[jeiber]

While I enjoy reading things like this and appreciate the 9mm versus 45 arguments and such to me it boils down to the simple fact that there are so many variables that there is no such thing as do this and that will likely happen.

I have only been carrying for a short time, but even before I started carrying I knew that things are not like in the movies, there is no such thing as a sure kill shot where you can make it every time, don't get off the trigger until the threat is over and the first rule of gunfighting is don't be there.

You're a wise man. There are indeed so many variables, it's almost comical reading all the "How To" guides to armed self defense floating around the Internet forums. I think 99% of the people out there just need to focus on hitting their target without looking down the sights.

This guy and his "hand cannon" should have done more reading on the Internet. :-D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anhdphUxNVo&feature=related

J

 

[StPete_Steve]

Fist fight, gun fight....key word is fight. Fights aren't won by equipment grade or dexterity or strength....it's won by tactics and skill. The rest are just icing on that cake.

Anatomy is great here...knowing what to not hit is as important as what to hit. Best thing to do is take a defensive pistol class that uses airsoft or paint round pistols, so you can get used to responding to a moving, shooting target. That gives you an idea of what's practical and what's just fantasy for you at the moment.

 

[45Freak]

Fist fight, gun fight....key word is fight. Fights aren't won by equipment grade or dexterity or strength....it's won by tactics and skill. The rest are just icing on that cake.

Anatomy is great here...knowing what to not hit is as important as what to hit. Best thing to do is take a defensive pistol class that uses airsoft or paint round pistols, so you can get used to responding to a moving, shooting target. That gives you an idea of what's practical and what's just fantasy for you at the moment.

Anatomy is a big plus, know your target, what makes it tick, what can stop it and in how long. Eye and hand coordination is a must, train your hand to respond to your brain and sight signals. I focus on center upper torso quadrant, If you focus on exact center mass, then you are shooting at Xyphoid process which is low of vital organs except Aorta and Vena cava major blood vessels and lower spinal cord.

 

[Franklin]

This article is good stuff. If you read this and go look at the article Brownie posted about NYCPD shooting stats, it really paints a picture about point shooting, accuracy and rounds on target.
Good stuff

 

[diver454]

Jim,
This is by far some the the most sane and valid pieces of lit on self defense and scrubbing the theory mill. Excellent Sir... I have read alot of information from Marc MacYoung who along the same lines. disputes the common assumptions of street life and what not to do. Rule #1 Avoid if possible. His site is http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/. If I may, I would like to copy,paste and send your wisdom above to alot of people.

 

[PanBaccha]

Mr. Higginbotham is correct in that you must continue to shoot until the threat no longer exists, however I'll point out whether the threat lives or dies is immaterial as your objective is survival.

The ultimate objective is the instinct of self-preservation. I can't concern myself so much if the threat does not go down as I am more concern in reducing his dynamics to do me harm.

 

[ssmdive]

A very interesting read..... I'll throw a thought out there.

The closest to actual combat is either simunitions training (can use paint ball and airsoft if used correctly... Which means you can't have 200 rounds loaded) OR a decent workout can bring CLOSE to the same physical effects.

So, if you can find a range that will allow this, try doing a bunch of pushups or a few wind sprints and THEN sending rounds down range.

Having done this type of training, I can tell you that even a few seconds after you start, you can get used to the physical feeling and make adjustments. For this reason alone, I want a higher round count.... It will give me the time to adjust to the adrenalin dump while still being a participant in the fight.

There will NEVER be a perfect round..... And this is all about accepting the level of risk we are willing to take. A .380 is better than nothing.

To me, it always comes down to round count, not round size.

 

[bttbbob]

FBI Miami Shootout
April 11, 1986: Pinecrest, Fla.
A close-quarters gun battle involving eight FBI agents and two heavily armed suspects during a felony stop in southern Miami, this incident led FBI Firearms Training Unit Director John Hall to conclude that the carnage was primarily "an ammo failure."
The FBI's after-action report solidified Hall's belief, because it showed that Michael Platt and William Matix—an Army Ranger and Army MP of the 101st Airborne, respectively—sustained fatal wounds yet continued to bring the fight to the agents. The agents had fired .38 Special and 9mm rounds from revolvers and semi-auto pistols, which lacked adequate stopping power, FBI officials said afterward. Only Special Agent Edmundo Mireles deployed a long gun—his Remington 870 pump-action shotgun.
One bullet, in particular, was singled out as the "shot that failed." Fired by Special Agent Jerry Dove, this 9mm bullet struck Platt's right forearm, entered his right ribcage, and stopped an inch from his heart. Platt survived to fight for four more minutes, eventually killing agents Dove and Benjamin Grogan.
Matix had also apparently been taken out of the fight early with a .38 Special +P round fired by Special Agent Gordon McNeill from his S&W Model 19 that struck Matix in the face and contused his brain. According to Dr. French Anderson's "Forensic Analysis of the April 11, 1986, FBI Firefight," the wound "must have been devastating." After he lay unconscious for more than a minute, Matix became alert, left his car, and joined Platt in agent Grogan's and agent Dove's vehicle.
Following the tragedy, the FBI phased out revolvers and .38 Special ammunition. Agents were also eventually issued H&K MP5 submachine guns for high-risk encounters.
"The FBI went looking for a pistol round with deeper penetration," says Dave Spaulding, a retired Ohio police lieutenant and pistol instructor. "It's not important that you hit something, it's important that you hit something important."
The FBI's adoption of 10mm Auto to attain greater stopping power popularized the then-obscure round. The FBI later switched to a subsonic load (the "10mm FBI") to better tame the full-powered 10mm that delivered about 38,000 pounds psi, says Ayoob, who's written extensively about the incident.
Later, the FBI switched to the .40-caliber S&W that is now the most prevalent duty ammo in law enforcement. The .40-caliber provides similar ballistics to a 10mm in a shorter casing.


I think this should help on the subject of ballistics. This gunfight alone, was studied by more law enforcement agencies than any other. Writings have been made by M. Ayoob, Dr. Anderson and many others.......This is one of 5 gunfights that changed Law Enforcement thoughts on gunfights forever. Please read this link to Police Magazine......http://www.policemag.com/Channel/Pa...5-Gunfights-That-Changed-Law-Enforcement.aspx

No matter what, its shot placement and hard hits that drop badguys.

Just my .02

BTTBBOB

 

[brownie]

FBI Miami Shootout
April 11, 1986: Pinecrest, Fla.
A close-quarters gun battle involving eight FBI agents and two heavily armed suspects during a felony stop in southern Miami, this incident led FBI Firearms Training Unit Director John Hall to conclude that the carnage was primarily "an ammo failure."
The FBI's after-action report solidified Hall's belief, because it showed that Michael Platt and William Matix—an Army Ranger and Army MP of the 101st Airborne, respectively—sustained fatal wounds yet continued to bring the fight to the agents. The agents had fired .38 Special and 9mm rounds from revolvers and semi-auto pistols, which lacked adequate stopping power, FBI officials said afterward. Only Special Agent Edmundo Mireles deployed a long gun—his Remington 870 pump-action shotgun.
One bullet, in particular, was singled out as the "shot that failed." Fired by Special Agent Jerry Dove, this 9mm bullet struck Platt's right forearm, entered his right ribcage, and stopped an inch from his heart. Platt survived to fight for four more minutes, eventually killing agents Dove and Benjamin Grogan.
Matix had also apparently been taken out of the fight early with a .38 Special +P round fired by Special Agent Gordon McNeill from his S&W Model 19 that struck Matix in the face and contused his brain. According to Dr. French Anderson's "Forensic Analysis of the April 11, 1986, FBI Firefight," the wound "must have been devastating." After he lay unconscious for more than a minute, Matix became alert, left his car, and joined Platt in agent Grogan's and agent Dove's vehicle.
Following the tragedy, the FBI phased out revolvers and .38 Special ammunition. Agents were also eventually issued H&K MP5 submachine guns for high-risk encounters.
"The FBI went looking for a pistol round with deeper penetration," says Dave Spaulding, a retired Ohio police lieutenant and pistol instructor. "It's not important that you hit something, it's important that you hit something important."
The FBI's adoption of 10mm Auto to attain greater stopping power popularized the then-obscure round. The FBI later switched to a subsonic load (the "10mm FBI") to better tame the full-powered 10mm that delivered about 38,000 pounds psi, says Ayoob, who's written extensively about the incident.
Later, the FBI switched to the .40-caliber S&W that is now the most prevalent duty ammo in law enforcement. The .40-caliber provides similar ballistics to a 10mm in a shorter casing.


I think this should help on the subject of ballistics. This gunfight alone, was studied by more law enforcement agencies than any other. Writings have been made by M. Ayoob, Dr. Anderson and many others.......This is one of 5 gunfights that changed Law Enforcement thoughts on gunfights forever. Please read this link to Police Magazine......http://www.policemag.com/Channel/Pa...5-Gunfights-That-Changed-Law-Enforcement.aspx

No matter what, its shot placement and hard hits that drop badguys.

Just my .02

BTTBBOB

:thumsup

 

[Judgment Training]

At Judgment Training Institute in Vero Beach, it is stunning how many first-time virtual-reality scenario students engage a threat with only two rounds. Range practice is a hard habit to break. Our computer is set to have any scenario end with a bad-guy collapse with a random number of COM strikes--rarely one.

 

[brownie]

At Judgment Training Institute in Vero Beach, it is stunning how many first-time virtual-reality scenario students engage a threat with only two rounds. Range practice is a hard habit to break. Our computer is set to have any scenario end with a bad-guy collapse with a random number of COM strikes--rarely one.

That isn't surprising at all. Sometimes two's enough, other times it's not. What your statement tells me is that most think two rds was/is enough. It may or may not be, and if the scenarios demanded more than 2, there's lessons there which is exactly why we train to begin with, to learn lessons from mistakes/errors in judgement that we then may not have to make on the street in real time.

 

[PaulT]

Uncle Sam was kind enough to train me, train me and then train me some more. We practiced 2 to "center mass", 1 to the head. In a military situation this is an acceptable way to engage a target. In the civilian world, you have to think before that type of engagement. The aftermath of any shooting is the problem. And no, I am not advocating that anyone disengage before the threat is removed. I practice 2 to center mass and then keep my weapon on target for immediate follow up shot. If needed, that becomes the 1 to the head. The moral of the story, keep your weapon downrange and on target until the threat has been eliminated. Obviously each scenario is different. Multiple threats would require immediate termination of each threat in succession. (you don't want to have to re-engage)

 

[brownie]

Uncle Sam was kind enough to train me, train me and then train me some more. We practiced 2 to "center mass", 1 to the head. In a military situation this is an acceptable way to engage a target. In the civilian world, you have to think before that type of engagement. The aftermath of any shooting is the problem. And no, I am not advocating that anyone disengage before the threat is removed. I practice 2 to center mass and then keep my weapon on target for immediate follow up shot. If needed, that becomes the 1 to the head. The moral of the story, keep your weapon downrange and on target until the threat has been eliminated. Obviously each scenario is different. Multiple threats would require immediate termination of each threat in succession. (you don't want to have to re-engage)

With multiples, boarding house rules apply IMO. You don't want to be putting 2-3 in the first two only to have the 3rd tap you before you can get to them for spending too much time on the first two. You may not have to re-engage either or may have to engage each again, but I'm not wasting time to get lead on each and damage them all thereby reducing my chances of getting hit to begin with.

And instead of two and assess for one perp as an SOP response, shoot them to the ground and shoot em some more if they are still a viable threat in any way [ moving ].

Uncle sam? If I only knew what uncle taught me in the Corps, I'd be dead now several times over.

 

[Scouse]

1. Its not that complicated....put as many rounds .22 - 44mag on target with (COM being you POA), as quickly as possible until the fight is over.....

2. Brits STILL train 2 X COM and if no result move to head shots...

3. I guess I went through a sex change without knowing it!, as I have carried and continue to carry a 9mm for most of my life. POI and tactics always out ways size of projectile.

4. Nice article though, even with some of the miss-information.

5. My 3 rules for a gunfight:
Have a gun that works.
Cheat.
Win.

Agree.

A Pistol that ALWAYS works! Any Ammo type. Carry a spare magazine (in case it stops working!) pessimist?

 

[Scouse]

With multiples, boarding house rules apply IMO. You don't want to be putting 2-3 in the first two only to have the 3rd tap you before you can get to them for spending too much time on the first two. You may not have to re-engage either or may have to engage each again, but I'm not wasting time to get lead on each and damage them all thereby reducing my chances of getting hit to begin with.

And instead of two and assess for one perp as an SOP response, shoot them to the ground and shoot em some more if they are still a viable threat in any way [ moving ].

Uncle sam? If I only knew what uncle taught me in the Corps, I'd be dead now several times over.

Brownie, a buddy and I did a lot of training, looking for the best way to shoot multiple bad guys (Man sized cardboard targets, 3 of)

Swinging left to right, right to left. Targets 7m away, 1m apart.

For whatever reason, single hits on each target! Had lots of misses, and/or poor, peripheral hits! Swinging to fast?

The best combination, two on each! Holding still for first shot, because you know you are going to fire more shots?

I don't know? Try it. Against the clock.

 

[brownie]

Brownie, a buddy and I did a lot of training, looking for the best way to shoot multiple bad guys (Man sized cardboard targets, 3 of)

Swinging left to right, right to left. Targets 7m away, 1m apart.

For whatever reason, single hits on each target! Had lots of misses, and/or poor, peripheral hits! Swinging to fast?

The best combination, two on each! Holding still for first shot, because you know you are going to fire more shots?

I don't know? Try it. Against the clock.

Got a really great friend who's a field investigator/agent with ICE/EPA in Ohio. He likes two on each as well. Here's the problem I see with that. As fast as he is, and likely you are, his splits run .20 seconds. That's .40 seconds added before the 3rd guy gets a helping of his own lead injection. It allows that 3rd person more time than necessary. Even a .17 split turns into a little over a third of a second to get a round on me while I'm working on the first two. Any of them may need more, or not, but they've been damaged if they need a second helping and thus aren't as likely to be as viable at putting lead into me thus decreasing the odds of being hit further.

We used to run a 3-3-3 drill at 12 feet with bg's 3 feet apart for time [ from the buzzer, open carried sidearm on the belt ]. In the two on each, best times were averaging about 2.1 seconds from the draw, yet I could put on each on those same three bg's averaging 1.4-1.6 seconds. Transitions were actually faster than splits most of the time. When time is of the essence, I'll take the reduced times to respond and then deal with anyone who needs seconds, but that's just me. There's NO way the fed friend could match the times with two on each. He still preferred two on each though.

 

[Scouse]

Got a really great friend who's a field investigator/agent with ICE/EPA in Ohio. He likes two on each as well. Here's the problem I see with that. As fast as he is, and likely you are, his splits run .20 seconds. That's .40 seconds added before the 3rd guy gets a helping of his own lead injection. It allows that 3rd person more time than necessary. Even a .17 split turns into a little over a third of a second to get a round on me while I'm working on the first two. Any of them may need more, or not, but they've been damaged if they need a second helping and thus aren't as likely to be as viable at putting lead into me thus decreasing the odds of being hit further.

We used to run a 3-3-3 drill at 12 feet with bg's 3 feet apart for time [ from the buzzer, open carried sidearm on the belt ]. In the two on each, best times were averaging about 2.1 seconds from the draw, yet I could put on each on those same three bg's averaging 1.4-1.6 seconds. Transitions were actually faster than splits most of the time. When time is of the essence, I'll take the reduced times to respond and then deal with anyone who needs seconds, but that's just me. There's NO way the fed friend could match the times with two on each. He still preferred two on each though.

Why I like the two on each, much better hits! The closest hits in a people situation, not targets equal distance apart, as in one guy in the center of the room, closest, then two more at the doorway. As in one at say, 3 yards, then two next to each other, off to one side, 7 yards away.

So a blinding fast double tap, looking over sights, the transition to full sights for the other two. What say you?

 

[brownie]

Why I like the two on each, much better hits! The closest hits in a people situation, not targets equal distance apart, as in one guy in the center of the room, closest, then two more at the doorway. As in one at say, 3 yards, then two next to each other, off to one side, 7 yards away.

So a blinding fast double tap, looking over sights, the transition to full sights for the other two. What say you?

All my hits are COM [ inside an 8" circle ] and that's all I look for with speed on multiples. If you find you don't have to shoot one or more twice [ which is probable based on odds ] you've decreased your time to the 3rd guy. If you have to go back to one and give him more lead, he's already been damaged and that increases your chances of errant rounds from him on yourself to boot.

Now, if they are spread out at different distances, I might be starting with the closest with 1/2 hip as it's faster than bringing the gun to eye level and unnecessary and then going to point shoulder while transitioning to another and may finish with qk pistol for the furthest perp.

 

[Scouse]

All my hits are COM [ inside an 8" circle ] and that's all I look for with speed on multiples. If you find you don't have to shoot one or more twice [ which is probable based on odds ] you've decreased your time to the 3rd guy. If you have to go back to one and give him more lead, he's already been damaged and that increases your chances of errant rounds from him on yourself to boot.

Now, if they are spread out at different distances, I might be starting with the closest with 1/2 hip as it's faster than bringing the gun to eye level and unnecessary and then going to point shoulder while transitioning to another and may finish with qk pistol for the furthest perp.

We are more or less thinking at the same speed! Slight differences.

Trying to call for Paramedics/Police, ears not working well at all! You with a reloaded and holstered Glock, no idea when you did that!

"Operator, I am wearing a grey wool sweater, black shoes, and a white ball cap, I have a white beard, and I am white" "I can not hear well." "I will repeat, hope you can hear me"