old lady new shooter
Member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2015
- Messages
- 30,571
USCCA asked prisoners 11 questions about who they target. I found some of the answers surprising, what do folks here think?
Convicted robbers tell how they select their targets
- Thread starter old lady new shooter
- Start date
- Status
Good Ol' Boy
Member
Keep your head on a swivel in urban areas (if you absolutely must go there), and train like your life depends on it, because it likely will.
The answers about gun takeaway is interesting. Assuming that the answers are accurate, it seems to indicate that a lot of the time when people pull guns they are either not competent to use them, or they expect the mere presence of the gun to be enough to end the confrontation.
Valkman
Member
I believe it, in the 3 CCW classes I've taken at least 90% of the class had never shot their weapon before. They barely know how the gun works or how to use it, so yeah I believe that what you say is true. Most are not on forums like this, they do not train or practice. Disaster waiting to happen.
Zerodefect
member
Seems accurate to me.
Criminals have serious ego issues. Note how they responded about other criminals working their turf, or people with bad attitudes. If you have to use your attitude, understand how it could escalate things.
People are domesticated animals. Like it or not. Some people are feral.
How about a non inmate? Open carry chumps are easy targets. $1000, easy cash. Weapon retension is a major PITA in training. You could do a whole weekend on it alone. Fuds would, of course, write it off as Wick nonsense.
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
So contrary to claims by the gun community, robbers are NOT very fearful of getting shot (only 27%). Moreover, drawing your gun is likely (more than half the time) to result in the robber trying to take your gun from you and they will apparently be successful sometimes. Well, if they aren't fearful of getting shot, then there is no surprise that they might be apt to try to disarm you. At the same time, criminals are less likely to attack you if they think you are armed. Okay, so does wearing my 5.11 pants and shoot me first vest make me a target or keep me from being a target. I am so confused.
But are these responses real?
Interesting that these criminals are respectful of the elderly. This seems quite dubious.
He keeps saying that you need to be trained. That doesn't seem to jive with reality common successful defense stories. It would be interesting to see if there were data on training and success in armed self defense. Maybe training makes a big difference, but I don't get that training means a whole lot from the interviews, with the possible exception of retention. Even then, he didn't get into how often the robbers were successful in disarming folks, which might be very telling as well.
Even the guy making the video cannot attest to the validity of the answers. That sort of invalidates the conclusions drawn from the video. Just to be clear, the respondents are the stupid people who were doing stupid things in stupid places, d'uh!
I bet if he did the same type interview with gun carriers, that a huge percentage would claim to be able to successful be able to defend themselves. Opinions and bravado don't mean a whole lot when it comes to reality.
As for avoiding stupid people in stupid places doing stupid things. The "stupid people" are everywhere, so chances are you aren't going to avoid them. Stupid places are where stupid people are doing stupid things, so that is just about everywhere. It is a cute, overly vague saying, but not really helpful.
But are these responses real?
Interesting that these criminals are respectful of the elderly. This seems quite dubious.
He keeps saying that you need to be trained. That doesn't seem to jive with reality common successful defense stories. It would be interesting to see if there were data on training and success in armed self defense. Maybe training makes a big difference, but I don't get that training means a whole lot from the interviews, with the possible exception of retention. Even then, he didn't get into how often the robbers were successful in disarming folks, which might be very telling as well.
Even the guy making the video cannot attest to the validity of the answers. That sort of invalidates the conclusions drawn from the video. Just to be clear, the respondents are the stupid people who were doing stupid things in stupid places, d'uh!
I bet if he did the same type interview with gun carriers, that a huge percentage would claim to be able to successful be able to defend themselves. Opinions and bravado don't mean a whole lot when it comes to reality.
As for avoiding stupid people in stupid places doing stupid things. The "stupid people" are everywhere, so chances are you aren't going to avoid them. Stupid places are where stupid people are doing stupid things, so that is just about everywhere. It is a cute, overly vague saying, but not really helpful.
Old Dog
Member
I'd give these alleged answers about a 10% validity rate.
Inmates routinely lie, obscure, prevaricate, minimize and rationalize when asked questions which will directly impact investigations, convictions, sentencing and release conditions -- all subjects that should be of great concern to them. I don't believe that most prison inmates will be truly honest when responding to surveys from well-intentioned, but anonymous groups when they have no skin in the game.
Too much ego involved, too much posturing, too little concern for fellow humans, far too little honesty and accountability.
Inmates routinely lie, obscure, prevaricate, minimize and rationalize when asked questions which will directly impact investigations, convictions, sentencing and release conditions -- all subjects that should be of great concern to them. I don't believe that most prison inmates will be truly honest when responding to surveys from well-intentioned, but anonymous groups when they have no skin in the game.
Too much ego involved, too much posturing, too little concern for fellow humans, far too little honesty and accountability.
I thought the same. I wonder if this is the respondents showing that their view of themselves is higher than warranted...or maybe it's just purely made up.
A lot of crime is essentially one criminal committing a crime against another criminal. This is one reason that the police can tend to be skeptical of both parties when they show up on the scene.
Choctaw
Member
I think you are absolutely correct. For some reason people don't credit criminals with some of the sheer audacity they are sometimes willing to exhibit. I guarantee you many people who carry are hoping their bluff won't be called when they pull their pistol . If a person isn't willing and capable of fighting with a firearm then leave the gun at home.
RetiredUSNChief
Member
I can't get into this. I got up to "Question number 2" and stopped.
We have no idea what the full questionnaire entails, for one. What is the full and complete list of choices for each question?
How a survey is written is very important to the usefulness of the information. It can reveal biases, for one.
Also, what criminals were subject to this? What are their demographics? How many participated? This, too, is important information.
I stopped watching because it seemed apparent to me that he was offering nothing to me that I didn't already know. And it was in a boring format, to boot.
60 Minutes years ago did it MUCH better on something similar, with actual interviews of car thiefs.
We have no idea what the full questionnaire entails, for one. What is the full and complete list of choices for each question?
How a survey is written is very important to the usefulness of the information. It can reveal biases, for one.
Also, what criminals were subject to this? What are their demographics? How many participated? This, too, is important information.
I stopped watching because it seemed apparent to me that he was offering nothing to me that I didn't already know. And it was in a boring format, to boot.
60 Minutes years ago did it MUCH better on something similar, with actual interviews of car thiefs.
old lady new shooter
Member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2015
- Messages
- 30,571
I was surprised that they said they were less likely to attack females. Maybe they were making that up like some of you are suggesting.
Old Dog
Member
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that I'm not merely suggesting: I know better. The predators almost exclusively target the weak, and unfortunately, that means elderly, disabled and often females (particularly those appearing older or less fit).
entropy
Member
They asked the questions, they edited the video (make no mistake - this video has "key" phrases re inserted thought the video. That is, phrases key to selling USCCA's product.)
This is on top of the questionable veracity of answers from people who lie to live, and live to lie.
While some of the answers fit with other data collected on this subject, I'm taking this one with so many grains of salt, they'll have to up my Lisinopril dose.....
This is on top of the questionable veracity of answers from people who lie to live, and live to lie.
While some of the answers fit with other data collected on this subject, I'm taking this one with so many grains of salt, they'll have to up my Lisinopril dose.....
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
Surely, you aren't suggesting a pro-gun organization is exhibiting any sort of marketing bias, pushing an agenda, creating a new narrative, and playing off of people's fears as if they were the mass media, all for the goal of the glorious dollar?
entropy
Member
Recently, I started to enroll my son in a CCW class. This program requires USCCA membership, and since I had tried to join them once (long story), I used my 'quasi' membership.
They started sending daily emails, like they had before, and they must have tried a tactic that didn't fly with the owner, or maybe it was set up to appear that way.
One of the emails looked like an order for some of their swag, which was never placed. The next day, an email from someone supposedly in their shipping dept. sent an apology for sending an offer as if an order had already been placed. To me, that is phishing, only exceeded in chutzpah by Steve Burke's North American Hunting Club actually sending unordered items, then billing members for them.
I kept the items sent, and sent Steve Burke a letter quoting Postal regulations on such activities, said thanks for the free gifts, please drop me from membership, and I will not be renewing. I then advised him to change advertising tactics, and or hire someone in advertising that actually has a smidgen of ethics. (I know, tough to find, right?)
JTHunter
Member
Does being a hunter make me a "predatory animal" or does it just help to enhance your ability to recognize other "predators"?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
