Minimum Split Time for Self Defense?

[WrongHanded]

Scope of the thread: Practicing shooting at speed is one of many important components of defensive handgun practice. I would like to discuss what should be the minimum bar that a shooter would ideally attain. I'd like to keep a narrow focus, despite the many factors that can effect split times. Split time is also obviously not the only, or even the primary, factor in defensive use of a firearm. I think we all understand that. To keep a narrow focus I'd hoped to limit the discussion in the following ways.

• The gun: I know that the size and weight of a firearm and the cartridge it is chambered in, will greatly effect the ability of any given shooter to shoot quickly and accurately. So let's assume a person has the gun they have, and is not going to change it.
• The draw: Fast and consistent presentation is certainly important, but I don't want to add that to the discussion. Whether someone has a 0.75s draw-to-first-shot, or a 3.0s fumble, is not relevant here (though obviously it is important in the greater picture).
• The target: Whether a realistic representation of a SD scenario or not, I'd like to limit the target to an 8" circle to represent the vitals. This target will be static at a distance of 21 feet. If we use this setup specifically, it gives all who answer the same frame of reference when we talk about accuracy and speed.
• Acceptable accuracy: 90% or higher on the 8" target. I'm not going to suggest higher than that because most of us miss on occasion. Requiring perfection will likely significantly reduce speed. But if shooting a 5 shot string, consistently missing 1 in 5 shots is unacceptable.

So having said all that, we all see people at the range shooting one shot at a time, looking for accuracy and repeatability, and not focusing on speed at all. One way to advance beyond this point is to shoot controlled pairs, or double taps, or longer strings of fire such as the Bill Drill. So when considering the desire to increase speed of shooting, where would you draw the line on minimum split time for the average person looking to become effective at self defense with a handgun?

Given the scope I mentioned, is 1.0s fast enough? Or 0.75s, 0.50s, 0.25s? Even faster than that? Please choose the closest vote option that applies.

 

[Kleanbore]

Take your target size, decide how many hits you want to make, calculate how far the target will move at "Tueller speed", from that calculate the time available, and calculate the needed split time.

 

[WrongHanded]

Take your target size, decide how many hits you want to make, calculate how far the target will move at "Tueller speed", from that calculate the time available, and calculate the needed split time.

Which doesn't answer my question at all. But if you'd like to try again, do the equation using your own variables, and please show you work.

 

[Kleanbore]

Which doesn't answer my question at all. But if you'd like to try again, do the equation using your own variables, and please show you work.

I'll try again. Based on a nominal closing speed of around 100 inches per second, estimate how much time you will likely have available from your first shot to you last, , decide how many hits you want, and calculate the desired split speed.

Then see whether you can put all, or almost all, of your shots into the target area at that rate of fire. Use a realistic distance--say, 8 to 12 feet. In the Tueller drill. 21 feet is the distance at which one starts to draw.

 

[WrongHanded]

I'll try again. Based on a nominal closing speed of around 100 inches per second, estimate how much time you will likely have available from your first shot to you last, , decide how many hits you want, and calculate the desired split speed.

Then see whether you can put all, or almost all, of your shots into the target area at that rate of fire. Use a realistic distance--say, 8 to 12 feet. In the Tueller drill. 21 feet is the distance at which one starts to draw.

Do you think that's a good answer to give to a new shooter who's looking for a solid and achievable goal to work towards?

I purposely included the target size and distance (as well as excluding the draw) specifically to avoid introducing those as variables. Yet you have chosen to introduce them anyway. I don't see why you would do that.

Do you have a number, or not?

 

[film495]

only as fast as you can go and do so safely .. proactice clearing jams also

 

[Kleanbore]

Do you think that's a good answer to give to a new shooter who's looking for a solid and achievable goal to work towards?

That is not the answer. It is the means to develop an answer and to explain the reason why it is what it is.

The instructor should walk the new shooter through it.

You will see that that for any realistic defensive scenario, the answer is your fastest quintile.

I am confident that (1) few new shooters will have any appreciation of how rapidly a defender should be able to shoot--I didn't--and (2) it will take a lot of shooting to approach that speed--it did sure did for me.

 

[WrongHanded]

only as fast as you can go and do so safely .. proactice clearing jams also

Agreed. We all need to practice in a controllable fashion that does not produce an unsafe environment for anyone. And we should practice a great many things besides shooting quickly (with acceptable accuracy).

But whilst balancing all of the veins of defensive handgun training/skills - particularly considering that ammunition availability and costs are proving prohibitive for many people right now - many people (particularly new owners) must choose how much time/ammo to put into a given skill, whilst assuring others also get enough attention. So setting minimum goals to achieve seems prudent.

Personally, I think splits of 1.0s or less is a bare minimum to strive for in ability (based on an 8" target at 21 feet). Faster is certainly preferable, but slower is simply unacceptable. What I'm trying to gauge is how many here think that 1.0s is unacceptably slow, and where they would set that bar.

 

[WrongHanded]

That is not the answer. It is the means to develop an answer and to explain the reason why it is what it is.

The instructor should walk the new shooter through it.

You will see that that for any realistic defensive scenario, the answer is your fastest quintile.

I am confident that (1) few new shooters will have any appreciation of how rapidly a defender should be able to shoot--I didn't--and (2) it will take a lot of shooting to approach that speed--it did sure did for me.

So you figured out what the answer is for you? If so, what is it?

 

[MedWheeler]

I don't think there is a fixed answer I would give a new shooter, or any shooter. I would just say get at least two shots off as quickly as you can without grossly throwing them way off, and be quick enough in between-shots assessment to determine if more are needed or when stopping is indicated. That's how we were trained in law enforcement, heavy on both double-tapping and on constant re-assessment.

A typical double-tap is faster than a full second in between.

 

[WrongHanded]

I don't think there is a fixed answer I would give a new shooter, or any shooter. I would just say get at least two shots off as quickly as you can without grossly throwing them way off, and be quick enough in between-shots assessment to determine if more are needed or when stopping is indicated. That's how we were trained in law enforcement, heavy on both double-tapping and on constant re-assessment.

A typical double-tap is faster than a full second in between.

Well that's a pretty good answer. To be sure double taps are fast than a full second. The way I understand double taps vs controlled pairs is that with a double tap the second shot is taken faster than a second sight picture can be acquired. Where as a controlled pair does require a second sight picture. Though still hopefully faster than a full second between the two shots.

 

[Kleanbore]

So you figured out what the answer is for you? If so, what is it?

You really should do a little homework before posing your questions on this

Your question"]where would you draw the line on minimum split time for the average person looking to become effective at self defense with a handgun?" calls for pure conjecture.

In the old days, "double taps" were taught. Today, the defender is taught to shoot until the attacker stops. In many training videos, including those on "The Best Defense" with Mike Seeklander, we see rates of controlled fire of 3 or 4 shots per second.

Videos of police shootings are roughly comparable, depending upon the speed of the attack.

We see why when we go through the exercises described in Posts 2 and 4 using realistic variables.

 

[JohnKSa]

People tend to shoot very fast in self-defense situations because they're afraid of dying. If they are good at shooting rapidly, they make hits. If they are not, they don't. Practice shooting rapidly (even if it's not practice shooting ultrafast and even if it's not a lot of practice) will help.

Things to focus on when practicing.

I see a lot of people at the range who adjust their grip on the handgun after every shot. Gripping the gun properly provides better control and helps with recoil management, but you don't learn that until you start trying to string together shots without the opportunity to re-adjust the grip with each shot.

Establishing a personal pace. Learning how fast you can go before you're just wasting ammo. This will be different for different distances so part of it is finding a pace for different ranges.

Learning to keep track of the sights.

Trigger control. Shooting rapidly without yanking the trigger, especially on the harder DA/DAO type triggers common these days is an acquired skill.

I guess what I'm saying is that rather than focusing on a specific split time threshold, the focus should be on good practice, good training that will contribute to the skill of shooting rapidly.

 

[Kleanbore]

I guess what I'm saying is that rather than focusing on a specific split time threshold, the focus should be on good practice, good training that will contribute to the skill of shooting rapidly

ABSOLUTELY!!!!

 

[rabid wombat]

I am confident that (1) few new shooters will have any appreciation of how rapidly a defender should be able to shoot--I didn't--and (2) it will take a lot of shooting to approach that speed--it did sure did for me.

Going more basic…a new shooter does not know how fast or how incredibly long 2 seconds is…The club I shot at had as one of their skills, draw and fire 2 scored rounds in two seconds…without a timer, I had no idea…once practiced and timed, there was an epiphany.

As others have said, rounds on target, shoot to stop, reevaluation,…there is a ton to process…

One of my favorite drills, the range officer calls a number…say “3”, the shooters draw and fire that number regardless of where they are in their mag (reload if you have to),…the fun was how many shot when the call was “0”….

 

[WrongHanded]

Your question"]where would you draw the line on minimum split time for the average person looking to become effective at self defense with a handgun?" calls for pure conjecture.

In what way does my question call for pure conjecture? It seems like a pretty simple question. And it's in the context of a drill based on a specific target size and distance.

You really should do a little homework before posing your questions on this

It's interesting to hear that I should do some homework before I ask a question. It's just a question, and I'm not looking for a definite answer. Just to see what people's opinions are. Yet for some reason, it seems you feel the need to horribly overcomplicate a simple question by reading far more into the situation than there is to be read.

In the old days, "double taps" were taught. Today, the defender is taught to shoot until the attacker stops. In many training videos, including those on "The Best Defense" with Mike Seeklander, we see rates of controlled fire of 3 or 4 shots per second.

Okay, so you're saying 0.25s splits. Thanks for the answer.

 

[WrongHanded]

People tend to shoot very fast in self-defense situations because they're afraid of dying. If they are good at shooting rapidly, they make hits. If they are not, they don't. Practice shooting rapidly (even if it's not practice shooting ultrafast and even if it's not a lot of practice) will help.

Things to focus on when practicing.

I see a lot of people at the range who adjust their grip on the handgun after every shot. Gripping the gun properly provides better control and helps with recoil management, but you don't learn that until you start trying to string together shots without the opportunity to re-adjust the grip with each shot.

Establishing a personal pace. Learning how fast you can go before you're just wasting ammo. This will be different for different distances so part of it is finding a pace for different ranges.

Learning to keep track of the sights.

Trigger control. Shooting rapidly without yanking the trigger, especially on the harder DA/DAO type triggers common these days is an acquired skill.

I guess what I'm saying is that rather than focusing on a specific split time threshold, the focus should be on good practice, good training that will contribute to the skill of shooting rapidly.

Thanks for the input. This all rings true with me and I believe is excellent advice for a new shooter. However, I also believe that being able to keep track of shot speed via a shot timer, and establishing goals to work towards, and minimums to maintain can be quite valuable. Hence the question and poll.

 

[Jeff White]

I’m against telling a student that any split time is good enough for self defense. Split times are something used in shooting games.

I once had a discussion about this very topic with a good competition shooter who said if every police officer could draw, fire and make a hit in a time that would make him competitive in a match it would cut down on shootings where something like a cell phone in the hand was mistaken for a gun. His theory was that if the officer had the confidence he could shoot that well he would wait longer before making the decision to engage and that would give him time to see it was a cell phone, not a gun.

That indicates a complete misunderstanding of the dynamics of a defensive encounter. I don’t think you can use any kind of metric to say “x” split time is good enough for defensive shooting.

You mentioned shooting controlled pairs. Controlled pairs are going to be too slow for many defensive encounters. Very close range is going to require shooting hammers or even what the late Pat Rogers called a non standard response.

I think JohnKSa has the right idea. Most people lack the resources to truly train for a defensive encounter. There aren’t a lot of ranges set up where the shooter can shoot while moving at a target that’s moving.

Then there is the over confidence factor you give your student by giving him a metric like that. He meets that metric and where does he go from there? He thinks he’s a gunfighter when he meets that metric and hopefully he’s humbled in force on force training and not on the street where humbling can be fatal.

 

[FL-NC]

Acceptable time would be as much time as it takes for you to handle your business and walk away from the encounter unscathed. As for a training regimen, it may be beneficial for you to look for the qual tables for various mil/LE agencies. Set realistic goals, and train. 3 principles I use in training:
1- practice doesn't make perfect- PERFECT PRACTICE makes perfect
2- you can't miss fast enough
3- Speed is fine, but accuracy is final. You must learn to be slow in a hurry.

 

[Kleanbore]

Just about everyone we see shoots, for some reason at a target 21 feet away. That was a standard police and Army training distance long before anyone ever heard of Dennis Tueller. i have never heard why.

Tueller's 21 feet is the distance that an attacker with a contact weapon can run before the defender can draw and fire, given a draw time of 1.5 seconds. The attacker will be at bad breath distance in less than that time.

In "Lessons from the Street", Tom Givens provided data showing a majority of real defensive shootings in his sample as having occurred within a distance much closer than 21 feet,

When I took a course with I.C E, PDN, we shot at targets at varying distances--usually about 10 or 12 feet. Discussion of the concept of "split times" was strongly discouraged.

Rather, the objective was to achieve a balance or speed and precision--precision meaning keeping all shots within the target (upper chest), snd speed being as fast as the trainee could do that. It varied wit the distance.

Nothing was timed.

I recall speeds that seemed to be around 4 shots per second, but we did not measure.

 

[WrongHanded]

Okay everyone. Apparently split time goals are a terrible idea for any aspect of defensive shooting. It seems speed is very important, but defining that speed as a minimum objective is unimportant. I really didn't see this thread going the way it has. But it did. Thanks for playing. Maybe the next one will be more productive.

 

[Kleanbore]

Done.