Shooting at multiple opponents

Status
Not open for further replies.
Move and COVER (and I don't mean Elbows Over Ears.) Fire while moving, even though it reduces your chances of lethal hits. The one time I had to take on multiple shooters, I had the advantage of some BIG rocks to hide behind. I still had to come up to shoot back, however. Sphincter Cramp time. We were pistols against M1s until I slithered back to the car for the 03A3.

Pops
 
Glenn, Theoretically the last guy in your one shot each sweep has the best chance of putting accurate lead in your direction. I would much rather have the guy with the weapon most difficult to hit me with take that shot.

The time you estimated should have already been eliminated having already made the decision to fire on all three.

In the close call that I have had (thankfully I didn't have to shoot) my brain processed so many things in under 1/2 second that it was incredible. My draw at that time was sub 1/2 second from buzzer to gun clearing the counters at work. When a customer pulled what later turned out to be a bb pistol from under his coat and pointed it at a coworker before asking if he could pawn it (admittedly to scare to coworker) I drew my gun, thought how big the gun was that this guy is pulling, thought about front sight, thought how skinny this butthole was pulling his gun and feared missing, and finally realized that the gun was fake before firing. Everything was in slow motion to me despite my partner saying that I looked normal. If I looked normal then everything was over in just over 1/2 second because I didn't make it to his shoulder area before ending the encounter. Some have said that the brain in times of trouble shuts down unnecessary systems and speeds up others. I now believe it as well. I also belief that the slow motion feeling is mealy your brain processing information much faster then you are used to. Giving the feeling that things are taking to darned long.

Maybe you are correct I don't know but man did I do an aweful lot of thinking and quick. My little pea was smokin afterwards LOL,
 
How many magazines do you carry? A Bandolier full?
Click to expand...

I don't carry....yet! But why not have a spare mag. Is that unheard of? Everyone here only carries one mag, so when your out your out? Doesn't sound to prepared to me. Maybe I am just crazy. I DO admit that "tactic" is not great for three or more people. But if you do have to shoot multiple rounds at the first guy why not pop in a new mag so that there are no surprises when on of his buddies pulls his gun.
 
3gun: you're right about the slow motion effect really being your brain running faster than it ordinarily does. It's from adrenaline.

So you have a lot of thinking time you wouldn't imagine you'd have in a second or two.

That's why training, knowing the law, deciding the whether-to-shoot issues are so important. This super processing power should be used to make tactical decisions, not strategic ones.

That's one of the reasons I like the scenarios that get posted, often by Doug.38. Sometimes they make me think through things I hadn't before, and probably should have settled before the shooting starts.
 
Of course confrontation is last resort!!!!

Personally, I would double-tap the closest threat first...all the while keeping in mind that the remaining BG's will be closing the distance rapidly...and address each accordingly.

Solve a potential armor problem...Practice double-tap head shots!

After all the survivors tell the tale...if the BG's don't survive:rolleyes: ...
 
I would put one in each, then repeat. One hit is better than no hit, I think
too many of us think of stopping power in terms of a lightning bolt, better to
think of it like pulling the plug on an electric motor-it will run for a few seconds but will shut down PDQ. Granted in a gunfight everything looks different-the muzzle of a .25ACP pointed at you looks like a 12 gauge and time seems to slow down.
 
Stephen Wenger's book I believe addresses this question. He is also a regualr poster on www.Packing.org

The bottom line is you want to get one in each ASAP. At least if they are not down they are seriously hinderred. He documents at least one officer who, when facing multiple attackers, duly applied two tot he first while the second killed him. It may only take a second or less to put that second round into the first target but you are assuming you have that time. You want to even the odds up as fast as possible while minimizing the chance that you get shot. For that reason you apply one to each and then repeat as needed. MOVING would also be a very good idea.
 
Anyone time a draw and fire on 3 targets or a 1-1-1 ? I saw a video posted on sightless in philly and the guys shot a 2-2-2 drill in 2.14 seconds. Thats pretty good if the hit were decent. I'm curious as to the difference in time.

We all know that putting an adversary under duress will see his skills erode in a hurry so maybe a 1-1-1 is better than a 2-2-2 against three armed opponents. I'm gonna start a thread with just that question.
 
You cannot speed up basic object recognition times. A lot of the slowing down effects people report are after the fact memory reconstructions.

Novices in the world of visual perception don't understand the reaction time processing models.

I will repeat, that if you are faced with multiple opponents, your best bet is to starting shooting rather than wasting a 1000 milliseconds for evaluation of guns. Shoot one and move on.
 
With the emphasis on MOVING

There are too many variables for any hard/fast rules

Moving off the line of fire (hopefully towards cover) will pay the most dividends

As for those that are double tapping each one.....how do you like that revolver now?:D
 
You cannot speed up basic object recognition times.
Click to expand...
Not only can you not speed it up, I suspect once you have a definitive threat you will have a difficult time even assessing the other 2 until you have somehow dealt with the first threat. The oft cited tendency toward tunnel vision is not necessarily affected by multiple potential targets.
A lot of the slowing down effects people report are after the fact memory reconstructions.
Click to expand...
How do they know this? I've experienced the slowing down of time, and the novelty of it registered on me as I was experiencing it. I've also experienced gaps in my memory after the fact... and I'm sure that is ripe for the brain to "create" the filler to smooth out the memory.
 
Your capabilities effect the correct answer for you...

You know, you can evaluate the original question somewhat objectively if you know what you are capable of doing.
For instance, let's say you are capable of a 1.4 second draw, .2 second splits on the same target, and .3 second splits transitioning to another target.
If you go 2-2-2, it will take you 1.4+0.2+0.3+0.2+0.3= 2.4 seconds before you get the first shot on the 3rd target. If you go 1-1-1, it will take you 1.4+0.3+0.3= 2 seconds to get a hit on the third target. Now, what percentage of BGs will be incapable of making the shot in 2 seconds, but can make it in 2.4 seconds? Probably a significant percentage, and if one of them is 3rd in line, you are going to regret going 2-2-2. Now, if you are a speed demon, and you can do a 0.5 second draw, 0.15 splits, and 0.18 transitions, you are looking at 1.16 vs 0.86 seconds. You can probably beat all 3, regardless of how you approach it. And, if your draw is 4 seconds, it probably doesn't matter how you do it either, because all 3 of them will likely get hits on you.
 
Big issue is what gun are you using to mitigate this threat? If I'm using a 5 shot snub I can't put two rounds in each BG without a reload. I'll have to do 1-1-1 and then do a tactical reload (ditching two live rounds but trading for 5). I'm more likely to try a reload if I'm behind cover than if I'm not. Say one drops then I'll do a 1-1 or 2 in the remaining. Then the issue of a reload is forced.
 
Tim B, You just hit my dilemma square on the head. The trade off of .0something secondfor the higher potential that badguy's one and two will be neutralized. If I shoot only a 1-1-1 and badguy #1 (the closest) doesn't stop is that better or worst that the extra tenth's given to badguy #3. Tough choice.
 
I don't count on 1 shot (or even 2) neutralizing a target. However, I'd like to think that a hit on a target disrupts its ability to shoot back significantly more than it just hearing shots being fired. Consequently, since I doubt I could get multiple hits on all 3 before any one of them can return fire, I'd settle for 1-1-1, in theory. In practice, I'd move, and take what shots were offered to me.
 
There is only one absolute to this question. PAY ATTENTION. Don't get yourselves into a nasty situation like this. Watch what goes on around you, watch people. Use streetsmarts and so forth.
 
Reaction times are pretty standard items of study as are perceptions of time. The time it takes to shift attention from target to target is about 40 msec. The time it takes to move the gun off target to next target is going to be fairly constant in most situations. If anything, with more targets, your time to more to the next target usually slows down a touch. Tim has a good analysis.

I've experienced the crystal clarity of an incident and it's clarity sometimes increases after the fact. I think we are mistaking a focus of attention for a time slowing. No one looks like they are moving in slow motion like the movies. People sometimes estimate event filled times as longer, but that doesn't mean things really were going in slow motion.

My comment is that throwing in the often said shoot the most dangerous person first is going to really slow you down if you did not evaluate and plan the sequence of fire before you start to shoot. If you are surprised, just start shooting one at a time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top