Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Armed Citizen Analysis

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by realmswalker, Aug 27, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. realmswalker

    realmswalker Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2003
    Messages:
    415
    I thought this might be some good info. I apologize if it's a repost.

    I saw this on the Cal Guns forum and thought I'd share it here since it shows some interesting stats and info regarding use of a weapon by private citizens. This is an interesting study the NRA has done collecting some data between 1997 and 2001 (be nice to see something new, I know).

    I'll just paste the results and stats here rather than gab about them. Looks like I'm ok not being a seasoned scout sniper or having twin .45's at the ready for HD. This article was posted in a thread where discussion arose over how many rounds a civilian needs (when CCWing or just in general for HD).

    The Armed Citizen – A Five Year Analysis
    OVERVIEW OF SURVEY
    For the period 1997 - 2001, reports from "The Armed Citizen" column of the NRA Journals were collected. There were 482 incidents available for inclusion in the analysis. All involved the use of firearms by private citizens in self defense or defense of others. No law enforcement related incidents were included. The database is self-selecting in that no non-positive outcomes were reported in the column.

    DATA ANALYSIS
    As might be expected, the majority of incidents (52%) took place in the home. Next most common locale (32%) was in a business. Incidents took place in public places in 9% of reports and 7% occurred in or around vehicles.

    The most common initial crimes were armed robbery (32%), home invasion (30%), and burglary (18%).

    Overall, shots were fired by the defender in 72% of incidents. The average and median number of shots fired was 2. When more than 2 shots were fired, it generally appeared that the defender's initial response was to fire until empty. It appears that revolver shooters are more likely to empty their guns than autoloader shooters. At least one assailant was killed in 34% of all incidents. At least one assailant was wounded in an additional 29% of all incidents. Of the incidents where shots are fired by a defender, at least one assailant is killed in 53% of those incidents.

    Handguns were used in 78% of incidents while long guns were used in 13%; in the balance the type of firearm was not reported. The most common size of handgun was the .35 caliber family (.38, .357, 9mm) at 61%, with most .38s apparently being of the 5 shot variety. Mouseguns (.380s and below) were at 23%, and .40 caliber and up at 15%.

    The range of most incidents appears to be short but in excess of touching distance. It appears that most defenders will make the shoot decision shortly before the criminal comes within arm's length. Defenders frequently communicate with their attackers before shooting.
    The firearm was carried on the body of the defender in only 20% of incidents. In 80% of cases, the firearm was obtained from a place of storage, frequently in another room.

    Reloading was required in only 3 incidents. One of those involved killing an escaped lion with a .32 caliber revolver, which was eventually successful after 13 shots.

    Multiple conspirators were involved in 36% of the incidents. However, there were no apparent cases of getaway drivers or lookouts acting as reinforcements for the criminal actor(s) once shooting starts. At the sound of gunfire, immediate flight was the most common response for drivers and lookouts.

    When multiple conspirators were involved, the first tier was a two man action team. If another member was available, he was usually the driver of the getaway car and remained in the car. If a fourth conspirator was involved, he was stationed immediately outside the target location as a lookout for the police or other possible intervening parties. The outside conspirators do not generally appear to be armed. It does appear that the trend over the period has increased from one weapon in the action team to two weapons.

    The largest group of violent criminal actors was 7, a group that committed serial home invasions in Rochester NY. An alert and prepared homeowner, who saw them invade an adjacent home, accessed his shotgun, and dispatched them (2 killed and 1 seriously wounded) when they broke in his door.
    Incidents rarely occurred in reaction time (i.e., ¼ second increments). Most commonly, criminals acted in a shark-like fashion, slowly circling and alerting their intended victims. The defender(s) then had time to access even weapons that were stored in other rooms and bring them to bear.
    The most common responses of criminals upon being shot were to flee immediately or expire. With few exceptions, criminals ceased their advances immediately upon being shot. Even small caliber handguns displayed a significant degree of instant lethality (30 per cent immediate one shot kills) when employed at close range. Many criminal actors vocally expressed their fear of being shot when the defender displayed a weapon. Upon the criminals' flight, the "victims" frequently chased and captured or shot the criminals and held them for the authorities.

    CONCLUSIONS
    1) Even small caliber weapons are adequate to solve the vast majority of incidents requiring armed self-defense.
    2) Mindset of the potential victim was far more important than the type of weapon used. All the victims were willing to fight their opponents in order to survive. Although not common, in some cases bridge weapons, such as pens, were used to gain time to access the firearm.
    3) Frequently, the defenders were aware that something was amiss before the action started and then placed themselves in position to access their weapons. Awareness of the surroundings appears to be a key element of successful defense.
    4) The defenders had some measure of familiarity with their firearms. Although perhaps not trained in the formal sense, they appear to be able to access a firearm and immediately put it into action. At least one defender learned from a previous experience and made the firearm more accessible for subsequent use.
    5) Training or practice with a firearm should include a substantial amount of accessing the firearm from off body locations, such as drawers, underneath counters, etc.
    6) This analysis does not present a view of the totality of armed self-defense in that non-positive outcomes were not available for inclusion in the database. The analysis may, however, be useful in helping to describe a methodology for successful armed self-defense. This methodology might be described as: 1. be aware, 2. be willing to fight, 3. have a weapon accessible, 4. be familiar enough with the weapon to employ it without fumbling, 5. when ready, communicate, both verbally and non-verbally, to the attacker that resistance will be given, and 6. if the attacker does not withdraw, counterattack without hesitation.

    Data Tables
    Location of Incident
    Home 52%
    Business 32%
    Public 9%
    In or around Vehicle 7%

    Shots Fired
    Type of Location No Yes
    Business 33% 72%
    Home 25% 75%
    Public 29% 71%
    In or around Vehicle 35% 65%
    Grand Total 28% 72%

    Number of Shots Fired
    Average 2.2
    Median 2
    Mode 1
    Max 20

    Gun Type
    Handgun 78%
    Long Gun 13%
    Unknown 8%

    Body Carry
    Type of Location No Yes
    Business 69% 31%
    Home 94% 6%
    Public 49% 51%
    In or around Vehicle 65% 35%
    Overall 80% 20%

    Multiple Assailants
    Type of Location NO YES
    Business 76% 24%
    Home 72% 28%
    Public 62% 38%
    Retail Business 52% 48%
    In or Around Vehicle 49% 51%
    Overall 64% 36%
     
  2. Rugerlvr

    Rugerlvr Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2006
    Messages:
    1,145
    Location:
    Utah
    Cool info. Thanks!
     
  3. jpruitt

    jpruitt Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2008
    Messages:
    153
    Location:
    Tampa Bay, Florida
    That's good reading. Do you have a link to the original NRA study? I know some people who would enjoy reading that.
     
  4. realmswalker

    realmswalker Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2003
    Messages:
    415
    Sorry I do not as I copied and pasted it from calguns.
     
  5. Jim Watson

    Jim Watson Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    21,957
    I don't take it to mean that the NRA did the study. I think somebody read over several years of Armed Citizen columns in American Rifleman and did his own analysis. I once saw a similar presentation at a Rangemaster Tactical Conference.

    This sort of stuff indicates the eternal IPSC vs Gunsite debate is kind of moot. Neither marksmanship nor "tactics" plays a great role. You mostly have to be willing to fight.
     
  6. NG VI

    NG VI Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2007
    Messages:
    4,884
    Location:
    Maine

    That is a scary proposition. At least I know .40 is sufficient for tigers!
     
  7. 3KillerBs

    3KillerBs Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2008
    Messages:
    993
    Location:
    NC Sandhills
    Interesting information.
     
  8. Chipperman

    Chipperman Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    4,572
    Location:
    Essex Co, MA
    That's not something we should advertise, as the Anti's would use it to say that requiring "safe-storage" does not impede the ability to use a gun in defense.
     
  9. shdwfx

    shdwfx Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2008
    Messages:
    579
    Location:
    Go Bucks!
    My guess would be that a more recent study of "successful uses" would show an increased percentage of incidents away from home.
    Why? Concealed carry is more common than it was in 2001.
     
  10. cambeul41

    cambeul41 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2005
    Messages:
    1,186
    Location:
    Southeast Michigan
    Interesting, but not scientific because the "sample" consists of cherry-picked stories chosen by the NRA "The Armed Citizen" column editors.
     
  11. RPCVYemen

    RPCVYemen Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Messages:
    1,937
    Good point. The study really tells us more about that the editors of the NRA think makes a good "Armed Citizen" story than anything else.

    Mike
     
  12. Double Naught Spy

    Double Naught Spy Sus Venator

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    9,562
    Location:
    Forestburg, Texas
    Yeah, I noticed the data were bizarre when I got to...

    Imagine if guns were fired in defense during 72% of self defense situations where the defenders had guns and that many BGs were wounded and/or killed. I would be willing to bet that our crime levels would be significantly declining.
     
  13. Vegas Native

    Vegas Native Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2008
    Messages:
    2
    Location:
    Vegas Baby!
    That is some cool info. I have been the victim of a home invasion before. When the BGs tried to kick the door in, they got a sight of me posted up diagonally behind a wall looking down the barrel of my XD-45, and the music of my wife screaming in to the phone at the inept 911 operator.
     
  14. Vegas Native

    Vegas Native Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2008
    Messages:
    2
    Location:
    Vegas Baby!
    Gotta love LVMPD 911. If you need help, it will be there in only a matter of hours!
     
  15. Atomsk

    Atomsk Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    14
    Location:
    Laurel, Ms
    Very informative
     
  16. BruceRDucer

    BruceRDucer Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Messages:
    690
    Location:
    Denver Colorado
    :uhoh::)
     
  17. RPCVYemen

    RPCVYemen Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Messages:
    1,937
    Yeah, I wonder what percentage of self-defense situations involve home invasions and multiple assailants. Those have high PR value to the NRA, since they inspire a high Fear Factor among middle class white people - the core of the NRA.

    At least around Raleigh, NC, there has been a darn near 100% correlation between involvement in the drug trade and home invasion. That sort of makes sense - most home invasions are about large amounts of cash (and/or drugs). Most people don't keep large amounts of cash at home - the bank is safer. It seems like the people around here who keep large amounts of cash at home are people who have good reason not to deposit it in the bank.

    That may be changing - there seems to be a growing trend of black on Hispanic crime around here. I guess it's the case that folk with questionable immigration status don't trust banks either.

    Mike
     
  18. HeadJunter

    HeadJunter Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2004
    Messages:
    96
    Location:
    Georgia
    I did the study because I wanted to have a better idea of what really happens in incidents. It's at least as relevant as anything else available, which, other than random 5th hand anecdotal accounts, isn't much.
     
  19. youngda9

    youngda9 member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2008
    Messages:
    877
    4 years, 482 instances = 120/year in this study.

    Kleck estimated 2.25 million devensive uses per year.

    The numbers you report are for 0.0053% (120/2.5million) of all defensive gun uses.

    Interesting numbers, but statistically insignifigant to attempt to draw conclusions from...nowhere signifigant to the total # of SD gun uses...the vast majority of which go unreported...and most of which include no shots fired at all, not 72% of instances as this reports.
     
  20. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    24,041
    Location:
    Idahohoho, the jolliest state
    Thanks, eh? Most interesting!
     
  21. heeler

    heeler Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2007
    Messages:
    2,619
    I find it interesting that even when confronted or shot with the lowly mouseguns the criminal took flight or expired.
    And at the shot most co-conspirators fled leaving their fellow criminal friends in the lurch.
     
  22. Panzercat

    Panzercat Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2010
    Messages:
    971
    This has far reaching merit to other threads in progress at this very moment. For example, "low capacity" is apparently absolutely fine for most encounters; be it a 6 round shotty or 10 shot 357 lever.

    You don't need a high capacity weapon. You just need the will to use it.
    ...Unless you're in a firefight with a lion. :scrutiny:
     
  23. MachIVshooter

    MachIVshooter Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2005
    Messages:
    14,243
    Location:
    Elbert County, CO
    Interesting. Good read!

    I was kinda surprised at the caliber breakdown, though. I would've expected more of them to be .40's and .45's in this day and age.
     
  24. HeadJunter

    HeadJunter Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2004
    Messages:
    96
    Location:
    Georgia
    You'd be surprised at how many people dump their bigger calibers after they've shot them for awhile. I had a client just this week dump the .357 Sig for something smaller. He said: "All I knew about guns was what I learned from TV." :)
     
  25. HeadJunter

    HeadJunter Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2004
    Messages:
    96
    Location:
    Georgia
    True that it's a small sample but for lack of anything else to go on it was at least something. Certainly better than the "my friend has a friend who a cop in another city and that cop has a friend who heard that.....", which is the general level of analysis prevalent in the training industry. And as I said at the end: "The analysis may, however, be useful in helping to describe a methodology for successful armed self-defense."

    The commonly cited statistic 5-10 foot gunfight distance is drawn from the 50 officers killed each year out of the roughly 2000 police gunfights that take place each year. So it's statistically insignificant as well. But many people latch onto that number like it's a life preserver in the middle of the Atlantic. ;)
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page