At what distance is a threat no longer “a threat”?

[johngalt]

What gets me is how most seem to take the 21 foot thing as gospel and refuse to practice at any longer range. I've been criticized for practicing at longer ranges. There is value in the shooting sports beyond training to kill people.

 

[rockquarry]

What gets me is how most seem to take the 21 foot thing as gospel and refuse to practice at any longer range. I've been criticized for practicing at longer ranges. There is value in the shooting sports beyond training to kill people.

Good post.

 

[SGT ROCK 11B]

We all know the Eli Dicken story. You may in a situation where you take action and save lives or let innocent people die.

Being a retired LEO I know what I will do. I would also remind everyone who carries a gun is a gunfighter by de facto.

 

[Mike SC Hunter]

There is no Tueler Rule. It is not a rule. It's Tueler Drill.
It is a training method called the Tueler Drill. It's named after Dennis Tueler, SLC PD, who developed it as a training method to demonstrate that even at 21 feet a person with a knife can still overtake a person and cause injury before a person with a firearm can react and fire. The reason for 21 ft was because reviewing many incidents of police being injured LEOs thought if they kept away from a person about 7 yds then they were safe from attack. Tueler showed with his training drill that even at 21 ft a LEO could still be attacked and injured before being able to draw a weapon.
I've seen a lot of depts train with the Tueler Drill and do it wrong. The LEO in the scenario knows the attack is coming and is prepared to draw his firearm. As a result they can get 1 to 2 rounds off before the attacker covers the distance. In real world that LEO won't know the attacker is going to charge. When the drill is properly taught the LEO is caught cold and seldom gets his firearm out of the holster and cannot get his firearm on target to take the shot before contact is made. What the Tueler Drill teaches is as soon as the attacker makes movement then the LEO needs to get off line to create distance.
Please don't call it a rule. It will bite you later. In several civil cases attorneys have picked up on it being called a rule and have used it to influence a jury. You violated the rule. It's not a rule. It's nothing more than a training method.
How far is a threat? So the gun blast guy thinks it's 15 yards. He's full of it. Typically those who set X distance, be it 5 yds, 15 yds, whatever, they'll admit that's all the farther than can hit anything. Anyone who says X number of feet is the threat then let someone shoot at them from that distance. You're under deadly threat no matter how far away someone is shooting at you.
I've done quite a few deadly force shooting investigations and have taken incoming fire. If someone is shooting at you then he's a threat.

All here and abouts call it the Teuler Rule.........Means the same......We ain't gonna change.

 

[ispcapt]

All here and abouts call it the Teuler Rule.........Means the same......We ain't gonna change.

No it does not mean the same. Once you find yourself in court you'll quickly learn the difference.
Dennis Tueler does not call it a rule and he is clear why it's not a rule, it's a training drill.
The only time it became called a rule is by people who don't understand the difference.

 

[Mike SC Hunter]

No it does not mean the same. Once you find yourself in court you'll quickly learn the difference.
Dennis Tueler does not call it a rule and he is clear why it's not a rule, it's a training drill.
The only time it became called a rule is by people who don't understand the difference.

Not gonna change......Not worried about court

 

[Delta Rose]

I think it is better to focus on the legal definitions that will be used to determine the justification of your decision than some set distance as a measure. Think Ability, Opportunity, Jeopardy and Preclusion…

UseofForce.us: AOJP

 

[Matt_X]

I was watching a Gun Blast video reviewing a customized Model 10. The presenter stated that the sights were regulated out to 15 yards.

What gets me is how most seem to take the 21 foot thing as gospel and refuse to practice at any longer range. I've been criticized for practicing at longer ranges. There is value in the shooting sports beyond training to kill people.

Your comment stuck with me as I continue to try to improve my skill, and in general use the B-8 target as my standard. If I can be consistant at 17 or 25 yards, then I have good confidence about closer targets of same size. It also means I can be confident entering a contest or competition, whether it be bowling pins or whatever. I may or may not do well in the game but that's fine - that's the point of entering.


This relates back to the matter of zeroing the fixed sights to 15 yards. Running some various loads in the on-line ballistics calculators, there doesn't seem to be a lot of difference between a 15 and a 25 yard zero. But it does mean a hold over sight picture is needed sooner. In contrast, a 50 yard zero requires a slight 6'o clock hold at closer distances. Given a choice, a lot of shooters prefer a 6 o'clock hold because the target is not obscured by the front sight. In an 'action shooting' type event it may also be easier to pick out the next target for the same reason.


The factory fixed sights are short, so this all may be somewhat of a non-issue other than for precision shooting. But since the customizer made a point of it, it got my curiousity.
A) as to what effect it might actually have, and whether it was done with a flatter higher velocity 110 gr, would then result in hold over with a slower 158 WC or RLN?
B) Does reducing the POA distance provide a near coincidence with POI over greater or lesser distances?


While I did crunch some numbers with Federal's calculator, I think this article shows it more clearly. Its done with a sight positioned fairly high above the barrel so the results are more extreme than would be with a factory Model 10.

Best Distance to Zero a Pistol-Mounted Red Dot | An Official Journal Of The NRA


Looking at the photos, it seems to me a 25 yard zero would generably be preferable to 12 and probably 15 yards for almost any purpose.

 

[Muss Muggins]

When it prevents me from getting home to me and mine. Your mileage may vary . . .

I was watching a Gun Blast video reviewing a customized Model 10. The presenter stated that the sights were regulated out to 15 yards. He made the statement that if you fired at a threat at a distance greater than 15 yards, you have some explaining to do. So, at what distance does a threat cease to be a threat? At what distance does a justifiable shooting cease to be justifiable because the distance between you and the threat minimizes the danger?

 

[SMSgt]

When he's out of gun range.

 

[biku324]

Not gonna change......Not worried about court

Then you've just not experiemced it enough. I want to leave something to my grandchildren, not the firm Duey, Cheatum, and Howe.

 

[Sgt. Buzzard]

Funny, I went to the police academy, we qualified out to 50 yards. I went to FBI firearms instructor school, we qualified out to 50 yards. Now after 30 years of training, 7 yards is good enough? I don't think so.

 

[rosewood]

I would think if you are a threat to the threat with a firearm at any distance, then they are a threat to you.

Rosewood

 

[ISCS Yoda]

A fictional event always comes to my mind when I read such discussions. The author of the fictional event clearly had an understanding of threat perception. So, think about this:

You are confronted by someone with a gun (or a knife if you like) at a reasonable distance from you, let's say ten yards or even twenty. You are armed, you have already made it clear that you are armed and capable of taking action. (I had a stress training class that included this long before I saw this fictional TV gunfight.)

You pointedly tell the threat that if he takes another step closer to you that you will shoot him.

He steps.

What's your move?

In the fictional gunfight the LEO shoots the threat. In the amusing fictional dialogue the threat whines, before he drops, "YOU SHOT ME!" Response? "I told you what would happen if you took another step toward me!"

The point of this fiction is clear. If you perceive a threat, the distance is irrelevant. The author did an excellent job of making the point as far as I was concerned.

 

[luvsmiths]

I was watching a Gun Blast video reviewing a customized Model 10. The presenter stated that the sights were regulated out to 15 yards. He made the statement that if you fired at a threat at a distance greater than 15 yards, you have some explaining to do. So, at what distance does a threat cease to be a threat? At what distance does a justifiable shooting cease to be justifiable because the distance between you and the threat minimizes the danger?

That question honestly cannot be answered. There is not one "stock" answer for every scenario.

 

[Rustyt1953]

That question honestly cannot be answered. There is not one "stock" answer for every scenario.

True. One size does not fit all.

 

[oldcop71]

You do not know the perp's training or experience with shooting at a distance. I was originally trained on .38 revolver at 50 yds. I used to practice with duty pistols at 100yds. If a competent shooter can see you, he can hit you. You should be able to respond in kind.

 

[rockquarry]

You do not know the perp's training or experience with shooting at a distance. I was originally trained on .38 revolver at 50 yds. I used to practice with duty pistols at 100yds. If a competent shooter can see you, he can hit you. You should be able to respond in kind.

You're right 100%, but how dare you suggest someone develop good shooting skills.

 

[sotexas]

Sure glad I learned to shoot and learned about ballistics before Al Gore invented the internet.

He promoted legislation that funded ARPANET which increased public access which helped develop the internet as we know it.

 

[sotexas]

That question honestly cannot be answered. There is not one "stock" answer for every scenario.

There are two stock answers to that question.
1. What does the prosecutor think
2. What does the jury say