Moreover, I argue that you've got #3 and #4 a little backwards, in that the great majority of violent encounters are not initiated by groups of skilled and commited men. I argue that it is the hi-cap boys who are misled.
I'm talking about this particular topic (is a 5 shot revolver enough), not the topic of firearm self-defense in general. In general, the field of firearm self-defense is plagued with people who chose a weapon/caliber/carry method based on something other than hard facts and then spend the rest of the time trying to use hard facts to prove why their choice was not just acceptable, but actually best.
It does not appear that criminals in general are up for hanging around and trading shots with their intended victims, but rather tend to scatter like roaches as soon as the specter of armed resistance appears.
In general, criminals are not violent at all and prefer to accomplish their crimes with minimal risk to themselves. Violent crime is a tiny subset of crime overall. But we still carry guns to deal with the minority that is willing to use violence as a tool. Same principle.
Yea, so we're constantly told, but there are a ton of videos just over on YouTube that show thats not always the case too.
Obviously it can happen either way.
All of us are unprepared for all sorts of things. You may remember the San Diego fellow who stole a tank a few decades back and caused all manner of trouble with it. I was and continue to be unprepared for such an event, as I consider it unlikely and don't wish to burden myself with the necessary equipment.
Right. Everybody draws that line in a different place based on what they carry, how they train, etc. There are, however, some things that are very important to understand.
1. People need to understand that they have drawn a line. It's a mistake to go out the door thinking you're ready for anything. I think most people realize this although they don't like to.
2. People need to understand the real-world ramifications of where they have drawn their line so that they make good decisions when deciding to/how to react. I see a lot of people who are hugely confused about what kind of capability they really have, based on their choices of what they carry and how they carry it. I see a lot of others who probably understand at some level that they are limiting their capability by the choices they make but can't admit exactly what those limitations are--perhaps not even to themselves. You know that these things are true when you see people arguing that a 5 shot snubby is just as fast and easy to shoot as a full-sized autopistol.
3. People need to have a general understanding of what can really happen out there. It's one thing to (correctly) point out that
most encounters involve very few rounds at quite close range and assailants who break off immediately at the first sign of armed resistance. It's quite another to pretend that multiple attackers or determined attackers are unicorns and the possibility of encountering such things can be completely dismissed.
Have we ever seen any civilian ccw'er carrying a snub nose engaged by multiple threats who ran dry and was unable to address the other threats who remained in the fight, in a situation that would have been won due to more rounds on tap?
When was the last time you read a news story that provided the details of how many rounds were left in a deceased defender's carry gun? If you were to find such a news story, how would you accurately assess that the lack of capacity was a factor in his death? Maybe there were 5 attackers and having another 10 rounds wouldn't have made a difference.
I'm comfortable with my set up and carry. I've carried more, I've carried less. This is my goldilocks.
Cool. But as we see, the problem is that people can't stop there... They want to go further.
I don't Inflate anything, I don't conflate anything.
Yet you were just trying to justify your choice by asking about facts that are not usually reported and would be open to interpretation even if they were. Why bother with that if the only thing that matters is that you are comfortable with your choice?
I am realistic about all of this though. Three armed bad guys with no quit, just like I said the last time this thread rolled around--- you're probably still dead whether you've a j frame or a g17. We are none of us john wick.
With typical gunfight hit rates, and assuming it takes two hits to stop an attacker, then in a single attacker scenario, the chances of achieving success with 5 shots is less than 50%. We don't need to talk about 3 determined attackers or liken ourselves to movie action heroes before we get into scenarios where the chances of failure start to look alarming.
If nothing else, check out the NRA's "Armed Citizen" reports, available in their magazines and online, and note the monotonous regularity with which "fled on foot" appears.
The problem with using the Armed Citizen reports is that they only report successes. If the defender is killed, that incident will never show up in the column.
And I'd be interested in an auto of the same size, weight, and power as the 340PD...
Velocities, of course, are pretty low. Top end 125s go about 1150 fps. 158 cast swcs are right around 1000 fps.
The ballistics are right in the neighborhood of 9mm +P in a 3"bbl auto. Of course, that's not full power for the 340PD. +P 9mm will be heavier but, for example, if you picked something like the Hellcat and left the magazine half full, you'd be only 3.5oz heavier than the 340PD fully loaded. You'd be smaller in every dimension than the 340PD and even with the mag downloaded you would still have one additional round. I suspect it would be a lot more shootable, too. I'm not trying to get you to change your carry--just answering your question.
