Unintended Consequences
Pro-Handgun Experts Prove That Handguns Are a Dangerous Choice for
Self-Defense
Chapter Three: Paper Targets Don't Shoot Back and Have No Right to
Live
It is difficult
to shoot a handgun accurately, even under the most tranquil of circumstances.
"The handgun is the most difficult firearm to shoot accurately and rapidly;
skill comes only with practice," according to Massad Ayoob.80 But many
handgun owners don't practice at all. The result is predictably low
marksmanship, according to handgun defense expert Duane Thomas:
Most cops and
civilian gun carriers are lousy handgun shots. The level of
ineptitude of many people who carry guns on a daily basis is nothing
short of appalling.81
The relative few
who do practice with their handguns typically shoot at paper targets.
Sometimes they practice on targets of human silhouettes, some of which
feature scowling faces and threatening postures. Handgun enthusiasts
who make a sport of target practice may achieve some skill at punching
holes in paper targets.
Paper targets, however,
do not act anything like real assailants. They don't lunge out of darkness,
arrive in groups, jump around, hide behind cover, or attempt to take
the victim's gun away. Most of all, paper targets don't shoot back.m
They therefore do not evoke the heart-pounding fright which normal human
beings inevitably feel under circumstances that legally justify
the use of deadly force in self-defense. (The physiological and psychological
effects of mortal fear and their impact on the gunfighter are discussed
in detail in the next chapter.) This chapter examines expert views on
the differences between punching holes in paper targets and exchanging
shots in real gun fights.
Handguns are Not Magic Amulets
Gun industry advertisements
make handguns seem like magic amulets that ward off evil forces just
by their presence. Buy one of these, they imply without elaboration,
and you'll be able to protect yourself. Massad Ayoob describes the mentality
of some handgun owners who buy into this myth as follows:
"OK, I've got
the gun, now I'm safe, but, God, I'll never have to shoot anybody."
You know, "I'll just have it to be safe," right, like somehow the
gun will project an aura that will save me.82
The experts are
well aware that there is no such "aura," and that real life is much
different than the fantasies of gun-industry marketing and most handgun
owners.
No Quick Surrenders.
Fictional drama has convinced some gun owners that they will probably
never have to shoot anyone because the bad guy will surrender. Noting
that the average American "has never witnessed—probably never even read
a complete, official report of—a real, armed confrontation," Ayoob contrasts
the typical television scenario that dangerously influences a gun owner's
plan with the inconveniences of real life:
On TV, the one
who has the drop on his opponent yells "Hold it right there," and
the gunman freezes, then slowly opens his hand to let his weapon fall.
But in real life, the criminal does not freeze at the unexpected challenge....
If you analyze
a number of official police reports of confrontations with armed criminals,
you will reach the inescapable conclusion that sudden and violent
resistance is, statistically, a much more likely response than surrender.83
Small, Deadly
Business. Homeowners are not alone in the widespread delusion that
having a handgun around makes them safer. Many proprietors of small
retail establishments have also armed themselves with handguns. Ayoob
notes that many retailers who have done so "are dangerously unfamiliar
with firearms," adding:
The average manager
or storeowner who keeps one or more guns on the premises has probably
acquired them with a vague view toward "self-defense" and "security."84
Such "vague" thinking
often leads to predictably tragic results. Using a handgun safely and
effectively involves much more than just taking it out of the box and
waving it around. The following story related by handgun defense expert
Bill Clede makes this point precisely:
In Tucson, Arizona,
in 1992 Daniel Bennett was working in his pizzeria when two armed
men entered and shot him in the chest. He drew his newly acquired
Glock and returned fire, but the gun failed to function after the
first round, and the attackers fired five more shots into him. Bennett
sued the gun manufacturer....
At the trial,
it was revealed that Bennett had bought the gun and a box of ammo,
had learned to load the magazine, had put it into the pistol, and
had chambered a round. And that was it. He did have the presence of
mind to draw his gun in self-defense, but he had never learned
to shoot it! Apparently, he "limp-wristed" the self-loading pistol
so that it failed to chamber the second cartridge.n Gun writer Jeff
Smith calls this "the classic freshman flunk."85
Daniel Bennet survived.
But Austrian handgun maker Glock doesn't feature his story in its advertising—not
even as a cautionary footnote, even though the NRA's official magazine
warns: "In a personal-protection situation, one can't be sure of having
a firm, two-handed shooting-range grip, so a pistol's functioning from
a weak grip is an important point."86
It is impossible
to say how many other would-be defenders like Bennett have died or been
injured because they simply didn't know how to operate their handguns.o
But it is distressingly easy to find other examples of handgun "self-defense"
gone awry in small business settings.
In New Jersey, for
example, a record-store owner unintentionally shot his business partner
to death with a Glock .40 S&W pistol during a "training" exercise the
two men were reportedly staging, simulating a robbery in order to "prepare
themselves to fend off a real holdup."p The two had never been robbed
but had recently bought the two guns they were using during the simulation.87
In Tampa, a store clerk shot himself in the leg when he apparently knocked
the store gun off the counter and it discharged upon hitting the floor.88
In Philadelphia, a store owner killed an eight-year-old boy when he
fired at an armed robber, missed, and hit the boy instead.89 A jeweler
in Franklin Township, New Jersey, unintentionally shot and killed his
wife when he fired at a robber who had knocked her to the floor.90
The Trouble with
Pistols. Unfamiliarity is especially problematic for the novice
owner of the semiautomatic pistol. A revolver is a simple mechanism
that almost anyone can figure out intuitively how to work and generally
does not contain a safety. But some pistols require a preliminary movement—such
as moving a safety lever or racking the slide back to cock the hammer—before
they can be fired.q
This is not merely
a theoretical problem. Ayoob cites several instances in which he says
law-enforcement officers survived after resisting suspects took away
their pistols because the suspects could not figure out how to prepare
the pistols for firing. He also describes a Florida police department's
experiment measuring how long it took lay employees to figure out how
to fire a revolver and a pistol respectively at a paper target "officer."
Said Ayoob, "On the average, the testers were able to pick up the revolver
and ‘kill the officer' in 1.2 seconds. Their average time with the safety-locked
automatic was approximately 17 seconds."91 The additional 15.8 seconds
spent fumbling with the gun would be more than enough in the typical
gunfight to get the owner killed or seriously injured.
Innocent Bystanders
The "appalling ineptitude"
in marksmanship that gun expert Thomas described above is more than
an unfortunate handicap for handgun owners. It is a direct threat to
innocent bystanders in every shooting. Ayoob notes that "it is reasonable
to assume that there will be bystanders present" when a defense handgun
must be used in public:
Your competency
with the weapon you carry must be such that you will not fire an accidental
or panicky shot into a group of bystanders....
What frightens
me most about civilians with guns is that so many of them are incredibly
rotten pistol shots....
There are too
many people carrying guns they don't know how to shoot straight, guns
they haven't fired in ten years.92
Semiautomatic
Pistols Increase the Danger. Bad marksmanship is an especially serious
threat with high-capacity semiautomatic pistols. "Not only do shooters
armed with 9mms fire more rounds than those folks armed with other weapons,
they also fire more misses," according to expert Duane Thomas.
This, he says, "is extremely bad, as every miss is a wild shot that
potentially endangers the lives of innocent bystanders."93
Another expert agrees
that high-capacity pistols are a special problem because users of such
handguns use "‘spray and pray' tactics in real-world shootings. Without
a doubt, ‘spray and pray' is happening in police-involved shootings....it
can be said with certainty that high magazine capacity can cause as
many problems as solutions."94 Jim Williamson, roving editor of Gun
Week, adds, "The average cop now shoots more, but hits less. Marksmanship
has lost out to volume of fire, too often."95 (There is no reason whatever
to believe that civilian handgun owners are more disciplined in shooting
their semiautomatic pistols than are police, and much reason to believe
that they are less disciplined.)
Innocents Lost.
Innocent bystanders are a serious concern at all times, even putting
aside wild shots from poor marksmen and spray-and-pray shooters with
semiautomatic pistols. A well-trained and highly disciplined police
officer should automatically scan for bystanders, as Jim Cirillo describes:
During one of
my stakeout confrontations....When I came out of our position to confront
the robbers, a group of hotel guests appeared directly behind the
gunmen. I did not dare fire with innocents in the background.96
Unfortunately, the
real world is often not so cautious. Even trained police officers unintentionally
shoot innocent bystanders. For example, in New York City a police officer
who shot at a man with a knife missed and hit a bystander on a bicycle.97
In the same city, 21 innocent bystanders were hit by police bullets
fired during 1995 and 1996.98 In North Carolina, a police officer unintentionally
shot an 11-year-old boy in the leg while shooting at a pack of wild
dogs. The boy was half a mile away at a water fountain near a baseball
field.99 In similar incidents in Seattle,100 Oakland,101 and Ft. Lauderdale,102
police officers shooting at threatening dogs unintentionally shot fellow
officers. In a separate Seattle incident, police bullets fired in a
rush-hour shootout with suspected bank robbers struck an occupied car
but did not hit any of the passengers.103 In California, a bank employee
was unintentionally shot by a police officer searching for holdup men.104
If police make such
mistakes, what can be reasonably expected of the poorly trained civilian—or
the civilian with no training, such as Daniel Bennet, the pizzeria
owner from Arizona cited earlier. Contrasting the reactions of sworn
police officers and civilians in moments of extreme excitement, Ayoob
asserts, "Civilians, who generally don't carry guns eight hours a day
or receive several hours of justifiable force instruction, tend to be
awfully bloodthirsty."105
Putting aside blood
lust, does the civilian in a moment of extreme fear even see the innocent
bystander in the background, much less have the skill to avoid shooting
him? Bill Clede observes:
If you are using
a pistol for self-defense, you've already identified your target—but
what's behind that target? What if a lunatic is shooting at you while
standing in front of a crowded playground? Can you risk killing someone's
child?106
In addition, as
Chris Bird observes, those in danger may be blocks away from the action:
Imagine being
attacked by a mugger in front of the polished granite wall of a bank.
You fire three shots at your assailant. Two hit but the third strikes
the granite wall and ricochets, striking a woman standing half a block
away at a bus stop. Now, you almost certainly face a civil suit. If
your life was in danger, your decision to shoot was right. It's better
to be alive and facing a civil suit than dead and facing the undertaker.
But it is something to think about.107
It is certainly
"something to think about" for the unfortunate bystander who is hit
by a "stray" shot—especially if the shooter's life was not actually
in danger.
To Kill or Not to Kill?
In addition to deficiencies
in practical skill, many handgun owners have not thought through the
moral decision involved in shooting another human being. "To win a gunfight,"
advises expert Bird, "you need to be more than able to shoot your attacker:
you must be willing. If you do not believe you can kill another human
being, you have no business carrying a gun."108
Fatal Procrastination.
Failure to come to terms in advance with this threshold question is
likely to be a fatal procrastination. According to Ayoob, "the thing
that kills innocent people in gunfights is their own morally-inbred
hesitation to kill fellow beings."109
Surprise—the essence
of the deadly encounter—is an important factor in this issue. It is
too late to make up one's mind about this profound moral issue once
the encounter commences. "Police officers go into situations sensible
citizens avoid, and the officers are trained to be prepared. Nevertheless,
in 30 percent of some six thousand shooting incidents investigated by
the New York City police, the need to shoot came as a surprise to the
officers."110
Unlike police officers,
civilians are not required to pursue danger. Therefore, a higher percentage
of incidents in which the use of lethal force is justified by civilians
must by definition be cases of surprise. The police officer who learns
of potential danger cannot just walk away from it, but the civilian
who has advance notice of danger and time, space, or both in which to
find safety, can and must—with a few narrow exceptions—avert the possibility
of a deadly encounter.
Suppose the handgun
owner honestly believes escape is impossible and he has no alternative?
Then he is faced with the moral decision whether or not to kill. "Simply
stated, you must be willing to kill any man who would harm you or your
family," writes handgun defense expert Gabriel Suarez. "You must be
willing to offer greater violence for violence offered."111
The fact is, however,
that most people today "are extremely reluctant to harm another person,
even when that person has taken clearly overt hostile actions toward
them....Such a mind-set must be overcome if we want to live to tell
about it when we have to shoot for our lives."112 Author Bird offers this
advice as an aid to achieving the correct mind-set, incidentally illustrating
the moral character of the heavily armed society:
Another approach
that may help you to pull the trigger on another human being is to
dehumanize him. Think of your assailant as a target, rather than a
person possibly with a wife, a mother, children. When we go to war
with another nation, we try to dehumanize our enemy. We talked of
"Gooks" and "Japs" in an attempt to make killing them easier. It may
help you to pull the trigger if you look on your attackers as "trash"
or "peckerwoods" or "scumbags."113
Some people who
shrink from killing another human being believe they can escape the
dilemma by simply brandishing a firearm to deter a criminal attack.
Expert Ayoob dismisses this thought as inviting a fatal result for the
defender:
ANYONE who
really feels this way should abandon any thoughts of keeping guns.
A criminal can tell when a person isn't going to shoot, the way a
dog can smell fear. And to pull a gun you don't intend to use is to
flaunt a power you do not really command: you are inviting the opponent
to take it away from you, and antagonizing him to use it against you.114
Ignorance of the Law of Self-Defense and Lethal Force
The risk to innocent
life is further compounded by the palpable ignorance of most handgun
owners about the law of lethal force. This prompts them to display or
use handguns in inappropriate and often criminal ways. According to
expert Ayoob:
There is a remarkable
degree of confusion among the general public as to just when lethal
force is warranted. Other important concepts of degree of force in
defense situations not only aren't fully understood, but are often
completely unknown to some who legally go armed.115
Degree of Force.
Well-trained police officers use a spectrum of force available for potential
use in any encounter. This ranges from the simple authority of the officer's
physical presence in uniform, through verbal commands, martial skills,
various non-lethal weapons, such as batons and disabling sprays, to
the use of the firearm. The firearm, lethal force, is the last resort.
Part of the risk
of civilians armed with handguns is that much of this spectrum (such
as the civic authority invested in the officer) is not available to
civilians at all. Also, many civilians are not trained, or inclined,
to employ any degree of force other than the lethal degree of their
handgun:
If verbal force
is not effective, the citizen is not likely to know or be able to
use impact weapons or take-down techniques. Having no other options,
out comes the handgun and we arrive at deadly force. The obvious problem
is that the civilian permit holder is missing the whole middle of
the force continuum. He will basically jump from harsh language to
gunfire in one quick step.116
But making that
jump can land the handgun owner in criminal court unless he is on solid
ground under the law of self-defense.
The Ideal World
of the Law. Most self-defense experts agree that the armed citizen
has a duty to know the law:
All fifty states
and many branches of the federal government have their own laws and
interpretations on the use of force....when you decide to carry
a gun, you become responsible for familiarizing yourself with the
laws of your state.117
In their writings
Ayoob and Clede repeatedly state how narrow the right to kill in self-defense
is in all states:
- American laws
universally condone homicide ONLY WHEN UNDERTAKEN TO ESCAPE IMMINENT
AND UNAVOIDABLE DANGER OF DEATH OR GRAVE BODILY HARM.118
- Whether you're
at home or on the street, you shoot to stop a felonious assault only
if the attacker may cause death or grievous bodily injury to you or
a family member. Your actions will be judged later by police and
possibly in a courtroom. You must be able to explain your behavior.
The fact that you were frightened does not mean that you were
actually threatened and does not legally justify shooting.119
- All courts will
hold, by statute or by logic, that "bare fear" does not warrant deadly
force. While the attacker need not actually be about to kill or
maim you, or another party you are justified to protect, you must
have sound reason to believe he is before you pull the trigger.120
- For instance,
an individual walks past a group of tough-looking persons on a street
corner. One of them, perhaps, makes a snotty remark. "Oh, my God,
they're going to get me," panics the individual, going for
his gun. He is at this moment in the grip of bare fear—a morbid fantasy
without basis in fact, on the grounds of which he is about to wrongly
employ lethal force.121
- A cornerstone
of a legitimate claim of self-defense is the innocence of the claimant.
He must be entirely without fault. If he has begun the conflict or
quarrel, or if he has kept it going or escalated it when it lay in
his power to abort it before it became a killing situation, he shares
a degree of culpability. The self-defense plea, in this case, will
not be allowed.122
- Nor is the armed
citizen altogether free to intervene with deadly force in an assault
involving others. For instance, he cannot always tell who is the guilty
party, and who is the victim: what if the latter has managed to overpower
his assailant at the moment the potential rescuer comes on the scene?123
These rules define
an extraordinary set of circumstances—essentially reasonably induced
mortal fear—under which resort to the handgun will be justified. But
how widely understood and applied are these rules in real life?
The Real World
of Handgun Ownership. According to the experts, most handgun owners
think more in terms of "B" grade Western movies than the law as it is.
For example, Ayoob writes, "It is a widespread and dangerous misconception
that all criminals are fair game for the bullets of good guys."124
In addition to wilful
indifference, another reason for the general ignorance of handgun owners
may be the reluctance of many police agencies, and even the National
Rifle Association, to take the responsibility of teaching civilians
when it is okay to kill other civilians. A Nevada trainer certified
by the NRA described the problem in The Police Marksman magazine:
Then there is
that pesky liability problem of the police teaching people when and
how to shoot, and then being held responsible for errors of omission
and commission....
Due no doubt to
the aforementioned liability considerations, the NRA does not allow
their instructors to teach the "when to shoot" portion of this class.
Instead, they require that a guest lecturer, who must be an attorney
or law enforcement officer, handle this area.125
The Problem of
"Brandishing." Pro-gun advocate John Lott often promotes the idea
that merely "brandishing" a handgun is an effective form of self-defense
that averts the possibility of any harm. He claims to have found that
"98 percent of the time that people use guns defensively, they merely
have to brandish a weapon to break off an attack."126 Putting aside the
fact that an independent analysis of Lott's claim—published in the official
newsletter of the American Society of Criminology—has found the source
for this claim to be mysteriously non-existent,127 gun experts dismiss
the idea of brandishing as a dangerously bad idea.
Here, for example,
is what the "personal security" expert for Guns & Ammo magazine
recently wrote about the idea (similar to the advice of expert Ayoob
quoted earlier):
As many a policeman
has found out, there are a lot of thugs running around who are all
too comfortable with approaching while a weapon is pointed at them
saying, "Go ahead, shoot. You know you can't." And they're
right....
I am always surprised
at the lack of understanding of violent confrontations displayed by
so many "experts" who offer advice. Brandishing a firearm, for example,
is a crime in most states. True enough, it can bring a violent encounter
to an end. Or it can escalate it to a deadly force situation....And
if it was reasonable to brandish a firearm, wouldn't it have been
reasonable to use a less lethal weapon if one was at hand, such as
an aerosol irritant?128
In addition, as
is so sadly often the case, "merely" brandishing a handgun is likely
to lead to tragically unintended consequences. In Huntington Beach,
California, for example, a 77-year-old man unintentionally shot and
killed his wife when he tried waving his gun from his car at the occupants
of another vehicle whom he thought had threatened him.129
Firing Ranges are Not Real Gunfights
Even assuming that
the handgun owner is conscientious enough to learn how to load and fire
his gun, has visited a shooting range to develop some skill, and knows
the basic legal constraints, his handgun is still far from an effective
defense. Because, as the experts warn, "shooting on the target range
and shooting under duress are not the same. You may be able to hit the
target with every shot at practice, but when you're threatened" everything
is turned on its head.130 Survival demands much different and well-honed
skills:
At this very moment
in the United States, there are probably thousands of police officers
on duty who hold their department's rating of expert in firearms.
These same police officers are riding or foot patrolling their areas
with total confidence that they will be able to handle any threat
that comes their way....Civilians who have carry permits and attend
approved handgun firearms courses may also feel that they can handle
any armed threat that may arise. Their confidence comes from the instructor's
certificate of qualification.
If the above training
is all the police officer or the pistol licensee is relying on to
protect him, then God forbid that he should ever get into a gunfight.
If he does get in one and luckily survives, the difference between
what he learned in formal firearms training and what he experienced
during the real thing will be a revelation to him.131
The "Firing-Range
Mind-Set." Expert Chuck Taylor cautions against the "firing-range
mind-set—the creation of tactics and techniques that work only under
controlled conditions....A handgun fight does not take place
under such conditions."132 He warns that this mind-set "can get you killed
in a hurry when the bullets fly."133
Real-Life Differences.
Experts on the use of handguns for self-defense reel off a number of
real-life factors for which range shooting does not prepare the handgun
owner:
- The Physical
Environment. One obvious difference is that shooting ranges optimize
lighting and view. The handgun owner, however, has no control over
the environmental conditions under which he may perceive the need
to use his gun. The experience of police officers in real shootouts
shows that "light conditions are often too poor to allow using the
sights. Officers normally practice and qualify on well-lit ranges
that allow full use of sights. Conditions on the street are rarely
as favorable as range conditions."134 Poor lighting and confusing situations
in real life increase the risk that the gun owner will make an error
in judgment and harm an innocent person, or be harmed himself because
he cannot use his handgun effectively. The range of potential environmental
differences from a shooting range is enormous, from a dark bedroom
to a rainy street corner or a bitter cold evening when the gun owner
is wearing bulky gloves.
- Physiological
Stress. Mortal fear does not accompany shooting at paper targets.
But in a life or death situation "your heart thuds in your chest and
your breathing accelerates and you have to react rapidly."135 This fear
seriously affects one's shooting ability. "The real world of combat
means a highly stressful event in which a very small percentage of
bullets fired even strike the target."136 Even well-trained police officers
who are taught to expect such stress reactions miss their targets
many more times than they hit them.
- Assailant
Movements. A handgun owner may be quite proud of the hits he has
scored in the "kill zone" on stationary paper targets. But, as many
police officers have learned, assailants don't stand still waiting
to be shot. "What a revelation. I was never so terrified in my whole
life. They never told me in the academy that the targets were going
to jump and move all over the place. There wasn't one 3' by 2' target
to shoot at like on the police range."137
- Unexpected
Assailant Reaction. More often than not, in the movies and on
television, people who are "shot" simply fall down and stay down.
End of fight. In real life, the opposite is often true, especially
if the assailant is on alcohol or drugs. They either don't fall down,
or they get back up and keep coming. "We can presume that in half
of the police-involved shootings, the felon will not lay down and
be cooperative instantly. In fact, many shooting reports included
information to suggest that the felon showed no indication that he
had been hit....Hitting such a moving target with a handgun, under
extreme stress, is not easy."138
- Ambiguous
Situations. There is no doubt about whether to shoot the targets
at a shooting range—they are there as surrogate bad guys. But many
real-life situations are ambiguous: is the "assailant" really a threat?
Is the threat deadly enough to justify the use of lethal force? From
his own experience, seasoned New York City police officer and author
Jim Cirillo notes: "Many times, situations looked like armed robberies
but turned out to be innocent. At such times, a man with no compassion
might shoot when he shouldn't, or he might not consider bystanders
during his moment of danger."139
- Disarmament
Moves. Is the civilian gun owner prepared when the assailant attempts
to disarm him, or simply shoots anyway? Is he aware that some criminals
learn specific procedures to do just that? Probably not. But being
suddenly disarmed or outgunned is a threat in the real world. "There
are many instances where the suspect has drawn a weapon and killed
an officer after the officer pointed his weapon and issued the proper
challenge. The suspect just plain beat the officer....The Aryan Brotherhood
prison gang, along with the Hell's Angels outlaw motorcycle gang,
have developed a technique to disarm an officer from a distance of
21 feet. It works in conjunction with an officer's natural lag time."140
Training for
Real Life. The point is not that it is impossible to train
effectively for defensive use of a handgun in real life, but that at
a minimum "training to survive a deadly force encounter...takes knowledge,
commitment, and lots of practice."141r The better police agencies try to
do so—
Most police officers
are bright, highly motivated individuals with good athletic ability
who can easily acquire knowledge and motor skills for firearms and
defensive tactics training. But this is not enough. They must be able
to automatically choose the right combination of skills under extreme
stress and a high arousal state....
[Y]ou want to
practice deadly force training that instills fear and forces you to
make fast choices in response to a rapidly changing situation.142
Only a decidedly
tiny minority of people who acquire handguns for self-defense seek
out and complete this kind of committed training and continued practice
to ensure not only their own safety, but also that they are not a danger
to innocent people when they perceive the need to use their gun.
"You owe it to yourself, and to the innocent people around you, to be
able to deliver your self-defensive gunfire into the vital organs of
the criminal who gravely threatens you and nowhere else," says Ayoob.
"A man who can't control the deadly force of his gun adds to the general
jeopardy."143
Where to Learn?
A threshold problem
for the handgun owner who wants effective training is finding a place
to get it. "You'll find many local clubs that teach target shooting,
but fewer that teach practical shooting," writes one expert.144 Moreover,
warns another, "No formal or informal firearms course I ever attended
came close to teaching me how to survive a real gunfight. In fact, some
courses teach you to do things that may endanger you."145
The reference to
dangerous teaching is to so-called "practical pistol" shooting, which
experts like Chuck Taylor and others warn has become a ritualized sport
that encourages practices that are actually dangerous in real life:
...virtually everything
about even so-called "practical" (really a synonym for "combat") competition
reflects a lack of knowledge of what the combat handgun is about and
the nature of the environment in which its [sic] used....
Many observers
of "practical" competition comment that there is little about it that
is truly practical. In fact, the more astute among them go so far
as to make the observation that what they see in such events is suicidal
if attempted in an actual gunfight.146
What to Learn?
Assuming that the handgun owner is able to find a course that won't
teach him "suicidal" techniques, what should he learn? The experts warn:
"Under the high-arousal states dictated by the natural fear response,
you will usually give little or no conscious thought to your actions.
Your body has been programmed by Mother Nature to go into autopilot
mode, and you respond automatically based on all your training and past
experiences."147 A person who has neither training nor experience obviously
will have no basis on which to react safely and effectively to a life-threatening
incident.
The experts generally
agree that one must acquire such a level of skill that one's reactions
become virtually automatic, even under the extraordinary "high-arousal"
physiological challenges alluded to above and described in detail in
the next chapter. A reviewer for Gun World states that "the true
mission of the handgun...is to provide reactive defense capability against
unexpected attack at close quarters."148 Here is one expert's description
of the rigor that is required to achieve a level of "reactive" skill
that is useful in the unexpected attacks of real life:
Before you can
fire your new handgun reactively, you must learn to shoot it
on purpose. Note I did not say instinctively. You may have
a natural talent for shooting, but the psychomotor skill of shooting
(and hitting the target) is not instinctive. The muscular movement
and the eye-hand coordination require practice. Even more practice
is necessary to make this skill reactive—something you can do virtually
without thinking about it. Instructors' estimates vary, but they generally
concur that this takes between two thousand and four thousand repetitions.149
The Bottom Line
of "Bullet Placement." The necessary skills involved are much more
than simply pointing a handgun and pulling the trigger, because real
assailants don't stand still and present passive expanses of space like
paper targets. This means that, in real-life encounters: "Bullet placement
is the key to stopping a felonious assault."150 In order for a handgun
to be an effective self-defense weapon, the owner must be able to hit
a small, moving target, quite possibly while he is also moving, seeking
cover. "Police weapons training should always include movement; learn
to shoot while moving. Whenever possible, you should practice with a
moving target and a moving shooter."151
The actual experience
of seasoned police officers illustrates how extraordinarily difficult
this real-life shooting challenge is for the typically untrained or
poorly trained civilian handgun owner. Former NYPD officer Jim Cirillo,
for example, reports that "in many confrontations, I was only offered
head shots—the gunmen who did not give up when challenged generally
ducked for cover, leaving only their heads or a portion of their heads
for a target."152 The difficulty of hitting such a target is underscored
by Ayoob, who writes "the head is a small, bobbing target, difficult
to hit even on stationary silhouette targets. Facing a living human
being, it becomes close to impossible."153
Several experts
discuss problems beyond the fact that the target is small and likely
moving that make head shots "totally unpredictable."154 For one thing,
it is not unusual for bullets to glance off of the hard human skull.
So, as expert Duane Thomas describes, accuracy becomes even more important
and even more difficult:
In order to make
a "head shot" work, you'd have to slip a bullet through the eye sockets
or the nasal septum. On a full-grown man, this is a target area approximately
two inches high by four inches wide. In the real world, under stress,
in bad lighting, with both you and your opponent moving (all of which
are possible, if not probable), making that sort of shot is going
to be very difficult. It will require a higher degree of shooting
skill than most people possess. It's not that shots like this can't
be made, it's just that most people can't shoot well enough under
stress to count on the head shot as a reliable stopper.155
But, even if the
assailant does not present such a limited target: "The only part of
the body certain to produce an instant stop is the central nervous system,"
advises another expert. "Hitting such a moving target with a handgun,
under extreme stress, is not easy."156
Keeping Up Skill
Level. The handgun owner who finds the right place to learn and
diligently applies himself must continue to practice because, experts
warn, proficiency with firearms is a perishable skill.157 "If you used
to ride a bicycle everywhere but you haven't been on one for years,
you don't expect to hop on a bike and be as sharp as you were as a kid.
The same is true of shooting and of any other motor skill."158
m) Many
law enforcement agencies train their officers under circumstances where
the bad guys do shoot back. They use, among other things, paint
ball guns and simulated ammunition rounds that sting but do not seriously
wound, and interactive simulators that present "shoot-don't shoot" situations
in which the officer not only has to avoid shooting innocent persons,
but avoid getting "shot" himself.
n) Most semiautomatic
pistols use recoil energy to drive a slide back against a spring. During
its rearward travel, the slide ejects the spent shell casing. When the
recoil energy is sufficiently spent, the spring drives the slide forward,
and the slide picks up and chambers a new round. "If the shooter fails
to take a firm grip on the pistol, the slide may fail to recoil fully,
causing failures to eject or feed," ("‘Limp-Wristing' Pistols," American
Rifleman, August 1997, 22).
o) Detailed national
incident data is routinely collected about deaths and injuries caused
by many consumer products, such as motor vehicles, and is widely available
for researchers analyzing causes and safety measures. But no comprehensive
database exists in relation to gunshot deaths and injuries. This is
largely because of the opposition of the National Rifle Association
and other members of the gun lobby.
p) In a curiously
similar incident, an Ohio police officer shot and seriously wounded
a fellow officer while they were "practicing for a role-playing training
session." The two, using real but theoretically "unloaded" Glock pistols,
overlooked a round in the chamber of one of the guns, (Lisa Perry, "Officer
Indicted for Shooting," Dayton Daily News, 27 January 1998, p.
5B).
q) This does not
imply that semiautomatic pistols are any safer around children, for
example, who discover their hiding place in the home. Unlike a novice
and operationally ignorant owner suddenly thrust into a self-defense
situation, children have more time to play around with the pistol's
mechanism. In addition, a pistol's trigger resistance is lighter than
that of a revolver, so it is actually easier for younger children to
pull and fire the gun. "Let it be repeated: no gun is childproof.
No matter how many levers and buttons it has, the child will eventually
figure out the combination." Massad F. Ayoob, In the Gravest Extreme:
The Role of the Firearm in Personal Protection (Massad F. and Dorothy
A. Ayoob, 1980), 124-125.
r) The fact that
even trained law enforcement officers suffer their share of unintentional
shootings of both civilians and officers underscores the perilous nature
of any armed encounter.
Back
to Table of Contents
All contents © 2001 Violence Policy Center
The Violence Policy Center is a national non-profit educational foundation
that conducts research on violence in America and works to develop violence-reduction
policies and proposals. The Center examines the role of firearms in America,
conducts research on firearms violence, and explores new ways to decrease
firearm-related death and injury. |