The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Tactics and Training

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old March 16, 2007, 02:13 PM   #26
Smokin Joe
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 30, 2007
Location: City of New York
Posts: 291
or hell, line them both up and use FMJ.
Smokin Joe is offline  
Old March 16, 2007, 02:37 PM   #27
dawg23
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 21, 2001
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 403
Quote:
What prompted my question is the thought of if you have to shoot at more than one target. Shoot one target once, then the other in quickdraw/pointshooting or start shooting one and wait 'til he goes down before you start shooting at the other(s) (if the latter then in the meantime they are shooting or striking at you)
The answer, as is so often the case, is "It depends." On a lot of things. One of which is your ability to deliver rapid, accurate shots.

If the fastest rate at which you can get accurate hits is one shot every three to five seconds, you may want to consider shooting each threat once before trying to neutralize the others.

If you can get accurate follow-up hits at intervals of .2 or .3 seconds, then David's approach is far better. While you have a good sight picture, pump multiple rounds before diverting your focus elsewhere. (Before the harpies jump in with fears of shooting a dude who is no longer a threat, I don't think what you do in a 1-second window of time is going to be a big problem for you if the first shot was "righteous," at least not where I live).

Other factors, in addition to your skill level, have to do with the relative positions of the threats (relative to each other and to you), the nature of their weapons (shotgun, knife tire iron ?), availability and proximity of cover, etc. etc., etc.

Just my opinions. But keep in mind I haven't written any books or gunrag articles on armed self defense.
__________________
.
www.PersonalDefenseTraining.net
dawg23 is offline  
Old March 16, 2007, 03:13 PM   #28
Mikeyboy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 31, 2005
Posts: 1,231
Quote:
In short, if a criminal attacks me, what are the chances that he is going to drop after receiving a round center mass?
Simple answer to the original question. One Shot Stop = Bullet in Brain.
All you need to worry about is if the bullet is effective enough to penetrate the skull and enough to do damage once it breaks thru.

Regardless of the caliber handgun, COM shots are never 100%. There is a lot of meat, bone, and clothing, or even kevlar that can throw things off. Heck you pierce into the heart and in the second or two before the guy expires , he can be determined enough to still move in to do you harm. On the other hand other BG could just give up and collapse, and bleed out where they lay. That is why Sanlow and Marshall's one stop precentages are subjective and actually can change from year to year. The COM is still a wise place to shoot at, just because its an easier target to hit, and there are a lot of vital organs in there that will make a the BG stop or die. Still destory the Brain and the CNS is gone, and the body does not function anymore. The switch in turn OFF.

If I had one dangerous BG and just one bullet left, I'm aiming for the head.
Mikeyboy is offline  
Old March 16, 2007, 03:30 PM   #29
stephen426
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 11, 2005
Posts: 3,840
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Armstrong
FWIW, check out the story of Stacey Lim. Shot in the heart with a .357 Magnum, she was able to stay in the fight.
David,

Please do not quote me out of context. Kickshot85 was talking about someone taking 3 hits of 00 buck and staying in the fight. If you read his post, you would notice that the shots were to the shoulder, leg, and abdomen. The person shot did die from his injuries, but he not before he took out the person who shot him. If someone caught a load of 00 buck square in the chest (lets assume 12 gauge), I don't see how it is possible for them to continue the fight. The multiple rounds of 00 buck (assuming they penetrate sufficiently) will cause massive hemmoraging and a major drop in blood pressure, causing the person to pass out and ultimately die from blood loss. A single shot is quite different from this and even then, did that shot merely nick the heart or penetrate the heart walls. Don't compare apples to orangatangs.
__________________
The ATF should be a convenience store instead of a government agency!
stephen426 is offline  
Old March 16, 2007, 03:41 PM   #30
stephen426
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 11, 2005
Posts: 3,840
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lurper
I am always amazed at the reaction this topic evokes and how most people do not understand the term one shot stop. NO ONE is saying that this bullet or that bullet has a x% chance of stopping someone with one shot every time. What they are saying is that historically in real incidents the attack was stopped x% of the time with one shot. If you don't know the difference, go back to school. One shot stop has nothing to do with knock down power, killng power or anything else.
The Marshall Sanow data is relavent. By showing how it has performed historically, it provides a very good indication of how it will perform in the future, assuming the conditions are very similar. While there are always outliers in the data, the high number of data makes it statistically significant. Perhaps you prefer we go back to theoretical speculation rather than looking at how the bullets have performed in real life.

I know the data is not perfect since there are many variables that are not recorded or addressed. For example, when you flip a coin and you would expect for it to land on heads about 50% of the time. That is not to say it would not be possible for a coin to land on heads 10 times in a row. Over time however, the trend should follow the 50/50 distribution.
__________________
The ATF should be a convenience store instead of a government agency!
stephen426 is offline  
Old March 16, 2007, 03:51 PM   #31
Smokin Joe
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 30, 2007
Location: City of New York
Posts: 291
Quote:
A way to quantify the historical and theoretical future performance of x caliber with x bullets. It is all about odds and percentages and has nothing to do with a "magic bullet".
that one stop shot percent thing has NOTHING to do with future performance.

NOTHING.

that statistics is for RECREATIONAL purposes only, for FUN READING. not for anything in real life at all.

DO NOT use that as if it was real. DO NOT use it to shop for ammo, DO NOT take it seriously, and most of all DO NOT tell others of that study which is so flawed in its reportings.
Smokin Joe is offline  
Old March 16, 2007, 04:55 PM   #32
Lurper
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 21, 2006
Posts: 943
Quote:
The Marshall Sanow data is relavent. By showing how it has performed historically, it provides a very good indication of how it will perform in the future, assuming the conditions are very similar. While there are always outliers in the data, the high number of data makes it statistically significant. Perhaps you prefer we go back to theoretical speculation rather than looking at how the bullets have performed in real life.
Aside from the fact that Marshall/Sanow have been largely discredited. Never forget the first rule of statistics:
Correlation does not equal causality.

The data should be used as a guide for measuring the amount of (theoretical) damage relative to another caliber. It is not an absolute measure. It has absolutely no relevance to tactics or technique. Yet, that is exactly how some try to use it. The data is not intended to infer that 1 shot from a .45 is going to stop someone faster than 1 shot from a .32. What it does infer is that a .45 does more damage relative to a .32 thus creating a larger margin of error in terms of shot placement. In essence giving you better odds of a one shot stop. The real problem is as mentioned earlier that a person who is incapacitated or a person who simply gives up is considered "stopped". That has nothing to do with the bullet's effect.

Those who use the data as a guide for what to carry, how many shots to fire, and myriad other tactical decisions do so at their own peril.

Last edited by Lurper; March 16, 2007 at 05:38 PM.
Lurper is offline  
Old March 16, 2007, 05:34 PM   #33
Skyguy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 13, 2005
Posts: 266
One should not infer that caliber trumps shot placement, even though some folk might imply that.
.
__________________
First off.....'she' is a weapon, not a girlfriend;
a genderless, inanimate mechanism designed to mete out mayhem in life threatening situations.
Skyguy is offline  
Old March 16, 2007, 06:12 PM   #34
buckster
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 24, 2006
Posts: 674
Try these

Try the Aguila 117 gr intelli-bullet. Boy does that puppy scream at 1350. They sound like a 45/70 when fired. What bark and bite at 565 lbs knock down. Your honor, I used the smallest round possible to stop him. Those things will up the edge on survival.
buckster is offline  
Old March 16, 2007, 06:26 PM   #35
stephen426
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 11, 2005
Posts: 3,840
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skyguy
One should not infer that caliber trumps shot placement, even though some folk might imply that.
Where do you get this from? Of course shot placement is critical, but lets assume shot placement is equal for all calibers. Otherwise, you cannot make any valid comparisons. Does it not make sense that a more powerful cartridge would inflict more damage and lead to faster incapacitation?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lurper
Aside from the fact that Marshall/Sanow have been largely discredited. Never forget the first rule of statistics:
Correlation does not equal causality.
Lurper,

So once something is statistically analyzed, all of the information concerning expected future performance becomes invalid... Yeah... What ever. I've taken my share of stats as well and I still won't throw out the results completely. I will take Marshall and Sanow's findings with a grain of salt as I realize there are flaws in the data. Many will argue that caliber (size) is everthing in handgun cartridges and velocity is meaningless. How about historical performance differences between the .380 auto and the .357 magnum? Both are practically the same diameter. What about the .40 S&W compared to the .380 auto. I hardly believe that the .02 inch difference accounts for anything. Lets take this a step further. What about the venerable .45 acp versus .44 mag or .454 casull? I guess since handgun velocities are meaningless, expected future performance cannot be inferred by the data. Yeah, okay... whatever. Companies pay big bucks for consumer research data even though the correlation of the data has no causation.
__________________
The ATF should be a convenience store instead of a government agency!
stephen426 is offline  
Old March 16, 2007, 07:21 PM   #36
Lurper
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 21, 2006
Posts: 943
Stephen
Marshall/Sanow were largely discredited for manipulating the sample (e.g. leaving out data that did not support their conclusion).

Expected future performance in terms of if I shoot x people with 1 round of x caliber x number will be one shot stops cannot be predicted. Yet that is constantly how people use the data.

First of all, shot placement is the single most important factor. I think we can all agree on that, right? Secondly, I never claimed that caliber was the major factor, it isn't. Size is no more important than velocity/penetration. They are all equal. Last time I checked, the only claim I supported was that the data shows damage of one caliber relative to another (meaning cartridge caliber, not diameter) and could not be considered as an absolute measure of effectiveness for dictating tactics or techniques to be used.

However, that being said you cannot support the argument that the next 100 incidents involving any caliber will produce the same results as in any of the tests. That is my point. The data is nowhere near comprehensive enough.

Anyone who believes that Marshall/Sanow, Hatcher/Thompson, Fackler or anyone elses tests are a measure of absolute stopping power is a fool.

Just because a company pays big bucks for data does not indicate that the data is valid or relevant. Ask R.J. Reynolds.
Lurper is offline  
Old March 16, 2007, 09:37 PM   #37
FM12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 5, 2007
Location: Monroeville, Alabama
Posts: 1,683
Some of you guys scare me...shoot til they stop offensive actions, NOT til they are dead. Once they cease and desist and you continue, some states may then consider you the aggressor. You can talk all the macho stuff you want to, but shoot only to stop them or incapacitate, NEVER to kill. you might also want to consider what you post here. I also believe in the " tried by twelve" mantra, but be careful about what you do and say. I expect a lot of naysayers about this post, but someone needs to say it.
FM12 is offline  
Old March 16, 2007, 10:26 PM   #38
Doug.38PR
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 18, 2005
Posts: 3,298
FM12, I know attorneys like to banter back and forth that "shoot to stop not kill" langauge around, but it's really downright absurd when you stop and think about it. To shoot someone at all is DEADLY force. To shoot someone at all is essentially to shoot to kill (unless you are deliberately going for the leg or arm to wound...SOMETHING I DON'T RECOMMEND BTW....but even there it is legally considered deadly force.)
Doug.38PR is offline  
Old March 16, 2007, 10:34 PM   #39
FM12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 5, 2007
Location: Monroeville, Alabama
Posts: 1,683
DOUG, I agree...However, when a person has stopped agressive actions, (either by throwing down the weapon, or shot to submission), its your duty to stop the attact/counterattack, don't you agree? AND Thanks for not jumping on me! Ken
FM12 is offline  
Old March 16, 2007, 10:57 PM   #40
Smokin Joe
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 30, 2007
Location: City of New York
Posts: 291
Shoot to stop ?

if the guy is dead, that is stopped.

it takes 2 seconds to empty my mag (10) into the guy.
Smokin Joe is offline  
Old March 16, 2007, 11:02 PM   #41
Smokin Joe
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 30, 2007
Location: City of New York
Posts: 291
Quote:
However, when a person has stopped agressive actions, (either by throwing down the weapon, or shot to submission), its your duty to stop the attact/counterattack, don't you agree?
VERY DANGEROUS,

u dont give the perp a chance to throw down his weapon. you fill him up with lead as fast as you can. (2 seconds)

that same time you take to "see if he had submitted" is the same time he will unload his mag into you. ( 2 seconds )

after you pump him fulla lead, your gun would be empty, WHILE YOU RELOAD, you can check to see if he had submitted or thrown down his weapon.

even if he is laying on the ground all wounded and bleeding, if that gun is still in his hand, he CAN shoot you. this is where you shoot him with another mag full.

THIS is real.

if you listen to all the media and other nonsense, one shot at his shoulder and the perp would drop the gun, fly back 15 feet and you hear him begging for his life...
Smokin Joe is offline  
Old March 16, 2007, 11:15 PM   #42
Rangefinder
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 4, 2005
Posts: 2,017
Smokin Joe>>If you feel you have a valid, life-threatening reason to draw on someone in self defense, okey-dokey. But if someone is attempting to submit/give up/ drop their weapon/ halt their attack---whatever you want to define it as, and you still shoot them? That isn't self defense anymore--it's murder.
__________________
"Why is is called Common Sense when it seems so few actually possess it?"

Guns only have two enemies: Rust and Politicians.
Rangefinder is offline  
Old March 16, 2007, 11:33 PM   #43
Smokin Joe
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 30, 2007
Location: City of New York
Posts: 291
forgive me if I sound harsh.

I'm not a LEO, I WILL NOT aim my firearm at a person and issue verbal commands.

therefore ACTION speaks LOUDER THAN WORDS.

if perp is holding a gun, and I believe he has intent to shoot me, or someone I care about, he WILL BE PUMPPED FULL OF LEAD, ( in 2 seconds ).

there is no mid way for me. Gun in hand = pummped fulla lead.

I guess you have never been lied to. perp says OK OK, DONT SHOOT ! then in 2 seconds, pumps your wife fulla lead.
Smokin Joe is offline  
Old March 16, 2007, 11:39 PM   #44
Smokin Joe
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 30, 2007
Location: City of New York
Posts: 291
pumpped fulla lead is just that you try your best to save your own self. you not supposed to shoot a dangerous perp that has the drop on your wife just ONCE or TWICE and ask him if he gonna stop.

but best be best, your enemy DEAD is the best. I assume you think wounded means stopped.... NO IT DONT,, see miami FBI shootout.

you shoot all you got into your ememy. ALL OF IT.
Smokin Joe is offline  
Old March 16, 2007, 11:46 PM   #45
SeaMariner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 25, 2006
Posts: 156
First...

OSS is a statistic... and anybody who has ever taken a good statistics class knows the first rule about suchs numbers is they say exactly what their presenter wants them to say... Give a good statistician just about any set of numbers and they can hand you back a graph/chart/table that says exactly what you want... so OSS is pretty much BS since I seriously doubt anyone who buys into it has actually read the entire report down to why they threw out X number of one shot stop incidents, etc etc etc... I can go on and on about why buying it is bad but lets leave at that...


Second...

Shooting until the perp stops, runs, or you run out of ammo is perfectly acceptable where I live in legal circuits... in fact a FL man just dumped his entire 7rd mag at two perps today or yesterday in MO with praise from the cops... So depending on where you live, is it better to die or face possible persecution from the law for defending yourself... the proverbial "judged by 12 or carried by six" line. Are you so scared of the law that you'd rather run the chance of dying versus possible jail time? Makes me wonder...

But anyway..


One Shot Stop is a statistic... you're better off taking a wad of $20's to the range, renting a few different guns, and shooting to see what you like.... Shoot your friend's guns... talk to people at the range and listen to what they say.... I have NEVER failed to offer a mag out of one of my guns to someone who wanted to know what shooting the model was like and I've always been offered, when talking to a fellow shooter, to fire their piece to see what the weapon was like... We're, for the most part, a friendly bunch and shooting our guns is not like sleeping with our partners... We don't mind sharing.
SeaMariner is offline  
Old March 17, 2007, 12:13 AM   #46
CobrayCommando
Junior member
 
Join Date: November 21, 2004
Posts: 1,631
Quote:
In short, if a criminal attacks me, what are the chances that he is going to drop after receiving a round center mass?
I will try to answer your question with very rough guestimates.
Assuming you are using .38 spc. or better:

If:
He is on PCP or a similar drug: 30%
He is not on drugs: 70%+

If the guy is in the middle of physically assaulting you, he is probably jacked up on adrenaline and the odds are slim he will drop in one shot. Probably similar to if he was on PCP.

The real answer is that you can NEVER know in advance. Statistically, the bigger the hole you make, the better the odds of the person dropping in less shots, thereby increasing your odds of survival. However, there is some debate as to the worth of trading power for slower follow ups. Also, there is a heated ongoing discussion as to which cartridges produce the bigger holes in the first place.

.38 snub, Glock 17, 1911, or .44 magnum, basically just tradeoffs. Avoid the extreme ends of the spectrum I would say... A .22 magnum derringer or a .500 SW Magnum are not practical carry options IMO.

In a nutshell, just keep shooting.
CobrayCommando is offline  
Old March 17, 2007, 01:05 AM   #47
chrisandclauida2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 21, 2005
Posts: 312
still so much misinformation.

head shots are not a guarantee of a stop. many have been shot in their head and still killed even though they die later.

the problem when people train with this crap in mind is they will fight like they train. that means if you shoot a double tap then add a head shot and stop and evaluate then you will do so in a fight and you could die.


ignore all this head shot crap double tap crap one shot stop crap energy dump crap and train to live thru a deadly encounter. none of that stuff has anything to do gunfighting. not one thing.


and for information during a fight you can shoot someone in the back or at angles that look like they are down and they wernt. there are many instances where during a fight while someone was defending themselves the shootee turned around and started to fall thus ending the threat 2 or 3 rounds before the shooters braid got the message threat over. while it looked like the shooter shot the threat in the back for good measure he didn't. same goes for when the threat falls backwards and gets a couple rounds at an angle that looks like he was down when shot or at a non threatening posture.

there are no absolutes except shoot center mass til the threat is gone.
chrisandclauida2 is offline  
Old March 17, 2007, 01:50 PM   #48
stephen426
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 11, 2005
Posts: 3,840
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisandclauida2
there are no absolutes except shoot center mass til the threat is gone.
Yeah... okay... What about failure to stops? What if the person you are shooting at happens to have a vest on? There is absolutely nothing wrong with 2 to the chest and one to the head. The shots to the chest may kill him EVENTUALLY, but a shot to the nervous system (brain shot) will put him down right away almost every time. We are not talking about grazing shots or shots that do not hit the brain. FBI snipers are trained to shoot for the medulla oblongata (area or the brain behind the eyes). You claim that there are no absolutes except for what you have posted. Please state your credentials and your experience to prove your "expertise".
__________________
The ATF should be a convenience store instead of a government agency!
stephen426 is offline  
Old March 18, 2007, 12:41 AM   #49
Smokin Joe
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 30, 2007
Location: City of New York
Posts: 291
Quote:
Please state your credentials and your experience to prove your "expertise".
I'm a mall commando. but I'm still gonna empty the whole mag.
Smokin Joe is offline  
Old March 18, 2007, 09:37 AM   #50
habeuscorpse
Junior member
 
Join Date: February 8, 2007
Location: Between borders of Texas and Louisiana
Posts: 54
One thing needs clarifying here. If a perp stops aggressing, you do not have a "duty" to stop shooting him or her. Rather you have lost the safe harbor of the applicable self defense statute and it is in your legal best interest to quit your response if you are no longer threatened.

Actually, the standard is if a reasonable person would no longer feel threatened. That is a roundabout way of saying a jury may eventually wind up second guessing your actions and applying up to twelve different interpretations of the event.
habeuscorpse is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:15 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.10175 seconds with 8 queries