Can you shoot them all good?

[Queen_of_Thunder]

Wow, talk about low standards!!

No time or distance requirements? I bet my 4 year old granddaughter could pass your test with no time limit and the target a few feet from the muzzle of the gun, but I wouldn't think that makes her "good enough".

You ought to google "Diligentia, Vis, Celeritas". It's an applicable phrase that's been around for a while.

Goal: Put all rounds on target.

Distance does not matter. All that matters is that the rounds hit the intended target.

Ten rounds spread over the target is much more effective at stopping the target than 10 rounds through the same hole the first round made. Ten rounds through a single hole means you wasted 9 of the 10 rounds.


To simplify matters: Two 16 foot boats: Boat A and Boat B

Boat A has one 1 inch hole in the bottom of the boat.

Boat B has ten 1 inch holes in the bottom of the boat.

Which boat sinks first.

 

[45_auto]

Goal: Put all rounds on target.

Distance does not matter. All that matters is that the rounds hit the intended target.

Ten rounds spread over the target is much more effective at stopping the target than 10 rounds through the same hole the first round made. Ten rounds through a single hole means you wasted 9 of the 10 rounds.

Sounds like great justification for people who can't shoot very well!

Since distance and target size don't mean anything to you, do you feel that time (speed) makes any difference?

Per your boat example:

Boat B with ten 1 inch holes will take a given amount of time to sink depending on the original displacement of the boat. I.E, an aircraft carrier with ten 1 inch holes in it will take much longer to sink than a rowboat. Meanwhile, before the boat with the 10 holes in it sinks, it manages to sink your whole fleet.

Boat A with one 1 inch hole in it sinks immiediately, no matter what size it is, because the bullet that punched the 1 inch hole then hit the on-board gunpowder magazine and it exploded.

Extra credit: How can you apply the boat analogy above to a self defense situation?

Hint: google "Diligentia, Vis, Celeritas" and learn what "diligentia" means.

 

[David E]

Borrowed from elsewhere:

Diligentia translates as accuracy, probably the single most important aspect of defensive shooting. You MUST be able to hit what you are shooting at.

Vis is power. Our defensive firearm should be the most powerful caliber we are proficient with.

Celeritas is speed. This aspect of defensive shooting is often minimized or over looked all together. Many instructors will tell you not to worry about how quickly you can shoot because accuracy is more important. Statistics show that the average gunfight is over in less than three seconds. Can you afford to take four or five seconds to place your shot?

In my experience, speedy accuracy is a foreign concept to many. They naively think they must choose between the two.

 

[Ankeny]

Whittling down the time from "oh crap I need my gun" to your first shot an an excellent training drill - as well as reducing your split times, so long as you don't start sacrificing accuracy to do it.

I know what you are saying, but accuracy will degrade in the search for speed. Power can also displace both accuracy and speed, as can the method of carry, and the firearm. That's where DVC comes into play.

 

[45_auto]

In my experience, speedy accuracy is a foreign concept to many. They naively think they must choose between the two.

+100!

My experience has been that the vast majority of people believe that they are "good enough", which is true for them since they have no idea of how bad they actually are.

If you can ever convince them to shoot with even a little bit of inconsequential pressure on them to get some adrenalin flowing, such as in a competition or even to shoot an established qualification course against a timer, they are almost universally amazed at how bad they actually are.

 

[JohnBiltz]

You know when I read about self-defense shootings it seems to me that most people are "good enough". The idea that you have to be Jerry Miculek is ridiculous. It would be nice if you had that level of skills but most people don't and they tend to do pretty well. The fact is most people who shoot a lot do so because they enjoy shooting and they can afford to do so. They may justify it in their heads otherwise but it is because they enjoy doing so. I shoot about 5,000 rounds a year, there is no way I would do that if I felt is was a duty of some kind. I do it because I enjoy shooting and I would shoot more if I could afford it.

 

[SharpsDressedMan]

Has there ever been a national level combat competitor, or recognized "expert" that has been involved in a recent self defense shooting, or EVER for that matter?

 

[golden]

It depends on the person, the use and the gun

I am one of those people who switch guns frequently. It is not a matter of whimsy, but need. I carry concealed and the gun that I carry is the largest one that I can conceal with the clothes I am wearing.

When I lived up north, I though nothing of straping on a BERETTA 96D. It did not show under my heavy parker and worked fine. That does not work well in FLORIDA, at least for me.
I tried carrying the BERETTA 96D, because it was my duty gun and was powerful, easy to shoot for a .40 S&W and very accurate, plus I was most familiar with it.
The only way for me to carry it was under a jacket or vest. That screams, LOOK AT ME, I AM WEARING A GUN. It is also pretty hot in the summer.

I went to smaller pistols when the BERETTA was replaced by the H&K 2000, but it was only a degree better, not really concealable for me.

In the end, I went to compact pistols. I try to keep them similar. I used a S&W model 38 and then switched to a BERETTA Tomcat. The Tomcat shoots well for the small size, but is still a small gun, so I picked up a SIG 232 .380ACP with an aluminum frame. This is great and conceals well, but not as well as the BERETTA Tomcat.
On the other hand, the SIG 232 will shoot as well as any of my 9m.m. pistols and is lighter and more compact. So I switched back and forth between the Tomcat and SIG depending on what I wore.
Then I cam across a WALTHER PPK in .32ACP. I bought it just as a collectible. I had heard the stories that they were not very accurate, bit the shooter's hand and had heavy, gritty triggers.
Surprise! The trigger is heavy, but not that bad. I have shot worse, much worse. The sights are too small, but usable and accuracy is almost as good as the SIG 232, which is very good.
I figured the PPK would hang up on hollowpoint and it does not feed HYDRA SHOK reliably, but will feed WINCHESTER Silvertip and FIOCCHI jhp without problems. It also goobles up COR BON Powerball like it was candy.
So if I am in between the size of the Tomcat or SIG 232, I carry the PPK. It has proven very reliable, easier to shoot than any other handgun this size and quite reliable.

The one thing that I try to do is keep the action similar. The BERETTA Tomcat, WALTHER PPK and SIG 232 have similar operating drills. All double action first shot and no slide release.

On my house gun and when I am travelling, I bring along either a SIG 225 or BERETTA 92D Compact or WALTHER P99.
They are similar enough that I do not have any problems going between them and my scores at qualification are very similar with the same ammo.
Going to a revolver or 1911 would be a much bigger transition and I do not bother with it.

Jim

 

[David E]

Has there ever been a national level combat competitor, or recognized "expert" that has been involved in a recent self defense shooting, or EVER for that matter?

Why does it have to be a "national level" competitor?

There have been several "competitors" who've had lethal encounters that have written about.

A recent write up by Ayoob mentioned the person involved thought the actual incident was a far easier shooting problem than he'd been required to solve at the matches.

Some folks may want to take note of that.

 

[SharpsDressedMan]

I was looking to see if there was anyone FAMOUS that might have had an armed encounter, maybe someone recognizably BETTER than myself. There are LOTS of competitors; I am one of them. If you are just accepting anyone with the title of "competitor", or police officer, or gun enthusiast, that really isn't leaving too many people out.

 

[David E]

Ok, Jim Cirillo. He shot competition.

 

[Deaf Smith]

Yes Jim Cirillo was a champion shot. So was Bill Jordan, Charlie Askins, Delf “Jelly” Bryce, and others who were in gun fights.

BUT, Lance Thomas was not. Neither were most of the old west gunfighters.

Being a top competitor is an advantage in a gunfight due to their being used to stress and still performing complex task. And yes I do feel it's a wise thing to become at least a good competitor.

Just as I feel being a hunter gives one an edge (Cirillo felt the same way in his books on the subject.)

But that does not grow you guts. And it's the guts that matters the most.

Deaf

 

[David E]

Guts matter, for sure, but many a valiant man has died due to lack of skill at arms.

 

[Ankeny]

The idea that you have to be Jerry Miculek is ridiculous. It would be nice if you had that level of skills but most people don't and they tend to do pretty well.

I'll pass this along just because. I agree one doesn't need to be a world class square range shooter to have an abundance of pistol-craft skills. I had a USPSA National Champion (single stack division) who also trains feds, police, etc. for a living tell me something to the effect, "The run of the mill B class (USPSA) shooter has all of the shooting skills he will ever need (reference to the square range). The ability to apply those skills in a dynamic situation is the determining factor." FWIW, B class is a long way from GM.

 

[David E]

I'd even include a mid to high level "C" class shooter.

 

[SharpsDressedMan]

My point is, we still have NO famous, or recognizable competitive shooter who had been involved in a personal self defense shooting mentioned, YET. Cirillo was involved in several shootouts, as a stakeout officer in NYC, as I recall, but I have never heard of him being involved in a personal, off duty armed encounter. There was a notable officer on the Cleveland Police who DID get involved in one or more OFF DUTY, self defense shootings, came out unscathed and victorious, and was cleared on all of them. I believe his name was Joe Paskvan, and he was a Viet Nam vet, career police officer in Cleveland, and extremely fast on the draw, with lightning reflexes. In other words, the WRONG guy for a bad guy to pick on........

 

[Deaf Smith]

Guts matter, for sure, but many a valiant man has died due to lack of skill at arms.

And many due to lack of guts and froze.

And Sharps,

Charlie Askins might have been in some off duty shootouts.

But back then in the 1930s on the Texas border was a rough place.

Deaf

 

[Ankeny]

My point is, we still have NO famous, or recognizable competitive shooter who had been involved in a personal self defense shooting mentioned, YET

What does that matter and what is your point?

 

[all357mag]

You're Damn Straight! Proficient with ALL!

 

[David E]

You're Damn Straight! Proficient with ALL!

Which means you're able to perform to what level of skill, exactly?

 

[MCMXI]

If only bad guys walked around with a buzzer ... shooter ready, standby ... BEEP!!

 

[David E]

If only bad guys walked around with a buzzer ... shooter ready, standby ... BEEP!!

Funny, when I was a cop, nobody I drew down on had a timer.

(What's your point again?)

 

[MCMXI]

(What's your point again?)

I think it's fairly obvious.

 

[Queen_of_Thunder]

Sounds like great justification for people who can't shoot very well!

Since distance and target size don't mean anything to you, do you feel that time (speed) makes any difference?

Per your boat example:

Boat B with ten 1 inch holes will take a given amount of time to sink depending on the original displacement of the boat. I.E, an aircraft carrier with ten 1 inch holes in it will take much longer to sink than a rowboat. Meanwhile, before the boat with the 10 holes in it sinks, it manages to sink your whole fleet.

Boat A with one 1 inch hole in it sinks immiediately, no matter what size it is, because the bullet that punched the 1 inch hole then hit the on-board gunpowder magazine and it exploded.

Extra credit: How can you apply the boat analogy above to a self defense situation?

Hint: google "Diligentia, Vis, Celeritas" and learn what "diligentia" means.

Simple. A boat with 10 one inch holes in it will sink faster than the same boat with one one inch hole in it. The more holes in a body the faster the blood bleeds out.

 

[David E]

I think it's fairly obvious.

Ok, bad guys don't walk around with shot timers.....

Good point!