Handgun Accuracy Standards in the Age of Mass Murder

For decades the mass murderer, most commonly in the form of an active shooter, has been deemed an anomaly in the realm of self-defense considerations.  It still is.  While the media goes hysterical over such events, the only reason they do so is to push for civilian disarmament.  The leftwing media incorporates gang related shootings into their numbers.  When three gangsters shoot each other on the streets of Chicago, an event that happens multiple times every weekend in that wonderful town, it is lumped into the mass shooting statistics.  The reality is, if gang violence were removed from the stats, the United States would have an infinitesimal crime rate.  That, however, does not fit the political agenda, so it is not discussed. 

Still, even though mass killer events prove very rare compared to more mundane street crime, I believe they are worthy of consideration for concealed carriers as the odds are low, but the stakes are exceedingly high.  After analyzing these events throughout the years, if we distill the shooting problem down to a single purpose-driven solution, the problem demands higher accuracy standards than what is being typically taught and practiced.

In the past couple of years I have spent more time working on fine handgun accuracy than I ever have previously.  This is due to a simple desire to obtain a high level of skill in this field just because I am a shooting enthusiast, but also because the need for such accuracy seems more and more relevant to the world we now live in.  when analyzing the active killer threat, we see that many such individuals who have been neutralized by armed citizens or law enforcement, armed only with pistols, have been engaged at greater than typical “defensive” distances.  Combine this with the fact that many such attackers have worn body armor, and the ability to neutralize such a threat becomes a hard shooting problem that demands significant handgun accuracy.  The face is the necessary target, and landing hits to the face at further distances may be what is required.   

I think the B8 bullseye target should be a consistent part of your training.  Shooting B8s at 25 yards is not exactly fun for most of us, but it is necessary.  Beyond just slow fire, work on drills like the Hat Qual, which aims for a score of 90 or better at 25 yards for 10 rounds, completed within 20 seconds.  Other drills with a B8 target are also beneficial, including those that are performed at closer range.  Ken Hackethorn’s “The Test” is a great drill (or test) to practice, which involves shooting 10 rounds at the B8 at 10 yards, in 10 seconds.  A score of 95 or above is good shooting here, and even though this is performed at only 10 yards, it programs you to reach for such accuracy standards.

I admit that I still shoot mainly with open sight pistols and I can achieve such accuracy drills with iron sights.  I have, though, been working with a red dot pistol and the dot makes the entire undertaking dramatically easier.  There is no denying that any shooter will be far more accurate with a dot at further distances.  In the age of active killers, I think the red dot on the pistol is a huge asset, so if you struggle with irons and you can determine that it is a visual issue that is holding you back (a dot won’t fix grip or trigger press issues) then look into equipping your carry gun with a dot. 

Of course, the shooting part is only one aspect of consideration when dealing with the possibility of the active killer threat, but it is a possible situation for concealed carriers to find themselves in.  While it still remains the anomaly compared to other crime, high accuracy standards are necessary if a citizen engages such a threat, and getting more accurate as a shooter has no down sides, does it?