OldMarksman
Staff
irrelevant. The number of rounds is only meaningful once the shooting starts
Probably about the same a that of being attacked by one.
What stats?
Is a single stack enough?
- Thread starter Jacket67
- Start date
OldMarksman
Staff
Do you really think that, if you are under attack by a violent criminal (think in terms of an approach speed of about 5 meters per second), at a distance that would make the use of deadly force justifiable, that you would be able to do anything with those magazines?
That could well be. But then the number of rounds needed is not an issue, is it?
Do you have any basis at all for that assumption?
Of course it is. But how much discussion is required to determine the required capacity in the context of a situation where none is required? Let's see:
"How much ammo do you need in a situation where you don't need ammo? None."
Ok, that didn't take long. Time to move on to a problem that's not quite so simple to solve.
If you are not satisfied with the "concept each attacker will take 2-3 rounds to neutralize" then you have multiple options--here are a few:
1. Do some research of your own to come up with a figure. If you come up with a figure that you're more comfortable with or that you feel is more reasonable then prepare for that "concept" instead. If you're feeling particularly magnanimous then you could share your research with the rest of us in case some find it valuable.
2. Don't bother with the research and just run the numbers for a range of hits that you think encompasses the spectrum of what you think is reasonable. Then prepare accordingly.
3. Dismiss the whole thing and think about some other topic that makes you happier.
4. Keep asking the same question over and over again and getting the same answer over and over again.
Yeah, I see your point. Preparing for two or three attackers requiring 2-3 rounds to neutralize makes no sense. What you're doing, preparing for two or three attackers requiring 2-3 rounds, is a lot more reasonable.
Pond James Pond
New member
I'm not a bad shot with it but, yes, I think that area is clearly one for improvement; and my best chances of success. Especially, when dealing with a snub.
This is what I know from that drill. If the third target is determined and does not panic or flee when the shooting starts and is semi competent he should have been able to effectively put rounds on target (me) before I put my rounds on him. In reality getting to a second target before the above becomes true is a problem. Further if my hit rate under extreme stress drops it's likely some of those rounds go off target. Why practice it? Because it is the worst case scenario my skill level could even give me a long shot at making it out through force.
I think if the situation evolves to where a large capacity pistol could be useful that magazine swaps are not out of the question. Think about the 8th shot in your own program: to get that far you have likely already had some luck in regards to the inability of your opponents to neutralize you (maybe you moved to cover?).
That is very likely. You'll note that's one of the caveats that must be kept in mind when interpreting the calculation results. I've stated it multiple times in the thread starting in the third post to try to keep that important caveat from being forgotten.
"For the purpose of calculating the probabilities, let's assume you ALWAYS have enough time to fire all your shots..."
"it must be assumed that the shooter will get a chance to fire all ... rounds before being incapacitated..."
"...and you get a chance to use all your ammo..."
"There's nothing that tries to account for the possibility of ... actually being unable to shoot your remaining rounds..."
Yes. Dealing with multiple targets is really difficult. For people who don't have your initiative to get out and try some scenarios at the range that mimic multiple attacker scenarios, they can run the probabilities here and get a little bit of a feel for how hard they are even without getting into the time constraints that are felt keenly at the range and even more keenly in a gunfight.
Right. That's wrapped into the assumption that you get to shoot all your shots. If you get killed/neutralized with rounds in the magazine then they don't do you any good.
That's why the results of the calculations should be viewed as a sort of "best case" outcome. There are lots of reasons why the outcome could be a lot worse than the probability suggests, but, and this is the important part. It's very unlikely that they will be significantly better.
They can't tell us if we will succeed. They can provide insight into scenarios where success is very improbable. They can give us an idea of what kinds of scenarios (based on the three parameters of hit probability, number of shots required and capacity) are "workable" and which ones aren't. They allow us to vary the three parameters to see how they affect the workability of the scenario.
Part of the value of the calculations is that they help us understand that there's a real possibility of emptying the gun and still having a problem that needs solving. That could be very valuable insight if it prompts us to take actions so that by the time the gun is empty, we're in a better position than we started in--that we're not simply back where we started but this time with an empty gun.
JoeSixpack
New member
Hmm dual weld? Not enough time? 2 hands 2 guns?
Im half joking of course, Im guessing it would slow your draw down and probably a difficult skill to master, But if you could...hmmmm.. *squints eyes and cocks head gently towards the sky, drifts off into daydream*
Im half joking of course, Im guessing it would slow your draw down and probably a difficult skill to master, But if you could...hmmmm.. *squints eyes and cocks head gently towards the sky, drifts off into daydream*
John I missed the caveats, apparently several times, and the limitations you intended for the calculations. My position was intended to be that my skill is the most likely limiting factor in a multiple attacker scenarios and the discussion in single stack vs double stack was so far secondary that it was not as important as it is made out to be (by some and sometimes).
Frank Ettin
Administrator
I'm aways amazed when thes discussion come up by how many folks seem to be so sure of what will happen and how it will happen. I guess you all do better at the horse races than I do -- consistently hitting the pick-six; and I'm sure that your stock picks and other investments are doing better than mine.Lohman446 said:
On the other hand, I have no idea what will happen and whether if I'm ever in a critical incident I will be worse served by limitations of skill or by limitations of equipment. Probabilities are all well and good, but rare events do happen. And I think that it seems that some folks don't sufficiently consider how sensitive the probability of an event unfolding in particular way might be to the initial conditions.
I've spent a lot of time participating in business and litigation planning -- trying to predict how a particular situation will develop and how to optimize our outcome. When we do that sort of thing we usually are focused on a particular and defined situation, and we generally have a lot of data. An important lesson from such activities is to not get too enamored of a particular plan, because it will almost certainly need to be modified along the way as black (or dark gray) swans begin to appear.
To paraphrase Hamlet the future (not just death) is an undiscovered country.
Triggernosis
New member
The majority of us would be much better served by practicing drawing a 5-shot revolver quickly and shooting at a "perp" that's approaching us from less than 10' away in an attempt to rob us while we're retuning our shopping cart at the local Wal-Mart.
OldMarksman
Staff
Better served than with what?
I retired my five shot revolver form primary carry years ago.
Triggernosis
New member
Better served than preparing for armageheddon in a shopping mall or fending off multiple assailants necessitating a magazine change.
To me this represents part of the dilemma. Why is an armed (firearm) attacker closing past ten feet? If he or she has not drawn do you have the legal right to draw? If he or she is unarmed do you have the right to lethal force? If the weapon is s knife at ten feet your firearm is not likely to come into play before you are injured. By the time you have legal justification to use a firearm in defense of yourself you are tactically at a major disadvantage.
Triggernosis
New member
^^^ I agree. It's a razor thin line that we walk.
JoeSixpack
New member
First I'd ask.. How do you know they're an attacker?
Just being armed isn't a crime in my state.. you sometimes see OC'ers.. rare but you do see it from time to time... what if the gun is printing but not visible? is this a fellow conceal carrier?
I just assume im gonna have to use at least 1 hand to fend off an attack.. I mean it will be great if that's not the case but I just assume the worse.
Reaction is always slower then action.. WE "the good guys" never throw the first punch.. er in this case shot.. You'll always be at a disadvantage.
My stated carry pistol is a Glock 19. 16 rounds of Ranger T 147g.
Due to cameras in stores, even gun shops, is becoming more popular, shoot outs have appeared on the web.
Popular often viewed scenario. One or more robbers enter premises, most often than not, gun in hand.
The employee, behind the counter, draws at once, aims and fires! In a hurry?
A deterrent in this scenario! The very loud sound of say a 9mm, fired indoors, no ear protection, is loud! And the muzzle is facing the bad guys! Louder!
The common reaction, turn and flee. Some times, a hurried shot, then turn and flee! The load out seems to become less important?
But none of these film clips have changed my mind. My Glock 19 has 16 rounds, a spare magazine with 17 rounds is carried, next to my Surefire light, on the off side. Always.
My Surefire is used much more than Gun, or extra Mag. But still is there every day. In fact is just behind me on my wee table, with the lamp just now.
Due to cameras in stores, even gun shops, is becoming more popular, shoot outs have appeared on the web.
Popular often viewed scenario. One or more robbers enter premises, most often than not, gun in hand.
The employee, behind the counter, draws at once, aims and fires! In a hurry?
A deterrent in this scenario! The very loud sound of say a 9mm, fired indoors, no ear protection, is loud! And the muzzle is facing the bad guys! Louder!
The common reaction, turn and flee. Some times, a hurried shot, then turn and flee! The load out seems to become less important?
But none of these film clips have changed my mind. My Glock 19 has 16 rounds, a spare magazine with 17 rounds is carried, next to my Surefire light, on the off side. Always.
My Surefire is used much more than Gun, or extra Mag. But still is there every day. In fact is just behind me on my wee table, with the lamp just now.
Pond James Pond
New member
The scenario you describe is the robbery of a business. That is the only reason there is CCTV footge for us to review
The victim is in a fixed place with fewer means of escape but greater scope for the selection of defensive weapon (pistol, shotgun etc).
This is less likely to be something that the average joe has to contend with IMHO.
Granted, however, most attackers aren't looking to risk getting shot to get a few $$$, so the chances are that they'd flee at the sound of a shot. This, however, depends on another factor, I feel:
It is also accepted that, in street aggression, the attack happens at contact or near-contact distances.
I think it far harder to predict that, when already within arm's reach, an attacker would choose to run and open ground for the armed victim to take more aimed shots (even if legally ill-advised) or to try to grab the weapon and disarm the victim.
The victim is in a fixed place with fewer means of escape but greater scope for the selection of defensive weapon (pistol, shotgun etc).
This is less likely to be something that the average joe has to contend with IMHO.
Granted, however, most attackers aren't looking to risk getting shot to get a few $$$, so the chances are that they'd flee at the sound of a shot. This, however, depends on another factor, I feel:
It is also accepted that, in street aggression, the attack happens at contact or near-contact distances.
I think it far harder to predict that, when already within arm's reach, an attacker would choose to run and open ground for the armed victim to take more aimed shots (even if legally ill-advised) or to try to grab the weapon and disarm the victim.
This thread gives so many angles, that I feel a need to resurface!
I taught people to shoot people for over 20 years. Why? Because they were armed for a job, that put them in harm's way. Police/Security Officers/Military personnel.
Anytime they drew a pistol, it was to shoot an other human being. Many studies have gone into this pastime, in a marksmanship area.
I always taught, always fire twice, at a man sized target.
First aiming spot, center chest. The normal reaction to two 9mm rounds to center chest. My speculation. OUCH! pause, being still. Now the head shot.
Or ideal situation, arms drop, gun drops. My thoughts on capacity, yes, again!
Firing twice, I have 14 left! Is this a problem? No, it is not! There is no reason not to carry lots of cartridges, none. You can pontificate add Infinitum!
Just got weighed, with no gun then with fully loaded G19.
The gun weighs 2 lbs.
I average around 207 lbs. So around 10% of my body weight extra? Nothing.
There is my rational, it is no big deal!
As I stated in an IALEFI Meeting, in 1986, I had been on The Board 2 years.
MORE IS BETTER, ALWAYS.
I taught people to shoot people for over 20 years. Why? Because they were armed for a job, that put them in harm's way. Police/Security Officers/Military personnel.
Anytime they drew a pistol, it was to shoot an other human being. Many studies have gone into this pastime, in a marksmanship area.
I always taught, always fire twice, at a man sized target.
First aiming spot, center chest. The normal reaction to two 9mm rounds to center chest. My speculation. OUCH! pause, being still. Now the head shot.
Or ideal situation, arms drop, gun drops. My thoughts on capacity, yes, again!
Firing twice, I have 14 left! Is this a problem? No, it is not! There is no reason not to carry lots of cartridges, none. You can pontificate add Infinitum!
Just got weighed, with no gun then with fully loaded G19.
The gun weighs 2 lbs.
I average around 207 lbs. So around 10% of my body weight extra? Nothing.
There is my rational, it is no big deal!
As I stated in an IALEFI Meeting, in 1986, I had been on The Board 2 years.
MORE IS BETTER, ALWAYS.
OldMarksman
Staff
I think most trainers teach shooting more shots under most circumstances.