Gun Incident Mega Thread - Post All Gun Incidents Here

But what really got me about distance was Claude’s conclusion:

Quote : The perceived need for massive quantities of ammo, reloading, and precision shooting at distance is largely a figbar of people’s imaginations. There is simply no evidence to support the contention that any of those conditions occur during armed confrontation

That might be the case from the limited data set which Claude examined, and perhaps he’s meaning it within that context. But the presentation is such that it implies such conditions NEVER happen PERIOD in any sort of private citizen self-defense encounter. Thus you should never worry about these matters, because there’s “simply no evidence” to support they ever happen. And that’s wrong, and Mr. Werner might want to check with his friend Tom Givens for some data on this topic.

Which takes me to another reason for why people might draw closer to their attacker: they can’t shoot them from far away. If all you ever do is blaze away at a cardboard target that’s 3 yards in front of you, you’ll probably be pretty good at that distance. If you never shoot your pistol at targets 25 yards away, how much confidence do you think you’ll have if now suddenly you have to make that shot? Under stress you’ll default to what you can already do, and given a drive for success you’ll work to put things more in your favor, so if that means getting closer then you will. If more of these citizens had adequate training, training that pushed them to do things like shoot at 15 or 25 yards on a regular basis, how might this data be different? And again, with the sharp rise in Gun Culture 2.0 and more private citizens seeking formal training, what would data from the last 10 years show by contrast?

But remember what average is, statistically. There were enough incidents that required more rounds, including at least 1 incident that needed more than 2 snubs worth of ammo, more than what a 1911 traditionally holds.

What’s hard to read about Claude’s findings is again the way it is presented, that 2 shots is all you need, you’ll never need more than 5 to take care of anything. This is simply not the case. Sure that might be the average, but boy… if you opt to train to just the averages, how do you think you’ll feel when you get to be the one statistical anomaly? Look at the edge cases in Claude’s own data and piece them together. The largest group had 7 VCA’s, and you’re going to need more than a 5-shot snub to deal with that many attackers. Again, this is about playing to statistics, about assuming you’ll be alright because the averages say. Does anyone say “gee, I wish I had LESS ammo”?

Conclusion

I don’t take odds with the data Claude collected, in terms of what he did and the summary picture that came out of the data set. I think it’s all reasonable collection and analysis of what was there. Furthermore, it does paint an interesting picture that’s worth knowing.

What I find problem with is some of the conclusions and suggestions in here, like that a snub is sufficient, that long distance shooting never happens, that reloads don’t happen. My fear is that someone could look at this data and use it as justification for developing a training program, or to justify they don’t need any training at all. “Why should I train how to reload? they never happen, and besides it’s a pain to reload my snub because it’s so small.” I believe this is Karl’s fear as well, tho it wasn’t perhaps expressed well enough in his comment (given the response from the blog owner). Claude may have stated at the beginning: “You decide what suits your needs best to solve this type of problem.” but to the untrained and unknowing, they’re going to look at Claude’s data, conclusions, and suggestions as authoritative and will likely use his data, conclusions, and suggestions in formulating what suits their needs best — because they’re a n00b and don’t know what their needs are and how to satisfy them! That’s the problem.

There’s something to be said for understanding all the data, and how that generates some averages and yes how that can and should influence our training both in terms of what to train and what not to train. If most self-defense incidents end up fitting that “3 shots, 3 yards, 3 seconds”, it would stand to reason that’s something to first ensure you can do (e.g. can you clean the “3 Seconds or Less Drill” consistently, constantly, and on demand). That doesn’t mean your training should only encompass that sort of work, but if you can’t do that stuff it’s best to master it before you go on to things like group shooting at 25 yards, if self-defense is your shooting goal. But you should eventually move on to being able to shoot groups at 25 yards and not be satisfied with what the data says, what the averages are, because while certain data sets may not support a need for it, who knows… you may get to be the lucky one that establishes a new data set.

Any details of these incidents that can be looked at by others?

Is this in one particular city or something?

Not that it matters too much, but it just seems like cherry picking.

Also I realize that YMMV based on location and conditions, but I still think 100 round drums are excessive.

Are these used in crimes?

I'd think a 100 round drum, loaded with ammo would be rather heavy and a bit more clumsy.

Thanks for posting a link to hsoi. Also good information there. I would just point out the 2 rounds used from Claude’s examination is both the Average and the Median.

Also I realize that YMMV based on location and conditions, but I still think 100 round drums are excessive.

Also I realize that YMMV based on location and conditions, but I still think 100 round drums are excessive.

Why?
.

Suspect named in Las Vegas Strip shooting, car explosion

The person police believe fired the shots is 26-year-old Ammar Harris (Full name: Ammar Asim Faruq Harris).

Harris is described as a black male, about 5'11" and 180 pounds. He has brown hair and brown eyes.

Harris has an extensive and violent criminal history and is considered to be armed and dangerous. He has several distinctive tattoos, including a heart shaped tattoo below his right eye, and a large owl tattoo on his neck.

Police are looking for 26-year-old Ammar Harris, who they believed fired the shots in the shooting that happened early Thursday on the Strip. Harris' arrest history in Las Vegas, which is extensive and violent, according to police, includes charges of kidnapping and pandering.

Frederick Douglass Society President: ‘Direct Correlation Between Gun Control and Black People Control’

Swimp compared the call for universal background checks for gun purchase to the time when blacks were required to register with the government.

“The first gun laws were put into place to register black folks, to make sure that they would know who we were – that we could not defend ourselves,” Swimp said.

“I think if you look right after the Emancipation Proclamation – what was going on down in the southern states, it’s very clear that the Dixiecrats wanted to disarm black people to keep us from defending ourselves against the Klansman, who were murdering white and black Republicans to control the ballot box,” Swimp said. “So I think history is [rife] with examples. There’s a direct correlation between gun control and black people control.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/a...MC1447915/

Reloading was required in only 3 incidents. One of those involved killing an escaped lion with a .32 caliber revolver, which was eventually successful after 13 shots.

The most common responses of criminals upon being shot were to flee immediately or expire. With few exceptions, criminals ceased their advances immediately upon being shot.[/I]

but I still think 100 round drums are excessive.

Actually the most common use -- by far -- is for a potential victim to point the gun at the criminal and watch the criminal flee. That is why you are safer with a gun because the studies that say you aren't EXCLUDE that outcome from their data sets.

Also FBI high stress simulations show almost all FBI agents will fire until empty. IE in most situations the defender, the person reacting to the criminal, even highly trained ones, will fire their entire magazine, in the case of top trained enforcement that is usually 17 rounds.

What is NRA's and most gun enthusiasts' recommendation regarding repelling a home invader, point the gun at them and allow them to flee or shoot them?