An example for the endless is 5 enough, I can't handle more than one opponent

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Sorry to beat this dead horse but we continually do:

Is five enough?

Then we had comments that you are helpless against all but the incompetent opponent.

Thus, some of us carry based on the small but possible intense critical incident and train to have a modicum of skill, even for FOGs.

So here's a good story. Yes, the good guy is a cop but his performance is exemplary and I opine in the realm of possibility for someone who puts in the effort with their EDC:

https://www.policeone.com/active-sh...Prophet-terror-attack/?NewsletterID=418683044

Note the suggestions of how to prevail at the end of the article. Of course, it may be reasonable for a civilian just to get the heck out of there. Not a bad plan. However, the fight is not impossible, if it came to that.

 

[TailGator]

Item number 5 in the discussion also contributes to the oft-repeated debate about whether aimed fire is useful. The successful shooter reports using his front sight, even though shooting with some haste and under fire. Adapting his technique to the needs of the moment seems to have helped him prevail.

 

[2damnold4this]

That was a very interesting article, Glen. Thanks for posting. I remember the attack but had heard no details.

 

[Lohman446]

We are cherry picking from our case studies.

The title might as well have read "for those of you who actually think a 9MM is enough"

 

[fastbolt]

The successful heroic actions, tactics and skills demonstrated by Garland Police Officer Greg Stevens reinforce some long known and well understood aspects of how trained persons may have an advantage when it comes to being able to utilize their training to better perform under stress.

Obviously, the training has to be combined with the alertness and will/mindset to attempt to effectively employ that training, especially under the stress of an unexpected horrifically dangerous, dynamic situation.

He didn't freeze, and apparently both his physical skills training, and his mental preparation, allowed him to sufficiently utilize his training.

It's instructive that Stevens had a clear view of his front sight while shooting, and took the time to obtain an appropriate, but not perfect, sight picture – what most instructors would call a “flash sight picture” – because, “I knew I needed to make the hits.”

When solid hits are crucial, the value and effectiveness of some sort of aiming often becomes apparent in the ability to make more accurate hits.

I've listened to my fair share of cops who described their experiences during shooting incidents. The significant majority of them also expressed their realization (during the incidents) of the critical importance of being able to aim and make accurate hits. A number of those cops experienced that realization after they'd already been seriously wounded, and knew their only hope to survive their incident was to get accurate, better hits on their attackers.

Regardless of caliber or ammunition capacity preferences - or even pistol v. revolver preferences - the ability to be able to have some experience in both skills training and mental preparation to fall back upon, will likely prove to be more useful than having little, or none, of either.

It probably also helped his alertness that he'd been privy to LE info/intel about potential threats, and his assignment put him into the mindset of him being present to actively look for signs of possible threats. He didn't freeze during the Observe/Orient part of his own OODA Loop process.

Salute to him, again.

 

[OhioGuy]

Looks like 14 were enough BUT only because he remained composed and made his hits count. Given his skills, I suspect he would have prevailed had he used a gun with fewer rounds and a reload in between. Had he been limited to only half that, the story would've ended differently.

On the other hand he could've had a 30 round magazine and still failed without the training and composure!

 

[Lohman446]

He seemed to have done everything right. When faced with an opponent with more range then you getting closer lessens their advantage. Advancing against a target before he or she has "bunkered down" takes away that advantage. Reassessing downed targets, especially whe IEDs are on the table, was an incredible sign of mental composure.

 

[Green Lantern]

Good article. Things can happen and we need to be prepared those situations. Even discuss possible scenarios.

 

[FireForged]

The man was competent, had enough personal grit to get it done and did his job. This is an example of a person who was not conflicted or restrained by uncertainty.. he simply realized the threat and acted. Its not really much deeper than that,... I salute him.

Is 5 enough,.. yeah probably. Am I willing to settle for what is probably enough?... nope.

Have I ever carry a 5 shot revolver.. yep. Did I feel ill-equipped?.. nope. Do I carry a 5 shot revolver often?.. no I don't.

 

[Deaf Smith]

Five is enough unless it ain't (but then six might not, or 10, or 20, or ...)

As Scotty said, "It's better to have and not need than need and not have.)

Deaf

 

[Nanuk]

We are cherry picking from our case studies.

What is wrong with looking at actual cases?

The title might as well have read "for those of you who actually think a 9MM is enough"

How did you come up with that?

 

[Sequins]

I couldn't help but notice he deployed all 14 rounds and reloaded another magazine. He would have been only 1/3rd of the way through neutralizing the threat and would have died hearing "click, click, click" if he only had 5.

ED: And just for the record I carry my SP101 quick pocket carry to the corner store or other situations where I'm mostly just concerned with a mugging, etc. but situations like the one in the OP are why I switched to a Glock 30 for serious EDC. If I'm in the mall, church, or some other marked target I want more than 5 rounds.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Great article. I think many people underestimate the mental preparedness angle. I've seen a few after-action breakdowns of post-shooting incidents and the amount of time that gets burned in the "OMG! Is this really happening?" phase often shocks me. I've definitely seen people who died before they made it out of that phase.

 

[Lohman446]

How did you come up with that?

The same way that the OP decided to use this as an example that five would not have been enough for the competent and determined hero. He used a 45 thus we must conclude, since we are using this case study as an unarguable example, that anything else would have failed.

 

[OldMarksman]

The same way that the OP decided to use this as an example that five would not have been enough for the competent and determined hero.

Five rounds did not suffice. Q. E. D.

He used a 45 thus we must conclude, since we are using this case study as an unarguable example, that anything else would have failed.

On what basis?

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

He used a 45 thus we must conclude, since we are using this case study as an unarguable example, that anything else would have failed.

First, you are imputing a kind of reductio ad absurdum argument to the OP that I did not perceive when I read it. So I think your response is flawed because you aren't addressing his actual argument.

Second, your argument lacks basic reasoning. The officer here did shoot five times and that did not work. Shooting more did work. He did not shoot someone with a 9mm unsuccessfully and then use a .45 successfully. So even had you stated his argument correctly, your analogy is flawed.

However, I think we can all agree there are some good lessons to discuss there if we don't get too caught up in the arguing part (as I'm doing right now) vice the learning part.

 

[Nanuk]

What I took from it was that a good shot that keeps his head can defeat opponents armed with superior weapons. I have been saying that for years but all the keyboard commandos say that when armed with a pistol against someone armed with a rifle it is an automatic loss.

 

[Jeff22]

choices for a CCW gun

When choosing a handgun for concealed carry, there are a lot of different factors to consider, including an evaluation of your own environment and an estimate of the potential threat situations that you might most likely encounter.

For YEARS I carried a 3 inch S&W Chief Special revolver as an off duty gun, with two reloads (spare ammo carried in Bianchi Speed Strips). For my environment, that was probably enough. I never had to find out.

Now I most often carry a Glock 43 in 9mm with two reloads, all of the magazines fitted with Taran Tactical +2 floorplates. In cooler weather, when I dress differently and can more easily hide a bigger gun, I carry a Glock 19 and at least one spare magazine (usually two). I generally carry the bigger gun any time I go to a shopping mall or out to the movies.

I know people who are satisfied with carrying an air-weight S&W revolver with a 2 inch barrel in a pocket and NO reloads. I personally don't like pocket carry (can be hard to deploy the gun when you are seated or when you are moving) and I ALWAYS carry at least one reload. But, people make their own choices for their own reasons, and what happens is what happens . . .

 

[briandg]

My take on this is that NOBODY could have done that more capably. From start to finish every action was based on keen observation and analysis. Observation of abnormal behavior indicative of danger, he was mentally prepared and saw the threat exactly when it appeared. He as was said proactively attacked and pounded the threat before they even started their checklist. He cut the plan off at the ankles. Both men went down because of controlled fire to vulnerable points and closing with them as he fired had numerous benefits.

All that I can say is that in that moment and event, he was on top of the event, maybe too focused, but he had one, only one event before him that absolutely had to be stopped. It could have failed if another crew came up behind him. Swat did their job.

He would not have prevailed with a .38. Maybe the armor would have protected enough to allow the bad guys to take control. Having a high cap semIautomatic of sufficient power was essential to that outcome. His skills and prepared mental state, and several other personal factors were what won the day, his equipment was useless without his skill.

That is probably never going to be presented to me. I'm probably gonna die. I am not the cool and well trained person. I don't always carry a high cap and only a nine. If I am once again presented with a robbery or mugging, I'll probably come through that as well.

Taking a terrorist attack and extrapolating to the millions of every day situations doesn't accurately represent what would have happened when the bozo shot up the convenience store here earlier this summer. In that case, the lady at the register took his rifle away!

I think that many cops would have done as well, that does not diminish this feat.

 

[JohnKSa]

What I took from it was that a good shot that keeps his head can defeat opponents armed with superior weapons. I have been saying that for years but all the keyboard commandos say that when armed with a pistol against someone armed with a rifle it is an automatic loss.

He did everything right and was also able to get "ahead" of them by reacting quickly and decisively to their arrival. Possibly because he was expecting some kind of attack based on the "intelligence briefings" mentioned in the article, but also because the way the car parked and the out-of-state plates drew his attention and sparked suspicion before the occupants even exited the vehicle.

What he accomplished was very impressive. It could easily have turned out differently had he not immediately reacted or had he been another 15-20 yards further away, or had both gunmen exited the car and attacked simultaneously thus denying him the opportunity to engage first one and then the other.

A person armed with a pistol against someone armed with a rifle is at a significant disadvantage. Does that mean it's an automatic loss for the person with the pistol? No, obviously it does not. But there's no real debate about which person is likely to be able to put more rounds on target and to do it faster. Nor is there any real question about whose shots are likely to have more and more rapid terminal effect.

We don't even have to speculate since there are a number of real-world scenarios that provide insight. The Tyler Courthouse shooting, the Miami FBI shootout and the North Hollywood shootout are a few that spring to mind.