Guns...

[NCRAVEN]

im aware, but i made two claims and to clarify, owning an AR is another issue outside magazine size and using handgun statistics vs an AR are going to be wildly inaccurate.

I gotcha, but he was talking about 10 period. There wouldn't be a need to talk about 10 or less in a gun that you were going to ban, ya mean?

I do agree with that, but realistically i dont see you shooting a moving target from a large distance in real life but i can see how theres other factors in that scenario. typically when your lifes on the line your abilities increase, not decrease though. Tunnel vision is actually "extreme focus" in the case of a shooter, youd be focused only on him, so it can be a negative, but also a positive. athletes define it as a positive thing all the time.

Normally, yes. Maybe it was just the way the instructor chose to describe it, but not in this case. In a fight or flight situation it was more of a hindrance than a benefit.

If your abilities increase when your life is in danger why do cops hit ratio drop?

I hope this is because you realized i was quoting your own statistics (11% vs 26%). ;)

Yeah, I thought you were saying it's better than that...

I mean that makes sense, im not really arguing that it would take more bullets in any scenario in real life than practice. much like practicing a jump shot in basketball vs game time situation. I just dont think its ignorance to say 10 is enough.

In his case it was.

maybe that depends on how one or more importantly when one plans to use the weapon. i think the last line you quoted is probably enough on the topic "there is no reliable data on hit ratio". because right below that it says..
depends on situation more than anything and where somebody may pull and have a less likely hit ratio, another may run. with cops it another story because its not really about them.

It actually say no reliable "national" data. I would guess, maybe I wrong that the 26% is the total regardless of the scenario. The 30% when not being shot vs the 18 when being shot it would seem to suggest that.

ultimately this is a debate for nothing because although I personally may not see the point in large magazines, i dont think they should limit them either. Again, im more concerned with who gets them and laws of that nature and probably more importantly enforcing the ones we have than limitations on guns or ammo.

I don't disagree with much here, other than of course the means in which you've mentioned making sure people are okay to own or carry a gun, but we've been there done that. THe issue with magazine size if discussed make sense. If there are 2 people mugging me or breaking into my house and I have say... 6 shots. If I miss each once, I now have 4, if I hit both off target (very likely in a stressful situation, they can still come at me, which means I now have to stop and reload, increasing the chance they win, not the desirable outcome.

Read up on the 21ft rule and how the only real way to stop someone without them getting to you inside 21ft is to shoot them in a 2 inch area above and below the eyes. If' I don't do that, I need more bullets.

Check this out.

which reminded me of a story I just heard talking to my police buddy the other day about a guy they took a gun away from who tried to buy a gun a few weeks before and got stopped because of a mental issue in his past. went to another place and got a gun anyway. not exactly sure of the details entirely but it sounded like one place did it by the book and another, not so much. perfect example of just enforcing laws we have saving lives or potential disasters.

:word