"Combat" distances in active shooter situations?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Lots of information here, but unfortunately, no distances to address the OP's question:

https://leb.fbi.gov/2014/january/active-shooter-events-from-2000-to-2012


Here's a Forensic Science link about hit percentages at different distances:

http://www.forcescience.org/articles/naiveshooter.pdf


I would note that most active shooters believe they have the run of the place when they are on-scene; that is, they are armed, and no one else is. Hence, they don't have to use cover or worry about return fire. In educational and business settings (where the vast majority of active shootings take place) you are talking hallways and classrooms/offices -- nearly point blank.

I will keep looking for an answer...
 
I think the biggest potential bloodbaths are concert halls and sports stadiums. Huge captive population, and often some very large, long spaces. Both the Miami shooting, the French truck attack and various concert fires demonstrate how appealing it is to attack a large group that can't run away.
 
Mr. Meredith asked a very specific question: "Are there any records on distance involved in active shooter situations?"

The setting of a concert hall or a club doesn't mean the killer is taking 75 yard shots. People huddled together between rows of seats or under a table can be killed at 7.5 feet.
 
Those settings do mean there could be opportunities for someone to counter from those longer distances. The fact that the bad guy is shooting from closer distance is a plus.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
 
Mr. Meredith asked a very specific question: "Are there any records on distance involved in active shooter situations?"

The setting of a concert hall or a club doesn't mean the killer is taking 75 yard shots. People huddled together between rows of seats or under a table can be killed at 7.5 feet.
How does that not address the question? If you are in line of sight with someone shooting at people, are you protected just because you aren't close?

If so, for how long? If returning fire is not a good idea, what is?


I'd much rather be trading shots with a rifle shooter at 100 yards, regardless of what I'm armed with.
 
RX, that is very true. I agree with you.

I just don't know what distance most mass shootings take place at, i.e. assailant to victim, police officer to assailant. I think that is what the OP is looking for -- "the distances involved." At least that is how I interpreted it.
 
Yes, ACP is right on point.

There will always be extremes, but I am a mediocre shooter and don't have the time or resources to try to become supershooter. I need to focus on what is more real world. One real world fact is my eyesight. I can't depend on having shooting glasses and am spending time on shooting without the prescription.

Goals may change depending on progress, but right now I am pleased to be able to hit a silhouette torso shots at 50 yds. Maybe the head shots will work out next week. :rolleyes:
 
I just don't know what distance most mass shootings take place at, i.e. assailant to victim, police officer to assailant.

I would suggest that the distance most happen at isn't what one should be looking at, but the longest possible if you want to realistically be able to counter one. It brings me back to the 7 yard only shooters. Because that's what the average is, they seem to feel they wont ever be in anything that's not average, and theres no reason to practice the outlier distances. I think that is intentionally seriously handicapping oneself. I recognize that not everyone has the facilities to practice truly longer distances, or the time and money to shoot more than minimally, but it isn't in the realm of supershooter to be able to do it. One can make an effort to use smaller targets at whatever distance they have, and strive to see what the best themselves and their gun are capable of, rather than aspiring to a lower level and calling it good enough.

A thought. Once one gets the hang of shooting at longer distances, shooting closer almost feels like youre cheating. It doesn't work all that great trying to reverse the order when needed.

Some choose to sight their guns to "drive the dot" meaning the point of impact is the center of the front sights dot, not the top edge of the sight or above it like a 6 oclock hold. Drive the dot is fine for fast and close, but I think that sighting with the point of impact at the top of the sight or slightly above it gives more useful sight pictures for longer distances, and helps with less front sight hold to connect when shooting farther distances. Being able to see the target and front sight in relation to each other helps, rather than holding the sight at some imaginary or figured amount above and end up covering the target up with the sight.


BTW^^^ torso at 50 yards isnt bad. Many think that's being a supershooter. :)
 
Last edited:
There are so few mass shootings, and so few attacks on people that don't live in poor neighborhoods, that I think it is real mistake to try and extract an average or normal when it comes defensive shootings.

Instead of examining what is likely, I think it is best to consider what is possible, then train and equip yourself for as many of those possibilities as is practical.
 
I think when beginning your training 7 yards and in makes sense. Once you get comfortable with that and how to handle your weapon without necessary though (it's part of you) then I think you should try all kinds of training scenarios and distances. It would be nice to spend some time at the range with your pistol to learn where to aim to make a solid hit in 25 yard increments out to say 200 yards. Learn what your limits are with the weapon and see if you can push beyond. In the same fashion, it would be good to have some martial arts training should a firearm not be available or you can't get it out fast enough. Wouldn't hurt to learn some knife, sticks, staff, and sword fighting as well. Oh, try training on grass, and sand as well. It behaves differently than cement. That way, you've had some experience at many different things. It's unlikely there is a scenario where I would need to use a 100 yard pistol shot. Yet, we can all come up with something where leaving isn't an options and not shooting isn't an option.
 
There are three active shooter events with known or approximate ranges I can think of off hand:

-Aurora theater: theater distance (point blank - 100 yards +/-) Time: a few minutes

-Columbine: point blank - 60 yards (shots exchanged with Deputy Gardner) Time: 49 minutes, give or take

-University of Texas (1966): a few yards to 1500 feet. The tower itself was 70 yards in elevation and the 1500 foot aimed shot connected with an individual 3 blocks away, trying to hide behind a car. Time: 20+ minutes

In studying these various incidents, and I am by no means an expert, there is a reason that law enforcement officers went from patrol shotguns to patrol rifles. Schools, malls, stadiums, and other areas with large numbers of people are good targets with long stretches of open areas. Time is critical if you are close by: responding law enforcement will arrive from 0 seconds to 6 minutes. If you are standing there with a gun in your hand, they will shoot first and ask questions later. It will be chaotic with people screaming, running, etc. For all they know you are the second, third, fourth, fifth gunman.

Personally, I feel confident I can engage a shooter with my revolver at 50 yards, which is about as far as I can hit an 8 inch steel plate. My misses are not by much, but I go from a near 100% hit rate at 25 yards to 10% at 50 yards. If bullets were flying in my direction, my percentage would be much lower, as it would be with anyone. Everyone has to make their own decision about distances, but the above data would go to show that the ranges can be extreme for the concealed carrier.
 
Last edited:
The initial response I provided -was for when you are the target of someone with a long gun and only have a pistol on your side of the equation... and for those questioning it you only have to look at the incident in Dallas recently where the officers were the target -particularly the number that were killed or injured when their response with sidearms was at great disadvantage in the situation...

Yes, you can engage at a distance if necessary - but much better tactics would be to go to cover and do your best to close the distance to where the odds on your side are a lot better... These kind of survival tactics are just that - for when you're the target and at great disadvantage because of disparity of force... For those that don't remember the "Texas Tower" shooter was killed by two responders (one civilian) who were able to gain access to the top of the tower and engage the shooter at close range. The only thing those on the ground were able to do was keep him from shooting freely - after there was already quite few casualties...

Yes, I know that those trying to intervene in an active shooter situation need to act to save lives - but when you're the primary target (particularly in a pre-planned ambush situation things are a bit different....).

We taught all of our officers that their first duty was to get home in one piece at the end of every shift if at all possible....
 
I "train" at 25+ yards with a handgun from time to time.

It helps me stay focused on the fact that I'm a horrible shot with a handgun at a stationary man-sized target at those distances. Some folks have the chops to make that shot. I sure as heck don't. I'm gonna run, or I'm gonna wait for the target to come closer. Otherwise, all I can muster is "harassment fire."

Throw in the factor of the target shooting back and trying to avoid being a target, and its prett much "fuggeddaboudit."

That's just the reality of it.
 
Yes, ACP is right on point.

There will always be extremes, but I am a mediocre shooter and don't have the time or resources to try to become supershooter. I need to focus on what is more real world. One real world fact is my eyesight. I can't depend on having shooting glasses and am spending time on shooting without the prescription.

Goals may change depending on progress, but right now I am pleased to be able to hit a silhouette torso shots at 50 yds. Maybe the head shots will work out next week.

I noticed on the northwestfirearms forums that you said you were looking for the "normal patterns." There isn't a normal pattern for active shooters. Shooting distances are often determined by the venue more so than the shooter. Outside active shooters often have shot distances that are MUCH greater than inside active shooters and inside active shootings are more common than outside active shootings. How you engage an active shooter the confines of the break room at your work will undoubtedly differ from how you engage one from across the street.

If you want to focus on real world, then spend 90% of your practice time on 5 yards or less and 10% of your time working on long range (whatever that means to you) shooting. This is the basic advice of Ken Hackathorn. Real world is that you have an exceptionally unlikely chance of being in such a situation and that if you need to draw your gun for self defense, then it will be at very close range, your typical robbery/assault/home invasion distances. Speed is going to be that much more critical at close ranges than at long ranges.
 
The following statement has been made by RX-79G.

Instead of examining what is likely, I think it is best to consider what is possible, then train and equip yourself for as many of those possibilities as is practical.

Very insightful statement. Although the average self defense situation is 3yds/3 shots, those results came from a bucketful of multiple rounds, and multiple distances, then some kind of division.

My thought is that look at a group of what has happened in various shootings, which tend to mostly be Police shootings, those brave men and woman run to the sound of gunfire, my thought would by Wife/Jeep/and go!

So a Glock 19, that I carry, and shoot IDPA with, same gun. TruGlo sights, very bright, day or night, 16 rounds in the pistol, of 147g Ranger T, spare G17 magazine, 17 rounds of NATO Hard Ball (would have a better chance of penetrating cover) a bright Surefire Flash light, Benchmade folding knife.

I am not a mediocre shot! At 7m, a hit into an eye socket is doable.

So this combination is carried every day. My job, protecting who is with me, my Wife of 23 years, or Grand Kids! The comment on combat breathing, good idea. A 100m hit, possible. For instance, a Clay Pidgeon can be dust at 50m.

So my advice, carry overkill, if needed you have lots of rounds, if not, you are equipped anyhow.

Sgt. Chuck Haggard, great article. A realist.

In being invited to a SWAT class in Tennessee, back in the 90s (I am terrible for dates!) as a member of the IALEFI Board of Directors, but mostly for my Pistol Training ability's!

Short version, they had a member of the team, but he could not pass the Qualifying pistol portion. Great with Shotgun/AR/Sniper rifle, hopeless with pistol! My job, enjoy the week long course, but fix the failing pistol shooter.

Why they wanted him so much? He was an amazing Street Cop, dress him up, he could vanish in any crowd. Fearless, nice guy, great scrapper! And he was black! In a place were Cops were almost exclusively white.
End result I could not train him to shoot pistol! My second failure in 25 years.
But I did learn a lot in that week long class (one thing, me at 60, could not keep up with 20+ year olds!)

We had access to a Hi School, just closed the week prior, moved to a New School. You could still smell the floor wax, spotless.
We did School Entry, old School, did not enter till we had enough people, 5? a diamond formation, tail end Charlie sealing classrooms we had cleared, kicking rubber wedges under doors.

I was no2 in the stick, when we reached the active shooter, a classroom, with a teacher sitting on a swivel chair, behind him, standing the shooter!

These play actors were not part of our class. Dressed the part, looked the part. We were armed with our own pistols, no magazines, or rounds on our persons (all professionally searched prior too!)

In peeping into the classroom, No1 went to a knee, presented his pistol, and said "Drop the gun" The actor said "Drop yours" And this went on, and on!

I moved the young Officer out of the way, gently. Took in the scene, aimed my Glock 17 at the shooters left eye, all I could see clearly, range 5m.

"You must be getting thirsty, would you like a bottle of water?" When he started to speak... CLICK! My Glock never moved as I dry fired it.

Our group had to clear out, next group moved in, we all went for a de-brief into a classroom. Question No1, "Why did you not shoot?" "I don't know"
"Not sure of hitting the head of the shooter?"

Question No2. Where did I get the idea to ask about water? "It is a technique I used working as a Bouncer in Night Clubs in Liverpool UK.

Only my question was "What time is your last Bus?" when the just about ready to fight! Youth, who had slid one foot back, and had taken that last second glance at his closest pal behind him!

As I saw the thought go in to his eyes! Straight left broken nose, right side kick to forward knee! One down, others step back. Me the center of three Bouncers on the door. The other two being way bigger than me.

When I teach Police, the nasty adrenalin fueled response? Domestic. Size of kitchen, viewed from door, around 5m distance. The average Police re-ql, uses big man sized target! Service pistol not used for the good old 2" dot target so much. But needed, knife to throat response.

Sorry for the length, just kept thinking back!
 
Last edited:
It seems many here have to go out of their way to find reason to shoot their handguns much further than 30'.
Since I was very young I've subscribed to Elmer Keith's belief that a handgun was a weapon of opportunity. I've always tried to keep one close and have had occasion to make hits at some impressive ranges.
I keep 10" gongs at 50&100 yds and shoot at them from a rest as well as off hand with my handguns and offhand with rifles.
I also have burned up thousands of rounds ( mostly) 22lr at obscene distances shooting at rocks and such on mountain sides and dry washes.
It's fun, has put food on the table and keeps the pests down and someday might make the difference.....

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
 
We taught all of our officers that their first duty was to get home in one piece at the end of every shift if at all possible....

I will only say LEO training isn't static, nor is the inclination of individuals as to what the appropriate course is in situations under discussion. The way some depts and private trainers are training now is whoever gets on the scene first should do what they can to make it stop. There are examples of successful solo interventions.


http://www.thetacticalwire.com/feature.html?featureID=3593
 
I used to belong to a club that had a 100 yard range. I used to shoot at steel plates with pistols sometimes. I am not all that good of a shot but I was able to hit dinner plate sized steel plates pretty consistently, even with a 45. Although I always felt like I was holding the 45 at about a 45 degree angle to be able to hit anything 100 yards away. I know I was only holding it it maybe a foot or two above the target but it always seemed like a lot more.

Personally, I plan to be elsewhere as quickly as I can get elsewhere if there is someone shooting at me who is 100 yards away.
 
Are there any records on distance involved in active shooter situations? I seem to remember a comment about the police firing back at a distance of 70 feet or so, the distances inside classrooms seems obvious. Any notes on the mall and theater situations?

Distances inside classrooms would be inside what a lot of people are comfortable with with a handgun. Hallways in some schools can be extremely long. We do active shooter training walk-throughs at schools and businesses when we can get access . . . I have laser measured hallways that are over 65 meters. That's a long combat shot with a handgun, which is a big reason most responders to active shooters bring a rifle.

The reason for asking is to understand how many of the extreme situations can be defended against with a carry gun.

Are you looking for actual measurements from the shootings, or do you just want to know distances inside of generic movie theaters and schools and such?

Keep in mind that you are responsible for all rounds that you put downrange. If the bad guy is using 5.56 and little Susie gets hit with a 9mm round from your gun because you shot at the bad guy from farther than you are capable of, you may be in trouble despite your good intentions. If the bad guy has a concrete wall behind him and no people around him (like the previously mention Austin Police Sgt. who took a 312 foot shot), feel free to take a chance. Most active shooting location are chosen because they have a lot of people, so the likelihood of a solid and safe background free of innocent people is low.

To me the real question isn't what extreme distance you may face, but what extreme distance you train for and are sure of your hits.

The way some depts and private trainers are training now is whoever gets on the scene first should do what they can to make it stop. There are examples of successful solo interventions.

Yep. Pre-Columbine we had "set a perimeter and wait." 5 years ago we had "minimum 4 man team to enter the building with an active shooter." 2 years ago we had "you and one other person are allowed to enter for an active shooter. More is better, but 2 is sufficient." Last year we started training for "solo response to active shooter." The good guy getting shot percentage goes way up with solo entry, but the bad guy getting killed or killing himself elapsed times go way down as well.
 
Last edited:
All my range practice with a handgun is at 25 and 50 yards. I figure if I can draw and fire, and hit a man-sized target at those ranges, I shouldn't have any problems closer up.

Why would this be true? Seems like you are forgetting about the "fight" in a gunfight.

Square-range long distance marksmanship practice has almost no utility for a close-quarters dynamic gunfight.

I'm not saying longer shots shouldn't be practiced some (it should definitely be a part of everyone's practice), but it is not at all the case that shooting bullseyes @ 25-50yds means that a close-range skills are also covered as a result.

LE agencies have found basically no correlation between qualification scores (which include hitting targets out to 15-25yds) and hit rates in gun fights at much closer ranges. Hit rates (somewhere on the body) of only 20-30% at average distances under 7yds is common in LE shootings and yet, these same officers all had hit rates of 80-100% on much smaller targets, at much further distances, in qualification.
 
A quick thought about that "one man entry" scenario and other not so smart ideas... Yes, many many young officers (and quite a few not so young officers) have put it all on the line upon occasion. In the sixties, fifties, and earlier times we called them heroes (before "hero" became such a common term that it lost much of its meaning...). By the seventies we still called them heroes, pinned a medal on any that survived, -then promptly found them another job away from the street action. By the late eighties we'd had a profound sea change in modern policing and began to factor in officer survival as an important side of training - and we carefully pointed out the dangers of "John Wayne type" actions on the street (competent training and tactics meant lots of bad guys going to jail or the morgue - and a lot less officers at area hospitals or dead themselves). That seemed to change over the years and after 9-11 and into recent history came the rise of "active shooter" incidents and once again a revision in tactics and philosophies for dealing with one or several individuals intent upon armed suicide and a big body count along the way.... No matter what rules of conduct or training you provide first responders to violent incidents -the human side (emotions and all... ) will still rule the outcome. I've seen more than one incident where officers risked life and limb to take on a violent actor - most survived it, some did not... In my short 22 year career in police work down here in south Florida (1973 - 1995) I quit going to officer funerals early on. Counting Dade and Broward counties (Miami to Ft. Lauderdale, roughly) as one area we had three officers a year killed on the job (and I'm not counting angry girl friends or wives - or bad personal habits at all - nor suicides...) year after year from a violent incident. The fact that most of the offenders died in the process doesn't do a single thing for the families involved.... I have no idea what the stats are today in that same area but there were 66 killed in my years (not counting feds either -include them and the numbers would go up a bit...).

We're still evolving as far as armed responses to serious killing scenarios - but I predict the return of folks actively encouraging the killing of officers on our streets will send things back toward the careful consideration of officer survival and what's needed in the way of training and tactics to achieve that goal... In the interim I'd advise any armed citizen to pay attention to current events and how cops deal with them on the street - for better or worse. I can state flatly that the hard lessons we learned on the street years ago seem to have been misplaced - at least in some of the things I've seen reported publicly.... Consider this very thread where otherwise reasonable folks are wondering whether it's a good idea to engage an armed opponent with only a pistol - and at ranges that make "self defense" an argument at best... In my world, using your weapons within their limitations makes really good sense. With a handgun, facing superior firepower, it's your job to either retreat safely - or if retreat isn't an option move into close proximity so that the weapon you have is effective (an alternative is to go to ground and wait in ambush until you are in proper range....).

Argue all you want about whether shooting at long range is a good idea... Me, I'm wanting whatever rounds I fire to be as effective as possible - and that doesn't include any civilian casualties from my weapon it at all possible...

I'll get down off of my soapbox now...
 
I'll shoot seriously out to 25 with pistols. With some of them I can hit 100 yards easily. I take my rifles from 25 out to 500.
 
lemaymiami

Makes sense to me.

The current public service announcements are all about Run, Hide, Fight. I'm good with all that and that is my personal strategy. However fighting involves returning fire, not throwing books, chair, fire extinguishers.

Getting caught up in a theater, mall or large conference area is a problem where fight may be at a longer distance. I don't want to be one of those people without a plan and hiding behind a chair, desk, sales counter or such knowing that my only alternative at that point is to patiently wait slaughter like a dumb animal in a slaughterhouse chute.
 
Personally instead of 'Run, Hide, Fight' I find 'Find them, fix them, fight them, finish them' works so much better, especially if you are armed.

And if you have to flee, just fishhook and wait for them to pass by.

Deaf
 
Not doubting any of you fine folks, but I'd really love to see a video of YOU shooting on target at 100+yrds with a carry sized pistol. Not a professional shooter, but what YOU are claiming.

Ok, maybe I'm doubting some of you. :)


I agree with those on here that have said it's not only unrealistic but also probably not advantageous to shoot out beyond 25-50yrs in a situation where you are planning on claiming self defense.

But what do I know? I'm no Ayoob or the like...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top