The 21 Foot Rule...Thoughts And Advice

[Rob Pincus]

FWIW, I think the "rule" is way over-played.

It is IMPORTANT to note that a guy with a contact weapon can close significant distance quickly... You shouldn't feel safe just because the guy can't reach you RIGHT AT THIS INSTANCE. Learn that, and move on.... 21', 22.5', 18'.... who cares?  Understanding the principle is much more important than any specific test/demonstration/detail.

Once you understand the principle, you can develop techniques to help you deal with it:

- Move Offline while presenting your firearm.
- Move perpendicular to the line of attack, not backwards.
- Act as Early as possible to prepare to defend yourself, regardless of distance and immediate lethality.

Honestly, very few people get attacked with contact weapons from further than 1 or 2 arms reach anyway... learning to fight inside of 5' is much more important than gaming what you will do against a guy confronting with you with a knife from across the parking lot.
-RJP

[Tyler Durden]

or you could just run away....


drop your pants and moon the guy....

or put your arms out in front of you all zombie like and go "BRAINNNNSSS!!!"

ya, know, anything to get inside his OODA loop.
 

[tombogan03884]

FWIW, I think the "rule" is way over-played.

It is IMPORTANT to note that a guy with a contact weapon can close significant distance quickly... You shouldn't feel safe just because the guy can't reach you RIGHT AT THIS INSTANCE. Learn that, and move on.... 21', 22.5', 18'.... who cares?  Understanding the principle is much more important than any specific test/demonstration/detail.

Once you understand the principle, you can develop techniques to help you deal with it:

- Move Offline while presenting your firearm.
- Move perpendicular to the line of attack, not backwards.
- Act as Early as possible to prepare to defend yourself, regardless of distance and immediate lethality.

Honestly, very few people get attacked with contact weapons from further than 1 or 2 arms reach anyway... learning to fight inside of 5' is much more important than gaming what you will do against a guy confronting with you with a knife from across the parking lot.
-RJP

Look at news stories, or NRA"s "Armed Citizen" column.
In many cases the attacker is well with in 21 feet before the threat is apparent, other side of the door, steps out of an alley or doorway, already in the room with the victim.
What Rob posted is just as true with guns as it is with other weapons, the likely hood is that any attacker will be close enough to take possession of whatever he is demanding from his victim.
In other words, you can expect that a robber will be with in arms length, while a rapist will have to close to with in 6 inches or so.
This thinking and the criminals preference for the "surprise attack" under score the importanc of Rob's points.

[Solus]

Rob is only right...and Tom too....

When I think of having 21 ft of warning, I am reminded of a scene from an old Western movie where a guy is at one end of the street in the classic gun fighter stance..arms at his sides a bit away from his hips, shoulders hunched a little and slowly swaggering towards his opponent at the other end of the street.

Meanwhile, at the other end of the street, his opponent is standing next to  his horse when the guy at the other end makes it obvious they are in a gun fight.  The guy at the horse, pulls his rifle from his saddle scabbard, lays it across the saddle and pops the guy at the far end.

I know I don't literally have that much time, but compared with the arms length surprise, I'd be thankful for it.  

[tombogan03884]

This is the reasoning that lead to my heated disagreement with Majer about "less lethal" defenses.
Consider, there have been cases where people have even more or less ignored a 12 gauge slug in the chest until they had bled out.
With that evidence that even a fire arm is not guaranteed to immediately stop an attacker, it is impractical, and dangerous , to waste limited reaction time and space on n even less effective method of defense.
When plan A fails you are  likely to not have time or space to go to plan B.

[Sponsor]

[Timothy]

Plan A should be the only option!  Plan B is looking for something to clean up the mess.....or "lawyer please"...

[1911 Junkie]

a rapist will have to close to with in 6 inches or so.

Just........gonna.......leave.........it.........alone...........  

No I'm not.  Tom, quit giving yourself to much credit.  

 

[Tyler Durden]

there was a police academy instructor/chief of police guy who used to shoot matches with us.  he said that it was "the rule of threes"

the majority of police officer involved shootings were:

from between 3 to 5 yards away

lasted from between 3 to 5 seconds.

and fired between 3 to 5 rounds

but...but...and here is my caveat, those were police officers, they have different duties to actually go after and apprehend bad guys.  us "simple civilians" do not.

[tombogan03884]

From reading news stories and things like "Armed Citizen" I would say that while you are correct about the difference in duties the "Rule of 3" you mention is still valid for citizens.

[Solus]

Tyler brings up a "moral" question I have asked myself.

I agree that the Police have different duties towards criminals than do ordinary citizens.

But, do ordinary citizens have the responsibility to do more?

Protect innocents who are being attacked when the citizen has the means, skill and capability to stop the attack.

Do they have a responsibility to stop the escape of a serial killer if they have the chance?

Do these responsibilities go away if it is risky?  Or illegal?

I look at these questions as separate from the legal answers to them.