Texas Bulldog,
The Marshall article you listed was a very condensed version of the data from several of his books. I had not seen that and appreciate you posting the link.
The following post should give you tons of reading on the Anti-Marshall side of things. Scroll down the page to the "Closing the book on Marshall Sanow" section. This site actually has some great information outside of their fallacious attempts to discredit the Marshall data. They have collected some "testimony" from people who claim this or that did not happen like Marshall said (just a bunch of "we said/they said" kind of stuff if you ask me.)Their major point is that the Marshall data is not a scholarly statistical anaylsis. Marshall never pretended it was, but simply because the situation does not lend itself to classical statistical analysis (too many variables), doesn't mean some very useful information cannot be gathered. I believe Marshall has taken time to gather more useful data on actual shootings than anyone else and I accept it for what it is and use it to my benefit. Anyway, here is where you will find the Anti-Marshall stuff.
http://www.firearmstactical.com./tactical.htm
This site actually presents a ton of great data on physiology in respect to trauma and incapacitation. The only bone I have to pick with them is that they seem to ignore the fact that almost all fights end long before the attacker is actually physically incapacitated. That is a significant fact and anything that contributes to the ending of the fight the fastest should be considered, even if it cannot be neatly measured and categorized. They do a pretty great job of measuring and categorizing everything that lends itself to that kind of analysis, and I appreciate their effort in that regard.
The Marshall article you listed was a very condensed version of the data from several of his books. I had not seen that and appreciate you posting the link.
The following post should give you tons of reading on the Anti-Marshall side of things. Scroll down the page to the "Closing the book on Marshall Sanow" section. This site actually has some great information outside of their fallacious attempts to discredit the Marshall data. They have collected some "testimony" from people who claim this or that did not happen like Marshall said (just a bunch of "we said/they said" kind of stuff if you ask me.)Their major point is that the Marshall data is not a scholarly statistical anaylsis. Marshall never pretended it was, but simply because the situation does not lend itself to classical statistical analysis (too many variables), doesn't mean some very useful information cannot be gathered. I believe Marshall has taken time to gather more useful data on actual shootings than anyone else and I accept it for what it is and use it to my benefit. Anyway, here is where you will find the Anti-Marshall stuff.
http://www.firearmstactical.com./tactical.htm
This site actually presents a ton of great data on physiology in respect to trauma and incapacitation. The only bone I have to pick with them is that they seem to ignore the fact that almost all fights end long before the attacker is actually physically incapacitated. That is a significant fact and anything that contributes to the ending of the fight the fastest should be considered, even if it cannot be neatly measured and categorized. They do a pretty great job of measuring and categorizing everything that lends itself to that kind of analysis, and I appreciate their effort in that regard.
Last edited:
