Lateral movement to escape line of fire

I present this from my personal experience, as more for you to think about, OP.
When I was a senior in high school a junior in the same class, called "Russia/China" wanted some help with his project, which was a Tae Kwan Do demonstration of how to disarm an attacker. On the day of the demonstration, I brought my Trooper MkIII ( had to be kept in the principal's office until the demonstration) and unbeknownst to anyone but the principal, when it came time for the demonstration, I had 6 primed, sized .38 Spl. brass in the cylinder. We squared off about 4-5 feet apart, me in the "dumb armed criminal" stance of the early 80's, (gun held out elbow's length at the hip). Even though he hadn't told me what move he was going to do, he telegraphed the roundhouse kick so obviously, I still giggle thinking about it. When he started the kick, I stepped my right leg back, withdrew the revolver with it, and fired (DA) before his kick swung past me. He fell backwards from the shock of hearing the gun actually go off (well, the primer) and not connecting his foot on the gun. I turned to the class and said "That is why you do not try to disarm someone unless you have been properly trained to do so." That kid hated me for a long time, and didn't learn his lesson there because he wanted to take on three Marines fresh out of boot on the choir trip to Anaheim a few months later. His girlfriend talked him out of it.
Just something to think about. Do you want to bet life and/or limb on the state of your attacker's abilities?
I agree that disarming someone is a difficult thing to do and a rare skill. But I am merely talking about moving away quickly, which most people can do.

I don't want to bet my life on his abilities, but I also don't want to bet my life on his goodwill if I just stand there with his gun on me. That's why I acknowledge from the beginning that there is risk both ways.
 
Practicing drawing from concealment while moving might convince the OP to rethink his strategy. Depending on clothing, a fumble can happen pretty often. What shirt a person happens to wear that day can determine a 1.25 second first shot to a fumble and a 2 second first shot.

Of course using a shot timer could make a person rethink his strategy. From concealment, about 1.25 seconds. How quick if your gun is already out and aimed at target? Even when moving, way under a second is easy. So if a person was to run a simulation against one’s self, questions could be answered in his or her mind.
I have practiced drawing from concealment a lot. I understand that a fumble can happen. But a fumble can also happen when drawing while standing still. The solution is to practice drawing from concealment while moving. And in the worst case scenario, if a fumble happens, you can keep running without drawing at all. Even if you can't shoot, running away quickly it's safer than standing in front of an ******* with a gun on you, because the guy is probably gonna miss.
 
Suggestions; find someone to train with. I learned retention, as well as how to disarm/disable a firearm in an attacker's (or defender's) hand by helping my dad, who was a cop, in working on retention. Jeff mentioned a good strategy with disabling/redirecting the gun & gun hand while simultaneously drawing and getting off to the attacker's off side and firing from there. Good drill to do with blue dummy guns.
 
Suggestions; find someone to train with. I learned retention, as well as how to disarm/disable a firearm in an attacker's (or defender's) hand by helping my dad, who was a cop, in working on retention. Jeff mentioned a good strategy with disabling/redirecting the gun & gun hand while simultaneously drawing and getting off to the attacker's off side and firing from there. Good drill to do with blue dummy guns.
Yes, that sounds like a good option for very close situations.
 
Have you trained for that? Way back in the day I spent a long day in SWAT training doing disarms with red guns. This isn't the kind of move you are going to try at 6 feet. It's a contact distance technique. There are other things that you might do if you are going to grab for his weapon. If you can push the slide of a semi auto out of battery it won't fire. You can grab the cylinder of a revolver and grip it tight enough to keep it from turning it won't fire. If you can get your hand, finger etc between that hammer and the frame it won't fire. These are all last ditch hand to hand options and you need to be prepared physically for a HTH fight.

Last ditch? We're talking about pulling a gun on somebody who already has a gun pointed at you, so, yeah, that's last ditch. Nobody should try any of this unless they know they will be shot otherwise. Like if you're being forced into a car and abducted, or forced into the back of a store after a robbery. A situation where you've resigned yourself to the fact if you're going to get shot anyway it might as well be where you can get help.

I haven't trained on this- I tried it one time in my living room. I already had tape at 3, 6, 9 feet out to 21 feet, and was doing something with a red gun. I went to the store and grabbed a cap gun revolver. We could disarm or grab the cylinder and beat the reaction time on the trigger almost every time at 3 feet. At 6 feet, 80% of the time. At 9 feet about half the time. Beyond that, very little chance. If your attacker is trained or just has room to turn around and run, that percentage at any distance is going down. Definitely not a guarantee you're not going to get shot.

80% chance of not getting shot is a 20% chance of getting shot. If I had a 20% chance of getting shot going to Chick-Fil-A, I would never voluntarily go to Chick-Fil-A no matter how delicious their chicken sandwiches are.

If someone is pointing a gun at you, I think we can all agree grabbing it or pulling your own gun is a terrible idea unless you're already going to get shot anyway. My question was which is worse, at least inside of 6 feet?
 
.... I don't want to sit there and do what he says. I want to fight if possible, especially if I am armed too.
Not I. If an armed criminal comes up to me after I have put the hose back in the fuel pump and demands my keys, they're his.
I have practiced drawing from concealment a lot. I understand that a fumble can happen. But a fumble can also happen when drawing while standing still. The solution is to practice drawing from concealment while moving.
Good. Know when to do it, and when not to.
And in the worst case scenario, if a fumble happens, you can keep running without drawing at all. Even if you can't shoot, running away quickly it's safer than standing in front of an ******* with a gun on you, because the guy is probably gonna miss.
Wishful thinking. Do you really think that you can outrun a hail of bullets?
I disagree that the distance from one jump would be insignificant. It would be enough to move off center and force the bad guy to readjust his line of fire
BY THE TIME THE BAD GUY'S BRAIN PROCESSES THAT I HAVE MOVED, I AM A FOOT OR TWO OFF LINE. IF HE SHOOTS RIGHT THEN, HE'LL EITHER MISS OR MAYBE HE'LL GET ME IN THE SIDE OR SOMEWHERE BUT IT WON'T KILL ME AND I CAN PROBABLY STILL SHOOT BACK.
I hate to put it quite this way, but that is incredibly naive.

I don't know why you think he would miss, or why has shot will not kill or disable you.

And your objective is to survive, not to "shoot back".

IF HE READJUSTS HIS AIM, A COUPLE SECONDS OF TIME WILL HAVE PASSED THAT WILL ALLOW ME TO SHOOT.
"Readjusts his aim"? Do you think he will be shooting as if at a bulls=eye target? He knows that the is threatening a mobile person, and awe will act accordingly.

"a couple of seconds"? That's naive.

Consider the Tueller drill, The defender is expected to draw, shoot and hit a running man in a second and a half,
 
Not I. If an armed criminal comes up to me after I have put the hose back in the fuel pump and demands my keys, they're his.

Good. Know when to do it, and when not to.

Wishful thinking. Do you really think that you can outrun a hail of bullets?


I hate to put it quite this way, but that is incredibly naive.

I don't know why you think he would miss, or why has shot will not kill or disable you.

And your objective is to survive, not to "shoot back".


"Readjusts his aim"? Do you think he will be shooting as if at a bulls=eye target? He knows that the is threatening a mobile person, and awe will act accordingly.

"a couple of seconds"? That's naive.

Consider the Tueller drill, The defender is expected to draw, shoot and hit a running man in a second and a half,
Of course I can't outrun bullets. I'm not suggesting that I can. I'm talking about running away LATERALLY, not vertically. The bad guy is probably gonna miss because it's very difficult to hit a laterally moving target.

I'm not being naive. I'm just thinking things through. I might be wrong, but that's part of learning.

Anyone who tries shooting a laterally moving target, unless you're an extremely good shot, will probably miss or hit far off center. Right? That's why I think that the bad guy would likely miss or at least not kill me. But of course he could get lucky and kill me, but my OP already acknowledged that some risk exists. And some risk exists by standing still too. The risk just seems small compared to what you would expect based on the common wisdom that you should always "wait your turn".

Okay, maybe less than a couple seconds. It's still time that I can use to create distance and decrease his likelihood of hitting me with his shot.
 
The bad guy is probably gonna miss because it's very difficult to hit a laterally moving target.
Well, it's not easy.. It takes traing and practice. But that may well be what you as a defender will have to do in the gravest extreme.
Anyone who tries shooting a laterally moving target, unless you're an extremely good shot, will probably miss or hit far off center. Right?
No, if anyone who tries shooting a laterally moving target would probably miss, most attackers would not be hit--but many are. That's what people have to do. Forget what you do at the range. Some of the shots fired may well miss, but that's not the issue.

Realistically, one can expect to hit "off center" a number of times.

Look: a violent criminal actor intending mayhem may well move at a speed of five meters per second, probably bobbing and weaving. At a likely distance of,say, five to ten feet before the first shot is fired, the defender will have a second or a fraction thereof to shoot, and it is not unlikely that five hits in that time frame will be required to effect a stop.

Can "anyone" do it? Maybe not every time. but that is what we train for. Really.

I strongly suggest that you avail yourself of some quality defensive training.

That's how you will learn about this.
 
Last edited:
Of course I can't outrun bullets. I'm not suggesting that I can. I'm talking about running away LATERALLY, not vertically. The bad guy is probably gonna miss because it's very difficult to hit a laterally moving target.

I'm not being naive. I'm just thinking things through. I might be wrong, but that's part of learning.

Anyone who tries shooting a laterally moving target, unless you're an extremely good shot, will probably miss or hit far off center. Right? That's why I think that the bad guy would likely miss or at least not kill me. But of course he could get lucky and kill me, but my OP already acknowledged that some risk exists. And some risk exists by standing still too. The risk just seems small compared to what you would expect based on the common wisdom that you should always "wait your turn".

Okay, maybe less than a couple seconds. It's still time that I can use to create distance and decrease his likelihood of hitting me with his shot.

At self defense distances it's not difficult at all to hit a moving target but unless you've trained it will be harder for you to hit your target.

There is a way to quickly engage from a laterally sprint with a high likelihood of hitting but it takes practice and the mechanics of it are more than I can explain here.
 
I know that common wisdom says that one should NEVER draw from the drop, i.e. when a gun is pointed at you, because you can never shoot fast enough to win and you will likely be shot. However, can one reliably escape such danger by quickly moving off the line of fire, either by jumping or running sideways?

My reasoning is this. There is a risk of being shot in any case, even if you fully cooperate. It is not clear to me that the risk of jumping off line creates a greater risk. Also, after you jump off line, even if the bad guy shoots, he will have to have first regained his sights, and his accuracy after doing so is going to dramatically suffer. Finally, even if a bullet hits you after jumping off line, it is unlikely to be a lethal hit. It is much more likely to hit somewhere non-lethal compared to when you are standing still.

In a situation where you are moving laterally quickly, I think there is almost no chance that the bad guy will be able to shoot before your body is fully off line. I saw a youtube video of a guy dry firing with his gun pressed against another guy's forehead. It was a demonstration of reaction time. The shooter was told to pull the trigger as soon as the other guy's head moved. The shooter did so but was unable to pull the trigger before the other guy's head was out of the line of fire. Reaction time is too slow.

So extending this logic to the whole body of the victim, it seems like jumping or running off line would be a reliable way to evade a gunshot. You can then draw while moving quickly to the side and shoot back, probably with greater ease because the original shooter is less likely to be moving.

I just hate the notion of "waiting your turn". Of course, this strategy will not work if you are on a confined space such that no room to laterally move is available. And of course it assumes that you have mobility.

Thoughts?
Stop fantasizing and get some realistic training.
 
Somebody is watching to much YouTube. It's entirely possible to shoot from a draw, two perps with guns drawn. While moving for cover

This I know for a fact
 
There isn't a single answer to the question. There might be odds and probabilities, but those are essentially impossible to calculate, considering the nearly endless variety of scenarios.

I will say this: if the gunman wanted to shoot you, he would most likely have done it right away. By just holding a gun on you, he is trying to get you to do something, and probably would rather not use it - he most likely is aware of the more serious consequences, and really is just displaying the gun in the hope that you will comply. There are many, many recorded instances of armed criminals refusing to fire their guns even when physically attacked by their intended victims, so I would say there is a better-than-zero chance that "lateral movement, then run or attack" would be successful. There also is a better-than-zero chance that such action will simply trigger the bad guy to shoot you...

My personal experience with force-on-force is that trying to beat the guy with the gun rarely works. Yes, the guys I trained with were presumably better trained than the average criminal, and yes, the assumption in training was always that the bad guy was willing to pull the trigger. On the whole, though, my belief is that A) your best bet is to train to avoid being surprised by a guy with a gun, B) if the situation does arise, your best bet is to comply - at least until an opportunity for defense arises, and C) if you really are planning on fighting regardless of the odds, you need hard, physical training and plenty of it.
 
There isn't a single answer to the question. There might be odds and probabilities, but those are essentially impossible to calculate, considering the nearly endless variety of scenarios.

I will say this: if the gunman wanted to shoot you, he would most likely have done it right away. By just holding a gun on you, he is trying to get you to do something, and probably would rather not use it - he most likely is aware of the more serious consequences, and really is just displaying the gun in the hope that you will comply. There are many, many recorded instances of armed criminals refusing to fire their guns even when physically attacked by their intended victims, so I would say there is a better-than-zero chance that "lateral movement, then run or attack" would be successful. There also is a better-than-zero chance that such action will simply trigger the bad guy to shoot you...

My personal experience with force-on-force is that trying to beat the guy with the gun rarely works. Yes, the guys I trained with were presumably better trained than the average criminal, and yes, the assumption in training was always that the bad guy was willing to pull the trigger. On the whole, though, my belief is that A) your best bet is to train to avoid being surprised by a guy with a gun, B) if the situation does arise, your best bet is to comply - at least until an opportunity for defense arises, and C) if you really are planning on fighting regardless of the odds, you need hard, physical training and plenty of it.
Thank you for this thoughtful response. That is the kind of insight that I was looking for.
 
I'm going to focus on some shooting mechanics before I give my answers to your question about "getting off the X".

You're really asking about three different problems:

1) Hitting a moving target while standing still,
2) Hitting a stationary target while moving, and
3) The combination of 1) and 2): Hitting a moving target while you are also moving

Note that these are not things that you are going to learn at an indoor range, shooting stationary targets. You're going to have to find a place where you can safely practice each one. As well, you're going to have to find a skilled buddy (or a team) with whom you can practice. But once learned, these skills are incredibly valuable.


Lessons I learned about hitting moving targets while standing still:

I learned to shoot a moving target by building a low, heavy cart, mounting a target stand on it, and then having a buddy pull the cart using a rope (sometimes using pulleys) while I shot at the target.

1) Using the cart to simulate a "Tueller Drill", I found that my ability to hit the target was better the further away the target was. The closer it came, the more I was simply point-shooting and the more quickly I had to move my gun. I found that I had a visceral desire to move off the line the closer the target got to my position. Lastly, there was no way that I could be aware of objects or persons in front of or behind the target as it got close to my position; and I was unwilling to fire at a close target that was about to pass by my side.

2) Shooting at a target moving right to left (or at oblique angles) is not too tough if the target's motion is predictable. If it is moving at more or less constant speed. And the target has some distance to travel. And if it moves in a straight line. But a target that starts/stops repeatedly, changes direction unpredictably, and moves quickly between close-by points of cover/concealment is very difficult to hit reliably.

3) Shooting at moving targets from more than a few steps away is especially difficult when using a handgun. Hitting moving targets from distance with a PCC, carbine, or shotgun (anything shoulder-mounted) is easier.

Lessons I learned about hitting stationary targets while moving:

1) Shooting while moving is best practiced using steel targets. The immediate feedback helps a lot.

2) I've only met one shooter who could reliably hit stationary targets at more than bad-breath distance while moving full speed. More can reliably hit stationary targets if they learn to take slow, steady steps (duck-walking?) that minimize movement of their upper bodies. Most shooters who are just learning to shoot while moving are in the "spray and pray" category. We have to learn to duck-walk before we try to run...

3) Shooting while advancing is very different than shooting while retreating which is very different than shooting while moving laterally with the target off your left shoulder which is very different than moving laterally with the target off your right shoulder. Moving laterally, you need to learn to walk forward and backward. You have to learn all of these.

4) Putting a couple of shots into a stationary target from the holster at the beginning of a move to cover is pretty easily learned.

A funny observation: my wife and I were ballroom dancers in college. My body automatically shifted to dance footwork as I learned to shoot while moving. Viennese waltz was a close analog. In a Viennese, both dancers minimize up-and-down movement of their upper bodies and shoulders while they move rapidly, laterally, around the floor. I found that my body waltzed as my eyes and hands shot the pistol.

Lessons have I learned about hitting moving targets while moving:

This is tough. Very tough. The skills are athletic and highly perishable. This is why SWAT teams practice so much.



With that background, these are my answers to your question about moving off the X in a deadly force attack:

Learn to put one or two shots quickly into a stationary attacker while you are taking quick steps off-line. Don't move, and then stop to shoot. Instead, shoot WHILE moving. Once you start moving, don't stop. Run toward cover. Bob and weave, accelerate and decelerate, just like a running back. While moving at full speed, don't try to shoot. You'll likely miss.

Once you shoot at him, your attacker is likely to realize that he has another appointment somewhere far away. And will try to get there quickly. Remember that once your attacker is moving, he is unlikely to have the skills necessary to shoot you reliably. But he may still try to wing shots your way while he makes his escape. If he puts enough rounds down range and is "lucky", he may connect. But probabilities are against it.

If you are moving and your attacker is moving, neither is likely to connect with the other. Especially the further apart you are. Don't risk putting bullets into innocents downrange.




As far as drawing from the drop, I defer to @.38 Special 's excellent answer:
My personal experience with force-on-force is that trying to beat the guy with the gun rarely works. Yes, the guys I trained with were presumably better trained than the average criminal, and yes, the assumption in training was always that the bad guy was willing to pull the trigger. On the whole, though, my belief is that A) your best bet is to train to avoid being surprised by a guy with a gun, B) if the situation does arise, your best bet is to comply - at least until an opportunity for defense arises, and C) if you really are planning on fighting regardless of the odds, you need hard, physical training and plenty of it.
 
Last edited:
maybe fein stomach pains and slowly crippling over to the ground, and as soon as you hit a good position to sprint out of, take off and keep going. zig zag a bit if you can.
 
but that doesn't mean that one cannot think about things in the abstract
I realize that this is the internet and all, but after you think about these various options, I encourage you to try things out on the mat, with blue guns, and at the range. Its the only way I'm aware of to really learn these lessons to the point that you can actually use them in an emergency.

Beware advice from anyone who has not done this.
 
I realize that this is the internet and all, but after you think about these various options, I encourage you to try things out on the mat, with blue guns, and at the range. Its the only way I'm aware of to really learn these lessons to the point that you can actually use them in an emergency.

Beware advice from anyone who has not done this.
This, a thousand times over. There is all sorts of stuff I used to believe that turned out to be stupid when actually attempted, and all sorts of stuff I have learned just because we tried something, failed catastrophically, argued about it on the mat, and came up with a solution.
 
Just a word on the concept of "getting off the X"

The X is basically where the bad guy can hurt you. In boxing getting off the X is a slight movement out of range. Before your opponent can strike you he now needs to maneuver. In a gunfight the X is much greater and a few short steps is not taking yourself off of it. You need to move in such a way that you force your opponent to react in a meaningful way to your movement before he can strike.
 
I'm going to focus on some shooting mechanics before I give my answers to your question about "getting off the X".

You're really asking about three different problems:

1) Hitting a moving target while standing still,
2) Hitting a stationary target while moving, and
3) The combination of 1) and 2): Hitting a moving target while you are also moving

Note that these are not things that you are going to learn at an indoor range, shooting stationary targets. You're going to have to find a place where you can safely practice each one. As well, you're going to have to find a skilled buddy (or a team) with whom you can practice. But once learned, these skills are incredibly valuable.


Lessons I learned about hitting moving targets while standing still:

I learned to shoot a moving target by building a low, heavy cart, mounting a target stand on it, and then having a buddy pull the cart using a rope (sometimes using pulleys) while I shot at the target.

1) Using the cart to simulate a "Tueller Drill", I found that my ability to hit the target was better the further away the target was. The closer it came, the more I was simply point-shooting and the more quickly I had to move my gun. I found that I had a visceral desire to move off the line the closer the target got to my position. Lastly, there was no way that I could be aware of objects or persons in front of or behind the target as it got close to my position; and I was unwilling to fire at a close target that was about to pass by my side.

2) Shooting at a target moving right to left (or at oblique angles) is not too tough if the target's motion is predictable. If it is moving at more or less constant speed. And the target has some distance to travel. And if it moves in a straight line. But a target that starts/stops repeatedly, changes direction unpredictably, and moves quickly between close-by points of cover/concealment is very difficult to hit reliably.

3) Shooting at moving targets from more than a few steps away is especially difficult when using a handgun. Hitting moving targets from distance with a PCC, carbine, or shotgun (anything shoulder-mounted) is easier.

Lessons I learned about hitting stationary targets while moving:

1) Shooting while moving is best practiced using steel targets. The immediate feedback helps a lot.

2) I've only met one shooter who could reliably hit stationary targets at more than bad-breath distance while moving full speed. More can reliably hit stationary targets if they learn to take slow, steady steps (duck-walking?) that minimize movement of their upper bodies. Most shooters who are just learning to shoot while moving are in the "spray and pray" category. We have to learn to duck-walk before we try to run...

3) Shooting while advancing is very different than shooting while retreating which is very different than shooting while moving laterally with the target off your left shoulder which is very different than moving laterally with the target off your right shoulder. Moving laterally, you need to learn to walk forward and backward. You have to learn all of these.

4) Putting a couple of shots into a stationary target from the holster at the beginning of a move to cover is pretty easily learned.

A funny observation: my wife and I were ballroom dancers in college. My body automatically shifted to dance footwork as I learned to shoot while moving. Viennese waltz was a close analog. In a Viennese, both dancers minimize up-and-down movement of their upper bodies and shoulders while they move rapidly, laterally, around the floor. I found that my body waltzed as my eyes and hands shot the pistol.

Lessons have I learned about hitting moving targets while moving:

This is tough. Very tough. The skills are athletic and highly perishable. This is why SWAT teams practice so much.



With that background, these are my answers to your question about moving off the X in a deadly force attack:

Learn to put one or two shots quickly into a stationary attacker while you are taking quick steps off-line. Don't move, and then stop to shoot. Instead, shoot WHILE moving. Once you start moving, don't stop. Run toward cover. Bob and weave, accelerate and decelerate, just like a running back. While moving at full speed, don't try to shoot. You'll likely miss.

Once you shoot at him, your attacker is likely to realize that he has another appointment somewhere far away. And will try to get there quickly. Remember that once your attacker is moving, he is unlikely to have the skills necessary to shoot you reliably. But he may still try to wing shots your way while he makes his escape. If he puts enough rounds down range and is "lucky", he may connect. But probabilities are against it.

If you are moving and your attacker is moving, neither is likely to connect with the other. Especially the further apart you are. Don't risk putting bullets into innocents downrange.




As far as drawing from the drop, I defer to @.38 Special 's excellent answer:
Thank you!
 
In a situation where you are moving laterally quickly, I think there is almost no chance that the bad guy will be able to shoot before your body is fully off line.

I wondered the same thing myself one day and instead on putting a target on my "runner", I put it on low speed and made it a shooting port, one had to follow. It was activated by the concussion of the first shot fired.

Seemed to be enlightening, especially to the ones that missed the very close but fast shots, to make them from the nonmoving cover position.


 
Here is a video that illustrates my point. Basically, action is always faster than reaction.

People put a lot of confidence into something not understood and it has and will get people killed.

Basically, action is only guaranteed to start before reaction, by definition. There is no guarantee action will complete before reaction completes. When it comes to fighting, nobody gives a rat's behind about who cleared leather first. They don't give out ribbons for that. What they care about is who won/survived better.

If action is ALWAYS faster than reaction, then you would not be able to catch your spouse who left the house just 3 seconds before you because she will always be 3 seconds ahead of you. Is that not amazing? You say, that is ridiculous. I just need to move a little faster than my spouse and I will catch them. And POOF, just like that, reaction will beat action.

If action ALWAYS beats reaction, then passes could not be intercepted and goalies could not block shots on goal, except by sheer luck.

If action ALWAYS beat reaction, you would not be able to parry a blow from an attacker, which is really amazing so many people who teach self defense will teach how to beat action with reaction by teaching you to parry blows, but will still spout how action always beats reaction.

Ever win a game of hand slaps? If so, then most assuredly it was because reaction beat action one or more times during the course of play.

You see, action is only guaranteed to beat reaction when you are talking about the start of the movement, not the completion of it. If action is going to beat reaction to the completion of a task, it is dependent upon several things to hold true that in real life don't always hold true.

Action beats reaction to the completion of a task only when the time taken to complete the reaction (including the delayed start) is more than the time it takes action to complete a task. Reaction (with the delayed start) can beat action by completing the task quicker than the time needed by action to complete the task. For example, you wind up a roundhouse punch to take off my head. Your hand to punch me has to travel 2-3 feet and my hand to block your punch only needs to travel a few inches. If I start moving right after you start moving, I will beat you. Even though I reacted after you acted, because I had less distance to travel to the intercept point, I got there first and blocked your punch. Here, the key point to remember is that in the real world, not everything is equal. In a very hypothetical world, action always beats reaction when the time to accomplish respective tasks is comparable or when reacting takes longer. To defeat your action does not always require a reaction on my part that is as time consuming.

Then you have the additional concept to consider of effective action and effective reaction. Let's say you and I are in a gunfight where you drew and fired first. Me, being older and slower, wasn't ever going to win against you in getting my gun drawn, but that isn't really the important issue at hand. You aren't getting a ribbon for starting first. So you draw and fire very quickly....and miss (for whatever reason) and I shoot you AFTER you tried to shoot me and I win the fight. I know that sounds outrageous and if it would make you feel better, we will say I drew first and missed. I don't care. This is a pretend example, but one that plays out time and time again in the REAL world.

Action CAN beat reaction, no doubt about it. Action may OFTEN beat reaction, which may be true. However, action does NOT always be reaction to completion, which is what matters.
 
A fast reaction can beat a slow action. The problem in this scenario is that the reaction is a simple trigger pull from an already drawn gun.

A person is going to have to try to read the situation and the likelihood they'll be shot anyways even if they don't do anything.
 
Back
Top