Tweet
Guns are used over 500,000 times a year in self defense situations. Its likely far north of that number.
Conclusions based on watching 200 some odd videos?
If the conclusions were valid one of the first things you do is lose the red dot, you're more likely to need a bomb shelter than a red dot.
The most important SD situations are the ones you'll never see on a video and no, watching those available is not better than nothing. When people watch these videos and then use them to formulate conclusions as was done here and its dangerous. Most of these videos are often narrated by just who? They tell, you listen, the seed for their interpretation is planted.
Lets take one of the conclusions and relate it to another:
"12. For some reason, people under stress don't shoot through concealment when the round would easily go through and hit the bad guy."
Absolutely amazing anyone would utter such a thing. There are plenty of reasons but that never comes up in the conclusion does it? The word concealment means what? Hidden from view right? Now for those carrying around periscopes, pay attention to #11 which states:
"11. Multiple attackers are common."
Now take #11 and # 12 and put them together. Anyone see the Obvious?
If you are concealed you aren't in a position to see everything you need to see without becoming unconcealed. Someone no doubt will say you might be able to see the BG. Ok, fine. Will you be able to see them all? Will you be able to see other people that might be moving and get in the way of your shot as you take it? Apparently there is this idea that someone moving can't move into the line of fire between the time you pull that trigger and the gun fires because no one ever gets shot that way, right? It can and does happen and not understanding that is the dangerous part.
You see, the conclusion was that if you can shoot through concealment its something you can and should do. Go ahead and read #12 again and see if that isn't the obvious conclusion, it's stated plainly.
How do you know the criteria used to select the videos, the totality of event and what the final result was?
and just so you know, it's not war and not everyone on the other side of concealment is the enemy. Yes, the conclusion was presented as a recommendation. The rest of the conclusions are just as dangerous if you think they represent anything other than entertainment of some kind.
Almost all the other conclusions are flawed as well.
.
Conclusions based on watching 200 some odd videos?
If the conclusions were valid one of the first things you do is lose the red dot, you're more likely to need a bomb shelter than a red dot.
The most important SD situations are the ones you'll never see on a video and no, watching those available is not better than nothing. When people watch these videos and then use them to formulate conclusions as was done here and its dangerous. Most of these videos are often narrated by just who? They tell, you listen, the seed for their interpretation is planted.
Lets take one of the conclusions and relate it to another:
"12. For some reason, people under stress don't shoot through concealment when the round would easily go through and hit the bad guy."
Absolutely amazing anyone would utter such a thing. There are plenty of reasons but that never comes up in the conclusion does it? The word concealment means what? Hidden from view right? Now for those carrying around periscopes, pay attention to #11 which states:
"11. Multiple attackers are common."
Now take #11 and # 12 and put them together. Anyone see the Obvious?
If you are concealed you aren't in a position to see everything you need to see without becoming unconcealed. Someone no doubt will say you might be able to see the BG. Ok, fine. Will you be able to see them all? Will you be able to see other people that might be moving and get in the way of your shot as you take it? Apparently there is this idea that someone moving can't move into the line of fire between the time you pull that trigger and the gun fires because no one ever gets shot that way, right? It can and does happen and not understanding that is the dangerous part.
You see, the conclusion was that if you can shoot through concealment its something you can and should do. Go ahead and read #12 again and see if that isn't the obvious conclusion, it's stated plainly.
How do you know the criteria used to select the videos, the totality of event and what the final result was?
and just so you know, it's not war and not everyone on the other side of concealment is the enemy. Yes, the conclusion was presented as a recommendation. The rest of the conclusions are just as dangerous if you think they represent anything other than entertainment of some kind.
Almost all the other conclusions are flawed as well.
.
Comment