allaroundhunter
New member
Yes, a gunfight did occur. Multiple parties do not have to engage each other for it to be a gunfight. If bullets fly at a person, a gunfight has occurred.
Was it a shootout? No.
Key to surviving a gun fight
- Thread starter TRguy
- Start date
Yes, a gunfight did occur. Multiple parties do not have to engage each other for it to be a gunfight. If bullets fly at a person, a gunfight has occurred.
Was it a shootout? No.
Both sides don't need to fire a gun for it to be a gunfight. In fact, if you get off your shot(s) before the other guy, and stop him, you have won the gunfight. What else could you call it? In fact this IS the best of all outcomes to a gunfight.
Automaticity! This alone was worth the price of admission. Love it.
Training and mental rehearsal (visualization) are the keys to successful performance, whether it be sports or gunfighting. The guy in the video obviously had both, and was a very cool customer, IMO.
Automaticity! This alone was worth the price of admission. Love it.
Training and mental rehearsal (visualization) are the keys to successful performance, whether it be sports or gunfighting. The guy in the video obviously had both, and was a very cool customer, IMO.
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
Brian, off the top of my head - I don't know the loss rate for motor skill imagery effectivness. I could hit the databases when I get a free moment.
Might be hard to study in the lab.
Might be hard to study in the lab.
Double Naught Spy
New member
It was a defensive shooting - nothing more unless somebody comes up with information that the bad guys also fired. The distinction between a shooting has been made clear to me by several firearms instructors such as Ken Hackathorn.
http://www.shootingwire.com/features/225864
Brian Pfleuger
Moderator Emeritus
DNS said:
Hard to argue with that.
allaroundhunter
New member
I think that is a rather cut and dry definition on scenarios that are not at all cut and dry.
I still believe that since the criminal initiated the conflict by producing a weapon and leaving the guard with only one option, to fire in defense, would qualify it as a gunfight, even though the criminal did not have the guts to stay and fight back, but YMMV.
Due to media usage of the term "shooting", it does leave a rather sour taste in my mouth to use it in this situation. Just ask yourself, who initiated this "shooting"? IMO, if it was the security guard, then yes it was a shooting. If it was the criminal, then I say that it was a gunfight because the security guard had no choice but to match deadly force with equal force (gun vs. gun).
A "shooting" is when a bad guy shows up and shoots one or a bunch of people a la the Colorado movie theater or the Sikh temple. All one-sided. No "fight" involved.
A gunfight, on the other hand, is when two armed parties face off and shots are fired. This can happen by one or both parties. It is still a fight. Presentation of a weapon in a threatening manner turns it into a "fight."
A "fight" presupposes the capability of violence by both parties. A "shooting" does not.
If a big kid beats up on a little kid, it's a beating. No fight involved. If he can fight back, it's a fight. Get it?
All of which is beside the point of the OP. Whatever you call it, that guard was my kind of guy.
A gunfight, on the other hand, is when two armed parties face off and shots are fired. This can happen by one or both parties. It is still a fight. Presentation of a weapon in a threatening manner turns it into a "fight."
A "fight" presupposes the capability of violence by both parties. A "shooting" does not.
If a big kid beats up on a little kid, it's a beating. No fight involved. If he can fight back, it's a fight. Get it?
All of which is beside the point of the OP. Whatever you call it, that guard was my kind of guy.
He accomplished his mission as a security guard. In watching the video he did what every Infantryman is trained to do.
....."close with the enemy by means of fire and maneuver in order to destroy or capture him, or repel his assault by fire, close combat, and counterattack." (bold face is added)
He was obviously well trained, well prepared both mentally and physically, and had a plan to repel the assault.
Good Job.
....."close with the enemy by means of fire and maneuver in order to destroy or capture him, or repel his assault by fire, close combat, and counterattack." (bold face is added)
He was obviously well trained, well prepared both mentally and physically, and had a plan to repel the assault.
Good Job.
Very impressive performance from a man undoubtedly paid poorly to sit in one place and watch a door ... wonder what his background is ... the speed with which he drew, his movement to the left to defend against the oncoming attack, his accuracy and lack of (evident) panic ... we should all hope to do as well, faced with the same circumstances ...
Well this one surprised me. I really thought a gunfight was when two or more people fought with guns. Shouldn't matter if one of them didn't get a shot off. Turns out that they both have to shoot according to an authority on the definition of words, 
Merriam-Webster:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gunfight
I learn something every day as long as I pay attention.
Merriam-Webster: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gunfight
I learn something every day as long as I pay attention.
theinvisibleheart
New member
first accurate hit=the one to make first accurate hit
Last edited:
zombietactics
New member
A "first accurate hit" does nothing to prevent rounds coming the other way, unless it's a very accurate head shot right to the "walnut". Good luck with that.
Anything else means your opponent has from several seconds to several minutes to return fire or do you harm by some other means.
You might kill your opponent quicker while he's in the process of killing you slower in return, but that's not "survival".
Getting 10 excellent hits and seeing him go down first is all fine and good. Congratulations ... you "won the match"! But it says nothing about his one lucky shot to your brachial or femoral artery (not even in the A zone!). EMS will be there in 10-20 minutes. You'll bleed out and die in less than 2. No doubt your shooting buddies will laud your excellent skills. Your widow and orphaned kids might have a different perspective.
If survival is the goal, the first priority has to be not getting shot or stabbed. That should be your first job while trying to position yourself to employ weapons skills to end the fight or attack.
Just my opinion, of course ... but I think it makes sense.
Anything else means your opponent has from several seconds to several minutes to return fire or do you harm by some other means.
You might kill your opponent quicker while he's in the process of killing you slower in return, but that's not "survival".
Getting 10 excellent hits and seeing him go down first is all fine and good. Congratulations ... you "won the match"! But it says nothing about his one lucky shot to your brachial or femoral artery (not even in the A zone!). EMS will be there in 10-20 minutes. You'll bleed out and die in less than 2. No doubt your shooting buddies will laud your excellent skills. Your widow and orphaned kids might have a different perspective.
If survival is the goal, the first priority has to be not getting shot or stabbed. That should be your first job while trying to position yourself to employ weapons skills to end the fight or attack.
Just my opinion, of course ... but I think it makes sense.
Last edited:
When I first viewed this failed robbery attempt, the poor stupidity of the three individuals who ran, I say again, RAN in, therefore making themselves instant targets, is hard to fathom, stupid people.
The Security Officer (Officer in Florida, not Guard) Did real well, I played the video a few times, what I found interesting, his hand dropped to the Pistol, a smooth release on the thumb snap on the holster's thumb break.
(If he had it on, I think so)
Would like to hear the AAR After Action Report.
The Security Officer (Officer in Florida, not Guard) Did real well, I played the video a few times, what I found interesting, his hand dropped to the Pistol, a smooth release on the thumb snap on the holster's thumb break.
(If he had it on, I think so)
Would like to hear the AAR After Action Report.
Jammer Six
New member
In my experience, the main factor is not thinking, training or circumstances, the main factor is willingness– specifically, willingness to believe.
The next factor, as much as everyone hates to admit it, is luck.
There is a moment, when something happens, where one "can't believe this is happening". Mental inertia. Partly because one is unprepared to believe it's happening, partly because one doesn't want to believe it's happening. The hesitation between the stimuli and the reaction is personal, and I would never question another person's reaction to combat.
When one overcomes that, the next factor is luck. Millions of people have ducked left, early and well, straight into a mortar round. A bad guy spraying bullets down a hallway is equally unpredictable. If it were possible to see and avoid bullets, that's what we'd teach.
Mental preparation helps overcome inertia. Training helps with the mechanic skill. Sometimes the combination wins fights. And sometimes the highest skilled, hair triggered rifleman dies.
It's much easier to say what won't happen.
If you don't drill, you won't win because you won't hit the target.
If you don't think about it, you won't win because you will hesitate.
The next factor, as much as everyone hates to admit it, is luck.
There is a moment, when something happens, where one "can't believe this is happening". Mental inertia. Partly because one is unprepared to believe it's happening, partly because one doesn't want to believe it's happening. The hesitation between the stimuli and the reaction is personal, and I would never question another person's reaction to combat.
When one overcomes that, the next factor is luck. Millions of people have ducked left, early and well, straight into a mortar round. A bad guy spraying bullets down a hallway is equally unpredictable. If it were possible to see and avoid bullets, that's what we'd teach.
Mental preparation helps overcome inertia. Training helps with the mechanic skill. Sometimes the combination wins fights. And sometimes the highest skilled, hair triggered rifleman dies.
It's much easier to say what won't happen.
If you don't drill, you won't win because you won't hit the target.
If you don't think about it, you won't win because you will hesitate.
Double Naught Spy
New member
Both of these are not true and have numerous folks who perform well contrary to them. In the first case, it reminds me that "only hits count." Most of the gun owners in America DO NOT DRILL or TRAIN, yet we read all the time how they win confrontations where they have fired their guns. Often they hit and often they don't, they they win. One of my favorite one shot stop stories is about an old lady in Florida who made some hells angels-type bikers mad and when a couple tried coming through her front door, she fired her tiny .25 acp just once and they fled. Two guys stopped with one shot from a puny caliber and the round stuck in the trim of the door. She won against a significant disparity of force and didn't hit either target.
Our trailer park hero was also a winner. That would be Vic Stacy who apparently put multiple shots into a gunman at some large distance (maybe 165 feet) and his story (search his name for the thread here) as told on video involved lots of thinking, hesitation, and methodical shooting and he certainly won.
These aspects are situational. Some people will fight you until their brain shuts down. Some people will run at the possibility that you have a gun. Some situations demand immediate action without thought. Other situations require careful consideration before firing.
Then of course was Mark Wilson. Seeing the gunfight from his window above the square in Tyler, TX, apparently responded without a second thought, bringing his pistol to fight a gunman armed with a rifle and ballistic and flak protection (multiple vests). Mark Wilson, a firearms instructor and gun range owner (possibly sold at the time of the event) did not think to grab a rifle from his apartment. As such, his shots on the gunman in the square were largely ineffective except for wounding him under the vest and drawing his attention where upon he downed Mark Wilson with one shot and executed him with a second before fleeing the square and later being killed by cops. A rifle would have done Wilson well, especially if fired from his apartment overlooking the square, but he didn't think and he didn't hesitate. Mark Wilson is a hero, but a dead hero of a gun fight.
Last edited:
theinvisibleheart
New member
missing & winning a gun fight: you are depending on luck.
Pistol against opponent wearing vest: groin/head shot.
It's not practical to always have a long gun with you.
Pistol against opponent wearing vest: groin/head shot.
It's not practical to always have a long gun with you.
FireForged
New member
I am not really inclined to believe that there is any real "key" to winning a gunfight. There are measures you can take to help you be prepared for a gunfight such as training/skill/knowlege/practice. The skills aquired from such things can lend you some specific advantages but does not mean that you are going to win over someone with less knowledge and training. All thing being exactly equal, yes.. I believe that the best trained, most skilled, best equiped person is very likely to win each time... but what gunfights are exactly equal?
Winning can depends on advantage:
Training is an advantage
Skill is an advantage
Better Equipment is an advantage
Numbers are an advantage
Position is an advantage
and so on and so on.
When you add all this up, is it enough to overcome the enemies advantages? It could depend on the actual worth you assign to each advantage plus a % of blind chance. yep, blind chance..
I believe that its always best to be well trained, well practiced and well equipped. I just dont necessarily believe that winning a gunfight will ever be as easy and written list of one - two - threes.
Winning can depends on advantage:
Training is an advantage
Skill is an advantage
Better Equipment is an advantage
Numbers are an advantage
Position is an advantage
and so on and so on.
When you add all this up, is it enough to overcome the enemies advantages? It could depend on the actual worth you assign to each advantage plus a % of blind chance. yep, blind chance..
I believe that its always best to be well trained, well practiced and well equipped. I just dont necessarily believe that winning a gunfight will ever be as easy and written list of one - two - threes.
Only hits count....
I read over a few of the posts & wanted to share my input(4 years active duty; US military, 20+ years in armed/protective services-security);
Mindset & training are important but what a few forum members may not be aware of is that armed attacks/robbery were common in central Florida. The G(Florida armed/licensed security) officer used good tactics & judgement but probably keyed into possible threats and the proper counter-measures BEFORE this lethal force event took place.
These new casino locations & gaming sites draw in thugs looking for a quick score. I'd opt for a tactical/LE type 12ga shotgun knowing multiple subjects may attempt a "take-down" robbery.
I also avoid the "what-if" game. You can second guess & talk yourself in circles doing protection/security work. The main point in armed security is to maintain a "hard target" and to find/remove any weak areas or problems in a security system. Thugs & gang members do not want to work hard or deal with well armed, well trained foes.
As combat veteran & top instructor; Clint Smith says; "if you look like food, you will be eaten."
I read over a few of the posts & wanted to share my input(4 years active duty; US military, 20+ years in armed/protective services-security);
Mindset & training are important but what a few forum members may not be aware of is that armed attacks/robbery were common in central Florida. The G(Florida armed/licensed security) officer used good tactics & judgement but probably keyed into possible threats and the proper counter-measures BEFORE this lethal force event took place.
These new casino locations & gaming sites draw in thugs looking for a quick score. I'd opt for a tactical/LE type 12ga shotgun knowing multiple subjects may attempt a "take-down" robbery.
I also avoid the "what-if" game. You can second guess & talk yourself in circles doing protection/security work. The main point in armed security is to maintain a "hard target" and to find/remove any weak areas or problems in a security system. Thugs & gang members do not want to work hard or deal with well armed, well trained foes.
As combat veteran & top instructor; Clint Smith says; "if you look like food, you will be eaten."