I trust you are all familiar with the recent Indiana case where a heroic young armed citizen stopped what would certainly have been a horrendous mass murder when he drew a concealed pistol and shot the gunman dead.  According to reports, it took him ten shots to end the deadly threat.

In states with the ten-round magazine limit law, that would have left him with an empty gun, or at best, a gun with only one round in the firing chamber.  

In his 1957 book “Fighting Handguns,” the great authority on gunfighting Col. Jeff Cooper wrote, “I’ve been told in a well-known law enforcement school that if you can’t settle the matter in six rounds you’d better take up some other line of work. This is like saying that if you can’t win all your fights in the first round you’d better give up boxing…Sure you should have things under control in six rounds, but just suppose you don’t!” (Page 57)

There are good reasons why both pistols and rifles with greater magazine capacity have become so popular among law-abiding armed citizens, and have become virtually standard with law enforcement and private security personnel.  

It’s why I carry spare ammunition whatever gun I’m carrying.

As I tell my students, “A gun without enough ammunition is a temporary gun.”

84 COMMENTS

  1. 1) These magazine capacity laws are not based on anything factual, but only on the imagination of ignorant leftists.

    2) They will never be satisfied with 20, 15, 10 round limits, but only with their goal of 0.

    3) The only people these laws hinder are innocent law abiding folks trying to defend themselves. If you are planning an armed robbery or mass murder you obviously don’t care about some stupid magazine limit law, or any law, and can bring as many 20/15/10 round magazines as you can throw in a sack.

    • The ammo sufficiency issue goes back at least to 1755 and Rogers’ Rangers, a British-raised militia company from the Province of New Hampshire raised to fight against the French enemy of the day. Major Rogers’ first rule of his famous “28 Rules of Ranging” prescribes a firelock, sixty rounds of powder and ball, and a (scoured) hatchet. I would argue that sixty rounds of handgun ammo plus some kind of hacking blade, maybe even a Spetznaz entrenching tool like mine, is still a good number for getting back with milk and cookies from a trip to the corner store, if maybe not for a long-term bugout like in Cormac McCarthy’s “The Road.” Some places you might need a concealed weapons permit, of course.

      • Thanks for the history. I am ALWAYS up for more from that period. The typical means to prepare one’s self for multiple rounds in short succession was what is commonly called today “a New York Reload”.Yes, some folks carried a long gun, at times if in a wagon or such, mabe a couple extras, and at least a brace of pistols tucked in the belt. Fire one, drop it, pick up the next, repeat as necessary. Often the sword was the final bckup resort. Go and read about a chap named Samuel Wittemore, and how HE managed on 19 April 1775, along the Concord road near his home in Menotomy.

        As to the Mother May I Card, yes some places do require them these days, but whenthe ship hits the span I somehow don’t think anyone will be checking for them.

  2. Isn’t it interesting-albeit horrifying-how many people without experience (or knowledge) of firearms and/or the dynamics of violence are so certain they know what’s “necessary” to solve any given problem?

  3. Old Jeff Cooper seemed to always carry his Colt 45 ACP with 7 in the mag. and 1 in the chamber. I guess that’s what he meant by a fair fight. Done in 6, yuk yuk.

  4. Hmmm . . . didn’t Jeff Cooper also say: “Be that as it may, I see no real need for a double column magazine. It is all the rage, of course, and like dual air bags, it is a popular current sales gimmick?”

    And quote approving, “Once when Bruce Nelson was asked by a suspect if the thirteen-round magazine in the P35 was not a big advantage, Bruce’s answer was, “Well, yes, if you plan to miss a lot.”

    Hmm . . . of course the obvious rebuttal would be, from this armchair gunfighter anyway, “Well I plan to hit every bad guy first time, every time, but I don’t think it would be wise to count on things going to plan in a gunfight.”

    • Funny Col Jeff would pan well known gun designers, such as the guy who brought us the M1911, and the M1926. In one case he brought us a heavy hitting low capacity handgun of substantial size and authority, in the other he brought is a not-so heavy hitter but capable of holding twice the number of opportunities. Both are pretty near the same size and weight. I know which one I prefer, though I do have both. Circumstances dictate which I’ll take out today. But it’s been a LONG time since I’ve felt compelled to carry the Bear Gun.

      As our host here is wont to say: ANY gun will do if YOU will do. I just try and guess which gun will be the “any gun” for the day. So far I’ve never needed anything.. but then, nor have I ever NEEDED my seatbelt, nor a life jacket. But I put them on anyway. (I HAVE needed a firebottle more than once, but only for someone else’s burning car. Never mine.

      • Actually, “Any gun will do if you will do” is attributed to Ignatius Piazza, and does not come from me.

  5. That’s the problem with too many aspects in life. Those making the rules and regulations a.)don’t understand what’s necessary, and b.) don’t have to live (or die) by said rules and regulations.

  6. Mag capacity limits are stupid and are written as if you desire to give an edge to the criminals.

    At best they are a flawed attempt to reduce casualties in a mass shooting by fantasies about using a reload as an opportunity to deal with the attacker. We have yet to see this fantasy occur in real life.

    What we have seen is mass shooters either ignoring the law, surprise, or merely bringing more magazines as THEY have planned the date and time.

    At worst they are written by folks who desire control over the lives of
    their subjects.

    • that clown who started shooting in the Arizona mall parking lot during a political rally got stopped when he had a misfeed in his LARGE capacity aftermarket mag, Some bold citizens, all for some strange reason UNARMED, seized on the pause to jump and ground the lout. this is the same event where Gabby Giffords happened to get clipped by a stray round, thus it is most often referred to as “the Gabby Giffords Shooting”which is a misnomer, as it is doubtful even the shooter realised she was even present. SHE certainly has taken her presence to the bank…..

      • From what I recalled, a little old lady grabbed the shooter’s 33 round Glock magazine protruding from his pistol and would not let go, preventing him from aiming the gun. If the goblin had a standard sized magazine, this could not have happened and the body count would be higher.

  7. I’m all for high capacity magazines, but would not sacrifice stopping power to carry more ammunition. My current packing pistol is a full sized Kimber 1911 with aluminum frame in .45 ACP and three spare magazines giving me a total of 30 rounds of Winchester 230 grain SXT ammo. The few times I go out at night, I carry an additional two magazines in an ankle rig to balance the S&W 37 or 442 on my other leg. With the Biden crime wave and hordes of “peaceful” protestors looking for free stuff from their victims, I had considered switching to my Gen 4 Glock 23 and two spare model 22 magazines, providing me 43-44 rounds of Speer 180 Grain Gold Dot ammo, nearly 50% more than what I’m carrying now in .45 ACP. I also have several Glock manufactured 22 round magazines in .40 S&W for my Kel-Tec carbine, which if substituted for the spare model 22 magazines would give me 57-58 rounds of ammo, hopefully enough to get me out of a hairy situation. Best to avoid any trouble, usually at night, if possible, but sometimes it just happens at any place and time of day.

    If one were to carry a pistol in 9X19, I would recommend you do what John Wick did in the movies and carry at least six or more magazines with extenders on your belt as they will be needed. Wick’s bulletproof tailored suit would come in very handy too.

    • https://www.tierthreetactical.com/analyzing-1800-shootings-which-caliber-has-the-best-stopping-power/

      With modern ammunition loads, “stopping power” is mostly a myth. Looking at the average number of rounds it takes to stop an attacker, and the numbers look like this:
      .45 Auto: ~2.1
      .40 S&W: ~2.3
      9mm: ~2.4

      So on average, if you want to stop your attacker, it doesn’t matter which caliber you carry, you’re probably going to shoot him 3 times. (Interestingly, the analysis that produced these numbers also looked at .22LR, which came in at ~1.4 rounds on average to stop an attacker, and the .380 Auto came in at about ~1.75. Why don’t we all just carry .22s, then?)

      And seeing as attackers tend to travel in packs, if someone is going to need to shoot each one an average of 3 times, it sounds better to have 15-16 of 9mm per mag than 11-12 of .45, doesn’t it?

      They also look at the percentage of one-shot incapacitations:
      .45 Auto: ~51%
      .40 S&W: ~52%
      9mm: ~47%

      Still similar-enough numbers between 9mm and .45. (And again, .22LR did better at ~60%. .380 Auto topped them all ~62%. Why are we debating “9mm vs. .45”, again?)

      [sarcasm] And the venerable shotgun beats out all “handgun calibers” across the board. ~1.2 rounds to incapacitate, and ~86% one-shot stops. Ergo, we can conclude the Taurus Judge loaded with .410 buckshot loads will be the perfect self-defense weapon, encompassing the absolute best of all worlds. [/sarcasm]

      (If we’re going to go by Hollywood standards, we should all carry Walthers in .32 Auto, like James Bond; it’s clearly the superior concealable weapon … and the .32 did pretty well “by the numbers”, too: ~1.55 rounds to incapacitate, ~72% one-shot stops.)

      The point is, the issue of “handgun stopping power” has been analyzed to death, with results all over the board depending on methodology and factors being tested. Whatever you want to “prove”, you can find documentation to support you.

      My non-expert advice is the same as it’s always been: Carry whatever you’re most comfortable with, shoot the best, and can have with you when you need it (which is probably not a shotgun). Just carry.

      • I would sure like to carry a Walther PPK in 7.62mm like James Bond (not the famed ornithologist), but unfortunately, I’m not licensed to kill. 🙁

      • Archer,

        I will state what everyone on this forum knows, but this may be good if any newbies are reading. Stopping power is important, but what is more important is SHOT PLACEMENT. In other words, the shots have to impact, and shut down, a vital area, like the brain, heart, lungs, or cause a lot of bleeding. Actually, causing a lot of bleeding is too slow, since the criminal can still be fighting while bleeding out.

        Shot placement probably explains why small rounds sometimes stop gunfights. Either that, or the criminal just felt bad when getting hit, and gave up the fight.

        Bottom line? A .22 LR hit in a vital area will probably end a fight sooner than a .45 ACP hit in a non-vital area.

      • Roger, in the comics, the Phantom carried a .22 pistol and used it effectively against hordes of evildoers. On the other hand, the pulp magazines’ Shadow and the Spider each carried a pair of Colt .45 pistols and wiped out a lot more criminals. Batman was basically anti-gun and never used a firearm.

      • @Tom606

        Strange, in the comics I remember every Sunday as a kid, the Phantom carried a pair of 1911 .45’s.

      • xtphreak:

        I was never a fan of The Phantom but did read a couple of comics of this character belonging to a friend as a little kid ages ago, so I could very well be mistaken. The Phantom had what appeared to be a blued Colt Woodsman looking pistol or one with a slim barrel.

        I am a fan of The Shadow and The Spider though and know for a fact both carried twin .45 caliber pistols under their cloaks. My favorite pulp hero is Doc Savage who doesn’t carry a gun but is an expert marksman with all firearms and made the compact machine pistols his assistants carried in shoulder holsters.

  8. Excellent observation. I was an infantry platoon leader in Vietnam. During most exciting times I was scrambling keeping track of what’s going on and hollering directions. But sometimes the situation tilted in favor of my direct action. Yet, I have never finished a fight saying, “Damn, I carried all that ammo for nothing.”
    One may want to “waste” ammo while seeking better cover or a more advantageous firing position. Plus, no reason to bet your life that the miscreant is alone. He may have multiple buddies around who decide to enter the fray.

    • yeah.. and likley just cagey enough for Number Two to wait till Number one is down then step in unanounced. HE knows where YOU are, but YOU do not know where HE is… yet. Then consider the potention number Three, etc.
      Advantage?Sure. NMaybe need more ammo? More than likely. Carry on……

  9. I understand where you are coming from. You are a professional and you teach professionals and serious amateurs. I have a different focus.

    I consider myself a semi-serious amateur. I’m really more interested in defending the 2A and that requires popularizing gun ownership and carry for self-defense. In this light, I think it’s a strategic mistake to adopt a posture of: ‘If you haven’t had as much training as I have had [e.g., MAG-40] then you shouldn’t carry a gun!’ I would rather see our community adopt an attitude of: ‘If you want to defend yourself and your family, get at least as much competence as you can to do it safely.’

    You, as any police officer, must bear in mind that you have a long history of not altogether satisfied customers who are after your scalp. Most of the rest of us don’t have that issue. We are opportunistic prey. Generally, a confrontation will stop during an “interview” at the “present arms” point. Zero rounds fired. Or, one or a few rounds.

    If the amateur can bring herself to carry a six-shooter (or 5-shot revolver) but can’t bring herself to carry a Glock-19, then – in my opinion – she does herself and the 2A a better service by doing what she WILL do, rather than NOT doing what she won’t do.

    I respect your opinion so highly that I would like you to consider segmenting your target audience into tiers of: interested; amateurs of limited ambition; amateurs of modest ambition; serious amateurs; and, professionals.

    The audience of interested (by my definition) won’t carry a gun at all, but we might get them to think about it. Amateurs of limited ambition will usually prevail at the present-arms point. Those who don’t prevail wouldn’t have prevailed if they would not have undertaken to carry a Glock-19 with a spare magazine. And so forth.

  10. A temporary gun? I have always maintained that an empty or unloaded gun is just an expensive stick! In the case of a handgun, an expensive rock! I have also always maintained that magazine limits are a deliberate attempt to a slow piecemeal disarmament. Slow and piecemeal to habituate us to restrictions, to eventually totally disarm us all. You cannot rule over an armed population except by their agreed consent. Once we are fully disarmed, then the true despotic rule of the political class will emerge triumphant, and we will be subjugated forever. We must never allow that to happen.

    • You’re not wrong. I word it slightly differently: Magazine limits are a deliberate attempt to render the civil authority de facto inferior to the military authority. Something which the U.S. Constitution and the Constitutions of most states are written to specifically disallow.

      I realize that police are ostensibly under the civilian authority, but the fed.gov has been trying to buy their loyalty with gun law exceptions and MILSURP toys — unavailable to we lowly civilians — for years, while at the same time doing their level best to kill off civilian gun culture and encouraging an “us vs. them” mentality among officers toward non-police. (Not all cops subscribe to this … but many do, and the fed.gov encourages it.)

      The political elites understand Mao’s observation that power grows from the barrel of a gun (and who should control the guns), and if they can’t control all the guns, they want to at least control the effective ones, “every other terrible implement of the soldier” notwithstanding.

  11. Or as I told my late wife some years ago, an empty gun is about as useful as a rock. All you can do is hit your aggressor with it or throw it toward him/her.

    • but for which you STILL must, in most places, ask permission to bring it along with you when you leave home.
      I remember back when London were coming unglued, assaults, stabbings, a few shootings, clubbings, etc. Mayhem ran rampant. The locals wanted to defend themselves when “out and about”, but of course were denied the use of arms. They turned to knives, and since “sporting” knives were getting thinner in supply a few bright souls began hitting the large department stores and buying chef’s knives from the kitchen areas. Gummit caught that trend, and banned the sale of them. In short order, someone came up with a blunt-ended version of a “chef’s knife” that looked pretty silly because it had NO POINT. (in two meanings….) Yes, the business end was rounded this unusable for stabbing. Still worked for carving. so some utility in defense. Certainly superior to a rock. Next came cricket bats. When the local government in London learned that six thousand new cricket bats had found new owners in the London area, they ordered them pulled frm the marketplace So the meanies and bullies got their way, and the many-generational locals got beat up because they were not armed to any level.

      • Tionico,

        “Rule Britannia, Britannia rule the waves
        Britons never, never shall be slaves.”

        Except to their own government, and yes, we Americans are on the road to slavery, too. We are already wage-slaves.

  12. It is all a matter of probability.

    Back in the days when police carried revolvers, it was estimated that the 5 to 6 rounds in a typical revolver was enough in about 90% of police defensive shooting. In other words, it was estimated that a police officer would have to perform a tactical reload, in order to continue the battle, in about 1 gunfight out of 10.

    This “rule of thumb” was based on experience using these revolver. It was derived from records of police engagements such as the NYPD Firearm discharge reports.

    When police switched over to semi-automatic pistols, this situation changed due to the fact that these pistols can be fired more rapidly, by a typical officer, than a revolver. In other words, the switch to SA pistols drove the average round count up a bit.

    However, for civilian concealed carry, this figure is probably still reasonable. I expect that most civilian defensive engagements are resolved within the 5 to 6 round capacity of a typical revolver.

    However, if one is caught up in a non-typical engagement. If one faces multiple opponents, or if the bad guys wear body armor, or they effectively use cover, then the calculus will change.

    Thus, there is always a chance that 5 or 6 rounds will be inadequate. For that reason, I always carry spare ammo. Especially if I am carrying a revolver.

    On those occasions when I carry my S&W snubby for concealed carry, I always carry two speed strips with spare ammo. Thus, I have 5 rounds in the revolver plus 10 more rounds available for reloading. A total of 15 rounds.

    Is this enough? I expect it would be enough in about 98 to 99 percent of defensive shootings. No amount of ammo is 100%. One can always envision special, non-typical defensive engagements in which vast quantities of ammo would be required. Are these realistic? Who knows?

    It basically comes down to what one is comfortable carrying. I am certain (in my own mind) that a 2-shot derringer is not up to the demands of modern self-defense. Such a firearm might have a role as a deep concealment back-up gun but not, IMHO, as a primary defensive tool.

    My 5 shot snubby, backed up with two speed strips, is about my personal minimum in terms of round capacity.

    Others want super high capacity pistols, with multiple loaded magazines available, as their minimum. Probably that is overkill for most civilian use but, if that is what makes you comfortable, go for it. You are the one who will pack the extra weight so it is your call. I won’t say you are wrong because, as this case shows, there are real world incidents where the extra ammo was needed.

    Certainly, the efforts to restrict capacity to 10 rounds or less (by law) are wrong-headed. That is not a call that “The State” should make for you.

    In light of the recent SCOTUS Bruen Decision, I think these laws to limit magazine capacity to an artificially reduced amount (10 rounds or less), violate the 2nd and 14th Amendments and are unconstitutional.

    It is my hope that legal challenges will soon start striking down such ill-advise laws.

    • Correction to my post above. In this line:

      “…estimated that a police officer would have to perform a tactical reload…”

      I (obviously) should have written “speed reload” or “emergency reload” instead of using the word “tactical”.

      While one may well want to do a tactical reload during a lull in a gunfight, the context here would be to perform a forced (emergency) reload.

      Sorry for my mistake in terminology.

      • what you meant was very obvious and clear. No worries. But high marks for coming back to “fix it” anyway.

    • Others want super high capacity pistols, with multiple loaded magazines available, as their minimum. Probably that is overkill for most civilian use but, if that is what makes you comfortable, go for it.

      My normal carry is a 16-round mag in the gun, and an extra 16-round mag. I think 16 is more than enough for the vast majority of “social encounters”. I carry the extra mag partially for the rounds in it, but mostly for the extra mag itself; it’s a hedge against mechanical malfunctions, in case the one in the gun fails for some reason.

      But I’d be lying if I said having 32 rounds available, in the event of that exceptional case that goes WAY beyond the average round count, didn’t make me feel better. (Antifa does operate in my area, after all, and they never do anything solo.)

    • I always carry 6 rounds in my Bianchi Speed Strips. Every reloading strip I’ve seen has room for six cartridges, so why not use them. An extra round for 5 shot revolvers may come in handy and there’s always the chance a cartridge may accidentally become dislodged or drop while being reloaded. To keep the reloading strips flexible, I treat them regularly with Armor All.

      • @ Tom606 – “…Every reloading strip I’ve seen has room for six cartridges…”

        Actually, they do make 5-round speed strips, for 38 Special ammo, in addition to the usual 6-round strips. The speed strips that I carry are, indeed, the 5-round versions.

        I could, of course, carry 6-round strips instead. Speed strips are inexpensive, and I do have some of both types. Nevertheless, I carry the 5-round version.

        I do so because of the way I carry them. I actually carry my speed strips in my left side shirt pocket. My pants pockets are already full since I use pocket carry for the revolver itself. My other pockets are full of other misc. items (wallet, keys, coins, comb, etc.). So, putting the speed strips into a pants pocket would just get them mixed up with other items.

        Shirt-pocket carry for the speed strips works out great for me. The strips do not get mixed up with anything else plus, since I am left-handed, I can grab a strip out of my left-front shirt pocket and bring it down to the revolver for a fast reload. I have practiced this many times and can do it quickly.

        The downside is that shirt pockets are not as stout as pants pockets. The shirt will sag if too much weight is put into it. I have found that the smaller (and lighter), 5-round 38 Special speed strips fit and carry in a shirt pocket much better than the larger 6-round variety.

        So, two 5-round speed strips (in a shirt pocket) work best for my selected carry method. In other words, there is method to my madness! 🙂

      • TN_MAN:

        One learns something new every day. I have Bianchi Speed Strips and have a friend who uses the ones available from Dillon Precision and they both hold six rounds of either .38/.357 or .44/.45 ammo. Since you carry two of them in a shirt pocket, weight is a factor. I only carry a single strip as my S&W 37 or 442 is a secondary backup gun. My main and backup gun both uses Browning 1911 magazines in .45 ACP and sometimes, I even add a Kahr .380 in a pocket holster for certain situations. If you don’t do so already, you may want to consider folding up a sheet of paper and putting it in your pocket in front of the ammo strips to conceal their outline. Some of those stiff advertisement postcards sent as junk mail works great.

      • Tom606 – Tuff Products makes both the 5-round and 6-round versions. See this link:

        https://www.midwayusa.com/product/2759358930?pid=358930

        If you place the loaded strips back-to-back, so that the bullets face away from each other, then the strips fit down into a shirt pocket and have no tendency to shift position. The end tabs stick up, toward the top of the pocket, which makes them easy to grab and extract from the pocket.

        In this configuration, the pair of strips don’t really print and show as ammo. You simply have some rectangular object in your pocket.

        One might think that they would have a tendency to drop out of your pocket if you bend down to pick something up, but i have not found this to be the case. I suppose if you were turned upside-down, it might happen but I have never had a problem under ordinary carry conditions.

        Anyway, this method works for me. Your mileage may vary.

  13. An important point made and an outstanding example of yet another selfless, heroic act on the part of a legally armed citizen.

    No doubt that many who carry in areas that restrict magazine capacity carry spare spares, and while reloading is a fast process, it is burdensome, stressful, and contributes an unneeded extra element of danger, especially considering the many experiences of the lack of “stopping power” by 9mm’s, not quite the “lung guns” some imagine them to be. I like Dave Spaulding’s comment about magazine capacity, that he would prefer “belt-fed” if that were possible.

    Can’t help but to make the comparison of magazine capacity to the politicians’ restriction of toilet tank capacity–I believe it’s 1.3 gallons in most areas (?), which simply leads to an increased number of flushes and sometimes the dreaded FTF (failure to flush). Heard that in some areas older toilets are “grandfathered in” to this nonsensical legislation, allowing those who can locate and afford the old high wall tank mounted systems to use them. After experiencing far too many bothersome issues, I discussed this with a plumber. Claiming to be equally frustrated over this particular issue, he told me that if I could obtain one of the old high-wall, chain activated flushers, he’d gladly install it for me. Still toying with the idea, it would be like transitioning from the velocity of a .22 short to that of a 10 or 12-gauge magnum, or at the very least like moving from a 5 to 10-round magazine to a 17-rounder.

    Good shooting (and eating) to all!

  14. Unless the report that I had seen has been updated/ corrected, the Indiana hero made 8 of 10 shots count, from a reported distance of 40 YARDS, in 15 seconds. I’m no special-ops operator but, any hits on a moving target, in an urban situation, from 40 YARDS with a handgun, is spectacular marksmanship. Especially coupled with giving guidance to fleeing bystanders and the fact the target was likely shooting back.
    I read a comment in a different post and I agree, Greenwood may have have had an X-man in town that night. And still, the left wishes to crucify him for fighting back!

  15. Yes, and we’ve discussed this before. Civilians need more ammo than cops and soldiers, because civilians are on their own.

    Limiting magazine capacity falls under the phrase, ” . . . shall not be infringed.” If an American wants to live in a gun-free country, there are plenty of places they can go. Leave America alone, leave America free. If you don’t like America, just leave.

    • And as there are more standard-capacity magazines in circulation than limited-capacity magazines, standard-capacity mags definitely fall under the “in common use for lawful purposes” standard set forth by Heller.

      RE: “If you don’t like America, just leave.” — I’ve said the same many times, but I use the phrasing, “If you don’t like America, I’m sure there’s another country with culture and laws more to your liking. There’s the border, don’t let it hit you in the @$$ on your way out.”

      The problem is, these people aren’t just looking for a culture with laws they like. That’s easy to find. No, they’re seeking suppression of freedom for ALL people. It’s not enough that they want to live under the control of Big Daddy Government; they must make sure everyone else does, too.

    • @ Roger Willco – You make a good point that most civilians don’t have immediate backup during a crisis. A police officer may have one or more partners right at-hand. He can also issue a call for additional backup. But then, in theory, the civilian can dial 911 and whistle up some police backup too!

      However, a police officer has a duty to confront the bad guy directly. As the recent Uvalde Shooting shows, they sometimes make poor decisions and fail in this duty. Nevertheless, a general duty to protect the public is in-force.

      A civilian has no such duty. He can retreat, run or hide without any charge of cowardice or neglect of duty.

      This option to retreat compensates, somewhat, for the lack of backup. Practical experience shows that typical civilian defensive engagements do not involve larger round-counts than the police. Indeed, the outlier high-round count shoot-outs tend to be by the police not civilians.

      Therefore, I don’t agree that a civilian “needs” more capacity than the police. Certainly, he does not need more ammo capacity than the military!

      It is very rare to find a civilian defensive shooting where an emergency reload was required to continue the battle. They may exist but I can’t think of a single case off the top of my head.

      • One does come to mind, but not completely clearly. Upstate Michigan, I think it was, maybe Illinois, rural area, young man at home late in the evening. Four armed perps crash in the door, demand his money. He was forced into the bedroom to get some, somehow managed to access his AR with a ten round mag, lying under the sofa on which he had been sitting when they crashed in. (something about feigning he was reaching for his wallet which they were demanding). He pulled out his AR and fired, hitting two who dropped, DRT. Number three got a round or two, a reload somewhere in there, as none were comletely out of action instantly. Number Four made the wisest move of the evening, hit the front door dudging lead and running, made it accross the yard. Can’t remember whether he took any fire or not. Number three got scooped up by the boys with the meat hack and brought to hospital, but as I recall he arrived just in time to be taken to the basement and fitted for his toe tag. Number four was eventually rouunded up by LE some time later. I sort of remember either mag jam or that the one in the rifle was not filled when the “fun” started. I do remember him having to reload at some point.

        But in general, not often. Just think, though, if the four mouseketeers had been skilled marksmen and tactically prepared. Mightn’t have gone down so well. I found myself sondering if that poor guy got ANY sleep that night…… the Boys in Blue wanted to talk with him for a long time….

      • @ Dave – Of course you are correct but the context of my comment was to indicate an ordinary civilian with no special authority. I was clearly excluding law-enforcement officers, Government agents, and members of the military.

        A law-enforcement officer may technically be a civilian but he has authority, resources, legal powers, (and duties) beyond those of Mr. Average Citizen.

        For purposes of analysis and study, pure civilian defensive engagements are generally placed in a separate category from engagements involving law-enforcement officers, Government agents, or military personnel. This separation was clearly the context used in my comment above.

  16. Absolutely. Same applies to the so-called “weapons of war”. If it is easy to operate, reliable, and quick to acquire a target, why restrict civilians from using it?. The rifle speed run today underscored that point. Politicians know little of what they legislate.

  17. I notice that the magazine-limit laws always contain an exemption for law enforcement, and most often for retired LEOS. “Because they encounter criminals.” As if they are different criminals from the ones we civilians encounter.

    • It also has the effect of helping to foster that “Us vs Them” mentality.

      If the military can have it we should be able to have it as well. The same goes for LEO’s. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. I’m keeping my standard capacity mags.

      I recently lived at a place with at least a forty-five minute Code 3 response time from the nearest firehouse. I had to be my own 911. Law Enforcement could be a shorter, or longer, response time depending on where the nearest Deputy was.

      When you live in a very rural area you realize quickly that law enforcement is there for after the fact.

      • I’ve lived pretty much in riral areas most of my adult life. During that time, I have put out at least nine house or car fires long before the officials ever were able to respond. One car fire was nearly to the runaway point. The ONLY time I’ve ever carried a firebottle with me in MY car. Those guys were certainly amazed and happy. I even had enough :junk” in my “junk box” (self-defense for my old clunker Volvo) to make theirs run again. One house fire had avanced almost to the point of no return, but I was VERY motivated… the burning house was eight feet away from MY house, both old wood frame, and I really wanted to sleep in MY OWN bed that night. Mine would have gone up too.

        I am still glad the “professionals” are out there for us, but so far they’ve never gotten there before I did.. and had I not been there/arrived, most of them would have taken the whole house or car, and some of them others nearby.

  18. Equal application of the law would likely moot this debate. Even police, fire, and ems are not immune from traffic laws and the driver’s are subject to the same consequences under the doctrine of competing harms. This applies to medical emergencies for private citizens, volunteer firefighters with a red light and no siren, police officers catching up to a reckless driver, lights and siren policies when approaching intersections, etc., the list goes on. These bans will go away the day that federal state and local law enforcement agencies, and the private security agencies employed by political office holders and their donors, have to follow the law. I am not a fan of double standards and cutouts, including LEOSA. And you’ve also boxed in the other side with this argument, how can they justify the purchase and issue of a weapon that’s only intended purpose and use is for “killing large numbers of people”?

  19. I carry what I carry.. be it a 5 shot J .38, 10 shot SIG P365, 15 shot Glock 19… 8 shot Kimber 1911 .45, 8 shot SIG P239 .40 S&W, etc….

    If I am sucked into a situation where I have to fire… Maybe 1 shot is enough, maybe 15 shots not enough, or whatever.

    I don’t have a crystal ball.. so no way of knowing. Thus AIM STRAIT. Hits count. And good hits count the most. Most important thing is.. see it coming so one has time to use good tactics.

  20. John Correa, host of “Active Self Protection,” has commented more than once that rarely does anyone end up reloading during a gunfight. One important reason to carry extra ammo, though, even if you don’t go beyond expending a “mag-dump” in a shooting, is to be able to reload in time to be fully prepared for another shooting if necessary. And you might want to be ready to load up for a third encounter. I even make a practice of keeping at least twice as many rounds in deep reserve concealed in my car, but ready to carry, to replace the 22 rounds or more that I normally carry on my person. I never want to be “Winchester.” Two are one, and one is none, but three keep you free.

  21. Speaking of ammo, I hope everyone has stocked or is stocking up. Farnam recommends 4000 rounds per caliber that you own.

    The next gun control push is going to be ammo control. The next time anyone mentions anything even sounding like ammo restrictions (bans on online purchases, purchase and storage limits, etc), the retail and wholesale pipeline will drain in a second. If civil unrest breaks out, or the Senile one declares martial law, the same thing is going to happen.

    Prices on common stuff have come down some (although still higher than pre-pandemic prices), and places like Lucky Gunner and TargetSportsUSA have inventory in stock. My law enforcement friend says get it while you can.

    • 4,000 rounds for every caliber is a lot of ammo and I will have to borrow some money from Cousin Elon to buy that much, especially for my 450/400 N.E., .44 Auto Mag, .455 Webley, and .475 Linebaugh. Fortunately, I have twice that amount in .22 LR so can make noise for awhile.

      • I have seen recommendations for 1,000 rounds per caliber. A recommendation of 4,000 seems high. Especially, if one owns oddball calibers like 450/400 N.E.

        The only caliber where I meet that recommendation is .22 LR. I have more than 4,000 rounds of it. I can meet the lower recommendation of 1,000+ rounds for some of the popular cartridges. For example, I meet it for 9mm, 40 S$W, 45 ACP, .223 Remington (5.56 NATO) and 7.62X39 Russian.

        However, for my oddball calibers (450/400 NE, 9.3X62 Mauser, 400 Cor-Bon, 32 S&W Long, etc.), I typically have less than 100 rounds on-hand.

        I think 4,000 rounds per caliber is realistic only if one owns a limited number of firearms that are all chambered in the popular calibers. Say, for someone with a “survivalist” mentality. It probably is not an option for a firearms enthusiast who owns many firearms some of which are in oddball calibers.

        At least, not unless he is independently wealthy! 🙂

      • I had recommended to my wealthy cousin Elon to buy and mount a Dillon .308 minigun with 10,000 belted rounds in the rear of a Tesla pickup truck under a custom camper top with drop down top and side panels. A second identical vehicle should be equipped with twin Browning M2 for thicker skinned targets. Minimum ammunition stocks for someone wealthy like that should be at least 100,000 rounds for each caliber.

        I wouldn’t doubt the Secret Service already has vehicles equipped that way and some of their big black SUVs even have Stinger missiles concealed under the stock looking bodies.

        I woul

  22. For those with possible illusions of any encounter ending ala Hollywood, there is the Sgt Gramins incident [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3QfyqtJLN4] where the average wasn’t enough. While the incident involved an LEO, there’s no guarantee that any of us here aren’t going to run into a similarly motivated individual who might be involved in street level income redistribution.

  23. this ~~~>”… It’s why I carry spare ammunition whatever gun I’m carrying.”

    i used to carry to mag capacity (17), but with an alloy framed gun plus 147 grain hornady, the gun was heavy. I’ve opted to carry one in the pipe and 10 rounds in the mag–as suggested by my states legislature. it is lawful to own use and possess mags greater than ten rounds in maryland, but you can’t buy them or ship them in the state. so my gun is lighter, the spare mag i carry has 17 in it and if i go to slide lock after 11, it proves the 10 rounder, as Mas stated, isn’t enough.

    epstein didn’t kill himself!

  24. As a side note, the Bruen Decision was not the only significant decision handed down recently by the SCOTUS. They also released West Virginia vs. EPA. Why is this important?

    Because this decision cuts back on the power of D.C. bureaucrats to bypass Congress and legislate by means of passing new regulations. See this article for a discussion of this aspect:

    https://spectator.org/how-west-virginia-v-epa-changed-the-administrative-state/

    This decision might also have application regarding the 2nd Amendment. We see the BATFE routinely acting to “pass” new restrictions on firearms by simply issuing new regulations. This approach was (or is) being used to ban bump stocks, restrict so-called “Ghost Guns”, restrict the use of forearm braces, etc.

    Note that Congress did not specifically authorize any of these restrictions. Rather, the BATFE simply claimed to have authority, under laws passed decades ago, to impose these new infringements upon 2A Rights.

    The WV vs. EPA decision clipped the wings of bureaucrats, at the EPA, to “legislate” new restrictions on the Energy sector by means of runaway regulations. However, this decision was broadly written and may prove to restrict efforts at bureaucratic overreach in other areas.

    Note that Congress has not specifically authorized the BATFE to ban bump stocks, restrict so-called “Ghost Gun” or restrict the use of forearm braces. These are solely the actions of anti-2A Washington DC bureaucrats.

    Perhaps legal suits could be launched to challenge these efforts to “Legislate from the Bureau”? Maybe the recent WV vs. EPA decision could be applicable to such a suit?

    Maybe some pro-2A group could look at this kind of approach? Maybe the 2nd Amendment Foundation?

    Anyway, we need to use whatever weapons we can find to fight back against the Firearm-Prohibitionists. I assure you that, to attack the 2A, the prohibitionists are throwing “everything against the wall” to see what sticks. We need to be as inventive as the Prohibitionists in coming up with means to defend our 2A rights.

    Anyway, just an observation that the Bruen Decision may not have been the only pro-2A decision recently delivered by the SCOTUS.

    • If memory serves aright, there are some folks who do that sort of thing looking into specifics for a case or two. I think the main thing waiting is to find a suitable plaintiff to carry the case forward. You are correct, that EPA case DOES indeed clip the wings of nearly every FedGov agancy which “makes law”. The US Constitutoin clearly states CONGRESS shall make ALL laws. BATF are not Congress.

  25. In June, Robert W. Thurston, Miami University emeritus professor of history, wrote an op-ed for the Cincinnati Enquirer about how we need ammo control.
    https://www.cincinnati.com/story/opinion/2022/06/04/opinion-forget-gun-control-its-time-ammunition-control/7452892001/

    His bio in the paper: “He has fired a range of weapons over the decades.” Gee, what a resume. Here is the crux of his nonsense:

    “What is a reasonable figure for individual possession of ammunition at any time? That would need to be determined in a national debate. My own view is that 10-12 rounds per gun are sufficient for self-defense.

    I laughed. Yes, I can’t wait for the national debate on magazine capacity. It will be as thorough and honest as this clown’s op-ed. He wrote almost 800 words about ammo control, I counted how many of those words explained how he came up with 10-12 rounds per magazine: the answer is zero words. The reasons for ammo control are: Shut up and do what I tell you. OK, but why 10 and not 11? Shut up.

    He also wrote this at the end: “If the NRA and other groups fear a slippery slope toward the ‘government taking away our guns,’ which is not under discussion, more reasonable citizens must focus on the bloody slope where we already live – and too often die.”

    At the time of this guy’s op-ed, members of Congress were, in fact, loudly talking about taking away guns. Not sure how someone as astute as Mr. I’ve Fired A Range Of Weapons Over The Decades missed that. Two months later, the House passed a bill to ban scary rifles.

    Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the wisdom of the elite.

    • Prohibitionists always assume that prohibition is a “Silver Bullet” (forgive the pun. 🙂 ) solution to their pet social problem. They always start out, as a basic premise, that prohibition can be done and it will work effectively.

      The alcohol prohibitionists, of a century ago, were of the exact same mindset. They believed in the power of prohibition with a faith that exceeds the faith of most religious fanatics.

      This professor, who authored the above linked article, is clearly a confirmed prohibitionist. Having despaired of ramming through firearms-prohibition, he is shifting target toward prohibiting ammo instead of guns. Similar to the fashion that the alcohol prohibitionists started out focused on banning “hard liqueur” but ended up banning beer and wine too. The prohibition mindset will never stop until the prohibition is total.

      I found it curious that this “Professor” tries to play with history and cover up Biden’s lies. For example, he writes:

      “The Legion, led by Anthony Wayne, proved its worth by defeating the Indian Alliance near Toledo in 1794. The regular army and navy then had, by everyone’s expectations, a monopoly on cannon, a strictly military weapon.”

      Biden has repeatedly claimed that the 2nd Amendment never included cannons and that private ownership of cannons were banned at the time the constitution was adopted. This has been, just as repeatedly, found to be false. Even by the left-wing fact -checkers. See this link:

      https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/jun/29/joe-biden/joe-bidens-dubious-claim-about-revolutionary-war-c/

      This professor is backing up Biden’s lie. Effectively, he is claiming that, as soon as a standing army unit was formed, the government had a monopoly on cannon ownership. I say that two lies don’t make a truth. Ask yourself, do you think that the privateers operating during the War of 1812 lacked cannon? See this link:

      https://worldhistory.us/american-history/the-role-of-american-privateers-in-the-war-of-1812.php

      What about the blockage runners during the Civil War? Did they lack access to cannons too?

      These leftists think that we, The People, are such gullible fools that they can tell any lie with impunity. The bigger the lie, the more readily we will swallow it!

      The 2nd Amendment confirmed the pre-existing right to bear arms for self-defense. It protects ownership and possession not only of the physical firearms, themselves, but the ammunition for them as well. A firearm without ammo is no firearm at all. This professor knows this truth and his entire article is simply a backdoor effort at total prohibition.

      When he wrote that the government (The Army and Navy) had a monopoly on cannon, he was simply expressing his desire not reality. The Left does want the government to have a monopoly on weapons. To quote Mao again, “Political power flows from the barrel of a gun”.

      The day that the government controls all firearms will be the day that government controls all the people. Leftists, like this “Professors”, are Statists. They worship “Big Government” and believe that “Big Government” is the path to achieve their left-wing utopia. That “Heaven on Earth” will, ultimately, be built by an all-powerful central government that controls every detail of every person’s life.

      This is the most dangerous ideology that the world has ever known. It has killed tens of millions of people already. The way things are going, it will soon take tens of millions more lives.

      I reject every word that this “Professor” has written just as I reject the doctrines of Satan himself for that is, literally, what he is preaching.

      • TN_MAN,

        Certainly civilians were allowed to buy cannons in the 1700s, and they still are today. I’m trying to think of a civilian use for a cannon, beyond just firing it for Fourth of July, re-enactments and fun. The punt gun comes to mind. It is almost a cannon, and was used for hunting.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punt_gun

      • @ Roger Willco – “I’m trying to think of a civilian use for a cannon…”

        What about the armed merchant ships of WWII? See this link:

        http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-083.php

        Now, I will admit that these ships were pressed into wartime service. Many of the guns were crewed by naval personnel. Still, the main crews were civilians (Merchant Marine) and civilians often served the guns too. Take this quote from the above linked article:

        “The merchant ships carried a Navy Armed Guard contingent of one officer and about twenty men to operate and maintain the guns, although they were often short of that complement. The gun crews were filled out with civilian crewmembers, sometimes including ship’s officers.”

        Was this a civilian application of cannon and machine gun usage? Or a military one? Perhaps quasi-military?

        In any event, the U.S. has a long history of using armed merchant vessels. From privateer to armed merchant ships.

        You know, the Constitution grants Congress (Article I – Section 8) the power to:

        “To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;”

        In time of War, Congress could still (legally) issue Letters of Marque and Reprisal to private ship-owners and loose them upon enemy shipping in order to disrupt enemy supply lines. This section of the Constitution has never been repealed or amended.

      • Roger, if I ever win the mega lottery (very unlikely as I’ve never bought a ticket), I would equip a large fast yacht with a pair of small 3 inch naval cannon and several Browning M2 guns behind drop down panels and manned by veteran and mercenary friends. I would then cruise around in international waters off the coast of Africa and wait for some unfortunate pirates to come out and meet their doom. It sure would beat a shooting gallery at the carnival. 🙂

      • TN_MAN:

        Thanks for this interesting article. As a multi-millionaire lottery winner, I would also invite some trigger happy, gun loving supermodels on these fun ocean excursions and they can parade on deck in their skimpy bikinis to tempt those nasty Somali pirates into becoming fish food. I would call these beautiful women my Sirens in honor of Homer.

  26. Hi Mas,

    Fellow septuagenarian, long time reader and veteran pin shooter here.

    Please bear with a change in topic, specifically to that of the Wedge grip you teach in the WC Channel video.

    I’m practicing it in dry-fire mode before taking it to the range.

    You say in the video that the index finger “makes its own way into a final resting position”. Questions: Does the index finger displace the middle finger any at all in that process, or does the “X” on the second joint of the middle finger remain in contact with the bottom of the trigger guard at all times?

    When I have managed in practice to effect the Wedge with the “X” in contact with the trigger guard, the front sight staisfyingly remains rock solid upon dry-fire. However, the grip is uncomfortable generally; the 1911 in my average-sized hands does not feel as secure in my grasp as it does with Wrap Around grip. The heel of my left palm feels as if it has a poor purchase on the gun. (That said, I don’t expect any new technique to begin to feel comfortable for 200-500 repetitions.)

    Your thougts and questions most welcome…

    • Don, the index finger of the support hand forces its way straight back under the front of the trigger guard. You will feel the muzzle lift, and the grip tang of an autoloader press down tighter into the web of the hand. The Index finger should finish ahead of the other support hand fingers, leaving the middle finger still in contact with the trigger guard.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here