Reloading during a self defense situation

[Muss Muggins]

I've been thinking about this quite a bit lately, and the thread regarding 9mm pocket guns (I don't think there is such a thing, but that's a different topic) really got me going. Many forum members have posted pictures of the gear they carry to leave the home, and that gear in some cases approaches that of a line law enforcement officer. Reloads (spare ammo in various forms and/or a second gun) are a frequent topic. A couple weeks ago, I began searching the web for information about citizens reloading during a self defense situation. My null hypothesis was that it was rare, to the point of never happening.

I found this:

The Thinking Gunfighter

The author presents an analysis of five years of incidents reported in the "Armed Citizen" column of the NRA magazine (not a member, so I don't know which one, and the article doesn't say). In any event, out of 482 incidents, the citizen reloaded during 3, including one in which a .32 revolver was used to dispatch an escaped lion with 13 rounds. Over half of the incidents occurred in the home, and the defense firearm was carried on the body in only 20% of the total incidents. In the other 80%, the firearm was retrieved from a place of storage, frequently in another room.

Unfortunately, the analysis is from 1997 to 2001, even though the article bears a 2012 date. I am continuing to search for a newer analysis of these incidents.

Everyone will have their own opinion about the meaning of these results, and will draw their own conclusions. For me, it means that I'm making an appropriate risk management decision by carrying a firearm consistently, but not loading myself down with ammunition I likely won't need.

Couple of points:

There is no challenge to anyone contained in this post that I can see, merely an observation that everyone will have their own opinion and draw their own conclusions. There's also a mention that I am still looking for other useful information. Others may have taken this as a challenge, but that is on them.

Also, I do not discuss how many rounds I carry. I just mention that I don't load myself down with ammunition I likely won't need. As I suggested earlier, other posters have drawn their own conclusions, which may or may not be correct regarding my situation.

Edit: I clearly did "challenge" others to find information proving me wrong . . . My bad.

 

[Muss Muggins]

I failed to add something earlier.

Since we started with statistics, it's only right that we continue along the same lines. The OP stated that because the vast majority of shootings only required 2 shots, he felt safe carrying no extra ammo/magazines.

I would follow with that logic being slightly ingenuous if not flawed. You see it fails to take into account the whole situation. If we really want to look at all of the statistics, we have to consider altercations where no shots are fired.

I found some studies where they showed in at least 98% of all assaults, where a gun was involved, no shots were fired. To go a little further, 99% of all those who carry will never have to present their gun in their lifetime. Therefore, if you follow the original logic through, there's no need to carry any live rounds or even a gun. Hmmm, maybe the anti-gun nuts are on to something here.

I agree with your analysis. For me, the first rule to engaging in a gunfight is "Have a gun." It's like insurance, brakes, a fire extinguisher, air bags, seat belts, and motorcycle helmets. You don't need them all the time, but when you need them, you REALLY need them. As for the amount of extra ammunition I carry, I have risk managed that. I don't have a fire pump at my home, but I do have an extinguisher. I don't have a $10,000,000 umbrella policy, but I have insurance. I don't drive an armor plated vehicle, but it has air bags and seat belts.

 

[Smoke]

Couple of points:

There is no challenge to anyone contained in this post that I can see, merely an observation that everyone will have their own opinion and draw their own conclusions. There's also a mention that I am still looking for other useful information. Others may have taken this as a challenge, but that is on them.

Also, I do not discuss how many rounds I carry. I just mention that I don't load myself down with ammunition I likely won't need. As I suggested earlier, other posters have drawn their own conclusions, which may or may not be correct regarding my situation.

Again, if I misread your post I apologize

That said, there most certainly is a very specific challenge challenge in this post

And I challenge you to find an example of a CCW holder in a a critical incident who ran out of bullets before he ran out of bad guys. Like the "blood in the streets" predictions of CCW opponents, it just doesn't happen . . .

Emphasis added

 

[Muss Muggins]

Again, if I misread your post I apologize

That said, there most certainly is a very specific challenge challenge in this post



Emphasis added

Yeah, you got me there . . . Sometimes the words in my head go out for a walk alone . . .

 

[old bear]

Keep two speed strips in car; as another poster suggested, the only reason for this is to top off my revolver, once the "smoke clears." On the rare occasion I carry reload on my person is to show off the way cool 2X2x2 pouches I have.

 

[ChattanoogaPhil]

I failed to add something earlier.

Since we started with statistics, it's only right that we continue along the same lines. The OP stated that because the vast majority of shootings only required 2 shots, he felt safe carrying no extra ammo/magazines.

I would follow with that logic being slightly ingenuous if not flawed. You see it fails to take into account the whole situation. If we really want to look at all of the statistics, we have to consider altercations where no shots are fired.

I found some studies where they showed in at least 98% of all assaults, where a gun was involved, no shots were fired. To go a little further, 99% of all those who carry will never have to present their gun in their lifetime. Therefore, if you follow the original logic through, there's no need to carry any live rounds or even a gun. Hmmm, maybe the anti-gun nuts are on to something here.

Quite true, I guess.

I think the underlying statistic to what is being discussed is peace of mind. For most of us, the only thing a carry gun will ever do is provide peace of mind. If somone feels better prepared carrying an extra mag or speedstrip, then it's already been of use. If it's ever needed in a gunfight that's a bonus.

 

[Cal44]

I failed to add something earlier.

Since we started with statistics, it's only right that we continue along the same lines. The OP stated that because the vast majority of shootings only required 2 shots, he felt safe carrying no extra ammo/magazines.

I would follow with that logic being slightly ingenuous if not flawed. You see it fails to take into account the whole situation. If we really want to look at all of the statistics, we have to consider altercations where no shots are fired.

I found some studies where they showed in at least 98% of all assaults, where a gun was involved, no shots were fired. To go a little further, 99% of all those who carry will never have to present their gun in their lifetime. Therefore, if you follow the original logic through, there's no need to carry any live rounds or even a gun. Hmmm, maybe the anti-gun nuts are on to something here.

And then you need to add in the people who ran out of ammo and were killed -- and therefore couldn't respond to the survey.

 

[Muss Muggins]

And then you need to add in the people who ran out of ammo and were killed -- and therefore couldn't respond to the survey.

At the risk of issuing another challenge, I bet you'd be hard pressed to find one news story about that scenario regarding a private citizen in a legitimate self defense situation . . . Such a story would make the national news in a nanosecond. I follow things like this, and have for about 30 years. One doesn't come to mind. Not saying it didn't happen, just saying it's uncommon to the point of rare and unlikely.

 

[g8rb8]

Muss Muggins,
Both sides of the opinion regarding carrying reloads have been well represented. Like you, I would prefer some hard statistics to better evaluate the situation.

Your points are well-made regarding the statistical unlikelihood the vast majority of citizens would ever need to draw a weapon, much less reload it. Many posters have made good points about their reasons to carry reloads.

A topic that would contribute to forming an opinion on this matter would be the "hit rate." There is a paucity of information regarding the "hit rate" for citizens defending themselves, however I can find some evidence of "hit rates" in police departments running in the 25-35% range. The two police officers that ran the conceal carry class I took cited 15-20% hit rates. If you extrapolate that data an argument can be made for more ammo when professionals are missing 65-85% of their shots. If citizens have "hit rates" similar to police the average guy with a 5-6 shot handgun, assuming no malfunctions, would just as likely run out of ammo as hit his target once.

John
Scoundrel and Ne'er-Do-Well in Training

 

[Muss Muggins]

Muss Muggins,
Both sides of the opinion regarding carrying reloads have been well represented. Like you, I would prefer some hard statistics to better evaluate the situation.

Your points are well-made regarding the statistical unlikelihood the vast majority of citizens would ever need to draw a weapon, much less reload it. Many posters have made good points about their reasons to carry reloads.

A topic that would contribute to forming an opinion on this matter would be the "hit rate." There is a paucity of information regarding the "hit rate" for citizens defending themselves, however I can find some evidence of "hit rates" in police departments running in the 25-35% range. The two police officers that ran the conceal carry class I took cited 15-20% hit rates. If you extrapolate that data an argument can be made for more ammo when professionals are missing 65-85% of their shots. If citizens have "hit rates" similar to police the average guy with a 5-6 shot handgun, assuming no malfunctions, would just as likely run out of ammo as hit his target once.

John
Scoundrel and Ne'er-Do-Well in Training

I'd point out that the police have a different mission than the average private citizen, and the circumstances surrounding the initial encounters of bad guys vs. private citizens vary enough that I don't think you can compare them. If you can, then citizens should be wearing three or four reloads, a BUG, a chemical weapon, an impact weapon, a TASER, and restraint devices. . .

 

[rwsmith]

I know what you are thinking, punk....

With the "guy" within feet....... bluffing is smarter than reloading!!!!!

Did he shoot six shots or five?

 

[BAM-BAM]

Did I shoot five shots or six?

"Do you feel lucky punk..... well do you"

 

[Muss Muggins]

Did I shoot five shots or six?

Awesome. Not sure she had the same handle on the round count that Clint did, though . . .

 

[BAM-BAM]

"Do you feel lucky punk..... well do you"

"I's got to know.......................................................click"

 

[rwsmith]

I pretty much agree....

I pretty much agree with T.T.G. with a little adjustment. I'd like a little bit of buffer in the ammo department just in case there is more than one perp and the rest of them don't get scared and run off.

 

[Biggfoot44]

Off the top of my head , I can think of a few incidents where business owners had major high volume gunfights , but that will start a discussion of the parameters of the sample. I won't go with *never* , but will certainly agree with *rarely* .

But it's been mentioned a couple of times in this thread , the overall population odds of expending rounds in SD are kinda slim . [ And so are needing a fire extingusher , spare tire , etc ]. So simply having a gun is already a major step into " being prepared because it's a good idea ". Insert various comparisons of 2.7 rounds fired gunfights with drownding in water that averages 2in deep.

It's been mentioned a cpl times in this thread that fresh mag is standard part of malfunction clearing of bottomfeeders.

For .38/.357 users , Speed Strips fit in watch pockets of jeans , and two fit easily in a pager case on belt.

Probably none of this will convince anyone , but for me everything has at least one reload.

I'm glad that bluffing with an empty gun has occasionally worked for the good guys/ gals , but I don't consider that a Plan A .

 

[Jiman]

I'd point out that the police have a different mission than the average private citizen, and the circumstances surrounding the initial encounters of bad guys vs. private citizens vary enough that I don't think you can compare them. If you can, then citizens should be wearing three or four reloads, a BUG, a chemical weapon, an impact weapon, a TASER, and restraint devices. . .

I'm not defending or disagreeing with the post this was in response to but just wanted to add my .02 cents regarding the quote above.

While I agree that the LEO mission is different, I will argue that the stress(s) that impact either person (LEO or private citizen) is not related to their profession.

With that said, it's those parasympathetic stresses that are the root of such a low hit rate. It's not the kinds of encounters per se, it's the human reaction to a perceived life/death situation, fear, panic, sensory overload, etc...and it doesn't matter if you're a cop or not, it a natural human reaction.

The only way to better control and manage those parasympathetic responses is through stress inoculation...generally through scenerio based training. And since the effects of stress inoc. is perishable, it has to be repeated often for its positive benefits

In theory cops, since they're exposed to more dangerous situations than a private citizen, should be more stress innoculated, but clearly from just the stats provided, they don't seem to be...or maybe they are and the 'hit rate' for the average citizen would be even worse vs. LEO.

 

[Rastoff]

Yeah, you got me there . . . Sometimes the words in my head go out for a walk alone . . .

I don't care who ya are, that's funny right there. I resemble that remark from time to time.

And then you need to add in the people who ran out of ammo and were killed -- and therefore couldn't respond to the survey.

Pretty sure these stats are collected without talking to those involved, but it is a reasonable question.

A topic that would contribute to forming an opinion on this matter would be the "hit rate." There is a paucity of information regarding the "hit rate" for citizens defending themselves, however I can find some evidence of "hit rates" in police departments running in the 25-35% range.

OK, full marks for word usage. Go to the head of the class. It's rare that someone pulls out a word I don't know and that was one of them. I divined the intent through context, but looked it up anyway. Allow me to advance our education- There is a paucity of exotic word usage on this forum.

English aside, I don't agree with the premise of your thought. While police are indeed professional gun conveyors, by default that doesn't make them great users of said guns. I have nothing but respect for our men in blue, but I've met many who were only marginal with their firearm. In fact, many saw the range only with disdain. They saw the annual or biannual or quarterly shooting qualification as a chore rather than a fun aspect of their job. Many of those barely passed qualification.

So, no, I don't agree with the premise that because a professional has a low hit ratio, we will too. In fact, I think it's more the opposite. Yes, I believe the hit ratio won't be high, but because we are enthusiasts, as opposed to carrying because our job requires it, we tend to seek training more often and practice more.

 

[Grog]

And I challenge you to find an example of a CCW holder in a a critical incident who ran out of bullets before he ran out of bad guys. Like the "blood in the streets" predictions of CCW opponents, it just doesn't happen . . .

I've never had a fire at home (my wife handles the cooking ) but I still keep three fire extinguishers handy at home and one in the front seat of my truck.

 

[Buford57]

These are good matters to consider before the fact rather than in after-actions.

Part of the threat analysis and situational awareness that should be part of our daily routine. Our situations and comfort levels vary.

The same considerations,such as destination, duration of trip, time of day, etc. that I use to decide what to carry will affect whether to take a reload or BUG and how many.

I didn't carry the same equipment for desk duty at the PD on day watch that I did in a solo car on graves in the industrial district or on a stakeout or for a drug raid.

I don't arm myself the same way for a noon trip to store for milk as I do for a cross country trip.

Biggfoot44
I do appreciate the idea of a speed strip in the cell phone case. My case has two interior pockets. The second one is too small for a derringer, but would accommodate a speed strip nicely. With the one already in my watch pocket, that should more than suffice for the times I decide to leave the .45, the 12 gauge, the Garand and the LAWS at home.