The Intimidation Factor Of a various hand guns...

W

Wildalaska

Moderator
This is a subject that I feel bears some study if a methadology could be worked out (and I have some ideas that would be of interest only to social scientists)....

But the issue is this..

We all KNOW that certain calibers are more "potent" than others. This is based on, minimally, a size hierarchy. All things being equal, the bigger the bulet the more the damage.

But considering that most defensive handgun aplications result in the reholstering (or repocketing, or return to storage) of the handgun, is there an intimidation factor inherent in the firearm LOOKS or design we can quantify?

Thus for example: Does the "cowboy" image of the West skew the decision making in attack/not attack or escalate/deescalate modes when folks are confronted with an SAA vis a vis Keltec. What about the image of the Glock as against a K Frame? This analysis would entail not only the CULTURAL aspects of the handgun in question, but the APPEARANCE itself...is a large caliber more intimidating thatn a small one? When and with who?

You would need a cross section of subjects, lots of guns....

Am I on to something here? Or am I just bored with L&P and since I am lucky to have 40 minutes of eyesight left for the day, just killin time :)

WildanybodywanttodoexperimentsAlaska
 
If they have a gun, and you have a gun, and you don't fire until they stop being a threat as soon as you draw, you're likely dead.

If they only have a knife and are a distance away or separated by barriers in the way, I would imagine that a .45 ACP train tunnel with the glitter of a hollowpoint in it might make them reconsider their next moves moreso than a nearly-obscured-in-hand tiny P3AT, yes. Just in an instinctive "Oh sh*t, that's gonna hurt" sense.

If they're not strung out on meth, of course.
 
I think you are on to something but I wouldnt let it influence my choice in a fighting gun. The look on your face or tone of voice might be a more powerfull element.
 
I read your "time for a new thread" on the other post and wanted to weigh in, but I think manedwolf beat me to it. A lot depends on the attacker.
That being said, I think any advantage one can gain is a plus. I'd no sooner step in front of a Toyota than a dump truck, but the latter just seems more intimidating.
 
Last edited:
For me I would be more afraid of an attacker with a very cheap gun. If some guy was to pull out a hi point or a kel tec I would expect them to shoot me and just throw the gun away. where as a person with a les baer is going to be too attached to the gun to get a new one.
 
You guys are letting your prejudices influence the experiment...think like a an agressor!

You think your average street criminla knows a Les baer? :)

WA
 
I am not a criminal and have never played on on tv but I'll play along.

If I was the aggressor and a victim pulled a gun on me, any gun big or small, chrome or black, revolver or semi...whatever, I would at least pause for an instant to decide as to whther or not to continue the aggressive action against the victim. ( drunks, meth heads and stone cold contract killers working for the mafia would be excluded from this sort of reasoning )

I do think that there could be a psychological advantage to a mid sized or fullsized handgun, over a ultracompact like a seecamp or NAA, but probably not much, if at all.

Now if we were doing a psychological comparision between a seecamp and a 12ga pump shotgun then the results would be significant, at least in my opinion.

take it for what's it worth.

Wild, what's that you got in that case picture you posted in the rifles section? Do you have a spare one I could have? I want one!!!

Mikeserioustacticalrifleenvyforwhatwildhasupinalaskajonestkd
 
I've asked major criminologists who have studied the DGUs and the literature from criminal predator interviews. I know them pretty well.

They said that they've never seen gun type as being a factor. Criminals will report being deterred by the possibility of a crime period.

There are two kinds of crime - economic and crimes of passion. In the former, the criminal wants the crime to go down with minimal trouble. Any gun is trouble and will have a deterrent effect.

In the latter, if you are nuts - hole size probably doesn't matter.

Since I know this stuff pretty well - there hasn't been a large sample study of this specifically but the general studies don't report a trend.
 
I don't know how or why 'intimidation' happens, but I know it exists.

For example, as a commercial sharpener, I put a mirror finish on my knife edges. As I wait on a client, we often discuss gun and knife related issues and sometimes they ask about defense.

I do know this. If they are ever is a 'stand off,' where the aggressor is drunk or a kid or maybe the guy is just trying to gather his courage, I tell my client to twist the knife a little bit in his hand.

By moving the knife, any ambient light will twinkle off of the polished edge.

For some reason, most people connect the 'twinkle' with 'very sharp.' I've seen clients actually jump backwards when I hand them their own knife back from sharpening or repair.

This little trick might get the aggressor to break off his attack and run. Maybe not 100% of the time, but it is another aspect for defense.
 
Since I know this stuff pretty well - there hasn't been a large sample study of this specifically but the general studies don't report a trend.
Click to expand...
I'll agree with Glenn here. I also know this stuff pretty well, and AFAIK there is nothing to indicate any real differences. FWIW, as a LEO everyone I interviewed that had been threatened with a gun described it as big, no matter if it was a 1911 or a .22 derringer.
 
Same thing...has there ever been a controlled study
Click to expand...
Not that I'm aware of, I doubt it, and I also question whether one can be done. Perception is based in large part on the situation, and thus the perception one gets in a controlled environment would probably be quite different than the perception in a surprise/stress environment.
 
Easy to make a scientifictest you know....start with reactions meausred by sensors then followed up with a questionaire....

WildprecededbyexcersizetogetstresslevelupetcAlaska
 
As far as a controlled study - there are ones that show that various types of weapons prime different levels of aggressive ideation.

However, to do a study on whether various weapons actually deter a crime would probably be impossible if you mean a classic experiment.

One certainly can get ratings of weapons appearance but so what? That may not transfer to actual usage under highly different stress levels and motivations as Dave said. As my friend Dave points out, people focus on the gun period.

The weapons focus studies indicate that people can describe the gun pretty well even when they don't know what else is going on. That's because it is a gun. And everyone is maxing out if the gun is pointed at them.

One might compare compliance rates in cities where police use different handguns but that wouldn't work. I doubt you could get reliable data.

Elmer Keith said a 22 is wimpy until it is pointed at you.

But we know that racking your shotgun makes someone poopy their pants!!

Ken, it's interesting but probably not much there for practical purposes with the range of normal carry guns.

"Well, punk - it's a 22 LR Smith and Wesson Model 63 and will drill a hole through your skull and the bullet will bounce around inside your brain and make you into a gork. Do you feel lucky!"

"Well, I do feel lucky as maybe the round will just slide around my skull bone and just zip open my scalp for a very messy head wound but survivable. Thus, Inspector Callahan - I'll reach for my shotgun and you just shoot me"

Pop, pop - ow, ow - what a mess - Pop in your eyeball, sucker! How about that? I'm blind, where's my shotgun? Pop in your ear, fool! Eat 22 LR brainstem.

Well, Harry - still carrying that Model 63 - Nope, trading it in for a SW 651 MAGNUM!

--- I didn't go to work today, as we can all see. GM
 
First off, I think the biggest deterent to crime is avoiding it all together and not looking like a victim. All my experiences with criminal studies show that most criminals are very good at picking up on who is alert and who is not and who appears to be defenseless and who does not. They will allow several people, that seem to be aware of their surroundings and able to quickly respond to a threat, pass without trouble until they find someone that fits the bill of an easier target.

So, once they have chosen their victim they usually do not expect much resistance or they expect to be able to take the victim down before they can react.

The sight of a gun, any gun, changes the scenerio very quickly. I believe that most any gun that is immediatly recognized by the attacker as a firearm will elicit the same spontaneous and involuntary reaction from the attacker. A bigger gun would probably have a better chance of being more quickly and easily identified as a deadly threat by the attacker and therefore have an advantage over a smaller, harder to see or recognize firearm.

Suddenly the attacker's feeling of advantage and safety has been shattered by the induction of an element that they had not taken into account. The fact that the victim they chose has the potential to hard or kill them.

That sudden realization can cause many different reactions in an attacker. It is mostly dependent on the idividual. That sudden realization causes them to shift from predator mode to survival mode. Fight or flight will kick in and how they then react is dependent on their own experiences, their own personality, and their own physical and mental fitness. They may run away, they may begin to bargain, they may grab the weapon and fight back, they may pull a weapon of their own.

That is when the duty of realizing how to now respond falls upon the gun holder. You do not shoot the fleeing man in the back but you have to be ready to fire if they go for your gun or pull their own.

So it all comes down to the fact that the bad guys ability the percieve the gun as a threat is more important that the actual caliber, design, or size of the firearm. All it takes is for them to realize that the balance of power has suddenly shifted for the victim to gain the necessary advantage. So the real advantage size and design gives you is the ability of the attacker to immediatly recognize the firearm as a deadly weapon. A dark colored or funky degined gun may be mistaken for something else where as a stainless revolver would be pretty easy to recognize.
 
I did my own take on this concept:

vaqhawk.jpg
 
OK, here's my $0.02 on the matter.

The BG doesn't care what gun you use. He is concerned with basically one thing, are you able and willing to use said firearm? I talk to convicted felons all the time and they KNOW if you are bluffing or not.

I don't bluff and I'm willing, I guess that's why I don't have too many problems. This all goes to the "Victim Selection Process". Anybody that carries a gun to scare away a BG or to intimidate one is asking for trouble. When I am placed in the situation of having to point a loaded gun at someone again you can be sure of one thing, I am willing and able to use it to STOP the threat that has forced me to clear leather.

That's my $0.02 on the matter.

Biker
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top