From the shooting classes I've taken I've been told that criminals are usually bad shots. There are exceptions to that but from what I've been told criminals that use guns are not that different in most people that own or use guns in that they get a gun and shoot maybe a box of ammo and think that they can then solve any problem, or in the criminal's case, cause any problem with a gun. That being said, somebody with good training and a good gun that they're skilled with should be able to take on most criminals who are usually going to be lousy shots. Like I said, there are exceptions but most criminals I've been told fall into the category of being bad shots.
Criminal shootings
- Thread starter PhotonGuy
- Start date
Interesting, that is not what I learned in my CCW classes. Linking to an article that is similar in language and description to what I learned.
Self-Defense Tip Training vs. Experience - The Truth About Guns
Self-Defense Tip Training vs. Experience - The Truth About Guns
Would that not imply the bad shot criminal would go for a weapon that could negate that. IE a shotgun or MP.
Criminals are people. That means they're going to run the gamut from World Class Sniper to Complete Bonehead (like the one I treated in the wee hours of the morning today, who shot himself in the leg while trying to break into a business).
And in a gunfight, pretty much everybody becomes a rotten shot anyway.
If you're taking classes that make ridiculous unsupportable assumptions like "all criminals are bad shots", I'd look for a different class.
And in a gunfight, pretty much everybody becomes a rotten shot anyway.
If you're taking classes that make ridiculous unsupportable assumptions like "all criminals are bad shots", I'd look for a different class.
The vast majority (something like 98% IIRC) of firearm crimes in the US involve a handgun.
Edit:
On quick factchecking of this statement it is something like 88% of firearm murders are commited by a handgun. I'll keep looking as a percentage of all crime, but 98% does seem high.
Last edited:
The idea that shotguns do not need to be aimed is a myth.
- Thread Starter
- #7
I was never taught that all criminals are bad shots. As I said in my first post there are exceptions. A good example of an exception would be the case of Platt and Matix back in the mid 80s who were both highly trained and both had served in the Army. In 1986 they had a big shootout with the FBI and although they were both killed, so were two FBI agents and a whole bunch of others were medically retired. So yes sometimes you will come up against a criminal or criminals who are highly skilled shooters such as Platt and Matix but that is rare. Platt and Matix were an extreme exception.
I'll keep that in mind.
Who is to say criminals don't take classes or use gun ranges either?
Just as well it's a myth, we'd be in trouble up here when the grouse and pheasant shooting season started otherwise
Just as well it's a myth, we'd be in trouble up here when the grouse and pheasant shooting season started otherwise
- Thread Starter
- #10
Because lots of people who own or use guns think that just having a gun and ammo is enough and that you only need a minimal of training. You will even find police officers and soldiers with this mindset. So with people thinking that a gun and ammo is enough and they think that they only need a minimal amount of knowledge and skill that would be most people in the gun community including criminals.
Now why would they think that when they are obviously trained?
And of course you have proof that people think this way?Just a little thing to please me?...Please don't start a sentence with 'because', it sort of hurts.
I have no statistics on what percent of criminals are bad shots but I am not about to believe their shot will not hit me if they point a firearm at me. Heck I'm not about to think it is unloaded or that they are not going to pull the trigger.
Who is to say criminals don't take classes or use gun ranges either?
Just as well it's a myth, we'd be in trouble up here when the grouse and pheasant shooting season started otherwise
Er are raisins not the most effective method laced with poison lol
Yeah makes sense. Must be a difficult presumption.
Er use Napalm?
Or enlist in the military to bring the combat skills they're taught back to the streets...
Gangs in the military
Tgace
Grandmaster
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2003
- Messages
- 7,766
- Reaction score
- 409
In general, the "average street thug" with a cheap Bersa .380 or Hi-Tech 9mm IS a "bad shot". Or more accurately an "untrained shooter". But they will still have a better chance of shooting you than you think. The reason they seem so good is (IMO) twofold.
First they typically have the advantage of initiative. Usually the badguy is the one making the decision to shoot. They have the OODA Loop advantage. It's a LOT easier to be a better shot than your opponent when you get to decide when to pull the gun, and shoot when YOU want, while the other guy has to react.
Second. These guys don't give a $%^& who or what they hit. They get to point the gun in any direction, and at any person or group of people they want, and unload in the general direction. This is usually from close range, with you having to react/catch-up with their actions.
Yeah, yeah, I've read the reports in the police trade rags talking about how the average gang-banger spends more time "on the range" shooting his crap gun at a wall in some project "warzone". But I believe the reasons above are more likely than "Ice Cube OG" having anything approaching effective and legitimate training.
First they typically have the advantage of initiative. Usually the badguy is the one making the decision to shoot. They have the OODA Loop advantage. It's a LOT easier to be a better shot than your opponent when you get to decide when to pull the gun, and shoot when YOU want, while the other guy has to react.
Second. These guys don't give a $%^& who or what they hit. They get to point the gun in any direction, and at any person or group of people they want, and unload in the general direction. This is usually from close range, with you having to react/catch-up with their actions.
Yeah, yeah, I've read the reports in the police trade rags talking about how the average gang-banger spends more time "on the range" shooting his crap gun at a wall in some project "warzone". But I believe the reasons above are more likely than "Ice Cube OG" having anything approaching effective and legitimate training.
Last edited:
- Thread Starter
- #19
At least in this country, police officers don't receive that much mandatory training with firearms. At a standard police academy you only get a week and a half of training with guns and then once a year they have a mandatory qualification test that involves shooting at paper targets. There is so much more you've got to know to be a police officer that very little time is spent with mandatory firearms training. I know and have spoken with police officers and with people who work in gun shops who know lots of police officers.Now why would they think that when they are obviously trained?
Just a little thing to please me?...Please don't start a sentence with 'because', it sort of hurts.
And why does it hurt? You shouldn't be so sensitive, especially with stuff people say over the internet.
- Thread Starter
- #20
Things must be changing. Back in the 80s the case of Platt and Matix were considered the exception.
