3 ms·

https://www.wikihow.com/Avoid-Being-Shot https://www.wikihow.com/Avoid-Being-Shot Intrigued, I got some info from wikihow. > If you are a fast runner or have

https://www.wikihow.com/Avoid-Being-Shot https://www.wikihow.com/Avoid-Being-Shot Intrigued, I got some info from wikihow. > If you are a fast runner or have bad knees, run in a straight line away from the attacker towards cover. The faster you can get away, the fewer shots they will be able to fire. >If you are a slower runner and do not have knee trouble, a zig-zag run may be a better option. You may still be hit in this case, but the chances of being hit in a vital area may be reduced.

p51-remorse 2y ago
I’m guessing there aren’t many studies on this, but as a young, fast runner I’d zigzag every time if they’re shooting _at_ me. At least run in a straight line that isn’t collinear with the shooter’s position. Obviously, if you can find cover, put it between you and them and cover distance. It’s so, so hard for any amateur to hit a target that is moving radially in a polar coordinate system centered on them, at all. I’d bet your average shooter who makes the news can’t put 7/10 shots in a stationary silhouette at 10yd. It’s harder than you’d think.
- justin66 2y ago
  > I’m guessing there aren’t many studies on this Yeah. Researchers would have liked to interview them, but all the people who zig-zagged in favor of running as fast as they could are dead.
- el_benhameen 2y ago
  A classic scene on the subject: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=szcviFDt9xM https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=szcviFDt9xM Fictional, but based on a real event.
  - reducesuffering 2y ago
    I was thinking more Always Sunny https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCZ9sIrjXpM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCZ9sIrjXpM
- jstanley 2y ago
  > It’s so, so hard for any amateur to hit a target that is moving radially in a polar coordinate system centered on them, at all. Isn't that the easiest possible way because they remain on a constant bearing?
  - p51-remorse 2y ago
    Radially might be the wrong word; I thought for a while about it. You’re correct, your goal is to present a target that is moving from the perspective of the shooter. Ideally not moving at a constant angular velocity.

p51-remorse 2y ago

I’m guessing there aren’t many studies on this, but as a young, fast runner I’d zigzag every time if they’re shooting _at_ me. At least run in a straight line that isn’t collinear with the shooter’s position. Obviously, if you can find cover, put it between you and them and cover distance. It’s so, so hard for any amateur to hit a target that is moving radially in a polar coordinate system centered on them, at all. I’d bet your average shooter who makes the news can’t put 7/10 shots in a stationary silhouette at 10yd. It’s harder than you’d think.

justin66 2y ago
> I’m guessing there aren’t many studies on this Yeah. Researchers would have liked to interview them, but all the people who zig-zagged in favor of running as fast as they could are dead.
el_benhameen 2y ago
A classic scene on the subject: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=szcviFDt9xM https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=szcviFDt9xM Fictional, but based on a real event.
- reducesuffering 2y ago
  I was thinking more Always Sunny https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCZ9sIrjXpM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCZ9sIrjXpM
jstanley 2y ago
> It’s so, so hard for any amateur to hit a target that is moving radially in a polar coordinate system centered on them, at all. Isn't that the easiest possible way because they remain on a constant bearing?
- p51-remorse 2y ago
  Radially might be the wrong word; I thought for a while about it. You’re correct, your goal is to present a target that is moving from the perspective of the shooter. Ideally not moving at a constant angular velocity.