Interesting article on armed offenders

[libertarian]

Article originally from The Force Science Research Center.

Nothing groundbreaking, but some interesting points.

[swdr]

Several good quotes in the article.

Several of the offenders began regularly to carry weapons when they were 9 to 12 years old, although the average age was 17 when they first started packing "most of the time." Gang members especially started young.

Nearly 40% of the offenders had some type of formal firearms training, primarily from the military. More than 80% "regularly practiced with handguns, averaging 23 practice sessions a year," the study reports, usually in informal settings like trash dumps, rural woods, back yards and "street corners in known drug-trafficking areas."

One spoke of being motivated to improve his gun skills by his belief that officers "go to the range two, three times a week [and] practice arms so they can hit anything."

[hbliam]

Too bad the last part isn't true.

[Glock Holiday]

Is that to read anything except what their trying for

[hbliam]

Originally Posted by Glock Holiday

Is that to read anything except what their trying for

huh?

[Quietpi]

Very interesting, and it must be a warning to us all. Still, I have a healthy distrust of all such studies (not just involving firearms), in all settings, based on a lot of experience. Usually the flaws in the study turn out to be in the method for selecting subjects or incidents -- factors that inadvertently pre-filter who/what is included in the study.

My experience with BG's indicates that their level of training and knowledge of the weapons they use is incredibly poor. It's pretty predictable that they'll know the caliber. After that, all bets are off. Few know how to disassemble, let alone clean a weapon, and fewer still have ever done it. Practicing is viewed as a waste of ammunition. I continue to run into this idea of holding a weapon horizontally. Who on earth came up with that idea?

Still, with the exception of drive-bys, must shootings occur well within the danger zone, where "instinct shooting" proves to be good enough.

Still, the warnings this article provides are valid. That part I do not ignore.

[YankeeDog]

One further comment on studies and polls, they can be and sometimes are rigged. When you conduct a study, you need to have a neutral group as a base. Doing a study on CCWs in San Francisco, might be a bit off target unless you were anti-CCW. Secondly, watch the error factor in polls. When I took a graduate course in statistics, the one fact that remained embedded in my mind was the fact that a poll to be accurate should be + or - 3% or less. The higher the percent the more the poll could be thought of as a coincidence. Watching the tube and seeing polls that are + or - 5% are really bs.
my .02
:h

YankeeDog in Surf City

[Quietpi]

Yup! Statistics proved to be one of the most interesting and useful classes I took.

One of the textbooks, one I recommend to all, although it's been out of print for years, is by Huff: How to Lie with Statistics. One saying I learned in the class, oh so many years ago, has stuck with me: "Figures don't lie, but liars do figure."

[Dutchman]

When you take into account that the BG can often lie in wait for law enforcement, the odds are often on the side of the BG. I am amazed that there are not more law enforcement injuries and fatalities given the situations they encounter on a routine basis...eg traffic stops and domestic calls. This isn't even counting the drugies and the fact police are expected to follow policy and procedure and obey the letter of the law while their scumbag criminal counterparts are not encumbered by such trivial things like rules and laws. Also, BG's usually don't care if they hit an innocent person...most cops I know do care.

Statistically, the BG's had better look like better shooters on paper, because much of the time they inherently have the upper hand over law enforcement. The only thing I take from this article, whether you are law enforcement, or a John Q Public ccw holder, you need to train as much as possible. I just don't like the tone of the article in the sense that it paints a false picture of the gangsta thugs being better trained than law enforcement.

[YankeeDog]

I have had the privledge of a better view of LEO training than the average guy, and from my humble point-of-view, LEOs are far better trained and equipped than the BG. One LEO called the BG shooting "spray and pray".

another from
YankeeDog in Surf City

[cksh8me]

I'd say they have the oppertunity to be better trained but there are MANY that if they needed to shoot a house they better be inside it when they fire.