How many rounds fired in self defense

[Jeb Stuart]

For EDC carry, there are many that feel a high round count is necessary. While others feel secure with a revolver or standard single stack. Most statistics show that typically only 1-3 shots are actually fired in the vast amount of common assaults. Maybe true, perhaps not. In the more than 10 years since I decided to EDC, I have followed the news of shooting a and have not seen where these satistics are not true.
However, I would be interested to see what the results are with High Road members, who seem to be avid EDC owners.

Please do not respond if POLICE, LAW ENFORCEMENT OR SECURITY ETC.

 

[labnoti]

I discussed this with a person who has been in 5 lethal-force encounters where he discharged his firearm. He is a former LEO where he specialized in this area (full-time SWAT). He was in hundreds of lethal force confrontations where he did not need to discharge. In the 5 where he did, he fired a combined total of 8 rounds. He still carries three extra magazines (28 rounds total) everyday. (Per request, I did not respond with a vote, but only added this anecdote)

 

[kwb377]

I was involved in an on-duty shooting last year vs. a suspect in a vehicle (trying to run over me and others). I fired a total of seven rounds.

I initially fired three rounds (G22, .40 caliber, 180 gr. HST) head-on through the windshield All three rounds hit center chest (I was later told that those rounds killed him, he just didn't know it yet).

He spun the car around @ 270 degrees (still attempting to run over us) and I fired four more rounds at the driver's window. One round hit the hood in front of the windshield, one round hit the A-post directly in front of the driver, one round went through the suspect's left arm and into his chest, and the last round hit the suspect directly behind the left ear and ended the situation.

I thought I had missed completely with the first three rounds, because of the seemingly no effect they had on his actions (other than making him spin the car, still under full throttle). It reiterated the fact to me that even lethal hits don't guarantee an immediate stop...a subject can be walking dead and still kill you, especially when medicated via meth, heroin, etc. (or both in my case).

 

[P5 Guy]

Never have and hope I never will.

 

[jmorris]

Generally just a shot or two, I do know none ever at a human.

I often carry guns that hold less than 10 rounds but also carry some that hold more than 10.

I can tell you that, If I ever need 11, I hope I am carrying one that holds more than 10.

We can cite statistics all we want. For example only 10-15% of smokers ever develop lung cancer but that unlikely occurrence doesn’t really help the 10-15% once they are in trouble does it?

 

[John Joseph]

The only altercation I've been in that fits your narrative was back when I was in college. I fired a total of one round. The perp took off running after that.

 

[748]

All of them.

 

[Sistema1927]

I was accosted/assaulted in 1977 by 3 guys, one holding the biggest Bowie knife I have ever seen.

I presented my concealed Browning Hi-Power, flicked off the safety, and put the front sight COM on the guy with the knife. I didn't need to fire a single shot, but I was certainly happy to have 13+1 of Super-Vel 9mm.

As a result, none of your poll questions really fit my situation. Yes, I didn't have to shoot, but it came real close to becoming a reality.

 

[beeenbag]

Is this another, "I carry a revolver and I feel the need to validate my decision based on proving to you that its all I will ever need" post? Fantastic, if you want to base your carry options on the statistical analysis of potential snow crab invasions, that's fine too.

People should carry what they shoot well, a chambering that is effective yet again, they shoot well, and has as many rounds as you can carry, and you shoot well.

 

[FL-NC]

I have never shot at another person inside of the US, but I know that ammo isn't something you want to come up short with in a gunfight. There is countless data on trained LE being involved in situations where larger expenditures of ammunition are required in order to stop threats that are not comparable to statistics. Remember that these same perps are the ones that we as civilians come into contact with- it isn't as if the police live and operate in a parallel universe where the adversaries that they face are separate and distinct from the rest of the world. Usually, it is the actions of these perps against us civilians that result in intervention by LE to bring the situation to a close.

 

[Jeb Stuart]

Is this another, "I carry a revolver and I feel the need to validate my decision based on proving to you that its all I will ever need" post? Fantastic, if you want to base your carry options on the statistical analysis of potential snow crab invasions, that's fine too.

People should carry what they shoot well, a chambering that is effective yet again, they shoot well, and has as many rounds as you can carry, and you shoot well.

NO, this is not what that is about. It is a simple poll, with no regards or questions asked at all about what firearm a person carries, what caliber, how many rounds, how many magazine carried Etc.
The poll question was meant to be straight forward and simple.
The Poll is not asking for other statistics, beliefs, opinions. It is meant for the members only to get a more clear view of real life experiences in the civilian population that Carry a EDC. My guess is that the Members of this forum are generally folks that do carry and many that have been for years.
The poll is not meant to discrimanate a EDC holder that arms himself with a 22.cal derringer, or a EDC holder that Carries a AR with a 30 rd magazine.
Just a simple question.

If you have a opinion based on your answer, then please feel free to explain.

 

[entropy]

Fine. I voted, but now you'll never know why, with that surly attitude.

Seriously, I have never had to fire. Both situations I have had a gun and produced it, that was sufficient. I hope that's all I ever have to, but I can't bet my life on that, which is why I train.

 

[Leadbutt]

Outside of combat in the RVN, as a LEO in the 60's, combined I was involved is several lethal encounters as most will be in a 30+ year career, but only 6 shooting where rounds where involved, as it happens 3 where with revolver, and 3 with a semi autos and shotgun mix, Revolvers- 2 required a speed reload, Semi- 1 shoot required 3 mags of 8 45acp, 1 with 9mm required 2 mags(1960's ammo type), The last shoot was one mag of 8, and 2 rounds buckshot

 

[Jeb Stuart]

I was accosted/assaulted in 1977 by 3 guys, one holding the biggest Bowie knife I have ever seen.

I presented my concealed Browning Hi-Power, flicked off the safety, and put the front sight COM on the guy with the knife. I didn't need to fire a single shot, but I was certainly happy to have 13+1 of Super-Vel 9mm.

As a result, none of your poll questions really fit my situation. Yes, I didn't have to shoot, but it came real close to becoming a reality.

I had a few experiences during my time as a EDC and one before. Before, I did carry, more than a decade ago. I was at a family picnic. Some thug got into a argument with a family man over nothing. Later going to the parking lot, the thug was waiting. Walked up and shot the man three times in the chest at close range. No gun could have help the victim unless he had one and had used "situational awareness."
Another time, I was leaving a store at night. On my way to the car, I noticed movement on the far side of my car. As I approached with my hand on my weapon, I saw it was a thug, trying to break in. Fortunately I saw him in time, put my off hand up and told the Perp to get the bland away. He took off running. I did not have to pull my weapon out.
My wife had a incident where a man full of road range tried to break the glass on her side of the car. My young son was also present. She did not have a Weapon. Fortunately a Police officer was there in time and arrested the would be attacker.

 

[Jeb Stuart]

Outside of combat in the RVN, as a LEO in the 60's, combined I was involved is several lethal encounters as most will be in a 30+ year career, but only 6 shooting where rounds where involved, as it happens 3 where with revolver, and 3 with a semi autos and shotgun mix, Revolvers- 2 required a speed reload, Semi- 1 shoot required 3 mags of 8 45acp, 1 with 9mm required 2 mags(1960's ammo type), The last shoot was one mag of 8, and 2 rounds buckshot

Thanks for your post Leadbutt. But just to clear up, did you use your weapon in the capacity of a LEO or civilian? Just trying to get a accurate account for the poll.

 

[beeenbag]

NO, this is not what that is about. It is a simple poll, with no regards or questions asked at all about what firearm a person carries, what caliber, how many rounds, how many magazine carried Etc.
The poll question was meant to be straight forward and simple.
The Poll is not asking for other statistics, beliefs, opinions. It is meant for the members only to get a more clear view of real life experiences in the civilian population that Carry a EDC. My guess is that the Members of this forum are generally folks that do carry and many that have been for years.
The poll is not meant to discrimanate a EDC holder that arms himself with a 22.cal derringer, or a EDC holder that Carries a AR with a 30 rd magazine.
Just a simple question.

If you have a opinion based on your answer, then please feel free to explain.

What does one do with a poll designed to collectively gather how many rounds are likely to be fired in a civilian defense situation? There are many studies that do prove, lets just say less than 5 rounds are typically the case. If these types of studies are going to be what one uses to base their carry sidearm on, then one would be inclined to not carry at all, or to carry an empty gun, as the vast majority of concealed carry holders never draw their weapon, OR they draw and never have to fire. It is equally as silly to base complacency at 5 rounds maximum with your carry gun, as it is to base carrying an empty firearm based on statistics. We carry for the "unlikely event" that we will need to have a defensive firearm because the loss of such an event (your life) is greater than we are willing to risk against the unlikeliness that we will ever encounter said situation. Same can be said for limiting yourself to 5 rounds because of statistics. I'm quite positive that no matter where you poll, or what study you read, you'll find support that 5 rounds will "likely" be enough. On that same token, if we are going to base our defenses around statistics, you would never need to carry at all. Why draw the line at 5 rounds? Everyone knows you're not likely to be involved in a civilian shooting based on statistics, so why carry at all? Whatever answer you just thought of for that question, apply it to "why not carry something with more rounds if you can shoot and carry it well?"

 

[Jeb Stuart]

What does one do with a poll designed to collectively gather how many rounds are likely to be fired in a civilian defense situation? There are many studies that do prove, lets just say less than 5 rounds are typically the case. If these types of studies are going to be what one uses to base their carry sidearm on, then one would be inclined to not carry at all, or to carry an empty gun, as the vast majority of concealed carry holders never draw their weapon, OR they draw and never have to fire. It is equally as silly to base complacency at 5 rounds maximum with your carry gun, as it is to base carrying an empty firearm based on statistics. We carry for the "unlikely event" that we will need to have a defensive firearm because the loss of such an event (your life) is greater than we are willing to risk against the unlikeliness that we will ever encounter said situation. Same can be said for limiting yourself to 5 rounds because of statistics. I'm quite positive that no matter where you poll, or what study you read, you'll find support that 5 rounds will "likely" be enough. On that same token, if we are going to base our defenses around statistics, you would never need to carry at all. Why draw the line at 5 rounds? Everyone knows you're not likely to be involved in a civilian shooting based on statistics, so why carry at all? Whatever answer you just thought of for that question, apply it to "why not carry something with more rounds if you can shoot and carry it well?"

Beeenbag, thanks for the Post. We could, if you prefer have a series of Polls with member insight to other scenarios. You might, or others might think of a different poll that they would like to see member results. I may do one later and label this as Poll #1. However, on the other hand, it might turn out to be a caliber war or other war etc.

 

[beeenbag]

Beeenbag, thanks for the Post. We could, if you prefer have a series of Polls with member insight to other scenarios. You might, or others might think of a different poll that they would like to see member results. I may do one later and label this as Poll #1. However, on the other hand, it might turn out to be a caliber war or other war etc.

There are few threads that the inevitable caliber war or capacity war isn't, at some point, injected into.

Polls and statistics are nice to look at and interesting at times. I just wish to caution basing any decisions regarding your personal defense or personal safety on statistics. If we devised our EDC around statistics, we would never carry a firearm or first aid kit. It isn't about the likeliness of needing your firearm, or the likeliness of needing 10 rounds, but rather, what is at stake if you need them and don't have them. One has to base their choice of carry gun on many factors (concealabity, shootability, budget, etc), I don't feel statistics should be one of those factors. You should always carry as much ammo and in a proven cartridge as you can based on you and your willingness to do so, not ever on what you "expect to encounter", based on statistics.

I'm not trying to be cantankerous or argumentative, I just feel it's dangerous for a false sense of security and complacency be derived from statistical data.

 

[Jeb Stuart]

There are few threads that the inevitable caliber war or capacity war isn't, at some point, injected into.

Polls and statistics are nice to look at and interesting at times. I just wish to caution basing any decisions regarding your personal defense or personal safety on statistics. If we devised our EDC around statistics, we would never carry a firearm or first aid kit. It isn't about the likeliness of needing your firearm, or the likeliness of needing 10 rounds, but rather, what is at stake if you need them and don't have them. One has to base their choice of carry gun on many factors (concealabity, shootability, budget, etc), I don't feel statistics should be one of those factors. You should always carry as much ammo and in a proven cartridge as you can based on you and your willingness to do so, not ever on what you "expect to encounter", based on statistics.

I'm not trying to be cantankerous or argumentative, I just feel it's dangerous for a false sense of security and complacency be derived from statistical data.

This poll is not a statistic, it is not a study, it is not scientific, it is simply a matter of asking a question to forum members. Nothing more. It will not be used in gun magazines, the FBI will not use it, it will not be make into a video or sent to CNN, etc. Let's not make more to this than it is. And there is Nothing dangerous about asking the questions for gosh sake.

 

[hso]

I have experienced three assaults on the street and each were handled without a firearm.

 

[Leadbutt]

Sorry JEB, it was as and LEO

 

[Jeb Stuart]

Sorry JEB, it was as and LEO

No problem, I found your post very interesting. Glad you posted.

 

[BigBore45]

Cops or civilians?

 

[Buzznrose]

I have never shot at another person inside of the US, but I know that ammo isn't something you want to come up short with in a gunfight. There is countless data on trained LE being involved in situations where larger expenditures of ammunition are required in order to stop threats that are not comparable to statistics. Remember that these same perps are the ones that we as civilians come into contact with- it isn't as if the police live and operate in a parallel universe where the adversaries that they face are separate and distinct from the rest of the world. Usually, it is the actions of these perps against us civilians that result in intervention by LE to bring the situation to a close.

This is a good point, and perhaps we will never hear the folks who ran out of ammo in their gunfight because they lost!

Just saying....

 

[.455_Hunter]

Answering for my father, one round of Speer .357 Mag 158 gr Gold Dot out of a 4" Ruger Police Service-Six ended the encounter.