[pax]

Ahab,

You'd do well to look at the source data if you're really interested in that question (ummm, not meaning to imply you haven't, no offense intended or implied...). It's interesting stuff.

As Marshall has said many times over the years, the "one shot stop" was simply the standard of comparison they hit upon, one that could be applied across a wide spectrum of data to provide a single common denominator. It wasn't intended to suggest how people should conduct a gunfight, or anything of the sort. It was simply a way to at least slightly narrow down one aspect of a huge array of variables into something less unwieldy. They had to pick a number, and "one" was the easiest and most available number, in part because in multiple-shot incidents, there was often some confusion as to how many shots were actually fired. So "one" was chosen as the number that limited the variables the best for their purposes.

Stepping out of the thread now; not here to defend anyone's work and I'm not a scientist. Just interested in accuracy for the little bits I do vaguely know.

pax