Thoughts on Multiple Assailants, Hit Rate & Capacity

[Kleanbore]

Posted by Skribs: Really makes me think twice about a revolver, a pocket pistol (as primary), or carrying without reloads.

Unless one chooses to remain in denial, it really does force one to at least think twice about it.

That said, I have not yet stopped carrying my J-Frame when going around what I think to be the more benign areas during the daytime. I am, however, more likely now to carry something else when heading to parking lots near big stores and near the major highways. My thought process hasn't changed, but I do think I have a somewhat better appreciation of what it may take to mitigate the risks.

John's analysis would almost certainly influence my thinking process were I in the market for a new compact pistol. Kimber, Ruger, and Smith and Wesson have all introduced new compact single column 9MM pistols that are appealing from a size standpoint, but at this point I'm pretty sure I would accept an additional 6MM in width before giving up the additional magazine capacity of, for example, a Smith 9c.

 

[Skribs]

Kleanbore, what makes certain areas safer than others? I used to have the philosophy that some areas I only needed my LCP and others I want my XDm handy, but I've since come to the conclusion that I want my XDm anywhere, because if I do get into a situation where I need it, it's not going to matter where I am.

ETA, for clarification: I know in some places you are less likely to get attacked. i.e. in gang territory, the likelihood of an attack is greater. But why does one assume that in an area where the likelihood of being attacked is less, that they will need less firepower IF they are attacked?

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by Skribs: Kleanbore, what makes certain areas safer than others?

Great question. I'll share my reasoning.

If I am driving from my house to one of a few stores we frequent that have small parking lots and that do not really have very convenient access to a highway, I think it reasonable to assess the risk as rather low, compared to...

...stores frequented by a lot of customers, with big parking lots, near bad areas, and easily accessed from major highways.

I have seen, and more than one of my friends have seen, drivers casing the lots in the big-store areas, obviously looking for victims. One actually witnessed an armed robbery recently (round count would not have mattered--the victim was taken by surprise).

Last year I was quite concerned when someone followed me into a large service station near a highway and kept his eyes on me until I drove out. I went the wrong way to lose him.

However, the one armed robbery that I have foiled (by pulling out a cell phone) occurred last summer in a most unlikely place--a high end neighborhood and small lot, far from the Interstate.

I used to have the philosophy that some areas I only needed my LCP and others I want my XDm handy, but I've since come to the conclusion that I want my XDm anywhere, because if I do get into a situation where I need it, it's not going to matter where I am.

Probably a wise strategy.

 

[Skribs]

In my edit I did kind of cover I know the difference between gang territory and soccer mom suburbia, but why is it that we assume the likelihood of being attacked equates to how much firepower we need if attacked? Just some food for thought.

I also was thinking in your post about the size difference between various autoloaders, such as the shield vs. the m&p compact. Specifically I was thinking of ankle carry, although I know that wasn't the intent of your post, but here's one thing to consider: the difference between the two may only be 0.23" width. However, the difference in the magazine width is probably bigger, I'm guessing 1/4-3/8 inch width between the double and single stack magazines.

So if you're pocketing the magazines, it's one thing to consider. If you're carrying magazines on the opposite ankle of your BUG (like I'm considering), then it's a bigger point. That is, of course, if you ankle carry the mags. If you don't, then the minor width difference is all you're looking at.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by Skribs: In my edit I did kind of cover I know the difference between gang territory and soccer mom suburbia, but why is it that when we assume the likelihood of being attacked equates to how much firepower we need if attacked? Just some food for thought.

AHA!

You have uncovered a flaw in my reasoning.

 

[Kleanbore]

One Other Thing...

Some of us are old enough to remember Colt's advertisements for the Cobra and Detective Special that emphasized that "all important sixth round". We also know that it made a big difference in sales to law enforcement personnel who chose Colt revolvers over their five shot Smith and Wesson counterparts.

If you take a look at John's second graph, you can see that simple statistics show that that sixth shot just might turn out to be all important! Not to mention a seventh, for those who carry a 1911. Choose any hit probability you like. I chose 50%.

Obvious? Well, if it was obvious to you, OK, but I have to admit that I had never looked at it this way.

 

[jungle]

3 seconds, 3 rounds , 3 yards. Statistics are wonderful, as is conjecture, but people who do this for a living have settled on a hicap 9 or .40.

More rounds, better training and a lack of assumption about what you might be facing in the future, it doesn't take much to place as many variables as you can in your favor.

Predictions about the number of attackers or the hit rate are just fantasy, why not be prepared for the worst case-you do this by training and carrying a hicap pistol with at least one reload, and there isn't much more you can do.

 

[Lawdawg45]

Kleanbore, what makes certain areas safer than others? I used to have the philosophy that some areas I only needed my LCP and others I want my XDm handy, but I've since come to the conclusion that I want my XDm anywhere, because if I do get into a situation where I need it, it's not going to matter where I am.

ETA, for clarification: I know in some places you are less likely to get attacked. i.e. in gang territory, the likelihood of an attack is greater. But why does one assume that in an area where the likelihood of being attacked is less, that they will need less firepower IF they are attacked?

As I've said previously, this comment has caught my attention more than once. When I've questioned these people "where they would carry their LCP vs their 1911", they frequently comment when they go to places like the gas station, 7/11 for a coke, or the grocery store. Again, these places statistically are high crime areas, yet they carry their smallest, weakest handgun in these locations.

LD

 

[X-Rap]

I carry a "weak" hand gun almost all the time and at some times it is my only one. That said I don't live in the illusion that I am armed to the level that best protects me but more like I am at the minimum armed. I am in firm belief that when at all possible I carry a 15 rd + 17 rd 9mm reload. I look at crime and criminals as evolving and so must I and the thought of multiple attackers with the presence of gangs almost everywhere now is more the norm than not. It does not mean that I believe there is a mob around every corner, more like I believe there is chance that I am not willing to gamble with.

 

[Lawdawg45]

I carry a "weak" hand gun almost all the time and at some times it is my only one. That said I don't live in the illusion that I am armed to the level that best protects me but more like I am at the minimum armed. I am in firm belief that when at all possible I carry a 15 rd + 17 rd 9mm reload. I look at crime and criminals as evolving and so must I and the thought of multiple attackers with the presence of gangs almost everywhere now is more the norm than not. It does not mean that I believe there is a mob around every corner, more like I believe there is chance that I am not willing to gamble with.

Clarification.....I'm not trying to sound sanctimonious, I also carry a 5 shot .38 much of the time, but my retirement philosophy is the same as when I was on the road......my handgun is a momentary tool until I can get to my vehicle and it's ample equipping.

LD

 

[X-Rap]

No problem, the point I was trying to make is to those who consistantly make the claim that if it can't be done with 5,6,7 or what ever the capacity of their pet gun is then it can't be done at all. IMO that is the denial element that Kleanbore mentioned and frankly while I have long been a fan of having plenty of ammo I am also guilty of advising the revolver based on its simplicity. I have given 5&6 shot revo's to my daughter, X, mother, stepmother and daughter in law mainly because in most of those cases they are unwilling to invest the time to become proficient in the use of a semi auto and few of them actually choose to carry on their person.
That is a fight I have not yet won but as they move to a more positive position of practice and carry I will certainly attempt to enlighten them on the benefits of what I consider a superior platform.

 

[Kleanbore]

I recently advised a man that his daughter should consider a J-Frame due to its simplicity, and she ended up getting one.

Having thought more about it, and having pondered John's graphs, I now think I would have suggested considering whether a six shot revolver would meet her needs. One might still be able to find a good Colt DS around.

My J-Frames now serve primarily in the back-up role (car carry), this having begun yesterday after this discussion and in particular, after Skribs uncovered a flaw in my reasoning that had never really occurred to me. Never too old to learn, if one is willing.

I have a lot more appreciation now for the New York Reload.

 

[Skribs]

Kleanbore, my Mom's first gun was a Ruger SP-101, and she actually likes her Sig P238 better. She doesn't have the finger strength to rapid fire a double action revolver, and it is slow for a different reason to fire the revolver in single action. She wanted the revolver at first, but it was after having it for a while and realizing its limitations that she settled on an autoloader, but she still only has 6 rounds in it.

How do you car carry your J-Frame, Kleanbore? I made another thread asking specifically about car carry, but since you brought it up here I thought I'd ask.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by Skribs: Kleanbore, my Mom's first gun was a Ruger SP-101, and she actually likes her Sig P238 better. She doesn't have the finger strength to rapid fire a double action revolver, and it is slow for a different reason to fire the revolver in single action. She wanted the revolver at first, but it was after having it for a while and realizing its limitations that she settled on an autoloader, but she still only has 6 rounds in it.

The DA pull on a J Frame is a problem for me as I get older--arthritis and tendon issues. The striker-fired M&P 9c is a lot better in that regard. I haven't fired a K-Frame or Colt in so long that I do not know how they compare.

I think most authorities will advise against using a revolver in SA mode for self defense.

I don't know about you, but I had not appreciated the tactical advantage of six over five until now. I always chalked it up to colt advertising. Seven or eight looks even better.

How do you car carry your J-Frame, Kleanbore? I made another thread asking specifically about car carry, but since you brought it up here I thought I'd ask.

I have been carrying them either IWB or in a pocket holster. I too have been looking into car carry alternatives, but I'm still up in the air on that. Right now I'm using the console. We always go together to the ATM for safety, and I can get to the console easily from the passenger seat.

A Centennial or LCR in a jacket or vest pocket holster provides some real advantages in terms of quick response in a questionable close quarters situation, and I do not intend to forget that. It's just that it would not be my only resource.

 

[Skribs]

I think most authorities will advise against using a revolver in SA mode for self defense.

With a trigger pull on a DA revolver, some people have to use SA mode to get any sort of accuracy. So if a revolver is all you have, I'd use SA in that situation. But, like I said - my Mom was looking at it, and found that a small, SA SA was the best option for her.

A Centennial or LCR in a jacket or vest pocket holster provides some real advantages in terms of quick response in a questionable close quarters situation, and I do not intend to forget that. It's just that it would not be my only resource.

Hmmm...I have longer limbs and a shorter trunk, so while NOT in a car, I actually reach my short's pockets easier. I typically put my hands in my pockets anyway, so if I'm walking through the parking lot with a BUG I can get to it real quick.

My Dad was telling me that snub-nose revolvers weren't made for concealment, they were made for a faster draw, so I see where you're coming from with a quick response vs. higher capacity standpoint. In the OP, it was assumed you couldn't get off X rounds without the BG stopping you. However, if your option is 5 rounds from a quickly-reached snub or 3-4 rounds from a duty-sized pistol before the BG gets to you, then the snub might be the better option. Of course, 6 rounds will come a LOT faster from the autoloader before the 6th from the snub.

 

[Lawdawg45]

Don't hate me for throwing a twist into the conversation, but if you are limited to 5 shots in a .38 revolver, how about improving the odds by carrying a Bulldog in .44 Special? I've had one in my arsenal for over 20 years, and it's often been in my front pocket.

LD

 

[jimbo555]

"Ammo is like toilet paper...It's better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it."

 

[Skribs]

Very interesting point, Lawdog. I think this is the first time I've seen a caliber-war-ish point brought up where the smaller and larger bullet have the same capacity (of course, I'm assuming its a bigger gun).

ETA: Expanding on that, if you are selecting a duty size autoloading pistol, and I'm just going to use Glock as an example, you have a choice in 17 rounds of 9mm or 13 rounds of .45. If you consider anything over 12 to be a luxury reserve, then the lower capacity of the .45 becomes a smaller factor when selecting between the two.

On the other hand, if you're looking at compacts, in this case I'll say XDm compact, the .40 and .45 both hold less than 12 rounds in a flush magazine, while the 9 holds 13 rounds. So in that case, to get over 12, you'll want the 9.

Not trying to turn this into a caliber war, but more looking at how the number of rounds you think you need can affect your caliber choice.

 

[DAP90]

The math in the OP is interesting in that it illustrates the importance of having enough ammo if the only way to “win” is to physically incapacitate your opponents via multiple hits.

Unfortunately, the tone of this thread has turned into such that ammo capacity has become an overriding concern.

I’ve been pondering that viewpoint and I just don’t buy it. Ammo capacity isn’t a trivial matter but it isn’t anywhere near the top priority for the average civilian. SD fights just don’t happen that way. Can such a fight occur? Sure, anything can happen, but it’s not common enough for ammo capacity to trump all the other factors that go into choosing the right carry gun.

The other issue is the math in the OP ignores the possibility of reloads or malfunctions. If someone only has 5 shots in the gun why can’t they reload? If the fight is such that there’s no time how do we account for malfunctions that need to be cleared and their effect on ammo capacity?

I understand that this will complicate the calculations but if we’re going to make decisions based on a simple formula we should consider that we are doing so based on incomplete info.

Still, it’s an interesting discussion so props to the OP for doing the work.

 

[harrygunner]

'JohnKSa' Thanks for running the numbers.

The overall picture is clear. And caliber is irrelevant. The calculations only involved probabilities of hits and numbers of shots.

I've practiced with police and always use my imagination as I train to generate stress as I train. Never had to shoot, but the one time I thought I might have to, I was fairly calm. But, there were no incoming rounds.

Beyond capacity, the other parameter we can affect is hit rate. I would say the best thing is to commit to staying with what we are trained to do in the middle of defending ourselves or others.

 

[jeepnik]

Now I'm joking here, so don't take it the wrong way.

What was it the fellow said about "danmed lies and statistics".

 

[harrygunner]

That's what I meant with "The overall picture is clear." You can run different numbers, but the point remains the same: Keep your head and make shots count.

And, the logistical cost of going to a higher capacity gun is low. Perhaps, one should up the round count.

 

[Skribs]

DAP, a lot of people carry 5 without a reload. So if you have 5 without a reload, then that works. And you're right - it actually made a lot of assumptions. One of those was that the shooter would get X shots off. It's a basic principle showing that 5 shots really isn't that much when you think about all of the factors involved. Against even 2 determined attackers, it can be very little.

 

[B!ngo]

This spreadsheet exercise helps underscore what I've been theorizing in multiple posts for months which is, round count wins out over round size - within reason of course. Starting with something like a .380 or 9mm, I would focus on trading off a larger round for more rounds because the probability of bringing an altercation to a close by actually hitting the BG (or two) is very challenging. It's why these mini-semi-autos are such a challenge. With 6 rounds you have to be a trained, experienced and fortunate shooter to prevail.
Of course, these are just probabilities likely with a huge amount of variance but the general model that they describe doesn't seem wrong.
So, I thank the OP for doing the work and documenting it carefully. Just one other thing. Does this have an implied set of time and distance factors? If the distance is compressed, the probability of a hit might increase but the need to fire more quickly may degrade the probability of a hit. Anyway, nice work.
B

 

[Skribs]

Bingo, mini semi-autos are also harder to shoot accurately because they trade fit-in-hand for hide-in-underwear.