs, but it didn't seem to matter.

Deborah Harr called the dogs by name, and they stopped momentarily.

Then, without warning, the dogs charged at Harr. The pit bull bit him on the leg before Harr trained his pistol and fired, hitting the dog in the head. He also fired at one of the Rottweilers, and it fell to the ground.

Harr, a librarian's assistant at Jimmie B. Keel Regional Library near Carrollwood, said he fired the rest of his bullets at the third dog, and it seemed to back away. He bolted for his house for more ammunition and a flashlight.
Let's see, and the reason that we passed a ban on high capacity magazines was because there was no legitimate use for them?

At the close of the 19th century, handguns were often advertised for dealing with dogs. I used to wonder if this was some sort of coy way of avoiding a more direct reference to self-defense, but in an age when dogs often ran loose, and rabies was more common than today, this makes a lot of sense. Having been bit badly by a dog once (and not even a very big dog at that), and feeling the air as another dog's teeth went through my pants leg, I find dogs a strong argument for carrying a pistol. Packs of feral or wild dogs are an argument for something with 13 to 15 round magazines.

I'll take my Browning high Power with two extra 13-rounders to a five shot revolver sans reloads any day thank you. As someone remarked already - glad you have an intelligent wife. :D
 
LAK- Good examples, thank you. I think the four legged thugs scare me more than the two-legged variety. And I'm glad my wife can now be back up for me. She is probably a better shot than me anyway.
 
Does anyone know of any situation or has even heard an account of a (non-LEO) person needing (as in used in an actual situation) more than say 15 rounds of ammo?

There was the incident in which a driver with a CCW saw an officer who had performed a traffic stop under fire in Arizona (if I recall the state correctly). He stopped and rendered aid in the form of both mags from his Glock 31. He ran out of ammuniton (he did not "spray and pray" but instead was firing at perps who had the benefit of a vehicle for cover but stopped the assault.

There was the officer in NY who used a J-frame as the first part of her defense against multiple attackers robbing the salon she was getting her hair done at. After running dry on her snub-nose, she grabbed a weapon that had fallen from robber she'd shot and finished the others off. Although this is an LEO involved shooting, the circumstances are the same as with any CCW so should be included.

There was a shop owner in Richmond who had been hit before and decided to cache multiple Rossi .38s in his store. When he got hit by a roving gang (which consisted of a crew operating out of a carnival and robbing locations the carnival visited), he ran from location to location emptying the revolvers at the offenders. He got multiple hits, but still ran several revolvers dry in doing so.

The CCW who stopped the church killings in Colorado ran through quite a bit of ammunition as well.
 
How is it a GOOD day if you need "only" FIVE rounds?

That's the ultimate point. If you have to pull the trigger, you have just won the "bad day" lottery statistically. Do we really want to fall back on "okay, the one in a million event has occurred, but at least it's not the one in 1.0000001 million situation where more than five rounds is needed?"

Carry what you want, but let's not get into the whole "you'll never need it" bit. If you want to go there, you aren't likely to need the five rounds in the snub nose either, so why not leave them at home to save weight?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top