This is a discussion on NYPD 2006 Hit ratio in Gunfights within the Defensive Carry & Tactical Training forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; There are allot of outstanding LEO out there. They train hard and are very good at what they do, I am proud to know a ...
There are allot of outstanding LEO out there. They train hard and are very good at what they do, I am proud to know a few of them, unfortunately they are very much in the minority. Not trying to get OT on this, but I believe my post explained one of the big factors of why the hit ratio's are so low.
"Planning to draw and chamber a round after TSHTF is like planning to fasten your seatbelt after you see the other guy run a stopsign..."
Professional hand engraver.
To see full picture of knife in Avatar click here
I don't know about that. Shooting once a week at a B27 silhouette that doesn't move or shoot back only proves that you can hit a target that isn't moving or shooting back.Not trying to get OT on this, but I believe my post explained one of the big factors of why the hit ratio's are so low.
It does little in the way of training for real world scenarios. This is the reason why shooting targets that move, learning to shoot on the move, shooting at real targets that shoot back and the various scenario drills have much more value in the real world than shooting a standard police course does.
Using simunitions can open ones eyes as to the training needed. Someone shooting at you when its unexpected or even if you know its coming and all of that time standing in front of a paper target doesn't mean a thing or do a thing for you other than for gun handling skills.
Fortunately, more and more Dept's. are going to more realistic training scenarios. Still others, are using outdated methods for qualifying. Thats where the problem is.
Universal Background Checks...the next step towards registration and confiscation.
AR. CHL Instr. 07/02 FFL
Like custom guns and stuff? Check this out...
For me training with Simunitions is what _reeeeallly_ opened my eyes wide toward threat assessment, reaction timing, and how most probably shots will be fired with a threat focus as opposed to a sight focus.
After doing so I was convinced that point shooting has merit, amongst a host of other things learned that cannot be via static range paper target training.
I recently read an article by Mas Ayoob where he touched on the career of a famous NYPD stakeout unit officer named Jim Cirrilo. I have read Jim's book, as well as Mas Ayoob over the years, and have found that I agree with the original poster regarding the training issue. I don't buy the heavy trigger nonsense because Cirrilo's most famous gun battle was fought with a service revolver. That's right, a revolver. Imagine being able to get off 3 head shots at distances exceeding 40 feet in less than 2 seconds? with a revolver. No optical sights. No compensators. No heavy frame 1911/w truglos in 9mm with wimpy loads designed to win the weekly IDPA match. Cirrilo pulled it off because he and the rest of the stakeout unit guys practiced relentlessly, and knew their weapons inside and out. Admittedly, Cirrilo admitted to the end that he could never duplicate the feat again, but he did stress that while shooting, everything seemed to slow down and become very clear, and this ability was what carried him through these fights.
That, and a crystal clear sight picture.........
So my point here is that, as the original poster has opined, it boils down to practice, practice, practice. Are you willing to bet your life on your weapon handling skills? Can you really make the shots at the moment of truth, when someone is trying to kill you? In recent events, a very brave lady security guard at a Colorado Springs church made the shots when it counted. At least one of her male counterparts did not, he froze.
What really matters is practicing sound tactics and weapons handling, and praying that if you ever face that terrible situation, you don't freeze at the moment of truth.
"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined". - Patrick Henry
Another element to consider is this: police and citizens aren't the same sort of "target" in an engagement with a BG.
Police are visible, known to have a job of taking down the BG, known to be armed. There's a kind of certainty that comes with an engagement between a determined BG and an LEO.
But with a citizen, there's a question mark as to whether the citizen can (or will) do anything about the situation. That's got to be a factor, in terms of preparedness of the BG, ability of the citizen to sneak under the radar and turn the tables, the variability of response keeping the BG off guard, and so on.
Uncertain how to isolate that factor in the statistics, though.
The statistics are toward police overall which would include uniformed, undercover, narcs, detectives...the whole range of outward appearances and situational occurrences toward discharging a weapon.
Are there any stats related to civilians? I remember somebody commenting once that the average number of shots taken in an encounter of Civilian v. BG in which the BG ended up dead was something like 1.4 shots per encounter. The person could not give me the author so I dismissed it as standard rambo urban legend.
You have to make the shot when fire is smoking, people are screaming, dogs are barking, kids are crying and sirens are coming.
Ego will kill you. Leave it at home.
Thanks Janq, that's useful information.
There is no second place in a gunfight!
Last edited by DCJS Instructor; December 17th, 2007 at 03:03 PM. Reason: Spelling
I know in the past I have seen some reference information toward civilian encounters, I'm at the moment though drawing a blank as to if I've posted as much before, where/what site to go back to for reference, or did I bookmark it for my own reading to which I have a ton of bookmarks toward 'stuff' in general.
I'll look into it further and if I can recall or find a new source I'll then bump this thread.
Being able to shoot the eye out of a nat at 100 yards doesn't necessarily translate into being able to hit a bg 10 feet away who also happens to be shooting back.
You are correct that practice, practice, practice, followed by more practice, will make a difference. BUT the type of practice you are doing is even more important. DON'T just practice standing still and shooting at stationary targets.
If you get in a combat situation it is going to happen fast, be very violent, and in all probability be over in seconds.