Hit running target statistic 4 of 100 ??

M

MurBob

New member
I was just reading an article about rapists and some of the finer details about what they look for in their targets. Tactics and stuff.

Part of the article went on to give advice about what a woman should do in certain circumstances.

I found one particular piece of advice that I am unsure of.

Quasi-quote "If a predator has a gun and you are not under his control, ALWAYS RUN! The predator will only hit you (a running target) 4 in 100 times and even then, probably not a vital organ."

Does that sound legit? I can't say I've ever tried hitting a moving target in such a way.

That's all the quote said.. it did not elaborate.. running straight away seems like an easy target.. Doing the zig zag thing should make it harder.. etc etc.. Lots of variables there but does anyone know if that statistic is true?
 
Another thing...if you are running away and shooting back at them...their hit rate is even lower. Always be armed and willing to use it, to save your life.
 
Last edited:
Allowing yourself to be transported to a second location often reduces chances of survival considerably.

It's hard to find definitive statistics, but looking at a number of sources suggests that 80-95% of victims who are transported to a secondary location are raped and/or murdered.

The numbers suggest that escaping, even if you take a bullet in the process, significantly increases your odds of survival.

Remember, that something like 80% of persons shot with a handgun survive.

So if you run, you've got some chance of being shot and if you are shot you still have a 80% chance of survival. The numbers are actually pretty good. If you assume an 80% chance of survival if shot, here are odds of dying based on the probability of being shot while escaping.

Assuming an 80% chance of survival if shot.
Chance of being shot while escaping---Overall chance of dying.
5%--1%
20%--4%
40%--8%
50%--10%
75%--15%
100%--20%

So even if you take a handgun bullet while escaping, your chances of dying are only about 20%. That seems much better than your odds of being seriously injured or killed if you are transported to a secondary location.

As always, you need to look at the specific circumstances to decide what to do. You don't want to just act blindly independent of the circumstances of the specific situation. If you know, for example that you will be transported in your vehicle and there's a weapon you will be able to access once you're in the vehicle, that might change the odds.
 
A 4% hit ratio? Well, maybe. I seriously doubt the average criminal has much practice / trigger time shooting moving targets.
 
Mur,

The "predator", you know, might be a good shot, experienced deer hunter, or is using a shotgun, or just plain lucky.

I would not bet my life on those stats.

Deaf
 
Those statistics are the only information you have. The predator may be a great shot or he may have put the cartridges in the magazine backwards.
 
A few years back there was an analysis of hit ratios in police shootings, and some actual simulations to test the numbers. It was 20% of the police rounds fired hit their intended target and 20% of the people shot by police die. That was a 4% fatality rate if police shot at a person. The hit rate on a moving target was in the 6-7% range. So, yes I can believe that might be valid.

From various FoF exercises I have participated in over the years, a reduction of 50% hit ratio, even for highly skilled shooters seems about right. When a person freaks and does not adhere to any fundamentals, the hit ratio was abysmal. One female student fired 27 rounds in various scenarios and never once hit the attacker and once, shot herself. This was in a class, and she intellectually knew she would not die, but she had no ability to keep it together under any amount of stress.

But stats only prove one thing. You might be the one that gets shot, and die. So do everything reasonable to keep from getting into a shooting situation.
 
I first heard this stat about twenty years ago from my sensei during a practical self-defense course he and I were teaching (I was his assistant/tackling dummy). I think he actually used 5%, but close enough for this discussion.

I remember thinking at the time that this number had to be too low, but I never bothered to check up on it.

Fast forward to a last week. I took a basic defensive handgun course along with a buddy of mine. There were about twenty or 25 students in the class, many of whom were rank amateurs, and several of those brought weapons that they'd never fired before that day. Our two ranges-to-targets that day were 5 yds and 7 yds. Five or six students had trouble keeping 5 rounds in the black at 5 yds (standard b-27 silhouette). At least a dozen people had difficulty staying inside the lines at 7 yards.

We had one exercise where we had to shoot one target in the thorax twice then step to our right or left, back peddle to the 7-yd line, then shoot a second target twice in the chest, then pick one of those targets and take one head shot. Only about half the class managed to keep all four chest shots inside the 9 ring. Over half the class missed the head shot.

After class the instructor told me that this was pretty normal performance.

Now that 4% doesn't look so improbable, if you factor in a target that is running away and maybe doing the serpentine thing.
 
The stats are correct, but only for single gun shots wounds. When a gun shot victim is brought in with multiple gun shot wounds the odds of survival are substantially less, more like 10% will survive.

So the point of the story is to not get shot multiple times, running might help you to accomplish that.


Stay safe, and avoid flying lead.
Jim
 
Quasi-quote "If a predator has a gun and you are not under his control, ALWAYS RUN! The predator will only hit you (a running target) 4 in 100 times and even then, probably not a vital organ."

Does that sound legit? I can't say I've ever tried hitting a moving target in such a way.
Click to expand...

The statistic appears to be a fabrication and I would not consider it valid unless the raw data can be validated. I sincerely doubt anyone has actually collected such data in a meaningful manner. Just how many shootings are there where people are running from predators?

To be perfectly honest, I would be more inclined to believe that 4 out of 100 actually shoot. In most cases, the predator is using the gun as a threat and for defense and if he has lost control of his prey, is not apt to fire it and risk drawing attention. However, there don't appear to be any real statistics gathered for this either.

Getting back to the original topic, the further you are away from your attacker, the less likely you are to not be hit. If you are in motion laterally, the less likely to be hit. This concept applies whether you are a victim running from a predator or a bad guy running from the cops.

Keep in mind that there is the reality that running away does not always work and that the gunman will have poor aim. Ms. Boyd here tried to accelerate away from a gunman and was shot in the face. Her gunman fired multiple times (twice) and his her once. The bullet, fortunately, only went through her face.
https://gordongabs.wordpress.com/2008/05/19/update-new-info-on-northpark-shooting/
 
The statistic appears to be a fabrication and I would not consider it valid
Click to expand...

Some people wouldn't believe the facts even if it jumped up and bite them in the butt. The FBI use to post these stats in the past, till the current administration took over. I wonder why that is?

One of my favorite expressions is "Statistics don't lie, but statisticians do." It means you can shape the numbers to say anything you want them to, like "Ted Cruz won the Iowa primary 48%" or "Ted Cruz lost Iowa 52% of the delegates will vote against him at the Republican convention.". Which one do you prefer??


Stay safe.
Jim
 
Last edited:
So you are vouching for the 4% statistic but noting the information no longer exists and you are blaming some form of government conspiracy theory?


Snopes doesn't know where the magic numbers come from either.
http://www.snopes.com/crime/prevent/ninetips.asp
It is found all over the internet...
http://web.archive.org/web/20061009083903/http://faama.org/managers/being_a_victim.htm

https://books.google.com/books?id=4...ven then, probably not a vital organ.&f=false

http://www.attackproof.com/volume-22.html

http://www.mississippigunnews.com/2...hters-to-carry-a-gun-human-trafficking-exist/

http://urbanbushbabes.com/read-now-this-may-save-your-life-safety-tips-for-women/

http://www.goese.com/reference/safety.html

And there are a lot more sites with this claim, the text being nearly verbatim, and NOT A SINGLE SITE documents the source of the information.

This really has the earmarks of recycled urban lore, especially when you add in the conspiracy theory that the government removed the evidence.
 
Hit a running target...
Click to expand...

Let me throw an obvious factor into the mix...RUNNING

By running do you mean:
1. NFL receiver dodge and run?
2. Size 0, anorexic, hand flapping run?
3. Semi-drunk and confused run?
(or my personal run of choice)
4. The fat man shuffle?
 
There are good statistics on police, criminal, civilian hits without breaking them down by running or not. All the statistics I have seen are 10-20% for all of those. It isn't hard for me to believe those numbers drop by a fourth if the target is running.
In that SD class the stress level was low. Even just start yelling at them and the number will probably halve.
 
We can also discuss exactly how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

Whatever the 'true' statistic is about running targets, you are almost certainly going to be killed if you allow a rapist to transport you from the immediate scene to another location of their choice.

Resistance results in foiled rape attempts quite often, and wounding is also less frequent.

A running target certainly stands a better chance of not being hit by gunfire than a person standing there doing nothing, or a person resisting. They also have a far greater chance of not being subdued by tasers, shockers, restraints, or wounded by knives or other objects, simply by putting distance between them and an attacker.
 
Don't forget that guns are loud. The perp will likely skeddadle after a few hasty shots. Plus, police are likely to be called to a shots fired event.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top