The Armed Citizen - are we over thinking things?

[Duke426]

I just finished reading "The Armed Citizen" in the most recent American Rifleman. It's one of my favorite parts of the magazine and today it got me thinking.

We spend a lot of time debating calibers, revolver or semi-auto, magazine capacity, etc, etc. However, time and again, the stories in The Armed Citizen involve a home or business owner firing one shot and the intruder dropping dead right there or making it as far as the yard before expiring. A lot of times they have nothing more than a .22 or .38 and they do the deed just fine.

My question is, are ALL of these people just incredibly lucky or are we over thinking all the choices we "enthusiasts" make in arming ourselves? Maybe most calibers and bullet choices are adequate beyond what we are willing to admit and maybe human attackers aren't all that difficult to stop after all. I'm not saying we shouldn't use all the gun we can handle and shouldn't carry the best ammunition available. Just suggesting maybe, for those not in law enforcement or the military, we are all better armed than previously thought for the average bad guy encounter.

Your thoughts are greatly appreciated.

 

[jtpur]

We do over think it a bit. The round that strikes the target is a more effective round than the one that misses the target.

 

[Glock 'em down]

They'll all kill ya deader'n hell. That's why I've never scoffed at the .38 Special cartridge. Even in standard pressure loadings, gunfighting within spittin' distance usually relies on one simple factor...

Whoever gets lead on target first.

That's kinda like all these exotic 12 gauge shells. An ounce of lead is an ounce of lead, whether it be birdshot or a rifled slug.

At true "combat distances" (within 5-10 feet) damn near any caliber will put your assailant down. It might not kill him, but it'll stop him long enough for the average armed citizen to get out of harm's way.

 

[deralte]

There are extremes to everything. You can kill a lion with a .22 but it wouldn't be a very wise decision to attempt. Back in my LEO days I knew of two guys that went at it - one with a .38 shot the other 5 times. The one that got shot grabbed the shooter and broke his neck and then expired. Certain calibers are certainly more effective but shot placement is the best and it is not always possible. Thats why LEO shootings usually end up with about a 37% hit ratio.

 

[Jellybean]

Caliber wars, auto vs. revolver, magazine capacity and etc. are here because of the gun rags, if they don't sell the writers, editors and etc. don't eat.

There are things that might give you an edge over others, but you are absolutely correct, luck is pretty much the deciding factor. One thing most people just don't get is how much the 'other guy' plays into the equation, and you have no control over him so you might want to carry a tactical rabbits foot every where you go.

 

[computeruser]

A bit of both, though I'd certainly prefer to stack the odds in my favor if possible.

 

[Helderberg]

I have always thought about the put down of the .380 and .38 as bad self defense rounds as would any of us really stand in front of a person with one of these and let them shoot at us. I think getting as good as we can with our chosen weapon that we can have with us all the time is the best gun. Stack the deck in our favor with the best we can but training is truly the key in my opinion.
Best, Frank

 

[therevjay]

Caliber wars, auto vs. revolver, magazine capacity and etc. are here because of the gun rags, if they don't sell the writers, editors and etc. don't eat.

There are things that might give you an edge over others, but you are absolutely correct, luck is pretty much the deciding factor. One thing most people just don't get is how much the 'other guy' plays into the equation, and you have no control over him so you might want to carry a tactical rabbits foot every where you go.

Didn't help the rabbit. (And he had 4 of 'em)

 

[ContinentalOp]

I've been put down for my choice of self-defense gun (revolver) and for my training regimen (emphasis on dry-fire practice drills with live-fire at the range once or twice a month). I've been told that unless I carry a semi-auto with a double-stack magazine, a back-up gun, fire 1k rounds/week on a 360-degree range, and engage in regular force-on-force training sessions that I'm deluding myself into thinking I'm prepared.

Yet, as the OP pointed out, many people with little to no training survive violent encounters, often with what many consider "substandard" weapons.

Training and gear selection are important, but I think determination and a willingness to use the appropriate amount of force when necessary are much more important.

And while self-defense skills are important to me, they are not the end-all/be-all of my existence.

As William Shatner once eloquently stated, "Get a life!"

 

[hatt]

Of course we overthink it. What else we have to do? I've sure noticed that armed citizens have a very good track record v criminals.

I know some forums where if you don't have a Glock 19 with two reloads, haven't been to several pistol classes, and fire hundreds of rounds a week training, you're just asking to be gunned down by that dude robbing the 7/11. You shouldn't even be carrying.

I go with the most important thing is having a gun, on you, when you need it.

 

[The Big D]

Spot on...except I shoot far less than do you.

Had to make a choice a couple years back when MD no longer allowed LEOSA eligible persons to qualify with both a semi-auto and a revolver. You had to pick just one; I chose the revolver. I am perfectly content with that decision and roll the mean streets of my city with nothing more than a j-frame (and usually a reload) at hand.

Be safe.

I've been put down for my choice of self-defense gun (revolver) and for my training regimen (emphasis on dry-fire practice drills with live-fire at the range once or twice a month). I've been told that unless I carry a semi-auto with a double-stack magazine, a back-up gun, fire 1k rounds/week on a 360-degree range, and engage in regular force-on-force training sessions that I'm deluding myself into thinking I'm prepared.

Yet, as the OP pointed out, many people with little to no training survive violent encounters, often with what many consider "substandard" weapons.

Training and gear selection are important, but I think determination and a willingness to use the appropriate amount of force when necessary are much more important.

And while self-defense skills are important to me, they are not the end-all/be-all of my existence.

As William Shatner once eloquently stated, "Get a life!"

 

[sheriffoconee]

Went to a shooting Sunday night....bad guy (family member) had a knife and his kinfolk had a 25 auto....one ball 25 round into the upper left gut took out a kidney and lodged in the offenders back...where it still is...
as soon as the guy was shot he dropped to the ground, ending the fight....
Just sayin'.......take it for what it is worth

 

[Maximumbob54]

Read the article on the history of the FBI's guns. That will make you feel better.

 

[Glock 'em down]

Once upon a time, I had a Beretta 92F 9mm. I wore it to work one day and one of the local deputies, who at the time was a big .44 Magnum aficionado came in. He saw my 9mm, called it a "pusillanimous (yes, a real word - you can look it up ) sub-caliber, baby rabbit gun" and began to horse laugh me.

I told him, "I tell ya what. Let's me and you just have a duel. You can shoot me with your big ol' hand cannon and I'll shoot you with this pusillanimous, baby rabbit gun, but...

LET ME SHOOT YOU FIRST!!!

He left me alone after that.

 

[Fritz52]

The question that should be asked is what will it take for the assailant to leave me alone.

If all I had to carry was maybe 5 rolled up Benjamin's to buy off an attacker it would be cheaper and a lot less hassle in the long run than the time and money it takes to responsibly carry a firearm.

The rabid pit bull might prefer a steak but I'm not carrying dinner too so I carry a gun. Much more efficient.

 

[Steve in Vermont]

I wear my seatbelt when driving, drive defensively and carry lots of insurance. Beyond that I have very little control over what others may do on the highway. I cc a J Frame loaded with .38 +P ammo and practice 2X per week. I also practice situational awareness and go out of my way to avoid trouble. Beyond that I have little control of what others may do. Life is like that, prepare as best you can for what may happen with the understanding it may or may not be enough.

 

[cshoff]

When you get right down to it, self-defense preparedness is nothing more than the assembling of various tools and skills in an attempt to satisfy what we personally feel is an acceptable level of personal safety. So with that in mind, it's pretty safe to reach the conclusion that each and every piece of equipment we select is simply a choice for what we hope/believe is an incremental gain in that personal safety. It is why we choose to carry a weapon over bare fists, a blade over a can of Mace, and inevitably, a gun over a blade.

IMO, choosing a "more capable" caliber is a perfectly natural extension of this selection process. It stands to reason that a person would want to select the most effective tool he/she can that meets/exceeds the given requirements of the situation. That said, there are some that certainly seem to want to over-complicate the process.

 

[Finn McCool]

I always read The Armed Citizen first. Guns and shooting are interests and hobbies for most of us here, so we may tend to over think things, especially from an outsiders viewpoint. That being said, The Armed Citizen probably doesn't post stories where things end badly for the good guys, and things may end badly if one doesn't use enough gun.

 

[Kanewpadle]

I know I've said this before but.........

The caliber of the man counts more than the caliber of his gun.

 

[7shooter]

I posted this a few days ago on this site. The study is worth reading.

" Greg Ellifritz has recently published some research on the comparibility of the common defensive calibers which makes me feel much better about the 38 Special. There has been some criticism of his research methodology but as someone who has been involved in scientific research in a variety of capacities I think he did as good a job as anyone could do in the real world. "

Here is a link to his research:

An Alternate Look at Handgun Stopping Power