Concealed Carry Response Time

[The Rabbi]

I dont think the analogy is apt.

The games give you good skills and experience in gun handling under a lot of circumstances. They teach use of cover and fast reloading (not that reloading is often an issue in a gun fight). They teach what holsters and ammo will and will not work. They teach what guns are and are not reliable.
Will they prepare you for an encounter with an armed felon in the dark totally unaware? No, but nothing will.
The games teach what they teach. I feel sorry for the BG who attacks Jerry Miculek. That doesnt mean that Jerry wont miss, just that he has a far higher probability of hitting that I do.

 

[CZ52GUY]

Hey Ktulu,

Respectfully, knowledge without skill is as likely to get you killed as skill without knowledge.

I think this is a situation where good people will disagree, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and hope you'll do the same for me.

Bottom line, to be a lifeguard, you need to be able to swim...a "waterphobic" EMT has limited value to the citizen about to drown in spite of his/her vast knowledge.

A strong swimmer, perhaps one that competes, has the basic capability to reach the individual in jeoparady...that's the first pre-requisite for rendering assistance, the ability to actually reach them.

Similarly, the competent competitor that has honed their skills has achieved one of the basic pre-requisites for self-defense with a firearm...they actually know how to use the firearm.

Given the risks faced by competitors (who actually practice and put their skills to use) and those who don't...I'm not persuaded that the competitor puts themselves in some additional real world jeopardy by competing.

It is hypothetically possible that a competitor may overestimate their skills in a fight. It is highly probable that the unskilled CCW holder will find their skills (or lack thereof) could get them in greater trouble when they really need them.

I suspect no combination of vowels and consonants will cause either of us to persuade the other.

You stay safe,

CZ52'

 

[CZ52GUY]

For your entertainment...

...I went out this afternoon and did some informal tests. Shot just 2 or 3 5-shot groups before commencing with the tests.

7-yd Bill drills fired at standard IDPA target using Pocket Pro' timer set at random start (no gaming the buzzer).

First, my CZ-75B (9mm) using Blade-Tech holster I compete with. Wearing hooded sweat shirt but pulled out of the way to allow for non-concealed draw (not as optimal as tucked in shirt as with classifier, but it was too chilly to take it off...so I have a cold...sue me ). All strings start cocked and locked.

String 1 - Bill Drill
Draw - 1.76
shot 2 - 4.24 (had to TRB)
shot 3 - 4.51
shot 4 - 4.77
shot 5 - 5.00
shot 6 - 5.22
TPD - 2

String 2 - Bill Drill
Draw - 1.90
shot 2 - 2.14
shot 3 - 2.36
shot 4 - 2.56
shot 5 - 2.77
shot 6 - 2.96
TPD - 15 (rushed big time...high and right)

String 3 - Bill Drill
Draw - 1.93
shot 2 - 2.16
shot 3 - 2.43
shot 4 - 2.68
shot 5 - 2.90
shot 6 - 3.13
TPD - 2


Next, my Bulgarian Makarov (9x18) with Fobus Paddle (my grab and go carry set-up). Hooded sweatshirt is pulled over the Fobus to completely conceal it. Mak' is started loaded but decocked making all Draw shots double-action.

String 1 - Control String where Mak' sweatshirt is pulled away equivalent to CZ-75B...Strings 2-4 will be concealed.
Draw - 1.76
shot 2 - 2.26
shot 3 - 2.47
shot 4 - 2.69
shot 5 - 2.87
shot 6 - 3.07
TPD - 5 (DA shot was low...others drifted high)

String 2 - Concealed
Draw - 2.72
shot 2 - 3.25
shot 3 - 3.48
shot 4 - 3.66
shot 5 - 3.88
shot 6 - 4.07
TPD - 3 (decent grouping but drifted high)

String 3 - Concealed
Draw - 2.48
shot 2 - 3.19
shot 3 - 3.38
shot 4 - 3.59
shot 5 - 3.78
shot 6 - 4.00
TPD - 9 (decent grouping but drifted high - had a Mike that went over the other five)

String 4 - Concealed
Draw - 2.41
shot 2 - 2.71
shot 3 - 2.96
shot 4 - 3.17
shot 5 - 3.39
shot 6 - 3.60
TPD - 7 (didn't group quite as well...2 drifted right...suspecting Draw+shot 2)

Conclusions/lessons learned
1) Condition of readiness of a piece very much influences ability to get off a rapid response. The DA/SA transition with the Mak' adds some time.
2) Concealment garments make a difference in ability to get off a rapid response (I find that my 5.11 vest adds about .2 to draw times...practical carry using a light jacket is about the same). Clearing the sweatshirt definitely added time.
3) As dusk resulted in dwindling light, the bladed sight on the Makarov didn't show nearly as well as the outlined Trijicons on the CZ-75B.
4) As always there is a speed/accuracy trade-off that has to be considered

Bottom line, depending on the specifics of your "carry kit", competition capability response times may not 100% translate (and that's before the emotional/physical reaction to being under real stress vs. simulated).

Stay safe,

CZ52'

 

[Ktulu]

I suspect no combination of vowels and consonants will cause either of us to persuade the other.

I might have to agree with you on that.

 

[PressCheck]

A good shooter can draw and fire a double tap in less than a second... average one can do it in about 1.3 seconds

My best time is .78 from 5 yards, but I've only done that once. My average time is about 1.2 seconds, and I shoot a lot.

 

[OF]

My best time is .78 from 5 yards

We need to make sure we qualify what we're talking about - is that 2 A-zone hits at 5 yards? Just 2 shots into the berm? Concealed? Off-the-shelf fighting pistol or USPSA open-class blaster? Big differences between all these things. Times are meaningless without some idea of what was accomplished.

.78 for a pair of A-zone hits at 5 yards, unconcealed with a standard-type pistol is world class. Absolutely. A .78 pair assuming a great .1 split would be .68 draw at the worst. Which is smokin'.

I'm an expert-class IDPA shooter, mid-C USPSA and I can reliably do 1.1 to 1.2 second unconcealed A-zone 7-yard hits (one shot) on an IPSC target with my stock Springfield 1911 from an OWB, which is a pretty fast draw for a C-class shooter, actually. Fastest draw ever was something like .80 or so at 7-yards for an A-zone hit (one shot). After some practice and warm-up I can hit 1 second flat all day long, but not out of the gate.

Concealed, with an LL Bean heavy shirt for concealment, 1.5 - 1.7 is pretty reliable for me, one shot 7-yards, A-zone hit. Best being more like 1.3-ish, after warming up for a while.

- Gabe

 

[MBane666]

David (et all);

You are absolutely right. No argument. A professional shooter is exactly that.

RE: Number of takes, ironicallly, the Jarrett El Prez was at a demo in California where he wasn't particularly trying for speed. It surprised him as much as anybody. Like you, when I watched some of the other shooting shows, I wondered how many takes it took to get that *super* shot. If you've watched SHOOTING GALLERY, you've seen me hit the ground, hard, during a simulation in Portland (hard enough to knock a bone chip out of my elbow!). Both my producer and the people being filmed came running over and said we could set up to do it again. Hell, I said, I hit the ground. My bad. Leave it in. Television is television, but honesty is a real thing!

I've seen Bill Rogers, demo'ing for some Feds, produce a 6-second El Prez with a concealed revolver. Fast is fast. I know that it takes me an additional second to draw my own CCW gun from concealment, and I practice with it. In my now infamous mugging, I did in fact outdraw the person attempting to mug me. He was very suprised!

The utility of competition is that it allows you to push the limits in an environment where you're not going to die if you screw up and it allows you to find both gear and techniques that work for you.

We're getting ready to do an episode on going after the one-mile pistol shot (the current candidate caliber is the 6.5 X .284 out of an modified XP-100). I swear I'll tell you JUST HOW MANY shots it takes to shoot a group at one mile!

mb

 

[The Rabbi]

Range Report.

Reading this I decided to test out some of the suppositions.
First, I decided that 7 yards is too far for a realistic scenario. I think that 2 yards is a lot more realistic, just out of touching distance.
I set an IDPA target against a tree stump. The drill was draw and fire once. My son was running the timer, set to random so there was no gaming it.
My best time was about 1.25 seconds, wearing a jacket, which is my normal wear. Most were in the 1.3 econd range. Without the jacket it dropped to .91 secs. As I thought, aiming is not an issue at that range. About 90-95% of the shots were on the target, many of them in the center. This was shooting from the hip, close in. If I went to bring the gun up to eye level to get something liek a sight picture the times grew to like 1.54 seconds. But I could not see much improvement in accuracy doing that. I was using a 1917 Smith revolver in .45acp btw. The barrel was cut to 3 1/2 inches and carried in just aregular type holster.

 

[LaVere]

Threat accessment

I think that the threat accessment is the hardest thing to do and do right.. I was in an event ( posted else where on this site) The Threat was always with in 21 feet. The place was crowed with people. He was carring a 12" butcher knife in a dining area. I can tell you he was not there to carve Prime Rib.

If I were a police offices I could generaly pull and point at any time I was there. Take the person out to the car, access the situation and let him go or arrested him if warrented. No shots no foul Situation taken care of.

As I'm not a police officer have may be only three choices. 1. Pull , if I pull to early I'm brandishing a weapon ( go to jail ). 2. Don't pull until absolutely blood is flowing. ( No go to Jail ) 3. Just leave, let them sort it out.

Knowing when to pull is tuff. We are alwary in a catch up mode. We have to react AFTER the other person acts.


Gordon

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Rabbi, an IDPA target against a stump? That would be the double leg amputee robber scenario where the robber is at ground level, I guess.

While you feel 7 yards is not realistic, and for many things it is not, having your attacker at ground level isn't either, nor is the drill itself where you stand there and wait for the buzzer and then shoot the immobile double amputee. It is quicker to get off shots when the muzzle doesn't even have to be brought up to horizontal.

Sure enough, you don't have to aim at that range and that close it might not even be in your best interest to project your pistol forward to normal aiming position as it might just be grabbed or batted away as you effectively hand it off to the bad guy.

Contrary to the notion, just because the timer was on random doesn't mean you weren't gaming it at all. No doubt you were on top edge and just waiting for it. It may not be gaming, but it was anticipating.

Even I can draw from concealment, rock the gun to near horizontal and pump shots into a target in less than a second. This is actually a great little unaimed retention shooting drill to perform. The reason for going to 7 yards was to add in the factor of needing to aim and actually bringing the gun to horizontal.

 

[The Rabbi]

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Raising the target another 2-3 feet would not alter the dynamics. Anyone facing a possible threat at close range will certainly be on high alert. I dont know what you could prove by having a threat materialize out of nowhere while the person was preoccupied with who knows what.
You have actually confirmed my point that since most encounters are 6 ft or under then aiming is largely secondary to speed. I did not claim that I could do something miraculous in drawing and shooting. In fact I said that I am at best an average shooter and that someone with a lot of experience should be even faster.

 

[David Blinder]

I think the point is that response time is materially different when you know you are going to draw and shoot versus when it's a complete surprise. The time needed to figure out what's going on, how it effects you, what you should do in response to it is WAY greater than the time needed to execute once the assessment, analysis and decison have been made. I've had the privilege of observing literally hundreds of top quality shooters in force-on-force scenarios. Some have sub one second draw to first shot times on the square range but invariably, it takes +3 seconds when they have a decision to make. Keep in mind that in FoF, they may not know what is going to happen but they do have the knowledge that in the next few minutes, drama of some sort is highly likely. In other words, their alert meter is pegged pretty high. In a real world CCW situation, it will be rare to have that luxury. Everyone is free to believe what they will but I highly suggest that people test themselves in a legitimate scenario based event if they are interested in learning the truth about how they might perform.

 

[The Rabbi]

I found very helpful a book called "The Snubby Revolver" by Ed Lovette. Somewhere in the book he writes that the gunfight today is going to be pretty much like the gunfight of the past: you are alone, facing a lone assailant. He will be armed likely with a gun but possibly with a knife or blunt instrument. Reloading is seldom an issue. It will be over very quickly and it is unlikely to resemble anything you have ever done in training.

It is this last point that bears keeping in mind. All training is tentative at best. You will never construct a scenario that will replicate any situation likley or unlikely exactly. Merely the act of making it training changes the dynamics of the situation (Maybe this is Heisenberg's Principle?).
I suspect a lot of training is done for entertainment and provided for profit. Thus trainers have a suspect motive in pushing more and increasingly elaborate training. This is not to say that all training is bad or worthless. But I do think the training that prepares you for that exact confrontation does not exist.