Your Gunfight: The Reality

[Aaron1776]

Gotta love the healthcare system. "Automatic" assessment without regard to actual care needed.

Thankfully the odds are in favor of me never having to worry about it.

I'm young (as in inexperienced) and have never had a serious medical problem so excuse my ignorance, but how does one pay $25,000 for medical care. Do hospitals have payment plans or something? If so do they charge interest? I would be in big trouble between student loans and a 25G medical bill...

Medicaid/The State of Indiana covered my $120,000+/- medical bill after I damn near got myself perished on State Road 67 back in 1993. I had just gotten out of the Corps a few months before and was no longer covered by military/VA medical care, and I was working a full-time job through a temp agency, so I had no medical insurance either...

My thanks to all Indiana State taxpaying members for hooking a brother up..! I had to sign an agreement to pay it back if my rich uncle ever gets out of the poor-house/I win the lottery, which I WILL honor in the unlikely case that either occurs...

Glad you're alive buddy. I'm sure you will honor it if you ever have the opportunity.

I could be wrong, but I believe most insurance plans have max out of pocket limits for the year, typically quite a bit less than the $25k in the write up.

But to answer your question, YES every hospital / large healthcare provider that I have dealt with will allow payment plans, typically without interest. I have utilized this several times in the past with large bills. In my experience there seems to be a standard of setting up monthly payments for up to 12 months (again, no interest). The people that I have talked with have been helpful and good to work with. I think they are just happy when people call them up and try to make right by them.

On the other end of the spectrum, recently I was offered a discount (10% if memory serves me correctly) if I paid my out of pocket costs within 30 days. I gladly obliged in order to save the $$.

To the OP - Thanks for taking the time to write this up. Worth the read.

You guys have it about right. I'm not an expert on hospital billing, as I work the clinical side, but basically it's kinda complicated. I used the 80% rule that the billing people gave me (I talked to the person in charge of all that before I wrote this up), but there are definitely insurance companies that just have you pay a certain limit before covering the rest of the cost. It just depends on the plan. But even if your limit is a 5000$ costs, when you add in missed work, physical therapy, follow up Dr. visits, lawyer fees, etc the cost adds up quick.

For those who can't pay at all, the tax payers pick up most of the tab (medicare/medicaid never pay us the full price it seems...this is of course after mandating we give the service). The rest of the cost is then spread over everyone else who visits the ER so that the hospital can stay afloat. Thus what we charge you is covering our costs, the other guy's cost, and your costs. Fun huh?

Though to be fair most of that cost being pushed over is for BS visits that **** us off, not poor people who get traumatic injuries.

 

[Tinner666]

Nice post. I couldn't rep you though.

 

[Aaron1776]

Thanks for all the kind words and rep guys! It's always good to know your work is appreciated!
I just hope this post really got people to think about what a traumatic ordeal a gunfight is and what they're truly willing to get into one over.

Everyone's "line in the sand" will be different, and I won't ever pretend to pass judgement on what your's is. I just want to make sure you've thought it through, and the best way to ensure that is knowing what you're getting into.


EDIT: Also, I'm adding in a few points that I missed. Mostly about how resistance is the best option, and an addition to the medical costs.

 

[Aaron1776]

Sounds like Lance Thomas. Linking to a couple of references for those who may be interested.

Urban Gunfighter ( The Lance Thomas story) - Ayoob article.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkWgp2abM2w

Yes!! That's the guy!

Balls of steel on that dude.

 

[cosermann]

...EDIT: Also, I'm adding in a few points that I missed. Mostly about how resistance is the best option, and an addition to the medical costs.

As you revise the OP, if you happen to have any references that could be added to support various assertions, I always find that helpful.

I'll offer up one to support the assertion below. Although it doesn't give the 2.5 number, it clearly shows the increase in homicides involving multiple offenders.

...Notice I said enemies, plural. Not your opponent, singular. According to Front Sight Firearms Academy, the average fight will have 2.5 attackers. ...

This graphic is from p24 of the DOJ report, "Homicide Trends in the United States: 1980-2008," which can be found here - http://bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/htus8008.pdf

 

[marrell1482]

Rep inbound great read thanks! I really feel like I need to prepare myself more. Hopefully for no reason.

 

[indiucky]

And some people will read the OP and still think carrying a plastic gun with a with a payload of 15 shots is enough gun....

And some people will read the OP and still think carrying a steel 1911 with a payload of 7 shots is enough gun....

The poor little revolver...It get's no respect anymore...I can not believe how wrong Elmer Keith, Col. Rex Applegate, Skeeter Skelton, Sheriff Jim Wilson, Bill Jordan, and Frank Hamer were.....They pale in comparison to the great purveyors of gunfight reality that is the youtube generation...They and their stupid revolvers...I bet they wouldn't last five seconds with this new generation of super criminals we need to be prepared against. Packs of multiple attackers, well trained and ready to do us in...Hopefully old age will get us before this new pack of shows us how not well armed we wheelgunners are....

I am looking at this Smith 65-3 with a three inch barrel and six .357 magnum hollowpoints made for short barrels right now. It and a J frame .357 magnum at my appendix are all that are protecting me and these thousands of dollars worth of firearms...I may as well just get a BB gun...I have a "Please Come in I am open" sign right by the unlocked door...I am doomed...No wait!!!! There it is! In the case...A GLOCK!!!! Thank the Lord...I may live through the day....Whew....That was a close one...

All IMHO ofcourse, in no way saying I am right, tongue planted firmly in cheek, part of my twisted humor, and no slams meant toward any youtube trainers, lest my love of revolvers be construed as "Religous" in nature or my comments appear as "testy"... If you know me you know I am teasing...If you don't you shouldn't care....

 

[Movealongmovealong]

I find those statistics highly questionable.

I took it upon myself to look at the latest available Bureau of Justice Statistics (part of DOJ) publicly available crime statistics and while there is a discrepancy between the frequency of violent crime victims between males and females (generally, more males), it doesn't break down any of these statistics by crime (murder, aggravated assault, robbery, etc., for instance) in relation to the victims sex.

You can check it out yourself here:
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv11.pdf


There are plenty of good stats showing that males commit more violent crime, especially "serious" violent crime, than women, but I'm not finding any data confirming your numbers otherwise.

Also, I am extremely skeptical that a company that tasks itself with selling self-defense training would be much of a verifiable source for crime statistics, as they have an extremely obvious incentive to make training look as necessary as possible. If you can ask them where they are getting their numbers from then we can all take a look. Their info would undoubtedly have to come from the FBI or DOJ (which the Bureau of Justice Statistics is part of) to have enough validity to generalize about crime rates across the entire country of 300,000,000+ people (much less to account for all of the crimes which occur which are not reported, which is a HUGE number).

While the rate of violent crime overall has plummeted since the high point of the early nineties, I agree that it is still wise to be prepared, especially against the real possibility of multiple attackers.

 

[cosermann]

I happened across the following yesterday. The numbers differ a little, maybe because of the time period involved, but it's clear that males are not only the most frequent perps, but also the most frequent victims of homicide.

"Male offender/Male victim 65.3%
Male offender/Female victim 22.7%
Female offender/Male victim 9.6%
Female offender/Female victim 2.4%

Both male and female offenders are more likely to target male victims than female victims" [1]

Seems counter-intuitive, but there it is.

[1] - http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/htius.pdf
p48.

...I am looking at this Smith 65-3 with a three inch barrel and six .357 magnum hollowpoints made for short barrels right now. It and a J frame .357 magnum at my appendix are all that are protecting me and these thousands of dollars worth of firearms...

That's 11 rounds on tap and probably enough for the average gunfight. Personally, I don't care a hill of beans whether those rounds are in a brace of revolvers or a single semi-auto.

One thing I find interesting is that carrying a handgun is preparing for a worst case scenario of sorts. But then, people pick a firearm based on convenience, or maybe based on the necessary capabilities of what they "think" or "feel" or "guess" will be enough for what they perceive as a typical gunfight - usually derived from non-fact-based assumptions (i.e. single perp, a hit rate similar to the range, accuracy similar to the range, etc.).

It's probably not practical to prepare for getting attacked by a criminal gang, but preparing for at least what the "average" situation might be (based on the data available) seems like a good idea.

 

[chezuki]

I find those statistics highly questionable.

89.6% of all statistics posted on the Internet are completely made up.

 

[cosermann]

89.6% of all statistics posted on the Internet are completely made up.

"All of my stories are 95% truthful." - Uncle Si.

 

[Spike_351]

OK time to vote INGO, I vote for this to become a sticky, this is needed information especially for new comers my gf is a new firearms owner and I plan on having her read it soon.

 

[GIJEW]

Excellent! btw, you mentioned front-sight, how does it compare to other schools?
repped!

 

[88E30M50]

How many people carry based on the most probable threat? I'm talking about varying what you carry to give you the best chance in the face of what is most likely going to challenge you in the remote chance you get attacked.

This writeup has me thinking about what I carry and what I am preparing for when I carry. A lot of the time, I carry a Sig P238 in a pocket holster. This is a great little gun if you come up against a petty criminal who is looking for an easy score. But, if I were facing a truly violent criminal that was not just looking for a bit of cash, but that also was seeking the violence, that little pocket gun would not be my first choice of defensive weapons. But, I tend to carry that gun when I'm in a public place and most likely to run into a petty thug.

Often time when at home at night, I'll carry a Glock 27 or 23. The 27 is a nice light pistol that is comfortable to carry when sitting on the couch. But, I have to ask myself: If I had to defend my family at 10pm, who am I most likely facing? Unfortunately, if someone where to kick my front door in at 10pm, knowing that the family was home, chances are they are the violent type of criminal that's there to do a great amount of harm to my family. Do I want to defend them with the most comfortable gun I have or the most capable? Maybe the G27 should give way to the G23 during the evenings or maybe even the G29 or G20. That G20 sure is a lot of gun though.

Then again, maybe I'm over thinking the whole thing and just should rock the G23 where ever I go.

 

[Aaron1776]

I find those statistics highly questionable.

I took it upon myself to look at the latest available Bureau of Justice Statistics (part of DOJ) publicly available crime statistics and while there is a discrepancy between the frequency of violent crime victims between males and females (generally, more males), it doesn't break down any of these statistics by crime (murder, aggravated assault, robbery, etc., for instance) in relation to the victims sex.

You can check it out yourself here:
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv11.pdf



Also, I am extremely skeptical that a company that tasks itself with selling self-defense training would be much of a verifiable source for crime statistics, as they have an extremely obvious incentive to make training look as necessary as possible. If you can ask them where they are getting their numbers from then we can all take a look. Their info would undoubtedly have to come from the FBI or DOJ (which the Bureau of Justice Statistics is part of) to have enough validity to generalize about crime rates across the entire country of 300,000,000+ people (much less to account for all of the crimes which occur which are not reported, which is a HUGE number).

I didn't post a reference page as this is INGO, not a college midterm paper. I believe the DOJ study I looked at took place over 2008/09?
I've been meaning to give FS a call and ask them where they got their 2.5 stat. I totally believe it though as all but one of my criminal encounters involved more than 1 criminal. The same with the gun fights I've seen come into the ER.

Don't assume the motivations of a reputable school. It is in their best interest to give out good information. There are tons and tons and tons of training schools out there. Someone will sink them if they don't perform. It's basic captalism. As to why I do trust them, the rest of the information they gave out I had learned earlier from lawyers, veterans, LEOs, etc, and knew it to be correct.

Excellent! btw, you mentioned front-sight, how does it compare to other schools?
repped!

I think Front Sight is best for having an overall understanding of what you're in for in a gunfight, has the best legal training, most options with the different courses you can take, and they have the best malfunction clearance/manipulation training IMO. (As to why I think it's the best, it would be a whole other thread discussing it.) However, they use the weaver stance instead of thumbs forward isos, which I don't like. But they let you use isos if you want to, and don't try to press one stance over the other. They don't incorporate nearly enough moving off the X IMO. However, I believe them to be an excellent school, as I have been there more than once. For more tactical training over gun running training, I suggest Mindset Labs. Shay is an INGO member and a great teacher. I've also heard good things about Tactical Response's "The fight", but I've never taken it.
Also look into Travis Haley or Chris Costa. After watching videos of their classes, I want to learn from them.

The poor little revolver...It get's no respect anymore...

I am looking at this Smith 65-3 with a three inch barrel and six .357 magnum hollowpoints made for short barrels right now. It and a J frame .357 magnum at my appendix are all that are protecting me and these thousands of dollars worth of firearms...I may as well just get a BB gun...I have a "Please Come in I am open" sign right by the unlocked door...I am doomed...No wait!!!! There it is! In the case...A GLOCK!!!! Thank the Lord...I may live through the day....Whew....That was a close one...

All IMHO ofcourse, in no way saying I am right, tongue planted firmly in cheek, part of my twisted humor, and no slams meant toward any youtube trainers, lest my love of revolvers be construed as "Religous" in nature or my comments appear as "testy"... If you know me you know I am teasing...If you don't you shouldn't care....

Hahaha, if you're going to use a revolver or 1911 be skilled at reloading as well as aiming. That's all I'll say.

(Full disclosure, I have a 1911 operator that I would bet my life on any day)

I happened across the following yesterday. The numbers differ a little, maybe because of the time period involved, but it's clear that males are not only the most frequent perps, but also the most frequent victims of homicide.

"Male offender/Male victim 65.3%
Male offender/Female victim 22.7%
Female offender/Male victim 9.6%
Female offender/Female victim 2.4%

Both male and female offenders are more likely to target male victims than female victims" [1]

Seems counter-intuitive, but there it is.

[1] - http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/htius.pdf
p48.




One thing I find interesting is that carrying a handgun is preparing for a worst case scenario of sorts. But then, people pick a firearm based on convenience, or maybe based on the necessary capabilities of what they "think" or "feel" or "guess" will be enough for what they perceive as a typical gunfight - usually derived from non-fact-based assumptions (i.e. single perp, a hit rate similar to the range, accuracy similar to the range, etc.).

It's probably not practical to prepare for getting attacked by a criminal gang, but preparing for at least what the "average" situation might be (based on the data available) seems like a good idea.

Thanks for the info!
However, I would completely disagree that it's not practical to prepare to take on multiple opponents. There are lots and lots of instances of people successfully fending off multiple attackers with a regular handgun.

As a rule of thumb you should have a handgun that is a full size (or at least a compact like a Glock 19) that will get you through a gun fight, and you should have a deep cover handgun for when concealing/carrying the full size gun isn't doable. (Like your XDS 9mm on a night of dancing).
Basically carry the biggest, baddest gun that you can.

Some people balk at carrying a full sized gun. It's very doable. You're body will adjust to just about anything. I carry a full sized M&P 9mm appendix style. Even on my small frame, it disappears.

 

[Aaron1776]

How many people carry based on the most probable threat? I'm talking about varying what you carry to give you the best chance in the face of what is most likely going to challenge you in the remote chance you get attacked.

This writeup has me thinking about what I carry and what I am preparing for when I carry. A lot of the time, I carry a Sig P238 in a pocket holster. This is a great little gun if you come up against a petty criminal who is looking for an easy score. But, if I were facing a truly violent criminal that was not just looking for a bit of cash, but that also was seeking the violence, that little pocket gun would not be my first choice of defensive weapons. But, I tend to carry that gun when I'm in a public place and most likely to run into a petty thug.

Often time when at home at night, I'll carry a Glock 27 or 23. The 27 is a nice light pistol that is comfortable to carry when sitting on the couch. But, I have to ask myself: If I had to defend my family at 10pm, who am I most likely facing? Unfortunately, if someone where to kick my front door in at 10pm, knowing that the family was home, chances are they are the violent type of criminal that's there to do a great amount of harm to my family. Do I want to defend them with the most comfortable gun I have or the most capable? Maybe the G27 should give way to the G23 during the evenings or maybe even the G29 or G20. That G20 sure is a lot of gun though.

Then again, maybe I'm over thinking the whole thing and just should rock the G23 where ever I go.

Don't try to play the "what am I most likely to run into" game.
There is no such thing as the "most likely thing I am going to run into" because statistics arent applicable to the individual. You have no idea where you are going to fall into the pie until it happens (or doesn't).

Take my experiences for example.

At age 14 three gun men ran into my school, one came within a few feet of me before I got the heck out of there.
At age 20 two armed men tried to rob my mother, and I was super glad I had a full sized gun on me that night.
At age 25 two men tried to pick a fight with me outside of my gym. One had a knife.
At age 26 a team of men, a lookout and a car with an unknown number of men inside attempted to rob my friends and I.

This does not count the criminal activity I observed, nor the unarmed fights I've been in.

"Statistically", I could have said after each experience "well, I got through my bad encounter, now statistically it's not likely to happen to me again, so I won't worry about it." and either stopped carrying a full sized gun, or carrying at all. And "statistically" the likelihood of another event happening was small. "Statistically" who gets into that many encounters?

Well, apparently I do.

Point being, carry a real gun with you everywhere. Only carry the little mouse gun when you physically CANT get away with the big one.

Don't get me wrong, I understand that probabilities and stats play a role in the decisions we make. They have to. I'm just saying that if you're going to carry a gun to protect yourself, then carry a gun that will have a reasonable chance of getting you through it all. You wouldn't buy tornado insurance that only covered 50% of your losses on a house.

 

[Shay]

What YOU can do will matter more than what gun you carry.

People get too wrapped up with making carrying a gun soooooooooooo complicated. Always switching guns and holsters and calibers and locations.

Stop.

Pick a gun that's big enough to fight with and small enough to carry. Train and practice with that gun in the same holster carried in the same place.

Put your time and energy into improving yourself.