How fast should you shoot

This is worth a read. If you google: why one carry 145 rounds of ammo ... you will get a number of articles on this incident some which vary in some very minor detail. The crux of the matter, the actual shootout, are consistent ......

https://www.policeone.com/police-he...ne-cop-carries-145-rounds-of-ammo-on-the-job/

You shoot until the threat stops and as fast as you can keep your shots on the intended target. You don't get to determine the parameters of the fight, nor do Marquis of Queensbury rules apply.
When the threat stops being a threat, you must stop applying force. Until then, you've been dealt the hand of dealing with it. Your gunfight, your choice on how to deal with it. Me? I'd rather put rounds on center of mass as quickly as possible and reduce the threat as quickly as possible.

RPZ, without referring to past cases where husband posting on internet forum of what his wife might do in a defensive shooting situation, I do not believe we will determine whether someone else's posted words will change a justified shooting to not justified shooting.

So let's get back to the OP discussion of how fast we should shoot.

Peace.

end the threat, right now. you don't have time to mess around if your life is in danger. in the first video posted by BDS the bad guy was shot at very close range with a revolver, and ran away only to come back. between low capacity, misses and a lack of a CNS hit, the bad guy was up and fighting for over 1 minute. Luckily the revolver was empty when he took it from her.

what stops a threat is overwhelming the body or disabling the body with CNS or major bone hits. 3, 4, or 6 rounds of 9mm to the center mass is not inappropriate IMO. most carbine courses and defensive rifle tactics use "double taps/controlled or hammered pairs. nobody seems to question if i controlled pair of 5.56 rds is "too much" although at close quarters the round is quite devastating.

now, I agree with the articles posted that you own every round you fire, I would not advocate trying to double tap a target at 20yds with a subcompact carry gun. shoot as fast as your skills allow for accuracy you are comfortable to with.

I do not focus on speed being a priority, I never have. I allow speed to be a natural byproduct of fluidity and economy of movement. I am as fast as my capabilities will allow but no matter how fast I am, it doesn't much matter.. if I miss. I think its silly to focus on speed when "speed" has not likely been the deciding factor in many armed confrontations since the 1880's. I don't say that to suggest that people should endeavor to be slower but I simply feel that worrying about speed is probably a misplaced concern ( generally).

People always want to focus on speed of draw... how about speed of recognizing danger to begin with, speed of making the decision to act and taking action. How fast are you if you are conflicted with the entire prospect of managing a dangerous situation? Speed comes from many places and not always from out of the holster.

rwilson1 said:

Should you shoot as fast as you can until there is no longer a threat?

Click to expand...

As fast as I accurately can (because I am responsible for every bullet) until there is no longer an imminent threat.

I feel like the premise is flawed for a few reasons.

1. We cannot expect the bad guy to respond to being shot (or shot at) in any particular way.

2. Also, I doubt anyone under the threat of death is going to be concerned with how fast they were shooting. They just shoot. With good training, they shoot with at least the front sight on target.

3. We cannot know how many rounds will stop the attack.

To me, that means that it would be in our best interest to put as many rounds on target as fast as possible.

No one should be blindly firing in the general direction of an attacker in public.

But I think it benefits the person being attacked to put lots of rounds on target as fast as possible.

"Smooth is fast"; attributed to someone whose name I can not recall. The masters of speed, people like Bob Munden, more recently Gerry Miculek, will tell you they practiced slow, using economy of motion (as mentioned by Water Garden) refining their technique. They then slowly - slowly - increased speed while maintaining their desired level of accuracy. Fluid motion - uninterrupted (Water Garden).

This is the way to real and effective speed.

Col. John ("Jeff") Cooper spoke of the concept of the "Coarse short range practicioner". This applies to short ranges only, and involves a flash sight picture where shots are directed into center of mass, upper torso. The desired results are fast as possible hits in the COM.

Of course shooting at a silhouette target(s) may not reflect an actual encounter. Your target(s) may be only partially visible behind cover. Or obscured partially by concealment. Here you must be able to think on your feet and chose your aiming point on the target - the difference between "shooting someone" as opposed to just "shooting at someone".

Water Garden said:

I allow speed to be a natural byproduct of fluidity and economy of movement.

I am as fast as my capabilities will allow but no matter how fast I am, it doesn't much matter.. if I miss.

Click to expand...

Very good points.

Whenever new match shooters started at my USPSA club, we emphasized smoothness and efficiency of movements and told them speed will improve with deliberate practice.

After I reached 80-90 percentile on Limited division with two factory stock Glock 22 (This was done on a dare by my defensive shooting instructor/USPSA RSO/Range owner where I helped out part-time), seasoned regional shooters told me to go beyond "Shot Calling" and pursue "Zen of shooting" by looking past the front sight and see the holes "appear" at will on targets. They also told me I wasn't actually "competing" with anyone else but myself and my own fastest stage times and that if I wasn't improving, I was stagnating regardless how well/poor my competitors were doing.

My defensive shooting instructor who also taught PD/SD SWAT teams, taught point shooting and now when I help new shooters, I start them out with front sight flash and also point shooting without using the sights. I have them simplify different shooting motions (Stance, grip, trigger control, follow-up shots, etc.) as one fluid motion with focus of hitting the POA. Once they synchronize POA with POI, they are often surprised how fast they can get shots on target, even without using the sights. After they master consistently hitting POA, I have them practice shooting faster and faster at multiple targets.

This repost from Competition Shooting category is pertinent to shooting fast and accurate - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...hange-split-times.832796/page-3#post-10774062

Rob Leatham explains speed AND accuracy and demonstrates most people are capable of sub 0.2 second reaction time. At 3:20 minute mark of video below he states, "Why would you ever pull the trigger slowly?" and explains the arts of "Jerking the trigger WITHOUT moving the pistol".

I tell people to dry fire while watching the front sight and buy pistols (especially match pistols) that do not move the front sight when the hammer/striker is released (so you start out with inherently more accurate pistol out of the box). I went through several pistols before I selected my last Glock for purchase. When the range staff became curious, I showed what I was looking for and range staff was surprised just how much front sight jumped/moved when the striker was released on pistols out of the box. Also when practicing dry fires or before shooting at the range, practice until you can release the hammer/striker without moving the front sight (Now you know where those low shots/flyers come from - shooter input on trigger). If your pistol still moves/jumps the front sight, then you may need to consider a trigger job or polish.

Rob emphasizes process used to shoot fast and accurate at 4 yards does not change regardless how far you are (Think about that as that is what I realized when told to "Shoot past the front sight" and "Zen" of making holes appear on target. When you practice until double taps appear at will anywhere on target, you move closer to shooting accurate and fast so you can focus more on other aspects of shooting a stage like round count, mag change, foot work, etc.).

When asked how far to push oneself, Rob says to practice until the point of failure. At 5:25 minute mark of video, Rob demonstrates accuracy deteriorating independent of speed. He comments when accuracy starts to suffer, we commonly tell the shooter to slow down - No, says Rob as speed has nothing to do with POI moving away from POA (Think hard about that). Instead of slowing down, we need to work on how to "jerk" or pull/depress the trigger without moving the pistol.

We cannot expect the bad guy to respond to being shot (or shot at) in any particular way.

Click to expand...

sure you can.. its call the laws of probabilities. Certain judgments and decisions are routinely based on probabilities each and every day. The benefit of training, knowledge, experience and quantified data is that you can reasonably expect certain outcomes when certain conditions exist. Having a reasonable expectation is not the same as proclaiming an absolute. A seed will not 'always" grow simply because is has the right amount of soil, light and moisture. The same goes for responses to combat conditions. A badguy may not always respond in the way you expect but that does not mean that you ignore or reject thousands of years of strategics which are based in part on universally accepted probabilities. I politely disagree with a suggestion that we cannot expect a badguy to respond in a certain way to a stimulus, I think you can if you have the necessary experience. You may not always be right but nevertheless, reasonable expectations and anticipations can all be part of a well developed strategy.

Water Garden said:

sure you can.. its call the laws of probabilities. Certain judgments and decisions are routinely based on probabilities each and every day. The benefit of training, knowledge, experience and quantified data is that you can reasonably expect certain outcomes when certain conditions exist. Having a reasonable expectation is not the same as proclaiming an absolute. A seed will not 'always" grow simply because is has the right amount of soil, light and moisture. The same goes for responses to combat conditions. A badguy may not always respond in the way you expect but that does not mean that you ignore or reject thousands of years of strategics which are based in part on universally accepted probabilities. I politely disagree with a suggestion that we cannot expect a badguy to respond in a certain way to a stimulus, I think you can if you have the necessary experience. You may not always be right but nevertheless, reasonable expectations and anticipations can all be part of a well developed strategy.

Click to expand...

I am not willing to bet my life on probabilities and reasonable expectations.

There is waaaaaaaaay too many instances (youtube it) of people expecting the bad guy to react a certain way only to end up in serious trouble when the bad guy steps out of choreography.

I will keep shooting until the threat is stopped.

I figure to put as many rounds on the target as fast as I can to reduce the amount of time that my attacker is in the fight or capable of fighting.
The longer it takes for me to stop the bad guy, the longer he has to do me harm.

s

Corpral_Agarn said:

I am not willing to bet my life on probabilities and reasonable expectations.

There is waaaaaaaaay too many instances (youtube it) of people expecting the bad guy to react a certain way only to end up in serious trouble when the bad guy steps out of choreography.

I will keep shooting until the threat is stopped.

I figure to put as many rounds on the target as fast as I can to reduce the amount of time that my attacker is in the fight or capable of fighting.
The longer it takes for me to stop the bad guy, the longer he has to do me harm.

Click to expand...

nobody ever said that you shouldn't... and I didn't see where I said to ignore what is happening in the moment. My issue with what you said was that you seemingly made a very broad statement which in my view was much to broad for me to agree with. If you want to stand by what you have said, thats fine. I have already outlined my issue with it. good luck

george burns said:

Neutralized does not mean emptying a 16 or 17 round magazine into someone. You will find yourself in very big debt, if you own anything of value. Even cops who use excessive force get in deep crap. There is no reason that you need that many shots to stop a threat, unless you are missing the target completely, or the guy has on Body armor.

Click to expand...

I have known a man who was hit 8 times with an M1 rifle and survived. I have seen a man take multiple hits from an M16 -- and made the mistake of stepping over his body. He tried to shoot me in the back, and was finally killed by a man following me. I have a friend who was a medical examiner who told of a man who was shot in the heart with a charge of buckshot -- the heart was shredded. The man walked half a block and sat down on his front step and died there.

"Neutralized" means -- "unable to employ deadly force against you." It has nothing to do with the number of rounds fired. Some people may be neutralized with a single shot, others may take the whole magazine or more.

If you decide to train for surviving a deadly encounter, self defense, family and or home, there are a few things you should consider to employ in your training. The first thing you need to realize, once you become scared, heart rate increases, panic, ect, your shooting ability takes a massive dump! Ex. Jog 100 yards then load 2 magazines with 6 rounds each and fire at a fist sized target at 21 feet, 7 yards. Now realize, you are just breathing heavy, not scared at all. Did you drop any rounds trying to load the mags. Anyone that has shot and reloaded their gun in the dark will also know it's very easy to drop things and it takes an adjustment to get good hits. Knowing these things, you should train to be pretty accurate at 7 yards, shooting fast and a grouping no larger than your fist. As in draw and double tap. Now add some movement. Shoot from a crouched position behind cover. Plan on your shooting ability to drop 50% in an armed and deadly encounter.

The second thing you should realize is, hits to vital areas end the fight much quicker. Double tap to the upper torso was mentioned earlier. First, learn where to aim to get vital hits. Most torso hits on targets I see are too low. Heart and upper lungs hits, spine hits, these are what you aim for. Second, practice shooting at them, Draw a spine box on your target, shoot at 30 and 45 degrees towards the target, aiming for the spine, upper torso. Change levels. Shoot from kneeling, squatting, and breath, slow that heart rate down.

How fast do you shot? It depends on your situation. If you have to fight a rapid heart rate, uncomfortable shooting position, ect, not as fast as you think, in order to get good hits. So train with this in mind and the time it takes for you to get multiple rounds on vital hit zones will take less time.

hdwhit said:

My brother works for a Sheriff's Office in Florida. He was trained to fire two rounds in rapid succession and then pause to assess and if additional force is needed, two more rounds, stop to assess, etc.

Click to expand...

That's bad training.

(from the John Deere commercial)
It's not how fast you shoot, it's how fast you shoot well.

As Jeff Cooper used to say, "There is such a thing as enough ammunition. And there is such a thing as not enough ammunition. There is no such thing as too much ammunition."

How slow can you shoot and survive a situation?

How fast can you shoot and not shoot so fast that you fire 1 or 2 (or more) rounds too many, meaning those rounds later determined to have been fired after using deadly force was no longer justified?

How aware are you when you're shooting at any speed, in any situation?

Will your actions be considered to be those of a "reasonable person" when examined in minute detail by a jury of your peers?

I don't pretend to have the answers for anyone else, and I hope my training and experience will allow me to make the right choices under any future dynamic, rapidly evolving events occurring in chaotic conditions.

The key is, are you reasonably in fear of your life? If so, shoot until the threat is neutralized.

The gist of the articles quoted in combination with what the OP it sounds like the argument is "If you are attacked by a violent criminal and you feel like your life (or the life of a 3rd party) is in danger to the point that you've cleared leather/kydex (and are actually firing a firearm at another human being) that you should fire one shot and then wait for their response. Then if they continue to attack you then fire one more shot and then wait for their response again".

IMO that's not a good plan. Action beats reaction. I've had to defend myself before and I wasn't even sure I hit the guy at the time. People aren't impact plates or shoot-n-see targets where you get some sort of feedback other than their activity (they're either continuing to fight, they're running or driving away, they're collapsing and ceasing activity altogether or they're putting their hands in the air and getting on the ground and saying something like "Okay, okay...just call the cops").

It doesn't even matter if you hit them or not. If they're still attacking then you should keep firing.

I'm not saying that anyone should just empty their gun at someone (even a violent attacker) regardless of what's occurring. I'm more saying to keep firing in a disciplined manner until hostile activity ceases. If that occurs at one round, great. If they're still attacking after you fire your 18th round then reload and keep firing until they quit attacking. Pausing and waiting for the violent criminal who poses a threat to your life to do something sounds like an extremely bad plan.

It sounds like someone is envisioning a scenario where you fired a shotgun at an intruder, and since the autopsy showed the first buckshot killed him, you're on trial for the other eight.

Maybe beating a dead horse, but you most certainly cannot rely on probability during a fight. The time for hedging bets is before the fight. Carry a known reliable firearm with reputable ammunition, get training, don't go to stupid places and do stupid things with stupid people. All things that stack the deck in your favor as much as can be reasonably expected. However, when the event kicks off, you must base your actions on immediate data and circumstance, not on statistics.

The law of averages says that shooting an individual a half dozen times in the torso with a service caliber handgun should be pretty decisive. I'm willing to bet there are bean counters who've done exhaustive studies on this. However, I know of one particular individual who took a few 9mm to the chest cavity and his immediate reaction was to be very annoyed that we had just shot him. Thankfully, our guy with a rifle reacted to the immediate circumstance, not the probability that the fight was over.