View Single Post
Old April 3, 2008, 10:34 AM   #35
Glenn E. Meyer
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 18,593
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. - Aux Armes, Citoyens
Being an Academic Shooter
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Page generated in 0.04223 seconds with 7 queries