jack44
Member
It just takes 1 shot center mass to stop the perp.
Is 6 Shots Really Enough?
- Thread starter LouisianaGunner12
- Start date
- Status
I guessed you missed the story I just posted, the incident that led to the ISP stopping use of the Silvertip: 13 didn't do it.
He died OF A HEART ATTACK as he tried to flee. He would've still been a threat...EXCEPT THE BAD GUY ONLY HAD A 5-SHOT REVOLVER.
When I was an infantryman, we trained to shoot controlled pairs into close-range threats, because even with a rifle, there's no guarantee even a COM single hit will instantly stop the threat. That's "magical thinking", and it obviously doesn't come from someone who's had any experience shooting actual, living things. I have shot LOTS of stuff. And I'll believe it's not moving anymore when I see a huge blood trail and wait at least half an hour, because that's how living beings work: they don't instantly shut down, unless you hit CNS, which I've also done, but it helps if you've already shot the target first, because their head moves slower.
He died OF A HEART ATTACK as he tried to flee. He would've still been a threat...EXCEPT THE BAD GUY ONLY HAD A 5-SHOT REVOLVER.
When I was an infantryman, we trained to shoot controlled pairs into close-range threats, because even with a rifle, there's no guarantee even a COM single hit will instantly stop the threat. That's "magical thinking", and it obviously doesn't come from someone who's had any experience shooting actual, living things. I have shot LOTS of stuff. And I'll believe it's not moving anymore when I see a huge blood trail and wait at least half an hour, because that's how living beings work: they don't instantly shut down, unless you hit CNS, which I've also done, but it helps if you've already shot the target first, because their head moves slower.
45_auto
Member
jack44 said:
Very true statement there.
When I was a 13B in the Army, EVERY single perp we hit center mass stopped.
(13B is artillery crewman, and we were shooting an M110 8" howitzer (203mm) firing 1,463,000 grain high explosive bullets (209 pounds each)).
http://www.paerab.us/MMRP/Appendices/Appendix_D/8_inch_Projo_HE_M106.pdf
I guess the only debatable point is just how big the bullet needs to be to ensure that one shot stop with a center mass hit.
Last edited:
Posts 475 and 487 explain the fallacy behind that reasoning.
Put another way, if you do end up having to draw and fire, the risk of that event occurring is irrelevant to the question of how many shots you will need to fire when it does.
If and when you do need to draw, the probability of having to do so will no longer be an unknown variable. The "unknowns", as we used to say in math class, are
- How many assailants will you have to deal with;
- how many of those, if any, will you have to shoot;
- how many hits will you need to stop them;
- how many times will you fire to score those hits; and
- how many shots would you like to have left over, or available as a reserve?
In contemplating that tough question, I would advise two things: (1) do not base how you think you will perform on how you do at the range; and don't even begin to hope for the immediate one shot stop of screen fiction.
We've been discussing capacity, and that's important, but there are other variables. How fast can one draw and fire? How well can one hit a moving target? Can one shoot while running backwards and sideways? What kind of training has one had?
I just returned from firing a new revolver at the range. I'm a little rusty. But the folks on adjacent lanes firing slow fire worry me. I took the time to stay afterwards and recommend that they avail themselves of some good high performance defensive pistol shooting, including rapid fire on steel plates.
barnbwt
member
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2011
- Messages
- 7,340
"Posts 475 and 487 explain the fallacy behind that reasoning."
Do you mean their content, or the fact we're still doing this after 487 posts?
Can we at least agree 3 probably isn't enough and call it a day? We won't even go into those ridiculous derringer guys 
Obviously someone thought the Pocket Pal was suitable for self defense
TCB
Do you mean their content, or the fact we're still doing this after 487 posts?
Can we at least agree 3 probably isn't enough and call it a day?
We won't even go into those ridiculous derringer guys
Obviously someone thought the Pocket Pal was suitable for self defense
TCB
Really? I have a handgun I keep near the bed when I'm sleeping. I keep a handgun because it's easy to conceal and resecure. If I hear what sounds like an intrusion, I will motion to any other occupants to call 911, grab my sidearm, and get my rifle. I hope to not shoot anyone in the meantime, but I'd rather have a handgun than no gun- it's just not practical to keep an AR15 next to the bed. (It's not far from the bed, either, but I want a firearm instantly within reach.) Thus: the sidearm is, as it has always been except in the case of military officers, a reactive weapon. If you know you're going to a fight, you bring a long gun. And if I have the time- I'm probably talking 20 seconds, and there's another locked door in-between- I will have one.
NOW, as for statistics: while not individual citizens, the Illinois State Patrol (IIRC- these were well-publicized cases, but it's been over 15 years) had several cases where they dumped magloads of 9x19mm into criminals. I believe in one instance it was over 40 rounds, and in another, over 60. The threats were brought down by .223 or 12 gauge, since the good guys foolishly started their fights with handguns. (There was also another case where a big biker took 13 9x19mm Silvertips center-mass, and then died of a heart attack while attempting to escape.
Now, maybe in your fairly happy universe, only people in uniform ever face threats like that. Yay for your happy, very mythical, universe.
I don't live there.
John
Right.
Any single case anywhere of a private citizen using a handgun to fight his (or her) way to a long gun?
You forgot the smiley indicating that you post was sarcasm.
Last edited:
hard to believe an administrator making a personal attack on a member (see post #499).
at least we find out that handguns are worthless in a defensive situation as over 40 and over 60 rounds won't put down the bad guy. so much for round count.
but we can't use those examples because leo tactics are forbidden to be discussed (40 and 60 rounds fired on the bad guy are tactics, bad tactics).
so, it may be a good idea to shut this one down. too many people getting carried away.
murf
at least we find out that handguns are worthless in a defensive situation as over 40 and over 60 rounds won't put down the bad guy. so much for round count.
but we can't use those examples because leo tactics are forbidden to be discussed (40 and 60 rounds fired on the bad guy are tactics, bad tactics).
so, it may be a good idea to shut this one down. too many people getting carried away.
murf
tomrkba
Member
- Joined
- May 30, 2010
- Messages
- 2,370
I am not sure what is worse: the guy with the $2,000+ custom 1911 shooting eight to twelve inch groups at 21 feet or the guy with the $3,000 AR-15 shooting twelve inch groups at 50 feet.
Revolvers require quite a bit of practice in order to maintain proficiency. Honestly, semi-autos are likely 50% easier to shoot fast and accurately. After this thread, I'm definitely losing interest in revolvers as anything other than sport guns.
While it does require a very different technique, I don't think it is harder to shoot at speed...because you don't have to wait for the sights to come back onto target to complete your trigger stroke
frankmako
Member
six shots will get the job done, except on tv where they need thousands of round for each gun fight.
barnbwt
member
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2011
- Messages
- 7,340
"because you don't have to wait for the sights to come back onto target to complete your trigger stroke"
Wow, 1200rpm --how fast are your split times? Or are you referring to recoil recovery (which I would assume is similar for revolvers and semis at similar levels of recoil and grip angle)?
TCB
Wow, 1200rpm --how fast are your split times? Or are you referring to recoil recovery (which I would assume is similar for revolvers and semis at similar levels of recoil and grip angle)?
TCB
Not really...well, maybe sort of...
With a pistol's SA trigger, you can reset and prep the trigger during muzzle flip and before the sights return to target...so you're waiting for the sights to appear on the target before you can finish your trigger press.
With a revolver's DA trigger, you cycle the trigger throughout the muzzle lift at a constant speed. Your goal is the get the sights onto your target before the hammer falls.
I'm not really shooting that fast, only about 4 or 5 shots a second
Yes, probably so, sometimes.
We've been over it before, but let's use that statement to look at the odds:
- If you need to make two hits to "get the job done", and under the adverse circumstances you can hit 30% of the time, you'll come out of it 58 percent pf the time; put another way, you will not succeed 42 percent of the time;
- if perchance you need four hits, say because there are two of 'em, your chances drop to 7 percent; that's seven times out of a hundred;
- but if you are really good and can hit 50% of the time, your chances go to 35 percent.
So, I don't think I'd say "will" with any confidence.
The math is conceptually simple, but running the numbers is a little tedious. JohnKSa has done it for us and shown them in Post #16.
You can very the the success criteria assumptions and do the math yourself.
The calculations do depend upon two other major assumptions:
- You sill be able to stop shooting at the first one immediately upon hitting him a sufficiant number of times to stop him, even if that's one shot; that may not happen; and
- you will be able to act quickly enough to do all of that before being incapacitated.
Food for thought.
vito
Member
I know this thread seems endless, and I don't have the facts to argue with the math. But if 6 are not enough, or 5 not enough (for J-frames), wouldn't we be reading about it in the media? The anti-gunners would like nothing better than to show a legally armed citizen failing to protect himself or others despite having a handgun in his or her possession at the time. Stories such as one where a robbery was attempted, the thug was wounded but still killed or injured the gun owner citizen. I can't recall ever reading such a story, or hearing about one on TV, and I also can't believe that if these things were happening that we would not hear about it. You might try to argue that the "media" would suppress a story that might lead some to believe that large capacity handguns are needed, but I doubt that that concern would bother the anti-gun news folks. I'll also add that for the last fifty or more years there have been thousands of off duty LEO's that carried a 5 round revolver and had that proved inadequate even a few times, LEO's would have sought some alternative. Just my thoughts.
Vito, there's a lot of supposition in your post.
Yes, I've read news stories in which both the defender and the home invader(s) were injured.
Further, many people do the minimum required. If your department required you to carry off-duty, but you felt no especial threat, there's a good chance you'd carry the least your job allowed.
My late friend Byron Quick, many years ago,used to carry a 5-shot Charter Arms revolver, to the point it wore imprints in all his jeans. He was carrying a good bit of money when he was threatened by a gang in Miami. The gang leader asked Byron what he thought he could do with 5 shots (heavy imprint, remember). Byron said, Shoot you in the (genitalia) 5 times.
They let him go. But if shooting had started, no, five shots wouldn't be enough. When he could dress for it, for many years Byron carried a Browning Hi-Power...and reloads.
John
Yes, I've read news stories in which both the defender and the home invader(s) were injured.
Further, many people do the minimum required. If your department required you to carry off-duty, but you felt no especial threat, there's a good chance you'd carry the least your job allowed.
My late friend Byron Quick, many years ago,used to carry a 5-shot Charter Arms revolver, to the point it wore imprints in all his jeans. He was carrying a good bit of money when he was threatened by a gang in Miami. The gang leader asked Byron what he thought he could do with 5 shots (heavy imprint, remember). Byron said, Shoot you in the (genitalia) 5 times.
They let him go. But if shooting had started, no, five shots wouldn't be enough. When he could dress for it, for many years Byron carried a Browning Hi-Power...and reloads.
John
No. Think about it.
In general, probably somewhere between one and three citizens out of a hundred are permitted to carry concealed, depending upon jurisdiction. Of those, far fewer actually do carry. Of those who do, very few find themselves in situations requiring the presentation of a firearm. And reportedly, the mere presentation of the firearm is often sufficient to diffuse the situation. Finally, nowhere near all of the shooters are armed with J-Frames or six shot weapons.
That's the data side of it--there are very few data. And then there is data collection. As Tom Givens points out, no one compiles the data on a comprehensive basis for armed citizens' defensive gun uses.
When is the last time you read anything about a the number of rounds carried by a crime victim?
Many of them have. There's the "New York Reload" (two revolvers); Charter Oak even makes an undercover holster rig by that name. And then there was that "all important sixth shot"; in the current issue of the Rangemaster Newsletter, Tom Givens explains why he prefers a Detective Special over a J-Frame for backup carry. A retired officer with whom I recently spoke said that the Colt was strongly preferred for that reason. And today, many of them carry semi-autos for backup.
jimbo555
Member
I think situational awareness is very important. It doesn't do you any good to have 35 rounds if someone sneaks up and hits you on the head with a baseball bat! If you like revolvers and are worried about capacity,just carry 2 and a good knife.Knives never run empty! Life is full of what ifs,you will go crazy trying to cover every possible scenario.
Situational awareness is a given and doesn't really factor into the capacity equation.
Sit awareness doesn't guarantee anything anyway.
But, yeah, the old New York reload is always an option. And a second gun does a lot of things a spare magazine or a speed loader doesn't. No matter what your firearms mechanical malfunction is, a second gun fixes it.
The problem seems to be keeping the BUG somewhere comfortable, concealed, and quickly accessible. And of course if you need more rounds, but have to transition to another gun isntead of having them already on board, that could be bad.
Pros/cons on every choice.
marcclarke
Member
Roger that.
marcclarke
Member
Never, in my personal reading experience.
Sometimes it is there, it just isn't reported specifically and directly by the media.
For instance, I'll bet that the number of rounds Z was carrying could be accurately determined to within 1 based on what we know.
beatledog7
Member
If 6 isn't enough, what about 7? 8? 10? 15? 30? 100?
If we cannot know with anything approaching certainty what waits for us around the corner, then maybe 200 isn't enough.
If we cannot know with anything approaching certainty what waits for us around the corner, then maybe 200 isn't enough.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
