Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
PSA
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 3/11/2010 9:52:27 AM EDT
Or have I NOT seen something posted here that discussed the shooting accuracy of CCL holders vs police officers?

Link Posted: 3/11/2010 9:55:18 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/11/2010 9:55:41 AM EDT by mjohn3006]
So the choice is:

A) You're crazy
B) You have not seen something posted here that discussed the shooting accuracy of CCL holders vs police officers

Since I do not know what you may or may not have seen, I am going with A.


IBTP
Link Posted: 3/11/2010 9:55:55 AM EDT



Originally Posted By OnlineAllTheTime:


Or have I NOT seen something posted here that discussed the shooting accuracy of CCL holders vs police officers?





Get both. I'll find it.



 
Link Posted: 3/11/2010 9:56:28 AM EDT
Yes, you are crazy.
Link Posted: 3/11/2010 9:56:41 AM EDT
Originally Posted By mjohn3006:
So the choice is:

A) You're crazy
B) You have not seen something posted here that discussed the shooting accuracy of CCL holders vs police officers

Since I do not know what you may or may not have seen, I am going with A.


IBTP


I can respect that.  
Link Posted: 3/11/2010 9:57:09 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Skillshot:

Originally Posted By OnlineAllTheTime:
Or have I NOT seen something posted here that discussed the shooting accuracy of CCL holders vs police officers?


Get both. I'll find it.
 


Link Posted: 3/11/2010 9:57:47 AM EDT
Knew I shouldn't have worded it that way.  
Link Posted: 3/11/2010 9:58:57 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/11/2010 9:59:16 AM EDT by mjohn3006]
Originally Posted By OnlineAllTheTime:
Originally Posted By mjohn3006:
So the choice is:

A) You're crazy
B) You have not seen something posted here that discussed the shooting accuracy of CCL holders vs police officers

Since I do not know what you may or may not have seen, I am going with A.


IBTP


I can respect that.  


Also. I had to do this.
Do with it what you will.

Link Posted: 3/11/2010 10:03:40 AM EDT
Originally Posted By mjohn3006:
Originally Posted By OnlineAllTheTime:
Originally Posted By mjohn3006:
So the choice is:

A) You're crazy
B) You have not seen something posted here that discussed the shooting accuracy of CCL holders vs police officers

Since I do not know what you may or may not have seen, I am going with A.


IBTP


I can respect that.  


Also. I had to do this.
Do with it what you will.

http://nullbits.foxxz.net/albums/Icons/NOOOOOOOOOOOO.jpg


Yeah, I've had to explain before that the name is one I took before I ever joined here.  It doesn't technically say "OnlineAtAR15AllTheTime" does it?  



Link Posted: 3/11/2010 10:06:37 AM EDT
One article is "Gun Control and the Subway Class," Wall Street Journal, Jan. 10, 1985" but I can't find it published online.

Link Posted: 3/11/2010 10:09:08 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/11/2010 10:10:18 AM EDT by AJ_Dual]
Originally Posted By OnlineAllTheTime:
Am I crazy?


Are you a woman?



No, just kidding... But yes, IIRC, it's something like CCW'ers > Crooks > Cops... in terms of shots/hits ratio.

I'm looking for the cite too.
Link Posted: 3/11/2010 10:10:47 AM EDT



Originally Posted By mjohn3006:



Originally Posted By OnlineAllTheTime:


Originally Posted By mjohn3006:

So the choice is:



A) You're crazy

B) You have not seen something posted here that discussed the shooting accuracy of CCL holders vs police officers



Since I do not know what you may or may not have seen, I am going with A.





IBTP




I can respect that.  




Also. I had to do this.


Do with it what you will.



http://nullbits.foxxz.net/albums/Icons/NOOOOOOOOOOOO.jpg


He's probably from East Texas which doesn't really count.



 
Link Posted: 3/11/2010 10:12:24 AM EDT
Originally Posted By bcw107:

Originally Posted By mjohn3006:
Originally Posted By OnlineAllTheTime:
Originally Posted By mjohn3006:
So the choice is:

A) You're crazy
B) You have not seen something posted here that discussed the shooting accuracy of CCL holders vs police officers

Since I do not know what you may or may not have seen, I am going with A.


IBTP


I can respect that.  


Also. I had to do this.
Do with it what you will.

http://nullbits.foxxz.net/albums/Icons/NOOOOOOOOOOOO.jpg

He's probably from East Texas which doesn't really count.
 



You telling me you looked at that close-up and still think I'm a *he?*  Hmmmmm.......

But yes.....SE TX.  
Link Posted: 3/11/2010 10:13:49 AM EDT
Oh, and thanks for looking!  I thought maybe it was in the 2.5 million Defensive Gun Uses per year article but skimmed over it and didn't see it.  Maybe I missed it.  I'll go recheck and pay more attention.
Link Posted: 3/11/2010 10:15:57 AM EDT
All I know is that if you dont like Boondock Saints, your thoughts and opinions dont matter.

Link Posted: 3/11/2010 10:17:30 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Kalahnikid:
All I know is that if you dont like Boondock Saints, your thoughts and opinions dont matter.



Add to that the fact that I'm a woman and I'm surprised I'm allowed on the site at all!

Link Posted: 3/11/2010 10:18:51 AM EDT
Originally Posted By OnlineAllTheTime:
Originally Posted By Kalahnikid:
All I know is that if you dont like Boondock Saints, your thoughts and opinions dont matter.



Add to that the fact that I'm a woman and I'm surprised I'm allowed on the site at all!



Well thats just ridiculous, I love women!
Link Posted: 3/11/2010 10:19:02 AM EDT
I found this in the Kleck article I mentioned:  Low as it is, even an 8% wounding rate is probably too high, both because of the censoring of less serious cases, which in this context would be cases without a wounding, and because the survey did not establish how Rs knew they had wounded someone. We suspect that in incidents where the offender left without being captured, some Rs remembered with favor" their marksmanship and assumed they had hit their adversaries. If 8.3% really hit their adversaries, and a total of 15.6% fired at their adversaries, this would imply a 53% (8.3/15.6) "incident hit rate," a level of combat marksmanship far exceeding that typically observed even among police officers. In a review of fifteen reports, police officers inflicted at least one gunshot wound on at least one adversary in 37% of the incidents in which they intentionally fired at someone.[78] A 53% hit rate would also be triple the 18% hit rate of criminals shooting at crime victims.[79] Therefore, we believe that even the rather modest 8.3% wounding rate we found is probably too high, and that typical DGUs are less serious or dramatic in their consequences than our data suggest. In any case, the 8.3% figure was produced by just seventeen sample cases in which Rs reported that they wounded an offender.

but it doesn't help debate-wise because it's all survey answers of gun owners.  I was hoping for something more concrete.
Link Posted: 3/11/2010 10:19:30 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Kalahnikid:
Originally Posted By OnlineAllTheTime:
Originally Posted By Kalahnikid:
All I know is that if you dont like Boondock Saints, your thoughts and opinions dont matter.



Add to that the fact that I'm a woman and I'm surprised I'm allowed on the site at all!



Well thats just ridiculous, I love women!


Just not ones who hate Boondock Saints?  
Link Posted: 3/11/2010 10:22:30 AM EDT



Originally Posted By OnlineAllTheTime:



Originally Posted By bcw107:




Originally Posted By mjohn3006:


Originally Posted By OnlineAllTheTime:


Originally Posted By mjohn3006:

So the choice is:



A) You're crazy

B) You have not seen something posted here that discussed the shooting accuracy of CCL holders vs police officers



Since I do not know what you may or may not have seen, I am going with A.





IBTP




I can respect that.  




Also. I had to do this.


Do with it what you will.



http://nullbits.foxxz.net/albums/Icons/NOOOOOOOOOOOO.jpg


He's probably from East Texas which doesn't really count.

 






You telling me you looked at that close-up and still think I'm a *he?*  Hmmmmm.......




But yes.....SE TX.  




I make no assumptions of gender on the internet.  



I keep hoping one day Femgungirl will turn out to be some 400 pound Samoan dude posting from a minimum security prison somewhere, just to laugh at the anguish of the leg humpers.  



As for your location: He shoots!  He SCORES!  




 
Link Posted: 3/11/2010 10:22:39 AM EDT



Originally Posted By OnlineAllTheTime:


Oh, and thanks for looking!  I thought maybe it was in the 2.5 million Defensive Gun Uses per year article but skimmed over it and didn't see it.  Maybe I missed it.  I'll go recheck and pay more attention.


Here's a web page with statistics from some of Donald Kates' books, but it is from 1985.



http://www.skepticfiles.org/ezine/firearms.htm



 
Link Posted: 3/11/2010 10:26:50 AM EDT
A does not preclude B.
Top Top