Raw speed

[JHC]

I don't want this discussion to fall into the common internet trap, of turning this into speed vs accuracy, or speed versus thoughtful tactics choice. The accuracy standard is upper CNS, and the tactics are "best available."

In Anchorage just in September, there were multiple murders in stores, where either the speed of the perpetrator, or depending on your point of view the lack of speed by the four victims, resulted in their untimely deaths. I have never seen statistics, which does not mean they don't exist, of what percentage of armed police officers and civilians, are killed due to lack of raw speed. My gut, though, says raw speed plays a big part in the outcome of conflicts where both parties are armed. It also plays a big part in the outcome of conflicts with unarmed, big, dark furry things.

A very helpful accuracy standard for channeling the discussion productively.

[Tamara]

A very helpful accuracy standard for channeling the discussion productively.

There's probably a connection between that and the fact that the draw in the FAST is to the 3x5 and not the circle.

[holmes168]

Sorry if my comment was taken as speed vs accuracy. I was thinking more along the lines of the training based on your comments.
The accuracy of the CNS at the best speed is the perfect answer- for sure.
I was addressing my own training thoughts and why I work on speed first, then accuracy.

[Peally]

Speed vs accuracy has always been a moot point to me. Just physically max out on both.

[Zincwarrior]

And then there is this:

Attachment 20144

Fortunately in Texas this is unlikely. We should also remember in the Real World (TM) we're likely dealing with both surprise and a massive adrenalin dump, which will negatively impact accuracy.

[11B10]

Raw speed is great, but no one is fast enough to outdraw a drawn gun unless they cheat. It's your job to cheat. If the other guy hasn't started shooting yet, it's time to disrupt his OODA loop and use surprise, speed, and ferocity of attack to prevail.

Seriously, I've yet to have anyone wish they were slower. However, when you don't disguise the draw, don't wait (or create) a moment of confusion or lack of attention on your opponent's part, and just rely on raw speed you tend to catch a bullet if the other guy is willing to pull the trigger on a functioning gun.

When I read about the success of Tom Givens' students in their real life, lethal force battles, I became convinced of the necessity of the successful shooter to utilize movement, even if it's only a side step, which is what Tom teaches. It creates that tiny bit of confusion that could make the difference.

[octagon]

Raw speed. The term pretty much suggests speed OVER accuracy otherwise it wouldn't be called "raw speed" right?

In the context of defensive or offensive shooting, the following base of experience says precision to hit a grapefruit sized target is the dominant priority for reasons of achieving the desired effects and for the accountability of rounds fired, ie misses endanger the non-combatants including team mates, family members, the public at large etc.

Dagga Boy's wealth of operational experience.

Wayne Dobb's ditto.

HRT based on their training and quals.

LAPD SWAT based on their training and quals.

Pretty much AFAIK all the former JSOC gunfighters that publish or train on the topic.

That is a clue.

Max splits/speed whatever HOPING for telling hits is not the way.

Are the bolded groups afforded different standards because of their operating in team or pairs as well as the equipment and initiation of engagement?

What I am getting at is a SWAT,HRT or JSOC individual often if not close to most often in a team or pair setting with another armed and trained person on their side to assist in engaging the threat. If both(or all team members) can shoot to CNS hits in similar times the difference in shooting slightly slower initial shot and follow up shots is minimized greatly compared to a single defender as a lone LEO or citizen.

These groups also initiate the engagement or go into situations differently than the surprised LEO or Citizen response. Guns out,body armor, multiple people engaging the badguy for him to decide who to engage are all different from lone LEO or citizen being targeted by badguy who initiates the encounter. Not to mention concealed carry draw speed vs open carry or gun in hand the groups are more likely to start from.

[taadski]

I don't want this discussion to fall into the common internet trap, of turning this into speed vs accuracy, or speed versus thoughtful tactics choice. The accuracy standard is upper CNS, and the tactics are "best available."

[Scratches head] Are those an "internet trap" or a "reality trap"? Seems like one can't germanely discuss one without the other. IDK.

In Anchorage just in September, there were multiple murders in stores, where either the speed of the perpetrator, or depending on your point of view the lack of speed by the four victims, resulted in their untimely deaths. I have never seen statistics, which does not mean they don't exist, of what percentage of armed police officers and civilians, are killed due to lack of raw speed. My gut, though, says raw speed plays a big part in the outcome of conflicts where both parties are armed. It also plays a big part in the outcome of conflicts with unarmed, big, dark furry things.

I don’t think anyone is ever going to say that pure speed is a bad thing, assuming it’s performed with the requisite level of precision. I don’t think we can ignore the old gunfighting adage that the first one to put bullet to meat has a dramatically increased likelihood of winning the encounter.

But given the altercations we’re talking about are hypothetically occurring between two (or more) human beings, an element at least as important to success is going to be recognizing you’re in a fight to begin with. It’s likely not going to be an old school showdown in the street where both parties are reacting to a beep.

Being on the law abiding, good citizen side of this equation often will mean that you’re reacting to actions that have already started. Sure being blazing fast on the square range can help stack the odds in your favor, but just as (arguably much more) important are becoming expert at being aware of your surroundings, recognizing pre-fight indicators, having some ‘distraction techniques’ up your sleeve, etc… And perhaps most importantly, having a mindset and a willingness to act immediately and exact violence.

I think “speed” in these elements needs to be weighed at least as heavily as pure shooting skill, if we’re talking about winning violent encounters.

Sorry if this is steering the discussion away from your thesis point. I'm honestly a bit unclear what it is. I guess I can take a stab... Yes, shooting someone in the face wicked fast and before they shoot you is likely to solve an immediate deadly force situation in your favor.

[SJC3081]

I think the real dangerous man, is a man willing to kill. No hesitation and moderate skill make a very dangerous adversary. A well trained shooter who is willing is someone to fear. Many LEOs are very well trained but hesitate and are reluctantly willing.

[JHC]

Are the bolded groups afforded different standards because of their operating in team or pairs as well as the equipment and initiation of engagement?

What I am getting at is a SWAT,HRT or JSOC individual often if not close to most often in a team or pair setting with another armed and trained person on their side to assist in engaging the threat. If both(or all team members) can shoot to CNS hits in similar times the difference in shooting slightly slower initial shot and follow up shots is minimized greatly compared to a single defender as a lone LEO or citizen.

These groups also initiate the engagement or go into situations differently than the surprised LEO or Citizen response. Guns out,body armor, multiple people engaging the badguy for him to decide who to engage are all different from lone LEO or citizen being targeted by badguy who initiates the encounter. Not to mention concealed carry draw speed vs open carry or gun in hand the groups are more likely to start from.

I don't get the impression any of those factors weigh into their shooting standards per se.