# Research: Untrained gun users prove ineffective at self defense



## BackyardCowboy (Aug 27, 2014)

Research: Untrained gun users prove ineffective at self defense


----------



## tony pasley (May 6, 2006)

Surprise, untrained drivers cause more wrecks, untrained doctors kill more patients, so on and so on.


----------



## BackyardCowboy (Aug 27, 2014)

Yeah, but the article is not calling for gun control measures, just points out need for 'users' to get and keep up with some good training.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

The vast majority of those that carry, either openly or concealed, just don't train and/or practice nearly enough. Ammo is expensive and proper education classes are even more so, as well as being time consuming.


----------



## tony pasley (May 6, 2006)

I was not in any way suggesting any government involvement but people should want to learn as much as they can about using their handgun so they can actually defend themselves.


----------



## joepeat (Jul 8, 2015)

-- From the article said:


> "It's easy to say you would rather be tried by 12 than carried by six, but taking a life is never easy," he said "There are mental aspects of it. It will change your life. Saying you can do it and doing it are two very different things."


I'm reminded of this dialog in the motion picture "The Shootist" between John Wayne and Ron Howard:

Gillom Rogers: [Books is giving Gillom a shooting lesson] Mr. Books, How is it you've killed so many men? My spread wasn't much bigger than yours.
John Bernard Books: First of all, friend, there's no one up there shooting back at you. Second, I found most men aren't willing, they bat an eye, or draw a breath before they shoot. I won't.


----------



## Cait43 (Apr 4, 2013)

While the study has a valid point that training is an essential if falls short in its facts......

*"The recent investigation used 77 volunteers and had each of them participate in three scenarios - a carjacking, an armed robbery, and a case of suspected larceny.

People with firearms training performed better than those without it."*

77 is hardly a worthwhile number for an investigation......

They state *"untrained gun users prove ineffective at self defense."* Then make this statement:
*"Statistically, 77 percent of shots fired in self-defense situations will miss their targets, even when fired by trained gun-handlers."*

This statistic also applies to the bad guy.

FYI: they fail to mention that this 77% is from 6-21 feet.... They did not mention that at 0-6 feet they percentage drops to 57% misses(on both sides).... See the following link which is embedding in the above article:
https://concealedcarryconfidence.org/

It boils down to this investigation is designed to discourage the people from obtaining a firearm for self protection....

I vote for having a firearm(did training or not) out weighs not having a firearm.....


----------



## firstberetta92G (Jul 28, 2015)

while on the subject of training what about law enforcement agency's, some of the hit rate stats are outrageous. how often do they train? and that's who most ppl are going call


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

Regardless of training, and performance in practice events, when one is in a real save-your-life panic (yes, _panic_) everything you've learned goes out the window.
It is only those who have practiced so much, so thoroughly, and with the most variety of scenario, who can let their skill and "muscle memory" take over, go into "automatic pilot mode" while their mind spins and dithers, and make good, effective hits under severe pressure.

The person who straps on a gun without training or real practice, and who believes that shooting a pistol is easy (because that's how it looks in the movies), will inevitably miss, and come in second-best in a two-man gunfight.
The cop who attends only the mandatory training, and does barely-acceptably well in qualifications, will do just as poorly in a real-life gunfight as does the untrained civilian. Most cops are not "gun people," and do not shoot well.

I agree with the statements *Cait* quoted in his previous post. Even though the sample was small, the study's conclusions are spot-on.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> Regardless of training, and performance in practice events, when one is in a real save-your-life panic (yes, _panic_) everything you've learned goes out the window.
> It is only those who have practiced so much, so thoroughly, and with the most variety of scenario, who can let their skill and "muscle memory" take over, go into "automatic pilot mode" while their mind spins and dithers, and make good, effective hits under severe pressure.
> 
> The person who straps on a gun without training or real practice, and who believes that shooting a pistol is easy (because that's how it looks in the movies), will inevitably miss, and come in second-best in a two-man gunfight.
> ...


I called it "Being in the zone".

When that situation arises, your brain is flooded with incoming information, so much so, that it processes it all w/o you even being aware of it.

There were many times, when I found myself with my arms extended and my firearm in my right hand. No recall what-so-ever of having even thought about doing it.

Thank God for tons of training, years and years of experience, and muscle memory. :smt023


----------



## boatdoc173 (Mar 15, 2014)

BackyardCowboy said:


> Research: Untrained gun users prove ineffective at self defense


ya think? how much $$ was wasted to achieve this brilliant conclusion?--like car accidents mor e common when drivers have no clue how to drive(no education) DUH!


----------



## boatdoc173 (Mar 15, 2014)

Stevem1911a1-- you are right--per usual

too many sheeple think tV is real--one bullet kills a perp.... too bad for them


----------



## OldManMontgomery (Nov 2, 2013)

*Probably true; so what?*

The 'survey' is propaganda; probably primarily for the anti-gun crowd, but useful to the 'pay-me-I'll-train-you' faction. The thought sets up the claim that 'laws' are needed to make sure gun owners are "properly trained". With various fees going to the government (at some level) and the training being so difficult the government involved can 'allow' ownership and carrying of weapons without actually anyone being able to own or carry a weapon.

The reality is the typical burglar or mugger doesn't know or care who is 'trained' and who isn't. Criminals get paid by the job, not the hour AND criminals do not get paid for being run off or wounded. So the typical house breaker is not going to burglarize a building knowing there is an armed occupant. Too much risk for an unknown profit.

Nor does a street thug when confronted by an armed potential victim conduct an interview to determine the level of threat.

We all see people everyday who can drive an automobile with minimal ability. But they seem to get to the store or theater or wherever and back home routinely. (Yes, they do cause inconvenience for many of us, but usually not much actual danger.)

Yes. Everyone who owns a firearm of any type should be well versed in the safe and efficient operation of said weapon. Defensive weapons, perhaps even more so. However, claiming an 'untrained' person cannot usefully defend themselves is teetering on the brink of falsehood.


----------

