I guess we just can't have this discussion here. Why are we talking about Ayoob? Whether you agree with or disagree with his conclusions (and for the 4th time, I personally disagree with his conclusions)is not the discussion. But just because I disagreed with his conclusions doesn't mean I disregard the data.
The discussion is about the data he presents in the articles, not his conclusions. The data remains regardless of the writer or his conclusions. Is no one capable of discerning this? Or do you think the data is all made up?
I guess this is why lawyers tear down the witness, because most don't have the critical thinking skills to differentiate between message and messenger.
I understand your frustration, but data acceptability is based to some degree on credibility; in this case, Ayoob's. If you're interested in pistol round penetration, read about Dr Fackler's (COL, MD, ret) testing and conclusions. No issues with creds or data, at least with the US Army, FBI, LAPD, etc. Bob
I don't always agree with his conclusions but I've never seen anything to make me think he was flat out lying. in that business is just way too easy to be caught in a lie, and if you are caught the shooting community would essentially run you out of your job. The man has been doing it for nearly 40 years if he had a habit of lying about data he would've been caught. given that the data presented is consistent with the experiences of other departments I personally don't question the data even though I do question his conclusions.
Gotta read my posts, Bro. Never said Ayoob was "lying". I said his credibility comes up short, due to a lack of experience as a street cop. If you haven't "been there and done that", you gotta get your data somewhere, so you use data from other sources, instead of personal experience. Doing traffic stops on hay-balers in a 1-stoplight town in New Hampshire doesn't qualify. Again, Ayoob is a good writer and apparently a nice guy. He doesn't 'LIE" but he writes articles about what he knows sells (gunfights and shooting), pimps himself off to defense attorneys as an expert (it's easy to get court-qualified on most any subject) and travels the country with his LFI roadshow (at least, that's what he used to call his courses). His conclusions are sometimes based on stuff ("data") that's wrong, but he doesn't know any better, because he's never been in a shooting, or even an almost-shooting. Some of the stuff he puts out as "data" is incorrect or flat-out dumb, but he goes by what he's been told by others, or what he's read, like most everyone else. It's a buyer's market for shooting instructors that teach you what to expect in a gunfight; most are full of BS. I'd rather listen to folks that have personal experience, several times over. They're out there; people like Kyle Lamb, Scotty Reitz, Larry Mudgett or Bill Allard. You just gotta be careful picking your "expert". It's your ass, after all. Bob
