Silver Vendor
- Messages
- 2,884
- Reactions
- 7,932
History;
In 1983 then Salt Lake City Utah Police Officer Dennis Tueller, did a research on how quickly a person with a knife can cover a certain distance and is considered in a person's "Danger Zone". How long does it take you to place two center hits on a man sized target? At that time the figure was 1.5 seconds. Then the other piece of the puzzle was figured out, at what distance could be covered in 1.5 seconds, the end result for an average person was 21 feet. Thus the 21 Foot thingy was born, but it clearly stated, "...an armed attacker at 21 feet is well within your Danger Zone." That is all.
Copy of original article here; The Police Policy Studies Council
Over the years it has been perverted in a way that people thought there is no threat if a person is at a distance greater than 21 feet. It got so bad that in the 90's and early 2000's, it was causing havoc with self defense cases, in that attorneys were convincing juries of this perilous thought. Worse yet, Police Officers and Administrators were being brain washed on such things...ugh. That term has not only caused great turmoil in the court room, but with LEO and citizen alike. Thus the 21 Foot Rule was born.
Analysis;
The original research was done with actors knowing what was scripted, and what was expected of them. The elements of recognizing a threat, and analyzing a proper response to it were taken out of the equation. Those two crucial elements are absent in the research, thus the distance of the "Danger Zone" is heavily skewed...few take this into account.
Also, at the time there were no "retention" holsters like we know of today, thus possibly slowing the reaction even more. Then add in concealed carry presentation, and the numbers and distance goes all over the board.
In talking with Dennis Tueller some years ago, and having some poor soul ask him, "Mr Tueller, could you please explain and go into detail about your 21 foot rule?"
Here's the explanation; it has never been, never is, or will ever be a "rule". He digressed a bit, OK, here's the rule...if you can't place your shot(s) in the head every time with the attacker starting out at 21 feet, you'll be dead from being cut up like a fine salad.
First; pistol bullets are way under powered to be a consistent performer...aka/i.e. pistol bullet performance sucks.
Second; with a clean heart shot, even from a rifle a person can live past two minutes...and a lot of damage can be done with a knife in two or more minutes.
Third; be honest with your equipment and your ability with it. If you can't reliably place accurate shots within a 6" circle on demand, you had better lengthen that "Danger Zone" distance appropriately.
Luckily times are a changin', and for the better. Folks are realizing what the research was, the elements involved, and a guideline eye opener at best...nothing more.
Police article from 2017; What officers really need to know about the 21-foot kill zone
This article calls out a lot of the misconceptions, as well as providing more up to date studies on action / reaction times. That holsters now with retention devices, which were not used in the original research, are slowing down draw times up to 2 seconds. Sighted in times are around .80+ sec. Those who've been through my classes are required to respond with a sighted in time of .33 sec or less, and a low ready time of .5 sec...all have done it. Now we can see what some relevant training looks like.
Conclusion;
With the above information, do an honest self assessment of where you are with your firearm and other weapons training. Your decision on how fast vs. how slow to press the trigger, how much front sight vs. combat look through and/or body index is based on two things, your perception of the threat situation AND your perception of your skill with your equipment...nothing more.
Distance is your friend.
In 1983 then Salt Lake City Utah Police Officer Dennis Tueller, did a research on how quickly a person with a knife can cover a certain distance and is considered in a person's "Danger Zone". How long does it take you to place two center hits on a man sized target? At that time the figure was 1.5 seconds. Then the other piece of the puzzle was figured out, at what distance could be covered in 1.5 seconds, the end result for an average person was 21 feet. Thus the 21 Foot thingy was born, but it clearly stated, "...an armed attacker at 21 feet is well within your Danger Zone." That is all.
Copy of original article here; The Police Policy Studies Council
Over the years it has been perverted in a way that people thought there is no threat if a person is at a distance greater than 21 feet. It got so bad that in the 90's and early 2000's, it was causing havoc with self defense cases, in that attorneys were convincing juries of this perilous thought. Worse yet, Police Officers and Administrators were being brain washed on such things...ugh. That term has not only caused great turmoil in the court room, but with LEO and citizen alike. Thus the 21 Foot Rule was born.
Analysis;
The original research was done with actors knowing what was scripted, and what was expected of them. The elements of recognizing a threat, and analyzing a proper response to it were taken out of the equation. Those two crucial elements are absent in the research, thus the distance of the "Danger Zone" is heavily skewed...few take this into account.
Also, at the time there were no "retention" holsters like we know of today, thus possibly slowing the reaction even more. Then add in concealed carry presentation, and the numbers and distance goes all over the board.
In talking with Dennis Tueller some years ago, and having some poor soul ask him, "Mr Tueller, could you please explain and go into detail about your 21 foot rule?"
Here's the explanation; it has never been, never is, or will ever be a "rule". He digressed a bit, OK, here's the rule...if you can't place your shot(s) in the head every time with the attacker starting out at 21 feet, you'll be dead from being cut up like a fine salad.
First; pistol bullets are way under powered to be a consistent performer...aka/i.e. pistol bullet performance sucks.
Second; with a clean heart shot, even from a rifle a person can live past two minutes...and a lot of damage can be done with a knife in two or more minutes.
Third; be honest with your equipment and your ability with it. If you can't reliably place accurate shots within a 6" circle on demand, you had better lengthen that "Danger Zone" distance appropriately.
Luckily times are a changin', and for the better. Folks are realizing what the research was, the elements involved, and a guideline eye opener at best...nothing more.
Police article from 2017; What officers really need to know about the 21-foot kill zone
This article calls out a lot of the misconceptions, as well as providing more up to date studies on action / reaction times. That holsters now with retention devices, which were not used in the original research, are slowing down draw times up to 2 seconds. Sighted in times are around .80+ sec. Those who've been through my classes are required to respond with a sighted in time of .33 sec or less, and a low ready time of .5 sec...all have done it. Now we can see what some relevant training looks like.
Conclusion;
With the above information, do an honest self assessment of where you are with your firearm and other weapons training. Your decision on how fast vs. how slow to press the trigger, how much front sight vs. combat look through and/or body index is based on two things, your perception of the threat situation AND your perception of your skill with your equipment...nothing more.
Distance is your friend.
