Weapon Focus.. BLAHH

[clgustaveson]

Ok, So I have read at least 100 million threads on this site alone, , that suggest some people don't know what the heck Weapon Focus is....

Can someone please tell me how it is construed to be a method of slight of hand?

Weapon focus has only been studied in its relation to eyewitness testimony.

Unless you have an illuminating weapon that blinds the BG your OC gun isn't going to divert the attention of someone else carrying a gun.

Dr. Elizabeth loftus studied the relationship between eyewitness testimony and a deadly weapon to determine the effect on the testimony... which sucked. If a deadly weapon is involved eyewitness testimony is damaged dramatically because those present focus on the weapon rather than relevant details.

This nonsense about the visible gun allowing someone the chance to pull out their concealed gun is a joke... it makes me laugh every time I see it!

"Wait! Look at my shiny deser eagle... while i pull out my .380 cap you!"

 

[clgustaveson]

And weapon focus. The BG is so focused on the weapon that he/she can see, they don't pay attention to the weapon they can't. Or even can. They pay so much attention to the OC handgun they ignore the concealed one, or the knife in the pocket, or even your hand.

LAME

 

[IndyGunner]

I studied that in one of my psychology class. When youre talking about BGs, that would be considered more of a deterrent (if at all). Weapon focus, like you said, affects the ability of a witness to recall specific details in the presence of a weapon. (knife, gun, etc)

One study we looked at had a priest and a cop. Each sat down, put their handgun on the table, and had a conversation. Never mentioning or even looking at the gun. After the confo they grabbed the gun, and left. The person was then given a test on what the guy looked like, what they talked about, etc. Most people scored around a 90% for the cop. Most people scored around a 5% for the priest.

 

[clgustaveson]

I studied that in one of my psychology class. When youre talking about BGs, that would be considered more of a deterrent (if at all). Weapon focus, like you said, affects the ability of a witness to recall specific details in the presence of a weapon. (knife, gun, etc)

One study we looked at had a priest and a cop. Each sat down, put their handgun on the table, and had a conversation. Never mentioning or even looking at the gun. After the confo they grabbed the gun, and left. The person was then given a test on what the guy looked like, what they talked about, etc. Most people scored around a 90% for the cop. Most people scored around a 5% for the priest.

Links are beneficial here, the results you gave sound wrong. Not saying they are but typically it is around 15% recall when a deadly weapon is involved.

 

[Disposable Heart]

To be honest, the few times I was mugged, I didn't even remember the weapon used or what time it was or what the guy looked like (other than generic things, race, etc... even hair color was hard to remember). I think in situations involving violence or dispensement of violence, weapon's focus is the LEAST of any accuracy detriments when taking reports. Just the violence of the event itself damages testimony and rememberance of the action....

 

[IndyGunner]

Links are beneficial here, the results you gave sound wrong. Not saying they are but typically it is around 15% recall when a deadly weapon is involved.

I couldnt possibly find it for you or even say its 100% correct percent. I took the class 2 years ago. Just felt like sharing. I guess you should take my previous statement with a grain of salt. Ill try and email my psych prof and get him to link it to me. (to be continued)

 

[clgustaveson]

I couldnt possibly find it for you or even say its 100% correct percent. I took the class 2 years ago. Just felt like sharing. I guess you should take my previous statement with a grain of salt. Ill try and email my psych prof and get him to link it to me. (to be continued)

Sounds great... What school did you go to?

 

[clgustaveson]

To be honest, the few times I was mugged, I didn't even remember the weapon used or what time it was or what the guy looked like (other than generic things, race, etc... even hair color was hard to remember). I think in situations involving violence or dispensement of violence, weapon's focus is the LEAST of any accuracy detriments when taking reports. Just the violence of the event itself damages testimony and rememberance of the action....

Well, this is true... eyewitness testimony is generally crap anyway. But it it becomes even more crappiest when there is a deadly weapon involved. We humans have bad recall in generall, if you don't give your statement withint the 2 hour memory curve your testimony is pointless.

 

[IndyGunner]

Took some searching, but I found it.

weapon focus 2.pdf

That should be a pdf of the entire thing. If it doesnt work then I guess youd need my bsu account info to look at it. In that case well have to wait until my prof sends me his slides.

 

[IndyGunner]

Sounds great... What school did you go to?

Im currently a junior at Ball State University. Studying financial investments and risk management. Only 1 year and 1 semester left!!!

 

[clgustaveson]

My accounts at BSU are all still active, Ill look at that when I get home (dont want mediafire doing any damage on my work computer).

 

[IndyGunner]

I 110% trust mediafire, but I understand why you would want to wait. When did you go there?

 

[clgustaveson]

I 110% trust mediafire, but I understand why you would want to wait. When did you go there?

I don't pay for em, and I have had some adware problems in the past.

Graduated 2010

 

[jeremy]

You will find when People are stressed no matter whether there is a Weapon involved or not they probably cannot tell you the day or any other real details. Even those that blather to being trained just for this type of thing...

 

[clgustaveson]

You will find when People are stressed no matter whether there is a Weapon involved or not they probably cannot tell you the day or any other real details. Even those that blather to being trained just for this type of thing...

Well, typically memory is better when someone experiences an adrenaline rush. It is the phenomenon that the individual only focuses on certain things that makes testimony worthless.

 

[jeremy]

Well, typically memory is better when someone experiences an adrenaline rush. It is the phenomenon that the individual only focuses on certain things that makes testimony worthless.

Ever talk to a Soldier after a Firefight or an IED?!
Or a LEO after a High Speed Chase?!

Good luck getting anything out of that...
LOL

 

[clgustaveson]

Ever talk to a Soldier after a Firefight or an IED?!
Or a LEO after a High Speed Chase?!

Good luck getting anything out of that...
LOL

This is true, but think about what is being focused on... The car, everything else peripheral.

I am not disagreeing with you I am just giving an answer.

 

[jeremy]

Not meaning to sound argumentative...

I have interviewed LOTS of Soldiers doing AAR's of Combat. Rarely could I get one who could tell you who was the actual shooter let alone what was being shot at them. Actually you would find it amazing at how much thought is usually put into something as simple as if their squadmates were there with them...

 

[clgustaveson]

Not meaning to sound argumentative...

I have interviewed LOTS of Soldiers doing AAR's of Combat. Rarely could I get one who could tell you who was the actual shooter let alone what was being shot at them. Actually you would find it amazing at how much thought is usually put into something as simple as if their squadmates were there with them...

Yeah, your missing the point.

PTSD is something entirely different but were talking about peripheral recall and recall of focus. Its not likely when being shot at the person is going to focus on the five ws.... thats why its so sketchy. Typically there focus is narrowed to a small amount of detail, it is being able to determine what that is that makes the interviewer valuable (not trying offend), but if I am being shot at the few things I will pay attention to are, my health, and vague aspects of my threat. I don't care what color his hair is, how tall he is, but more along the lines of where he is and what he is doing.

 

[jeremy]

Yeah, your missing the point.

LOL...
No I am not I just do not think Weapons Focus is really that big of a deal...

PTSD is something entirely different but were talking about peripheral recall and recall of focus. Its not likely when being shot at the person is going to focus on the five ws.... thats why its so sketchy. Typically there focus is narrowed to a small amount of detail, it is being able to determine what that is that makes the interviewer valuable (not trying offend), but if I am being shot at the few things I will pay attention to are, my health, and vague aspects of my threat. I don't care what color his hair is, how tall he is, but more along the lines of where he is and what he is doing.

No I am not talking PTSD.

I am talking minutes to hours after debriefing on what has happened to determine whether it was a good Action or Not. Think more like what LEO's would have to do after they are involved in a Murder/Killing of someone.