The Expert Question: Building Houses of Cards?

[JimHawkins]

This is a multidimensional problem. You can't address it (in its entirety) by considering one dimension at a time.

Maybe you can't but it can..

To address the 'ease of killing' (spirit) at various ranges one need not take into account every other factor in each situation..

You will be aware that the ability to hit a target goes down dramatically with distance.

False..

The difficulty of hitting a target at 500 yards does not increase as the target closes to 100 yards, etc..

Those two elements capture what Glenn's father-in-law was saying. I totally understand what he meant.

We are not talking to Glenn's relative.

We are talking with Glenn.

His point (correct me if I'm wrong Glenn) was that they had no increased difficulty in firing (attacking) (pulling the trigger) as the ranged closed.

What is clear to anyone is not the fear of anything in this situation other than the fact that if the enemy kept getting closer and were not yet DEAD that soon they would be DEAD..

This is called TFOGG or, The fear of getting got..

Which in clinical tests has shown to cause magazines to get emptied 80% faster than normal.. (joke)

[Bill Glasheen]

Jim

SLOW DOWN!!!! You are in the mode of posting before you think. I can't even make an edit on what I said before you're 3 posts later.

We've been there before.

Case in point.

You will be aware that the ability to hit a target goes down dramatically with distance.

False..

The difficulty of hitting a target at 500 yards does not increase as the target closes to 100 yards ..

I highly recommend you abide by one of Covey's Habits.

Seek first to understand, and then to be understood.

Be back later.

- Bill

[JimHawkins]

Jim

SLOW DOWN!!!! You are in the mode of posting before you think. I can't even make an edit on what I said before you're 3 posts later.

We've been there before.

Case in point.

You will be aware that the ability to hit a target goes down dramatically with distance.

False..

The difficulty of hitting a target at 500 yards does not increase as the target closes to 100 yards ..

I highly recommend you abide by one of Covey's Habits.

Seek first to understand, and then to be understood.

Be back later.

- Bill

Another non post Bill..and you're projecting...

You are trying to discredit my post based on time posted..

Not my fault if you choose to re-edit a single word reply minutes later--I read a little faster than that.. I also can type and comprehend faster than that..

(Your edit can't be seen now because you moved my response.)

I understand this and Glenn's post apparently better than you do..

Instead of addressing the actual point you address some other point. You do it all the time.

You often complain that folks are just responding to what you wrote instead of what you mean.. Not my problem if you don't write what you mean..

Any dummy who's ever fired a gun knows things don't get harder to hit when they close until you get into Tueller range..

Glenn's point was that as folks got closer it was no harder to make the choice to kill in fact it got easier.. Glenn please confirm..

By bringing some other point (accuracy) that is not actually relevant in this situation you are the one muddying the waters and causing all kinds of confusion here..

I'm sure you don't mean things are harder to hit when they are closer in the macro sense.. Yet this is what you wrote.

They fired more often because time was running out..

The real issue there is that they were trained soldiers in the heat of battle..

That should be your point.

Or that at very close range it is harder to be accurate with a firearm..

Or that most regular folks find it harder to kill when looking their target in the eyes.. When killing gets personal...................

None of which was a part of this range/accuracy thing you came up with.

Sheesh.

[TSDguy]

So, Grossman may be right about his general message, and common sense tells me he's right about at least a lot of it, but as far as I can tell he used bad sources and thus the topic is over.

And because it won't be over, I'm sure we all know the reason M-16s got 3 round burst-fire modes slapped on them.

[Glenn]

But remember the caveat - IF YOU ARE ALREADY PREPARED AND EQUIPPED TO KILL...

- Bill

I think the problem in this discussion may be that there are too many tangents to the discussion itself. My understanding is that we are primarily talking about a statistic that said only 15% or so of trained soldiers would fire on an enemy during WWII. I agree that the percentage of casual citizens and weekend dojo warriors who would engage in violence would likely be much lower than the percentage of trained military, but at question here is a statistic that is only applied to the trained military. So if these soldiers were "already prepared and equipped to kill", and thus meeting the caveat, why would so many not do so? Contrary to Marshall, Grossman, and others, apparently they did.

And no, Homer was not really talking about hitting the target as much as laying down fire on a close enemy...saturation rather than sniping.

[Glenn]

Glenn's point was that as folks got closer it was no harder to make the choice to kill in fact it got easier.. Glenn please confirm..

They fired more often because time was running out..

The real issue there is that they were trained soldiers in the heat of battle..

Yes, that is exactly what he was getting at. When an armed enemy was closing (one or both sides closing really), everyone let loose with what they had to try to overpower the enemy before they were overpowered by the enemy. He made the comment that close-combat was not the time to conserve ammo, that was for when the enemy was at a longer distance where the chance of hitting anything was much lower. If they could see the enemies' faces, eyes, etc, they hit them with everything they had to try to stop the enemy.

Although I have no data, I suspect that psychologically in addition to the survival instinct kicking in, something close to group-think also occurs as the distance between combatants decreases...as the firing increases (on both sides) and it seems like everyone is shooting, it becomes much easier to join in and begin firing yourself, regardless of any reservations about it. This would be a situation similar to what has been discussed here before about people being more likely to engage in threats and/or violence as part of a gang than as an individual.

There is another related situation there bares consideration: In tense situations, when one person fires before everyone else that can trigger the rest to start shooting. According to Marshall and Grossman, that should not happen.

As a side note, I wish I could discuss this with him again, to follow up with some questions based on this thread, but he passed away suddenly a year and a half ago. When we got copies of his discharge papers for the funeral they listed his purple heart and another commendation, Bronze Star if I remember correctly. Sadly, we never found the commendations themselves.

[JimHawkins]

Good points Glenn..

The reality is that the willingness to kill is directly related to fear among other things.

The more fear there is the more force is used or expressed and more ammo is used..

Thus we are familiar with the famous quote, "Don't fire until you can see the whites of their eyes.."

Translation: Don't fire until you can actually hit them.

[Bill Glasheen]

This directly quoted your post, Jim. Re-read what YOU wrote.

*******************

Jim

SLOW DOWN!!!! You are in the mode of posting before you think. I can't even make an edit on what I said before you're 3 posts later.

We've been there before.

Case in point.

You will be aware that the ability to hit a target goes down dramatically with distance.

False..

The difficulty of hitting a target at 500 yards does not increase as the target closes to 100 yards ..

I highly recommend you abide by one of Covey's Habits.

Seek first to understand, and then to be understood.

Be back later.

- Bill

[JimHawkins]

Try addressing the points Bill....

I'm on the same page as Glenn.. As to what page you are on... I have no idea.

[Jason Rees]

Jim

You will be aware that the ability to hit a target goes down dramatically with distance.

False..

The difficulty of hitting a target at 500 yards does not increase as the target closes to 100 yards ..

Oy. Difficulty and ability are two different things. It may be easier, physically, to hit a target as it gets closer. Shooting a person does NOT get easier as they get closer. A person can be degraded in the mind of a soldier to become nothing more than a target, but in today's society, the ability of the soldier to use that frame of mind is becoming rare. We're too independent, too desirous to understand.

A pilot has no issues to deal with after dropping a bomb on someone they can't even see.

An artillery battery doesn't have to deal with PTSD firing rounds a few miles down range.

It's the infantry, who get face-to-face with the enemy, that has to deal with the consequences of killing people. I have met people who couldn't pull the trigger, or had problems afterward. I've met others that had no problem with it or the aftermath. The first group outnumbers the second by a large margin.

What Glenn talks about is when more than one person is with the shooter. Groups of people are more inclined to break the rules of the society they grew up in. That's why mobs are dangerous, while a single protester won't do anything. When you have a group of people defending a position, it's easier to fire once someone else has fired first, in essence, giving you permission. Even more people will fire when given the order to fire, if someone else fires first.

You can diss Grossman's sources, but what he says rings true to the communities he deals with: law enforcement, and the military. Glenn and Jim are right, and so is Bill. You're just thinking in different terms, as far as individuals versus groupthink.

[JimHawkins]

Oy. Difficulty and ability are two different things. It may be easier, physically, to hit a target as it gets closer. Shooting a person does NOT get easier as they get closer. A person can be degraded in the mind of a soldier to become nothing more than a target, but in today's society, the ability of the soldier to use that frame of mind is becoming rare.

Disagree.

No group of soldiers is going to have greater difficulty hitting or firing on any target as the rage closes, save Tueller range..

The quote I posted shows that as a fundamental truth even long ago..

The FEAR factor is going to be dominant.. The choice to kill was made easier by this imminent fear..

If you contend soldiers have a harder time firing at 50 yards over 100 yards then offer up the proof.

The reality is as was explained by Glenn.. As the threat level increases so does the rate of fire..

It's really very simple to understand: The closer the enemy gets the closer you are to death.

[Jason Rees]

Jim. Slow down, and read up. I edited my post while you responded.

[JimHawkins]

See this is the kind of BS that makes it tough for me to take folks seriously..

The quote I quoted that you wrote is unchanged..

As such my (too fast) response stands.

[TSDguy]

It looks like everyone agrees Grossman used bogus sources, so does anyone have any actual research now? Anything else -even personal experience or things that seem to be common sense- is just speculation.

[JimHawkins]

What some are confused about is being in a combat situation in war and being some white bread dude from suburbia..

Yes it gets tougher in general for folks to kill as the range gets more personal.. I already wrote this..

In war however as the range closes and the threat gets larger it becomes all too easy and quick to pull the trigger.. If you don't you're dead.. Both sides face the same challenges.