Self Defense Confrontation

That is how the law reads, with all of the normal caveats, reasonable belief, whether it was reasonable to believe, etc. As I said, it's not advice, and the rest of what I wrote was about how reasonable belief on the part of the shooter isn't always a correct assessment. The farther away a person is, for example a stranger, distance, understanding, so forth. Reasonable belief can go up in smoke when a person isn't directly involved. What can appear to be clear cut can turn into something totally different, and acting rashly without proper consideration can be a disaster.

The shooter can only act on his own beliefs, but the system judges whether or not his actions and beliefs were correct, so to speak.

Sd situations are never good for the careless or stupid, poor judgment is not protected.

Is this close to correct?
 
That is how the law reads, with all of the normal caveats, reasonable belief, whether it was reasonable to believe, etc.
Click to expand...
Whatever that means....

The point is that there is more to it than "if anyone in the vicinity is in extreme danger, lethal force is justified.".

The "normal caveats" for self defense usually include indications of an imminant threat of death or great bodily harm, and a basis for reasonable belief hat deadly force, and no less, is immediately necessary.

There's also the little matter of innocence.

That also applies in the case of defending a third person, and it can be tricky. In most jurisdictions, unless there is a basis for reasonable belief that that "anyone in the vicinity" would be lawfully entitled to use deadly force for self defense, the use of deadly force would not be justified.

Distance may or may not enter into the equation for a basis for a readable belief. did the acorns know what had transpired before the encounter? Does the actor have any way of knowing who the participants might be? There would be more than distance involved in addressing those questions.
 
Check out

Fighting Smarter: A practical Guide for Surviving Violent Confrontations
By Tom Givens (revised 3rd edition)
(Memphis, Tennessee; Rangemaster, Inc; 29 January 2015)

Chapter 13 – Training Priorities (pages 95 to 105)

In summary, his recommendations:

I would suggest the following as the skills that a private citizen should work toward competency in:

 Fast, effective, and reliable presentation of the handgun from concealment.
 The ability to accurately place several quick shots into an anatomically important area of the target at a distance of 3 to 5 yards.
 The ability to place an anatomically important hit in a reasonable amount of time beyond 7 yards out to at least 25 yards.
 The ability to reload the handgun quickly and efficiently, especially if it holds less than 10 rounds.
 The ability to rapidly move off the line of force (sidestep) without hindering the presentation of the pistol from concealment
 
The FBI has for years studied incidents in which police officers were killed (The LEOKA reports)

They have NOT collected statistics on ALL police involved shootings, which I have always found quite bizarre. New York City PD publishes an annual report called SOP9 that provides statistics for incidents that NYPD officers are involved in.

I think Tom Givens and John Farnam and Massad Ayoob and some others have information on incidents that their students were involved in.

There is currently no comprehensive data base that exists that covers ALL police-involved or citizen involved shooting incidents.

As somebody commented above, first train for the probable and then prepare for the possible
 
Carry the biggest most powerful gun you shoot well and conceal. After a lifetime of LE, between Military, Big city and Federal I carry a full size Glock 357 Sig or a Smith and Wesson 44 magnum revolver concealed every day all day.
 
The last one that happened in this area that was non LEO was a distance of around 20 feet during a home invasion. BG was hit one time through the neck with a .357 Magnum SJHP. Was dead on the spot when law enforcement arrived. It was a cut and dry case of justifiable SD. The BG was known to the occupants of the house. Had made death threats, and had a past history of violence towards one person in the house.
 
Sd situations are never good for the careless or stupid, poor judgment is not protected.
Click to expand...

To a large extent Careless and / or stupid makes a lot of situations a non issue into a life altering situation. It is best to think before you act.
 
I read somewhere that the average self defense shooting distance is 3 yards with an average of 2.7 rounds fired.

I have also read it will usually be very fast, violent, and close range. Counting one robbery attempt overseas, I've faced four instances where a shooting might have been necessary. Of those four times three were within arms' length and one was perhaps 21 to 30 feet. Thank God each time the assailants backed off when it became clear they were in for more than they expected.

Speaking of training, I think it's a good idea to practice a speed rock. This is inherently dangerous since you'll be drawing and firing from the hip, into the belly/center mass of a target. Be sure not to shoot yourself!

When it comes to CCW, everything I have read said to "carry the largest weapon of the largest caliber you could both shoot well and conceal."

Big guns handle better, balance better, and are easier to shoot well and keep rounds on target. I have also read that "basement" calibers were 9mm Luger and .38 Special. I no longer carry anything less than .38 SPL and I am about to go back to carrying .45 ACP.
 
Last edited:
Simplicity is the name of the game. A Glock 19 gives you (if using the magazine it came with) 16 rounds with no reload.

This weapon, loaded weighs a couple of pounds, and can be concealed quite well. Carry the same gun, always. In the same place.

With an extra 17 round magazine and a SureFire flashlight, just about covers most eventualities, yes? Simple, same gun, the same place always.

What you do? I could care less. At 82 YOA, I have yet to shoot anyone, most likely never will, but if I am required to protect, me, or mine, I will do my best.

But 16 rounds of 9mm 147g Ranger T, ready to go, is not too bad.
 
The problem with statistics is that most people don't understand them beyond what the "average" (mean is the preferred statistical term) is. If the mean number of rounds expended is 3 (rounded up from 2.7), then the range of rounds fired is from 1 to some number probably larger than 3. The median (middle number of the series) or the mode (most frequent single number) are probably better measures. For some reason, one rarely sees these.

Take rounds fired in 5 hypothetical defense shooting events: 1, 1, 1, 3, 14 (Glock 19 at 20 yards for the last one). Total rounds fired = 20. Mean = 4, median = 1, mode = 1. The mean number, 4, is really not an accurate measure, 80% of the incidents were less than 4 rounds and the other 20% was much greater.
 
The average number of rounds fired by anyone over the course of a lifetime outside of the military and law enforcement in self defense is EXTREMELY close to zero and likely rounds to zero. I am certain it is far less than 1.

For the record no I did not find the actual statistical information. I believe the above statement holds enough face validity that we can work with it.

By this logic a 2 shot derringer is FAR more than anyone needs.
 
The average number of rounds fired by anyone over the course of a lifetime outside of the military and law enforcement in self defense is EXTREMELY close to zero and likely rounds to zero. I am certain it is far less than 1.
Click to expand...
True, and meaningless.

By this logic a 2 shot derringer is FAR more than anyone needs.
Click to expand...
That "logic" is flawed.

It is a fundamental tenet of risk management that one should base mitigation strategies, should the decision be to mitigate a risk, on what is likely to be needed should the risk materialize. The fact that the likelihood of occurrence may be remote or less than remote is simply one of the factors in deciding whether to mitigate the risk in the first place, or to accept the risk unmitigated.

Should one be faced with an immediate need to employ deadly force, a two shot derringer would not be considered "far more than anyone needs".

It might suffice, but probably not.
 
Applying some common sense, and 25 years experience as an LEO, I will go out a limb and say:

MOST armed encounters START as something else (usually a hand to hand fight, strongarm or cutting weapon robbery, etc.), which puts you at arms length, or closer.

MOST of what I've seen is the "fight" encounters. They escalate to an armed encounter AFTER one of the parties injects some type of weapon into the fight, or it turns into a 3 or 4 on 1 fight, and turns it into a deadly force encounter.

So, the short answer for civilian self defense - It will more likely than not be at arms length (or shorter). As far as round count, I've seen one shot and I've pistols run dry. Most that I have seen personally involve a round or two being fired. Then everyone is scurrying to find cover or trying to get away from the threat.

That's my REAL WORLD experience with civilian self defense incidents. I have yet to encounter a civilian that has had to use a gun for self defense beyond 3 yards and fire more than 3 or 4 rounds. It COULD happen, but I haven't seen it.
 
Applying some common sense, and 25 years experience as an LEO, I will go out a limb and say:

MOST armed encounters START as something else (usually a hand to hand fight, strongarm or cutting weapon robbery, etc.), which puts you at arms length, or closer.

MOST of what I've seen is the "fight" encounters. They escalate to an armed encounter AFTER one of the parties injects some type of weapon into the fight, or it turns into a 3 or 4 on 1 fight, and turns it into a deadly force encounter.

So, the short answer for civilian self defense - It will more likely than not be at arms length (or shorter). As far as round count, I've seen one shot and I've pistols run dry. Most that I have seen personally involve a round or two being fired. Then everyone is scurrying to find cover or trying to get away from the threat.

That's my REAL WORLD experience with civilian self defense incidents. I have yet to encounter a civilian that has had to use a gun for self defense beyond 3 yards and fire more than 3 or 4 rounds. It COULD happen, but I haven't seen it.
__________________

There we go! Thank you for that info and (goes without saying) thank you for what you do for the country and community.

But what will we keep doing? Practicing at 25 yards and carrying as much ammo as possible. LOL. I don't feel "right" without at least one reload. Two reloads is a bit much although at times I will carry a backup. Once, during my time at a local Stop & Rob, I carried a New York Reload (reload was my backup weapon).
 
I have yet to encounter a civilian that has had to use a gun for self defense beyond 3 yards and fire more than 3 or 4 rounds. It COULD happen, but I haven't seen it.
Click to expand...
Of the sixty-plus actual civilian defensive shooing incidents described by Tom Givens in Chapter 7 of Straight Talk on Armed Defense, 92 percent took place within three and seven yards, and 5 percent took place at greater than seven yards.

That leaves 3 percent at "arms length or shorter".

That is an extremely small data sample. It may serve to illustrate the probable range of distances, but that's about it.

One thing to consider: a person will rarely really constitute an imminent threat to another unless the distance is short; the defender will not have drawn before the threat is presented; and the time it takes to recognize the treat and to draw and fire at an attacker will likely leave very little distance.

Yet we do see numerous people practicing against stationary targets at a distance of seven yards.
 
During firearms training classes, I have had several instructors, that were LEO's, tell the class that the average self defense shooting happens within 3 yards, in about 3 seconds and requires about 3 rounds.
 
During firearms training classes, I have had several instructors, that were LEO's, tell the class that the average self defense shooting happens within 3 yards, in about 3 seconds and requires about 3 rounds.
Click to expand...
That is repeated often. No one can provide a basis for it.

Think about it: if you are shooting at someone within three yards, and he is moving toward you at anything grater than a yard and a half per second, how in the world could you fire three rounds?
 
I would go with what i thought myself stats would not come into it, one gun two mags. You will see arguments regarding how much ammo is enough, and with out fail in most situations only 2 shots are fired will be posted usually from the revolver guys. But having not enough ammo could get you killed, you will never have to much ammo within reason.
 
Last edited:
During firearms training classes, I have had several instructors, that were LEO's, tell the class that the average self defense shooting happens within 3 yards, in about 3 seconds and requires about 3 rounds.
Click to expand...

What if you are not in a average situation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top