Lots of commentary on recent events, one thought that comes up is that what stops a shooter during the event is a hit. Not a Dead Right There kill. All too often nothing is done and people just hide - and if they aren't armed or are trying to shelter family while the shooter is moving away, then good.
But for those facing the muzzle, just how accurate do you need to be? Spray and pray? Nope, not even. There are likely innocent people around, even choosing to run toward the confrontation and even more so, in the actual line of fire. Can't fix that. They aren't being stupid, they are simply acting on a lack of information. When interviewed and asked "why did you run toward the conflict?" they most usually say, "I didn't even know."
Now, we can most assuredly make comments about sheep throwing their aprons over their head and wildly blundering around, but isn't neither generous, accurate, or solves the problem. If you intend to return fire - you must deal with it.
So, how accurate do you need to be? Good enough to get an odds on hit. Not a miss and a lifetime of regret. And get that hit while moving away, seeking cover, or peeking around from something to see an armed shooter at that moment being a generously placed target.
Take a ringed torso target, name the number you think is minimum. Only 9's and above? I will ask for you to substantiate that in the actual shot placements recorded in recent history. Nope, they were not even that good. In most cases, 7 ring.
Now, can they still fight back, yes. But - do they? For the ones interested in getting even with life by shooting innocents, not so much. Many quit the fight and even the field of battle they chose to dominate. Once hit - and significantly, even fired at - they immediately reconsider, move out of the zone, and retreat.
You do not need to hit a 9 zone shot or above with a heavy weapon that will knock them off their feet and kill them on the spot before their head even hits the pavement. It's a ridiculous fantasy in the light of actual events.
And the committed terrorist? I will say that if the perpetrator is not leaving the field, they remain a target to be hit again, until they stop trying to shoot other people. Now, we can cuss and discuss where to aim on endless pages of pixels, the point is that you hit them again. And, once again, you do not necessarily need to make another 9 ring or better hit. You need to make A hit, not a miss. Another hit is additive and the body will be sending signals to the brain to stop it to survive. It's extremely difficult to overcome and nobody is trained to do it - get hit again and again and keep shooting. No, there is no course coming to your range that does it, and I haven't seen anyone advertise it yet.
Now, there is a contingent of shooters who think it's absolutely necessary to train to get precision hits - and I think it's a dangerous standard as some people who could be motivated to shoot back don't. They aren't bullseye shooters and are good enough to get on paper in the black. Well, that IS good enough. Returning fire is rare enough, we shouldn't create an artificial obstacle to returning fire when it's justified.
If you are in their crosshairs, and you have the shot - don't pass on it because "it's not good enough." The preponderance of evidence shows that hits are the minimum standard and there is no higher scoring in real combat. You get hits, you can and will win the fight.
Combat/self defense is about hits. Not scores. A "poor" shot who gets hits can win the day. What evidence of that do I have? The majority of servicemen who pass weapons qualification do not fire Expert. But they qualify, and that is all that is being asked. That is the real standard - get a hit.
But for those facing the muzzle, just how accurate do you need to be? Spray and pray? Nope, not even. There are likely innocent people around, even choosing to run toward the confrontation and even more so, in the actual line of fire. Can't fix that. They aren't being stupid, they are simply acting on a lack of information. When interviewed and asked "why did you run toward the conflict?" they most usually say, "I didn't even know."
Now, we can most assuredly make comments about sheep throwing their aprons over their head and wildly blundering around, but isn't neither generous, accurate, or solves the problem. If you intend to return fire - you must deal with it.
So, how accurate do you need to be? Good enough to get an odds on hit. Not a miss and a lifetime of regret. And get that hit while moving away, seeking cover, or peeking around from something to see an armed shooter at that moment being a generously placed target.
Take a ringed torso target, name the number you think is minimum. Only 9's and above? I will ask for you to substantiate that in the actual shot placements recorded in recent history. Nope, they were not even that good. In most cases, 7 ring.
Now, can they still fight back, yes. But - do they? For the ones interested in getting even with life by shooting innocents, not so much. Many quit the fight and even the field of battle they chose to dominate. Once hit - and significantly, even fired at - they immediately reconsider, move out of the zone, and retreat.
You do not need to hit a 9 zone shot or above with a heavy weapon that will knock them off their feet and kill them on the spot before their head even hits the pavement. It's a ridiculous fantasy in the light of actual events.
And the committed terrorist? I will say that if the perpetrator is not leaving the field, they remain a target to be hit again, until they stop trying to shoot other people. Now, we can cuss and discuss where to aim on endless pages of pixels, the point is that you hit them again. And, once again, you do not necessarily need to make another 9 ring or better hit. You need to make A hit, not a miss. Another hit is additive and the body will be sending signals to the brain to stop it to survive. It's extremely difficult to overcome and nobody is trained to do it - get hit again and again and keep shooting. No, there is no course coming to your range that does it, and I haven't seen anyone advertise it yet.
Now, there is a contingent of shooters who think it's absolutely necessary to train to get precision hits - and I think it's a dangerous standard as some people who could be motivated to shoot back don't. They aren't bullseye shooters and are good enough to get on paper in the black. Well, that IS good enough. Returning fire is rare enough, we shouldn't create an artificial obstacle to returning fire when it's justified.
If you are in their crosshairs, and you have the shot - don't pass on it because "it's not good enough." The preponderance of evidence shows that hits are the minimum standard and there is no higher scoring in real combat. You get hits, you can and will win the fight.
Combat/self defense is about hits. Not scores. A "poor" shot who gets hits can win the day. What evidence of that do I have? The majority of servicemen who pass weapons qualification do not fire Expert. But they qualify, and that is all that is being asked. That is the real standard - get a hit.
