[fastbolt]

I don't think it's all "luck" when you consider that we have innumerable examples across dozens of states, for decades. This is a very large sample size.

Nobody said anything about counting on luck. But the actual real world real life fact is that the vast majority of lawful carriers do succeed in actual real world defensive gun uses, despite our perception that most gun owners or gun carriers are inept.

Obviously the more skilled and ingrained you are, the better off you will be.

As for priorities, my experience tells me that the average gun carrier would do far more to decrease their risk of premature death through diet and exercise to stop being obese, than any amount of firearms training.

Okay, then perhaps look at it as the average untrained person is more or less hoping to find themselves landing on the fortunate side of the odds?

Never said anything about the presumed ineptitude of the "average gun owner" who lawfully carries a handgun (and didn't mean for my comments to be taken that way), but there's a difference between getting some level of training in using a gun as a dedicated defensive weapon, versus hoping your lack of skills won't put you on the wrong end of things in an unexpected incident.

Also, one of the things that probably deserves more mention is the mindset and attitude of the person electing to lawfully carry a gun, meaning if someone has already addressed the mental test of whether they're willing to use it, versus the person who hopes that the mere sight of it will turn aside attackers and they won't be forced to actually face making the decision to fire it.

Someone who is willing to protect themselves, even if untrained in self defense, may have a mental advantage over another person who has taken self defense classes, but is unwilling to think about actually "hurting" another person in real life. I've seen that sort of thing, often enough. Not unreasonable, I'd think, to look at something similar in the vast number of people who have made the decisions to lawfully carry, or keep, a gun for protection.

Mindset can only take you so far, though, as it's also been determined (in LE studies) that folks prone to criminal violence can also develop a willingness to immediately use it against someone else. It's been said that they also have an additional "advantage" over the law abiding folks, though, which that they may have no compunction, or lack of willingness, to deliberately ignore rules and laws in how and when they use violence against others.

 

[Warp]

Okay, then perhaps look at it as the average untrained person is more or less hoping to find themselves landing on the fortunate side of the odds?

My only real point here is that the odds are clearly in their favor.

Never said anything about the presumed ineptitude of the "average gun owner" who lawfully carries a handgun (and didn't mean for my comments to be taken that way)

That was meant for Fred, he has a very low opinion of the average gun owner/carrier and believes in government mandated training before being granted the privilege of carry.

but there's a difference between getting some level of training in using a gun as a dedicated defensive weapon, versus hoping your lack of skills won't put you on the wrong end of things in an unexpected incident.

I wonder what % of carriers have some level of training in using that gun as a defensive weapon. I wager the majority have not, ever, especially if you consider how the 'training' mandated by some states doesn't even count.

Also, one of the things that probably deserves more mention is the mindset and attitude of the person electing to lawfully carry a gun, meaning if someone has already addressed the mental test of whether they're willing to use it

Absolutely, yes!

I mentioned that earlier.

Fortunately, the bottom line, we have decades of innumerable examples all across the country demonstrating that your average Joe concealed carrier almost always succeeds when presenting or firing that carried pistol in lawful self defense. Seems a classic case of mindset being #1, even if the skillset could in some cases hold you back. So, there's that.

I do believe that most who carry a gun have the mindset to use it if needed.

Someone who is willing to protect themselves, even if untrained in self defense, may have a mental advantage over another person who has taken self defense classes, but is unwilling to think about actually "hurting" another person in real life.

Absolutely. And the better training classes will drive home that point on mindset. The last one I attended made an explicit point of what it was you were shooting, why, and what kind of result you should expect...win or lose.

I've seen that sort of thing, often enough. Not unreasonable, I'd think, to look at something similar in the vast number of people who have made the decisions to lawfully carry, or keep, a gun for protection.

Mindset can only take you so far, though, as it's also been determined (in LE studies) that folks prone to criminal violence can also develop a willingness to immediately use it against someone else. It's been said that they also have an additional "advantage" over the law abiding folks, though, which that they may have no compunction, or lack of willingness, to deliberately ignore rules and laws in how and when they use violence against others.

Yes.

A lot of people might have hangups about various social norms or, to use today's language, worry about being PC or how they are going to be portrayed in media/social media when they should be worried about whether or not they are going to be seriously injured or killed in the next 2.5 seconds

Or just simple hangups against interpersonal violence, not being conditioned to it the way many violent criminals have.

 

[fastbolt]

...

I do believe that most who carry a gun have the mindset to use it if needed.
...

Belief can be a wonderful, satisfying and comforting thing.

Not sure I'd bet the farm on a "belief", though.

I've met my fair share of cops and CCW licensees over the years (in and out-of-state), and I'd not be willing to stake my life on such a belief. People are people.

I'd not exactly bet against the "talisman effect" probably being a modern version of carrying a lucky rabbit's foot for many lawful gun owners and carriers.

(Okay, as a trainer who has taught mostly LE, but also a few hundred CCW-type folks, I may have acquired a bit of a somewhat jaundiced eye when it comes to seeing the axiomatic existence of a belief. )

 

[Warp]

Belief can be a wonderful, satisfying and comforting thing.

Not sure I'd bet the farm on a "belief", though.

I've met my fair share of cops and CCW licensees over the years (in and out-of-state), and I'd not be willing to stake my life on such a belief. People are people.

I'd not exactly bet against the "talisman effect" probably being a modern version of carrying a lucky rabbit's foot for many lawful gun owners and carriers.

(Okay, as a trainer who has taught mostly LE, but also a few hundred CCW-type folks, I may have acquired a bit of a somewhat jaundiced eye when it comes to seeing the axiomatic existence of a belief. )

I think, once again, the decades of data across dozens of states and who only knows how many self defense shoots, bears it out.

There are an awful lot of chances of lawfully armed/carrying folks to have draw their gun only to have it taken away because they were unwilling to use it, but I can't think of examples. If it was a thing where the majority were not willing to use it...that would be a somewhat common occurrence, don't you think?


Who is staking their life on that belief, and why? Nobody is asking you to stake your life on whether or not some random concealed carrier out there has the mindset to use their pistol.


Would you like it better if instead of the concise word "believe" I said that based all evidence I have come across or been presented over the years, the actual factual reality indicates that most carriers of pistols have the mindset to use it?

 

[fastbolt]

I think, once again, the decades of data across dozens of states and who only knows how many self defense shoots, bears it out.

There are an awful lot of chances of lawfully armed/carrying folks to have draw their gun only to have it taken away because they were unwilling to use it, but I can't think of examples. If it was a thing where the majority were not willing to use it...that would be a somewhat common occurrence, don't you think?


Who is staking their life on that belief, and why? Nobody is asking you to stake your life on whether or not some random concealed carrier out there has the mindset to use their pistol.


Would you like it better if instead of the concise word "believe" I said that based all evidence I have come across or been presented over the years, the actual factual reality indicates that most carriers of pistols have the mindset to use it?

We're probably just looking at it from different perspectives created by a different type of learned and experiential knowledge, as well as different sources of training and data points.

When you talk with people who have been forced to reluctantly use a gun to protect themselves, whether it be normal private citizens or cops, it can radically change many folks.

What makes you think that a lot of people who lawfully carry guns are willing to fire them and kill another human being? Whether private citizen or cop?

Just look at what years of testing and review has consistently revealed about the willingness of our soldiers to kill someone, individually, in the personal/contact context. And that's after military training, and being put into combat. Why would ordinary folks, meaning those without any sort of military, public (LE) or private/commercial training, be significantly different?

Ever read On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society, or On Combat, The Psychology and Physiology of Deadly Conflict in War and in Peace? (Dave Grossman)? It covers some of this interesting info from a more clinical perspective (meaning not just skimming a column of selected incidents in a gun enthusiast's magazine).

 

[fredj338]

And yet, any number of untrained gun owners do manage to successfully defend themselves using their guns.

Yes, only because their attacker is a bigger moron in his attempt. Yep, planning for the best case scenario always goes well.

 

[hogarth]

1%er here. Not a woobie.

 

[Warp]

What makes you think that a lot of people who lawfully carry guns are willing to fire them and kill another human being? Whether private citizen or cop?

I think I already gave an example of why. Because, when put into that scenario, the vast majority seem to do so.

Just look at what years of testing and review has consistently revealed about the willingness of our soldiers to kill someone, individually, in the personal/contact context. And that's after military training, and being put into combat. Why would ordinary folks, meaning those without any sort of military, public (LE) or private/commercial training, be significantly different?

Ever read On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society, or On Combat, The Psychology and Physiology of Deadly Conflict in War and in Peace? (Dave Grossman)? It covers some of this interesting info from a more clinical perspective (meaning not just skimming a column of selected incidents in a gun enthusiast's magazine).

I have read both On Killing and On Combat, yes.

It is an interesting comparison there and does make you wonder, I suppose.

And very clearly explains why we use the terms bad buy, BG, perp, scum, lowlife, etc to describe the adversaries...in case there was any doubt about why that is.

Yes, only because their attacker is a bigger moron in his attempt. Yep, planning for the best case scenario always goes well.

The vast majority of lawful carriers, even the millions who carry with no government mandated training, succeed when using their firearm for self defense. Fact. Deal with it.

1%er here. Not a woobie.

1% here as well, obviously.

But being in the 1%, based on the video in the OP, doesn't necessarily mean anything regarding mindset at the moment of truth...just to continue with the conversation going with fastbolt. It does definitely speak towards skillset though

 

[Bruce M]

In looking at the overall population clearly a majority of people in our nation do not regularly carry a firearm. Of the minority that do carry, fewer still carry all the time, and only a fairly small fraction of those are in, for lack of a better name, the 1%ers with a fair amount of training.

In looking at the overall population clearly a majority of people in our nation are not criminals. Of the minority that are criminals, a lot are fairly slow and not especially well skilled. Of the ones that are skilled, a fair number go to fair lengths to not get caught and to both minimize the chances of victimizing someone who has a chance of winning and minimizing stuff that increases sentencing.

My guess is how confrontations between gun owners and criminals unfold has a lot more to do with the great infrequency that the two "pinnacle groups" actually encounter each other during crimes than with any other factor.

 

[Warp]

In looking at the overall population clearly a majority of people in our nation do not regularly carry a firearm. Of the minority that do carry, fewer still carry all the time, and only a fairly small fraction of those are in, for lack of a better name, the 1%ers with a fair amount of training.

In looking at the overall population clearly a majority of people in our nation are not criminals. Of the minority that are criminals, a lot are fairly slow and not especially well skilled. Of the ones that are skilled, a fair number go to fair lengths to not get caught and to both minimize the chances of victimizing someone who has a chance of winning and minimizing stuff that increases sentencing.

My guess is how confrontations between gun owners and criminals unfold has a lot more to do with the great infrequency that the two "pinnacle groups" actually encounter each other during crimes than with any other factor.

Translated...the more skilled criminals tend to recognize the folks who don't look and act like prey, opting for easier victims. Or, once moves are made to demonstrate the presence of a defensive firearm, they break off. Passing/failing the interview as some call it.

 

[Mayonator]

Translated...the more skilled criminals tend to recognize the folks who don't look and act like prey, opting for easier victims. Or, once moves are made to demonstrate the presence of a defensive firearm, they break off. Passing/failing the interview as some call it.

I think most often, it's not chance encounters. (Wrong place at the wrong time, dance of death and and all that.) Someone who is strange to you isn't contemplating premeditated murder. Correct me if I'm wrong, but most of time people shoot somebody who is known to them. Something precipitated the event.

I don't know about Woobie and all that, but if yr gonna carry a gun for whatever reason, it should be something that's gonna work well for ya at rubber band flipping distances, because that's the most common range, 7 feet or less, conversational distances. Having said that, practicing for that is boring. I typically shoot at small targets 30 yards away, and I take my time doing it. I'm just goofing around because I enjoy it. I can flip rubber bands pretty well though. Paintball would probably be the best way to get trained up for the real thing. (Shooting on the move, using cover, anticipating yr opponent, etc.) Paper targets on a timer is all well and good, but it's not gunfighting.

 

[Warp]

I think most often, it's not chance encounters. (Wrong place at the wrong time, dance of death and and all that.) Someone who is strange to you isn't contemplating premeditated murder. Correct me if I'm wrong, but most of time people shoot somebody who is known to them. Something precipitated the event.

I don't know about Woobie and all that, but if yr gonna carry a gun for whatever reason, it should be something that's gonna work well for ya at rubber band flipping distances, because that's the most common range, 7 feet or less, conversational distances. Having said that, practicing for that is boring. I typically shoot at small targets 30 yards away, and I take my time doing it. I'm just goofing around because I enjoy it. I can flip rubber bands pretty well though. Paintball would probably be the best way to get trained up for the real thing.

How easy it is depends on what it is.

Just because it's close, let's say 5-7 yards, doesn't mean it's going to be easy, and it's a bit different from slow fire for groups.

 

[Mayonator]

How easy it is depends on what it is.

Just because it's close, let's say 5-7 yards, doesn't mean it's going to be easy, and it's a bit different from slow fire for groups.

Yeah, no doubt. Not implying anything combat-related is easy. Personally, I'm not training for it. Perhaps I should. Right now, I'm just more interested in training to shoot a deer or an elk with a bow.

 

[Lunch Meat]

Someone who is strange to you isn't contemplating premeditated murder. Correct me if I'm wrong, but most of time people shoot somebody who is known to them. Something precipitated the event.

They may not be contemplating premeditated murder but you would be unpleasantly surprised at just how many of them couldn't care less if you live or die. They may not go into the encounter intending to kill you but if you end up dead they really don't care.

 

[fredj338]

I think most often, it's not chance encounters. (Wrong place at the wrong time, dance of death and and all that.) Someone who is strange to you isn't contemplating premeditated murder. Correct me if I'm wrong, but most of time people shoot somebody who is known to them. Something precipitated the event.

I don't know about Woobie and all that, but if yr gonna carry a gun for whatever reason, it should be something that's gonna work well for ya at rubber band flipping distances, because that's the most common range, 7 feet or less, conversational distances. Having said that, practicing for that is boring. I typically shoot at small targets 30 yards away, and I take my time doing it. I'm just goofing around because I enjoy it. I can flip rubber bands pretty well though. Paintball would probably be the best way to get trained up for the real thing. (Shooting on the move, using cover, anticipating yr opponent, etc.) Paper targets on a timer is all well and good, but it's not gunfighting.

Neither is paint balling btw?? Yes you are more likely to be killed by someone you know, unless you are just unlucky & in the wrong pace wrong time. Think florida night club or a baseball field in virginia. Evil has no boundries, no safe spaces. So imo, if your life is worth carrying a gun, it should be worth some training & practice time.
Btw, practice only under 10ft, you are doomed if the fight goes the length of a car or two. You will be relying on pure luck to save your butt. Jmho.

 

[Lunch Meat]

1%er here. Not a woobie.

 

[GlockyQ]

... the average gun carrier would do far more to decrease their risk of premature death through diet and exercise to stop being obese, than any amount of firearms training.

Yep. That’s probably true. Lol. I need to go to the gym tomorrow.

 

[Mayonator]

Neither is paint balling btw?? Yes you are more likely to be killed by someone you know, unless you are just unlucky & in the wrong pace wrong time. Think florida night club or a baseball field in virginia. Evil has no boundries, no safe spaces. So imo, if your life is worth carrying a gun, it should be worth some training & practice time.
Btw, practice only under 10ft, you are doomed if the fight goes the length of a car or two. You will be relying on pure luck to save your butt. Jmho.

I agree completely. Paintball is cheap and fun, Simunition training isn't, I'm sure. It would probably be more beneficial, but it wouldn't be real gunfighting either, just trying to think along the right lines. I don't carry a gun unless I'm particularly nervous about something (aggressive bear, bad area I can't avoid) but that's just me, I'm not opposed to people carrying generally. I just don't feel the need to. I practice at greater distances than 10 ft. because I like the challenge. Also, I've noticed that if I can hit a clay pigeon at 30-40 yds, I'm much more accurate close in. 50 yds out, I'm hitting all around a small target like a soda can within a few inches, sometimes I nail it.

If you and I got in a gun fight, there's not much doubt in my mind who'd win. The average bad guy? I don't know... Luck might very well be a factor, but I'd like to think I'd smoke him. I'll have to give it some thought, but I think I will get some real training one of these days.

 

[fredj338]

My issue with paintball, while it reinf cover, you have nearly an ulimited supply of "ammo" & you are free to hoze down a target area. Neither is valuable in an urban gunfight scenario. You willhave limited ammo & you are responsible for every round that does not connect. Where simunitions & fof comes into play. As close as you can get to a real gunfight.

 

[FireForged]

I have said this many times.. I am a proponent of training ( especially force on force). Training is good and training certainly can add some measurable advantages. That said, the overwhelming majority of criminals out there committing violent acts with a firearm typically do so while being substantially "untrained". Some of these guys are not even really sure how their firearm works, how to load it, clear it, engage the safety or identify the proper caliber. Despite the obvious handicap, they still manage to commit crime and cause harm on a regular basis.

There are not that many ways to fight with a handgun and its not rocket science. If you receive competent training, you will most certainly be better off than if you don't but I disagree with the idea that if you don't seek and receive tactical training, you are somehow doomed. Its a silly notion that is proven wrong each and every day of the week.

A young lady in the lower part of my state recently defended herself and small child from 3 home invaders, 2 of which were armed ( one with an axe the other with a rifle). The young lady used her husbands 38 special that she had never fired. She hit one and ran the others off. She was untrained, unskilled and unpracticed. She defended herself by using common sense and a little bit of grit.

Yes, get training but please don't give in to the idea that untrained people are not capable of successfully defending themselves with a firearm. They are not likely up against super-secret ninja squirrel operators.