Psychological Stops are grossly underrated.

[kwh]

3 types of stops:
1) Central nervous system damage to brain stem= stop is immediate.
2) Blood loss stop. Damage to heart/lungs, or femoral artery. Activity stops when blood loss is so severe as to cause lack of consciousnesses. May take a little while. Depends on size and shape of hole.
3) Psychological stop. Person stops attack for what ever reason. Fear, pain, noise, reassessment of situation,etc. Person may or may not have been shot.
I also have wondered if momentum would increase more "psychological" stops with a non-incapacitating wound. Compare .45 acp vs. 9mm. on swinging steel targets.

 

[ken158]

Psychological stops are real, I've had several. 2 human and 2 animal come to mind. Human: Large group of kids was intent on beating the **** out of us 2 police officers until one saw that I had a 1911 cocked and locked IN THE HOLSTER, and freaked out that my "thing" was back (the hammer) anyway he freaked and got the rest of the mob to leave. Mission accomplished. Second was a group of drunks that thought my wife looked like a fun playtoy and laughed at the 1911. They did not laugh at the M1A and left the scene, as did we. Animals: 2 Doberman trained (supposedly) attack dogs, did not like a 1911 being stuck in their mouths as they tried to bite, one got choked out the other just left. I later heard from the owners that their dogs were next to useless after the event. Would I ever think of relying on this - not only no, but hell no. If it happens, fine but plan for the worst.

I had 30 years on the job also and never had interaction with anyone who thought a uniformed officer was not armed and was never attacked by a dog that knew the difference.

 

[gman51]

This brings up the belief that don't pull a gun unless you intend to use it. Also if you pull a gun and don't use it you just might get arrested for pulling or displaying a gun in order to intimidate or scare someone. Then the question could be who was the victim.
It can be a very psychological experience alright.

 

[Gene L]

I don't know, but to me, a psychological stop as I see them, puts the terms of the Stop the Violence in the hands/mind of the perp. Like most LEOs, I've drawn and not shot anyone, so my understanding of psychological stops is incomplete. I DO NOT think it's a thing you can place any confidence in. In other words, don't count on it.

I'm pretty confident that in the unlikely event I need to throw down on a bad guy, I'll know when it's appropriate to shoot/not shoot.

 

[Echo40]

Well, this thread was a bust because apparently not that many people even know what a Psychological Stop is, ergo not many folks have read articles in which the term has been used/described/discussed, and thus lack the knowledge to comment on it.

I posted this thread under the assumption that folks were aware of it or at the very least that reading the OP provided an adequate description in context, but evidently I was wrong and thus there's no point in continuing on with it. Sure, other folks in the thread have provided accurate descriptions, but that alone does not provide adequate information with which to form an informed opinion on the phenomenon, and I don't expect everyone to go read up on it, so screw it, I'm calling it a loss.

 

[BC38]

One point to add. Psychological stops may be "under-rated" in SD threads in gun forums, but they certainly aren't in the real world where hundreds of thousands of DGUs prevent crimes without a shot being fired. Every time a criminal turns tail and runs when the intended victim produces a gun counts as a psychological stop, doesn't it?

 

[JayFramer]

Psycho-stops are best achieved with the 125 grain .357 SJHPs.

The muzzle burst and audial clap have a profound effect on the tango.

 

[Smoke]

"There is no appreciable difference in the effectiveness of the 9mm and 45 ACP cartridges"

-Vincent J. M. Di Maio, GUNSHOT WOUNDS: Practical Aspects of Firearms, Ballistics, and Forensic Techniques SECOND EDITION, Page 150.

Vincent Di Maio - Wikipedia

 

[Ziggy2525]

Wasn't this a made up term to clarify some data? The stuff I've seen on psychological stops all seems to connect back to the Greg Ellifritz/Buckeye Firearms article linked above.

In a certain (fairly high) percentage of shootings, people stop their aggressive actions after being hit with one round regardless of caliber or shot placement. These people are likely NOT physically incapacitated by the bullet. They just don't want to be shot anymore and give up! Call it a psychological stop if you will.

From his definition, to be a psychological stop, doesn't the person...

1) have to actually have been hit by a bullet, not just see the display of a gun.
2) have an injury that isn't physically incapacitating.
3) gives up.

Since it's a made up term, can't it mean pretty anything anyone wants it to?

My 2 cents. YMMV.

 

[misswired]

Was a LEO for 30.5 years. Taught at a large state university for 25 years. Am fairly well read.

Until today, had NEVER heard or read the words psychological stop in the same context as the OP presents them. (Certainly NOT in quotations or CAPS as would denote a common term, either.)

Given I may not be as smart as I would like to be, I did a search online...NOTHING.

So, is the OP smarter than me (us?) or is he simply inventing something for some unknown purpose(s?)

Be safe.

I've never heard the term used either,but, have no problem understanding the meaning without google. The mere act of exposing my 1911 at an out of the way boat ramp was an effective psychological stop.....

Despite your impressive resume;.....I do believe you are stumbling over machismo.

 

[Justin T]

Well, this thread was a bust because apparently not that many people even know what a Psychological Stop is, ergo not many folks have read articles in which the term has been used/described/discussed, and thus lack the knowledge to comment on it.

I posted this thread under the assumption that folks were aware of it or at the very least that reading the OP provided an adequate description in context, but evidently I was wrong and thus there's no point in continuing on with it. Sure, other folks in the thread have provided accurate descriptions, but that alone does not provide adequate information with which to form an informed opinion on the phenomenon, and I don't expect everyone to go read up on it, so screw it, I'm calling it a loss.

I'm not always the sharpest tool in the shed, but I had hoped to have a followup question to try and learn a little sumpin. It seems I'm not in the same plane of knowledge as you, though, so I'll quit on that.

For the record, I completely get there may be value in throwin' down on a person intent on doing me harm, in the hopes I may not need to shoot him. Hopefully I can do things to avoid all of that in the first place (like leave the area or defuse the confrontation). But I won't allow myself to believe I can actually rely on that as an effective tactic-just like I refuse to believe that racking a pump shotgun will scare a home intruder away. I believe you said as much in your OP.

ETA: because i'm not always the sharpest, it takes a second time around on the stone to get me to cuttin'. After reading the OP again, and post 2, I suspect even if some of us aren't familiar with the nomenclature, we are all going to be happy if we can reduce a conflict and not have to take a life. No matter how we get there, and statistics be damned. Caliber, gun shape, etc have little to do with that.

 

[The Big D]

Congratulations re: your 'stop'...

...of someone presumably threatening you. But isn't it simply a 'stop?'

A quick search of this Forum and its half a MILLION threads and almost 6 MILLION posts found only one use of the term 'psychological stop' before the instant thread and that was by the OP.

To 'stop' an assailant(s) or potential assailant(s) is the very nature of the use of a gun...or any weapon for that matter.

In my personal experience of toting a gun for more than 45 years I have used a gun on scores of occasions including non-LEO situations. Happily never had to shoot anyone but 'stopped' the actions that necessitated my use every single time.

The OP In channeling Ellifritz seems to imply that caliber and type of gun makes a difference. Having stopped bad people with .38's, 9mm's, .223's, and 12 gauge shotguns at various times suggests they didn't know what kind of gun was being pointed at them but stopped regardless.

Personally, I think way too many people overthink carrying a gun. Some aver a 'fighting gun' is the only gun to carry; some ponder caliber and capacity to extremes.

To me, knowing WHEN to shoot and HOW to shoot are the basics and will serve the vast majority of the population...including LEO's. Your methods/thoughts may vary but let's not overly complicate things.

Be safe.

PS: Never have I been associated with machismo.

I've never heard the term used either,but, have no problem understanding the meaning without google. The mere act of exposing my 1911 at an out of the way boat ramp was an effective psychological stop.....

Despite your impressive resume;.....I do believe you are stumbling over machismo.

 

[686-380]

A broad umbrella term

I'm not always the sharpest tool in the shed, but I had hoped to have a followup question to try and learn a little sumpin. It seems I'm not in the same plane of knowledge as you, but I'll ask anyway.

For the record, I completely get there may be value in throwin' down on a person intent on doing me harm, in the hopes I may not need to shoot him. Hopefully I can do things to avoid all of that in the first place (like leave the area or defuse the confrontation). But I won't allow myself to believe I can actually rely on that as an effective tactic-just like I refuse to believe that racking a pump shotgun will scare a home intruder away.

On to the question: I'm reminded of a particular mall shooting event where the attacker started seeing return fire from citizens (not police) and then chose to off himself rather than fight back. I believe there are a couple of other situations that have ended this way.

Psychological stop or nah? DGU? How would the above scenario be described using your definitions or classifications in the OP?

I love the opportunity to discuss these issues. Some folks take it much more seriously than I do. I don't like it when members seem to denigrate others in an attempt to make themselves feel superior. I'm just an everyday person. I've had to learn from what I've read, seen, heard and my own experiments.

This statement is what I "hope" actually happens...which it probably won't. If I perceive a threat great enough to prompt me to draw my firearm, my intention is to shoot. No warning, just draw, aim and fire. I will continue unti the threat stops, for whatever reason. Thererfore, a psychological stop probably won't be a factor, unless the criminal immediately surrenders.

 

[Justin T]

I love the opportunity to discuss these issues. Some folks take it much more seriously than I do. I don't like it when members seem to denigrate others in an attempt to make themselves feel superior. I'm just an everyday person. I've had to learn from what I've read, seen, heard and my own experiments.

This statement is what I "hope" actually happens...which it probably won't. If I perceive a threat great enough to prompt me to draw my firearm, my intention is to shoot. No warning, just draw, aim and fire. I will continue unti the threat stops, for whatever reason. Thererfore, a psychological stop probably won't be a factor, unless the criminal immediately surrenders.

Caught me in mid-edit, sir. I like learning things and am able and willing to participate in these sorts of discussions if I can know what the boundaries and meanings are. But if questions are treated as stupid bothersome then why bother? That's why I edited myself.

I guess what I wanted to say was that although I haven't had the need to draw yet, I do believe that "psychological stops" are a thing that can happen but since they are unique to each situation shouldn't be planned for. More of a "thank the maker i didn't have to kill you" sort of thing. I mean, at that moment, a participant is only going to care about the situation in front of them, and not what the statistics or white papers say.

And at that point, why is it important how we get to the end?

 

[BB57]

Was a LEO for 30.5 years. Taught at a large state university for 25 years. Am fairly well read.

Until today, had NEVER heard or read the words psychological stop in the same context as the OP presents them. (Certainly NOT in quotations or CAPS as would denote a common term, either.)

Given I may not be as smart as I would like to be, I did a search online...NOTHING.

So, is the OP smarter than me (us?) or is he simply inventing something for some unknown purpose(s?)

Be safe.

Don't take this wrong, but Marshall and Sanow's first book came out in 1992. It's almost impossible to discuss discuss one shot stops, stopping power, or pretty much any comparison or analysis of handgun cartridge effectiveness in real world shooting incidents without considering psychological effects and running across the term "psychological stop". Unless you are choosing to be really selective about what you read.

I also taught at the university level and I'm a big believer in knowing and understanding all the arguments, even the ones you don't happen to subscribe to or believe in. It enables you to be able to better understand and defend your position. More importantly it enables you to teach students to use critical thinking, debate all the facts, make their own decisions and reach their own conclusions, rather than know what they know based on an authoritarian method.

 

[BB57]

Psychological stops are real, I've had several. 2 human and 2 animal come to mind. Human: Large group of kids was intent on beating the **** out of us 2 police officers until one saw that I had a 1911 cocked and locked IN THE HOLSTER, and freaked out that my "thing" was back (the hammer) anyway he freaked and got the rest of the mob to leave. Mission accomplished. Second was a group of drunks that thought my wife looked like a fun playtoy and laughed at the 1911. They did not laugh at the M1A and left the scene, as did we. Animals: 2 Doberman trained (supposedly) attack dogs, did not like a 1911 being stuck in their mouths as they tried to bite, one got choked out the other just left. I later heard from the owners that their dogs were next to useless after the event. Would I ever think of relying on this - not only no, but hell no. If it happens, fine but plan for the worst.

Those are examples of what has become known as a "defensive gun use", but they are not examples of a "psychological stop". The psychological stop has been traditionally defined as when the attacker says to himself, "Oh God, I've been shot" and lies down to die or be taken to a hospital. In other words, he is not physically incapacitated but stops and lies or sits down anyway.

It's also sometimes more broadly defined as the assailant either going down or running away or otherwise stopping the assault after being shot with an incapacitating hit. In that case it's more of "Oh God, I've been shot. Getting shot sucks, I'm going to stop doing whatever caused me to get shot so I don't get shot more" and then either surrender or run away, depending on the situation.

I've also seen the term misused when an assailant runs away or surrenders after just receiving fire and not being hit, because they do not want to get shot in the first place. In this case it's more a matter of "Oh God, I've bitten off a lot more than I can chew. I need to leave right now before I get shot."

In your examples it's more an issue of "Oh God, I'm about to bite off more than I can chew, maybe I should just put down the fork."

 

[rockquarry]

...of someone presumably threatening you. But isn't it simply a 'stop?'

A quick search of this Forum and its half a MILLION threads and almost 6 MILLION posts found only one use of the term 'psychological stop' before the instant thread and that was by the OP.

To 'stop' an assailant(s) or potential assailant(s) is the very nature of the use of a gun...or any weapon for that matter.

In my personal experience of toting a gun for more than 45 years I have used a gun on scores of occasions including non-LEO situations. Happily never had to shoot anyone but 'stopped' the actions that necessitated my use every single time.

The OP In channeling Ellifritz seems to imply that caliber and type of gun makes a difference. Having stopped bad people with .38's, 9mm's, .223's, and 12 gauge shotguns at various times suggests they didn't know what kind of gun was being pointed at them but stopped regardless.

Personally, I think way too many people overthink carrying a gun. Some aver a 'fighting gun' is the only gun to carry; some ponder caliber and capacity to extremes.

To me, knowing WHEN to shoot and HOW to shoot are the basics and will serve the vast majority of the population...including LEO's. Your methods/thoughts may vary but let's not overly complicate things.

Be safe.

PS: Never have I been associated with machismo.

You're right in presenting a direct response that's both simple and sensible. I certainly agree with your comments and I'm sure others also agree. However, I doubt the obsessive theorists will see things in such a practical light.

The sort of things being discussed here probably were seldom if ever discussed before concealed carry. I'm not critical of concealed carry in any way, I'm all for it, but how much time is spent on very grave matters in a concealed carry class? It couldn't compare to what is taught to law enforcement personnel, nor should it be as extensive.

As a result of necessary yet minimal classroom instruction, concealed carry holders are curious about many things not touched upon. That's good, but it shouldn't develop into an obsession that might cause confusion or hesitation in a life-threatening event.

 

[dockmurgw]

What's a "psychological stop"?

Its what lazy hipsters with 32's do at railroad crossings when the lights aren't flashing.

 

[Rule3]

Well, this thread was a bust because apparently not that many people even know what a Psychological Stop is, ergo not many folks have read articles in which the term has been used/described/discussed, and thus lack the knowledge to comment on it.

I posted this thread under the assumption that folks were aware of it or at the very least that reading the OP provided an adequate description in context, but evidently I was wrong and thus there's no point in continuing on with it. Sure, other folks in the thread have provided accurate descriptions, but that alone does not provide adequate information with which to form an informed opinion on the phenomenon, and I don't expect everyone to go read up on it, so screw it, I'm calling it a loss.

What did you expect?? Where did you do all your research.?
What kind of Psychology Degree do you have?

A PS has so many many variables involved with the individual make up of the person shot and all other surrounding influences. You are also way off base with "calibers" coming out of a handgun. There is a recent thread on it by Federal. But the caliber wars and now PS wars will continue.

No one truly knows until the exact moment that a specific shooting takes place. It may or may not happen. If I got shot with a BB gun I would probably scream Ive been shot and give up!

If Dirty Harry pointed his 44 Mag at you and said his famous line, would you stop!
On the "caliber side of this"

Lucky Gunner/Federal video
YouTube

 

[10ring]

Well, this was/is a very strange thread. I am quite familiar with the concept that in some situations, individuals who are shot will cease their aggressive behavior despite the wound not being incapacitating, and where this is not a conscious or tactical decision on their part. There are at least a few cases where it is claimed an individual died despite the wound being one that was not life threatening from a medical point of view.

Some people just give up out of fear or pain or recognition that this is not going to turn out well once they get hurt or someone is shooting back at them. That is a conscious decision, and not what the concept (as I am familiar with it) really refers to.

The concept as usually discussed addresses the idea of a person responding in a certain way to being shot, based on subconscious or unconscious factors. I have never heard this referred to as a "psychological stop." Essentially it is something that is not quantifiable or predictable and for the most part independent of the nature of the wound, caliber choice, etc. It is one of those variables we really cannot account for when evaluating some shooting outcomes.

One theory is that a certain number of folks have a mental schema that people who are shot will fall down or pass out or die, and when such a thing happens to them they do just that. Perhaps it is due to things they read in books, saw in television or movies or even just an internal belief.

It is just one of the ways/factors that a threat may be ended by a defensive or LEO gun usage.

Why do some but not all females scream when they see someone hurt or killed? Is it biological or a planned or intended response, or have they grown up thinking that is what one does and they just do what their brain "tells them" to do? On the other hand, relatively few men scream in such situations.

There is a school of thought that says it is important/valuable to teach police officers and military personnel the idea that being shot does not mean you can no longer fight or that you will die, in order to try and counter this psychological factor in the "good guys."

Anyway, I cannot see how this concept would ever affect one's choice of defensive weapon or caliber.