Food For Thought

And let's not forget, we are assuming a single person threat. For multiple attackers, the law of averages becomes more relevant. Not exact science, but relevant nonetheless. If four guys are attacking you, the study says on average it will take 2.8x4=11.2 rounds to stop all of them. It can't hurt to consider data like this when deciding how many rounds you will carry on a normal basis. Logic tells us that if 11.2 is the average for four attackers, then 50% of the data will be lower than that, and 50% will be higher. Would any of us only carry three rounds, since that's the average you'll need for a single attacker? No, that would be ludicrous. Personally, I follow the Boy Scout motto: be prepared. Be prepared for the law of averages to be on vacation out of the country when trouble knocks your door down. Always carry as many spare rounds as you can possibly stand on a daily basis. And if you have a backup gun, do the same with that. To hell with the averages.
 
If four guys are attacking you, the study says on average it will take 2.8x4=11.2 rounds to stop all of them.
Personally, I follow the Boy Scout motto: be prepared. Be prepared for the law of averages to be on vacation out of the country when trouble knocks your door down. Always carry as many spare rounds as you can possibly stand on a daily basis. And if you have a backup gun, do the same with that. To hell with the averages.

Based on experience, my point is that IF, that is IF, you are attacked by multiple assailants, you said four.... whether they be armed with guns, knives, bats, or fists....... the actual clock time that it takes you to fire your weapon at multiple attackers = and hit them=..... YOU need to be prepared to die. Clock time will NOT allow you to shoot 4 attackers that are hell bent on destroying you.

Practice this: Have a friend stand 8 feet away from you while pretending to have a knife in his hand. Shout GO as you pull your weapon and he simultaneously takes 2 strides towards you and lunges his knife into your guts. 8 feet disappears in approximately .6 of one second. Can you pull your weapon, shoot, and disable the assailant before he punctures you? Now consider, can you stop FOUR simultaneously? Unless you are dealing with wannabe gangstas, you are a dead man.

18 rounds in your 9mm and 2 more mags might be impressive to you and your friends, but you will never be able to shoot more than 4-5 unless you are in a fire fight "at a distance".

Think about it, please. This is the real world, not a movie. You don't get to get up later and appear in the next movie.

edit: Another good practice scenerio is to draw your weapon while simultaneously falling down sideways and backwards WHILE SHOOTING UPWARDS towards your attacker. This does 2 things. 1) you are getting smaller and moving away so you are harder to hit/ as well as a moving target. 2) as you go down, your shooting trajectory is upwards which can avoid innocents who might be in the line of fire in case of a miss or an over penetration. Handy if you are confronted in a crowded area.

This also makes it fun to piss off your karate instructor when he wants to show off how he can kick a gun out of your hand for the rest of the class. (After he "died" 5 times he stormed out of the room and did not come back. After the second drop shoot, I changed and dropped to the left instead of the right// By the way, practice point shooting from the hip not sticking your arm out.... he's only a few feet away= hard to miss.).

Again, just my opinions. Hope it helps save your life.
 
Ok sure. If the scenario is just as you say, four bad guys standing around me at eight feet away, and I have my weapon still holstered waiting for someone to yell "go", I will have already decided to die.

My POINT, is that there is NO predicting how much time, how much ammo, or how many attackers (or about a billion other variables) in a self-defense situation. You may have a great relationship with your local palm reader. I don't.

Being prepared to beat the general average based on REAL WORLD statistics is smart. Putting people down for doing so, using phony unrealistic simulations is...well, not.

Peace out!
 
It wasn't a shotgun--- Duh it was a revolver and he used 5 more shots. Yes the imenent danger was passed.

He was a dumb ass. Oh yeah maybee it was 5.8 shots average. Duh.

Point there is no average on parts of a bullet only whole bullets --- Duh averages only work on other things.
 
I have an offer to who ever want to try. I'll give you .8 bullets. That means I will cut off a piece of bullet and hand it to you.

Now you stand in front of me with your .8 bullet and I will use a whole one, and shoo it at you.

Averages don't work with bullets! only whole ones. I'm not stupid I understand averages.

But they don't work when shooting at someone. Only whole bullets! Averages can bite my ass.
 
Thats true in a sense. Even the sound of the gun going off is enough to have the BG running like a bat out of hell

That is total BS.:no: If you depend on this fantasy, you will, in all likelihood have a rude surprise coming.

Statistical averages are just that, Statistical averages. So arguing about .8 bullet is disingenuous at best. If you shoot, you shoot until the threat ceases. You never shoot a certain number of rounds and stop to check how you are doing.
 
It wasn't a shotgun--- Duh it was a revolver and he used 5 more shots. Yes the imenent danger was passed.

He was a dumb ass. Oh yeah maybee it was 5.8 shots average. Duh.

Point there is no average on parts of a bullet only whole bullets --- Duh averages only work on other things.

As you have stated, "He was a dumb ass".
He has essentially received a "life sentence" for his "overkill". 59 + 38 parole = 97

The pharmacist apparently put one shot into the perp's head, and then emptied that gun at the second man who had a gun. Then he went and got a second gun and shot the perp 5 more times.

The pharmacist was WRONG to have fired the second volley of 5 shots after the perp was "down and out".

The video report I watched said the second was a shotgun.
OK, so it was a revolver.... a JUDGE .45/.410 actually...... and loaded with specialized fragmenting ammunition.

Question: If only part of that specialized fragmentation hits the perp, wouldn't THAT be considered a fractional portion of a "bullet/load"? ?????????
 
I have always had a problem with that "ideal" of the absoluteness of the sanctity of human life.

To wit: I am suddenly confronted by a BG who, from his demeaner and armament, has already decided that MY life means nothing to him. Yet I am tasked by society to "treat him as well as I can"?

Thus, should I only wound him, rather than put him out permanently..... since he didn't damage me, chances are that he will be back on the streets in a few years, and I don't really expect his "mind set" of unconcern for human life will be improved by his incarceration. (VERY low probabilities, at any rate.) If I didn't "permanently" stop him and I found that he had killed someone else a few years later, how would I feel then?

So, as a result, my desire to permanently remove the trash from the streets MUST, by Law, be tempered with concern for the BG's life. A quandry, to be sure. Obviously can only be resolved through accuracy in your shooting.

"One in the eye is worth three in the thigh!" (If you get my drift.) :wink:

GG
 
Well said, Gunny!

The same applies to rapists and child molesters.
With a 96% recidicism rate...... why do they get the revolving door treatment?

OR

In this county...... negotiated to a "misdemeanor violation of a city ordinance, fine $300".

Clear-cut cases require decisive actions.
JMO
 
My uncle is a cop a here in Indiana and we were discussing self defense shootings via home invasion or attacks and his advice was to empty the magazine and say you were scared for your life and panicked. He said if they live they could sue the pants off of you. This was several years ago before we had castle doctrine (ours protects you from civil penalties as well) and before my joining the Marines and getting the best "how to" from training and combat deployments. and all the wonderful "user friendly" gun laws in this state. Point being the average Joe citizen wouldn't be charged with second degree murder. At least I'd sure hope not.
 
I'm glad to see you still have that crush on me G50. It's flattering. Those are the words if an LEO so I'll trust his experience in those situations. As much a you go on and on about badges I'm beginning to think you probably wear one yourself. You know like the bully in school that goes around calling everybody gay and fairy and ****, but is actually gay himself... Just sayin
 
My uncle is a cop a here in Indiana and we were discussing self defense shootings via home invasion or attacks and his advice was to empty the magazine and say you were scared for your life and panicked.

I'll bet your uncle also said that if you shoot the guy as he is running out the door and he happens to make it outside before expiring on your lawn that you should pull him back inside to make it look like you killed him while he was still in your house, right?

Know what happens to cops who lie to try to justify their actions?
Link Removed
 
No he didn't but that type of stuff does happen a lot. Like I said this conversation took place before we got the castle doctrine and could face serious civil suits. He said once they exit the premises they're no longer a threat and you're in big trouble if you shoot them in the back.
 
Or how about this scenario. In the heat of the moment the defender fires three rounds. As they pull their weapon their vision goes into tunnel vision and they fire three rounds. The first round barely grazes the attackers rib cage and the other two rounds hit center mass and end the attackers life.

There is your .8th of a round. The graze.

Lol...it's an average. Just like in Vietnam they figured out that it took 50,000 rounds to kill one enemy combatant. I don't know if that statement is true or not, but it is widely quoted. That's quite an average. Better 2.8 rounds than 50,000 eh....lol.


Rick
 
"Panicked and emptied the gun?"

Your panic analogy clearly shows that the defensive shooter is incompetent and cannot control his actions.

That's the type of rhetoric that gives the anti-gun liberals reasoning to demand that NO ONE have a handgun or a defensive weapon.

The anti-gunners, quite rightly, don't want someone spraying bullets and hitting innocent bystanders. That's why I advocate TRAINING beyond "the minimum" and as I indicated earlier, shooting upwards.

******
The rest of the comments about "dragging them inside", etc., deliberately altering a "crime scene", will in 98% of the cases, get you an undetermined stay with "3 hots and a cot".
 
Lol...it's an average. Just like in Vietnam they figured out that it took 50,000 rounds to kill one enemy combatant. I don't know if that statement is true or not, but it is widely quoted. That's quite an average. Better 2.8 rounds than 50,000 eh....lol.


Rick

VietNam can be stereotyped by the "kids with fully auto weapons" who sprayed wildly in the general direction of the enemy's supposed location. Until they learned to use "aimed fire" and conserve rounds, all they did was make themselves feel good by making a lot of noise.
 

New Threads

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
49,524
Messages
610,665
Members
74,995
Latest member
Solve4X
Back
Top