Has anyone been involved in a concealed carry shooting?

[GardoneVT]

I have been reading through a lot of threads since I found PF recently and I am impressed with the quality of posts and the knowledge and experiences of those who post. I have visited plenty of forums and never felt the signal to noise ratio was worth asking a question I've had until now.

Has anyone here been involved in a concealed carry type shooting incident?

I know there are plenty of LEO and Military members that may have been involved in shootings as it relates to their job and maybe even some plain clothes assignments where a member was involved in a shooting. I am curious to find some true citizen concealed carry or regular off duty civilian clothes shooting incident info. I know Tom Givens is a member here and he has some good data on citizen concealed carrier shooting ( Tom if you would be willing to share it would be appreciated) Also if anyone knows of a firearms trainer/teacher or high level IDPA/USPSA competitor who was involved in a concealed carry shooting incident that is documented somewhere I would appreciate any info or link to a news story.

I have interviewed LEOs at my dept that were involved in on duty shootings and there are some places that have news stories or data on gun use where no shots were fired but I haven't found a decent source of concealed carrier shootings.

Thanks in advance.

There's a lot of variables involved with a defensive incident. Even the defenders own perception of events is altered by the nature of it.

Further , I'd wager the majority of Joe Public CCW incidents are resolved without shots fired- bad guys out to score money or a car don't want the loot bad enough to get shot over it. The moment Mr Thug sees a gun or the possibility thereof he's outta there--its something I've seen firsthand .

Now ,crossing over into the land of total speculation id posit the cases of citizens actually shooting at bad guys is more frequent when it's a home or business robbery; in those cases the bad guys have advance time to determine what the payoff is and are committed to the attack .

[octagon]

This is long so see the bottom for the basic gist but all of it gives more depth to the questions and more to come.


I guess it is time I clarify since the thread is drifting and it doesn't seem to be getting responses from CC shootings. I can understand someone not wanting to publicly discuss an incident that has not been fully resolved in criminal and civil proceedings nor if they have psychological issue or discomfort in doing so. Some may be comfortable giving info on an old incident or one fully resolved.

As a LEO for over 20 years who has studied as much info as I could find on shootings to better prepare myself and those I was responsible to teach. I also get that every incident is different. However in looking at incidents in detail over a period of time and with enough incidents there will be trends and common factors. I read the article or a similar one by Tom Givens HCM posted years ago and that continued my interest in shooting data and how it relates to training and vice versa. The info BBI has collected is new to me and is good to see another source and more data. I totally agree with Tom Givens' premise that there is a difference between police,military and concealed carry citizen shooting incidents in how they occur, are trained for and duties and responsibility as well as supporting equipment and team members/help present or coming. I don't want to speak for Tom or BBI but I would guess both would agree that they found trends and commonality in their collection of research and that they probably would like to have a lot more data available to them from past shooting incidents to evaluate and use to continue developing realistic training.

With that said and with no intent to denigrate any ones training,experience or service ,be it police,military or otherwise I have some questions and continued concerns or maybe curiosities.

We all want the best training for our time and money. We want it to best prepare us for a life altering defensive incident or if competition to best prepare us for being better at a chosen game. I don't think anyone wants to learn or work on a bad technique or have to unlearn or adapt to a new technique or skill after finding out what they were taught doesn't work in reality. Sometimes these techniques are taught by well known, well meaning, articulate/charismatic trainers with good reputations and/or experiences. Some examples of this are how Fairbairn/Sykes, Applegate et al taught and promoted point shooting. The FBI used a version of it for a time. Sanow and Marshall wound ballistics research. Information used by Bruce Siddle and Col Dave Grossman some of which is refuted,changed in interpretation or used improperly. The same could be said about Boyd's OODA loop and Coopers color code system and how they can be overused/abused/confused in how they applied etc.

Some of these things are just things that evolve as we gain knowledge and experience and see how things work compared to how they theoretically would seem to work when developed. BUT a significant part of that evolution comes from research and evaluating training and equipment or tactics taught in a course or courses from multiple instructors that are the same or very similar to what actually happens when applied in actual shootings. We have evolved from 1911s,S&W model 39s and revolvers being the cutting edge to polymer frame, striker guns that are reliable,accurate and yet weigh less,hold more rounds and cost less. Body armor has gotten better at protecting while being lighter and more comfortable. On the skill side things evolved from hip shooting leather slap and point shooting through Weaver,Chapman,Isosceles to what most competition and military/police train with and use today. All this and yet we don't have a large and thorough collection of shooting incident data to ensure what is taught is working and if not what to change and what to keep. We have the LEOKA(Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted) Data that is a good start as it is pretty comprehensive and collects a lot of information on officer involved shootings where the officer was killed. That helps in determining what didn't work in looking at trends. However what works? Tom Givens and BBI have some of the answer. What about the military training compared to the results? How much of a persons military training or experience can be translated or is applicable to a citizen in a concealed carry shooting? On a similar note since it was I believe Boyd who commented or documented that a fighter pilot really only gains a distinct advantage after they have been in 5 or more dogfights. How much does 1 or 2 shooting incidents give an instructor real and credible experience enough to be passed along to students ?

Why have we not collected and evaluated real life shootings information and compared it to how those involved were trained?

[octagon]

Now before some people jump in and state that there is liability in releasing or discussing shootings I get it but some data can be gathered without affecting a person liability and other information can be gathered without identifying those involved or after the case is cleared through the courts criminal and civil.

Also some things are pretty clear to work and have for years or would be the only practical way to achieve something so need not be overly reviewed. However some things are still debated with vigor by good,credible trainers.

A question that is related but not resolved is how much does a persons unrelated skill or experience no matter how significant translates?

Take a Green Beret,airborne,Ranger, SF guy who has been in combat and several shootings using a rifle/carbine with other similar members present and small unit tactics in a foreign country and in somewhat known or prepared for circumstances. How much does their experience aid in training a guy who carries concealed a S&W Shield and faces an armed robber in a parking lot with family and un-involved public in the area?

[BehindBlueI's]

Why have we not collected and evaluated real life shootings information and compared it to how those involved were trained?

As I quickly found out, it's incredibly time consuming and it's also rather difficult to track the variables. There is also some bias inserted regardless.

I only use cases I personally investigated or have access to the lead detective and case file. Self-reporting is notoriously biased, often unintentionally, but biased none the less. Media accounts are trash. If you don't have access to the investigation, I don't think you can truly understand the shooting.

I also quickly realized that there were two main categories of shootings, and they looked totally different. Random shootings vs targeted shootings. There were significant differences in distance, rounds fired, the attacker's resistance to the psychological stop, etc.

So what I ended up doing was culling the random crimes, eliminating the LE shootings, criminal on criminal shootings, domestic shootings, etc. That actually eliminates the vast majority of shootings, so you're left with a fairly small pool. You *need* a busy office to get any meaningful data. Large amalgamations of data, like the FBI statistics, do not let you cull the shootings that are relevant to you. There's nothing in the UCR/NIBRS that lets you bust it out like that. The NRA's columns, culled from media or first hand accounts, lack the indepth information you want and, as mentioned, are hopelessly biased or just plain wrong.

You're probably starting to see the issue. There are very few people in the position to investigate, or have access to case files, of a substantial number of defensive shootings. Then you have to have one of that group who's willing to put in the time and effort to collect the data. Then you do, and you've got something that's actually pretty valuable. If it's kept proprietary, it's a good marketing tool for training or publication.

It was mentioned up thread that someone took my course. I do not really teach shooting. There are much better people out there to do that. What I teach is more along the lines of "here's what's worked, here's what's failed when Joe Everyman was confronted by random violence and elected to fight back." I have also studied/trained on body language, decision making under stress, etc. and add that into what students see in the surveillance videos and in the recreations. Honestly, I learned more from studying these shootings than I did from being involved in one. Thugs and children have shot and killed people, it doesn't make them an expert in deadly force.

If you've got specific questions, I'm happy to address them. There's also a link to my class in April, which is likely the only one I'll have time to teach this year, in the training sub-forums here. I think there's two slots left last time the host contacted me.

[octagon]

BBI I agree with your assessment and about the challenges of collecting any meaningful data on shootings while not biasing it with criminal on criminal revenge shootings and the like. I have tried to use the NRA stuff and similar media reports but as you say they are greatly lacking. LEOKA I thought would start or may give the idea to collect data in a similar way on LEO involved shootings where the LEO was successful but even that is not occurred or has but not in the same depth and consistency. NYPD SOP 9 on all officer involved firearms discharges is a source and largish but I don't think it has been continued for a number of years (Any NYPD guys please correct me if I'm wrong here) and is just 1 agency on one region so would also be biased or limited in comparing training with reality. I guess I'm just surprised no one has tried to gather what is available to them (particularly if they are a trainer for a profession or their agency) and or the many conferences that the info many may have in small numbers isn't respectfully shared and compared to give the bigger and more importantly better picture. I know Massad Ayoob also has discussed some info from real shootings but other than you Givens and him I just don't find any and that seems shocking with all our other developments over many decades and the ease of communicating in recent past via the internet/email.

I am greatly appreciative for those who share what they can of their collection I just wonder how to get more to benefit the defensive shooting community and selfishly me along the way.

I have been to shootings,suicides,murders(one sided where the victim wasn't armed ) and knife vs gun BG on BG stuff as most cops. I also have conducted a bunch of Simunition scenarios over the years with a couple hundred different participants. All this means less if it can't be critically viewed in the light of how it compares to reality. Sorry I may be preaching to the choir but the issue remains.

On another related thought is how some trainers techniques are accepted or rejected because of the trainer or the message gets lost because of the messenger. Suarez,Yeager and others who may not have great reputations may also have a valid technique that gets trashed because of their reputation(self induced and deserved or not) I don't think we should not consider something because of those type issues.

One of the bigger issues that seems debated but not resolved is shooting while moving. Some promote stand and deliver. Some move then shoot, and others promote move dynamically while shooting and don't stop until you reach safety or cover. I'M sure there are others in between. All have merit but in looking at Simunitions scenarios, compared with CCTV body cam in in car video, compared with competition with timers,video and more scientific testing there is no agreed upon or objective answer most use. To this point there is the issue of which is more important in a gunfight not getting shot or shooting the badguy? I think so often the measure of balance gets lost and training reflects this.

I have rambled enough. I look forward to the comments on these issues and possible directions to help answer some of these issues.

[HCM]

Massad Ayoob has been documenting shooting incidents for over 30 years in his American Handgunner column. They are a mix of LE, historical and civilian CCW shootings. Most are cases where Mas was an expert witness so they are public record. The full collection of columns are available on CD.

[BehindBlueI's]

One of the bigger issues that seems debated but not resolved is shooting while moving. Some promote stand and deliver. Some move then shoot, and others promote move dynamically while shooting and don't stop until you reach safety or cover.

Most of my folks have not moved, or not moved any significant distance. However that's not to say moving isn't better, or that some losses might have been avoided by movement. I really try to not delve into "what ifs", though, just the what happened.

I try to teach it as skill dependent and situation dependent. If you're Gabe White, then you sure as hell ought to be shooting on the move. If you're Joe Shmuck who hasn't touched his gun to train or practice in the last 12 months, you probably ought to get a good hit on the bad guy then start to move if you're faced with a street robber. Vs a targeted attack, like a domestic where the intent is murder/suicide, *really* good hits are even more important. The street robber leaves once the stakes are too high, he can get someone else's wallet who isn't putting holes in him. The enraged drunken ex-lover is more likely to not psychologically stop, so shot placement matters more. I'm sure as a cop, you already instinctively know that, but most folks do not or have never stopped to think about it. It's also the reason I've tried to segregate the shootings as I have.

Crawl, walk, run and all that. We had some tip of the spear military dudes help put together our patrol rifle program, but had to modify some of what they taught because they were just that much better than us. What they could do in terms of speed, accuracy, and teamwork was unattainable for the vast majority of patrol rifle officers, including me. It's the same. Once your skill rises to a certain level, more and better tactics become available to you. Try to use those tactics without the required skills, though, and it may go poorly.

[octagon]

HCM I read those when I pick up AH but I didn't know there was a collection of them on CD. I'll check that out if you don't have a link handy. Mas covers the important details well.

BBI Your last paragraph hits home the differences between Military-Police and Citizen CCW training and abilities. Training each differently makes sense as their environment and how situations will likely unfold are vastly different.

On movement I completely agree that it will be situationaly dependent as many tactics or techniques just may not be possible or practical. The problem that continues is that it is often seen in CCTV footage of actual shootings and if it isn't taught it won't be applied very well. BUT should it be taught and or practiced at all or should it be focused on fairly early after basics are covered because it works to prevent being hit as much or more than getting good hits on the BG? It is a conundrum without data and review or after action dissection of shootings. The simple one side step seems weak for any effect but does continued movement at a controlled pace work better or worse than dynamic movement maybe with shooting or without to be even faster work? I don't think there is a clear answer now but it seems like there could be if the data was available and collected to see.

Some things I have heard or seen being regularly taught is a tactical reload. I asked a few years ago on a number of forums similar to PF if anyone other than military situations has any information on a documented shooting where a LEO or citizen did a tactical reload and then used the partial loaded magazine again in the fight. I didn't find any. That is a small sample but even looking for it for years I have never found anything even hinting that it occurred. It seems like a practical technique and I even use it for after action assessment procedure to top off. But actual in fight tactical reload seems nebulous for anything practical and to train or practice it if that is the case ( I really don't know as the proof for or against is still out) seems like wasted effort that should be spent elsewhere. Granted this is a personal issue that an individual can choose but the early learning students may be wasting time practicing what may be almost useless.

I trained with Jim Cirillo and talked his ear off at the school. I have his books and videos and read probably every article he wrote or wrote about him. Here is a good shooter who was a cop, a firearms instructor for NYPD and FLETC,hunter and competitive shooter who was involved in multiple shooting likely more than almost anyone outside the military. I tried to absorb every word and idea he had to share. However it is still only a small portion of the bigger picture I think we all are searching for.

Maybe I am just frustrated that there is still not a good solid source for the info in the modern age when there are others like Sun Tzu, Machiavelli, Musashi, and middle age diagrams on sword fighting around even though paper and writing let alone a how to on fighting was so much more expensive and uncommon.

[BehindBlueI's]

Well, somethings we just have to wargame out.

Hit rates go down the longer the gun fight goes on. Participants start to move, find cover, etc. Hitting a stationary target in training is simpler than a moving one, and when both shooter and target are on the move it's even tougher. Most defensive shootings by civilians just don't get to that point as they are over too fast. One team is down, disabled, or fleeing very early on.

Reloads in general is more of a gaming skill than a defensive skill. I've yet to see a civilian reload at all in a random crime, and yet to see reload speed matter in doper-on-doper crime, where we have found empty magazines and enough spent casings to indicate reloads took place. Even in LEO shootings, the reload is usually an after the action affair, nothing that mattered. I've yet to see a tactical reload matter, although I'm aware of incidents they were used. Todd made the point in a blog post that you have to reload to continue a range session anyway, so you might as well not waste the training opportunity. I get that, and agree, but it's not a high reward skill in my opinion.

The biggest single predictor who will win in a random crime is who shoots first. It's not 100%, there are exceptions, but it's a pretty solid majority. Surprise, speed, and violence of assault on the criminal are the main factors. The rest is minutiae. That's not to say it's worthless or small advantages aren't to be found there. Reading body language and seeing the assault coming (along with avoidance and de-escalation), a solid and consistent draw that is disguised or involves a distraction, and then quick hits, that's it.

I'm going to belabor this point a bit, but in random crime the criminal is generally not very dedicated to killing you. They wanted to rob you, rape you, etc. They want to live another day to rob or rape the next victim. Once you scare and hurt them, they are most likely exiting the fight. In the majority of cases they don't fire back at all, in the ones they do they fire as they flee, sometimes shooting unsighted over their shoulder, but more often taking a quick shot as they turn. Perhaps a startle reaction, perhaps to get you to stop shooting, I don't know. Either way, it's generally not sighted fire, but from where they were concealing the pistol from passerbys, and I believe that movement can help avoid that shot. It's just not as important as often as getting the first shot and resetting their attitude. Targeted crime where the goal is to kill you, or failing to kill you will result in apprehension for a lengthy prison term, things change. That's why the "we deal with the same guys as you" that CCW holders say is true, but misses the mark. The mugger in a shootout with the victim and with an obvious escape path vs the mugger in a shootout with police with sirens closing in surrounding him may be the same person, but the motivation to stay in the fight and kill is much different.

[Wondering Beard]

Once your skill rises to a certain level, more and better tactics become available to you. Try to use those tactics without the required skills, though, and it may go poorly.

Very important and well said.