Umm, what exactly is the relevance? The article I cited was about LE hit ratios. I daresay anytime a cop discharges his firearm, whether he hits or not, it's going to be recorded.Jeff White said:All anyone can do is guess at the number of defensive firearm uses where shots were not fired or shots were fired and no one was hit. There isn't ever going to be a reliable way to track those incidents.
The FBI's reporting of justifiable homicides by private citizens has been attacked by Professor Gary Kleck. If anything, it's low.Jeff White said:One also has to wonder how many of the justifiable homicides on the UCR were actual cases of a real good guy killing a real bad guy in self defense
Get real. For that to be true, that means the police are doing a woefully inadequate job of investigating one of the most serious crime scenes possible--person A shot and killed person B. You cannot seriously be suggesting that cops look at the priors of the deceased and say, "Eh, call it a public service. Next."Jeff White said:and how many of them were two bad guys in a disagreement that wound up in a killing?
kengrubb said: Get real. For that to be true, that means the police are doing a woefully inadequate job of investigating one of the most serious crime scenes possible--person A shot and killed person B. You cannot seriously be suggesting that cops look at the priors of the deceased and say, "Eh, call it a public service. Next."
The article I cited was about LE hit ratios. I daresay anytime a cop discharges his firearm, whether he hits or not, it's going to be recorded.
Get real. For that to be true, that means the police are doing a woefully inadequate job of investigating one of the most serious crime scenes possible--person A shot and killed person B. You cannot seriously be suggesting that cops look at the priors of the deceased and say, "Eh, call it a public service. Next."
According to John Farnam, as recently as 6 years ago, the hit ratio from the NYPD SOP-9 was still below 20 percent. I found references to the 2002 and 2004 SOP-9 online, but I'm given to understand it's no longer provided unless one has LE credentials. Seems that if the numbers could be deemed positive, they'd get published.Jeff White said:Everyone I've contacted seems to believe that the 12-18% hit ratio that has been discussed and referenced in print comes from the old NYPD SOP 9 report
Here are some more anecdotes for digestion.Jeff White said:So far all the information I've been able to find on police hit ratios is all anecdotal.
Here in Washington, we call that manslaughter.Jeff White said:A self defense killing in a dispute over how much of the money from the crack you sold should go to someone else is still self defense
Given that you're an Illinois LEO, you wouldn't have any experience of folks shooting muggers in parking lots. That would involve the carrying of firearms which still isn't legal there.Jeff White said:it's not the same as the citizen who shoots the intruder in his home or the mugger in the parking lot.
So it's guilty until proven innocent then? 3 to 4 million CCW licensees, plus the tens of millions who keep loaded guns ready at home, but far more criminals "justifiably" killing? You're reaching so far on this that you're risking falling from the ramshackle assortment of arguments cobbled together into a ladder.Jeff White said:I would bet that there are more justifiable homicides from the former example then the latter.
According to John Farnam, as recently as 6 years ago, the hit ratio from the NYPD SOP-9 was still below 20 percent. I found references to the 2002 and 2004 SOP-9 online, but I'm given to understand it's no longer provided unless one has LE credentials. Seems that if the numbers could be deemed positive, they'd get published.
An in depth 1992 review of Portland, Oregon's police shootings revealed an increase in the number of shots fired per incident from 2.6 rounds per revolver to 4.6 rounds fired from pistols. However the study seemed to isuggest that hit probablity increased with adoption of semi-auto pistols. From January 1, 1983 through January 5, 1990, Portland police reportedly struck adversaries with 24 rounds out of 67 fired (36% hit ratio). Firing semi-auto pistols from July 21, 1984 through February 7, 1992 officers struck their adversaries with 19 rounds out of 44 that were fired (43% hit ratio).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff White
A self defense killing in a dispute over how much of the money from the crack you sold should go to someone else is still self defense
Here in Washington, we call that manslaughter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff White
it's not the same as the citizen who shoots the intruder in his home or the mugger in the parking lot.
Given that you're an Illinois LEO, you wouldn't have any experience of folks shooting muggers in parking lots. That would involve the carrying of firearms which still isn't legal there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff White
I would bet that there are more justifiable homicides from the former example then the latter.
So it's guilty until proven innocent then? 3 to 4 million CCW licensees, plus the tens of millions who keep loaded guns ready at home, but far more criminals "justifiably" killing? You're reaching so far on this that you're risking falling from the ramshackle assortment of arguments cobbled together into a ladder.
Some reasons why gun games are games, and their limitations, which preclude them from being considered proper practice:
Games occur on square ranges
The decision to shoot has already been made - its not possible to "win" a stage by not shooting
zero target interaction
Bix said: Ken - does this mean that spending time running dot drills is precluded from being considered proper practice?
Like the martial art of battojutsu, the art of drawing and striking in a single motion. You train for the fastest way, once under threat, of getting the sword clear of the sheath and immediately engaging the attacker. Kendo can make you proficient with the macro skills of using a katana, but it's a whole other set of skills and practice that teach you and build the mindset to defend against an unexpected attack.There are some things that demand reflexive training. You alluded to gunhandling skills and I agree. But there are also reactions to certain stimuli that need to be trained reflexively. In the Army we called them immediate action drills. You need to have some immediate action drills for the street too. You need to carefully assure that they meet all the legal and moral requirements for self defense where you are at, but you may not prevail if you're not prepared to act immediately when receiving the stimulus to fight.
Umm, yeah, that was among the points John Farnam made. Here's the link again in case you didn't go there.Jeff White said:For instance SOP 9 includes all rounds fired by an officer to include NDs, officer suicides, dispatching of animals and other instances that were not gunfights.
That isn't what I said, and you know that. You started with a silly assertion, and now you've changed the scenario.Jeff White said:You're telling me that in Washington state you have no right to self defense if you have a criminal record?
So what makes 'em a crack dealer if they don't have any drugs on them? They just look like a crack dealer? Is that from measuring the distance between their eyes or a call to the Psychic Friends Hotline?Jeff White said:Crack dealer #1 draws a weapon during the argument and crack dealer #2 kills him, it's not self defense? So crack dealer #2 gave up his right to defend himself when he became a crack dealer?
You expect me to believe that Illinois LE, even factoring out Chicago PD, simply look the other way in the aftermath of a deadly force shooting, even though the person who shot was illegally carrying a handgun? Yeah, sure. Don't you know all good fairy tales begin, "Once upon a time ..."Jeff White said:So you're saying that people here never illegally carry firearms for self defense and sometimes actually use them? I think the statistics are on my side in this one.
I'm not sure about the "advent of shall issue", but that date is well before Florida and 1987. A few hundred killed a year, but not thousands.Jeff White said:The idea that the good guys are killing the bad guys in large numbers since the advent of shall issue CCW is a myth.
Certainly not all, but it's an unsubstantiated guess on your part, with no data to support your statement, to say it's the average.Jeff White said:The average CCW holder doesn't even carry a weapon regularly
Untrue. I had not found a single state with falling numbers until Washington this year. In state licensees fell from 230,496 to 229,006 in 2006. Likely the Californitization factor.Jeff White said:the number of permits that are renewed is always much lower then the number of permits that are issued after a state passes shall issue CCW.
Failing to kill someone doesn't make having a gun not worth the risk. That might be the B.S. they feed you in Illinois, but it don't wash elsewhere.Jeff White said:For most people, the risk they perceive doesn't outweigh the hassle of carrying every day.
kengrubb said: I gather you're one of those LEOs who knows best that cops and the military are the only ones professional enough to carry a gun.
The new "average" number of rounds fired is eight. Subsequent data may alter that number, but that is what we have now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff White
You're telling me that in Washington state you have no right to self defense if you have a criminal record?
That isn't what I said, and you know that. You started with a silly assertion, and now you've changed the scenario.
You stated, "A self defense killing in a dispute over how much of the money from the crack you sold should go to someone else is still self defense".
You seriously want me to believe that killing someone in a dispute over money or drugs, rather than fear of death or grave bodily harm to the innocent, is justifiable homicide?
So what makes 'em a crack dealer if they don't have any drugs on them? They just look like a crack dealer? Is that from measuring the distance between their eyes or a call to the Psychic Friends Hotline?
Out there somewhere is a person with no felony convictions, or misdemeanor convictions that would preclude them from getting a CCW license, who has a CCW and who is actively dealing crack and just has not yet been convicted, and while carrying a concealed handgun with their CCW license and no drugs gets into a deadly force shooting.
You expect me to believe that Illinois LE, even factoring out Chicago PD, simply look the other way in the aftermath of a deadly force shooting, even though the person who shot was illegally carrying a handgun? Yeah, sure. Don't you know all good fairy tales begin, "Once upon a time ..."
I'm not sure about the "advent of shall issue", but that date is well before Florida and 1987. A few hundred killed a year, but not thousands.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff White
The average CCW holder doesn't even carry a weapon regularly
Certainly not all, but it's an unsubstantiated guess on your part, with no data to support your statement, to say it's the average.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff White
the number of permits that are renewed is always much lower then the number of permits that are issued after a state passes shall issue CCW.
Untrue. I had not found a single state with falling numbers until Washington this year. In state licensees fell from 230,496 to 229,006 in 2006. Likely the Californitization factor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff White
For most people, the risk they perceive doesn't outweigh the hassle of carrying every day.
Failing to kill someone doesn't make having a gun not worth the risk. That might be the B.S. they feed you in Illinois, but it don't wash elsewhere.
Shootings and self defense shootings are not the same, but you seem to imply it's only the criminals who get into self defense shootings.Jeff White said:Even the late LTC Cooper has stated many times that most shootings are done among members of a certain social staus in our society.
If they have a felony record, then they won't have a CCW.Jeff White said:We have a neat little thing called the NCIC criminal history data base. And it usually comes out during the investigation what the dispute was over.
One can certainly find a handful of examples of CCW holders who break the law after they are issued a license, and there have been a few convictions for violent crimes up to and including manslaughter and murder. But those are rare anomalies and not representative of the group.Jeff White said:Tomorrow I post links to some examples. A CCW permit is not in any way shape or form a guarantee that a subject is a fine upstanding citizen. It's merely an indicator that he might be.
On what? That there are a few hundred self defense killings a year? That's easy. FBI UCR, but as Kleck's work suggests, citing the not so gun friendly Time magazine, there's likely a lot more than what the FBI reports.Jeff White said:Let's see some hard numbers. Ball's in your court.
Figures to back up any claim as to what percent of CCW licensees carry "regularly", whatever "regularly" means, appear by your own admission to be the equivalent of running a flag up a pole and seeing who will salute.Jeff White said:Once again, I'll be back later with figures.
Stop trying to change what you said. You claimed RENEWALS of CCWs were always lower, and that's untrue. Florida, Texas, Arizona, Utah, North Carolina, Ohio, Louisiana and Minnesota have their numbers online. Some other states will give out a number if you ask, but they don't publish it online.Jeff White said:I'll be back later with figures. Informal polling on if CCW holders actually carry all the time here at THR and there is always a significant number who say they don't.
What is your guys/gals opinion on training? Should it be strictly tactically sound or do the "games" have their place for those that take guns seriously?