Hit running target statistic 4 of 100 ??

[OldMarksman]

Posted by cougar gt-e:

Don't forget that guns are loud.

Well, yeah...

The perp will likely skeddadle after a few hasty shots.

I would not count on it. If he is close enough to have caused you to draw and fire, it may be plainly obvious to him that trying to outrun bullets would be futile.

Plus, police are likely to be called to a shots fired event.

What good will that do?

 

[Deaf Smith]

Cougar,

What you say is silly. You are assuming, and we all know what can make out of us.

And Dave, right on. Few are world class dodgers.

Deaf

 

[cougar gt-e]

Why is it silly? Every single SD class wants the victim to attract attention. I can't yell at 150db, but that's how loud guns are. Gunshots get reported, in some locations automatically with triangulation. If you run and they shoot, a 1:5 chance of being hit, 1:5 chance of mortal injury if hit. Surrendering to an armed attacker is worse odds. Or do you see that different?


Oldmarksman, we are talking about the ATTACKER being armed and firing a shot at a fleeing victim...NOT the other way around.

 

[Deaf Smith]

Cougar,

Google "victim shot running away" and read some interesting stories. I have grave doubts about the 4 percent solution.

I'd run if that was the only solution left (taking cover and shooting back being much more preferable) and even then it might be TOWARD the attacker.

Deaf

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Plus, police are likely to be called to a shots fired event.

And in 5-20 minutes, police will be on scene, or at least in the area. Do you realize how many "shots fired" calls police get where they never find anything?

Gunshots get reported, in some locations automatically with triangulation.

Very few cities have Shotspotter technology and even then it covers a very limited area. In 2009, a square mile of coverage could cost a quarter million dollars. Houston is 627 square miles. Denver is 155. Cincinnati is 80. How much of those cities get covered by such technology? Zero to very little. In the few cities that do use it, it is only used in very limited areas and is considered a very expensive resource that has been plagued with problems.

http://www.shotspotter.com/news/art...-effectiveness-of-shotspotter-versus-the-cost

http://fox61.com/2013/05/22/fox-ct-investigation-is-costly-gun-shot-detection-system-worth-the-cost/

 

[OldMarksman]

Posted by cougar gt-e:

Oldmarksman, we are talking about the ATTACKER being armed and firing a shot at a fleeing victim...NOT the other way around.

The comment was "The perp will likely skeddadle after a few hasty shots."

Of course, the defender could not lawfully shoot, but the questions is chanter the attacker would rely on that detail in the heat of the event. I would not count on an attacker charging at a distance of say, ten feet, turning and running rather than pressing the attack.

 

[johnwilliamson062]

The company’s data says that during a one-month trial of the “ShotSpotter Flex System” this winter, it displayed 100 percent accuracy. Why the sudden improvement? After years of problems, ShotSpotter reps flew to Hartford and New Haven to change the system.

And that is in an article from 2013. My understanding the accuracy of the systems in m=place in Ohio now is not disappointing anyone. Just because police arrive on the scene and don't find a body or a blood trail does not mean no shots were fired, either. From celebratory shots in the air to just plain misses, there is a lot of gunfire that would leave no evidence at the location.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

And that is in an article from 2013. My understanding the accuracy of the systems in m=place in Ohio now is not disappointing anyone. Just because police arrive on the scene and don't find a body or a blood trail does not mean no shots were fired, either. From celebratory shots in the air to just plain misses, there is a lot of gunfire that would leave no evidence at the location.

The system is 80%+ accurate based on the Lt.s discussion of its implementation in 2015...
https://nextdoor.com/agency-post/ca...-monday-06-15-15-starting-at-900-pm-12514407/

Yeah, I would hope that after just about 20 years they would have the bugs worked out of the system, but apparently they don't. Reporting gunshots that leave no evidence is interesting when some of the gunshots reported turn out to be things other than gunshots. On top of that and 20 years, it isn't like the price for the system is coming down significantly. It is still hugely expensive to run, hence why the cities that do use it only use it in a very limited area.

And that was a big implication of what I was getting at in my post. The system has bugs. The system is hugely expensive. The system is only employed by a limited number of cities and in VERY limited areas, which means that if you or I get shot at by somebody, there is really very little chance that it will be picked up by the system unless you or I happen to be in one of the very worst areas of the city at the time, which is where these systems are predominately placed.

 

[Skans]

The first thing I do when I see a bum approaching me is to move around. I never stand still. Yes, I tend to get approached by bums while pumping gas at gas stations in certain areas. Bums get nervous when you start to move around....add a few quick jerky movements - that scares them off; usually.