How accurate should a CCW handgun be?

[David E]

DonRon said:

an officer that I worked with was able to abate a threat with 3 shots out of a S&W model 36, 2 in revolver. Two in the ground and one in the aggressors foot did the trick.

I said:

I'm willing to bet that 2 shots center mass and one in the eye would've "abated" the threat just a little bit better....

DonRon responds:

Tell me you don't work in law enforcement please. That line of thinking will get you before a Grand Jury real quick.

Let me get this straight....are you saying that a viable tactic is to shoot two rounds in the ground and one in the badguy's foot? Just because it "worked" once?

That shooting 2 rounds into the ground and one in the foot will keep IA out of your hair?

Are you saying that 2 rds center mass and one in the eye (fired bang!bang!bang!) is less effective than 2 to the ground and one to the foot?

Tell me, what is wrong with my "line of thinking" that has me putting all of my fired rounds into the badguy instead of missing him completely with 2 out of 3, then barely connecting with the third??

Here is my line of thinking: If it comes time to shoot, I'm shooting for the center of the available mass until the threat(s) is no longer there. I could give a flip about how IA or the DA will regard my shooting as I'm firing rounds into the badguy that's actively trying to kill me.

Somehow, I doubt that you had that concern during your encounter.

 

[Sam1911]

I see I'm returning late to the party, but I'll respond...

That being said, an officer that I worked with was able to abate a threat with 3 shots out of a S&W model 36, 2 in revolver. Two in the ground and one in the aggressors foot did the trick.

I certainly believe you. I'm sure you'd never recommend doing that on purpose, though. If your level of competency is going to degrade by 75% (or whatever) in a life-and-death encounter due to adrenaline/stress/fear/rushing then how much MORE important is it to be highly competent to begin with?

The correct response to a "foot-shot-stop" would be, "Thank God that was enough to stop the attack," not, "I'm satisfied with my performance."

With all due respect, there is no training for a gunfight.

That is a perfectly self-defeating statement, and flies not only in the face of logic, It is also completely contrary to the experiences of guys like Jelly Brice, Jim Cirillo, Bill Jordan, and other legendary gun fighters (and Holschen, Givens, Hackathorn, Cooper, Awerbuck, Chapman, etc., etc., defensive shooting trainers) who practice(d) their skills hundreds of thousands of times to be able to perform those tasks on demand and under extreme stress.

The point isn't to write a script for how your shooting will occur (though there are benefits to developing certain strategic pre-decision paths to guide you through an encounter) but to train yourself to perform the basic tasks well and instinctively so that you don't have to think about them when the need arises.

The bad guys don't come to the training classes and behave like you think they are going to

Of course they aren't at your training class, but they aren't magical, alien creatures. They are humans and they do behave in a range of somewhat predictable ways. Those who study armed encounters and criminal behavior certainly have identified a variety of likely traps, encounters, confrontations, etc. that are most often used to put good folks at risk. If human beings can think of ways to harm others, then human beings can also develop responses to such behavior. AND, can practice those responses so they develop an instinctive set of reactions to increase their chances of surviving such an encounter. (Not that the gun really factors into 90% of those responses ... but I think we're limiting our discussion to those few instances where it does.)

It is absurd -- extremely absurd -- to say that since a task will be hard and will have to be done quickly under stress, practicing that task is not helpful. EVERY person tasked with responding to a crisis practices and drills religiously the skills they'll need to employ in a moment of dire need. Doesn't matter if you're a firefighter, pilot, EMT, sailor, diver, cop, or armed citizen, you drill and drill and drill your emergency response skills so that you don't have to spend time thinking when you must be doing. That's what the practice is for -- to make sure you're executing the task correctly and then make that proper execution as automatic as possible.

 

[DonRon]

I see I'm returning late to the party, but I'll respond...



I certainly believe you. I'm sure you'd never recommend doing that on purpose, though. If your level of competency is going to degrade by 75% (or whatever) in a life-and-death encounter due to adrenaline/stress/fear/rushing then how much MORE important is it to be highly competent to begin with?

The correct response to a "foot-shot-stop" would be, "Thank God that was enough to stop the attack," not, "I'm satisfied with my performance."


That is a perfectly self-defeating statement, and flies not only in the face of logic, It is also completely contrary to the experiences of guys like Jelly Brice, Jim Cirillo, Bill Jordan, and other legendary gun fighters (and Holschen, Givens, Hackathorn, Cooper, Awerbuck, Chapman, etc., etc., defensive shooting trainers) who practice(d) their skills hundreds of thousands of times to be able to perform those tasks on demand and under extreme stress.

The point isn't to write a script for how your shooting will occur (though there are benefits to developing certain strategic pre-decision paths to guide you through an encounter) but to train yourself to perform the basic tasks well and instinctively so that you don't have to think about them when the need arises.


Of course they aren't at your training class, but they aren't magical, alien creatures. They are humans and they do behave in a range of somewhat predictable ways. Those who study armed encounters and criminal behavior certainly have identified a variety of likely traps, encounters, confrontations, etc. that are most often used to put good folks at risk. If human beings can think of ways to harm others, then human beings can also develop responses to such behavior. AND, can practice those responses so they develop an instinctive set of reactions to increase their chances of surviving such an encounter. (Not that the gun really factors into 90% of those responses ... but I think we're limiting our discussion to those few instances where it does.)

It is absurd -- extremely absurd -- to say that since a task will be hard and will have to be done quickly under stress, practicing that task is not helpful. EVERY person tasked with responding to a crisis practices and drills religiously the skills they'll need to employ in a moment of dire need. Doesn't matter if you're a firefighter, pilot, EMT, sailor, diver, cop, or armed citizen, you drill and drill and drill your emergency response skills so that you don't have to spend time thinking when you must be doing. That's what the practice is for -- to make sure you're executing the task correctly and then make that proper execution as automatic as possible.

It has been amazing to see this unfold. Everyone has an opinion and professing to be an expert but NO ONE has taken the time to ask why there were two shots in the ground and one in the aggressors foot!

The officer had a stretched out coat hanger wrapped around his neck in a fight for his very life. The S&W model 36 was his back up weapon he finally was able to get to in the battle.

So tell me, do you drill for this scenario? Is it covered by any of your legendary gun fighters? Have you ever been in a life or death struggle? Have you ever been shot? Have you ever shot another human being? Have you ever even seen a human being shot at close range or at any distance? So many questions remain.

 

[Sam1911]

It has been amazing to see this unfold. Everyone has an opinion and professing to be an expert but NO ONE has taken the time to ask why there were two shots in the ground and one in the aggressors foot!

The officer had a stretched out coat hanger wrapped around his neck in a fight for his very life. The S&W model 36 was his back up weapon he finally was able to get to in the battle.

If you withold critical information about your example, why should anyone consider your view valid?

So tell me, do you drill for this scenario? Is it covered by any of your legendary gun fighters?

With the coathanger? No. Ground-fighting, with back-up guns, close-retention/grapple techniques. Absolutely!

Have you ever been in a life or death struggle? Have you ever been shot? Have you ever shot another human being? Have you ever even seen a human being shot at close range or at any distance?

Thankfully, no. Fortunately you don't have to have killed a man to train for a struggle, or to study lethal force tactics.

So many questions remain.

If you are forthcoming about your examples, not so many.

 

[DonRon]

Just where is it written that bad guys have to be forthcoming so you can tell in advance what they are going to do? With all due respect, I think I told you once before that you assume too much. You get someone all hyped and jacked up with that sunshine superman nonsense and he will think he is invincible and ready for anything. That just never really works out in the real world sir.

All the extensive training I had both Military and Civilian ever prepared me for a real gun fight. Screaming yelling, total chaos, blood everywhere. Then there was the aftershock when everything goes quiet. Then a bunch of so called experts want you to relive it over and over again so they can try and figure it out for you. I love experts, they are the ones who can tell you everything you need to know before it happens. I just call them fortune tellers and chalk it up to that and walk away. That works for me anyway. Regards

 

[Sam1911]

Just where is it written that bad guys have to be forthcoming so you can tell in advance what they are going to do?

Who said they would? I don't think anyone who studies such things would claim that bad guys are going to give you warning. I never claimed that such was expected -- or a necessary part of practice/training.

The purpose of training is to prepare you to act and react by making as much of your response automatic as possible. So that when you grab that gun and squeeze, the shot goes as close as possible to where you intended without you having to take the time to ponder HOW to accomplish that.

With all due respect, I think I told you once before that you assume too much.

I'm pretty dense. What are you assuming that I'm assuming?

You get someone all hyped and jacked up with that sunshine superman nonsense

What in the world are you talking about? Speak clearly, please.

and he will think he is invincible and ready for anything. That just never really works out in the real world sir.

If you come through training and you think you are "invincible and ready for anything" then you've CLEARLY missed the point. I'd say quite the opposite is more likely true. The more you learn, the more you understand your own limitations and how much more work you have to do.

All the extensive training I had both Military and Civilian never prepared me for a real gun fight. Screaming yelling, total chaos, blood everywhere. Then there was the aftershock when everything goes quiet. Then ...

None of which says that you would have performed better if you were untrained -- or that you wouldn't have been better prepared with more practical, realistic, relevant training.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by DonRon: Just where is it written that bad guys have to be forthcoming so you can tell in advance what they are going to do? With all due respect, I think I told you once before that you assume too much. You get someone all hyped and jacked up with that sunshine superman nonsense and he will think he is invincible and ready for anything. That just never really works out in the real world sir.

All the extensive training I had both Military and Civilian ever prepared me for a real gun fight. Screaming yelling, total chaos, blood everywhere. Then there was the aftershock when everything goes quiet. Then a bunch of so called experts want you to relive it over and over again so they can try and figure it out for you. I love experts, they are the ones who can tell you everything you need to know before it happens. I just call them fortune tellers and chalk it up to that and walk away. That works for me anyway. Regards

Now, what is all that about?

This thread started out with a legitimate question about handgun and shooter accuracy requirements for CCW. In the discussion of that subject, the importance of a second variable--time to get shots on target--was introduced. That quite naturally led to a discussion of the importance of training and skill development and practice to maintain skills.

As Sam1911 said,

EVERY person tasked with responding to a crisis practices and drills religiously the skills they'll need to employ in a moment of dire need. Doesn't matter if you're a firefighter, pilot, EMT, sailor, diver, cop, or armed citizen, you drill and drill and drill your emergency response skills so that you don't have to spend time thinking when you must be doing. That's what the practice is for -- to make sure you're executing the task correctly and then make that proper execution as automatic as possible.

I don't really think that anyone can reasonably disagree with that.

Surely many incidents develop unpredictably, but the issue is skill development. Again from Sam1911:

The point isn't to write a script for how your shooting will occur (though there are benefits to developing certain strategic pre-decision paths to guide you through an encounter) but to train yourself to perform the basic tasks well and instinctively so that you don't have to think about them when the need arises.

And again, in the event, the unexpected will likely occur. I think that that's what you have been trying to say, DonRon--correct me if I'm wrong.

However, that the unexpected may occur does not negate either the importance or the usefulness of one having developed and practiced the basis skills, whether one is discussing fire fighting or flying an airplane or evasive high-speed driving--or defending oneself with a firearm, for that matter.

 

[DonRon]

Point Taken, my point is to always stay realistic. There is no absolute in a gun fight ever! So don't go telling people there is

When you work OIS (Officer Involved Shooting) case files you will see this develop. I will site the case of another officer who was former combat Marine, had achieved black belts in every form of martial art to Black and Decker power tools. 229 lbs of human fighting machine, 26 inch waist and 56 inch chest. Carried a custom Yonkers Blaster by Kimber with Night sights, expanded and extended magwell and God knows what other doo dad he had on it that he spent 4 grand on. He was also the departments tactical combat weapons expert and trainer.

He got dropped and killed by a 19 year old Mexican illegal immigrant with a .25 caliber Bryco pistol. When he made his entrance he observed the subject and saw the Bryco Pistol. He instinctive turn side ways and flinched as the subject fired. The .25 caliber slug entered his upper arm then got into his thoracic cavity and bounced around being contained by the inside of his ballistic vest. We think it hit the heart twice in its travels.

There is just way too many variables to say anything is an absolute when it comes to a close quarters or 10 foot area gun fights. Being prepared is one thing. However that said, I am personally convinced that gun sights and ammunition is totally irrelevant.

 

[9mmepiphany]

However that said, I am personally convinced that gun sights and ammunition is totally irrelevant.

While I can understand your view being a product of your exposure to out of the ordinary shootings, to advocate that as the default only leaves a responsible gun carrier less prepared that he needs to be. One should always optimize their abilities and tools to an unexpected encounter...it is always better to have the odds in your favor.

I quoted the the above, be cause it does remind me of something a trainer once told me. He was a shooter for a gang in Southern CA. His Shotcaller had seen to to Northern CA to teach the young gangbangers how to correctly do drivebys. He was in jail on a unrelated charge and I had a chance to debrief him...he was actually very professional about what he did. He also advocated not using the sights and the use of FMJ ammo. His reasoning was that the point was not to stop your target, but at a way to disrespect him...it was much like Counting Coup.

While I have little doubt that you really believe that your training and preparation has served you well, newer shooters should take advantage of advances in training and technique to better their chances of survivial in a deadly encounter.

 

[DonRon]

There you go again. Would you care to explain what an Ordinary shooting is because I have never seen such a thing in my 40 yr career. 20 with NJSP and then another 20 with the DOJ.

 

[DonRon]

Now, what is all that about?

This thread started out with a legitimate question about handgun and shooter accuracy requirements for CCW. In the discussion of that subject, the importance of a second variable--time to get shots on target--was introduced. That quite naturally led to a discussion of the importance of training and skill development and practice to maintain skills.

As Sam1911 said,



I don't really think that anyone can reasonably disagree with that.

Surely many incidents develop unpredictably, but the issue is skill development. Again from Sam1911:



And again, in the event, the unexpected will likely occur. I think that that's what you have been trying to say, DonRon--correct me if I'm wrong.

However, that the unexpected may occur does not negate either the importance or the usefulness of one having developed and practiced the basis skills, whether one is discussing fire fighting or flying an airplane or evasive high-speed driving--or defending oneself with a firearm, for that matter.

Please don't parse my statements like this in the future. I feel it is offensive and condescending. Let's debate and discuss only one issue at a time for the sake of clarity.

Thanks Ron

 

[gunzee]

As long as it's 10" or less, 25 yds, it'll outshoot you

when you are under fire. An exception might be if you have installed your earplugs, are braced around cover, and the target is unaware of your presence (because he's engaging someone else, etc.)

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by DonRon: Please don't parse my statements like this in the future. I feel it is offensive and condescending.

Which of the following do you believe I have done?

parse (pärs)
verb parsed parsed, parsing pars·ing, pars·es
verb, transitive
1.To break (a sentence) down into its component parts of speech with an explanation of the form, function, and syntactical relationship of each part.
2.To describe (a word) by stating its part of speech, form, and syntactical relationships in a sentence.
a. To examine closely or subject to detailed analysis, especially by breaking up into components: “What are we missing by parsing the behavior of chimpanzees into the conventional categories recognized largely from our own behavior?” (Stephen Jay Gould).
b. To make sense of; comprehend: I simply couldn't parse what you just said.

I quoted your entire post and indicated that I did not understand what you were trying to say:

Now, what is all that about?

Sam1911 made a similar comment:

What in the world are you talking about? Speak clearly, please.

To try to comprehend your statements, I made an educated guess about your meaning and asked for your confirmation or correction:

... again, in the event, the unexpected will likely occur. I think that that's what you have been trying to say, DonRon--correct me if I'm wrong.

However, so far, you have neither confirmed nor corrected me.

Let's debate and discuss only one issue at a time for the sake of clarity.

Perhaps you could clarify a bit. The issue at hand for the last several posts has been one of the importance of training. Sam1911 has provided some very worthwhile discussion on that issue. You seem to have been arguing with him, but to what end is not clear.

Your more recent comments have been about noise on the battlefield, stopping someone with a shot to the foot (with something about a coat hanger added later), a tragic death of a fine man at the hands of a crook with a .25 automatic, to mention a few, and another one that is quite clear:

You just can't prepare for everything, that's the interesting part about life. The older you get the better you will understand that!

No one can argue with that, and it was that one that led me to ask if your point has been "the unexpected will likely occur."

If that is the meaning, and it is certainly a very true statement, how does it relate to the issue at hand--the importance of training?

Are you disagreeing with Sam1911 when he says,

EVERY person tasked with responding to a crisis practices and drills religiously the skills they'll need to employ in a moment of dire need. Doesn't matter if you're a firefighter, pilot, EMT, sailor, diver, cop, or armed citizen, you drill and drill and drill your emergency response skills so that you don't have to spend time thinking when you must be doing. That's what the practice is for -- to make sure you're executing the task correctly and then make that proper execution as automatic as possible.

and

The point isn't to write a script for how your shooting will occur (though there are benefits to developing certain strategic pre-decision paths to guide you through an encounter) but to train yourself to perform the basic tasks well and instinctively so that you don't have to think about them when the need arises.

and if so, why?

You have related stories of real world experience and training. You have given some excellent advice in terms of knowing when to stop shooting, avoiding conflict, not engaging in a long range fight for SD, and other points. The problem I have is why you have been arguing with Sam1911 about training and on what basis.

I have not intended to offend you. However, none of us can debate any issue with clarity if you do not make make clear what you mean.

 

[DonRon]

I did not mean for my commentary to be misconstrued and determined as an argument with anyone. I was hoping it was a debate where as all can learn and benefit. I do however feel ganged up as there are 3 moderators in my wheel house.

I guess the point I am trying to drive home is there is never a normal shooting, nothing ever goes as planned and when the SHTF happens all bets are off and sights, bullet caliber are irrelevant. No matter how hard you train there will always be the unknown factor so be prepared to think fast on your feet and don't follow any predetermined game plan. Adapt and adjust to what you are dealing with and you better be quick doing it. Additionally there is no disgrace in running away and many confrontations can be resolved by this. Put your pride and ego in your pocket and walk or run away as I taught my guys. I would rather have live cowards than explaining what happened to a dead hero's wife and/or parents.
Regards Ron

 

[Prosser]

Excellent comments, DonRon and all.

While I am all for thread drift, I think one of the most important points is that the targets react unpredictably to being shot, and this creates major issues with what you consider adequate accuracy.

 

[content]

Hello friends and neighbors // I use medium sized pizza boxes for SD practice.

Hold up one of the Med. pizza boxes to your chest and you can see how getting hits in this area will count in a SD situation.

We have our own outdoor range and I set it up like the last Advanced Defensive Handgun course I took.
I set up three boxes chest high spaced and staggered 10-15 yards front to back and 5-10 feet left to right.

First I pull up in my truck and practice drawing upon exit. I fire from behind the door, or over the hood, two each if using the CZ75B .40 or one each if using the S&W442 .38.

I then practice on the move. Draw, shoot, then step right or left and shoot again, repeating until empty, reload and continue.
After I got comfortable with this I started moving up and down slope stepping over obstacles (rocks, logs) while shooting.

It is foolish to think I will be attacked at the range with known surroundings and a nice flat floor. I am a member of the local range and enjoy shooting yellow jackets and T2-blues as much as the next person but accuracy is relevant to the situation.

SD Accuracy is the question and hitting medium sized pizza boxes while on the move is the answer. I do get most in the center quadrant now but I'll still take a hit anywhere on the box as a potential life saver

I'm not much into hazardous on the job training, especially if my life is at stake so building confidence and muscle memory should aid my accuracy and possibly save my life.

At least that is the plan.

***I have only taken SD classes. I have never been engaged while armed like a LEO or Soldier and hope never to be.
My thanks to those who put themselves in harms way so most of us do not have to.

 

[David E]

The .25 caliber slug entered his upper arm then got into his thoracic cavity and bounced around being contained by the inside of his ballistic vest.

Nope, that's not how it happens. Due to physics and what-not, once the bullet leaves the body and encounters the cushion of the kevlar ballistic vest, the bullet is captured therein. (Unless it's so powerful to penetrate it) It won't be redirected back into the body.

 

[David E]

As far as "training for a gunfight" goes, can you train specifically for a gunfight?

No, but you can train for the elements of one. You can train your gunhandling and marksmanship skills to a high level, leaving you to think about the situation and not about basics like "where is the safety release on this thing?"