one aspect I seldom see discussed is the concept of guys actually testing and practicing,
with their firearm of choice.
now while its true most confrontations will take place at under 12-15 ft and less than 6 shots,
will be fired ,
most people will never be confronted with a life or death confrontation.
but if you are your skills may be critical to surviving.
I find it amazing how many people I know that carry a pistol of some type,
that they would be very, unlikely to be able to consistently, hit a fairly small target ,
(lets say a soda can) shot at 25 feet.
if that handgun was drawn rapidly and used , under stress,,
and you are depended on, the first two shots,connecting,
it should provide a well practiced owner with an excellent chance of hitting its intended target.
why carry something you are very unlikely too consistently hit a target with,
or select a cartridge with that may not get the job done convincingly, with a single well placed hit.
example one of the guys I regularly hunt with is a crack shot with a 6" l-frame 357 mag revolver.
but he carries a glock 17, with which he has a hard time hitting a coke can at 25-30 feet with.
I asked him why? he stated 16 shot capacity, vs 6 shots with a revolver....
I asked him what good are the extra 10 shots going to do if you can,t consistently hit with the first 6?
Im certainly not suggesting the glocks a bad choice or the S&W 357 mag would be a much improved choice,
but simply suggesting that any firearm you choose,
will require you to practice until you can rapidly and consistently hit your target.
and ease of rapid access, decent accuracy, durability and consistency,
are really more important than high magazine capacity, in most cases.
