View Single Post
Old January 8th, 2009, 07:29 PM   #16
kazzaerexys
Distinguished Member
 
kazzaerexys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Maryland
Posts: 1,426
kazzaerexys is a forum contributor
Quote:
Originally Posted by AzQkr View Post
"Aimed Vs. Point Shooting' - Massad Ayoob"

The title is wrong to begin with, the rest of the results can't be relied on to prove anything.
Authors don't generally choose titles, editors do. The first paragraph of the article clearly states that the thesis is to test the 'argument over using gun sights versus merely pointing the handgun for defensive use.'

If you disagree with the article, you might want to do so on its own merits, rather than a superficial tag that in all likelihood wasn't of the author's choosing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Randy View Post
The author lost credibility with the suggestion that the odds were "astronomical" in reference to the shooters obtaining the same number of hits. I seriously question the validity of any other "findings" revealed here.
'Astronomical' is a qualitative observation on a coincidental result, not a finding about the performance results. By my reckoning, 107 shooters. Chance that the same number of shooters made both head shots in each situation: 1 in 107. Chance that the same number made one headshot in both situations: 1 in 107. Chance of the same number missing in both situations: 1 in 107.

(1/107)^3 = 1/1,225,043

One in a million may or may not be astronomical to you, but it doesn't seem like an unfounded hyperbole to me.
__________________
“What is a moderate interpretation of [the Constitution]? Halfway between what it says and [...] what you want it to say?” —Justice Antonin Scalia

SIG: P220R SS Elite SAO, P220R SAO, P220R Carry SRT, P226, P239 (.40S&W), P2022 (.40S&W); GSR 5", P6.
kazzaerexys is offline   Reply With Quote