If limited to 10 rounds, what do you carry?
- Thread starter Echo40
- Start date
The Preacher
Member
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2003
- Messages
- 238
- Reaction score
- 580
If limited to just ten rounds that'll mean that the 2nd Amendment is under full attack with more to come. Thus I carry this:
The Preacher
The Preacher
mscampbell2734
Member
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2012
- Messages
- 796
- Reaction score
- 881
If I'm going to be limited in how many rounds I can carry I want to carry the biggest possible.
So 1911 with 8+1 and at least one spare.
So 1911 with 8+1 and at least one spare.
12 gauge. With magazine extension.
YkcorCal
US Veteran
I have to respectfully disagree. One should shoot what one shoots the best. Now I will grant that most can shoot a 9MM easier and faster than a .45 ACP however someone like me that has been shooting a .45ACP for well over 60 years (I'm 71) has it so ingrained it has become instinctual and I don't think about recoil. It is funny because when I was qualifying in the US Army with the Colt 1911, I overheard some of the other fresh Second Lieutenants complaining about the recoil of the .45 ACP and it surprised me because I had never thought about it before. I grew up shooting my grandfathers Colt 1911 and it was just the way it shot so I had never before considered it as a bad kicker but them I grew up in a gun culture where "recoil" was just a fact of life to be lived with and overcome as the hunt was on. I grew up in Southern Arkansas just north of the Louisiana border running the pine barrens and swamps with a part Cherokee best friend. We knew the woods better than any of the game wardens. We told one game warden about some big gators in this one swamp area and he told us in no uncertain terms that there were no alligators in that swamp because they had all been hunted out! that was until he hit an 8 footer lying across a road near that swap tearing the front out from under his truck. My best friend and I made sure to ask him about it. When he confirmed the story we proceeded to say; it could not possibly be true as we had it on the local Game Warden's authority there were no alligators in that swamp! Oh, the language that man used about teenagers!
A crazed man's rampage came to a not-so-sudden end Saturday morning in Montgomery County Maryland, and a bystander caught it all on video. After 8 shots he is still advancing. Cell phone video of the incident, NOT FOR THE SQUEAMISH. Anyone who believes in "stopping power," hydrostatic "crock" or puts all their faith in boutique bullets ain't never really killed anything.
Attachments
Last edited by a moderator:
OP
Echo40
Member
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2017
- Messages
- 4,067
- Reaction score
- 7,906
Folks are quick to point out these freak occurrences in which somebody gets pumped full of lead and keeps coming as proof that all bullets are equally effective, completely ignoring the obvious fact that the reason why such stories are noteworthy in the first place is because they are the exception, not the rule, and thusly don't prove anything besides the undisputed fact that shot placement is the single most decisive factor in a gun fight.
You can argue all that you want that folks shouldn't rely upon unproven theoretical ballistic performance, that much is true, but to argue that all duty cartridges are equally effective/ineffective based on the results of unilateral ballistics gel tests or freak occurrences such as this is completely ludicrous.
I've said it before and I'll say it as many times as necessary... Carry what you feel confident with, learn to shoot it well, and don't fall into the trap of second-guessing your choices to the point that you'll never become proficient with anything because you're constantly swapping out what you carry in search of the illusive ideal, one-size-fits-all self-defense platform.
My entire argument is that most people expect that whoever they are shooting will fly back and fall down like they do in the movies.
I went through a fair number these kinds of incidents with green troops first time in combat. Most of never hunted either so had no experience at all at seeing real living things react to being shot. It the seemingly similar shots where in one case the critter crumples up and the next time runs a hundred yards.
The guy in the video was enraged. Imagine him with a satchel charge or an RPG instead of a stick. How much damage could he have done in the 15 seconds it took for him to bleed out?
You have to know where the bullets need go and put them there. Destroy the central nervous system or break down enough major bones to immobilize them to make a determined foe stop.
Last edited:
OP
Echo40
Member
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2017
- Messages
- 4,067
- Reaction score
- 7,906
Perhaps I'm being overly optimistic here, but I really don't think that anyone who is into firearms enough to discuss them on forums is that misinformed.
Granted, but I'm used to folks who are into firearms either being hunters or otherwise folks who are really into weapons/warfare/self-defense and thus are aware that guns don't work in real life like they do in movies.
I mean, I would imagine that most folks who've been to the range, shot at any form of reactive target would understand based on simple observation that bullets do not behave as they do in movies in real life.
Heck, before I had ever fired a gun, I knew that guns don't work in real life as they do in movies because nothing else does and movies are made to be entertaining. I think a lot of folks are aware of this as well, otherwise I imagine that folks in general would be terrified of automobiles due to how easily they explode in films. Or at the very least, you'd think that folks would be safer drivers because they'd be encouraged to drive more slowly and keep their eyes on the road more if they were under the impression that their vehicle would burst into flames/violently explode in the event of a minor accident.
Fortunately, most civilians aren't armed with heavy explosives, so much like how shooting someone with a pistol won't throw them several feet backwards, I'm confident that nobody is going to rush anyone else with a satchel charge or an RPG, not in the United States anyway.
True, but once again, you are presuming that folks here don't already know this and that much to the contrary, that the majority of people here think that shot placement can be substituted by ammo choice.
Frankly, that's an issue that I have with a lot of folks who make bold statements on firearms forums, they arrogantly presume that the majority of other posters are ignorant, misinformed, or sometimes even downright foolish, especially towards those who don't follow along with the latest trends.
I myself have gotten a lot of such remarks simply because I choose to carry .40 S&W, which has gone out of style. Folks seem to jump to the conclusion that I am under the impression that because .40 S&W is a mere 1mm/.05" larger in diameter than 9mm that I am attempting to substitute accuracy for bullet size. No, I just like the cartridge, I'm confident with it, guns chambered in said cartridge are cheaper/more available, and I'm not about to sell all of my .40s for 9mm just because Law Enforcement has moved to another cartridge.
Folks need to stop being so presumptuous in their assumption that mere differences in opinion/selection indicates ignorance on their part and that they require instruction on the matter.
It may be done with good intentions, but it comes of as arrogant, condescending, and ironically ignorant.
Don't get me wrong, if someone outright expresses an erroneous belief, then go right ahead and correct them, but don't assume that just because other folks choose to carry something other than what you do, even if it isn't necessarily an optimal choice, that they have made said choice based on ignorance/misinformation.
Perhaps you are correct. I spent a considerable chunk of my adult life in the Army and in Combat Arms having to train soldiers who had had no exposure to firearms before entering the military. Many career soldiers have done no shooting outside the training environment.
A four hour block of instruction on assembly, disassembly, and immediate action followed by forty rounds on the range repeated annually until they muster out doesn't make anyone proficient.
I suspect having to deal with so many who were NOT gun guys has skewed my perspective.
OP
Echo40
Member
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2017
- Messages
- 4,067
- Reaction score
- 7,906
It's completely understandable. Most folks who enlist don't do so out of enthusiasm for firearms, but out of a genuine desire to serve, ergo they have very little exposure to firearms prior to their enlistment. So constant exposure to novice shoots could easily skew one's perspective, especially if that is one's sole exposure to shooters on a regular basis.
Last edited:
YkcorCal
US Veteran
Nightstand gun is an Apex Tactical Specialties S&W 625-8 4" loaded with a full moon clip of Federal HST +P rounds.
Ranger17
Member
Regardless if a 10 rnd limit was in play or not, any cc for me would be my EZ Shield in 9mm. That's what works for me and my arthritic thumb (and what I enjoy shooting/practicing with). So at least in that area a restriction wouldn't affect "that" gun need. It could affect other gun needs but that's a different discussion lol.
Do you actually own that gun? Those are stock photos . . .
Nightstand gun is an Apex Tactical Specialties S&W 625-8 4" loaded with a full moon clip of Federal HST +P rounds.
