Interesting Averages for shots fired in a Self-Defense

[Riposte1]

No such thing as "muscle" memory, though many like to use that term. The only memory is between your ears. While I'm not positive, I think I have an idea of what others mean when they say "muscle" memory.

That may be technically true but the nerve impulses that drive the muscular reaction develop "kinesthetic sense" through the process of "mylenation".

So, repetitive actions do end up in a pattern. "Muscle Memorty" is just a type of "short hand" for "Perfect Practice Makes Perfect" - "Practice Makes Permanent - whither it is good or bad".

Riposte

 

[KenTheHunter]

As best I can figure, and we had the same problem coaching teens in basketball and soccer, what they are doing is making a mental aiming confirmation on the "feeling" of the muscles. It does not work partly because your muscles vary in strength and speed day to day and never exactly feel the same especially when the athlete varies the amount of stress or tension in the opposing muscles under stress of fatigue.

I really want to hear your idea RQ about what others mean, thanks!
BrianD

When I think of "muscle memory ", it reminds me of whenever I pick up a hand gun my index finger automatically, and without thought, arrives horizontally above the trigger and on the frame. Safety position.

 

[Greyman50]

I've posted this several times. After Vietnam I got on Army pistol team. Training by AMTU instructors was tough but who had better duty than shooting all day???
Muscle memory is a huge factor in Bulls eye shooting, plain and simple. Had an instructor that positioned himself at firing point, aimed his 1911 while talking to us about the importance of stance and muscle memory. He put pistol down , turned his head away to look at us, picked up his pistol extended his arm and fired couple rounds while still looking at us. His rounds hit inside the B-8 target.
From 60 some years of shooting training is so important. If one can shoot accurately at 50-25 yards they are good to go at closer distances. Part of Bullseye shooting is focus on front sight and in personal defense same is true. Close distances zero to 3-5 yards just point and shoot. People have vary different views on shooting but bottom line is as long as one can hit what they Need to they are good to go.

 

[rockquarry]

I think we all get the message, regardless of the term or terms used. I can't think of a better term to use in place of "muscle memory" but the fact remains there is no "muscle memory", so have at it.

 

[WR Moore]

BB57 makes some great points, I'm going to polish a few.

Your load out might well be situationally dependent. Running to the farm supply, get fuel/groceries and so on are one thing. Going on a road trip or visiting a big city might well suggest something different.

Smooth is definitely best, shot timers don't lie. When I trained up for competition, it quickly became apparent that "hurrying" messed up getting on target quickly. The goal of getting on target was to be a stable platform for delivering multiple rounds on possibly multiple targets. Raw speed is over rated and frequently over emphasized.

While there are prosecutors (and a few LLEA types) who might regard virtually any SD shooting as avoidable, range can be situationally dependent too.

 

[65-2x2]

Averages are very subjective. What is an average human, physically (60% Female/40% male), menatally average intelligence, (bell curve from mentally deficient to genius). What is included in average rounds expended in gunfight. That depends on what is included (ex. all fights were guns are drawn or only those were shots are actually fired). it makes huge difference of wether you need a gun or not. All data accumulated to determine averages on anything is subject to the biasis of the person doing the calculating.
The point is do what you feel appropriate to your situation. and hope you have sufficient skills ,ability and ammunition to resolve situtions you may face. All i know is, I am not going to base my decision on someones published averages.

Not only that, but an average would only come into play if you had mutiple incidents to "average." You can bet, that if you are ever involved in a self defensive shooting situation, it will be unique.

 

[ColoCoug]

That's one of the more important points that people mis understand.

Sure, you don't want to focus on the "normal" or "expected' scenarios to the complete and total detriment of all of the possible fringe scenarios - but you also don't want to weigh yourself down in preparation for highly unlikely fringe scenarios to the detriment of what you will most likely encounter - especially when you can mitigate the potential for those fringe scenarios.

In other words, then 90-95% of defensive handgun uses don't even involve firing the handgun, it really doesn't matter what caliber it is or how many rounds are in the magazine. All it needs to convey to the assailant is "you're about to get shot" and in those 90-95% of situations it's going to be sufficient to stop the assault as the assailant flees.

Consequently, one of the most effective decisions on defensive handgun choice is to choose one that is convenient enough that you'll carry it all day, every day. That's 90-95 percent coverage for all of the scenarios where you might need to defend yourself with a handgun.

A better handgun, better cartridge, larger magazine or more magazines can all help improve your odds for that last 5-10%, where you might need to fire, but only a tiny fraction of those will actually need a duty sized handgun and multiple high capacity magazines.

And again, there is nothing wrong with choosing to carry all that. But you do have to be aware that there is a point of diminishing returns. Beyond that point the weight and bulk of the chosen EDC make it less likely you'll carry it all day everyday. The EDC becomes far less concealable, creating other issues in terms of telegraphing you are armed and limiting the situations where you can be armed without creating other issues. And if you ever do have to use it, it will raise questions with the police, the prosecutor, the grand jury and potentially the jury about why you felt the need to go to the Piggly Wiggly armed like you were expecting to participate in a gang war.

In other words, sometimes too much is too much and if your alternative in those situations is nothing at all, you not only lose the very minimal gains for those fringe scenarios but you also leave yourself at a disadvantage for the car more likely 90-95% scenarios.

There's a sweet spot and that sweet spot will be different for different people.

This may be the most rational, clearest explanation of a thoughtful approach to firearms carry that I have ever read!

 

[Keith C.]

noun: muscle memory

1. the ability to reproduce a particular movement without conscious thought, acquired as a result of frequent repetition of that movement.
   "typing relies heavily on muscle memory"
   
   
   I think reloading relies heavily on muscle memory too.

Jeff Cooper stated, "Sight picture is nothing more visual verification of proper presentation". Howard Hill, one of the greatest instinctive archers of all time stated, I do not focus on my arrow, but I am aware of where it is in relation to the target. I believe he called it secondary focus. The same principle has been applied by many world class shooters from Ed McGivern to Rob Leatham and many others. Regarding sight picture, Ron Avery said " See what you need to see to make the shot". The theory being a refined sight picture is not necessary if you have practiced enough with any given firearm, the sights will come up aligned. Repetition and consistency are the path to success.

 

[britbike1]

The trouble with averages is they can skew things. if you, I and bill gates sat at a table together our average daily income would be almost $11 million.

 

[Law-dog]

One comment. As a retired prosecutor, attorney, cop, federal agent, and CCW instructor starting in 1996, I have this one comment.


Never, never, never use police shooting results to justify when to shoot, how far away you can shoot, whether you can shoot through open doors or windows, or anything whatsoever. The law treats police officers on the job differently than than other people using deadly force.

Too many facts and situations to post here. But rely only on studies of individuals who fired in self defense or maybe invoked a stand you ground defense.

The most worthless stats of all are when they count rounds fired by cops, foolish info. Never, ever rely on it, it is not real life, like a self defense shooting, a couple of reasons, 1) you may have just ran a long way while barking on the radio for 10 minutes, 2) officers have been dealing with flashing lights from multiple angles for minutes, 3) officer may have just dismounted from running 115 mph, been there, 4) officers may have been fighting, 5) officers may have chosen to shoot long distances to keep the perp from getting away or into a residence, which will kill others, 6) officers may have been slowed down by 22 pounds of gear, vests, radios, etc, which raises blood pressure 15-20 points above a self defense citizen shooting--and the list goes on and on.

Whether a retired officer in a self defense situation is held to the same standard is debatable.

Just saying, using cop shootings to suggest self defense events for private citizens in a fools errand, only a fool would rely on that.

That said, ammo used and points of impact data is very relevant to determining ammo effects,

 

[Brian Parrish]

One comment. As a retired prosecutor, attorney, cop, federal agent, and CCW instructor starting in 1996, I have this one comment.


Never, never, never use police shooting results to justify when to shoot, how far away you can shoot, whether you can shoot through open doors or windows, or anything whatsoever. The law treats police officers on the job differently than than other people using deadly force.

Too many facts and situations to post here. But rely only on studies of individuals who fired in self defense or maybe invoked a stand you ground defense.

The most worthless stats of all are when they count rounds fired by cops, foolish info. Never, ever rely on it, it is not real life, like a self defense shooting, a couple of reasons, 1) you may have just ran a long way while barking on the radio for 10 minutes, 2) officers have been dealing with flashing lights from multiple angles for minutes, 3) officer may have just dismounted from running 115 mph, been there, 4) officers may have been fighting, 5) officers may have chosen to shoot long distances to keep the perp from getting away or into a residence, which will kill others, 6) officers may have been slowed down by 22 pounds of gear, vests, radios, etc, which raises blood pressure 15-20 points above a self defense citizen shooting--and the list goes on and on.

Whether a retired officer in a self defense situation is held to the same standard is debatable.

Just saying, using cop shootings to suggest self defense events for private citizens in a fools errand, only a fool would rely on that.

That said, ammo used and points of impact data is very relevant to determining ammo effects,

Thank you for this comment.
My uninstructed opinion is that the cops we see on YT videos who "spray and pray" are essentially using muscle memory. They are not using flash sight picture or front sight or any other form of aiming.
Kind Regards!
BrianD

 

[Cal. Det. 1989]

During a 32 year career as a California peace officer, I spent 17 years (1989-2006) working as a detective. This was in a mid sized California city. During that time I assisted in the investigation of more than a dozen officer involved shootings (OIS). As I also had a collateral duty as a firearms instructor, I was able to informally chat with the officers weeks after their shootings. A common theme was present: most used their sites, and scored hit(s), the one(s)who did not use the sites were not as successful. With the exception of one shooting, the action was finished with what was in the gun (pistol, shotgun, or patrol rifle). The one action which required a reload was an engagement with a felon who wounded one cop, and killed another. When he was confronted in an alley, a rare multiple exchange of shots were fired by him and three of our officers (a couple of reloads took place by our guys).
This falls in line with the "three shots, at three yards, in three seconds" theme seen often in law enforcement shootings. With the exception Newhall CHP (1970), Miami FBI (1986), and North Hollywood LAPD (1997) -the notable ones I recall-though doubtless others exist, cop shootings are over fairly quickly.

 

[rockquarry]

Jeff Cooper stated, "Sight picture is nothing more visual verification of proper presentation". Howard Hill, one of the greatest instinctive archers of all time stated, I do not focus on my arrow, but I am aware of where it is in relation to the target. I believe he called it secondary focus. The same principle has been applied by many world class shooters from Ed McGivern to Rob Leatham and many others. Regarding sight picture, Ron Avery said " See what you need to see to make the shot". The theory being a refined sight picture is not necessary if you have practiced enough with any given firearm, the sights will come up aligned. Repetition and consistency are the path to success.

There are complicated ways of saying everything. "Experts" aside, learn to shoot well and shoot often.

 

[WR Moore]

While most armed encounters do end quickly, back in the 1960's the Pittsburgh PD had the chicken hill gun battle with bank robbers. IIRC, it pretty much ended when everyone ran out of ammo. But, the PD had more on the way. The bad guys surrendered.

 

[DocSkinner]

noun: muscle memory

1. the ability to reproduce a particular movement without conscious thought, acquired as a result of frequent repetition of that movement.
   "typing relies heavily on muscle memory"
   
   
   I think reloading relies heavily on muscle memory too.

Key word conscious. Muscle memory is reflexive thought, and it start in the brain, not in muscles. Otherwise paraplegics/quadriplegics would still be able to exercise "muscle memory" and move their extremities.

It is basically you o have done something so many times that you no longer have to CONSCIOUSLY think about all the parts. First gun related you learn is trigger pull. The body wants to reflexive flex all fingers together. When you first learn to shoot you have to consciously suppress moving the rest of the muscle to isolate just the trigger finger muscles. after a while, that becomes automatic, if you are learning it right, and it becomes easier to focus on sight picture. Poor shooters almost always skipped that step.

 

[hike]

In the accounts that I read, most LEOs will use all the ammo in their firearm -- 6 for a revolver and 15-17 for pistol. (The one incident that springs to mind is a female LEO who emptied all 17 rounds in her Glock 17). Civilian, practiced & prepared, expend fewer rounds per incident.
NRA articles are entry-level articles (from those that I read). They may be interesting and information but they are only the basic information that one can find on any of their topics. Further (and readily available) reading/researching is required for a better understanding of any topic.

 

[Keith C.]

There are complicated ways of saying everything. "Experts" aside, learn to shoot well and shoot often.

I have always said "half of what I know I learned from old farts. The other half I learned from books that old farts wrote." I can't speak for you, but as for myself, I could not have become the shooter I am without input from my mentors, all dead now. No matter how good a person thinks they are, there are always ways to improve. I am jealous of your apparent shooting skill regarding speed and accuracy, apparently achieved without input from any "Experts". There are over simplified ways of saying everything, quite often indicating a finely tuned level of complacency.

 

[rockquarry]

I have always said "half of what I know I learned from old farts. The other half I learned from books that old farts wrote." I can't speak for you, but as for myself, I could not have become the shooter I am without input from my mentors, all dead now. No matter how good a person thinks they are, there are always ways to improve. I am jealous of your apparent shooting skill regarding speed and accuracy, apparently achieved without input from any "Experts". There are over simplified ways of saying everything, quite often indicating a finely tuned level of complacency.

I never said or implied I was a skilled shooter because I'm not. Those were your words only. The sentence I referred to is just as I described it, needlessly complicated. Also very wordy. Because a mentor is old or is an old writer is no indication they are expert at anything.

Stating something in a clear and concise manner isn't even closely akin to a "finely tuned level of complacency".

 

[SHODriver]

clickbait title and a poorly researched and argued article. Proficiency is paramount and most people have a habit of shooting the gun until it is empty. Reloads aren't just in case you need more rounds but also to handle a mechanical issue due to the mag in the gun. For most people a self defense shooting will be a close encounter because your average self defense shooting takes place in a confined space. Adding distance increases the legal hurdles you will need to fight as the people investigating and deciding on charges begin to wonder whether or not the person you shot so far away was truly a threat. Also, they claim everyone is a good shot at close range. Maybe at muzzle contact, but you still need to aim at close range. There's a lot of bullets fired that missed at close range because people didn't bother to aim. Just look at a lot of cop shootings with 18 rounds fired and maybe a quarter of them actually hit the intended target somewhere.

 

[Keith C.]

I never said or implied I was a skilled shooter because I'm not. Those were your words only. The sentence I referred to is just as I described it, needlessly complicated. Also very wordy. Because a mentor is old or is an old writer is no indication they are expert at anything.

Stating something in a clear and concise manner isn't even closely akin to a "finely tuned level of complacency".

Are you implying the men i mentioned in my original "wordy" comment were/are not experts. I only repeated what they said/wrote because their "words" were instrumental in clearing up concepts I was not completely comprehending. Clear and concise in my opinion. I shared their thoughts hoping it might help others as it helped me. . You and I clearly learn in different ways. My maternal Grandfather had a "wordy" saying, " We learn by reading the thoughts of those who possess more knowledge than we." Thank You for the spirited debate. Best wishes from NW Colorado