[walkinguf61]

I believe it those stats. There is a semi prominent instructor I had say the same thing and offered up something like a year's worth of free training to anyone who could provide evidence of a civilian gunfight where a reload occured and made a difference to the outcome. As far as I know he's still waiting for anyone to collect on that.

I will still carry a reload anyway though. It's cheap insurance with really no extra work to edc.

This does however bring in to question why anyone would waste extensive time working on fast reloads for any real world purpose. I think most care for gaming reasons but I'm sure somebody out there spends hours in front of a mirror trying to drop half a second off their reload times with thoughts of it maybe winning their gunfight someday. Be competent at reloading, but our time is probably better served practicing other aspects if the end goal isn't drill times and gun games.

Does a second gun instead of a reload count to his contest. There kid that jeweler enjoy had multiple revolvers around .
There are some shooting that the person wished they could have reloaded but went dry.

 

[walkinguf61]

If we are looking at statistics why carry a gun to begin with. What are your chances that on any given day you’ll need a gun. Pretty freaking low.

I carry the highest capacity gun I can effectively conceal on any given day. If it’s possible I carry a spare mag. Aside from some limited attire days where I didn’t have spare pockets, I’ve never struggled to find a way to carry a spare.

I’m the event of having to prioritize. It’s gun, light, knife then spare mag.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Those stats are a little off. Those stats are if you have to shoot that gun . Most of the time, just drawing it can make the bad guy stop and run. Those encounters are rarely put into the statistics .

 

[walkinguf61]

Well statistics say otherwise. The 95% confidence interval tells us that is likely 2 standard deviations away from the mean. Given a standard deviation of 3, that would make 11 (10+1) rounds have a 99.7% confidence level.

If those aren’t exactly the numbers… the math puts it in that ballpark. More than enough to support a statement of “close to zero.”

if you’re going to argue math and statistics… know something about statistics first.

I’m going argue methodologies. You are assuming the population has an even chance of being a victim. It’s more local than that. If we subtracted 25 cites out the hundreds of cities in the US, our crime rate would be very low. If you are in those 25 cities, your chances of being a victim are much greater. If you work and commute certain hours you chances of being a victim are much greater. If you work certain professions, you chances of being a victim are much greater.

 

[walkinguf61]

Yeah, I didn't include a SoCAL incident from many years ago where more than 130 rounds were fired by cops at an incident.

The skeptical part of me will always wonder how any particular 'study' could provide any definitive statistics due to the way such data is hard to find. Considering there's more than 17,000 state and local LE agencies, and the feds now have a lot of agencies under their broad umbrella (especially with DHS), there's a lot of opportunity for data to be lost amidst the background noise, as well as to be missing from efforts to cull such data. Even if mandatory reporting were guaranteed, the normal error rate when it comes to inputting and tabulating data has to be considered.

I'd not be surprised if private citizen shooting incidents produced fewer instances of unintended GSW victims than LE shootings ... as long as criminal shootings were kept out of the mix, of course. Even criminals who are determined to have been defending themselves in some incident.

Looking for statistics to support some desired change in a training policy, or refute some claim, etc ... may be easier than some might think. Just depends where you go to gather your statistics.



Yeah, the term "civilian" when it comes to private citizens can sometimes rub some folks the wrong way. It's been used for decades when it comes to discussing the Motoring Public and Law Enforcement, though. Lazy, perhaps.

To arguably be more accurate, LE (outside of military law enforcement) is civilian LE, making it civilian (non-MIL) just like the civilian Public it serves, and from which it draws its sworn employees.

Further interesting trips down the rabbit holes are possible when it involves specialty city/county agencies, or state agencies ... meaning swat versus front line LE, or special task forces where officers or deputies may be assigned the additional designation of "agent" (including on task force badges and ID cards), etc. At the end of the day, though, if they aren't military, they're civilian law enforcement.

That's why I usually try to make the effort to differentiate between LE and non-LE, or LE and Private Citizen, but I'm sure that there are folks who would still object to those distinctions (on both sides of anybody's badge).

As long as everyone understands what everyone else is talking about, it's all more or less just grayscale.

But firemen aren’t civilians either by certain definitions-lol
NYPD stats are commonly used because it was one of first to keep these statistics.. They have a history to be able to compare data and see trends . The FBI generally just tracks the seven majors ( felonies) and does a profile of cops killed in the line of duty incidents. Not much more from police departments.
The there is also when they do polls of the general public to see if they were a crime victim etc and compare the two . But it’s accuracy can vary.

 

[walkinguf61]

When I was on plainclothes enforcement, I had a mini utility belt amount of stuff. It was easier to leave it on and go home then to take it off. Sort of line Clint Eastwood in The Line of Fire.

Now, If I have a single stack, I usually have one spare magazine. Why? Even if I shoot seven rounds if I get into a shootout, I don’t want to have to stand there with an empty gun while I wait for the police to come.
If I have my G26, I don’t always carry a spare magazine.
My EDC is more geared around what I might need/want on a daily basis than being a potential victim of an assault. Too much to carry otherwise.

 

[walkinguf61]

Edited

 

[walkinguf61]

Chance to become a victim has zero relevance to how many rounds you use once you are in a defensive encounter.

if you have date that shows otherwise, please share it.

I might have linked my response to the wrong person’s quote-if I did , sorry. I was responding to someone who stated something about the chances of having to need your gun was such and such.

As to the number rounds in a civilian shooting? The methodology is also in question as compared to police shootings. How many self defense shootings occur where no one is hit? Or at least, a victim still at the scene. There is usually no crime scene if no one is hit and there is nothing more to it, That throws off the accuracy of the data.
I can tell you there are a lot 911 calls of shots fired with no “ victim” present . Are they hit? Who knows? Occasionally we would get a gunshot victim who would lie about where it happened. Could the detectives figure out from where? Sometimes. Sometimes not.
A lot of self defense shootings are not reported especially in areas where guns are illegal to have.

 

[walkinguf61]

I forgot to add if this study is based on one firearms instructor and his students — it is not civilian shootings but his teaching thst the study judges. He might be such a great instructor that his students need less than 10 where a less trained CCW needs more than 10 on average.

 

[walkinguf61]

This is exactly why I carry a NUMBER of rounds and stuff as many into the gun as possible. I try to get to 30 if possible. If I am stuck with a revolver, I try to get to 24.

This is easy with my 8 shot N Frame; two IWB loaders up front and the gun carried strongside. For my 629, it means one split 6 in front of the gun and two on the off side. For a 1911, that means one mag up front and two behind the hip. For a Glock 17/19, life is easier with just one spare G17 mag with or without spacer. I have yet to figure out the Glock 21/30 since the mags are so huge and uncomfortable that I usually violate the rule and just carry a spare 13 round mag up front.

WILL I NEED ALL THIS? Probably not. But if MY fight falls into the tail of the statistics, then I have what I need.

24 rounds is your minimum EDC carry for a revolver and 30 rounds if a semi?
Just curious, what is the rest of your EDC look like?

 

[walkinguf61]

With more active shooters with AR-15's, I think the possibility of using more rounds, and requiring a reload is increasing. There was the mall shooter, that required 10 rds to take out, what if he only had a 6rd G43? Many more people could of died! You can continue to live in your fantasy world, I will live in reality

Did it require 10 rounds or was be shot with 10 rounds before he fell but was already incapacitated? Legit question .
But you point is a good one regardless.

 

[walkinguf61]

Let he who is without spin cast the first bullet?
NYPD has a wealth of stats collected and reported over the decades.
When they had mostly 6 shot revolvers they rarely emptied or reloaded them during shootings. They have been more likely to empty and reload their 16 shot semis.
Either way their hit rate has ranged from 8-30%. Some revolver years better than some semi years.

The older NYPD revolver data might be misleading. The number of shooting incidents is much higher in the revolver days than semi auto. The standards of when you could shoot were lower then and police shot a lot more. It messes up the comparison . Police in 1971, the revolver days, they had over 800 firearm discharge incidents . In 2020, the total number of discharge incidents was 43 ( only 25 were “shootouts”, 10 were accidental discharges, a few were animal attacks, and suicides ). From the 25 incidents , 7 officers fired between 11 to 20 rounds. The others were 10 rounds or less
“Discharged per Member in ID-AC Incidents, 2020
2-5 Rounds (20) 39%
6-10 Rounds (11) 22%
11-20 Rounds (7) 14%”
And here is the ranges :
“ID-AC Distance to Target by Discharging Member, 2020
11-15 Feet (2)
4%
15+ Feet (35) 68%
0-5 Feet (5) 10%”

I didn’t see any exact figures for beyond the 25 yard line.

 

[walkinguf61]

I thought everyone should hear from the source himself.

He explains that police have a different mission than a private citizen who isn’t to pursue the criminal but break contact.
But look at the his stats. It doesn’t work that way.
And as I said , even if I win a gunfight without needing a reload, I don’t want to be there with an empty gun while I wait for the police.
And unlike John, I have seen a magazine failure in a gunfight that only a new magazine would have fixed. But to be fair, it was the criminal’s gun.

And his response to Mas Ayood’s video:

I think he was advocating a higher capacity gun over the reload.

 

[walkinguf61]

I carry 12 rounds. When travelling through other states you have to be cautious with your magazine limit. If you get caught in certain states with a mag that can hold over ten rounds you're going to be their guest. (and it has happened)

I just found out that I can carry 15 round magazines in NJ. If you carry on LEOSA, they let you have up to 15 rounds.

“
A box, drum, tube or other container which is capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition to be fed continuously and directly therefrom into a semi-automatic firearm. The term shall not include an attached tubular device which is capable of holding only .22 caliber rimfire ammunition. Qualified retired law enforcement officers that have registered a handgun(s) with the New Jersey State Police as part of the Retired Police Officers permit to carry program may possess a magazine with a capacity of up to 15rounds of ammunition for that specific registered handgun(s). Active duty law enforcement officers may possess magazines with a capacity of up to 17rounds for personal firearms and over 17 rounds for any department issued firearm.”

I say this as to how I was surprised by it. This time it was to my favor , next time it might not when I travel out of state .

And no one is really discussing the intial capacity of the gun. If you are carrying a 5 shot J-frame, carry spare ammo. If you carry a Glock 17, you probably won’t need it .

 

[walkinguf61]

With 10+1 in your gun, the chances you'll need more ammo to finish the fight are near zero.

Also, the Active Self Protection guy has stated that out of however many hundreds or thousands of shooting videos he's seen, he's NEVER ONCE seen anybody have to reload and keep fighting. Any reloads always happened after the fight wound up being over.

Most people these days seem to think they most likely will be fighting off an entire platoon of bad guys. That's why those stupid 15 round Shield magazines are so popular for the G43's and G48's.

Hell, just learn how to shoot the damn gun and make every shot count and be mentally prepared for a deadly encounter. Mindset and training is more important than hardware.

He said Civilian shootings, plenty of cop shootings with a reload or malfunction drill

 

[walkinguf61]

Just a question. LEOSA makes a cop immune from ammo possession so why would that apply to the amount of ammo the cop has on him. Magazine capacity is different than a limit on the amount of ammo. So if I took a revolver to DC with a box of 25 rounds would LEOSA cover me?

 

[walkinguf61]

This would be a very long post if I don’t shorten some things up.

1994 in EMT class and 1996 at Ft Sam Combat medic course tourniquets were only a field expedient type like your belt. On the civilian side they were taboo. Oh, and the golden hour was rule of the land.

2002 - Why are soldiers still extanguinating on the battle field like they did in Vietnam?

2003 - problem identified and EVERY person deployed to AO is issued CAT tourniquets, no more teaching of field expedient tourniquets, and all Medics begin training on Tactical Combat Causality Care prior to deployment. We learned from the special operations community to what actually worked in combat.

2005 - Golden hour no longer taught and replaced with golden period and an emphasis on training to stop bleeding as the leading cause of preventable death out of hospital, just like it is in combat. This came with a lot of things like permissive hypotension on trauma patients and more focus on MAP and perfusion guided care.

2010 - Tactical Emergency Casualty Care becomes a class. Same as TCCC without treatment under direct fire. It focused on the use of CAT tourniquets, would packing, and wound sealing as the primary means of preventing death. ETA this was when tourniquets fell into “favor” on the civilian side.

It is next to impossible to get a normal belt tight enough to actually stop bleeding. The bleeding it will stop is not arterial in nature. There are multiple peer reviewed studies about this. I carry 4 CAT tourniquets impregnated combat gauze and two chest seals in a pouch on my vest and always have an IFAK with the same in the car that I take to the range, I don’t carry on me on normal days. Current expert recommendations are high on the limb and multiple tourniquets may be needed to stop arterial bleeding.

I can go on a very long tirade about tourniquets and the brand and type. The American College of Trauma Surgeons is well published on this and on acceptable brands of tourniquets for use.

This is my life, out of hospital emergency medicine is what I do and what I have dedicated over 25 years of my life to. I do not want to hijack this or any other thread and any PM questions will be answered.

Keep preaching. Make a new thread . I don’t know enough on this stuff. My info is way out of date

 

[walkinguf61]

I personally don’t believe a CCW qual needs to be terribly stringent, nor those for LE. There’s precious little correlation between qual scores and success in real world shootings anyway. The training, on the other hand, ought to be as rigorous and stressful as safety will allow for Law Enforcement. It should be challenging and realistic for civilians who want to carry as well, but it obviously will have differences from that of LE

To a large degree, you can design qual courses that will eliminate some otherwise excellent police officers from their academy or training programs. Furthermore, a history or marginal or, worse, failed qualification scores are something that an officer has to walk around with for the rest of their career. They never go away, and those records are a sure bet to be subpoenaed by plaintiffs in a civil suit. It’s a potential factor for negligent training or retention lawsuits and despite the fact that an officer might improve greatly, any marginal or poor performances can come back to haunt.

The same can be said for civilian CCW. If there’s so little correlation, and basically no causation, between a super tough qual course and successful real world handgun use, then what’s the point of super tough quals? Quals aren’t training, after all, they’re basically a way to numerically quantify performance based on a snapshot in time that someone has has claimed is “good enough.” No matter how well a civilian ccw’er (Can I say this? Is it a real word?) is trained, you or I could design a qual course they would fail. What would be the point in doing so?

In my humble opinion only, the best combination is hard training but simpler quals. And furthermore, quals that are scored pass/fail rather than with a numeric percentage. In other words, X is the standard based on safety and a demonstrated fundamental ability to run the gun and hit a target. You either meet it or you don’t. How hard the standard was to meet isn’t so much the issue. It exists more to prove you’re not a menace and a danger to others than to attempt to predict whether or not you’ll be the next Wild Bill Hickok when the rubber truly meets the road.

Anyhow, silly schpiel concluded. Just one man’s musings.

A civilian training doesn’t even have to be close to an LEO training. The civilian is told to break contact when possible where they LEO has to hunt down the threat. The LEO needs to be trained in moving and shooting where the civilian does not . It’s a plus but he isn’t expected to move toward the threat.
Requals in themselves aren’t training beyond reenforcement of muscle memory of the draw etc. However during a requal cycle, we would usually shoot a training course of fire of some type. Some had value, others not so much.
Simmuntions is where the real training happened for us.

 

[walkinguf61]

Think of it as conserving your ammo. You have to pause to reload.

Buy more mags-lol