Is anyone changing carry/training distance in light of terrorrist threats?

[MachIVshooter]

the term "statistically significant" or "statistical significance" has a well defined, technical meaning. And use of the term in a technical sense, together with associated statistical analyses, has application in the social sciences.

I absolutely agree. But terror attacks differ from other injury and injury death statistics in that there is no way to calculate a statistical probability. Homicides, MVA, drowning, poisoning, falls-they occur with regularity, to the point that we can anticipate with reasonable accuracy how many will fall victim in a given time period. We can further analyze the data to determine that people of certain ages, people of certain races, people living in particular areas, etc. are at a greater risk of certain causes of injury or death. Again, no way to know that with terrorism. If it occurs, it can be anywhere, have casualties ranging from 0 in a botched attempt to thousands, and the victims can be anyone of any age/size/sex/sexual orientation/race/creed/religion/ethnicity/nationality. Hence my contention that it is random. Of course, random doesn't necessarily mean insignificant; that I conclude by adding the vanishingly miniscule likelihood to the randomness.

You might be trying to say that the rarity of injury from terrorism is so low that as a matter of probability (statistics) the likelihood of injury is low (insignificant). If so, that's fine. But then the conclusion that low probability equates to insignificance is a value judgment, not a statistical or mathematical conclusion.

It is also a value judgement, but not that alone. The "mass shootings" fall more into that category, as though there is still some randomness to them, they happen with enough frequency and there are enough common denominators that some predictions can be made about them. The contribution of mass shootings to annual homicide rates is miniscule, but the frequency of occurrences enough for them to be tabulated and averaged over a given time period. Not so with legitimate terror attacks.

 

[old lady new shooter]

I also don't see that the enemy's ideology and goals-the reason behind their attacks-make them any less random to the rest of us. You really can't even put longshot odds on an American citizen on American soil being a victim of a terror attack, let alone one that provides the intended victim a situation in which they can defend themselves (shooter vs. bomber, etc). So, I maintain that for the purposes of this discussion-being armed adequately to defend against a terrorist-, the threat is statistically insignificant, because even assuming the if is dealt with, not only is the where, when and who random to the victim(s), but so is the how.

So, you really think a terrorist attack is equally likely in a remote town in Alaska and a large prominent synagogue in New York City?

 

[MachIVshooter]

So, you really think a terrorist attack is equally likely in a remote town in Alaska and a large prominent synagogue in New York City?

Nice straw man. Please read the rest of my posts before you proffer any more such ridiculous extrapolations as though I predicated them.

In the interest of expediency, I already covered target density as being the one predictable variable of terror attacks:

The only pattern to these attacks is that they are far more likely to occur in places where there are large numbers of people.

 

[old lady new shooter]

Nice straw man. Please read the rest of my posts before you proffer any more such ridiculous extrapolations as though I predicated them.

In the interest of expediency, I already covered target density as being the one predictable variable of terror attacks:

Population density of the city was only one factor in my example.

 

[mljdeckard]

Not to where I expect a pistol to do a rifle's job. State laws and guard regulations in my state have made it more possible to keep a rifle in my truck more often.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...terror attacks differ from other injury and injury death statistics in that there is no way to calculate a statistical probability. Homicides, MVA, drowning, poisoning, falls-they occur with regularity, to the point that we can anticipate with reasonable accuracy how many will fall victim in a given time period. We can further analyze the data to determine that people of certain ages, people of certain races, people living in particular areas, etc. are at a greater risk of certain causes of injury or death. Again, no way to know that with terrorism....

Really? How do you know? Where's your data? You're just guessing.

There is no doubt an enormous amount of data on terrorist acts over a fairly long period -- data on time, place manner, number of terrorists, responsible group or groups, target, damage, casualties, etc. All this data could be categorized and analyzed. And i strongly suspect it has been.

Bottom line is that I don't think you know what you're talking about.

 

[BigBore45]

he guys lets stick to the OP not go haywire over a comment. common one of you is a moderator.

 

[a_canadian]

I agree most heartily with BigBore. Among family and friends I'm tolerated as something of a grammar nazi and pedant when it comes to the use and abuse of the English language, but getting emailed notifications regarding updates to this thread only to find repeated boring digressions over something as exquisitely boring as statistics and its terminology is tempting me to unsubscribe... and I don't wish to do that as legitimate comments on the thread's subject are of interest to me. Not that the quibblers give a rodent's hindquarters what I think... but kindly grow up a little for the sake of the actual subject at hand.

 

[Frank Ettin]

Sorry, but bad information is still bad information. There is already enough bad information floating around in cyberspace.

 

[MachIVshooter]

Really? How do you know? Where's your data? You're just guessing.

There is no doubt an enormous amount of data on terrorist acts over a fairly long period -- data on time, place manner, number of terrorists, responsible group or groups, target, damage, casualties, etc. All this data could be categorized and analyzed. And i strongly suspect it has been.

You accuse me of conjecture, then turn around and speculate in the very next sentence. We have a word for that.

Having said that, I agree that the data of the handful of terrorist attacks has been dissected every which way, down to the bits and atoms, and poured over by analysts galore. Doesn't mean there has been a pattern established for predicting future attacks without gathering intelligence. They are still random to everyone but those planning them.

Population density of the city was only one factor in my example.

I said nothing of population density; I said large numbers of people. But please, enlighten us: What other common factors are there between each of the Al Qaeda/IS terror attacks? Were not the people in the twin towers from all walks of life? All different religions, races and ethnicities? How about France? London? Spain? They did not attack Synagogues or Christian churches, nor were these government buildings. Simply places where they could inflict maximum casualties with minimum personnel in Western nations considered to be enemies.

kindly grow up a little for the sake of the actual subject at hand.

It is the subject at hand. Whether or not terrorism represents a real threat, and whether or not anticipation and preparation makes a difference IS the thread. If the minutia of that bore you, if talking about from how far away you can get a round out of your trunk gun and into an IS fighters skull is what you want, there is no doubt a chest thumping thread about this stuff over on glocktalk or arfcom.

 

[Frank Ettin]

You accuse me of conjecture, then turn around and speculate in the very next sentence. We have a word for that....

I clearly said I was speculating. You purported to be stating fact.

...I agree that the data of the handful of terrorist attacks has been dissected every which way, down to the bits and atoms, and poured over by analysts galore. Doesn't mean there has been a pattern established for predicting future attacks without gathering intelligence. They are still random to everyone but those planning them....

More guesses stated as fact. Where's your evidence? And if attacks are not random to those planning, they are not random.

 

[MachIVshooter]

More guesses stated as fact

Wrong. I can play the semantics game too. I said doesn't mean a pattern has been established; I did not say it hasn't been. However, if there is one, particularly where Al Qaeda/IS attacks on US soil are concerned, I'm not aware of it.

Where's your evidence?

Onus probandi. You deny my assertion that came first, so support yours. Besides power laws, which we really have insufficient incidents with AQ/IS to apply here in the US, and targeting large groups of people being an expected tactic, what is the pattern that makes the attacks statistically significant? Predictable? The only such risk factor analysis I've seen offered is the lifestyle-exposure theories that go hand-in-hand with terrorists targeting large groups. Aside from that, the only predictable thing about radical Islamic terrorist attacks is that they probably will not hit a mosque. Everywhere else is fair game.

Really, what pattern can you establish with the '93 WTC bombing (6 dead), '97 empire state shooting (7 dead), 9/11 (2,977 dead), DC sniper (5 dead in 5 separate incidents), fort Hood (13 dead) and Boston Marathon (3 dead)? And only two of those were done by a terrorist organization; the rest shared the religious extremism, but acted on their own.

 

[The Alaskan]

Well this thread went south pretty quick. Figure I'll throw in a few efforts at comic relief.

...but the odds are so remote that upsizing/increasing capacity of your daily carry for that reason would be like taking a parachute in your carry on when flying commercial airlines just in case your flight is that one in 2 million that falls out of the sky.

United Airline's carry on policy allows sport parachutes. Guess they never heard of D.B. Cooper.

I once knew of a flight mechanic at a local, regional airline who flew around with a parachute. No kidding. (Then again, after being a mechanic at that same airline, I don't blame him.)

So, you really think a terrorist attack is equally likely in a remote town in Alaska and a large prominent synagogue in New York City?

Hey, now. Do you know something I don't know.

 

[agtman]

This thread's run its course, Gents. As always, IBTL.

 

[coloradokevin]

No real notable changes here. I pretty much always carry, and 98% of the time my off-duty (CCW) gun is a Glock 26. For years I've gone back and forth between carrying just one magazine (11 rounds total), and throwing a second full-length magazine in my pocket (11+17 rounds, for 28 total). These days I'm maybe slightly more inclined to carry the extra magazine, particularly when I'm in big city areas, or crowds of people. But, I haven't really changed all that much… the threat is the same, people are just now starting to realize it.

 

[Walkalong]

Or am I just kidding myself?

Practice is never a waste of time, however, the chance of an average citizen stopping an incident like this is remote, but one needs to be ready for things in life, so practice as you see fit.

While the chances you will be involved in a terror attack are very small, you might just win the lottery so to speak, as someone will after all.

Be ready to get yourself to safety, and maybe save some lives doing so, which should always be the focus of training.

Come home alive is always the point, isn't it?

 

[ACP]

Yes, getting home alive, I agree, Walkalong.

I guess my point is, from what I have read, al Qaeda would target military/purely Christian targets for fear of injuring any Muslims.. ISIS is engaged in a different type of terrorism -- more public and random?

I am out with my kids a lot at schools and shopping malls. It is Christmas time -- we are attending a lot of Christian-type events, and public events, like train rides and movies and shopping and parades.

Are those potential targets for terrorists like ISIL? Yes.

is ISIL in the United States? I don't know.

More importantly -- for me -- is there a difference in distance between an ATM mugging and a hostage situation, or prolonged attack? I believe so.

So for myself, I tend to be practicing at much longer distances now (50 and 75 feet on a 6" paper plate and an 8.5x11" piece of copy paper) than I have been in the past.

And, I shot a few of my different carry guns (fixed sights) at that distance last week. I was shocked at how much more practice I need. Let's just say the Browning Hi Power is on my hip now, and the S&W Model 65 is staying in the safe.

 

[X-Rap]

Practice is never a waste of time, however, the chance of an average citizen stopping an incident like this is remote, but one needs to be ready for things in life, so practice as you see fit.

Been reading about a guy who was at the clinic in CS and came FTF with the killer, had his window shot out, if armed could he have effectively engaged the killer at that point?

 

[Sheepdog1968]

No change. Having said that, the only thing I dislike about my XS sights on a pistol is that I find them harder to use at 25 yards or beyond. Inside of 15 yards, I love XS sights. Nothing that has happened recently will make me change them. This year I've been shooting more out at 25 yards to gain confidence. Michael Bane has been experimenting with a red dot sight on a pistol and he says it makes shots out to 50 yards easy. My brother recently put a red dot on a training pistol and my brother will be taking a class with it (one he has taken before with irons on a pistol). I will see what he thinks. Maybe in the future I will switch over to a red dot with co witnessed irons or put a laser on my pistol and see how that helps me at 15-50 yard distances.

This isn't predicated on what has happened recently but more that I know what my current limitations are for defensive firearms use is and wanting to see if I can extend my effective self defense distance in the rare event I need to shoot further than 15 yards.

 

[gallo]

If I had a nickel for everytime I read, 'you're more likely to die of this or that than by a terrorist attack', I would have paid my mortgage a couple of time over. The fact is that stats don't matter to those that are dead or get caught in a gun fight. Let's be honest, the chances of getting in a gun fight, period, are less than whatver stats you fancy — lighting, heart attack, etc— to justify carrying in the first place. But we still carry, right? So why not, in light of recent threats, give some thought to a little more capacity, an extra magazine, per se.

That's what I did. I added a magazine to my G26 edc. I may never be involved in a terror attack. It may not even make a difference, but it won't hurt having it on if something does happen. Is it a substitute for heightened awareness? No! But neither is a pocket full of lint, where instead an extra magazine could ride. That's my 2 pennies on the matter.

 

[a_canadian]

Pocket full of lint, eh? I wonder... has a bad guy ever been taken out with pocket sand? Or isn't that a thing?

 

[gallo]

Pocket sand is only a distraction, like a ninja's smoke bomb, to get away.

 

[a_canadian]

Not quite like a smoke bomb, ninja or otherwise. Pocket sand is partially disabling. Hard to pick your targets when your eyes are being scoured with sharp sand as you try to clear them. Just joking of course. My wife wouldn't tolerate sand going into her cute little Samsung washing machine and without making a custom 'sand bomb' I'd have trouble getting all the sand out of every pair of pants before tossing them in the wash. Hm. Sand bombs... that could be a thing. Peppery sand bombs.

 

[GEM]

Coming back to this thread, I would like to thank Frank the Mod for his expansion of the meaning of statistical significance. Even though, I taught the subject from 1973 to last year, wrote a stat book and designed a major web site explaining basic concepts - I couldn't have done it better.

 

[shafter]

The armed citizen going about his business does not carry a handgun to fight his way to a long gun. That person would get flayed in court if they managed to disengage and then return with a rifle.

Consider your handgun as your primary. It's what you've got to deal with whatever comes at you. Win or lose that's what you're fighting with so make sure you carry accordingly.