Discussion:
The NRA speaks...
(too old to reply)
DumbedDownUSA
2018-02-22 10:32:40 UTC
Permalink
Arm Teachers says their spokesperson and president of the doofUS.
--
Trump: If there is a shutdown I think it would be a tremendously
negative mark on the president of the United States. He’s the one that
has to get people together.
Clave
2018-02-22 15:14:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by DumbedDownUSA
Arm Teachers says their spokesperson and president of the doofUS.
Yes, smart and insightful leadership that was!
-hh
2018-02-22 19:16:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by DumbedDownUSA
Arm Teachers says their spokesperson and president of the doofUS.
That's a great idea if you want even more innocent bystanders get hit.

Case in point, the Rand Study commissioned by the NYPD to assess
their police force's shooting performance:

<http://www.pointshooting.com/1arand.htm>

BLUF: Average P(h) = 18%

Hint: that means 82% of rounds fired missed their intended target.



-hh
Alan Baker
2018-02-22 20:03:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by -hh
Post by DumbedDownUSA
Arm Teachers says their spokesperson and president of the doofUS.
That's a great idea if you want even more innocent bystanders get hit.
Case in point, the Rand Study commissioned by the NYPD to assess
<http://www.pointshooting.com/1arand.htm>
BLUF: Average P(h) = 18%
Hint: that means 82% of rounds fired missed their intended target.
Not to mention the terrible tragedies that will result when police come
on the scene and shoot the armed gunmen they encounter...
Clave
2018-02-22 23:24:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by -hh
Post by DumbedDownUSA
Arm Teachers says their spokesperson and president of the doofUS.
That's a great idea if you want even more innocent bystanders get hit.
Case in point, the Rand Study commissioned by the NYPD to assess
<http://www.pointshooting.com/1arand.htm>
BLUF:  Average P(h) = 18%
Hint:  that means 82% of rounds fired missed their intended target.
Not to mention the terrible tragedies that will result when police come
on the scene and shoot the armed gunmen they encounter...
Oh boo fucking hoo, shitstain!
m***@gmail.com
2018-02-22 20:10:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by -hh
Post by DumbedDownUSA
Arm Teachers says their spokesperson and president of the doofUS.
That's a great idea if you want even more innocent bystanders get hit.
Case in point, the Rand Study commissioned by the NYPD to assess
<http://www.pointshooting.com/1arand.htm>
BLUF: Average P(h) = 18%
Hint: that means 82% of rounds fired missed their intended target.
-hh
From your link:

"Bill Burroughs, in his paper of several years ago: Components and Considerations for Combat Shooting, said that "Shooters miss at close ranges because of faulty, incomplete and, yes, negligent training."

He also said that combat shooting is actually quite simple and anyone can learn it.

In a span of less than two hours and with shooting fewer than 100 rounds of ammunition, an Officer can be taught The Applegate System method and reproduce it during periods of stress. And marksmanship levels are high inside the distances where the method was designed to be used - close quarters."



FYI: That report was from 2007. Got anything more recent. See what you can Cherry pick.
-hh
2018-02-22 21:53:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by -hh
Post by DumbedDownUSA
Arm Teachers says their spokesperson and president of the doofUS.
That's a great idea if you want even more innocent bystanders get hit.
Case in point, the Rand Study commissioned by the NYPD to assess
<http://www.pointshooting.com/1arand.htm>
BLUF: Average P(h) = 18%
Hint: that means 82% of rounds fired missed their intended target.
"Bill Burroughs, in his paper of several years ago: Components and
Considerations for Combat Shooting, said that "Shooters miss at close
ranges because of faulty, incomplete and, yes, negligent training."
But of course training is a factor. Performance is proportionally
related to how much (time & money) is invested in training. Point
here is that the amount that the NYPD provides is only adequate to
get you up to this ~18% P(h) value. If you want teachers to be
better than that, then they need (substantially) more firearms
training than the NYPD receives.
Post by m***@gmail.com
He also said that combat shooting is actually quite simple and
anyone can learn it.
Sure, but there's a difference between learning it and performing
at some proficiency level ... and because shooting is a perishable
skill, there's also the recurring cost in training (& facilities)
to then stay at that level of proficiency.
Post by m***@gmail.com
In a span of less than two hours and with shooting fewer than
100 rounds of ammunition, an Officer can be taught The Applegate
System method and reproduce it during periods of stress.
Even 2 hours and 100rds has a non-zero cost (multiplied by however
many teachers are in the USA), but this duration is far too brief
to be able to instill longer term muscle memory. The classical
rule of thumb is that at least five (5) repetition sessions are
required over a multi-week period for adequate retention rates.
Post by m***@gmail.com
And marksmanship levels are high inside the distances where the
method was designed to be used - close quarters."
Yes, ~95% in ideal (static range) conditions, which is better
than the likes of the 70% PD qualification tests. But the
concern here isn't how well PD performs while unstressed in
an ideal setting, but in real life - - the Rand study shows
that that 70% degrades to less than 20%. There's been claims
that Rex Applegate's method is ergonomically superior, but
where's there the published performance data?

Where "high" is quantified as being of just what P(h) value?
Post by m***@gmail.com
FYI: That report was from 2007. Got anything more recent.
See what you can Cherry pick.
There doesn't appear to be any more recent large sample size
systematic research reports since the Rand. There are a few
"2015" era annual reports which have a single year's data,
but that doesn't appear to show any meaningful difference
while also being thinner.

FWIW, you can find reports such as this one:

<http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downloads/pdf/analysis_and_planning/nypd_annual_firearms_discharge_report_2011.pdf>

Which contains the following (& interesting) statement:

"OBJECTIVE COMPLETION RATE ...the Department does not calculate
average hit percentages. Instead, the objective completion rate
per incident is employed as it is both more accurate and more
instructive. Like combat itself, the objective completion rate
per incident is pass/fail. When an officer properly and lawfully
adjudges a threat severe enough to require the use of his or her
firearm, and fires at a specific subject, the most relevant measure
is whether he or she ultimately hits and stops the subject. This is
the objective completion rate, and it is determined irrespective of
the number of shots the officer fired at the subject."

Translation: don't count how many rounds are fired, but look at
what percentage of engagements had (a) LEO lawful fire conducted;
which then (b) also had one or more rounds hit the target (out of
no specified number of attempts); which then (c) resulted in target
incapacitation.

Continuing:

"In these 36 incidents, officers hit at least one subject per
incident 28 times, for an objective completion rate of 78 percent."

This means that 22% of the time, they never even hit (out of
an unknown number of attempts).

And interestingly, it continues:

"When officers were being fired upon, however, they struck
subjects two thirds of the time (six out of nine incidents)."

FWIW, it does look like the latter pages of this style of
report does contain the discharge rate values from which a
traditional P(h) percentage can be arrived at.

Bottom line is that the training will cost time & money.
When teachers are buying their own classroom supplies, its
pretty damn clear that the current resources are inadequate.

-hh
Clave
2018-02-22 23:25:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by -hh
Bottom line is that the training will cost time & money.
When teachers are buying their own classroom supplies, its
pretty damn clear that the current resources are inadequate.
-hh
So we allocate some resources, done.

Next!
-hh
2018-02-23 00:34:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Clave
So we allocate some resources, done.
Next!
Easy to claim...

But we’re in now-increases deficit spending, there is no free
money laying around. What taxes do you raise, and by how
much to cover at least what’s minimally necessary?


-hh

m***@gmail.com
2018-02-23 00:02:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by -hh
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by -hh
Post by DumbedDownUSA
Arm Teachers says their spokesperson and president of the doofUS.
That's a great idea if you want even more innocent bystanders get hit.
Case in point, the Rand Study commissioned by the NYPD to assess
<http://www.pointshooting.com/1arand.htm>
BLUF: Average P(h) = 18%
Hint: that means 82% of rounds fired missed their intended target.
"Bill Burroughs, in his paper of several years ago: Components and
Considerations for Combat Shooting, said that "Shooters miss at close
ranges because of faulty, incomplete and, yes, negligent training."
But of course training is a factor. Performance is proportionally
related to how much (time & money) is invested in training. Point
here is that the amount that the NYPD provides is only adequate to
get you up to this ~18% P(h) value. If you want teachers to be
better than that, then they need (substantially) more firearms
training than the NYPD receives.
Post by m***@gmail.com
He also said that combat shooting is actually quite simple and anyone can learn it.
Sure, but there's a difference between learning it and performing
at some proficiency level ... and because shooting is a perishable
skill, there's also the recurring cost in training (& facilities)
to then stay at that level of proficiency.
Post by m***@gmail.com
In a span of less than two hours and with shooting fewer than
100 rounds of ammunition, an Officer can be taught The Applegate
System method and reproduce it during periods of stress.
Even 2 hours and 100rds has a non-zero cost (multiplied by however
many teachers are in the USA), but this duration is far too brief
to be able to instill longer term muscle memory. The classical
rule of thumb is that at least five (5) repetition sessions are
required over a multi-week period for adequate retention rates.
Post by m***@gmail.com
And marksmanship levels are high inside the distances where the
method was designed to be used - close quarters."
Yes, ~95% in ideal (static range) conditions, which is better
than the likes of the 70% PD qualification tests. But the
concern here isn't how well PD performs while unstressed in
an ideal setting, but in real life - - the Rand study shows
that that 70% degrades to less than 20%. There's been claims
that Rex Applegate's method is ergonomically superior, but
where's there the published performance data?
Where "high" is quantified as being of just what P(h) value?
Post by m***@gmail.com
FYI: That report was from 2007. Got anything more recent.
See what you can Cherry pick.
There doesn't appear to be any more recent large sample size
systematic research reports since the Rand. There are a few
"2015" era annual reports which have a single year's data,
but that doesn't appear to show any meaningful difference
while also being thinner.
<http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downloads/pdf/analysis_and_planning/nypd_annual_firearms_discharge_report_2011.pdf>
"OBJECTIVE COMPLETION RATE ...the Department does not calculate
average hit percentages. Instead, the objective completion rate
per incident is employed as it is both more accurate and more
instructive. Like combat itself, the objective completion rate
per incident is pass/fail. When an officer properly and lawfully
adjudges a threat severe enough to require the use of his or her
firearm, and fires at a specific subject, the most relevant measure
is whether he or she ultimately hits and stops the subject. This is
the objective completion rate, and it is determined irrespective of
the number of shots the officer fired at the subject."
Translation: don't count how many rounds are fired, but look at
what percentage of engagements had (a) LEO lawful fire conducted;
which then (b) also had one or more rounds hit the target (out of
no specified number of attempts); which then (c) resulted in target
incapacitation.
"In these 36 incidents, officers hit at least one subject per
incident 28 times, for an objective completion rate of 78 percent."
This means that 22% of the time, they never even hit (out of
an unknown number of attempts).
"When officers were being fired upon, however, they struck
subjects two thirds of the time (six out of nine incidents)."
FWIW, it does look like the latter pages of this style of
report does contain the discharge rate values from which a
traditional P(h) percentage can be arrived at.
Bottom line is that the training will cost time & money.
When teachers are buying their own classroom supplies, its
pretty damn clear that the current resources are inadequate.
-hh
Care to voice your solution?
Clave
2018-02-22 23:23:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by -hh
Post by DumbedDownUSA
Arm Teachers says their spokesperson and president of the doofUS.
That's a great idea if you want even more innocent bystanders get hit.
Bullshit fear-mongering.
Post by -hh
Case in point, the Rand Study commissioned by the NYPD to assess
<http://www.pointshooting.com/1arand.htm>
BLUF: Average P(h) = 18%
Hint: that means 82% of rounds fired missed their intended target.
-hh
So fucking what?

18% is better than 0%, dumbass.
-hh
2018-02-23 00:15:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Clave
Post by -hh
Post by DumbedDownUSA
Arm Teachers says their spokesperson and president of the doofUS.
That's a great idea if you want even more innocent bystanders get hit.
Bullshit fear-mongering.
Hallway full of innocents trying to flee, and only one valid hostile
target somehow doesn’t equal a very high downside risk on taking
a shot? Come again?

The pragmatic reality is that your defender staff needs to be trained up
to “Hostage team rescue” proficiency level+, which is very expensive.
Post by Clave
Post by -hh
Case in point, the Rand Study commissioned by the NYPD to assess
<http://www.pointshooting.com/1arand.htm>
BLUF: Average P(h) = 18%
Hint: that means 82% of rounds fired missed their intended target.
So fucking what?
18% is better than 0%, dumbass.
Not when the fraction of those 82% misses results in more hits
on innocents, increasing the casualty count higher than it otherwise
would have been.


-hh
Clave
2018-02-23 00:25:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by -hh
Post by Clave
Post by -hh
Post by DumbedDownUSA
Arm Teachers says their spokesperson and president of the doofUS.
That's a great idea if you want even more innocent bystanders get hit.
Bullshit fear-mongering.
Hallway full of innocents trying to flee, and only one valid hostile
target somehow doesn’t equal a very high downside risk on taking
a shot? Come again?
The pragmatic reality is that your defender staff needs to be trained up
to “Hostage team rescue” proficiency level+, which is very expensive.
Post by Clave
Post by -hh
Case in point, the Rand Study commissioned by the NYPD to assess
<http://www.pointshooting.com/1arand.htm>
BLUF: Average P(h) = 18%
Hint: that means 82% of rounds fired missed their intended target.
So fucking what?
18% is better than 0%, dumbass.
Not when the fraction of those 82% misses results in more hits
on innocents, increasing the casualty count higher than it otherwise
would have been.
-hh
But they don't necessarily do that.

And with the kids in duck and cover mode the incidence goes WAY down.

So stop your gutless leftard whining and accept that the game has
changed and we need armed personnel in schools now.

Sucks.

But that is reality.
Carbon
2018-02-23 00:33:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by -hh
Post by Clave
Post by -hh
Post by DumbedDownUSA
Arm Teachers says their spokesperson and president of the doofUS.
That's a great idea if you want even more innocent bystanders get hit.
Bullshit fear-mongering.
Hallway full of innocents trying to flee, and only one valid hostile
target somehow doesn’t equal a very high downside risk on taking a shot?
Come again?
The pragmatic reality is that your defender staff needs to be trained up
to “Hostage team rescue” proficiency level+, which is very expensive.
Obviously the answer is to require all children to pass BUD/S every year
in order to graduate. They should view this as a refreshing change after
all the non-stop drilling to pass standardized tests.
Silvio
2018-02-22 22:05:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by DumbedDownUSA
Arm Teachers says their spokesperson and president of the doofUS.
That should work out great when a teacher snaps...

Only a fool can believe that a gun problem can be solved with more guns.
-hh
2018-02-22 22:16:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Silvio
Post by DumbedDownUSA
Arm Teachers says their spokesperson and president of the doofUS.
That should work out great when a teacher snaps...
Apparently, something akin to that may have just happened in
West Virginia:

<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/education/wp/2018/02/22/i-dont-think-people-recognize-how-dire-it-is-west-virginia-teachers-strike-closing-all-public-schools/>


-hh
-hh
2018-02-22 22:27:23 UTC
Permalink
A tangent while on this subject - - extracts from some offline
conversations with some friends who currently work as public
school teachers.

Quite direct and poignant:


"Buying wasp spray, and learning about using my flag as a spear
were not covered in my teacher training..."

"I know entirely too well what those parents face, and it's
rebreaking my own heart. If our school gets attacked, I will die
charging at the attacker. I cannot watch my students get hurt,
or face their parents should I survive and their kids not. But
by golly I will HURT the bastard before I go down."


"Our principal just called with a notification of a shooting
threat at [school] tomorrow, over 100 students reported it.
They traced the phone to an address in Indiana, seems to be bogus,
so come on in tomorrow. It's all my students want to talk about,
so we do. They are sadly very mature and cynical. and scared."



-hh
Clave
2018-02-22 23:28:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by -hh
A tangent while on this subject - - extracts from some offline
conversations with some friends who currently work as public
school teachers.
"Buying wasp spray, and learning about using my flag as a spear
were not covered in my teacher training..."
"I know entirely too well what those parents face, and it's
rebreaking my own heart. If our school gets attacked, I will die
charging at the attacker. I cannot watch my students get hurt,
or face their parents should I survive and their kids not. But
by golly I will HURT the bastard before I go down."
"Our principal just called with a notification of a shooting
threat at [school] tomorrow, over 100 students reported it.
They traced the phone to an address in Indiana, seems to be bogus,
so come on in tomorrow. It's all my students want to talk about,
so we do. They are sadly very mature and cynical. and scared."
-hh
Predictable lib anecdotes.

Which is a frightening way to form your world view, btw.

But you lot always do it.

Reductionism ad absurdum.

That's why your policies tend to fail, badly.
Clave
2018-02-22 23:25:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Silvio
Post by DumbedDownUSA
Arm Teachers says their spokesperson and president of the doofUS.
That should work out great when a teacher snaps...
And the incidence of that is:_______________________________???
Post by Silvio
Only a fool can believe that a gun problem can be solved with more guns.
Right, cops and the military never solve anything...

You IDIOT!
Carbon
2018-02-23 00:27:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Silvio
Post by DumbedDownUSA
Arm Teachers says their spokesperson and president of the doofUS.
That should work out great when a teacher snaps...
Only a fool can believe that a gun problem can be solved with more guns.
Unfortunately the world is full of fools. There are a lot of true
believers who think that having more guns must lead to less crime, when it
is blindingly obvious that the US has the most guns and the most gun
deaths per capita in the first world.

Abstract
Background
Violent death is a serious problem in the United States. Previous research
showing US rates of violent death compared with other high-income
countries used data that are more than a decade old.

Methods
We examined 2010 mortality data obtained from the World Health
Organization for populous, high-income countries (n = 23). Death rates per
100,000 population were calculated for each country and for the
aggregation of all non-US countries overall and by age and sex. Tests of
significance were performed using Poisson and negative binomial
regressions.

Results
US homicide rates were 7.0 times higher than in other high-income
countries, driven by a gun homicide rate that was 25.2 times higher. For
15- to 24-year-olds, the gun homicide rate in the United States was 49.0
times higher. Firearm-related suicide rates were 8.0 times higher in the
United States, but the overall suicide rates were average. Unintentional
firearm deaths were 6.2 times higher in the United States. The overall
firearm death rate in the United States from all causes was 10.0 times
higher. Ninety percent of women, 91% of children aged 0 to 14 years, 92%
of youth aged 15 to 24 years, and 82% of all people killed by firearms
were from the United States.

Conclusions
The United States has an enormous firearm problem compared with other
high-income countries, with higher rates of homicide and firearm-related
suicide. Compared with 2003 estimates, the US firearm death rate remains
unchanged while firearm death rates in other countries decreased. Thus,
the already high relative rates of firearm homicide, firearm suicide, and
unintentional firearm death in the United States compared with other
high-income countries increased between 2003 and 2010.

http://www.amjmed.com/article/S0002-9343(15)01030-X/fulltext
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...