The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Defense and Tactics => Topic started by: tstand on February 04, 2012, 10:29:50 PM
-
Are there research reports on what self defense tools or methods have been successfully used by civilians to defend themselves when away from home? I recently read a research report showing a metropolitan police force has found pepper spray and tasers, in addition to firearms, to be very effective for gaining control over bad guys. It is a statistical analysis based on real world encounters. I’m wondering if a similar analysis has been conducted for civilians.
For example, how many civilians have attempted the use “X” in an encounter, and what was the outcome? X could be a handgun, rifle, taser, pepper spray, tactical flashlight, knife, martial art, and so on.
Many thanks! ;)
-
You aren't trying to "gain control" of the BG, you are trying to stop his attack, period.
You aren't a cop, arrest/ apprehension is not your problem.
-
you do understand how difficult it would be just to collect that raw data in the first place, don't you?
-
I realize there is a difference between trying to gain control of a bad guy, and get away from one. That is why I am asking about techniques and tools used by civilians.
There are so many, many guns, electric devices, fighting methods, etc out there. And yet, I've seen virtually no evidence showing how trully effective any of it is in an actual deadly encounter. Almost everything I run across is all anecdotal, or based on "experts" advice, but I want data compiled from a sizeable number of cases. Maybe it does not exist, I'm just asking whether it does.
-
I suspect the best source would be the FBI "Crime statistics". But the problem arises from the fact that so many incidents go unreported.
This was shown when researchers tried to come up with hard data on defensive fire arms use, if no shot was actually fired the incident was often not reported.
I assume the same holds true with other items, attacker sees potential victim has some means of defense and goes about their business else where.
-
While it is an interesting question, I think it is based on a false assumption that there is a best solution. As MB says in the podcast all the time, every solution is a compromise. Size, weight, concealability, your skills, training, attitude, etc.
I have been an emergency responded in industry for a long time. What we stress in training for chemical spills, medical responses, etc. is the same as I hear from MB and the trainers he likes. The most critical skills are in order:
1. Awareness
2. Scene Assessment
3. Bias to Action
4. Application of available tools (guns, knives, running away, etc.)
Us guys want to talk about number 4 all the time cause it is cool and that is where your question is aimed. But it is useless without 1-3. In fact the better you are at 1-3 the easier it is to pick a useful tool.
In my experience, 1 responds to constant preaching (Thank You Michael!), 2 responds to scenario drills (mental or physical), 3. is by far the hardest to teach and comes from experience (this is the value of competition) and 4 is about understanding the limits of what you have at hand.
Long winded answer :)
Joe
-
While it is an interesting question, I think it is based on a false assumption that there is a best solution. As MB says in the podcast all the time, every solution is a compromise. Size, weight, concealability, your skills, training, attitude, etc.
I have been an emergency responded in industry for a long time. What we stress in training for chemical spills, medical responses, etc. is the same as I hear from MB and the trainers he likes. The most critical skills are in order:
1. Awareness
2. Scene Assessment
3. Bias to Action
4. Application of available tools (guns, knives, running away, etc.)
Us guys want to talk about number 4 all the time cause it is cool and that is where your question is aimed. But it is useless without 1-3. In fact the better you are at 1-3 the easier it is to pick a useful tool.
In my experience, 1 responds to constant preaching (Thank You Michael!), 2 responds to scenario drills (mental or physical), 3. is by far the hardest to teach and comes from experience (this is the value of competition) and 4 is about understanding the limits of what you have at hand.
Long winded answer :)
Joe
Great response, Joe. Thanks!
-
I have to disagree with Joe to a point, (it may be because I am misunderstanding part of his reply )
It is a widely held opinion that #1 Awareness, and #2 Assessment will keep you from getting into situations in the first place.
Where I disagree is on #3 which I take to mean "initiative".
The initiative to target a specific person and when and how to commence the attack will always be with the active attacker instead of the passive (in the sense that he/she is taking no action to participate in the event ) target.
My conclusion is that the only areas citizens have input are 1, 2, and 4.
Another thing I think Joe left incomplete is that he posted "Us guys want to talk about number 4 all the time cause it is cool".
He might have added that another reason we focus on that aspect is because it is a GUN forum after all.
All in all I would say it's a thought provoking response.
-
I took #3 "Bias to action" to mean that if things are going downhill rapidly you are going to be doing something (running like hell, finding a defensible position, etc.) other than soiling your pants mumbling "What do I do? What do I do? Oh my God, where are the police?"
-
An armed man will kill an unarmed man with monotonous regularity. ....Statistically speaking....
-
My wife and i are both fortunate in being able to react in the moment to bad situations. We are also pretty good at avoiding bad situations, although I'm learning a lot by reading criminal incident reports for our area.
We are getting a shotgun for home defense, but are reluctant to carry a handgun while out. It would be really nice to know what else would be an effective, defensive carry - such as pepper spray, tactical light, stun gun, etc.
-
Go with guns. Do you want to bet your lives on half measures ?
-
Go with guns. Do you want to bet your lives on half measures ?
+1
Get armed self defense training from quality instructors, get a permit, good holster belt, carry for 90 days and you'll feel naked without it. My $.02.
-
Go with guns. Do you want to bet your lives on half measures ?
+1
Get armed self defense training from quality instructors, get a permit, good holster belt, carry for 90 days and you'll feel naked without it. My $.02.
I agree with the above, but would like to add a possibly controversial qualifier. If you are not confident with carrying a handgun, your skills, or your ability to make the appropriate judgement call on its use, maybe you should wait. Carrying a firearm is a thought out concious decision you have to make and be ready for what having it on you entails.
Either way, carry or not, I suggest you do a couple of things.
1. Carry a good bright (50 lumen or more is generally recommended) flashlight that is easy to operate. After carrying one, now two, for over a year, I can't believe I ever went without one. They have been useful in so many situations I can't count. Self protection/target identification is one of those situations; thankfully, I haven't had to use it for that.
2. Buy a handgun that is comfortable to you, shoots well for you, is dependable enough for you, that you are willing to trust your life with, and you can afford to shoot a lot. Take Magoo's advice on buying quality and train with it. If you aren't ready to carry now, you will be soon.
-
It is going to be the same as law enforcement, and it the effectiveness will proportional to the training and competency. People are people, and what matters is your ability to use it not your career path.
Read the requirements laid out for law enforcement, and you will find nationwide that the average officer needs very little firearm training or practice. Most departments have cases of practice ammunition that goes unused. By the time an officer deals with all of the training and certification they are required to do annually most do not want to go even to a square range to practice. When I started teaching EMS and Rescue I did many courses on violent situations. FBI statistics showed that law enforcement in limited and slow fire situations only hit their targets 25% of the time. If they went into rapid fire the percentage got far worse. Fifteen years later when I needed to back off on the training due to other responsibilities the FBI was reporting that LE had gotten worse in their shooting - I think it had sunk to about 22% hits.
Don't worry about what works for others as much as what works for you and that you will practice with.
-
I agree with the above, but would like to add a possibly controversial qualifier. If you are not confident with carrying a handgun, your skills, or your ability to make the appropriate judgement call on its use, maybe you should wait. Carrying a firearm is a thought out concious decision you have to make and be ready for what having it on you entails.
Either way, carry or not, I suggest you do a couple of things.
1. Carry a good bright (50 lumen or more is generally recommended) flashlight that is easy to operate. After carrying one, now two, for over a year, I can't believe I ever went without one. They have been useful in so many situations I can't count. Self protection/target identification is one of those situations; thankfully, I haven't had to use it for that.
2. Buy a handgun that is comfortable to you, shoots well for you, is dependable enough for you, that you are willing to trust your life with, and you can afford to shoot a lot. Take Magoo's advice on buying quality and train with it. If you aren't ready to carry now, you will be soon.
Agreed, the thought crossed my mind but I was trying to stay on point. Not much use around here ;D
-
It is going to be the same as law enforcement, and it the effectiveness will proportional to the training and competency. People are people, and what matters is your ability to use it not your career path.
Read the requirements laid out for law enforcement, and you will find nationwide that the average officer needs very little firearm training or practice. Most departments have cases of practice ammunition that goes unused. By the time an officer deals with all of the training and certification they are required to do annually most do not want to go even to a square range to practice. When I started teaching EMS and Rescue I did many courses on violent situations. FBI statistics showed that law enforcement in limited and slow fire situations only hit their targets 25% of the time. If they went into rapid fire the percentage got far worse. Fifteen years later when I needed to back off on the training due to other responsibilities the FBI was reporting that LE had gotten worse in their shooting - I think it had sunk to about 22% hits.
Don't worry about what works for others as much as what works for you and that you will practice with.
as I understand it from the cops who have showed up at IDPA and USPSA matches, the departments don't want to pay the cops overtime to go qualify and/or practice.
The bureacrats, say like the mayor, would rather see the police force out patrolling the streets during their normal straight time shifts.
-
as I understand it from the cops who have showed up at IDPA and USPSA matches, the departments don't want to pay the cops overtime to go qualify and/or practice.
The bureacrats, say like the mayor, would rather see the police force out patrolling the streets during their normal straight time shifts.
The remainder of that statement is ;
"and they don't care enough about their own safety to practice on their own time. What the hell, they get really nice funerals."
-
Where I disagree is on #3 which I take to mean "initiative".
Tom,
What I was referring to is that moment of hesitation that MB has called the "This can't be happening" reaction. It happens in all crisis situations to pretty much everybody. I have seen in at car wrecks, heart attacks and any other incident. You can train yourself to MOVE mentally to get unstuck. It is similar to RP's starting from a flinch response in training. My experience is mainly with accidents not violence where folks that I have trained do the deer in the headlights thing until something triggers their training and then the kick into gear.
I agree that by definition we will start behind the curve in an aggressive situation. The bad guys are often mentally lazy and assume we will give them the sheep response because that is what they always see. Items 1 and 2 applied early through #3 can change the equation.
At that point, it is what tools can you apply?
Joe
-
"We are getting a shotgun for home defense, but are reluctant to carry a handgun while out. "
I would argue that you are making an uninformed decision regarding carrying. Go get some basic hand gun training and use the session to get your questions answered. You may still decide not to carry, based on how it fits your lifestyle and personal choices.
Personally I have no interest in pepper spray and such. Just my opinion.
Joe
-
Tom,
What I was referring to is that moment of hesitation that MB has called the "This can't be happening" reaction. It happens in all crisis situations to pretty much everybody. I have seen in at car wrecks, heart attacks and any other incident. You can train yourself to MOVE mentally to get unstuck. It is similar to RP's starting from a flinch response in training. My experience is mainly with accidents not violence where folks that I have trained do the deer in the headlights thing until something triggers their training and then the kick into gear.
I agree that by definition we will start behind the curve in an aggressive situation. The bad guys are often mentally lazy and assume we will give them the sheep response because that is what they always see. Items 1 and 2 applied early through #3 can change the equation.
At that point, it is what tools can you apply?
Joe
OK. I did say I might have been misunderstanding what you posted.
-
We are getting a shotgun for home defense, but are reluctant to carry a handgun while out. It would be really nice to know what else would be an effective, defensive carry - such as pepper spray, tactical light, stun gun, etc.
Go with guns. Do you want to bet your lives on half measures ?
There is a definite place for "1/2 measures" in a use of force continuum. The bad guy who breaks after he gets his eyes bleached from a 120 lumen flashlight or gets OC sprayed is someone who doesn't have a family filing a wrongful death lawsuit.
Immediate, life threatening, no other possible course of action? May you center mass your way to good health. Anything less than that doesn't need deadly force. The earlier a threat can be noted and dealt with, the more options you have.
-
Depends on what's more important to you. Avoiding a lawsuit ? Or being alive ?
-
as I understand it from the cops who have showed up at IDPA and USPSA matches, the departments don't want to pay the cops overtime to go qualify and/or practice.
The bureacrats, say like the mayor, would rather see the police force out patrolling the streets during their normal straight time shifts.
The department must allow them the time to stay proficient. The bottom line is that most officers don't want to practice, so they use this as an excuse. Those officers that want to get stuck with what their co-workers cause for them. However like Tom said, if these officers cared they would do it on their own time. Most of us get our continuing education that is required for our licenses or jobs on our own time and dime. Don't whine about needing to go to the range and practice.
-
Depends on what's more important to you. Avoiding a lawsuit ? Or being alive ?
Read the whole post. Immediate, life threatening, no other possible course of action? May you center mass your way to good health.
Being alive is of course the only choice in your narrowly phrased response....but I also have powerful lights and OC spray.
Avoiding a lawsuit is a big deal - even if you win, you lose financially. My house may not be anything special but it keeps me dry when it rains, and I do like to be able to eat.
Remember the old adage: If the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. More tools = more options.
-
Remember the old adage: If the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. More tools = more options.
In what circumstances would you use OC spray or a light in self-defense? Deadly force is clearly valid in cases of imminent grevious bodily harm or death, what is short of that were the application of OC/taser/bright light/club is valid?
I guess what I'm getting at is if you aren't in immediate/immenent danger you can run away or am I missing something?
-
If you do not feel your life is in danger (when a gun would be an inappropriate response ) the use of Pepper spray or other non lethal defense item is called assault and YOU will be the one going to jail.
If there are more than one attacker you will wind up with that light shining out your butt.
And people will laugh at you and ask " why didn't you carry a gun ?"
-
I have fired about 6 different handguns over the past few months. The first was a Walther P22 and it sucked. It was too small in my hand and I could not hit anything. I also fired a 40 caliber Glock the same day and felt overwhelmed by the power.
Next it was a 22 revolver, 38 revolver, 9 mm Glock, and also a big boy gun but I can't remember the caliber. Maybe a 45?
By comparison, I also fired a pair of 22lr and 9mm rifles, and hit bullseyes easily. But everyone keeps telling me the 22 isn't good enough to stop an attacker. So then I finally fired a shotgun and found I could hit the clay pigeon sometimes and the kick wasn't bad at all. It seems like the logical choice for a weapon with knock down power and fairly easy to aim.
In all I just don't feel confident I could hit a target under stressful conditions with a handgun, and a story from my initial instructor stays with me. An LE and expert marksman at a range he knows got caught in a firefight, and the guy could not hit his target at all even after 40-something rounds. Having someone shoot at HIM changed the whole situation. I don't imagine I would fair much better even with lots of practice.
-
Very seldom do Law Enforcement and Expert Marksman belong in the same sentence.
There are dozens of stories of Cops emptying their duty weapon and never hitting a darn thing. Most only shoot to qualify yearly and are not that good!
You need experience and training! Over time, you'll feel more comfortable with firearms. Until then, be patient.
Most of us grew up with firearms. It's second nature...
-
The only drawback of the shotgun is that it is not likely to always be with you.
-
Joe Carillo was on the New York stake out squad and was involved in numerous gun fights and was a competitor. I remember him telling the story about his first shooting and seeing his sights so clearly he could count the serrations on the front sight blade. 3 shots in 3 seconds=3 dead guys.
Massad Ayoob says it best, shooting contests aren't a gunfight but a gunfight is a shooting contest.
You won't get better if you don't train and shooting at a static target from a stationary position bulls-eye style is not training for self defense. The LE you mentioned may have been good at poking holes but found out the hard way his training was inadequate.
-
The most effective self defense fire arm is the one that's always with you.
A .22 in your pocket has much more stopping power than a .44 magnum you left home.
After that comes what are you comfortable shooting and the best way to answer that is to shoot a bunch of different types and calibers as you have been doing .
You didn't say where you had gotten the guns,I'm guessing your friends are saying "here, try this".
In case you were not aware most, if not all, indoor ranges have rental guns available that will let you try further types and calibers.
After that comes the cost factor.
Then, pick an action (semi Auto/ revolver )( Single action/ or double action ) in a caliber you are comfortable with, in a price range you can afford.
As for the long gun, since it will be a "house gun" while a shotgun is fine, and can be had for reasonable money, you will want to consider what your wife can comfortably shoot as well, since it is possible that she will need to use it.
She may be fine with the shot gun, you may want to consider a pistol caliber carbine, or you may want to buy her her own long gun.
Regardless of what you get for protection, you should include a .22 LR rifle, and pistol since they are much less expensive to shoot than other calibers, and they are fun ;D
Joe Carillo was on the New York stake out squad and was involved in numerous gun fights and was a competitor. I remember him telling the story about his first shooting and seeing his sights so clearly he could count the serrations on the front sight blade. 3 shots in 3 seconds=3 dead guys.
Massad Ayoob says it best, shooting contests aren't a gunfight but a gunfight is a shooting contest.
You won't get better if you don't train and shooting at a static target from a stationary position bulls-eye style is not training for self defense. The LE you mentioned may have been good at poking holes but found out the hard way his training was inadequate.
What Magoo posted is true, but only up to a point, any time spent practicing the fundamentals of sight picture, and trigger squeeze is good training for shooting.
If you just plain can't shoot all the Tommy Tactical training in the world will not do you a bit of good.
Start with Safety training, move on to learning how to shoot, then you will get the most benefit from training focused on Self defense.
Then Practice man, practice. This is where the .22 comes into its own with ammo under $5 a box opposed to center fire ammo at $15+
There are also "dry fire drills" that you can do at home.
http://www.downrange.tv/forum/index.php?topic=357.0
http://www.downrange.tv/videos/bruce-gray.htm
Here are some more video's on Concealed carry as well
http://www.downrange.tv/videos/ccw-demystified.htm
-
If you do not feel your life is in danger (when a gun would be an inappropriate response ) the use of Pepper spray or other non lethal defense item is called assault and YOU will be the one going to jail.
If there are more than one attacker you will wind up with that light shining out your butt.
And people will laugh at you and ask " why didn't you carry a gun ?"
I call Mall Ninja Bullllsheeet! ::) If you are assaulted, you have every right to defend yourself and you can use non-lethal means to do so.
You are only going to jail if YOU assault someone with OC spray.
In what circumstances would you use OC spray or a light in self-defense? Deadly force is clearly valid in cases of imminent grevious bodily harm or death, what is short of that were the application of OC/taser/bright light/club is valid?
I guess what I'm getting at is if you aren't in immediate/immenent danger you can run away or am I missing something?
I'm too old to run and too fat to hide. Having 35% disability in one leg, running isn't an option any more.
Not all attackers have their "hands full". The aggessive panhandler who doesn't want to take no for an answer, the drunk who thinks it's time to be a badass.
Geez guys, use your imagination a little. Watch The Best Defense. You really want to shoot these people for buffoonery?
Do a search on Harold Fish.
Ask yourself if he might have been better served with a can of OC spray rather than using his 10mm and ending up in prison and $500,000 in legal fees. His 10 yrs in prison was overturned with the conviction. The 1/2 million debt is still his.....and he "won".
His gun was the ONLY option he had with him.
All I'm trying to say is - keep the weapon as an option but it doesn't have to be the ONLY option.
-
Do a search on Harold Fish.
Ask yourself if he might have been better served with a can of OC spray rather than using his 10mm and ending up in prison and $500,000 in legal fees. His 10 yrs in prison was overturned with the conviction. The 1/2 million debt is still his.....and he "won".
His gun was the ONLY option he had with him.
All I'm trying to say is - keep the weapon as an option but it doesn't have to be the ONLY option.
Did you happen to catch Massad Ayoob's interview with Tom Gresham on Guntalk a few weeks back? Mas elegantly dealt with this case and if you listen close you'll see that Mr. Fish was poorly represented yet still alive. Are you sure pepper spray would have caused the attacker to cease hostilities? Would you bet your life on it? BTW if a man charged me after I fired a shot at his (dangerous?) dogs and I were disabled I would have feared for my life (clearly he isn't afraid of a gun), so where was he wrong? Just because the DA charged him and got a conviction doesn't mean Mr. Fish was wrong. In fact they are changing the law so that it can't happen again.
As a healthy mobile man, with the ability to put the hurt on someone if I need to, I don't have first hand knowledge of the challenges of disabled people. But my wife and father-in-law both have MS and face extremely different challenges-she is mobile but has anxiety problems, he is in a wheel chair but has no problem leaving the house/state/country. My father-in-law carry's a gun-sometimes, his prerogative, but hasn't ever felt the need to carry pepper spray. That being said I am not a fan of pepper spray, it has little affect on me and I have NO faith in its ability to dissuade an aggressor. But I would carry one of those Scottish club/walking sticks if I was less mobile, it gives you a chance to create distance to bring a gun into the fight.
-
A couple other things Mitch overlooks, first off, lights don't bother aggressive dogs, second, the fog type pepper sprays aren't worth a crap out doors, the stream type that are more effective take more accuracy than a pistol since they require an face hit. That kind of accuracy is a challenge with a pistol with sights, never mind a spray device.
-
Are you sure pepper spray would have caused the attacker to cease hostilities? Would you bet your life on it? BTW if a man charged me after I fired a shot at his (dangerous?) dogs and I were disabled I would have feared for my life (clearly he isn't afraid of a gun), so where was he wrong? Just because the DA charged him and got a conviction doesn't mean Mr. Fish was wrong. In fact they are changing the law so that it can't happen again.
I never said I was sure about spray, just as I'm not sure about handgun effectiveness either. Shotguns and rifles are MUCH more positive than the popgun handguns in any popular, commonly carried caliber. (have a plan B and plan C) We carry handguns because it's easier. Fish could have used the spray on the dogs and maybe he wouldn't have needed to fire a shot to try to scare off the dogs.
I also never said Harold Fish did anything wrong. They had to change the venue from Payson to Flagstaff (treehuggerville) so he could get hosed by a corksoaker of a prosecutor and 12 people too stupid to get out of jury duty. He eventually got freed and he's still severely fooked. And remember, He Won!!
I SAID LESS THAN LETHAL WAS AN OPTION. That means optional, as in: You can carry it or not while you carry your gun. I have never said INSTEAD of your gun.
A couple other things Mitch overlooks, first off, lights don't bother aggressive dogs, second, the fog type pepper sprays aren't worth a crap out doors, the stream type that are more effective take more accuracy than a pistol since they require an face hit. That kind of accuracy is a challenge with a pistol with sights, never mind a spray device.
No shit - that's an apples and watermelons comparison drawn up from.....I don't know what. Now you're just making crap up.
Nobody mentioned anything about using a light on dogs.
Pepper spray DOES work for dogs quite well, at least the dogs I've used it on. To equate spray with pistols you would have to use a Glock 18 as the pistol example. The spray is "full auto" and can be adjusted on the fly. I've never used the fog type because I've always wanted a stream. They have their drawbacks too, so if conditions aren't right, go to plan A. You know, that OPTIONS thing.
-
Make a plan, evaluate your plan, prepare for your plan, evaluate your plan, practice your plan, add to your plan, subtract from your plan, evaluate, prepare, practice, evaluate, etc, etc, etc, etc, ...
There is no perfect plan, and there is no one size fits all plan! Tools, abilities, situation all change what is best, and what will work.
There are plenty of reports of sprays and electronic guns crippling and killing, just like a lead projectile kills (remember that chemical spray and electrodes are also propelled objects just like a chunk of lead moved by gunpowder). You are better served to follow my first line, practice it, document it, and live it. That is better cyb than a million dollar lawyer, a good insurance policy, or always worrying about the what ifs.