Bad guys, police and armed citizens

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • mercop

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 21, 2008
    1,408
    38
    PA
    Recently I read a study conducted by the Force Science Institute Research Center titled Violent Encounters, A study of felonious assaults on our nations Law Enforcement Officers. The study showed the glaring differences in mindset and training between law enforcement and the criminals they face. The point on this article it to discuss the implications this has in regards to the armed citizen.

    During the study 40 incidents were studied out of 800 that were considered. Interviews were conducted with 43 felons and 50 police officers. The scenes of the shootings were also visited.

    Not surprisingly the handgun was the weapon of choice for the bad guy and all but one was obtained illegally on the street or from a robbery. Only one of the felons claimed to have actually selected a particular firearm believing it would be more destructive. Most said they used whatever was available at the time they needed it.

    Some of the bad guys began carrying a firearm as young as nine years old and 17 was the average age at which they began to carry a firearm all the time. This is frightening since we know how unpredictable even non-violent juveniles can be. They also realize that they are protected under the juvenile justice system.

    Approximately half of felons interviewed claimed to have some type of formal firearms training, primarily from the military. The one statistic that blew me away was that on average bad guys reported practicing about 23 times a years in informal settings like back yards or drug areas. This type of constant informal training, which I doubt, is seldom conducted with the goal of shooting tiny little groups in a piece of paper, in very unstructured environments can obviously lead to a “thinking outside the box” mentality. The average police officer in the US qualifies 2.5 times a year. If you are an armed citizen, have you ever qualified? How often do you draw from concealment and engage live/moving targets? The officers who practiced the most off duty did so in the form of competitive shooting. You have to ask yourself how much of that transfers to shooting to save your life.

    Over half of those interviewed had participated in live gunplay prior to engaging a police officer. That means that half of them had previously been inoculated to being shot at or shooting at another person. Ten of the felons had been involved in five or more live firefights. Have you participated in any use of force in the form of Simmuntions or airsoft? Only eight of the 50 police officers had been previously involved in shootings. I have to imagine that number would dwindle even more for legally armed citizens.

    Across the board like most of us, the bad guys carry their guns in the waistband with the groin and small of the back being almost tied in way of preference. Amazingly 40% claimed to carry back up guns. None of them reported using a holster, which leads me to believe they will need only more preparatory movement to access their firearm.

    Approximately 60% of all offenders including the street combat veterans claimed to be point shooters in that they focused on the target. They seemed more willing to shoot at the available target and were not focused on center mass. The concentrated on shooting their victim to the ground and once that was achieved had no problem walking up and executing them.

    In the shootings investigated the bad guys put rounds on target a staggering 70% of the time with only a 40% hit rate for the police. Even though it is not discussed at length in the article it is interesting to note that the majority of time police are involved in a shooting the initial contact is made by the officer. At some time during the contact furtive movement on the part of the suspect often initiates the shooting. Obviously even the most lackadaisical officer realizes the danger of any contact. Police are loosing gunfight even though they initiate contact. The armed citizen is even further behind the power curve since it is usually the criminal who initiates contact.

    Even though I know that many folks seem to know exactly how they will respond to a deadly threat, more than half of trained police officers failed to use deadly force when it would have been justified.

    Existing every day in an environment where violence from fistfights to shootings are the norm the felons expect to be killed and will not hesitate to fire first. They have learned to survive by hitting while their victim is thinking about it.

    Here I only covered some of the high points. What is more important is what it means to police officers and our focus here, the armed citizen. The key to survival is constant, unpredictable training in chaotic environments. Constant means that training cannot depend on just live range time and a choreographed routine. Unpredictable means that what you do in a training session not always be based on what you have in mind and must encompass open hand combatives and the introduction of not only firearms but edged and impact weapons. The chaotic environment is the hard part. For many staying away from these places is what keeps us from getting locked up that would result in us being prohibited from purchasing or carrying a gun. When you do find yourself in a chaotic environment focus on scanning for possible threats without getting tunnel vision.

    In my opinion one of the best training investments you can make is a quality airsoft and Blue Gun. Make the focus of your training responding to furtive movement within seven yards. Putting rounds on target and using every possible aide at your disposal such as open hand skills, light, sound, movement, angles and physical barriers. Learn what your natural responses are and train into them. Come violent or don’t come at all.
     

    shooter521

    Certified Glock Nut
    Rating - 100%
    17   0   0
    May 13, 2008
    19,185
    48
    Indianapolis, IN US
    I read that report when it first came out. Sobering stuff when you think about it, but unfortunately a lot of the potential lessons to be learned are going unacknowledged by many trainers/schools.
     

    indyjoe

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    8   0   0
    May 20, 2008
    4,584
    36
    Indy - South
    It makes sense that the criminals rarely if ever have holsters. One of their requirements is the ability to ditch the gun and no longer have anything on their person connecting them with having carried a gun.

    Definitely things to think about.
     

    shooter521

    Certified Glock Nut
    Rating - 100%
    17   0   0
    May 13, 2008
    19,185
    48
    Indianapolis, IN US
    It makes sense that the criminals rarely if ever have holsters. One of their requirements is the ability to ditch the gun and no longer have anything on their person connecting them with having carried a gun.

    Oh; I thought it was because no belt and droopy drawers weren't conducive to holster carry. :):

    On a somewhat-related note, Steve Tarani taught a disarming technique as part of ITOG's Urban Conflict Resolution course a few years back that was specific to the BG carrying the gun in the front of his trousers. It was pretty damn slick, and addressed what he felt was one of the more common scenarios a citizen might face on the street (i.e. a thug or banger lifting up his shirt to expose his gun as a form of intimidation).
     

    hippykiller

    Marksman
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 2, 2008
    251
    16
    Johnson Co.
    Not an attempt to insult any LEO's on the boards, or any where for that matter. But could it be possible that some armed citizens are better trained then many officers. I have heard even LEO's say befor that many of the officers they serve with only use there firearms when they need to qualify with them. I know there are many armed civilians who shoot atleast once a week. Now I do understand however that simple target shooting can in no way prepare you for what you would experience in a gun fight against one or more armed individuals who's main concer is seeing you dead.
     

    mercop

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 21, 2008
    1,408
    38
    PA
    There is no doubt in my opinion that the average armed citizen is better shooter than your average police officer. However when it comes to other combative skill sets besides the gun including force on force training they are about neck and neck.
     

    Frank_N_Stein

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    79   0   0
    Nov 24, 2008
    10,229
    77
    Beech Grove, IN
    There is no doubt in my opinion that the average armed citizen is better shooter than your average police officer. However when it comes to other combative skill sets besides the gun including force on force training they are about neck and neck.

    There's a big difference in stationary target shooting (whether it is standing, kneeling, or prone) and "combat shooting" i.e. shooting on the move, use of cover/concealment, and having external stressors put on you while shooting (instructors firing weapons loaded with blanks behind you, yelling, describing shoot/don't shoot targets before the course of fire before you shoot and expecting you to remember them and shoot the correct ones).

    You could be a 100% accurate x-ring shooter while standing still, but your accuracy goes down once you put all those other variables in the mix.

    From the article "In the shootings investigated the bad guys put rounds on target a staggering 70% of the time with only a 40% hit rate for the police." I think this could possibly be attributed to the "spray and pray" type shooting that most offenders use when firing at the police. I say most but not all because there have been numerous incidents of police being killed by well-aimed shots, but I think the majority of officers are shot by offenders who simply point their weapon in the general direction of the officer and fire off as many rounds as possible. This tactic is also used for thug-on-thug violence. Police aren't trained in the spray and pray style of shooting because they don't want to cause "collateral damage" by shooting an innocent bystander or another officer. Just my :twocents: as I'm no expert.

    As far as other skill sets besides the gun like mercop mentioned, most police officers only get trained in the basic defensive tactics in the academy and have to seek out additional training in areas such as MMA, knife defense, etc in order to be on par with a non-police officer that may train in those areas regularly.
     

    mercop

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 21, 2008
    1,408
    38
    PA
    Well said, if I could point out to the three major things that I think are lacking in defensive use of the pistol they would be-
    Audio vs visual ques for training
    Lack of shooting within five feet
    Lack of shooting after violent physical contact, meaning their was interpersonal combat before the shooting occurred. Training this creates a smoother transition.
     

    Frank_N_Stein

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    79   0   0
    Nov 24, 2008
    10,229
    77
    Beech Grove, IN
    Well said, if I could point out to the three major things that I think are lacking in defensive use of the pistol they would be-
    Audio vs visual ques for training
    Lack of shooting within five feet
    Lack of shooting after violent physical contact, meaning their was interpersonal combat before the shooting occurred. Training this creates a smoother transition.

    Most police departments with a decent firearms training staff incorporate all 3 of these into the required training curriculum. The physical contact isn't necessarily violent in training, but it does involve some running/grappling/attempted handcuffing/even use of a Taser before shooting to get the heart rate/adrenaline up. Shooting in a relaxed state is easy, shooting while all jacked up is a different story.
     

    mercop

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 21, 2008
    1,408
    38
    PA
    At least here on the east coast I would hesitate to say most. I hope it is different IN.
     

    Tinman

    I'm just enjoying the show!
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    I would agree with you George. Most is probably not what I would say. I would lean more towards a few forward thinking departments. I can only think of 3 that I have had contact with that do any kind of serious stress innoculation or integrated response training.

    I've got some other thoughts, but I'll have to get them up later.

    Tinman....
     

    Tinman

    I'm just enjoying the show!
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Ok, After a brief break to settle the storm at the day job (wow what a week), I’ve got my head back on and wanted to drop a few thoughts on this one.

    I disagree that the hit ration could be attributed to the spray and pray theory. Typically that thought process will yield a lower hit percentage not higher. I think that does explain the thugs willingness to take shots at anything visible rather than focusing on center mass.

    I think the difference in hit percentage could possibly be due too to factors.

    The first being action verse reaction in a violent incident. Although the cops were making initial contact, they still have to operate within the rules of force for their department. In most cases, this gives the action advantage to the bad guy. In the rush for the body to catch up to the mind during the reaction phase, misses happen lots.

    The second as Mercop alluded to is one of training. Not just the frequency, but the type of training they are receiving. It’s likely that the bad guy isn’t training on how to shoot out the X-ring on a B-27 at 25 yards, it’s also just as likely that the cops aren’t training to hit a moving pie plate while on the move one handed at 3 yards. Now before the point shooting verse sighted fire argument flames up again, we all need to face the fact that there are places, situations, distances, and conflicts that support the need to be skilled at both methods of fire. However, for every North Hollywood shootout that requires a 25+ yard pistol shot, there are probably 1000 under 15 yards and 100 under 5 yards. Where should we be spending the majority of our time training to defend our lives as cops, or civilians.

    As a side note, I have often asked why is it that when the FBI shooting statistics show the average distance for a violent confrontation (for LE) going down most of the last 10 years, most of the LE qual courses continue to weight the 25 – 15 yard shooting skills heavier than the 5 and in ranges?

    So I guess in short, in addition to the stress inoculation training, I think there is a fundamental need for more technique based training in the close range conflicts.

    Guess that’s my thoughts, what do you’ll think?

    Tinman….
     

    mercop

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 21, 2008
    1,408
    38
    PA
    I agree Tinman. The sighted vs point shooting thing has been done to death. Before and after my own shootings (one live, one deploying less lethal) I would always go out of my way to talk to folks who had been involved in shootings and ask them if they remembered using their sights or not. Most would say no, some would say yes. When I do my best to remember whether or not I used the sights during my incidents it is hard to do so. What I have surmized is this. Sights are never going to try to kill you, bad guys do, for that reason your eyes lock onto the threat. When the gun gets between your eyes and the threat you pull the trigger, I call this shooting silhouette of the gun. Since the sights are on the gun there is a good chance that you will see them or remember seeing them since they got between you and the threat. The natural focal distance depending on your age is about 11-13 inches. When the pistol is pressed out the front sight can be more than twice that distance. To me that suggests that given the stress of the situation you would likely be unable to "focus" on the front sight during a spontaneous situation. You can see how perception and science and get kind of whacky here.

    For these reason after making sure that the fundamentals of marksmanship are where they need to be for shooters I will continue to teach anatomical indexing and using the silhouette of the gun for combative pistol.
     

    Ashkelon

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 11, 2009
    1,096
    38
    changes by the minute
    As someone who has represented many of these types of felons I often ask in my shooting cases about technique re: sights vs. point and shoot. I have yet to find someone (felon) who has given a response for using laser grips. I personally think we should oufit all road officers with laser grips like those made by crimson trace etc. These dramatically increase target acquisition speed but when I have mentioned this to many of my friends in law enforcement most tell me that is bad guy ******** and if you want to learn to shoot go to the range. Why do you think there is resistance to easily applied technology that can increase reaction time?
     

    mercop

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 21, 2008
    1,408
    38
    PA
    Mindset and training always trump tools. I have not fiddled with laser sights much since the early 90's. I can see where they have there place, but during shootings at well under five yards I don't see them being a huge advantage, and even if they were they have nothing to do with the shooting knowing when and how to deploy his pistol.

    I was at my buddy's house who happens to an air marshal and part time holster makers. A buddy of his had dropped off his J frame off to have a holster done, the gun had a Crimson Trace laser on it. I picked the gun up, cleared it and began to point it at the wall. I was like WTF, no laser? Then I realized I could only see the laser when my finger was on the trigger, when I was point index it covered the laser. I was not impressed.
     

    Ashkelon

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 11, 2009
    1,096
    38
    changes by the minute
    Try the grips not the trigger models. The pressure from the palm of the hand activates the pointer. If gripping properly the laser is not interfered with by the hand. You may want to check them out again.

    I agree that the under 5 yard scenario has nothing to do with tools or gimmicks but I was suggesting a scenario that might aid law enforcement in the 10-20 yard scenario during an adrenaline rush situation. If human nature is to focus on target wouldn't using the most advanced technology be an investment worth making. Hell, we invested in the technology for weapons guidance why not for people?

    I agree that it is the mental knowledge that is your most important weapon.
     

    esrice

    Certified Regular Guy
    Rating - 100%
    20   0   0
    Jan 16, 2008
    24,095
    48
    Indy
    Try the grips not the trigger models. The pressure from the palm of the hand activates the pointer. If gripping properly the laser is not interfered with by the hand. You may want to check them out again.


    If I'm reading mercop's complaint correctly, he is saying that this was a "grip activated" model, and that when his finger was in register along the side of the frame, underneath the cylinder, it was blocking the path of the laser, making it useless.


    I don't think he was suggesting that his trigger finger was not present to activate the switch.
     

    shooter521

    Certified Glock Nut
    Rating - 100%
    17   0   0
    May 13, 2008
    19,185
    48
    Indianapolis, IN US
    If I'm reading mercop's complaint correctly, he is saying that this was a "grip activated" model, and that when his finger was in register along the side of the frame, underneath the cylinder, it was blocking the path of the laser, making it useless.

    That was the read I got, too. This is an issue with the J-Frame Lasergrips in particular; I encounter it regularly when demo'ing them at the shop unless I make a conscious effort to relocate my finger to a different register point (muscle memory is a bitch, though).

    This is the reason why Lasermax put the emitter up near the topstrap on their J-Frame lasers (which are inferior in all other respects).
     
    Top Bottom