The Firing Line Forums

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

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old November 28, 2019, 09:57 AM   #76
stinkeypete
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 22, 2010
Location: Madison, Wisconsin
Posts: 1,286
I’d forgotten about the BB gun fight with my best friend in middle school, Mike. At least we wore shop goggles although no one got hit. I remember we were running around in deep snow.

I now keep a box of no. 4 shotgun shells in the trunk as last time Dog and I went pheasant hunting the 10 rounds I lug around in my coat were depleted to one last round. The birds were not shooting back. Only one harvested and i was shooting poorly.
stinkeypete is offline  
Old November 28, 2019, 10:01 AM   #77
OldMarksman
Staff
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 4,022
Quote:
Statistically you are unlikely to ever be in a gunfight at all,....
That's completely irrelevant.
OldMarksman is offline  
Old November 28, 2019, 10:31 AM   #78
FireForged
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 4, 1999
Location: Rebel South USA
Posts: 2,074
Quote:
That's completely irrelevant.
Statistics are probably never completely irrelevant in this regard. Statistics can certainly be an important part of any properly constructed risk assessment. The weight a particular stat carries will depend on many things. Certainly they are not always considered to carry the same weight in all circumstance, all subjects or in all frames of reference. They do customarily, quite often ( nearly always) meet the threshold of being a relevant element.

To suggest otherwise is rather dewy-eyed. To say that they are irrelevant (to you) sounds a little more reasonable.
__________________
Life is a web woven by necessity and chance...
FireForged is offline  
Old November 28, 2019, 10:33 AM   #79
Aguila Blanca
Staff
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,433
Statistically, you are unlikely to ever need a fire extinguisher in your kitchen -- so why waste the money to buy one?
__________________
NRA Life Member / Certified Instructor
NRA Chief RSO / CMP RSO
1911 Certified Armorer
Jeepaholic
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old November 28, 2019, 10:34 AM   #80
Ben Dover
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 11, 2013
Location: High up in the Rocky Moun
Posts: 665
Quote:
Originally Posted by FireForged View Post
Statistics are probably never completely irrelevant in this regard. Statistics can certainly be an important part of any properly constructed risk assessment. The weight a particular stat carries will depend on many things. Certainly they are not always considered to carry the same weight in all circumstance, all subjects or in all frames of reference. They do customarily, quite often ( nearly always) meet the threshold of being a relevant element.

To suggest otherwise is rather dewy-eyed. To say that they are irrelevant (to you) sounds a little more reasonable.
Correct in every respect.

Every business, or scientific endeavor relies heavily on statistical analysis for all important decisions.
__________________
The soldier's pack is not so heavy a burden as the prisoner's chains. Dwight Eisenhower

It is very important what a man stands for.
But it is far more important what a man refuses to stand for.
Ben Dover is offline  
Old November 28, 2019, 10:42 AM   #81
FireForged
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 4, 1999
Location: Rebel South USA
Posts: 2,074
Quote:
Statistically, you are unlikely to ever need a fire extinguisher in your kitchen -- so why waste the money to buy one?
Because my friend, sometimes people will ( in spite of the statistical unlikelihood) deem that a particular loss is worth the abundance of caution/precaution. There are people on this planet who have freely chosen NOT to own a fire extinguisher.

This is not an uncommon logic platform. What is uncommon is for someone to suggest that any reasonably accurate statistic relating to danger, is irrelevant.
__________________
Life is a web woven by necessity and chance...
FireForged is offline  
Old November 28, 2019, 10:58 AM   #82
OldMarksman
Staff
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 4,022
Quote:
Statistics are probably never completely irrelevant in this regard.
The likelihood thas a person will ever need a fiirearm is completely irrelevant to a discussion of how many rounds may be needed should the need arise.

That's basic conditional probability theory.

Quote:
Statistics can certainly be an important part of any properly constructed risk assessment.
Certainly!

Quote:
To suggest otherwise is rather dewy-eyed.
I have not suggested otherwise.

Quote:
To say that they are irrelevant (to you) sounds a little more reasonable.
They (statistics) are not irrelevant to me.

The fact that the need to fire a gun in self defense is unlikely has not made me decide to not carry a fiirearnm. That is the only decision to which it would be relevant.

The thread was not about that subject.

There is a lot more to risk assessment than probability. Severity of potential consequences, availability of mitigation approaches....
OldMarksman is offline  
Old November 28, 2019, 11:03 AM   #83
FireForged
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 4, 1999
Location: Rebel South USA
Posts: 2,074
Then perhaps you can reconcile this comment with the one you made in post 82. If you want to make a proclamation with out qualification.. people are probably going to assume you are speaking completely and broadly.

I still remain confused if you think the statistics are relevant or not.


Quote:
There is a lot more to risk assessment than probability. Severity of potential consequences, availability of mitigation approaches....
I don't think anyone has said anything to the contrary.
__________________
Life is a web woven by necessity and chance...

Last edited by FireForged; November 28, 2019 at 11:11 AM.
FireForged is offline  
Old November 28, 2019, 11:10 AM   #84
OldMarksman
Staff
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 4,022
Quote:
Then perhaps you can reconcile this comment with the one you made in post 82.
ONE MOORE TIME, that was about the likelihood that one will ever be involved in a gunfight.

The thread is about the number of rounds that may be required should shooting occur.

Completely irrelevant.

Quote:
I still remain confused if you think the statistics are relevant or not.
Statistics concerning how many rounds may be required in a defensive encounter would be relevant.

But stats from the limited actual data available, with the large number of variables, are of very limited usefulness indeed.

Rather, one would have to apply statistical analysis and modeling techniques to other measures, which would be obtained via simulation, shooting exercises, and so on.
OldMarksman is offline  
Old November 28, 2019, 11:14 AM   #85
FireForged
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 4, 1999
Location: Rebel South USA
Posts: 2,074
Thank you for explaining it.. ONE MORE TIME.

well, we simply stand at odds in this regard. I think it is quite relevant and can easily be a part of what a person decides to carry as well as capacity. I stand by my previous criticism.
__________________
Life is a web woven by necessity and chance...

Last edited by FireForged; November 28, 2019 at 11:22 AM.
FireForged is offline  
Old November 28, 2019, 11:21 AM   #86
OldMarksman
Staff
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 4,022
Quote:
I think it is quite relevant and can easily be a part of what a person decides to carry as well as capacity. I stand by my previous criticism.
Perhaps you could explain why you believe that the fact that few people are involved in 'gunfights" would have anything to do with how many rounds might be needed in one should it occur.
OldMarksman is offline  
Old November 28, 2019, 11:41 AM   #87
FireForged
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 4, 1999
Location: Rebel South USA
Posts: 2,074
I never said that it would have anything to do with what I feel is needed ( should it occur). I was suggesting that it could have a bearing on what a person decides to carry in regards to capacity. In essence, what they are willing to settle for based on a presumption of exceedingly low risk.

What I am saying is that people may settle for less capabilities if they consider the risk to be rather low.

If a person accepts that they are not likely to EVER need a gun or if they feel that danger is incredibly unlikely to confront them is a certain place or at a certain time, they may settle for something less. I am not saying that I accept those things as critically important or that I make my decisions based primarily on statistical likelihoods ( because I don't). I am saying that it is not unreasonable to consider such things or that such things have some manner of impact on a persons decision.

Perhaps I missed it but I did not take this discussion to be about what a person likely needs to walk onto the active field of battle. I agree, it doesn't really matter how unlikely you are to get into a gunfight if you already know the gunfight is going to happen or is happening.

JohnKSa made a thoughtful comment which included a reference to stats and I tend to agree with what he said. The Stats as he framed them in his comment are indeed relevant as far as I am concerned. I say this to clarify my point for the reader, not to change anyone's mind.
__________________
Life is a web woven by necessity and chance...

Last edited by FireForged; November 28, 2019 at 11:53 AM.
FireForged is offline  
Old November 28, 2019, 12:22 PM   #88
Nanuk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 3,082
Quote:
Statistically you are unlikely to ever be in a gunfight at all,
There were about 1.2 million violent crimes in the US last year. Criminals don't care about statistics.

Quote:
so please justify your 5 or 6 shots. After that, rethink the question.
A separate issue. Can you justify using force against a violent attack or threat on your life?
__________________
Retired Law Enforcement
U. S. Army Veteran
Armorer
My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon.
Nanuk is offline  
Old November 28, 2019, 12:26 PM   #89
Nanuk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 3,082
Quote:
My point is it's really hard to prepare/dominate 'ANY' fight..Fairly confident I will prevail, without knowing what it will be or IF it will even happen, but confidence and mental preparedness goes a long way, regardless of equipment.
Not really. Master your carry gun. If attacked use the proper tactics for the situation and destroy your attacker. Use immediate, dynamic force to counter any attack. Carry multiple reloads.

What if I said that dominating the fight can be as simple as 1 or 2 solid hits, take cover and let nature take its course.

I know in today's PC climate that is unpopular, but it beats the alternative.
__________________
Retired Law Enforcement
U. S. Army Veteran
Armorer
My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon.
Nanuk is offline  
Old November 28, 2019, 12:42 PM   #90
USNRet93
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 23, 2018
Location: Republic of Boulder, USA
Posts: 1,475
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nanuk View Post
Not really. Master your carry gun. If attacked use the proper tactics for the situation and destroy your attacker. Use immediate, dynamic force to counter any attack. Carry multiple reloads.

What if I said that dominating the fight can be as simple as 1 or 2 solid hits, take cover and let nature take its course.

I know in today's PC climate that is unpopular, but it beats the alternative.
I think that's VERY popular and VERY realistic. 2 solid hits and most times, the 'event' is over. It's not like you are just showing the BG your gun or firing 'warning' shots over his head..THAT would be PC...'oh I didn't want to hurt the guy'...
__________________
PhormerPhantomPhlyer

"Tools not Trophies”
USNRet93 is offline  
Old November 28, 2019, 12:58 PM   #91
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,929
Quote:
The likelihood thas a person will ever need a fiirearm is completely irrelevant to a discussion of how many rounds may be needed should the need arise.
That's exactly my point.

Every so often, someone brings up the point that gunfights are improbable as a rationale for low capacity. That might be good rationale for not carrying a gun, but what I was trying to get across is that once the decision to carry has been made, it must be left behind. From that point on, the focus is how to survive a gunfight, not on whether or not it's likely you'll be in a gunfight.
Quote:
I was suggesting that it could have a bearing on what a person decides to carry in regards to capacity. In essence, what they are willing to settle for based on a presumption of exceedingly low risk.
But it shouldn't. That's the point.

How many rounds a person needs to survive a gunfight is totally independent of whether or not gunfights are improbable.

Let's say you're in an area where gunfights are extremely improbable. Does that mean you'd expect to need fewer shots to survive a gunfight in that area? Of course not. The actual gunfight itself isn't going to be different just because it's less probable to occur.

If you think that incidents requiring a gun are too improbable to prepare for, then don't carry a gun. That's a reasonable decision that most people make and that most people get away with.

BUT, once you have decided to carry a gun it doesn't make sense to carry one with very limited capability. You've already made the decision that you want to prepare for an incident requiring a gun--NOW it's time to focus on what it takes to survive that incident.

If you decide to re-evaluate your decision to carry a gun, that's fine. But mixing the two decisions doesn't make sense. The two things are completely independent of each other.

The probability of needing a gun does not affect how many rounds will be required if the need arises nor is it affected by the number of rounds required to survive the incident.

The number of rounds required to survive a violent incident does not affect and is not affected by the probability of needing a gun.

Both of those statements are true--it doesn't make sense to pretend that they aren't.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old November 28, 2019, 01:01 PM   #92
OldMarksman
Staff
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 4,022
Quote:
I never said that it would have anything to do with what I feel is needed ( should it occur).
How else could it be relevant to the thread?

Quote:
I was suggesting that it could have a bearing on what a person decides to carry in regards to capacity.
Not if the decision is a logical one.

Consider the likelihood of a kitchen fire. It is very low.

But tthe severity of the potential consequnces is such that many of us choose to mitigate it. I do,

The low likelihood of occurrence would never properly justify a decision to have a fire extinguisher containing a mere cubic centimeter or two of material. If a fire occurs, putting it out will take what it takes, the low risk of occurrence notwithstanding.

Does that help?

Quote:
What I am saying is that people may settle for less capabilities if they consider the risk to be rather low.
Yes, sone people do approach the issue in that manner, but it is unsound, from the standpoint of statistical analysis.

Full disclosure: at one time, I did approach my carry decision in that manner, but then someone on TFL questioned the logic, and I realized the folly,

Before I ever started carrying, I co-wrote the risk management procedures for a major corporation. And yet, I initially ignored what I knew.

Quote:
I agree, it doesn't really matter how unlikely you are to get into a gunfight if you already know the gunfight is going to happen or is happening.
Good.

What is it, then, that you have been trying to say?

Quote:
JohnKSa made a thoughtful comment which included a reference to stats and I tend to agree with what he said. The Stats as he framed them in his comment are indeed relevant as far as I am concerned.
John's comments have been entirely consistent with mine.

To wit, "...if you decide you do want to prepare for a gunfight, then start thinking about how to do that and STOP thinking about how unlikely they are--".
OldMarksman is offline  
Old November 28, 2019, 01:37 PM   #93
FireForged
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 4, 1999
Location: Rebel South USA
Posts: 2,074
I have repeatedly placed my comments into context, if you are confused by what I said, missed the point or whatever.. I cannot further clarify. Its not like I dropped a comment and refused to elaborate. At some point it just becomes silly to labor the point. If you disagree with what I said, its fine by me. Historically, we do not agree very often. I stand by my previous criticism for all the reasons I have previously outlined. I simply will not run this into circles or deflect into some other point.

I have enjoyed many comments in this thread

I wish everyone the best
__________________
Life is a web woven by necessity and chance...

Last edited by FireForged; November 28, 2019 at 01:42 PM.
FireForged is offline  
Old November 28, 2019, 06:36 PM   #94
OneFreeTexan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 15, 2002
Location: West, Texas
Posts: 280
Wow

Loads of interesting replies.

I had to go back and see why I had started this thread.....almost forgot my reason..

I was just wondering that if I am fairly proficient with a revolver, why I need to carry a semi with many more rounds in back up??
OneFreeTexan is offline  
Old November 29, 2019, 07:58 AM   #95
USNRet93
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 23, 2018
Location: Republic of Boulder, USA
Posts: 1,475
Quote:
Originally Posted by popshooting445 View Post
People who say you would likely no have to be in a gun fight are seriously wrong. considering muggers and burglars, Bank rubbery and car theft. one has a high possibility of shooting someone/defending yourself.
That's what this thread is all about. BUT, statistically, your chances of needing a gun to protect yourself/your family is very low. Many LEOs go an entire career w/o needing to shoot somebody..and they 'seek' danger/BGs/crime...often with BGs who are armed.

BUT, statistics mean zero if anybody finds themselves in a situation where they 'need' a gun, of course. Can it happen? Sure can. But again, chances are slim.

Everybody has to make their own decisions based on their own circumstances.

I live in a 'statistically' VERY safe town, and the ones I am around often(grand daughters, Daughter-in-law) do too but I carry everyday, all day.
__________________
PhormerPhantomPhlyer

"Tools not Trophies”
USNRet93 is offline  
Old November 29, 2019, 10:34 AM   #96
OldMarksman
Staff
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 4,022
About statistics:
  • Averages, whether means, medians, or modes, have little use in individual decionmaking. One must consider the statistical distribution.
  • Do not put much stock in averages for large populations. Factors vary from group to group.
  • Know when to evaluate conditional vs cumulative probability.
  • Do not confuse causality with non-causal correlation.
OldMarksman is offline  
Old November 29, 2019, 01:40 PM   #97
zoo
member
 
Join Date: October 2, 2019
Posts: 414
I try to keep in mind that my whole survival up to his point in life has been due to a string of statistical anomalies.
zoo is offline  
Old November 29, 2019, 06:14 PM   #98
Tactical Jackalope
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 5, 2010
Location: Miami, Florida
Posts: 6,429
What I learned about this forum is that people don't really care what your reasoning is. Even if you've been gun fights, fought overseas, worked undercover, etc. They don't care.

They made their decision to carry 5-6 rounds and that's that. Why? Statistics told them so.

I make it a point to not argue that point anymore because they refute any new information and fail to register the fact that criminals travel in packs and seem to love extended magazines and high capacity weapons themselves. So they're handicapping themselves at a chance of survival.

Cognitive dissonance much?


Anyway... You'll rarely meet too many people who have been in gunfights stateside (where they mainly carry pistols) carry less ammunition after their gun fight than they did before their gun fight. The anxiety of being low on ammunition while still getting engaged or in a "hot-zone" is earth-shattering.

Military is pretty divided as they mention stateside that they're given a duty to retreat or become reactive is slimmer than overseas where they mainly carried rifles and had an entirely different code to abide by.


That said, I and many others I know carry similarly.

Glock 17 or HK P30L with at least one spare on person. The usual EDC pocket dumps. And medical. A TQ and combat gauze are a must.


Some lessons are learned the hard way and there's nothing we can do about it. Not even sit around and take low-key shots at one another because of pride will help that.
Tactical Jackalope is offline  
Old November 29, 2019, 08:19 PM   #99
American Man
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 21, 2018
Posts: 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tactical Jackalope View Post
What I learned about this forum is that people don't really care what your reasoning is. Even if you've been gun fights, fought overseas, worked undercover, etc. They don't care.

They made their decision to carry 5-6 rounds and that's that. Why? Statistics told them so.

I make it a point to not argue that point anymore because they refute any new information and fail to register the fact that criminals travel in packs and seem to love extended magazines and high capacity weapons themselves. So they're handicapping themselves at a chance of survival.

Cognitive dissonance much?


Anyway... You'll rarely meet too many people who have been in gunfights stateside (where they mainly carry pistols) carry less ammunition after their gun fight than they did before their gun fight. The anxiety of being low on ammunition while still getting engaged or in a "hot-zone" is earth-shattering.

Military is pretty divided as they mention stateside that they're given a duty to retreat or become reactive is slimmer than overseas where they mainly carried rifles and had an entirely different code to abide by.


That said, I and many others I know carry similarly.

Glock 17 or HK P30L with at least one spare on person. The usual EDC pocket dumps. And medical. A TQ and combat gauze are a must.


Some lessons are learned the hard way and there's nothing we can do about it. Not even sit around and take low-key shots at one another because of pride will help that.
I have wondered why some people can be so thick headed. It's probably cause nothing has ever happened to them. That is the case with most civilians. There are people that are incapable of learning from other's mistakes and misfortune. Even with the all the news media and entire channels devoted to one TV series after another about the demise of innocent people just going about their lives, some just trek along without a care in the world. 5 rounds is better than none I suppose. But I hear you... I have TQs in all my vehicles... stuff I consider the basics, but some call it paranoia. lol Most people just have no idea how bad things can get.
American Man is offline  
Old November 29, 2019, 08:23 PM   #100
Ben Dover
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 11, 2013
Location: High up in the Rocky Moun
Posts: 665
Quote:
Originally Posted by American Man View Post
I have wondered why some people can be so thick headed. It's probably cause nothing has ever happened to them. That is the case with most civilians. There are people that are incapable of learning from other's mistakes and misfortune. Even with the all the news media and entire channels devoted to one TV series after another about the demise of innocent people just going about their lives, some just trek along without a care in the world. 5 rounds is better than none I suppose. But I hear you... I have TQs in all my vehicles... stuff I consider the basics, but some call it paranoia. lol Most people just have no idea how bad things can get.
Could it be that some folks just aren't as paranoid as others??
__________________
The soldier's pack is not so heavy a burden as the prisoner's chains. Dwight Eisenhower

It is very important what a man stands for.
But it is far more important what a man refuses to stand for.
Ben Dover 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 03:48 PM.


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 0.09234 seconds with 8 queries