Gun control advocates who try to justify restrictions on law-abiding citizens may sometimes look at how violent crimes unfold to justify their argument. They might say that most gun fights only involve a few rounds, for example, so why would you need a 15-round magazine?

I've had that conversation.

And, to be fair, most gunfights actually are over after just a few shots. Most don't even need to hit to end the fight because most bad guys are cowards who want easy meat, not someone ready to fight back.

The problem with this is that it assumes the average is universal. The average gun battle may only have, say, three shots fired, but a lot of them only have one round discharged. That means some involve a whole lot more.

And a recent home invasion in Texas illustrates one way that happens.

Police say four armed men broke into a man's home on the southwest side and demanded money at gunpoint.

The attack happened around 12:30 p.m. in the 400 block of Wilcox. Police say the door to the home was unlocked when four men with guns and masks barged in and held the man at gunpoint.

They took the money and pistol-whipped the victim and are currently at-large.

Now, either this gentleman didn't have a firearm or couldn't get to it in time, so it didn't turn into a defensive gun use. However, let's say, for the sake of argument, that he did.

Do you think one shot would have ended the threat? There were four of them. According to this report, all four were armed. 

That means an armed resident in such a situation would need to take on all four with his firearm.

Now, let's say he had a 10-round magazine. That would leave him with a little over two shots per bad guy. That might sound like enough if your knowledge of fighting with a firearm begins and ends on a static range where you have all day to shoot non-moving targets. In reality, you're going to miss. You're probably going to miss a lot.

So now that 10-round magazine only let's you successfully engage one or two of the bad guys before you need to reload. That still leaves two armed criminals who want you dead. Even if they're empty, too, that's still enough folks to just beat you to death.

Not a pleasant thought, now is it?

Especially since it's likely that reloads aren't going to be readily available.

This is why more rounds in a single magazine are good. No one ever survives a gunfight and thinks, "I wish I'd had fewer rounds." It just doesn't happen. However, quite a few victims wish they'd had just a few more shots left in their magazines.

Anti-gunners aren't gun people. They don't understand firearms, as we've seen all too often. That's especially true when the anti-gunners are working for the ATF, but it's pretty true across the board in general. Because they're not gun people, they don't understand what we've seen regarding gun fighting as a general thing. If the anti-gunner is being generous, they figure you being prepared for the average encounter is sufficient.

But an average is just that, an average. Some people deal with less than that but some have to deal with far worse. Being prepared for the average encounter means you're completely unprepared for the above-average fight.

Yet for someone, that's the engagement they're going to find themselves in. That might be you or me, though I pray it's not. If it is, though, we have a God-given right to defend ourselves, and that means having the means with which to do so. If that means a 30-round magazine in an AR-15, then so be it. No one should have the ability to prevent that.