Shooting at multiple opponents

Status
Not open for further replies.
Most BG's are cowards

If the 3 BG's are typical street thugs they are very likely to run away if one of their own gets shot. Of course you can't count on that, they could be on meth or crack, but most criminals are cowards by nature.

Having said that, the situation described would be a very fluid one. Action following opposing reaction. I would take out the most immediate theat then deal with the other 2 if they don't run. And keep moving, you're harder to hit.

Tex
 
With all the storys out there about how "one or two shots didn't drop the bad guy", what would be the best tactic to shooting at say three opponents attacking you?
Click to expand...


Run.

Seriously.

Three people cannot run full speed abreast for long. When they give chase, they will string out. Hop a fence. The fat guy in the back won't be able to get over it. Throw something in their path. The leader falls over it and gives up the chase. The middle guy gives up because the leader gives up. He didn't really want to have to deal with you anyway, so he acts like he is helping his friend while hurling curses in your direction.

At the very least, by running, you string your attackers out to where they must attack one at a time, and you can deal with them one at a time.

At best, you may get away with all your ammo.
 
XB, Running is the best way to get shot in the back. Controlled retreat while engaging the badguys is better. Retreat to the nearest suitable cover. Besides if I'm going to get shot, I would rather get shot fighting back. Before my lights go out I might be able to kill the sorry sucker who shot and killed me.
 
XB, Running is the best way to get shot in the back
Click to expand...
You are assuming they are armed with firearms, that they want to kill you, and they are excellent marksmen, able to hit a zig zagging target while on the move themselves. Yep they might get lucky. They might get lucky if you stay and fight too.

Remaining in a conflict is the best way to get killed, whether you are armed or your assailant is armed. Removing yourself from the conflict gives your adversary two choices........pursue you, or find another victim.

Most strong arm robbers will simply vacate the immediate area and find a more compliant victim elsewhere when a victim flees. They will not be targeting you personally. If you resist, you remain in the conflict. If you flee, a simple robber will not risk murder charges by shooting you in the back when he can find a more compliant victim easily.

As long as you have not been personally targeted by the mob or the Crips, there is a good chance your attacker will simply wait for a more willing victim. If you have been personally targeted by the mob, the Crips, or Al Quaida, then you should address that issue prior to venturing out on your own.

The goal when attacked on the street is to survive, not to be a big man.
 
As you move to cover the only real option you have to "spoil thier aim" (other than movement) is to shoot back

Yes, with multiple opponents you are likey to get shot

Most of the "tactics" discussed here center on you NOT getting shot

But just like you should NEVER count on a single hit to stop an attacker, your mindset can allow you to continue the fight even if you have been hit.
 
I think the 1-1-1 and then back will give the best defense/offense in this situation. We are all just thinking of our own speed and how fast we can get the kills, but we also need to take into consideration what the 1-1-1 shot will do to the BG speed. If they see that you are shooting at them all, they will duck, hide or slow down their own attack. But if they see you are focusing on one target, they will increase their attack.

I'm sticking with the 1-1-1.
 
I'd use my claymore first and then I would toss a couple of frag grenades that way just for good measure.(just kidding) but if I had them I would. 3 to 1 odds are not good I would run ( firing as you retreat)and take cover and engage from there.
 
"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."

Yes, that's true...but what about evaluation prior to drawing your weapon?(if the situation permits)

Just a thought...:rolleyes: ....
 
XB,
You are assuming they are armed with firearms, that they want to kill you, and they are excellent marksmen, able to hit a zig zagging target while on the move themselves. Yep they might get lucky. They might get lucky if you stay and fight too.
Click to expand...

Yes in this thread we all have been assuming that they had firearms and wanted to shoot us. You need to understand that when you turn your back on somebody who does decide to shoot at you, their accuracy is much better than if you retreat while firing back.

posted by obiwanAs you move to cover the only real option you have to "spoil thier aim" (other than movement) is to shoot back
Click to expand...
posted by delta3 to 1 odds are not good I would run ( firing as you retreat)and take cover and engage from there.
Click to expand...

Absolutely right. Never give your opponent a "free" shot especially at your back. Turns them into Wyatt Erp real fast.

Anthony,
"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."

Yes, that's true...but what about evaluation prior to drawing your weapon?(if the situation permits)

Just a thought... ....
Click to expand...

I asked a similar question. If I know what guns the guys have prior to the draw the shotgun man is getting it first. I'll take my chances with the pistol guys rather than giving the shotgun man the extra time. Glenn's response will be that just thinking about a firing order will take time(and I agree), time that is better spent shooting. I thought about it but decided that either way somebody is going to get extra time, either through the delay caused by thinking (as glenn suggests) or by the shooting order (the last guy will get extra time before his turn arrives). Given this fact, I personally want the shotgun knocked out first. I believe that it gives me the best chance of survival. JMHO.
 
Yes in this thread we all have been assuming that they had firearms and wanted to shoot us. You need to understand that when you turn your back on somebody who does decide to shoot at you, their accuracy is much better than if you retreat while firing back.
Click to expand...
No where in this scenerio did it say these attackers were armed with firearms. They might be armed with a knife, a pipe, fists. You assume a gun. You might be wrong.

Most people can run faster forwards than backwards. If you retreat straight backwards, you are presenting just as easy a target as you would running straight forwards. The key is erratic movement, not which way you are facing. I'll guarantee you that you cannot run down the street backwards, hopping fences backwards and shooting your gun accurately as fast as an assailant can catch up with you, or as fast as they can find cover and put a bullet in you when you fall over a fire hydrant.

If a person's only tool is a hammer, every fastner looks like a nail.
 
Answer to 3 on 1 Situation

MOVE!

Tim Burke, bclark1 and British Soldier all have the right idea. Quick lateral movement is most important, preferably toward cover and in a direction that will stack number two and/or number three behind number one so they are in each others way. Once you reach cover, continue to increase the distance between you and your adversaries as long as you can keep the cover between them and yourself. Unless they've already chosen to disengage, they will try to out flank you if you stay right up against it.
 
XB, The thread started with a "depends on weapon" tilt. It evolved into the discussion of which order is most approriate for engaging multiple firearm armed attackers. Either way I'm not a marathon runner and most people aren't either. You might run like a deer but I certainly don't. Running (as in sprinting) is not an option for many.

If you retreat straight backwards, you are presenting just as easy a target as you would running straight forwards.
Click to expand...

If you aren't returning fire this is true. If you are returning fire it is absolutely false.

The key is erratic movement, not which way you are facing.
Click to expand...

The key is "duress". Placing your oppenent/s under the threat of death, while gaining distance and seeking cover. Thats a common similarity among many professionals. The difference in shooting ability between someone with and without fear of death is said to be tremendous. Statistics agree that your ability goes down hill under stress.

Please don't mistake my not making a sprinting retreat with not being willing to make a hasty withdrawl prior or during any conflict. I will alway try to retreat if possible. Against armed (don't care how) attackers the best,safest, and correct way is to do so while engaging the them.
 
OK threegun. I agree to disagree with you.

FWIW if you examine what I have said which you disagree with and what Capt38 has said which you support, you may find that Capt38 and I are in agreement. :rolleyes:

But you win. OK?

Watch out for those fire hydrants.
 
Given these quotes for tim burke I just assumed that Capt38 was shooting as he moved since he said that tim had the right idea.

by tim burke In practice, I'd move, and take what shots were offered to me.
Click to expand...

by tim burkeIf you are facing 3 armed guys and you aren't an IPSC Grandmaster, then I'd recommend that you shoot on the move
Click to expand...

I don't want to be right simply because you no longer want to debate. Why not ask some of the gun "experts" if turning and running is better than control retreat while firing at you opponent. You do what you feel is correct........I just wanted to help. I was thankful when I was told the correct way. Some of us get upset when corrected........I apologize for upsetting you.
 
XB, Why do you carry? Since the vast majority of attacks end in the attacker simply leaving you unhurt, why carry. You yourself said that by simply running it will give the badguy.........
two choices........pursue you, or find another victim.
Click to expand...
So that is why I ask the question why do you carry?
 
3gun

I had to login just to post this: in my close to 2 years lurking here, I've found XB to be one of THE most valuble members of this board.

There's no reason to make it so personal. His advice is sound. You seem to agree also with the retreating part. Calm down. Why carry? Why, I'd think most everybody carries for the same reason, to protect oneself.

Sorry, but I got real irked when I saw you attacking XB.

Severian, logging off until I'm again moved to speak (it'll next be in the rifle section, as I'm planning to get some type of AR by this summer)
 
If I may........

XB, Why do you carry? Since the vast majority of attacks end in the attacker simply leaving you unhurt, why carry. You yourself said that by simply running it will give the badguy.........
Quote:
two choices........pursue you, or find another victim.

So that is why I ask the question why do you carry?
Click to expand...

For that 1 in a million chance that you cant outthink, outrun, or outplay an assailant. They are for saving your life not your dad-gum manhood.:rolleyes:
 
Thank you gentlemen.

I had written a rebuttal, but I have chosen not to waste my time. After a prior post review, it seems the ignore button is the proper response.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top