Using a Gun for Self Defense Without Firing a Shot

[Tydeeh22]

ditto, it means that everyone has their own perception on what is and what is not a reasonable reason to either show / unholster their firearm. one man wont pull his firearm when met with a violent individual due to hand / hand expertise, while another is going to try to avert the whole situation by unholstering.

it boils down to personal stress levels IMO. there is no unanimous "breaking point".

 

[ditto]

Point taken. Maybe I should edit my original post. I asked with the full knowledge that it'd be a subjective topic.

 

[Burnsy]

Ok. Apparently I'm in the dark, here. Some kind soul please shed a little light on me.

Based on a thread I was previously just viewing, I have a question. I've seen several posts chastising someone for so much as THINKING about drawing their weapon on an oncoming hostile individual (or several). I maybe do not always agree with an OP's reasons for revealing their weapon (if not OCing), thinking about drawing, or actually drawing - but I thought the whole point of all this was self-defense. Does that mean I'm going to storm around and draw on anybody that looks at me crossways? Or flash my gun when somebody at Wal Mart snags the last good looking avocado before I can get to it? We all for the most part seem like reasonable individuals.

How close are you going to let someone aggressive, intoxicated, what have you, get to you before you start reaching for your gun? If you're Bruce Lee then I commend you...but hey, I'm not Bruce Lee.

What am I, nuts? Backwards? About to get flamed to a crispy goodness? Guess I'll find out.

I ask you all: Where is the line?

As has already been said, the topic is subjective. What would the everyday prudent man do given the same situation if ability, opportunity and intent existed so should vote the jury. That said, personally if I draw my firearm, I should have every intention of using it for it's purpose and if not leave it silent.

IE if I feel fear for my life or great bodily harm or for that of those around me for which I care about I should draw and defend as best I can. If they turn their back to me and cease harm I should cease action. I would contact the police but I am not interested in pursuing.

Each of us has to make our own decisions about what that encompasses and if we chose to do so, convince 12 others, be carried by 6 or run in the first place if one is not ready to deal with the first two. Which in the interest of living to fight another day against insurmountable odds is not always a cowardly option but instead common sense.

 

[StuBob]

Sure, the bad guy gets away. Sure, he might do something bad to someone else. We're not vigilantees out to tame the lawless. We're civilians who are prepared to defend ourselves in any way necessary within the full extent of the law.

Exactly right. We're "licensed to carry handguns," not "deputized to enforce the law." There's a difference.

 

[indybuell]

I see no problem with not firing the weapon. Always better to get out of a gun fight without having to fire a shot.

 

[Jack Burton]

Ok. Apparently I'm in the dark, here. Some kind soul please shed a little light on me.

Based on a thread I was previously just viewing, I have a question. I've seen several posts chastising someone for so much as THINKING about drawing their weapon on an oncoming hostile individual (or several). I maybe do not always agree with an OP's reasons for revealing their weapon (if not OCing), thinking about drawing, or actually drawing - but I thought the whole point of all this was self-defense. Does that mean I'm going to storm around and draw on anybody that looks at me crossways? Or flash my gun when somebody at Wal Mart snags the last good looking avocado before I can get to it? We all for the most part seem like reasonable individuals.

How close are you going to let someone aggressive, intoxicated, what have you, get to you before you start reaching for your gun? If you're Bruce Lee then I commend you...but hey, I'm not Bruce Lee.

What am I, nuts? Backwards? About to get flamed to a crispy goodness? Guess I'll find out.

I ask you all: Where is the line?

We all start at UseofForce.us: AOJP

and then decide how that applies to each situation for ourselves, hoping we make the right decision in a timely fashion.

 

[esrice]

there is no unanimous "breaking point".

Exactly. It can vary based on the person and on the circumstances.

Its up to each one of us to develop these "breaking points" or "if/thens". Some are hard lines, and some are more subjective.

Such as-- "I will never let someone force me into a car/truck/van-- I will die right there fighting".

Force-on-force is great for working through these kinds of things in advance.

 

[Indy Wing Chun]

He defended himself. It would be nice if he could defend the community as well, but that spills over into the police function. Which the armed citizen is not. He might have shot, but didn't. I don't see he has anything to apologize for.

Agree!

That's why we call it SELF-defense.

Self-defense is about
-Avoid
-Escape
-Survive

WHATEVER you have to do to achieve one or all of those goals is 100% correct. I'm glad it turned out OK for the victim.

 

[Bung]

I think this guy got lucky. If someone is pointing a gun at you, then you draw your gun, then they have time to see it, turn round, then run away, you are lucky to be alive. Either the perp didn't have the guts to shoot or didn't have ammo. If the perp had a loaded gun and the guts to use it, this guy would be dead since he didn't fire. In this case, he really should have fired, it is pure luck he is alive to tell this story.

 

[Tydeeh22]

Agree!

That's why we call it SELF-defense.

Self-defense is about
-Avoid
-Escape
-Survive

IMO that sounds alot like "Self-Avoidance" or "Self-Evasion"

im all for getting out of the situation quickly, but i think this is a major reason we all have such a broad spectrum view of what "self-defense" is all about. there are so many aspects that must be looked at prior to talking about what should or must be done.

not taking a jab at ya, but using what you said as a piece of learning material.

 

[Excalibur]

Well that is the whole point. If you get get out of there, get your ass out of there. If you are cornered, taken by surprised or have no choice, you have to draw and use your gun.

 

[jgreiner]

It happened to me a year ago. Thank god I was carrying. And thank god I didn't have to fire a shot.

 

[Vic_Mackey]

I've used this method many times, mostly at work, but also on my own free time. One instance that was fairly recent: My band was playing a show one night, afterwards we were loading our gear and found a bunch missing. Found the gear inside a van and, understandably, retrieved it from said van. Choice words were said, somebody talked about cleaning a clock, and next thing you know several guys are coming around the side of the van.

I was smart enough to retrieve my pistol after discovering the theft, and it came in handy. When the guys came around the van one of them had a section of cymbal stand in his hand and made an offer for free dental work. I told these guys to back up and put the pipe down. They didn't listen, we were outnumbered, so i drew to the low ready. The guy with the pipe said "nice cap gun"and continued forward, so I leveled my Glock center mass and told what for. He put the pipe down, I had him get face down spread eagle, and my guitar player retrieved the rest of our stuff without incident. Told the douche to stay face down until we were clear. Then we left.

All of this happened in a matter of about two minutes between retrieving some of our gear to leaving. If he'd come any closer I would have shot him dead. Plenty of witnesses inside the venue to corroborate it. Had I not grabbed my pistol it would've been ugly. The guys in my band are not fighters and used to give me crap for carrying at shows. Not anymore.

 

[daddymikey1975]

I think this guy got lucky. If someone is pointing a gun at you, then you draw your gun, then they have time to see it, turn round, then run away, you are lucky to be alive. Either the perp didn't have the guts to shoot or didn't have ammo. If the perp had a loaded gun and the guts to use it, this guy would be dead since he didn't fire. In this case, he really should have fired, it is pure luck he is alive to tell this story.

Or the perp ran as the good guys gun came out of the holster before he had his sights lined up to fire. We don't know how long the moment of pause was but things could have changed as soon as the bad guy caught wind of the gun before it was pointed at him


We might never know .

 

[bwframe]

OK, on the don't shoot side. If someone is pointing a gun at you and you are able to draw without getting shot at, they will likely not shoot. Of course, a lot would argue that attempting to draw with a gun pointed at you is a very foolish idea.

 

[Kick]

OK, on the don't shoot side. If someone is pointing a gun at you and you are able to draw without getting shot at, they will likely not shoot. Of course, a lot would argue that attempting to draw with a gun pointed at you is a very foolish idea.

During a training exercise, the trainer had several participants point their weapon at his chest. He then told them that he is going to draw his weapon and shoot them. The participant was then instructed to shoot the trainer the second he put his hand on his weapon. The trainer shot the participant every time.

We tried this on or own because, let's be honest, not everyone is "Quickdraw McGraw". At least 9 times out of 10 the person that was already aiming his weapon got shot.

It comes down to action vs. reaction. Action will almost always win. The person with the holstered weapon, decides to draw is weapon, aim, and fire. The person with the weapon already in had has to make the observation that the other subject is reaching for a weapon, orient himself accordingly, decide what to do, and then act. It simply takes longer. It all goes back to Colonel John Boyd and his OODA loop.

 

[Spike_351]

During a training exercise, the trainer had several participants point their weapon at his chest. He then told them that he is going to draw his weapon and shoot them. The participant was then instructed to shoot the trainer the second he put his hand on his weapon. The trainer shot the participant every time.

We tried this on or own because, let's be honest, not everyone is "Quickdraw McGraw". At least 9 times out of 10 the person that was already aiming his weapon got shot.

It comes down to action vs. reaction. Action will almost always win. The person with the holstered weapon, decides to draw is weapon, aim, and fire. The person with the weapon already in had has to make the observation that the other subject is reaching for a weapon, orient himself accordingly, decide what to do, and then act. It simply takes longer. It all goes back to Colonel John Boyd and his OODA loop.

Hadn't considered this point of view before, good post. Give a me something to think about.

 

[bwframe]

During a training exercise, the trainer had several participants point their weapon at his chest. He then told them that he is going to draw his weapon and shoot them. The participant was then instructed to shoot the trainer the second he put his hand on his weapon. The trainer shot the participant every time.

We tried this on or own because, let's be honest, not everyone is "Quickdraw McGraw". At least 9 times out of 10 the person that was already aiming his weapon got shot.

You and I have discussed this before. I believe I finally have it figured why my FOF training has opposite results of yours. The instruction was different. Our "bad guys" shot on any movement, not waiting for touching a gun. We could never outdraw a pointed gun without additional measures.

 

[grogie]

Do I agree with the "idea" of the comment? Darn straight. Those thugs will move on to another victim, but with some more hesitation.

But as I was bringing out my gun and saw them react and pull back in the two seconds that it probably happened, I'd probably rest my finger on the trigger as well. Hard to say from a keyboard....

 

[esrice]

During a training exercise, the trainer had several participants point their weapon at his chest. He then told them that he is going to draw his weapon and shoot them. The participant was then instructed to shoot the trainer the second he put his hand on his weapon. The trainer shot the participant every time.

We tried this on or own because, let's be honest, not everyone is "Quickdraw McGraw". At least 9 times out of 10 the person that was already aiming his weapon got shot.

It comes down to action vs. reaction. Action will almost always win. The person with the holstered weapon, decides to draw is weapon, aim, and fire. The person with the weapon already in had has to make the observation that the other subject is reaching for a weapon, orient himself accordingly, decide what to do, and then act. It simply takes longer. It all goes back to Colonel John Boyd and his OODA loop.

Either I'm misunderstanding this exercise, or something about it is missing.

Did you really mean that the trainer shot the participant every time? Or the participants shot the trainer every time?

Using the OODA loop, the person with the drawn gun doesn't need to "orient"-- they can bypass that altogether. All they need to do is observe (furtive movement, not actually touching a gun), decide, and act (pull trigger). Meanwhile the person with the holstered gun is having to process through the slowest part of his particular OODA loop-- act (drawing gun, aiming gun, pulling trigger).

If you really did mean that the trainer was drawing and shooting the participants before they could get a shot off then he was using a flawed start time (touching of gun). If this was LEO training then that may have been to drive home the point that they don't want cops shooting people unless they actually touch a firearm. But the BG doesn't live by those SOPs.