A discussion was held on "why" larger capacity magazines are prudent. I will paraphrase Mr. Sagebrush's answer because I think he captured many good points.
Predators are not stupid. They profile their victims and choose people least likely to mount a credible defense. That means they will choose a family over a single man. The reasoning is that a family has less situational awareness and the wallet carrier is much more likely to roll-over in the hope of avoiding collateral damages.
There is no guarantee that the predators will stop with the wallet, especially if the area is remote (like a deserted parking structure) or when the few witnesses are "friendlies".
The picture in my head is that I am much more likely to need my sidearm when I am with my two kids, ages 4 and 7. Part of me will be making every effort to stay between the bad guys and my kids. The other part of me will be trying to score solid hits on the goblins. The last thing I need is to run out of bullets and try to attempt a reload.
Predators are not stupid. Reloading during a firefight that the bad guys planned is an invitation to get shot.
The reason I need a magazine with deep capacity is for comfort. Every piece of first-hand evidence I have is that it is extremely uncomfortable to get shot (even when wearing body armor).
I don't carry "high capacity" magazines. I carry "comfortable capacity" magazines.
It would give me great satisfaction if more of us "gun bloggers" abandoned the vocabulary chosen by the anti-gun crowd and started using terms like "comfortable capacity."