Distances involved in shooting instances by LAPD, etc.

[g.willikers]

One thing seems clear from the statistics.
There's no definite scenario one might face in a potentially deadly encounter.
Close, far, in between, there's no guarantee of what to prepare for.
Best to be competent for any and all.

 

[fastbolt]

While this is true, it's also true that the VAST majority of those situations are ones in which the officer has intentionally inserted himself. That singular fact is the one thing that completely eliminates any meaningful comparison to civilian situations, IMO.

To add to your comment, folks might consider the number of reported instances which resulted from uniformed patrol observation incidents, dispatched incidents and task force activities. Not exactly the same sort of situations in which most private citizens will find themselves involved (when lawfully armed and going about their lawful activities).

Then, look toward the relatively small number of off-duty incidents in the report. It would seem as though "trouble" isn't finding off-duty LAPD cops with anywhere near the same frequency as on-duty cops are finding trouble, or being sent to it.

Granted, an off-duty officer can invoke status and take an enforcement action to intervene in a situation, but it's not uncommon for agencies to also have clear policies governing off-duty conduct in this regard.

I'm sure this report will make interesting reading for people interested in LAPD's activities regarding use-of-force, but it's not something that should be taken out of context and applied to private citizen activities.

As far as the "average" cop v. the "average" gun owner when it comes to familiarity with firearms, as well as safety in handling and manipulating & shooting skills?

I'd not be surprised to learn that a number of folks may experience confirmation bias more than they might realize or suspect.

 

[tipoc]

Just to warn that the sample size is so small from both L.A. and N.Y. that some of the statistics may not mean what they first look like.

While this is true, it's also true that the VAST majority of those situations are ones in which the officer has intentionally inserted himself. That singular fact is the one thing that completely eliminates any meaningful comparison to civilian situations, IMO.

Several have pointed out the difference between what leos do and what the non leo is likely to encounter. But I'm cautious about the "completely eliminates" point I highlighted above. It's too strong and broad a generalization.

Most shootings involving non leos (civilian shootings if we must) are at close ranges of speaking distance. This is usually because such shootings are between, family members, co-workers, friends, ex boyfriend and current boyfriend, etc. They are proceeded by anger and words. These shootings are most common and so numerous as to go almost unnoticed in the daily press. (The daily press highlights the random shooting and the spectacular. So do the folk who sell guns, gear and training.)

There are other types of shooting though even if less common.

To have a shoot out in a parking lot in L.A. is more likely to occur and involve greater distance than the same shoot out in N.Y. "Everyone" is in and out of parking lots constantly in L.A. in New York not owning a car is common. But if a drunken argument between BFFs over the Super Bowl ends in a shooting that is likely to happen either place.

tipoc

 

[Brit]

The Police shootings tell me one thing, no one can predict what circumstances are going to govern their particular gun fight/shooting, as a LEO.

Which now should govern my choice of weapon I carry, because I also can not predict an incident, if one ever takes place.

So I shoot a Glock 19 in IDPA competition, I carry a Glock 19 every day. A couple of months ago, at my own large Gun Club, I was the most accurate shooter, out of 68 competitors.

So we can take it as read, I can hit what I aim at, most of the time.
Using the same gun I compete with, I carry. My pistol has 16 rounds? Because it does, and more is better, always.

I have fiber optic night sights, TruGlo, to my mind the best on the market.

So when I hear people (lots of them) say the average gun fight is ten feet, and 3 rounds? That's why they carry a Chief Special, 5 shot revolver? I smile, and pat my spare G17 magazine, and my bright LED Flashlight.

I broke my Crystal ball years ago.

 

[Noreaster]

Hal is right. I love my brothers and sisters but I have 24yrs on the job and Hal is right.

 

[JohnKSa]

...the VAST majority of those situations are ones in which the officer has intentionally inserted himself. That singular fact is the one thing that completely eliminates any meaningful comparison to civilian situations, IMO.

We should expect that it will alter some aspects of LEO shootings vs non-LEO shootings, but it seems quite a stretch to assume that it would completely eliminate any meaningful comparison.

Getting back to your specific argument, it's true that in LE shootings, the LE has generally inserted himself intentionally into the situation. That's different in one sense than non-LEO shootings.

HOWEVER, in any self-defense shooting, it is ALWAYS true that at least ONE of the participants has intentionally inserted himself into the situation. How would the fact that the defender is the one who made that decision dramatically alter the distances involved?

Logically speaking, if anything, it seems more likely that if the defender voluntarily entered into the situation, the distances might be expected to be shorter, since both the attacker and defender could have at least some interest in continuing the engagement.

In general, it would seem to be a wash if the LEO's target is attempting to escape. In that case you'd have one participant trying to continue the engagement while the other is attempting to escape.

As tipoc points out, we should also consider the fact that some of the shootings are totally non-analogous to non-LEO shootings. It may be that some of the longest shootings fall into that category for one reason or another.

I guess what I'm saying is that on the balance, it doesn't seem reasonable to assume that the average distance will be significantly different than what one would expect in non-LEO shootings. Some might be closer due to both participants wanting to continue the engagement, some might be farther away due to the fact that not all LEO shootings are self-defense type shootings, but most of them will probably be good analogs for typical non-LEO self-defense shootings.

All in all, it seems pretty reasonable to expect that if anything, LEO shootings might tend a bit more towards being shorter than typical non-LEO self-defense shootings.

 

[Hal]

Hal is right. I love my brothers and sisters but I have 24yrs on the job and Hal is right.

Thank you..

As I said, it's not a slam against them.

 

[Brian Pfleuger]

I'd have to disagree, John. I really can't see any meaningful connection. This table is just a bunch of numbers so we don't really know anything about the specifics. I stop and consider as many LE shootings as I can remember, from here, YouTube, news or my LE friends and I honestly can't think of a single one that reasonably mirrors what I would expect to see happen in the civilian world.

As an example, we had an incident near here a year or two back with a guy shooting into the air, LE responded, couldn't get him out of his truck verbally, they barricaded and took cover, he eventually fired two rounds at an officer (who I think was trying to close and talk) and about 10 officers responded with something like 127 rounds in under 2 seconds. That seems to be a very typical LE encounter and would quite obviously be a very, very atypical civilian encounter.

Just counting shots fired per incident, I see no reasonable correlation.
Looking at the NRA Armed Citizen Analysis, every stat is almost completely backwards from this report. Very few shots fired (2, mean and median) and distances were "...short but beyond touching..." and "... it appears that most defenders will make the shoot decision shortly before the criminal comes within arm's length."

It appears to me that LE is much more likely to be outside, much more likely to be shooting at a barricaded/covered/hidden (or even fleeing) opponent, likely to fire far more shots and much more likely to be well beyond contact range.

Just the fact that 40% of LE shooting were beyond 30ft tells me it doesn't apply to civilians. What are the odds of scenarios that a civilian would be shooting beyond 10 yards? Sure, it's happened, but I'd bet the odds are closer to 4% than 40 and probably lower than 4.

 

[tipoc]

Below is a link to an article by Claude Werner which attempts to draw conclusions on civilian shooting incidents based on the reports published in the "Armed Citizen" column of the "American Rifleman" magazine. From "The Thinking Gunfighter".

http://thinkinggunfighter.blogspot.com/2012/03/self-defense-findings.html

The original article by him was written in 2002 as I recall. Someone may have a link to the original.

A word of caution though. While the information is good it is drawn on only reports published in the NRA magazines column. A good many things are not reported there.

I'd have to disagree, John. I really can't see any meaningful connection. This table is just a bunch of numbers so we don't really know anything about the specifics.

All tables are just a bunch of numbers. Were you referring to the reports from L.A. or N.Y.?

Seems that there is some interest here beyond what applies immediately to any single civilian with a gun.

tipoc

 

[Brian Pfleuger]

All tables are just a bunch of numbers.

Not to pick on you in particular, but this drives me crazy. Why must people pick out a single sentence that's really not related to the point and take it out of context so they can disagree, while ignoring the main point?

Of course all tables are a bunch of numbers, I really think everyone understands the larger point of the entire post.

Your link is the exact study I was referencing and it has been discussed here a number of times.

The implications of it's data from civilian defensive shooting is almost completely opposite of the data from LE shooting in the OP of this thread. As I explained in my previous post. There may be a number of things not reported but I doubt those things are going to change the data to the COMPLETE and TOTAL OPPOSITE of what it now says, which is what would have to happen if it were to match the LE data.

I don't think it applies, in any relevant way. That's all. Enough said. You all can continue with your extrapolations. My point is made, there's only so many ways to disagree without going in circles.

 

[RX-79G]

I completely agree with Brian.

Not only are the intentions of cops and civilians different, but the intentions of criminals that engage cops and civilians are very different. A bank robber who expects police attention is prepared in an entirely different way from a mugger or a bottle wielding drunk that a civilian might end up having SD shooting with.

It would be absurd for a cop to carry a .32, but there may be nothing better for a civilian because it makes them more likely to be armed.

Stats on off-duty or plain clothes officer shootings might be a little more appropriate, but still skewed. The main thing they would reflect back on civilians is how rare an SD shooting is, and how arbitrary the circumstances.

The application of statistics to extremely rare events is usually a bad idea. The extremes of the bell curve do not behave in a mathematical way.

 

[Nanuk]

The Police shootings tell me one thing, no one can predict what circumstances are going to govern their particular gun fight/shooting, as a LEO.

Which now should govern my choice of weapon I carry, because I also can not predict an incident, if one ever takes place.

So I shoot a Glock 19 in IDPA competition, I carry a Glock 19 every day. A couple of months ago, at my own large Gun Club, I was the most accurate shooter, out of 68 competitors.

So we can take it as read, I can hit what I aim at, most of the time.
Using the same gun I compete with, I carry. My pistol has 16 rounds? Because it does, and more is better, always.

I have fiber optic night sights, TruGlo, to my mind the best on the market.

So when I hear people (lots of them) say the average gun fight is ten feet, and 3 rounds? That's why they carry a Chief Special, 5 shot revolver? I smile, and pat my spare G17 magazine, and my bright LED Flashlight.

I broke my Crystal ball years ago.

Totally agree. The big difference between police shootings and civilian shootings are the events leading up to the shooting. The fact that 14 officers fired 127 shots in one incident is irrelevant because each officer should be looked at individually for accurate comparison.

 

[JohnKSa]

As an example, we had an incident near here a year or two back with a guy shooting into the air, LE responded, couldn't get him out of his truck verbally, they barricaded and took cover, he eventually fired two rounds at an officer (who I think was trying to close and talk) and about 10 officers responded with something like 127 rounds in under 2 seconds.

This is an outlier example even for LE shootings.

Part of the problem with trying to assess the value of a collection of statistics based on personal memory of various reported incidents is that the LE shootings that make the news are the ones that are out of the ordinary for some reason. The more "typical" shootings either aren't reported or get only a line or two of exposure that reveals nothing of substance about the details of the incident.

I stop and consider as many LE shootings as I can remember, from here, YouTube, news or my LE friends and I honestly can't think of a single one that reasonably mirrors what I would expect to see happen in the civilian world.

The standard for having some utility in this context isn't that each LE shooting needs to "mirror" civilian shootings, merely that some parameters, (in this case shots fired and distances at which they are fired) need to show at least a rough similarity on average.

Looking at the NRA Armed Citizen Analysis, every stat is almost completely backwards from this report.

The NRA ACA is actually a fairly poor source for compiling data on self-defense shootings because the incidents are very carefully selected for inclusion. They report only incidents that are clearcut self-defense and only ones that are successful.

 

[Brit]

Just remembered a shooting incident, on a Seniors Development. I am sure a few of the readers might remember it (better than I!)

Police responded to a shooter, and ended up swapping shots with this person (who had mental issues) a fellow resident, retrieved his large bore revolver, and hit him twice at a measured 125 yards! Not fatally, but caused cease and desist to set in. If I was in that same persons shoes, I would stand a good chance of hitting the person (with the 16 rounds in the Glock 19, and an extra mag with 17!) more is better always.

 

[sigxder]

Useful information that may or may not transfer to the civilian world. No one rapes, robs, carjacks, or mugs you from 21ft.. I think we can agree most of these situations do not on a very regular basis happen to LEO's. Other than a home invasion most situations a civilian will get into are much shorter.

 

[tipoc]

These statistics along with the others in the report tell us more about the NYPD or LAPD than what non leos may be likely to face but that doesn't mean that there are no lessons to be learned. Just not a one to one correlation across the board. There may be in some areas though

The same is true for about any set of statistics gathered. The study based on the NRA articles, Ellifitz's "study", etc.

I've been hinky on the oft repeated on gun forums 3,3,3 standard that the average gunfight involves 3 shots or less, in under 3 seconds, at 3 yards or less. Maybe, drive bys, rare in NYC more common in L.A., happen at longer distances tough.

Another factor involved is that these statistics are like cancer statistics. An average tells you noting about what will happen to you. For no individual is there an "average" gunfight.

tipoc

 

[Brian Pfleuger]

This is an outlier example even for LE shootings.



Part of the problem with trying to assess the value of a collection of statistics based on personal memory of various reported incidents is that the LE shootings that make the news are the ones that are out of the ordinary for some reason. The more "typical" shootings either aren't reported or get only a line or two of exposure that reveals nothing of substance about the details of the incident.The standard for having some utility in this context isn't that each LE shooting needs to "mirror" civilian shootings, merely that some parameters, (in this case shots fired and distances at which they are fired) need to show at least a rough similarity on average.The NRA ACA is actually a fairly poor source for compiling data on self-defense shootings because the incidents are very carefully selected for inclusion. They report only incidents that are clearcut self-defense and only ones that are successful.

It doesn't seem like an outlier to me, John. TOTAL shots fired, yes, but not average or the distance or the basic scenario.

I agree that what matters are the parameters but I conclude that those parameters are not sufficiently similar, in fact seem opposite.

I also agree that the LE incidents that make the news are typically "extraordinary" but the ones we discuss and can watch on YouTube, etc, aren't all that extraordinary.

Yes, the NRA numbers come from "confirmed " SD and only successful ones but isn't that what we want to know?i don't want to know about claimed SD that was criminal. Unsuccessful events are not included but I don't know why that would skew the numbers, except that perhaps the more shots you need the less likely you are to succeed?

I don't know. I just don't see any relevance.

I've watched a boat load of police shooting videos and talked to officers who have been in shootings or have debriefed officers who have, and obviously all have trained for it.

I've also watched a boat load of SD videos, discussed scenarios, etc. They're not similar, at all, IMO.

SD is usually very close, very unexpected and very short duration. Police shootings tend to be longer distances, planned in the sense of intentional involvement, longer ranges and far more shots fired.

Ultimately, I conclude that while there almost certainly is valuable information in specific LE statistics, the value is not in a table of numbers because the average incident is very much different than an average SD incident.

Specific scenarios, yes. Averages, not helpful.

 

[RX-79G]

Only paying attention to successful SD is dumb. If all the unsuccessful SD happens at a certain range or caliber or shots fired, that's the MOST useful information we can have.

 

[JohnKSa]

It doesn't seem like an outlier to me, John. TOTAL shots fired, yes, but not average or the distance or the basic scenario.

I can't imagine how a barricaded suspect or officer with multiple officers on the scene could seem like a typical LE shooting as opposed to an outlier. I think this speaks strongly to my comment about trying to judge what is typical by personal recollections.

Yes, the NRA numbers come from "confirmed " SD and only successful ones but isn't that what we want to know?

Well, it's part of what we want to know. But we really need to see what goes on in ALL the shootings, not just the ones that turned out right. It's not possible to find out what is typical if we only focus on the ones that were all easy enough for the typical, untrained, unskilled, gun owner to survive.

i don't want to know about claimed SD that was criminal.

First of all, it doesn't appear that they even include the ones that might appear questionable, so the fact that they only include the clearcut ones doesn't mean that they're only eliminating criminal shootings. It means they're eliminating anything that might even appear to be questionable.

Second, what we want to know about is what we need to think about in terms of preparation. The fact that a defender might have made a serious legal mistake in the process of saving his life certainly doesn't mean that there's no value in understanding and preparing for the kind of situation that put him in need of self-defense in the first place.

Unsuccessful events are not included but I don't know why that would skew the numbers...

Generally speaking, statistics theory suggests that you're more likely to skew results by throwing away data altogether than by including outliers. The outliers tend to occur on both sides of the average and often have a tendency to cancel each other. But when you throw away an entire class of shootings (questionable legalities, LE involvement, unsuccessful self-defense), you have a very good chance of ending up with a data set that is completely unrepresentative of reality.

I think there's a little bit of a double standard going on. In spite of the fact that we all realize that the ACA stats have been "pre-filtered", you suggest we should be willing to accept the filtered results as typical of what we should expect and prepare for but at the same time, based on personal recollection of what is typical for LE shootings, you say we should discard all the LE shooting information as irrelevant.

It doesn't make sense to accept the ACA data as valid for determining what is "typical" in spite of the fact that we know for a fact it is heavily filtered before we ever see it and then use something as unreliable as personal recollections/impressions of what is typical for LE shootings to completely invalidate the use of LE shooting data for anything not related to LE.

 

[Nanuk]

Just remembered a shooting incident, on a Seniors Development. I am sure a few of the readers might remember it (better than I!)

Police responded to a shooter, and ended up swapping shots with this person (who had mental issues) a fellow resident, retrieved his large bore revolver, and hit him twice at a measured 125 yards! Not fatally, but caused cease and desist to set in. If I was in that same persons shoes, I would stand a good chance of hitting the person (with the 16 rounds in the Glock 19, and an extra mag with 17!) more is better always.

I believe that is Brady, Texas you are thinking of. The old guy used a 6" N frame S&W 357 mag with some sort of Lead bullet in reloads if I remember correctly.