Most important thing you've learned on THR

[Jammersix]

Good advice if you're ever attacked by a marauding ream of twenty pound bond paper.

You (or probably they) are confusing two separate issues: accuracy (or more correctly precision) and the effect of incoming fire on a human being.

If the desired result is one ragged hole in a piece of paper, they're right, slow down. If the desired result is to change someone's course of action, fast misses can be very effective at doing so. Their mistake is applying the desired result for the piece of paper to a bad guy. They're not the same, and the desired results aren't the same.

It's hard to concentrate on the front sight if the window you're looking through, the jamb and the Venetian blinds all explode in your face.

 

[old lady new shooter]

Good advice if you're ever attacked by a marauding ream of twenty pound bond paper.

You (or probably they) are confusing two separate issues: accuracy (or more correctly precision) and the effect of incoming fire on a human being.

If the desired result is one ragged hole in a piece of paper, they're right, slow down. If the desired result is to change someone's course of action, fast misses can be very effective at doing so. Their mistake is applying the desired result for the piece of paper to a bad guy. They're not the same, and the desired results aren't the same.

It's hard to concentrate on the front sight if the window you're looking through, the jamb and the Venetian blinds all explode in your face.

The point is, your body is gonna do what you've trained it to do. If you learn to shoot accurately slowly, you will be able to shoot accurately fast -- maybe not QUITE as accurately, but a lot more accurately than if you never train for accuracy. So if you can make that ragged hole at your desired distance shooting slowly, then if you try shooting as fast as you can it probably won't be a ragged hole but you'll get all your shots in the 10 area. But if when you go to the range you're just pulling the trigger and many shots don't even get on the paper target, what's gonna happen in a gunfight? And what if BG is holding one of your family members hostage, don't you want to shoot well enough to avoid hitting your loved one?

 

[Jammersix]

I don't have a problem with slowing down to improve accuracy. I don't have a problem with training accuracy. I think those are splendid ideas.

My problem was the part of the statement that said you can't stop the bad guy by missing. I'm sorry, but you can, if you have to. You can keep his head down while you maneuver, while your partner maneuvers or reloads, etc., etc.

Or while your partner maneuvers and lines up a fatal shot.

 

[old lady new shooter]

The tactic you describe is probably great for a person who has a partner in the altercation, which implies a military or law enforcement team. I am one old lady, on my own. If someone breaks into my house I need to take them out of the fight as quickly as possible, not just stop them temporarily. Out in public if there is any possible way to escape that would be my first choice. If not, I'd still rather take them out of the fight as quickly as possible, not just stop them temporarily.

 

[Jammersix]

I wasn't arguing tactics, or even really suggesting any particular tactic.

I was pointing out that "you can't miss fast enough to win" simply isn't true. My counterexample demonstrates that.

There was a cop killed by an assailant several years ago, and it was all caught by a security camera. It made the rounds of the gun boards because the assailant had served in the Marines, and during the firefight he used two tactics, slicing the pie and suppressive fire, to win. The cop was taking cover behind his cruiser, and the bad guy behind his car, until the bad guy used suppressive fire in a letter perfect advance across about twenty feet of open parking lot to the front of the cruiser, leaned over the cruiser's hood and shot the cop point blank.

 

[old lady new shooter]

What a horrible occurrence.

 

[Paul R Zartman]

It's not what I have learned, it's the depth of the learning...
I creeped around in the shadows here for a few years, decided this forum was where I wanted my "home" to be.

Didn't need the beginner section...too experienced.

Didn't need the Trading Post...get along just fine on my own

Didn't need the legal section...do pretty good at knowing what's right and wrong...mostly

NOT A ACTIVIST...till ya mess with my $#!%

Reloading section is cool...

Some of the MODS can be uptight...that's understandable dealing with me...

@Driftwood Johnson knows his stuff, and has some AWESOME information and pics...and obviously guns...

The grass is not greener on the other side..

Autos will never overtake Revolvers...but they have their own place in the pecking order...

Pumps are better than Bolts... ...Remy 760 rules...300 savage the best rifle ctg.

1911 is the best year ever...

Pre 64 94...

All the fellow enthusiasts who know how to poke it a bit and take it a bit...love ya all

THR....THE BEST ROAD...

BE SAFE...

PAUL

 

[MistWolf]

The point is, your body is gonna do what you've trained it to do. If you learn to shoot accurately slowly, you will be able to shoot accurately fast -- maybe not QUITE as accurately, but a lot more accurately than if you never train for accuracy. So if you can make that ragged hole at your desired distance shooting slowly, then if you try shooting as fast as you can it probably won't be a ragged hole but you'll get all your shots in the 10 area. But if when you go to the range you're just pulling the trigger and many shots don't even get on the paper target, what's gonna happen in a gunfight? And what if BG is holding one of your family members hostage, don't you want to shoot well enough to avoid hitting your loved one?

Stick to your guns. You're on the right path.

 

[MistWolf]

I was pointing out that "you can't miss fast enough to win" simply isn't true. My counterexample demonstrates that...

Your counterpoint supports the maxim. Suppressive fire doesn't target the bad guy. Suppressive fire targets areas to deny the bad guy movement and a place to shoot from. Miss those target areas and suppressive fire is nothing but noise.

 

[Jammersix]

What a horrible occurrence.

We agree on that, whole heartedly.

 

[theotherwaldo]

"Get a shot off fast. This upsets him long enough to let you make your second shot perfect."
Robert Heinlein, The Notebooks of Lazarus Long.

-The first shot that I get off is a quick try for center of mass, all following shots are refinements on that first shot.
A shot in the dirt might upset him, an imperfect hit will definitely upset him.

 

[theotherwaldo]

I suspect that suppressive fire by a single shooter takes more training and practice than actually learning to hit a moving, offensive target.

 

[bdickens]

There are problems with that. Above a certain volume, suppressive fire is extremely effective, whether it misses or not. You may not stop him permanently, but you can sure stop him for a couple seconds.

This one was written by someone who has never been shot at.

As a civilian (or as an LEO), you can't do suppressive fire. Not legally.

 

[Jammersix]

For a number of reasons, I can't call an Alpha strike off a Nimitz class carrier, either.

That doesn't mean it wouldn't work.

The nugget we are discussing says that suppressive fire wouldn't work.

 

[Jammersix]

P.S. I'd like to see law, whether statute or decision, outlawing suppressive fire.

As long as one remains responsible for every last bullet fired, I'm not sure I see a problem. There is any number of cases in which cops lit up an entire hallway with fire that if it wasn't suppressive fire, I'd take it anyway. These include more than one instance in which they lit up the wrong hallway.

Perhaps they were simply the worst shots America has seen since... well... ever.

Do you have such a citation? I will prepare my retraction in anticipation of reading it.

 

[Robert]

We seem to have wandered far off topic. The in ability to stay focused is a thread killer.