Self-defense shooting distances

[ACP]

I spent some time last night with Marshall and Sanow's book "Street Stoppers" in order to get some idea as to self-defense shooting distances.

I know this is a limited set of examples, and that they apply to both police and civilians. But I thought I'd share the results here. Please note, Marshall and Sanow do NOT give exact distances in this book, nor do they attempt to break down shooting scenarios by distance. This is my extrapolation based on the descriptions given. Some are more precise than others.

Anyway...

57 (100%) total shooting scenarios are described, with calibers ranging from .32 ACP to .44 Magnum.

3 (5.26%) occurred at distances I could not determine from the description.

33 (57.9%) occured at contact or arms length/conversational distance. This really surprised me. A lot of these shootings were preceeded by a physical assault, i.e. a stabbing, gunfire, or use of a blunt instrument such as a baseball bat or iron bar. There was quick escalation of force. Many of these scenarios were one-on-one, but several involved a group. Usually, when one of the group was shot, the others fled. These self-defense shootings rarely occured while the good guy was standing in a Weaver stance; he/she was usually crouching, on the ground, or struggling against an advesary.

10 (17.54%) occured at less than the length of a residential bedroom, which I take to be 10 to 12 feet. In this category I include shooting across a vehicle or a Dumpster.

3 (5.26%) occured inside a convenience store.

8 (14%) occured at what I'd call "moderate" distance, i.e. an estimated 30 to 50 feet (shooting from a tree behind a home to a doorway, from the corner of a building to the scene of a crime, from behind a pickup truck, from behind a door to a sidewalk, etc.) What's interesting about these "moderate" distance shootings is that in five of them, the good guy was behind some kind of hard cover (a tree, a brick wall, a support beam, a door, a truck). In one other instance, the person was concealed in high weeds. In the remaining two, the good guys appeared to be completely out in the open (one was cloaked in pitch darkness, though).

Just some food for thought next time I'm at the range. I think I'll spend more time on drawing from concealment and hitting a target 7 FEET away while I'm moving, crouching, or shooting one-handed.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Hackathorn actually suggests that something like 90% of your defensive handgun training should be at distances of 10 yards and less, especially for non-LEOs. Why? Primarily because things tend to happen MUCH faster at close range. You may need better skills at longer ranges, but longer ranges often afford you the luxury of a little more time.

The summary you did of the information is pretty neat. I think you are a little off, however, but probably not due to your work, but due to the bias in the examples presented in the book. LEO shootings tend to take place at longer distances. Non-LEOs, on the other hand, tend to shoot at 3 yards and less. Why? Because they are often the intended victim of a crime. How many times have you heard of people being stabbed or raped at distances greater that contact? How many robbers take place at greater than 3 yards?

An extremely salient point is that proximity negates the need for skill. A blind guy in a wheel chair can shoot and hit an attacker with every round if he has contact with the attacker and hence knows where to point the muzzle. As the distance between sides opens up, more skill is needed to be able to consistently land shots on the opposition. For a person who practices, greater range shooting gives the practiced person a decided advantage over a person who does not practice. Close in, it may all come down to simply who starts pulling the trigger or stabbing with the knife first.

Consider taking a class in handgun defense. Given contact distance incidents, it would be hugely beneficial if you learn about how to shoot from retention and how to properly egress from a situation while being able to stay on the move, firing at the opposition, and to not end up falling down.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

FYI, a course specifically along these lines...

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=27386

 

[toro]

Most experts say that civilians have to watch out for close encounters of the criminal mind. Hackathorn is one of the first people to start the Ohio IPSIC matches way back in the early 80s. I know him, have shot matches with him and have read many of his articles. He really knows what he is talking about. The last I heard from him he was teaching classes for the FBI. This has been a while.

Here are some tips for being Alert. On the street let no stranger take your hand. To allow a potential assailant a firm grip on one of your hands is to give him a possibly fatal advantage. Use your eyes. Do not enter areas you are not familiar with. Try to get something solid between you and your attacker.

Needless to say, no sensible person ever opens the door of his house without knowing who is knocking. If your entranceway does not permit visual evaluation of the person at the front door change it. It is most important to be able to see who is calling.
Just a few hints that may keep you safe

Mrs. Toro


____________________________________

Galations 4: 3-7
Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world: But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, abba, Father, wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.

 

[444]

I have read countless times that the vast majority of shootings occur at close range. I don't argue that, it seems logical and the evidence seems to strongly suppor that position. However, what if you happen to be one of the few that needs to defend yourself at longer distance ? If you only practice at short range to prepare yourself for the most likely senario, you could be in trouble. As was mentioned, shooting at longer range requires much more skill than shorter ranges. Again, as was already mentioned at three yards or five yards, skill isn't all that much of a factor. Speed is the factor, who shoots first or hits first. At those ranges you can pretty much point the gun and hit. At 25 yards, this is unlikely to work. To me, this means you need to spend more time shooting at longer ranges and becoming proficient. After all, if you can put all your shots COM at 50 yards, you are likely to be able to do the same at 3 yards. But it doesn't work the other way around. Don't get me wrong, practice at short range, but don't limit your practice to short range only just because this is the most likely senario. Instead of getting one specific senario in your mind and believing that this is the only possible senario, seek to master every possible senario. Common sense would tell you that you will never master every possible senario, but it doesn't hurt to try.
Every thread like this will have a few guys post: if you ever shot someone past contact distance you will have a hard time explaining it in court or something such as this. Bravo Sierra. I can think of many circumstances where shooting at 25 yards or even further would be justified. Ever thought about how long a grocery store isle is ? What about Wal Mart ? We had a guy a couple years ago (we as in, residents of this town) walk into the grocery store with a shotgun and started shooting people. If you were at the meat counter and saw and heard a guy shooting people, would you wait to see if you are next ? Or wait until he was three yards away ? That could easily be a 25 yard shot. What about this DC sniper ? It isn't hard to envision someone else doing something similar. Some nut staking out a parking lot with a rifle. What if you saw him as he opened fire, possibly when you were in an exposed area where running would only draw attention to yourself could you shoot back (providing it was a safe responsible shot ) ? I mean, there could be millions of senarios like this that arn't far fetched in any way, that have actually happened. Why not prepare for it ?

 

[okjoe]

http://www.pointshooting.com/sop9.htm

The URL is a link to a digest of the NYPD SOP9 analysis of police combat. The material is somewhat dated, but because of the large number of cases considered, it's reasonable that the results will be almost as valid today.

Of particular note are the distances and accuracy rates.

 

[Glamdring]

Great thread. I would like to see more discussion and training on techniques and tactics to use at less than 6 feet.

 

[Glamdring]

http://www.pointshooting.com/sop9.htm

Rapid Reloading

The average number of shots fired by individual
officers in an armed confrontation was between two
and three rounds. The two to three rounds per
incident remained constant over the years covered by
the report. It also substantiates an earlier study
by the L.A.P.D. (1967) which found that 2.6 rounds
per encounter were discharged.

The necessity for rapid reloading to prevent death or
serious injury was not a factor in any of the cases
examined.

In close range encounters, under 15 feet, it was
never reported as necessary to continue the action.

In 6% of the total cases the officer reported
reloading. These involved cases of pursuit,
barricaded persons, and other incidents where the
action was prolonged and the distance exceeded the 25
foot death zone.

Sounds like reloading matters very little.

 

[ACP]

I read the NYC pointshooting.com thread and found it interesting -- though not surprising -- that there is no absolute correlation between good "range" marksmanship (i.e. 25- and 50-yard target shooting) and successful combat shooting.

 

[Blackhawk 6]

Glamdring,

I would say that you are correct...unless of course you find yourself in a prolonged engagement and your slide locks back. Then reloading will matter a great deal.

 

[444]

"there is no absolute correlation between good "range" marksmanship "
That would surprise me. Shooting anywhere, at anything gives you some training in handling the firearm. You are more familiar with it and this usually results in better performance. I don't think this nessessarily means that the best shot on the range is always going to fare the best in combat. But someone who has experience with guns is going to be ahead of someone who doesn't. But you have to keep in mind that gunfighting involves much more than simple marksmanship. Tactics, speed, situational awareness and pure luck factor into the equation among other things. But marksmanship is certainly one factor, it is one piece of the puzzle. It isn't going to make up for a serious lack of the other components, but it is going to help your situation if allowed to come into play by the other factors.

Blackhawk 6: Obvioiusly I agree with that statement, and this is what I am getting at with my first post. You can look at statistics and figure out probabilities. You can decide that most gunfights occur at distance X, most gunfights involve X number or rounds fired etc. And you may be totally correct in your findings. The problem occurs if the gunfight you are in, doesn't follow this pattern. If you have only practiced at 3 yards, and never practiced a reload and your gunfight doesn't happen under these circumstances, you are behind the 8 ball. Instead of limiting your training to the minimum, why not try to prepare for any eventuality ? It isn't going to hurt; if you are involved in a gunfight at close range with a small number of rounds, it didn't hurt you to be prepared for a longer range encounter with more shots fired.

 

[ACP]

My point is that someone who buys a Kimber Gold Macth with adjustable sights and shoots mostly from a rest or slow-fire for accuracy will have a VERY difficult time drawing from concealment and firing one-handed, perhaps while under attack or off-balance and in a handgun retention position, at a closely moving target. Limp wrist? Malfunction drill? Flash sight picture? Retention position? None of this is practiced at 25 or 50 yards, I'll wager.

 

[444]

What you practice and how you practice is a decision you make for yourself. If there is something that you think is important to train on, then do it. If you are deficient, you have no one to blame but yourself. There is nothing that says you can't practice those things at 25 or 50 yards. There is also nothing to say that because you practice at 25 and 50 yards that you don't also practice at 3 and 5 yards. That is my point, practice it all, and do it at all reasonable distance. You will be more well rounded than someone who gets one specific senario in their mind and refuses to believe that anything else is possible. The fact is that there are trends as to what happens most frequently, but in reality anything is possible. We can't train for any conceivable senario, but we can make our training as well rounded as possible.

 

[Blackhawk 6]

444-
You and I are of the same opinion. As you correctly stated, how you train and what you choose to train on is a personal decision. If you choose to train for the "typical" encounter and find yourself in an atypical encounter and you are unprepared, you have no one to blame but yourself.

 

[Art Eatman]

I go for maximum speed in drawing and firing at ranges of one to fifteen yards. I also will try a high-speed draw and fire at two to five yards, and then rapidly swing to targets at 15 to 20 yards.

It doesn't hurt to mess around and try hitting small objects at 50 or more yards, as well. And, I've sat on a hillside and shot at rocks out to 300 or more, with a Gummint model. (You don't holdover nearly as much as some would have it believed. )

I just figure it's familiarization with all phases of shooting a handgun...

Art

 

[Glamdring]

They said 90% of the shootings happened at less than 15 feet that would be only 5 yards.

That broke down to 34% from contact to 3 feet (ie touching to 1 yard)

47% at 3 feet to 6 feet (1 to 2 yards).
***
Does a gunfight at contact to 3 feet really involve shooting skill?

***
For self defense shooting vs offensive shooting, you need the skills to survive the up close and in your face problem before you even think about longer range skills.

Surviving is first priority. Hitting target with a killing shot first doesn't mean the target can't STILL kill you. Specially at close range.

Did you note the single biggest factor of officer survival? It was COVER.

The truth of the matter is no matter what the skill level the closer you are to the target the easier it will be to hit.

 

[Glamdring]

444:

there is no absolute correlation between good "range" marksmanship

I believe they were just looking at the qualification scores of the LEO. Not at who went shooting every week or every month.

 

[voilsb]

I think one should definitely train in some grappling, as well as practice the point shooting referenced above by okjoe, as well as practice the 15, 25, and 50 yard target shooting. If you've got good gun handling skills at long range, you've got the muscle memory for good triger pull and sight alignment. If you practice the point shooting, it looks like you'll have good fast target acquisition. If you practice grappling and knife fighting techniques (hard to do at a range, but you can take some jujitsu classes), you can survive at the < 3ft range.