So how many Rounds on board are "enough"?

[Tamara]

Unless you're running a S&W 432 like me: 6-shot 32H&R mag with Black Hills 85gr JHP.

Fist bump.

100gr SJHP from Georgia Arms, here. Don't know how well they'll expand; I just like the the idea of a bit of sectional density.

[Mitchell, Esq.]

#1 Extra mags are a luxury only to be enjoyed by those looking for trouble. Most gunfights between top level marksmen and untrained rabble alike won't last long enough for you to reload. The ones that do are both so rare and so dangerous that your extra reloads probably aren't going to count for much.

#2 Legally, reloading in a gunfight is a tenuous action. It implies that there was time for thought, and that the next rounds fired are let loose with purpose and intent. Pulling your gun to defend yourself is one thing, but taking the time to reload and get back on target will temper the opinions of the grand jury hearing your case.

#1 Why do I care about training for fighting "untrained rabble"? I train for a motivated, malevolent person who had decided I am in his way, and it's easier to kill me than to ask nicely in order to get what he wants.

#2 Really? You got any training/info to back that statement up, or are you just making up legal arguments to sound like you know what you are talking about?

Now, I don't know much about law as related to self defense and all that stuff...but it seems to me that because the standards for self defense involve review of your actions under the subjective/objective test, the people reviewing your incident would want to know if your actions were subjectively reasonable to you per your training, and objectively reasonable under the common course of practice for someone carrying a gun according to the training standards of the day...

Standards set by people like...

SIG Academy.
Tactical Response.
Massad Ayoob.
Michael de Bethencourt.

Who all say that after shooting, you reload and make sure not to stand their with an empty gun.

But I'm sure all of them know nothing about anything compared to you...Right?

[Johnkard]

http://thinkinggunfighter.blogspot.c...-findings.html

Is a good example of what most modern statistics indicate.


As to the first point, my reference is to the defender's experience, not the agressor. Untill you have actually been in combat, you cannot speculate about your reaction. Training (even very good training as provided by SIG Academy, Tactical Response, Massad Ayoob, Michael de Bethencourt, etc...) breaks down as soon as the first shot is fired. The only people that can actually predict and control their reaction under fire are those who have had both training AND experience taking live fire. Neither you, nor I have had such experience...therefore we fall into the breadth of the aforementioned statistics. That means we're most likely to fire 2 shots or just keep shooting till the weapon is empty. In either case, the agressor will almost certainly be dead or fleeing for his/her life after the first few shots. The preconceived notion of a truly malevolent bad guy intent on murder is naive and astronomically unlikely compared to normal thread for events that demand the use of a firearm.

As to the second. according to the above article, 3/482 incidents involved a reload, and considering the fact that most aggressors simply run away after the first few shots are fired, any competent prosecutor is going stress the fact that you paused long enough to reload and keep your senses, but still continued shooting.

I have no way or reason to prove that my experience or qualification validates what I say. In general, I let logic dictate what I type, and if somebody disagrees or comes to a different conclusion all the better, I get to learn something new. I honestly couldn't care less whether I am right or wrong, I simply want to propagate conversation that will develop the original idea, and ideally lead to a conclusion that shows the culmination of a great many members' constructive input.

[Tamara]

The preconceived notion of a truly malevolent bad guy intent on murder is naive and astronomically unlikely...

So is needing a gun in the first place, and yet here we all are.

[Al T.]

#2 Legally, reloading in a gunfight is a tenuous action.

Anything you do in a use of force situation is fraught with peril. Locally, our state grass roots legal representative presented a CLE course to state prosecutors. There was a tremendous amount of ignorance about using a firearm in self defense. I've posted an abbreviated summary of his comments:

I was one of the instructors at two recent continuing legal education
classes for judges, magistrates, and lawyers.

(snip)

There were a couple of issues that came up that I thought you might
find interesting.

1) A lawyer asked me why Jason Dickey's failure to fire a warning
shot should not be held against him.

2) A prosecutor stated that "they" use the fact that the shooter used
two hands to hold the handgun as proof that the shooter acted with
premeditation.

[KravPirate]

For me, I often carry without a spare mag when I am alone. I know lots of people would disagree with this. However, The chances of me reloading are very slim. My pistol is with me as a way to get the hell out of a deadly encounter as quickly as possible. What if my pistol malfunctions? I throw it as freaking hard as I can while I am running the other way! If I am with my family then I take a different approach. With my family, I may not be able to retreat and I may have to stay in the fight. So when I have my family with me, I always carry a spare mag and I will be the most violent animal an attacker or attackers could ever encounter.

[NETim]

http://thinkinggunfighter.blogspot.c...-findings.html

Is a good example of what most modern statistics indicate.


As to the first point, my reference is to the defender's experience, not the agressor. Untill you have actually been in combat, you cannot speculate about your reaction. Training (even very good training as provided by SIG Academy, Tactical Response, Massad Ayoob, Michael de Bethencourt, etc...) breaks down as soon as the first shot is fired. The only people that can actually predict and control their reaction under fire are those who have had both training AND experience taking live fire. Neither you, nor I have had such experience...therefore we fall into the breadth of the aforementioned statistics. That means we're most likely to fire 2 shots or just keep shooting till the weapon is empty. In either case, the agressor will almost certainly be dead or fleeing for his/her life after the first few shots. The preconceived notion of a truly malevolent bad guy intent on murder is naive and astronomically unlikely compared to normal thread for events that demand the use of a firearm.

As to the second. according to the above article, 3/482 incidents involved a reload, and considering the fact that most aggressors simply run away after the first few shots are fired, any competent prosecutor is going stress the fact that you paused long enough to reload and keep your senses, but still continued shooting.

I have no way or reason to prove that my experience or qualification validates what I say. In general, I let logic dictate what I type, and if somebody disagrees or comes to a different conclusion all the better, I get to learn something new. I honestly couldn't care less whether I am right or wrong, I simply want to propagate conversation that will develop the original idea, and ideally lead to a conclusion that shows the culmination of a great many members' constructive input.

And my understanding is that occasionally there may be some individuals who have previously endured incoming fire don't always respond properly, i.e., their mental wheels may come off, despite prior experience.

Mental conditioning is what most, if not all, good schools try to instill but yes, even then we don't know how we'll respond when the lead starts flying. I don't believe that the ability to keep one's cool can be taught. Regardless there seems to be an amazing amount of people who manage to get the job done when needed and they are in no way associated with any known SEAL team.

Regardless the fight will be what it wants to be and having more ammo on hand harms nothing IMHO.

[JodyH]

any competent prosecutor is going stress the fact that you paused long enough to reload and keep your senses, but still continued shooting.

And any competent defense attorney is going to agree that yes YOU KEPT YOUR SENSES and therefore were acting as a "reasonable man" would act in those circumstances.
Since you were in control and able to make the informed decision to reload then it's reasonable to assume you were also able to make a informed decision as to the threat status and the need to continue shooting to stop that threat.

[Bill Lance]

And any competent defense attorney is going to agree that yes YOU KEPT YOUR SENSES and therefore were acting as a "reasonable man" would act in those circumstances.
Since you were in control and able to make the informed decision to reload then it's reasonable to assume you were also able to make a informed decision as to the threat status and the need to continue shooting to stop that threat.

"Like" Button

[BigT]

This may be a thread hijack, and if so moderator please break it off into its own thread, but it seems to go with the topic. Assuming you have these uber-BGs that insist on pressing their attack in the face of them and their friends being shot, how many BGs do you realistically think you can shoot down before being overrun, given the fact that most encounters are going to be up close and personal?

All of them. And their dog. Anything else is an epic failure in mindset IMHO.

In response to the OP I really want over a dozen in gun with at least that in the spare to start to feel warm and fuzzy. More is better though.

If im carrying 50 rounds and only use 2 I don't lose any points. If ive got five and need more my day has turned into an ever bigger suckfest than it was when the shooting started.