Risky Locations

“We live in a nice neighborhood.”

“I never thought something like that could happen here.”

“This is the good part of town.”

You’ve probably heard – or even uttered – these phrases. Crime happens in a place you wouldn’t expect it to, and phrases like these come out.  The reality is, crime happens everywhere – no where is immune. But certainly, there are areas that can have a higher tendency for crime than others.

Force Science Institute News #268 contains an article on “What locations are riskiest for you?” In this context, “you” means law-enforcement officers. And while I tend to look at things from a private citizen standpoint, this is still information worthy of note.

The study looked at data from the nation’s second largest municipal police department (Chicago), and constructed “a “risk terrain model” that links an officer’s relative danger of felonious injury to the presence of certain environmental factors.” They looked at 991 batteries (“serious bodily harm or death, including firearm threats and assaults) against CPD officers over a 12-month period. They examined where those tended to occur across the city, at a granularity of about 1-city block. They also considered other “potential risk factors”, locations likely to be trouble spots like apartment complexes, night clubs, homeless shelters, laundromats, convenience stores, etc..

From their analysis, they determined an “exceptionally strong” statistical correlation between batteries against officers and proximity to 11 environmental features.

In a descending order of risk, “police who handle calls for service at locations with foreclosures, problem buildings [sources of complaints about criminal activity], bars, schools, gang territories, banks, apartment complexes, liquor stores, clusters of service requests for malfunctioning streetlights, grocery stores and/or retail shops are at a greater risk of felonious battery,” Caplin writes.

At the upper end of this list, calls “within three blocks of foreclosures and/or within a dense area of problem buildings pose as much as two to three times greater risk of battery to police officers” than calls to locations at the lower end of the spectrum, he says. But even the lesser locations on the list present a significantly higher danger than the average among all the cells analyzed.

Of course, the risk is even greater at locations where more than one of these “model features” is present.

The specifics are unclear, but Caplan theorizes that the behavior of people can be influenced by the geographical features around them. “The nature of certain places may be perceived by offenders to be opportune locations to behave aggressively toward police,” he writes.

For example, “foreclosures may be high-risk due to the absence of invested caretakers who would otherwise serve as ‘eyes and ears’ within the area. This void of guardians may serve as cues to certain suspects that the prospect for instant freedom from criminal justice authorities is better had with aggression toward police rather than cooperation.”

Rather an interesting take-home. Of course, like any study it really is a call for further study: to have the study replicated in other cities, other jurisdictions, other departments, both within the US but also abroad. So, take the study results for what they are.

Out of curiousity, I asked Tom Givens how this data compared to his (ever growing) data set of student/civilian incidents. His response:

John,

That all makes sense from a law-enforcement perspective. Bear in mind that these are police officers responding to calls for service. That takes them to foreclosed homes, ghetto apartment complexes, and such locations that the typical middle-class CCW holder is far less likely to frequent.

In our civilians experience the most dangerous places are gas station/convenience store, shopping malls and parking lots in general. These are the places where your typical CCW holder has the highest chance of interacting with strangers, and thus with criminals.

Hope this helps.

Tom

Either way, this information does give you an idea of where there is greater risk, and lends into John Farnam’s quip about personal safety: “Don’t go to stupid places, associate with stupid people, and do stupid things.”

About these ads

2014-11-25 training log

It must be a new level of 80% days, because it’s unusual to have +10% days in a row.

Everything was just solid today.

I went ahead and upped my working max on my squats by 10#, recalculated percentages. Yeah, it often works out to only being a 5# increase, save the final 1-rep weight, but that’s what it is. Every bit adds up to more work.

But the 275 went up firmly. Even last week when the 265 felt crappy, the 275 was solid. Yeah… tightness matters. Crush grip that bar, get everything tight…

During the working sets I really felt my torso being tight. I haven’t felt that in a while. But again, crush-grip the bar, and the tightness just radiates out to everything else. I know this, I just don’t always do it.

I almost wondered if I should jump up another 10#! I won’t… I’ll stick here for a bit, but still. What I might do tho is if next squat session feels this good, after the 275 keep going up… like maybe to 300, then 325 (essentially my working max right now), just for singles. AND… without a belt. That should be very interesting for me.

And get this. The deadlifts? This was the first time the 315 felt “easy”. Oh sure, I was worked, but my speed was there. The lift wasn’t slow. I truly could just explode and the bar moved really well. That’s a first. Admittedly, I felt a little tight in my hips, so it’s possible I wasn’t getting down as much and put a little more back into it, but even when I focused on keeping the torso as upright as possible, things still ripped pretty well. I’ll give it another week, then up the weight by 10#.

I didn’t lunge today. Since I’m back on the defatting diet, instead I got on the elliptical for 15 minutes. Set it on one of the steeper angle, more resistance settings, and moved at about 140 strides per minute. Nothing huge, but I figured if it helps me up things a bit to burn more, I’ll take it. Fat loss is my focus.

Just felt like a damn good day.

Based upon Paul Carter’s Basebuilding

  • Squats (model 1)
    • bar x 5
    • bar x 5
    • 160 x 5
    • 185 x 4
    • 220 x 3
    • 240 x 2
    • 275 x 1
    • 195 x 5
    • 195 x 5
    • 195 x 5
    • 195 x 5
    • 195 x 5
  • Sumo Deadlift (model 1)
    • 135 x 5
    • 225 x 5
    • 315 x 3
    • 315 x 3
    • 315 x 3
    • 315 x 3
    • 315 x 3

2014-11-24 training log

Changes.

Things have been feeling good, so I went ahead and up’d the weight. Just a 5 lbs increase, but that’s how you do it… start light, progress slowly, progress longer, build a real foundation.

Benching went really well, actually. The main work sets were really good, and focusing on crush-gripping the bar really carries over into getting the whole body tight and thus moving the weight well.

Whereas last week the dips caused my body to scream, this week my body was like “ok, I know what’s going on now” and they went really well. The first set was smooth and I certainly could have done more than 4×6. But again, start light, make progress, especially since part of this is trying to rehab my shoulder… which actually is feeling much better since I discovered the stretch angle I needed was the one you get at the bottom of a dip (vs. things like pec stretching standing in a doorway). Been a big help.

All in all, things went well. Is this a +10% day? Hard to say, but I really feel like it was just a solid 80% day, progressing like one should.

In other news… I’m back officially on a “losing” diet. During the past month Nick put me into a maintenance mode. While there was leeway to gain some weight (Nick allowed me up to 5 lbs of gain), I really didn’t. I’ve basically held around 245 the whole month. A little up, a little down… I mean, yesterday morning I was at 247, and this morning at 245. I reckon I lost a little bloat given I was hungry all day yesterday. But basically I held steady.

My goal is to aim for a rate of 2 lbs per week. Aggressive I know, but I would really love to drop say 15 in 8 weeks. Being around 230 at the start of the new year would be pretty awesome. So, I’m going to do whatever it takes to get there. Driven.

Based upon Paul Carter’s Basebuilding

  • Bench Press (model 2)
    • bar x 5
    • bar x 5
    • 120 x 5
    • 135 x 4
    • 160 x 3
    • 175 x 2
    • 200 x 1
    • 210 x 1
    • 200 x 5
    • 200 x 5
    • 200 x 5
    • 175 x 5
    • 175 x 5
    • 175 x 5
    • 140 x 20 (AMRAP)
  • Chest Dips (between benches)
    • BW x 6
    • BW x 6
    • BW x 6
    • BW x 6
  • Incline Press (350 Method)
    • 85 x 22
    • WT x 17
    • WT x 13

Sunday Metal – My Favorite Judas Priest

When you have a career as long as Judas Priest, you know there are going to be lots of favorites.

“You Got Another Thing Comin'” is a favorite, because it’s one of those songs I gravitate to when I need to refresh my attitude.

But as unconventional as it is, and probably no surprise to long-time readers, one of my favorite Judas Priest songs to listen to is the “Rising in the East” version of “Diamonds and Rust”

 

Federal HST Ammo Tests

After reading my post about “Pick your ammo, and move on“, long time reader and KR Training student, shared some data collection he performed a few years ago.

This reader went out and did some ammo testing and did a nice write-up with charts and pictures and such about how it all went. It was originally posted on another website, but no more. He sent me the original HTML and pictures and said I could repost it here if I wanted to. So here it is, only touched up for formatting and other HTML-isms to make it work here on my blog.


The Testing of 9mm Federal Premium HST Rounds

on Wednesday, November 26, 2008 in Dale, Texas.

The purpose was to get a better understanding of how these rounds would function in various guns and check out the +P versions. All the reviews found to date have tested the 147 grain rounds, however the 124 grain as well as both +P versions seem to have been left out. I assumed the +P were just too new for the 2001 to 2005 testing data I had found on-line so we set up a test to see what would happen!

Weight was measured on an American Weigh Scale AMW-100 (0.01g graduation). A 100g weight was used to calibrate the scale before measurements were taken. Expanded diameter was measured with manual vernier calipers. Gel calibration was done with a .177 cal steel BB. Muzzle velocity (fps) was recorded by a Gamma Master Shooting Chrony chronograph with ballistic printer.
The Ballistic Grade Gelatin was provided by Vyse in their “Complete Trial Pack” for $90.00 including shipping. All three 6 inch by 6 inch blocks were made in a single batch using 10% gel and 90% RO water (water was under 140F). The gel is sticky nasty stuff – and smells like wet dog.

Shots were taken 10 feet from the gel and all velocity measurements were at the muzzle of the firearm.

Block 1 – BB depth 3 11/16 inches – 604.58 fps – Used for 9mm Glock 19 Test (4.06 inch barrel)
Block 2 – BB depth 4 3/16 inches – 608.47 fps – Used for 9mm Kel-Tec Sub-2000 Test (16 inch barrel)

Block 1 shot from the left
Block 2 shot from the right

Initial velocity measurements in fps

  115gn Remington (R9MM3) 124gn HST Federal Premium (P9HST1) 124gn +P HST Federal Premium (P9HST3) 147gn HST Federal Premium (P9HST2) 147gn +P HST Federal Premium (P9HST4)
Sub2000 1212.07 1279.19 1352.66 987.75 1047.86
Sub2000 1015.85 1257.13 1325.55 946.07 1041.02
Sub2000 1072.37 1287.35 1358.12 1003.81 955.25
Sub2000 1059.88 1261.98 1347.24 1020.57 1005.06
Sub2000 n/a 1264.35 1356.9 994.08 1040.93
Sub2000 in Gel n/a 1229.05 1337.56 1042.99 1053.15
Average 1090.04 1263.18 1346.34 999.21 1023.88
Standard Deviation 84.89 20.22 12.65 32.79 37.63
 
G19 1092.6 1146.08 1213.89 978.25 1021.94
G19 1066.42 1111.56 1210.37 999.25 1000.57
G19 1097.06 1139.39 1200.77 975.26 990.99
G19 1085.74 1155.49 1203.15 986.14 981.59
G19 1082.15 1159.03 1191.9 972.83 1006.9
G19 in Gel n/a 1139.18 n/a n/a 1003.31
Average 1084.79 1141.79 1204.02 982.35 1000.88
Standard Deviation 11.80 16.91 8.60 10.70 13.83

Into the Gel!


Pictured Above – 124 grain HST fired from a Glock 19

9mm 124 grain Federal Premium HST (P9HST1)

A single round was fired from a Glock 19 and a Kel-Tec Sub-2000 into Gel. Both rounds were found to have lost mass due to fragmentation (lost petals). All bullets had retained gel under the copper jackets along with a piece of a broken petal. The round from the Glock 19 retained 2 of the six lead petals while the round from the Sub-2000 fired bullet retained zero petals.

9mm 124 grain +P Federal Premium HST (P9HST3)

A single round was fired from a Glock 19 and a Kel-Tec Sub-2000 into Gel. Both rounds were found to have lost mass due to fragmentation (lost petals). All bullets had retained gel under the copper jackets. The Glock 19 bullet captured 1 of the broken petal against the copper jacket and retained 2 of the six lead petals. The round from the Sub-2000 fired bullet retained zero petals.


Pictured above – 124gn (upper) & 124gn +P (lower) fired from a Kel-Tec Sub2000

9mm 147 grain Federal Premium HST (P9HST2)

A single round was fired from a Glock 19 and a Kel-Tec Sub-2000 into Gel. They were all fully intact with a bit of gel under the copper jackets. The only noticeable difference between the Glock 19 round and the Sub-2000 was the additional gel penetration depth of just under 1 inch for the sub-2000. The size difference of the expanded 147 grain HST was noticeable when compared to the expanded 124 grain HST.

9mm 147 grain +P Federal Premium HST (P9HST4)

A single round was fired from a Glock 19 and a Kel-Tec Sub-2000 into Gel. They were all fully intact with a bit of gel under the copper jackets. The only noticeable difference between the Glock 19 round and the Sub-2000 was the additional gel penetration depth of just under 1 inch for the sub-2000. Again, the size difference of the expanded 147 grain +P HST was noticeable when compared to the expanded 124 grain HST (+P or otherwise!).


Pictured above – 147gn & 147gn +P (left to right) fired from the Kel-Tec Sub-2000


Pictured above – 147gn +P fired from the Glock 19

Recoil between the 124gn & 124gn +P was noticeable. You would be lucky to notice the difference between the 147gn and 147gn +P recoil. I really couldn’t tell in the G19 and another shooter using a Walther could just barely tell with the 147s.
The permanent wound cavities were very similar with the 147gn creating just slightly longer/larger destruction in the gel.

Recovered Bullets

Pictures

Comparing a 124 grain HST (left) to a 147 gain HST (right). The 147 grain bullet protrudes slightly more from the casing and there are longer & deeper cuts along the side of the bullet. The +P is marked on the casing as such while the non +P has luger on the head stamp.

147 grain HST
124 grain HST

Notice how almost all the petals are missing from the 124 grain bullets below

I also shot a 9mm Ranger-T into the gel just for fun. It had good penetration (about 13.5 inches into block 2) and retained the sharp copper points. However it was small compared to the 147 grain HSTs and fragments from the Ranger-T were visible in the gel. I didn’t end up saving it but should have upon reflection. It was very similar in size to the 124gn +P shot from the Kel-Tec Sub-2000.

Some fun

I had thought about shooting into 4 ply denim however it had already taken a long time to set up and test the 9mm. There were some more fun things to play with so we ended up shooting a HP .22LR. Surprisingly good penetration (11 inches) and it actually expanded. A hollow-point .223 was shot from about 15 feet and did an amazing amount of damage to the gel with significant fragmentation.

Then we fired a .308 HP into the gel. Velocity was measured at 2880 fps. The gel block jumped above the table about 2 feet and it blew a hole about the size of a loaf of bread in the bottom of the table. The gel block split along its side. We did find a sizable divot in the dirt below the table. We can only assume that a fragment of enough velocity and mass broke away, traveled down and out of the block creating the hole in the table. Wow!

We then shot the last intact block with a .30-06 HP. This broke the table in half and ripped part of the supporting saw-horse in half. The back side of the block was in fragments.

Taking aim with the .30-06.

Checking out the damage!


This was a group effort! My thanks to everyone that helped with the testing!

Updated November 28, 2008


Thank you again to my reader for sharing that and allowing me to reprint the testing here!

2014-11-21 training log

Grip. Grip. Grip.

I’ve been dry-firing more regularly. One thing that’s key to do in dry fire is to still grip the gun as hard as possible. It’s very easy to not do this because you know there’s no recoil to manage. So you must focus on it. I guess because of that, it’s spilled over here into my back work really thinking about grip today.

I ebb and flow here… sometimes with a fair grip, but then sometimes with a crush grip. In general you want to crush-grip things, but yeah, you forget amidst all the other cues and things to remember. But today, I focused on it.

What killed me was the Meadows Shrugs. I mean, each rep is probably 5 seconds long, and as you keep doing stuff well… my grip ended up peeding out before my shoulders did. After the 3rd set I went in search of the gym’s straps — lord, I knew better than to touch those things, and now I will certainly never touch them again. In fact, it made the 4th set harder because the grip circumference was larger and more squishy. Lost the straps for the 5th set and got more reps out because my grip lasted longer. Still tho, grip was the weak point here.

Frankly, I’m OK with this — if it gives me reason to get my grip strength back up, fine.

In fact, by the end of today’s session, my forearms looked and felt like my skin was going to tear — pump was crazy. :-)

Speaking of pump. I’ve long been feeling like I need another set of rows in here, like maybe doing seated cable rows for a “pump set”. So I did that today. Light weight (ended up being too light, but that’s probably A Good Thing™ for these purposes). Sit as upright and back arched/straight as possible. At the bottom of the movement, let the shoulders have as much extension as possible, then row back thinking about pulling from the elbows such that you try to touch the tips of the elbows together behind your back — impossible of course, but with that sort of range, scapular retraction, and even a little hold/squeeze at the top of the movement — let the back muscles work. It’s not out to get a ton of work in, just like a “light” pump set sort of thing just to ensure the back gets worked. It was good, and today did have a good feeling of solid back work in there… tho I do think I was slightly hampered by the exhaustion of my forearms. Still, all good.

I also dumped the 100-rep curls in favor of trying the 350-method. I liked it, and will stick with it for a while — a little heavier instead of just repping-out.

In other news….

The break period in my diet is over. Nick had me on a month of maintenance to give me a mental break as well as let my body relax a bit. I still stuck to a basic diet program (which really wasn’t that different from what I was doing for moths prior), but I did allow myself a little more slack and casualness with things at times. Overall weight has held, tho I think these past few days I bloated up a bit from allowing myself a little more (too much?) freedom since I knew this was it for another probably 3 months or so.

So… back on the losing train I go. If I can drop another 20 lbs in 3 months, I’ll be stoked.

Based upon Paul Carter’s Basebuilding

  • BB Rows
    • 150 x 8
    • 150 x 8
    • 150 x 8
    • 150 x 8
    • 150 x 8
  • Meadows Shrugs
    • 75e x 12
    • 75e x 12
    • 75e x 12
    • 75e x 8 (straps)
    • 75e x 10 (no straps)
  • Wide, Neutral-grip Lat Pulldowns
    • 130 x 10
    • 130 x 10
    • 130 x 10
    • 130 x 10
    • 130 x 10
  • Seated Cable Rows
    • 70 x 10
    • 70 x 10
    • 70 x 10
  • BB Curls (350 method)
    • 40 x 25
    • 40 x 15
    • 40 x 10
  • KR Training November 2014 Newsletter — Including 2015 schedule of classes

    The KR Training November 2014 newsletter is out.

    Biggest news from there is the 2015 class schedule is also available.

    There’s already some great guest instructors coming, like Caleb Causey, Ben Stoeger, Tom Givens, SouthNarc, and Massad Ayoob.

    The 2015 schedule does have some room for more classes, so if you don’t see a class you’ve been wanting to take, drop a line and request it!

    I would say it’d be wise to plan for classes now and reserve if you can. Classes do tend to fill up, and you may need to plan ahead due to circumstances (e.g. ammo purchases).

    BTW, for those of you that like to carry small guns in the summer? We’re going to offer our Defensive Pistol Skills Back-up Gun class twice this year. We believe this to be an important class. We KNOW you like carrying small guns in the summer, and shooting such small/pocket guns is more difficult than full-sized pistols that we tend to prefer to shoot. If you’re going to carry it, you ought to ensure you’re proficient with it. So now you’ve got 2 chances to take the class — take advantage of that opportunity. :-)

    See you on the range in 2015!

    About these ads

    Writing about whatever interests me, and maybe you.

    Follow

    Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

    Join 825 other followers

    %d bloggers like this: