If you’re not familiar, the Rule of Threes or the 3-3-3 Rule is a self-defense “rule” that claims that most defensive gun uses take place within three feet (some say three yards), are over in three seconds, and involve three shots fired. It sounds reasonable, and it’s catchy and easy to remember. The trouble is that no one is really able to figure out where it came from. The internet at large seems to think the FBI figured this out, but I can’t find any FBI data that actually confirms it, or at least not for civilian use. There does seem to maybe be some FBI data that indicates the 3-3-3 rule holds true for officers, but an officer making an arrest or apprehending a suspect is a very different situation from private citizens protecting themselves against a threat to their lives.
Over time, the 3-3-3 Rule has grown into one of those things that “everybody knows” that might actually be just internet lore with no basis in fact.
Why Does It Matter?
What’s the big deal if this rule is false or not? Well, many instructors teach and many shooters train and prepare with this in mind. If you focus all your energy on being able to shoot at a couple of yards, you might struggle with accuracy if you’re faced with a threat at six or eight yards. If you count on only needing three shots and you carry a revolver or a microcompact with a six- or seven-round capacity assuming that’s good enough … well, what if it’s not? You don’t want to train to a set of assumptions that’s not based in reality, because it leaves big gaps in your skills and your preparedness.
So What Are the Actual Numbers?
This is hard to nail down, but a few organizations have assembled their own data. The Armed Attorneys, for example, put out a great video summarizing their own clients’ DGU data. They found that among their 30 most recent shooting cases (with a single attacker and a single defender), the average number of shots was closer to four—about 40% of the incidents involved three shots or less. One of the hosts states, “In my experience, typically in these types of situations, you either have the person who shoots one time and … maybe the target stopped, or they shoot about five times. There seems to be a one or a five, and you have a few that are right there in between, but it kind of seemed to be on one end or the other.” That’s an important note—in this particular data set, if the fight wasn’t over in one shot, it often took five shots to resolve.
The average distance was nine and a half feet, with most engagements falling between five and 12 feet. The average duration from draw to resolution was six seconds. Six seconds is still a short time, with a whole lot of chaos happening, but it’s twice the number stated in the 3-3-3 Rule.
Interestingly, the Armed Attorneys state that 40% of the time, the defender knew their attacker — family disputes, alcohol-fueled arguments, neighbor conflicts, etc. We know from other data that the number only goes up when we’re talking about female defenders—83% of women know their rapist, and 90% of female murder victims knew their murderer. If you have time, watch the video—the attorneys share lots of great insight, including the averages based on which clients got convicted and not.
The 2A Firearms Academy posts some data as well, though they do not cite their source other than “an analysis of 66 private-citizen defensive gun uses.” They found that 55% of DGUs involved more than three shots, and “a meaningful percentage” involved seven to 10 or more. They also found that only 18% of encounters happened at three yards or less, with 24% happening beyond 10 yards. Half of the encounters required an accurate shot at seven yards or longer, which, if true, is a really key piece of data to keep in mind when you’re training.
Interestingly, they found that 12% of DGUs involved hands-on contact between defender and attacker—we have no way to know how that number would change if we were to study only female defenders, but it’s important to know so you don’t neglect to train retention and defensive movements. The 2A Firearms Academy did not give an average round count, but they do point out that in every single one of the 66 cases analyzed, not a single case required a reload. Every incident was solved with whatever the defender had in the gun.
It’s pretty obvious that the 3-3-3 Rule just doesn’t hold up for civilian defensive gun uses. That matters, because it informs how we train and what we prepare ourselves for. The bottom line is that you just don’t know what you’ll be facing when you are required to defend your life, so it’s best to train for the average-and-beyond statistics. Don’t dial in on three shots at three feet, but also don’t spend a ton of time trying to become an accuracy expert at 40 feet, either, because that’s an outlier distance-wise. And while there’s nothing wrong with carrying an extra magazine and training fast reloads, understand that it seems statistically unlikely that you’ll ever need them, so that space on your belt might be better used for something else (like an IFAK).
