The Firing Line Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old April 2, 2008, 10:05 PM   #26
Deaf Smith
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 31, 2000
Location: Texican!
Posts: 3,214
Guys, Tom Givens, of Rangemaster, said it best.

"Keep in mind that when you hear it always happens to other people, well you ARE OTHER PEOPLE to everyone else!"
__________________
"The government has confiscated all of our rights and is selling them back to us in the form of permits."
Deaf Smith is offline  
Old April 3, 2008, 12:28 AM   #27
Scattergun Bob
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 29, 2008
Location: Nine Mile Falls, Washington
Posts: 1,186
Criminological stats are all over the place and very suspect. The folks who actual kn

Mr Meyer,

I believe you made this statement, please direct me to your source, I subscribe to both wound ballistics journal and The FBI shooting statistics review. I find your statement suspect Sir.

"Criminological stats are all over the place and very suspect. The folks who actual know stats know this quite well."

I am waiting to be enlightened.
__________________
First, with the most, WINS!
Regards, Scattergun Bob
Scattergun Bob is offline  
Old April 3, 2008, 12:44 AM   #28
Scattergun Bob
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 29, 2008
Location: Nine Mile Falls, Washington
Posts: 1,186
No you may not!

FerFAL,

You may not add to what I write, it is what it is. Just as I have not suggested that you alter what you believe, even though it is becoming old and has been a dead horse issue for 10 years, you may carry what you wish, you may define firepower as you choose.

You seem to believe that the tool that you have selected is the best for your needs, good for you. However, please remember "If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to view every problem as a nail." What I think this means is that the gunfight will not be the way you want it to be, the gunfight will be the way it is. being prepared is great, being positive is wonderful, having 15+1 will only be part of the solution.

Maybe it is time to start a thread about the rest of the solution?

Good Luck & Stay Safe
__________________
First, with the most, WINS!
Regards, Scattergun Bob
Scattergun Bob is offline  
Old April 3, 2008, 01:13 AM   #29
Nnobby45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2004
Posts: 3,148
Averages take in the extremes--both with re: to the number of shots fired, and the number of opponents one might face. Where shots are concerned, there's a 50% chance you'll need less than the average and the same chance for more. Common sense says plan for more, and Murphy says a lot more.

Louis Awberbuck said there's no such thing as an advanced gun fight, and I'd dare say--no such thing as an average one (to those involved), either.

That's not to say that you can't learn from studying other peoples gunfights, but I think the one that really matters is yours.
Nnobby45 is offline  
Old April 3, 2008, 07:27 AM   #30
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
UF ROTC instructor

Years ago, there was an old MSG who was one of the Army ROTC instructors at UF. He was SF, VietNam vet, and told classes about the reality of surprise firefights.

Specific example, he was on point, ran into a VC point man. According to the MSG's story, both of them had their eyes about pop out, and both went full auto, M16 vs AK47. Both emptied magazines; neither was hit; both retreated for cover and reload.

If a Green Beret can fire 30 rounds at close range and still need more rounds, then...
MLeake is offline  
Old April 3, 2008, 08:14 AM   #31
buzz_knox
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 2, 1999
Location: Knoxville, in the Free State of Tennesse
Posts: 4,191
Quote:
Louis Awberbuck said there's no such thing as an advanced gun fight, and I'd dare say--no such thing as an average one (to those involved), either.
Louis also won't have a primary carry gun that has less than 10 rounds in it, and always carries a backup, based on his experience in combat and instructing citizens who have been in civilian firefights.
buzz_knox is offline  
Old April 3, 2008, 08:57 AM   #32
pax
Staff
 
Join Date: May 16, 2000
Location: Washington state
Posts: 6,904
I always kinda figured that if I ever had to really use my defensive firearm, it would be on a day when Lady Luck and Murphy both personally hated my guts.

pax
__________________
Kathy Jackson
My personal website: Cornered Cat
pax is offline  
Old April 3, 2008, 09:34 AM   #33
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,529
Scattergun - you continue to miss the point. It is that using the average only is too simplistic. You need to know the distributional shape of shots fired as it compares to various situations.

I can't give you that data because it doesn't exist in reliable form. The FBI shooting reviews, SOP, Wound Ballistic, etc. don't have that data. Their data is crude.

Then even if you had such, once again - folks need to decide on the basis of the extremes of the distribution and the probability of such.

That's the point, Sir.

When some one asks whether they should carry XY or Z because the average is some number, they, unfortunately, show their ignorance.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old April 3, 2008, 09:58 AM   #34
Scattergun Bob
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 29, 2008
Location: Nine Mile Falls, Washington
Posts: 1,186
Scattergun - you continue to miss the point

Mr Meyer,

"Criminological stats are all over the place and very suspect." I am not missing the point, you say the words very suspect, I am calling upon you to supply the providence for those words or withdraw, Sir.

You obviously read only what you choose, please reread #18, I am in no Way defending NYPD stats with regard to civilian shooting.

I AM saying that officers lives and blood are represented by these numbers, if you choose to refute them, have cause and support, not bravado and "I think", show me a better way as I've asked or be gone!
__________________
First, with the most, WINS!
Regards, Scattergun Bob
Scattergun Bob is offline  
Old April 3, 2008, 10:34 AM   #35
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,529
You still miss the point. You attempt to hide your misunderstanding the point by now ranting about blood and lives as this was an issue of honor.

1. The issue is from the OP:

So, the question is pretty simple; do you think that it is wise to expect to shoot just 3 or 4 rounds, or should you have a weapon with more capacity just in case that average no longer holds truth, or you just happen to be one of those that don’t trust luck when it comes to falling within favorable odds.
It would be great if we could have a mature discussion here guys. Data from real gunfights would be good too.


2. My point is that just talking about the averages is insufficient for statistical reasons. If you don't know that much about statistics, that isn't my problem or a point of honor (a cheap rhetorical trick)

3. You need to know about the distributional shape and how we can separate out various types of incidents that might have different needs.

4. The SOP and other police sources don't have that data. I have read them. Go look at the SOP and find it. I read the criminological journals, gone to ASC conference and know the experts on civilian DGUs and they don't know a source for the type of sophisticated data. Don't you get that? It's very simple and not a question answered by blood and lives.

To conclude - the OP asked if we can make a decision based on the average. No, you can't. Your comments are irrelevant and a rant if you miss this point. The average is insufficient. You need to plan for the reasonable extremes.


Have a nice day but please try to understand what I said.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old April 3, 2008, 10:54 AM   #36
Scattergun Bob
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 29, 2008
Location: Nine Mile Falls, Washington
Posts: 1,186
In general this question was answered before our time!

To FerFAL,

After rereading my last note to you, I decided to step back a bit. You asked a question in a certain light and I tried to explain to you how this data was gained. Is it relevant to us, this part of you question I did not answer, other that to say no it is not.

I said to you that the issue was old and stale, I did not take into account that perhaps it has not been a discussion you have been involved with over a great length of time, My Statement is drawn from 30 years of debate, and in my opinion the CZ-75 and the Browning Hi-power answered the question of firepower perhaps before our times. It in no way meant to imply that your thoughts were not relevant.

Please don't mistake my lack of information, "I never say what I carry" or brake the "never supply your potential enemy with anything, material or intelligence" rule as a indicator that I carry less out of some other convenience, NOTHING TAKES PRESIDENCE OVER MY SAFETY OR THE SAFETY OF MY CREW! It sounds like you also TAKE your safety seriously.

I share the quote below that I wrote 28 years ago with you only to say that I believe that we will live or not on decisions made before battle, your point is well and clear there. But, beyond that combat will be won or lost on other things besides what gun and how much ammo.

"Once the combat envelope wraps its' cold clammy arms around you, there is more than enough to think about besides how your weapon works, what condition of readiness IT IS IN, or where it shoots to."

I was hoping that this forum would be the place to have discussions outside of guns and ammo, "that just costs money", my constant interjection into this thread was frustration and never getting past guns and ammo.

Best to you, I'll leave you be.
__________________
First, with the most, WINS!
Regards, Scattergun Bob
Scattergun Bob is offline  
Old April 3, 2008, 11:31 AM   #37
Scattergun Bob
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 29, 2008
Location: Nine Mile Falls, Washington
Posts: 1,186
No Glen you are Wrong

The report that I brought forward in #3 does not suggest that only 3 or 4 rounds were fired. It suggests that gunfights are fluid and that each shot string measure 3 or 4 shots. every time a lag occured such as a reload or movement it was measued as a new incident. I thought you knew what you were talking about!

What a foolish statement to make, "It's very simple and not a question answered by blood and lives. " This is all about blood and lives, numbers are there only because blood stains paper!

You still choose to avoid the issue of your self conceived reality being a better meter than the flawed data you are suspect of. You choose to ignore the the flame you wrote to ignite this discussion, it is not for me to explain this report and what it demonstrates to such a superior statistician as your self, but as I said in my second note IT DOES NOT APPLY TO CIVILANS AND THAT IS CLEAR.

I guess enlightenment is a ways away.
__________________
First, with the most, WINS!
Regards, Scattergun Bob
Scattergun Bob is offline  
Old April 3, 2008, 11:39 AM   #38
Deaf Smith
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 31, 2000
Location: Texican!
Posts: 3,214
Scattergun,

When the Titanic went down, everyone said it was 'unsinkable'. So fewer lifeboats were carried, the captian delayed abandoning ship, and no one took it seriously till really started sinking!

I do read stats, but I don't rely on them totaly. Stuff happens and you or I might be the exception.

If I belive in averages then everyone ought to be 5 ft 9, right? That is the average.

So remember, "Keep in mind that when you hear it always happens to other people, well you ARE OTHER PEOPLE to everyone else!"
__________________
"The government has confiscated all of our rights and is selling them back to us in the form of permits."
Deaf Smith is offline  
Old April 3, 2008, 12:40 PM   #39
Benzene
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 27, 2005
Posts: 384
My vote!!!!!

Deaf Smith, you get my vote!!!!!! There are so many who lunge into intricacies of the physics of recoil, statistical analyses, etc. when in fact their knowledge is more often than not laughable.
Benzene is offline  
Old April 3, 2008, 02:14 PM   #40
raimius
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 27, 2008
Posts: 1,310
IF half of shootings involved one shot and the other half involved 5 (just throwing out numbers), the average would be three. However, somone carrying 3 rounds would only be prepared for 50% of shootings. Now, that example is FAR too simple, but I think the point is clear. Judging by averages is not always wise. I do not know the data on how shootings are distributed. It could be that the VAST majority involve less than 3 rounds, but some shootings involve a high number of shots. It could be that a large percentage involve a larger number, but others only involve 1 shot. I do not know. Does anyone have that information?

Statistically, none of us is likely to need a firearm on any given day; yet so many people still carry one. Statistical outliers are what we are all trying to deal with.

I would carry whatever I felt prepared with, judging by the potential situations around me. I would probably carry more in a dangerous area than in a relatively safer area. It all comes down to the compromises we are willing to make, otherwise we would all be living in bomb shelters!
raimius is offline  
Old April 3, 2008, 02:34 PM   #41
Dusty Rivers
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 27, 2008
Posts: 155
shots vs hits

Isn't the number of hits far more important than the number of shots.

What is your average number of hits per shots? Oh no I didn't ask that did I?
Dusty Rivers is offline  
Old April 3, 2008, 04:19 PM   #42
Tom Givens
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 10, 2004
Location: Memphis
Posts: 127
I don't want to argue statistical methodology, and I'm the first to say that ten incidents is not enough to establish a trend or a statistical probability. However, my school has a lot of private citizen students who are involved in shootings. At the Tactical Conference this year I gave a Power Point presentation on ten representative incidents from our files. They are just that-- typical examples of private citizen self defense shootings. Here are a few tidbits from the summary.

5 of the 10 incidents involved an armed robbery by 1 or 2 suspects.
3 occurred on mall parking lots, only 1 occurred in the student's home.
The lowest number of shots fired was 1. The highest was 11. The average was 3.8. There were 3 cases which involved 4 or more shots.

In 2 cases, the defender fired 8 and 11 shots. These were above the average, and neither would have been able to do that with a five shot gun.

Here is my take on "averages". If you have one foot in a campfire and one foot on a block of ice, on average you're comfortable. Since needing more than 4-5 shots is a reasonably forseeable problem, I carry a gun that holds more BB's. YMMV
Tom Givens is offline  
Old April 3, 2008, 04:43 PM   #43
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,529
Scattergun, we will just have to disagree.

I stand by what I said about considering the extremes of the distribution and not basing carry capacity on the mean - which is what the OP asked.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old April 3, 2008, 05:26 PM   #44
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
Averages

Just thinking about averages.

So far, I've met two sharks in my first thirty dives... no monsters, the biggest was an 8 footer, but that still trumps the average.

I've had close encounters with a water moccasin and a rattlesnake.

I've had fairly close-up looks at a lot of 10 and 12 foot alligators (luckily, I was in a canoe at those times, not swimming).

My mother once got chased by a moose.

My father was wakened from a nap outside by a black bear.

My family seems to have a knack for running into problems that are outside of statistical norms. Ergo, I tend to try to prepare for Murphy. This means that when I carry, I do carry a spare mag.

Murphy could gift me with multiple B/G's, or a single magazine failure.

Cheers,

M
MLeake is offline  
Old April 3, 2008, 05:31 PM   #45
longcoldwinter
Member
 
Join Date: February 20, 2008
Posts: 68
Do people really carry around a medium size glock, 2 to 4 mags and a backup gun I mean really how the heck do you hump all that around on a regular basis.
longcoldwinter is offline  
Old April 3, 2008, 07:25 PM   #46
Deaf Smith
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 31, 2000
Location: Texican!
Posts: 3,214
"If you have one foot in a campfire and one foot on a block of ice, on average you're comfortable".

Tom, I love that!
__________________
"The government has confiscated all of our rights and is selling them back to us in the form of permits."
Deaf Smith is offline  
Old April 3, 2008, 07:34 PM   #47
Scattergun Bob
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 29, 2008
Location: Nine Mile Falls, Washington
Posts: 1,186
Mr. Smith

I seem to be the focus of living on some average when it comes to life threatening event.

Please re read post #18

"You have again played right into FerFAL and his continued crusade for high capacity handguns. I see the wisdom of Mr Benzene, Mr Raimius, Mr Meyer, and Mr Raytracer. HOWEVER, gentleman in your rush to agree with FerFAL you overlooked the true issue. Is the data that supports officer involved shooting "and it is current data" valid in relation to civilian shooting incidents? The answer is no, ...."

I am having a private debate with a man on a public forum because he is not willing to post his e-mail address and is not what he professes to be. I know that this method is wrong and I apologize.

However, what I was hoping for is that someone would know that this myth presented by NYPD is a classic case of "RANGE DRILLS DEFINING LIFE ON THE STREET" 3 or 4 shots per perp, was the training drill taught in officer survival at the range. In a nut shell "shoot 2 evaluate your target, shot 2 more", ring a bell! NYPD was not gathering data on real life events, they were gathering data on the effectiveness of their firearms training. Of course the average will equal 4 if you are taugt to deliver a basic response of 4 rounds!!!!

The point is that anyone whom professes to be "on the job" or work in the field knows this is a classic error, right along with the poor folks in Hollister looking for the brass bucket. At yet all that was talked about was My guns bigger and I carry more ammo! or incessant yapping about averages. So, for those who professes to be "on the job" or work in the field, I suggest a little re-read, Street Survival documents this well, or perhaps we aren't what we say we are, right Mr. Meyer!

Sorry when I first checked aboard this site I was told it was serious, so tell me when do we get past 101 my gun is best. John Browning solved the problem of firepower in pistols for FerFAL before my time, guess this isn't the right place for me.

So Long & Be safe
__________________
First, with the most, WINS!
Regards, Scattergun Bob
Scattergun Bob is offline  
Old April 3, 2008, 07:53 PM   #48
Boris Bush
Junior member
 
Join Date: September 7, 2007
Posts: 921
I remember when I was a youngman going hunting with my dad. He would take 6-8 shotgun shells for his single shot 20 gauge. For years and years this did just fine for him.......... Then the day came we were hunting and had a mixed bag of squirrels, grouse and rabbits. He brought 8 shells and shot all of them long before the hunt was over. I kept on hunting until I reached the legal number of animals I could gather for the table. As that was I almost ran out of ammo myself and I carried a light load of a mere 35 rounds.

Now he carries atleast a box (25) and a 22 pistol for that rabbit that sits there thinking "he don't see me" and 50 rounds for the pistol.

I might only need 3-4 rounds, but I sure as hell aint going to carry 3-4. Minimum I carry 29. If I have the BUG (always have it) on me, I have 22 for that and if I travel long distance add a 14 round mag of ball and a box of 50 somewhere in the car. Seems like alot but it realy is not. It is 2 mags extra for the primary and two for the BUG at max. Typicaly it is one extra for the primary and two extra for the BUG
Boris Bush is offline  
Old April 3, 2008, 08:23 PM   #49
FerFAL
Member
 
Join Date: June 13, 2006
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina
Posts: 57
Quote:
longcoldwinter wrote:
Do people really carry around a medium size glock, 2 to 4 mags and a backup gun I mean really how the heck do you hump all that around on a regular basis.
A Glock plus two mags and a snubby or mini Glock in the pocket isn’t that big a deal.

The issue discussed is delicate to say the least, people feel strongly about their choices.

Just for the sake of clarity and to avoid some of the common clichés
“High capacity autos make you shot more and hit little”
At least for this discussion here, lets assume that the person is indifferently mature, relatively smart, and posses a certain degree of skill with firearms. Meaning: When discussing hypothetical situations, our hypothetical guy wont go blasting away like a fool just because he has more ammo.

I’ve even read people say that those that carry autos are inherently more violent compared to revolver guys, and more likely to choose to fire before it’s really the last option, just because they have an auto.

Lets just assume that autos don’t magically make you an idiot and revolvers don’t have mystical forces that automatically make you this wise, deadly accurate marksman with nerves of steel.

You can be a fool, you can be an awful operator, or the other way around, and the weapon of choice wont make any difference whatsoever.

While we are at it, there’s a common cliché that comes to mind right now, and does have relation with the ammo capacity your weapon posses.
“Only hits count”
We hear that and we nod silently, in respect to the wise, letters written in bronze.
Hold you horses my friends!!!
Only hits count does not mean you are not going to miss!
It can happen. Actually, statistically peaking you are very likely to miss more than a few rounds. So that’s one more reason for having extra ammo, even if you are hoping to need just a couple of shots, supposing you are lucky and fall within the favorable part of the statistics.

Another point regarding the good old “only hits count” .
Say I fire a bunch of rounds against and attacker. That attacker fleas.
Didn’t those rounds achieve their intended objective? I’m not advocates inaccuracy in any way. Just saying, at the end of the day, if you managed to achieve what you wanted, those shots fulfilled their purpose in my book.

Now for the real world case to use as an example.
Something similar happened here with a politician, ex military guy called Rico.
He was taking his girls to school early in the morning, and just as they exited the garage the daughter notices a suspicious car, which was waiting for them full of armed men inside.
Rico’s reaction? Draw his gun (Beretta?) and start firing into the vehicle.
We never knew if anyone got injured or killed, but they did leave and that’s what matters.
More ammo allows you the luxury of putting down range a certain limited amount of suppressive fire, enough to brake contact in some cases. Doing this with a revolver leaves you with an empty gun soon, but with an auto you can put one round per second against them for 10 seconds, and still have 5 or 6 left if more problems arise or if you need more accurately placed shots.
More ammo means more options, more possibilities, more chances of making it through.
No, in no way does it replace awareness and training, but if you have those, more ammunition gives you more options to work with if the situation calls for it.

FerFAL
FerFAL is offline  
Old April 3, 2008, 08:32 PM   #50
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague County, Texas
Posts: 10,343
Quote:
So, the question is pretty simple; do you think that it is wise to expect to shoot just 3 or 4 rounds,
NO

Quote:
or should you have a weapon with more capacity just in case that average no longer holds truth, or you just happen to be one of those that don’t trust luck when it comes to falling within favorable odds.
The average doesn't mean squat. Mutually exclusive historical data mean nothing to your particular shooting situation. What happened to somebody else, say Tom Givens' students (or any other shooting data), doesn't mean squat. The data are interesting, but can't be used to predict what will happen to YOU in YOUR SITUATION.

You have a 50-50 chance your shooting will be average. Either it will be average, or it won't.

So do you have an issue with preparing for more than 3-4 rounds? It isn't like preparing for more will utterly destroy you if you train for a higher round count. What is wrong with preparing for the worst and hoping for the best?
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher."
-- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

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 02:21 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.14593 seconds with 7 queries