[PublicAnimalNo9]

Xort Xort:

Lemmy Lemmy:

I would score a firefight from a safe distance if possible.

You understand the question he is trying to ask, we both do.

So you can understand how I can't answer him, given what he asked.

To futher this along I'm asking you if you can come up with some way to properly ask the question for him, as he has refused to do so in the past when I asked him to ask a better question that I could answer.

~

You know what he is asking is stupid, so why don't you just say it?

Given the fucking context of the discussion, it's a pretty safe bet that someone that isn't being purposefully obtuse wouldn't answer by talking about his "prowess" as a fucking tank gunner.

Your initial claim is the average handgun owner can perform better in a tactical situation than most police officers. All we're asking is how well you've faired getting rounds on target with a handgun whilst said target is moving and shooting at you, not necessarily at the same time.
I asked you that question a while ago and you never answered it. That's the point Gunnair has been making here. Just answer the fucking question.

[fifeboy]

Jonny_C Jonny_C:

You were a tank gunner? And you equate a tank to a firearm??? That's a mind-boggling concept.

Wasn't this topic about CCW and handguns? How do you conceal carry a tank? Or for that matter a tank gun?

[Jonny_C]

I want to be clear, xort. In a different context I would laud your service with our tanks in Afghanistan. Your service is appreciated. But in the context of this thread you are, unfortunately, off the mark, IMO.

[Xort]

Jonny_C Jonny_C:

Nobody said that. But you have implied that all police officers are inept.

I think I did more than imply that the average officer doesn't have enough training.

$1:

Yes, but not in all-or-nothing fashion, as you do. And not with the arrogance of an expert in close combat with firearms, which you have suggested.

Shooting is a skill you need to spend time on to be good at.

$1:

You were a tank gunner? And you equate a tank to a firearm??? That's a mind-boggling concept.

I asked him to define his question better. I said to note what weapons and what ranges.

$1:

It makes you whole description about "100% with the first shot", which you made sound like prowess with a firearm, just plain ludicrous.

Well here is a clue in a firefight you don't conduct an investigation into who shot what when and account for every round fired. So asking what my score was, is in my mind even more misleading.

$1:

You don't learn about close combat with handguns and rifles by sitting in a tank and picking off hostiles with HE rounds.

Correct, but you do learn about close combat when you work guard shifts outside of your tank, and you are trained in more than basic marksmenship. Getting shot at and returning fire with a rifle is different than a pistol.

I have said at least twice I've never been in a pistol firefight.

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

Given the fucking context of the discussion, it's a pretty safe bet that someone that isn't being purposefully obtuse wouldn't answer by talking about his "prowess" as a fucking tank gunner.

I asked more than once to put forth a better question.

$1:

Your initial claim is the average handgun owner can perform better in a tactical situation than most police officers.

Correct, because unlike the police people dedicated to having a pistol as a daily item actualy train with it. The police qualify with it. Otherwise you could take any police officer and drop them into a tactical unit without any training.

$1:

All we're asking is how well you've faired getting rounds on target with a handgun whilst said target is moving and shooting at you, not necessarily at the same time.

And I've said I've never used a pistol in a firefight. I have used a carbine. What was my score with it? Well I was in the military not a video game, so I didn't get a score to pop up in my sights.

$1:

I asked you that question a while ago and you never answered it. That's the point Gunnair has been making here. Just answer the fucking question.

What my score is?

I don't know. Real life doesn't issue a score.

[Gunnair]

Xort Xort:

I don't know. Real life doesn't issue a score.

Odd...you'll quantify someone else you don't have clue one about but you won't do it to yourself?

You've been called out in public and have been found to be full of shit.

I doubt too many will take you seriously after this.

[Xort]

Gunnair Gunnair:

Odd...you'll quantify someone else you don't have clue one about but you won't do it to yourself?

I'm willing to talk, I fired 2 rounds from a rifle, while under fire, I hit each time. Which is funny because at the time I had 3 MGs I could have used, I just by chance had my rifle in my hands when I was being shot at.

Although that doesn't count because that person wasn't running at the time.

So you are right I have no experince shooting people that are moving while they are shooting at me with small arms.

However I will say that I don't think it's going to be a huge leap to go from shooting a static target to a mover at ranges less than 100m. I also think that with a pistol at short to point blank range I could hit a moving target without missing. Getting shot at, never bothered me. If you are going to panic and think that the other guy has a death ray you need to dodge out of the way of, chances of you hitting your target are very low. I take cover as fast as the next guy when I don't know where I'm being shot at from, or by a MG. But for an AK fired from a poor shooting stance, at mid range I always worked from the point that me ended the fighitng is safer than taking cover and not returning fire fast.
~
Criminals that are not mass murders trying to kill people with a firearm tend not to be the best shots in the world. However, if you are at very close range (less than 6m) you are at risk of being shot even by someone holding a gun sideways. So in that case the situation becomes one of can I draw and shoot fast enough to beat the other guy? Do I have anywhere I could move to to get out of the way if I wanted to? Can I close to hand to hand combat?

Fun fact 22 feet is generaly reguarded as the range in which someone can close with a knife faster than you can draw a pistol in defence. Although if the person already has a pistol out that is ready to fire that range is no longer true.

$1:

You've been called out in public and have been found to be full of shit.

The only one full of shit is you. You haven't called me out, because you can't figure out how to do the call. What is your score? Real life, doesn't issue a score, so if you want to know how well I shoot you need to define some things first.

Like what weapon, what range, how many shots fired, how many shots hit. Then you need rules for giving value to different shots at different ranges. For example does a miss at 300m count less than a miss at 25m? Then you need to give weight to aspects of how much of the target was visible, was it moving, how fast and in what relative direction to the shooter. Was the shooter shooting supported, prone, standing. Does that change the value you give to hits?

Or do you just take the abstraction and say, shots on target VS shots fired? (which in many ways is as useful when looking at a large number of shots fired as a much more indepth review giving values to each situation)

What you can't do is ask for a score, unless you are making referance to an established scoring system.

$1:

I doubt too many will take you seriously after this.

Why because you can't think of how to ask a real question?
Hey man you shoot guns? What's your score?
~
As you limited my whole shooting experince to: While being shot at, returning fire on a moving target I don't have much to talk about. In fact I don't actualy have any situations that meet you ultra narrow requirement for small arms.
~
What experince do you have with shooting small arms? Range time or real combat. Pistols, rifles, shotguns, black powder muskets? Any tactical training? Ever take a class on tactical shooting and moving?

Do you just know people that shoot guns a lot?

Ever been shot at before while in the open?

[Toastmaker]

Bit of a confusing thread all of a sudden. "Scoring" a firefight ? Not sure what's meant by this but in LA, if you and your partner walk away from one without holes in you - you "score" a 100%.

As you can imagine, different police agencies have different handgun proficiency standards that officers have to maintain. They're not state secrets and you could find out by a simple phone call to your local agency's training facility. Major (and many minor) departments require annual or semi-annual requalification with any weapon they are authorized to use (including shotguns, assault rifles or full auto).

The fact is, the average police officer is a pretty good shot although few score "expert" without a personal interest in lots and lots of practice.

[Gunnair]

Toastmaker Toastmaker:

Bit of a confusing thread all of a sudden. "Scoring" a firefight ? Not sure what's meant by this but in LA, if you and your partner walk away from one without holes in you - you "score" a 100%.

As you can imagine, different police agencies have different handgun proficiency standards that officers have to maintain. They're not state secrets and you could find out by a simple phone call to your local agency's training facility. Major (and many minor) departments require annual or semi-annual requalification with any weapon they are authorized to use (including shotguns, assault rifles or full auto).

The fact is, the average police officer is a pretty good shot although few score "expert" without a personal interest in lots and lots of practice.

Unfortunately it went off the rails when the noob braggart rolled in and said cops in general were poor shots after New York and that he was generally a better shot in the same situation.

When called on it he dodged until he finally came back with the "I got nothin'" post

I would expect police are pretty good shots.

[EyeBrock]

Toast, I'm sure it’s no different in the US cops. There are very few gun 'enthusiasts' in the police. I don’t hug my pistol and there are many like it. This one is mine for now.

Pretty good shot is the average, nothing special but definitely good enough to do the job.
Being an awesome shot on ranges is all very jolly but wasted effort when you turn up to that domestic or missing kid or a bar assault.

We do enough weapons training for the job we do. We will leave the large scale killing of bad guys to our military. The police are there to protect and detect, not take large amounts of land or towns by force of arms.

Different concepts that require some posters to engage in a paradigm shift.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Xort Xort:

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

Given the fucking context of the discussion, it's a pretty safe bet that someone that isn't being purposefully obtuse wouldn't answer by talking about his "prowess" as a fucking tank gunner.

I asked more than once to put forth a better question.

$1:

Your initial claim is the average handgun owner can perform better in a tactical situation than most police officers.

Correct, because unlike the police people dedicated to having a pistol as a daily item actualy train with it. The police qualify with it. Otherwise you could take any police officer and drop them into a tactical unit without any training.

$1:

All we're asking is how well you've faired getting rounds on target with a handgun whilst said target is moving and shooting at you, not necessarily at the same time.

And I've said I've never used a pistol in a firefight. I have used a carbine. What was my score with it? Well I was in the military not a video game, so I didn't get a score to pop up in my sights.

$1:

I asked you that question a while ago and you never answered it. That's the point Gunnair has been making here. Just answer the fucking question.

What my score is?

I don't know. Real life doesn't issue a score.

Yer right, it's up to YOU to determine the "score". Now, since you've admitted to never being in the described situation, a situation that very few people have been in, and since there's no way to keep "score", how do you justify your claim that the average hand gun owner would perform better in that situation? Is it intuition? Arrogance? Or just bluster cuz you wanna carry a gun around with you?

[cretualin35]

$1:

how do you justify your claim that the average hand gun owner would perform better in that situation? Is it intuition? Arrogance? Or just bluster cuz you wanna carry a gun around with you?

Or just a nice way to troll around.

People make exaggerated claims all the time. Even more out of proportion when no one knows who you are, like on a forum.

At this point it seems futile to try and convince him of anything. Since he has so much experience with the "average" handgun owner I say good luck to you sir and cheer up.

[Xort]

Gunnair Gunnair:

Unfortunately it went off the rails when the noob braggart rolled in and said cops in general were poor shots after New York and that he was generally a better shot in the same situation.

When called on it he dodged until he finally came back with the "I got nothin'" post

I would expect police are pretty good shots.

Wow historical revisionism not just for neo-nazis anymore.

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

Yer right, it's up to YOU to determine the "score". Now, since you've admitted to never being in the described situation,

Yes because the firefight I was in when I shot the other guy he was standing still at the time. Clearly I have no legs to stand on when I talk about a gunfight.

$1:

a situation that very few people have been in, and since there's no way to keep "score", how do you justify your claim that the average hand gun owner would perform better in that situation? Is it intuition? Arrogance? Or just bluster cuz you wanna carry a gun around with you?

Because the average daily carry owner spends more time training with it.

And skill is a function of training, ability, and practice. All the instructional training in the world means nothing if you can't practice or have no physical aptitude for something.

[ShepherdsDog]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

Toast, I'm sure it’s no different in the US cops. There are very few gun 'enthusiasts' in the police. I don’t hug my pistol and there are many like it. This one is mine for now.

Pretty good shot is the average, nothing special but definitely good enough to do the job.
Being an awesome shot on ranges is all very jolly but wasted effort when you turn up to that domestic or missing kid or a bar assault.

We do enough weapons training for the job we do. We will leave the large scale killing of bad guys to our military. The police are there to protect and detect, not take large amounts of land or towns by force of arms.

Different concepts that require some posters to engage in a paradigm shift.

What Xort Bus doesn't understand is that the firearm is not a police officer's primary line of defense, or that killing a bad guy is his raison d'etre. It's their ability to assess a situation and try and diffuse it. In short(xort) their brain. Going in guns blazing is not what the police are for. We always hear plenty of stories about police who went decades without ever having to draw their weapon or shoot at anyone, other than paper targets. Just because someone is a crack shot doesn't mean they have the ability to assess a situation and diffuse it, which is crucial for a peace officer. Xort Bus , in this thread like most he's posted in, has no clue. Lawns get greener around him everytime he opens his mouth to speak.

[Gunnair]

Xort Xort:

Gunnair Gunnair:

Unfortunately it went off the rails when the noob braggart rolled in and said cops in general were poor shots after New York and that he was generally a better shot in the same situation.

When called on it he dodged until he finally came back with the "I got nothin'" post

I would expect police are pretty good shots.

Wow historical revisionism not just for neo-nazis anymore.

Godwined.

Again with the nothing with you.

[Lemmy]

Xort Xort:

Because the average daily carry owner spends more time training with it.

And skill is a function of training, ability, and practice. All the instructional training in the world means nothing if you can't practice or have no physical aptitude for something.

Unless you're Inspector Clouseau and you've enlisted Cato to jump out of your refrigerator when you aren't expecting it, your gun training means exactly FUCK ALL when someone else pulls one on you. You'll shit your pants just the same, no matter how many hours you've frittered away on the range.