Is a fast draw the most important skill for deadly force encounters?

[OhioGuy]

I can't remember where I saw it -- YouTube, surely -- and someone was opining that the most important, but usually least practiced, skill for CCW was a lightning fast draw from concealment. His reasoning did make some sense, in that a pistol will never come into play until threat of serious harm or death is imminent, and at that point the defender is already behind the curve of the attacker.

Draw too soon, and you're probably brandishing a weapon. Draw too late and you've already lost.

Anyways, the reasoning went that since you can't draw until you've basically seen the deadly weapon in the other guy's hand, having a lightning fast draw -- followed by accurate fire of course -- is the difference between winning and losing.

I guess you can imagine scenarios in which you have more time to draw -- you're already behind cover after the shooting has started, or you're drawing in defense of someone else and maybe have some element of surprise on your side -- but if the majority of armed defense scenarios are surprise attacks from robbers, muggers or whatever, I guess I can see why someone would say a lightning fast draw is more important than other skills.

What do y'all say?

[ROCK6]

I think it plays a significant role, but can't definitely say it's the most important; maybe it is.

For me, what's more important is deadly-force avoidance. No, you can't avoid everything, but I would say a large percentage of avoiding a conflict involves basic situational awareness, keeping your distance, always assessing escape routes and/or cover; and profiling potential threats to steer clear of.

Now, that said, I practice the hand-distance drill, shooting from the ground, shooting from a chair/vehicle. I think most targeted attacks will occur in very close-distances. However, the whole "active shooter" phenomena also stresses the importance of distance shooting as well. Your threat may be 15-20 meters from you; both speed and accuracy are important (well, accuracy is always important as well, but more so at greater distances). Speed will always be important, but focus should be on getting your firearm out and engaging at close-distance from various positions, angles, or similar potential impairments. Fast may not be controlled, may not be accurate, and may cause problems simply in clearing your holster. Slow is smooth, smooth is fast...or something like that

I specifically bought a time to improve my speed. However, my focus has always been on a secure grip, clearance of my concealment system, eyes and barrel on target, finger on trigger as soon as the threat is aligned or in my sights.

ROCK6

[OldMarksman]

Anyways, the reasoning went that since you can't draw until you've basically seen the deadly weapon in the other guy's hand, having a lightning fast draw -- followed by accurate fire of course -- is the difference between winning and losing.

Not accurate.

The defender must have a reasonable basis for believing that using or threatening daily force is immediately necessary to defend against an imminent threat.

Justification would require a basis for believing that the "other guy" has the ability and the opportunity to seriously harm; that there is actual jeopardy; and that drawing is the only viable defense. It does not require seeing a weapon.

The rapidity with which the defender can act when faced with an imminent threat is extremely important. The process starts with avoiding dangerous situations, includes recognizing the emergence of a potential threat timely, and reacting to avoid the threat. It may include drawing and then, perhaps, firing,

[OhioGuy]

Originally Posted by OldMarksman

Not accurate.

The defender must have a reasonable basis for believing that using or threatening daily force is immediately necessary to defend against an imminent threat.

Justification would require a basis for believing that the "other guy" has the ability and the opportunity to seriously harm; that there is actual jeopardy; and that drawing is the only viable defense. It does not require seeing a weapon.

The rapidity with which the defender can act when faced with an imminent threat is extremely important. The process starts with avoiding dangerous situations, includes recognizing the emergence of a potential threat timely, and reacting to avoid the threat. It may include drawing and then, perhaps, firing,

I think the trouble is that it falls to people who have no understanding of self defense, and who may be hostile to the whole idea of armed citizens, to make the determination about whether the defender's basis for believing he was in jeopardy was reasonable. When I look into many of the publicized police shootings, where the cop is always crucified long before any real investigation has happened, I often see things that would seem obvious to anyone that the cop had real reason to believe he/she was in jeopardy -- suspect being chased after being seen breaking into cars, running from police through dark places, won't obey commands, turns and sticks his hand into his pocket, cop shoots in self defense, and it turns out the other guy had a pack of gum in his hand. BAM, cop is a horrible murderer.

Or "the police shot that teenager for having a toy gun!" (Real story, teenager is robbing people with a replica BB gun).

So if Joe Citizen is confronted by someone who's getting in his space, won't back off, avoidance is not working, escape is not possible (Joe has his kid with him, whatever). Maybe some altercation ensues and Joe shoves the guy off of him. Guy then reaches into his pocket, or back into his waistband. Does Joe draw? Does Joe shoot? Or does Joe wait that 0.00001 second until he sees the gun come out? Or...maybe it's a knife...or maybe the guy was grabbing his phone...or nothing at all.

I guess that's the kind of situation I'd envision. The one in which it isn't an immediately clear case of a deadly threat (like an armed robbery or something).

May not even be a thug or a robber. Sadly there are cases of someone with a CCW permit and a hot head who gets himself into a spat with someone, escalates it, then draws his gun because he's an idiot.

So while what you said is right, it seems like unless the other guy has pulled a howitzer and signed a statement saying "I am now going to murder you," you'll come out on the losing end in some way.

Or as a lawyer told me half-jokingly, "make sure you only get robbed in counties with a pro-2A sheriff. "

[jmorris]

Situational awareness would likely serve you better. If you fail to recognize a threat up to the point a gun is drawn on you, you could be able to outdraw Bob Munden and still get killed.

[NoSecondBest]

Fast draw is a TV line of bull made famous by all the westerns that used to be on TV. It's a fantasy. I think someone's been watching too much TV.

[markp]

Any time someone makes a statement like that, ask them what personal experience do they have to come to that conclusion.

[HiBC]

IMO, that's roughly equivalent to saying air bags and seat belts are the most important traffic safety strategy.
they certainly can make a difference if you must have a wreck.
There is a lot to be said for driving in a manner that avoids accidents.


That does not say seat belts and air bags don't have value after every thing else has failed. Relying on them is a losing strategy.

[OhioGuy]

Originally Posted by NoSecondBest

Fast draw is a TV line of bull made famous by all the westerns that used to be on TV. It's a fantasy. I think someone's been watching too much TV.

I don't think he was describing a gun slinging fantasy. He was describing being in a situation at which you've realized someone is reaching for a gun, and now are already at a disadvantage.

To the other comments, yes avoidance is best. This question is focused on what happens when you can't avoid

[jar]

Another thing to practice is on making time when there is none available. For example throwing an object at the threat's head makes a small amount of time available to you and also moves the point of concentration of the threat from you to avoiding the thrown object.

The point I'm trying to make is that there is no single most important skill but rather a whole spectrum of skills and the goal is to choose the one most suited to the individual and unique situation.

AbE: the magician depends as much on misdirecting YOUR attention as on his own skills.

[5whiskey]

Situational awareness would likely serve you better. If you fail to recognize a threat up to the point a gun is drawn on you, you could be able to outdraw Bob Munden and still get killed.

^This

Fast draw is a TV line of bull made famous by all the westerns that used to be on TV. It's a fantasy. I think someone's been watching too much TV.

^This too, with the caveat that I believe there is at least some benefit to practicing a quick draw. Not for being a "gunslinger," but just being fluid enough to not need 3 seconds to draw from concealment.

Another thing to practice is on making time when there is none available. For example throwing an object at the threats head makes a small amount of time available to you and also moves the point of concentration of the threat from you to avoiding the thrown object.

The point I'm trying to make is that there is no single most important skill but rather a whole spectrum of skills and the goal is to choose the one most suited to the individual and unique situation.

^And this for the win.


I'm too lazy to look for them, but I've seen numerous videos of actual SD shootings both in training and on the internet. I have seen exactly 0 where someone drew on a gun already aimed at them gunslinger style and win. I have seen a lot where the threat's attention was divided between 2 people, and the defender took advantage of this and slipped into the threat's peripheral to draw and defend. I've seen several where someone faked compliance (initial hands up), then distracted the threat long enough to draw and defend. Many other times, the defender was not the primary focus of the threat and they used this opportunity to draw from cover and defend.


Above all, drawing on an aimed gun is risky business no matter what... even if you're smart about it. Best bet is to have good situational awareness and be ahead of the curve. As to the notion of "waiting until a deadly weapon is presented to you to draw your firearm," baloney. Some rough dude is walking up to you wearing all black at the ATM late at night. You use good situational awareness and catch him several yards away, still closing. I'm not saying draw and point automatically, and definitely not draw and fire. Drawing your gun and keep it in hand low by your leg, and assuming a defensive posture? Yup, that's what I would do and have done in dicey situations as a cop. Chances are at that point, the threat's resolve will waver fast and they will decide they have somewhere else to go. This is also where some professional FOF training comes in handy. It's an eye opener. Put airsoft guns in hand and draw on a gun pointed at you. See how well it works.

So if Joe Citizen is confronted by someone who's getting in his space, won't back off, avoidance is not working, escape is not possible (Joe has his kid with him, whatever). Maybe some altercation ensues and Joe shoves the guy off of him. Guy then reaches into his pocket, or back into his waistband. Does Joe draw? Does Joe shoot? Or does Joe wait that 0.00001 second until he sees the gun come out? Or...maybe it's a knife...or maybe the guy was grabbing his phone...or nothing at all.

In the exact hypothetical you describe, Joe Citizen absolutely draws at the point that threats hand reaches pocket or waistband IMO. Not after threat has already retrieved the item he seems interested in at the pocket or waistband. You'll get numerous answers, but that is mine. Not an automatic draw and fire, but definitely draw and present your firearm with loud commands to basically go somewhere else.

[tipoc]

5Whiskey's advice and opinion is good and deserve's some thought.

tipoc

[Bartholomew Roberts]

I’ve looked at the case files on more than a few shootings. I can count on one hand the situations where being able to draw in less than three seconds might have made a difference. Being able to draw and control the weapon while someone tries to cave your head in is probably a more important skill.

The most common failure I see with normal people is they just freeze/go into denial. If they survive, then later on they’ll tell the police “I can’t believe this happened to me. It was surreal! etc.” Criminals, however, have no trouble believing they are being robbed or assaulted because usually it has happened to them before. They tend to have really good reactions as well.

The conflict cycle is typically broken up into Observation, Orientation, Decision, and Action. For a fast draw to save you, you already had to fail the OOD portion of the loop - and even if you can outdraw Jelly Bryce, at most you are going to gain 2-3 seconds of time back. On the other hand, basic, rudimentary observation and orientation stuff will give you a lot more time to work with. Time you can use to prevent denial/freeze, avoid the confrontation before it happens, etc.

It doesn’t get much talk on gun forums because it is kind of a boring subject; but the non-violent skills are the most important in a deadly force encounter. Basically battlefield prep at the individual level.

or shorter summary, I agree with 5whiskey.

[rural12]

Another thing to practice is on making time when there is none available. For example throwing an object at the threats head makes a small amount of time available to you and also moves the point of concentration of the threat from you to avoiding the thrown object.

The point I'm trying to make is that there is no single most important skill but rather a whole spectrum of skills and the goal is to choose the one most suited to the individual and unique situation.

AbE: the magician depends as much on misdirecting YOUR attention as on his own skills.
__________________

BINGO...this is not taught much...but anything out of the ordinary that takes place in a potential deadly encounter can force a reset that works in favor of the defender.

And, it can even work after gun is drawn...example would be if gun is drawn and first round is fired...that first round, whether on target or not, has impact on the aggressor...in most cases the aggressor will go from 100% offensive mode to say a 70% offensive/30% defensive mode...that little bit can make a difference in the outcome.

[OhioGuy]

Originally Posted by 5whiskey

In the exact hypothetical you describe, Joe Citizen absolutely draws at the point that threats hand reaches pocket or waistband IMO. Not after threat has already retrieved the item he seems interested in at the pocket or waistband. You'll get numerous answers, but that is mine. Not an automatic draw and fire, but definitely draw and present your firearm with loud commands to basically go somewhere else.

I've wondered about this before -- if a cop holds someone at gunpoint and issues commands, and the person fails to comply, then there's actually something the cop can do about it right? Arrest, or some other action.

What commands can Joe Citizen issue that he can actually stand behind? I would think (and that's all it is, thought, but what is your experience as a cop?) that if Joe says "Back away" or "Don't come closer" or "Do not put your hand in your pocket," those are all linked to belief in imminent danger, and if he shoots because the other guy continues reaching into his pocket, it would be justified.

ON the other hand if Joe commands them to lie on the ground, or to stay put until police arrive, and the guy doesn't comply, what can Joe do about it? Where is the risk that issuing armed commands becomes the thing that escalates the situation?

[T. O'Heir]

"...too much TV..." And/or Western novels. Both Earp and Hickok were quoted in the 19th Century as saying accuracy is more important than speed.
If firing a shot is required, where that shot goes is far more important than how fast the firearm was drawn. You are 100% responsible for where every shot ends up.
Situational awareness is what keeps you out of trouble in the first place.

[sigxder]

I will speak some from my own experiences. And let me preface this I am not an attorney. But I have been teaching armed and unarmed defense for decades. And have some experience in these manners first hand. And understand that laws vary from State to State on use of deadly force. "Retreat
to the wall" vs. "Castle Doctrine" for example.
The number one thing if possible is to stay away from bad areas, where bad things happen. Usually when bad things happen they involve alcohol and/or
drugs. As one person put it "don't go to stupid places, where stupid people, do
stupid things". The gentleman speaking knew of what he spoke and said this would cut your chances of attack by 80%.
Next it is beat to death but can not be quoted enough "Situational Awareness".
And yes it is being aware of what;s going on around you, possible exists, and so on. But I would expand it further to become aware of how criminals work.
If you know the warning signs or precursors of attack you can usually see it coming and avoid it. Or at least get ready for it. Maybe get to cover and get your weapon out. Usually for instance their is a verbal or non verbal interview, or both before an attack. The bad guys don't expect you to know that.
Avoiding it or seeing it coming gives you time to prepare for action. In the incidence I have been involved in thank God I have seen it coming and either left, Or was able to prepare a counter ambush and have my weapon out with
out the need for a fast draw. But under these situations I had all the elements necessary for a legal shoot. Jeopardy, Opportunity, and Ability.
The measure of these situations is usually what would a reasonable person do. Under JOA you do not have to wait until a weapon is shown. Someone bearing down on you, saying they are going to kill you, and reaching suddenly into a waistband, pocket, etc. is usually enough to warrant action.
If they are closing on you rapidly, in an aggressive manner, telling you they intend to kill you, and reaching for something, that is usually sufficient grounds to act. Again much depends on State to State law. But if you wait for an actual weapon to be drawn you are usually in trouble. Action usually beats reaction. Once you have decided that it is go time getting your gun out is a matter of life and death.
And yes it is an important skill. No matter how good you are at shooting paper at the range in a ready position. If you need to be able to produce your weapon you better of practiced. From every which way you can. If you can't get the weapon out and into action you will probably die.
Fortunately when I have gotten my weapon out first the bad guys decided too stop what they had in mind. If you have to draw your weapon and not have to use it call the police anyways and tell them what happened.
The bad guys might have already called and accused you of threatening them with a weapon. Brandishing a weapon I think would fall more in line with producing a weapon without proper cause. In other words not having met the requirements of Jeopardy, Ability, and Opportunity. Every situation is unique. Laws differ from lace to place, But again if you wait until the weaon is drawn you are probably in trouble.

[OhioGuy]

Originally Posted by sigxder

Usually for instance their is a verbal or non verbal interview, or both before an attack. The bad guys don't expect you to know that.

Could you elaborate on what you mean by a verbal or nonverbal interview?

[hot chili powder]

A quote from Wyatt Earp: Fast is fine but accuracy is everything!

[SIGSHR]

IMHO that's like asking what's more important-trigger squeeze or breath control ? SD shooting-like target shooting-requires a combination of skills.

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Another thing to practice is on making time when there is none available. For example throwing an object at the threats head makes a small amount of time available to you and also moves the point of concentration of the threat from you to avoiding the thrown object.

For those of you with a shot timer, have a friend ask you a question and let him trigger the buzzer while you are answering it. See what that time looks like compared to your normal non-verbal draw.

Also, there is a big underlying fallacy to the “fast draw” theory, and that is that the first shot to hit will stop the fight. That’s highly unlikely with a pistol. Unless you get a hit on the upper central nervous system, that person can be dead on their feet but still have lots of time to shoot/stab, etc.

If I can create time, I’d use that time to find cover.

[tipoc]

Could you elaborate on what you mean by a verbal or nonverbal interview?

I think he means that people talk to each other, often, before they start shooting.

tipoc

[5whiskey]

What commands can Joe Citizen issue that he can actually stand behind? I would think (and that's all it is, thought, but what is your experience as a cop?) that if Joe says "Back away" or "Don't come closer" or "Do not put your hand in your pocket," those are all linked to belief in imminent danger, and if he shoots because the other guy continues reaching into his pocket, it would be justified.

Good question, with no solid "best" (or even good) answer. If you draw and present a firearm, and the guy completely ignores your commands... that's a rough spot. Do you risk being seriously injured or killed by hesitating long enough to confirm that he's trying to produce a deadly weapon? Do you decide to shoot? What if he doesn't have a deadly weapon? Are there any other witnesses, or is there a video there to corroborate your account of what happened? Do you have an attorney retained? I hope so. What I really hope is this. Your particular scenario to never happen to anyone. I will say that in this case, if you have no reasonable avenue of escape or de-escalation, MY PERSONAL BELIEF is that the use of deadly force would be justified if the threat continued to act aggressive and was trying to pull "an object" from a pocket or waistband.

The problem with that statement above is "MY PERSONAL BELIEF." Ask 10 prosecutors, 5 may believe it's self defense and no charges are needed while the other 5 may believe it needs to be put before a jury. Where do you live? In Southern California? That 50/50 ratio may turn into a 90/10 of prosecutors who would push for charges. In rural Alabama? It may turn 90/10 the other way. Another issue is what evidence will corroborate your account of the incident. If you have good witnesses, injuries from the initial unarmed scuffle, video surveillance footage, etc. odds are more in your favor. If absolutely none of this exists, and the only evidence is your statement... that's not a situation I would want to be in.

ON the other hand if Joe commands them to lie on the ground, or to stay put until police arrive, and the guy doesn't comply, what can Joe do about it? Where is the risk that issuing armed commands becomes the thing that escalates the situation?

Joe Citizen's primary concern should be getting away from threat. That is the purpose of any form of self-defense. If you draw down and give commands, and the guy freezes but also doesn't really comply (you order to get on the ground, he doesn't), your recourse then is to find a way to back out of this situation. You've bought yourself some time, use it. Start backing away, sidestepping, whatever you need to do. The goal isn't to make threat comply, the goal is to get away from threat. Whether this happens by the threat disengaging, or by you disengaging, matters not.

[Bartholomew Roberts]

He is talking about Managing Unknown Contacts

[5whiskey]

It doesn’t get much talk on gun forums because it is kind of a boring subject; but the non-violent skills are the most important in a deadly force encounter. Basically battlefield prep at the individual level.

^This as well. With the most important one of all being to avoid the deadly force encounter altogether by avoiding circumstances that make it more likely. But still, you can't mitigate everything. That's why we do train on the "violent skills." There are certain cases where everything else was done right, and there was just no avoiding the encounter. It's rare though.

Fortunately when I have gotten my weapon out first the bad guys decided too stop what they had in mind. If you have to draw your weapon and not have to use it call the police anyways and tell them what happened.

As is the case 99% of the time, which is why our hypothetical "Joe Citizen" situation has about a 1 in a million or less chance of happening.