Posted on 09/12/2014 12:09:36 PM PDT by RC one
Assailants rarely stand still and announce themselves as a “threat.” In the September issue of Townhall Magazine, where this article originally appeared, BearingArms.com's Bob Owens asks if your firearms training is realistic.
I’ve been to a number of different self-defense courses in the past 20 years, almost all of them focused on drawing and shooting at a stationary paper target at a known distance on a static firing line after the lead instructor has shouted “threat!”
I’m now supremely confident that if I am ever attacked by a stationary paper target, I will survive.
Unfortunately, criminals rarely shout “threat!” as they attack, they don’t conveniently stand stock-still, and they’re incredibly uncooperative with their would-be victims. The sad fact of the matter is that even most “advanced” self-defense classes offered by reputable organizations and shooting schools only prepare us to deal with caricatures of threats, and generally in manners that won’t succeed in a real conflict.
For example, you might be told that once you are given the fire command, you are to fire two shots into the center of target “A” and then run to cover, perform a reload while hiding behind cover, and then engage with target “B” as you emerge from cover on the opposite side. You knew what to expect the entire time, because the scenario was explained completely beforehand.
An advanced class might feature a more complex drill involving reactive targets (targets that move after being struck just once, or after a prescribed number of times) and “no shoot” non-threatening targets representing normal people going about their daily lives. Instead of engaging a specific number of targets in a specific order with a specific number of shots, the shooter is going to have to read the situation at each point of the process and think their way through the scenario as they encounter possible threats.
Such a class introduces complexity and is more realistic but the course of fire, once set, is set. The reactive target can’t decide to become a non-threat, and the “no shoot” can’t drop a bouquet of flowers as it draws a knife and charges you, and you are generally not allowed the best defensive option, which is creating space between the assailant and yourself, running if you can.
To get the semblance of a real threat, humans need to attack other humans.
It is because of this need for more realistic force-on-force training that the U.S. military introduced the Multiple Integrated Laser Engagement System in 1980, and later added man-marker rounds that allowed servicemen to use their real weapons with conversion kits that would only fire paintball-like or wax-based marker rounds.
In more recent years, many companies have added force-on-force training courses for civilians that use commercial, off-the-shelf airsoft firearms that mimic the action of modern firearms, but which fire lightweight 6-millimeter plastic BBs at a reduced velocity.
I was recently able to witness force-on-force training using realistic airsoft pistols. Trace Armory Group incorporated force-on-force scenario training in their NRA defensive pistol class. After a morning of shooting real handguns at paper targets, students were directed to the Camp Butner MOUT (Military Operations on Urban Terrain) range for role-playing exercises that happened in, around, and among the range’s buildings. The defending student was armed with an airsoft pistol in an inside-the-waistband holster, and would be expected to “act appropriately” to the appearance of an unexpected person or persons.
In some scenarios the opposing role-player was nothing more than a curious person engaging the defender in conversation. In others, they were intent on an all-out attack with a handgun, knife, or blunt object. In other scenarios, the assailant was informed to react to the defender, and only to attack if the defender gave them an opportunity, letting the opposing player get close enough to use a knife or bat.
While not perfectly mimicking real life, the course quickly informed every student that shooting at paper targets from a static position is poor preparation for a real life defensive scenario.
In the 70-plus scenarios I saw acted out, the defender had the opportunity to establish a classic two-handed firing grip just once; the rest of the engagement was typically one-handed hip shooting or point shooting with only the rare use of sights.
In many scenarios, the defender was using their support side hand to ward off attacks that often didn’t develop until opposing players were an arm’s length away. Static, stay-in-your-lane shooting might make liability insurance for shooting ranges more affordable, but is it preparing you to deal with real life threats the way that force-on-force training might? •
Right.
While acting in a civilian capacity, I have presented myself where my weapon was visible three times. I have drawn once. I have shot zero times.
...and this is from my contracted guard days.
Preparing for a self-defense scenario is impossible. The advise I was given and the advise I give is to get familiar with your weapon and practice handling your weapon. Nobody wants to be fumbling around trying to chamber a round or fumbling around trying to get a safety off or trying to undo a holster strap when seconds count.
Or women... trying to dig through a purse to find your weapon or reaching in a glove box thats locked... etc, etc.
I practice getting it out, getting it locked and loaded, and getting on target as quickly as possible. I would never know if I was upside-down on my back trying to ready my weapon or running a sprint trying to ready my weapon... I would never know.
This is The Peoples Republic of CT....never happen.
Yes fortunately most of the time just showing the weapon is enough to diffuse the situation. Most criminals are looking for the easy target. They move on if it looks like a fight.
Mr. GG2 and I were in a situation a few months ago and we just gave the guy the stinkeye and he seemed to have ESP that it was going to be a bad outcome. He swerved off and kept walking away from us.
Yep. You see the lions on TV surrounding the slowest or injured antelope. Same thing.
Me and the wife were on the range today. She fired off 100 rounds in her new Glock 42 .380 pistol. I fired up my new shotgun with buck shot. Man what a hole that makes in the targets. Any guy I ht with that will not get up off the floor.
We should just put up signs that say “No Threat Zone”.
Then everyone would be safe forever.
Post 10 did sound that way.
Ha, my neighbor saw me coming back from an obvious hunting trip.
“How’d you do? Kill anything”
I said “OH yeah... I racked up this time. I shot four pepsi cans, a miller lite and a bud light... two fence posts and a what looked like a spent diaper at 100 yards.”
There you go being an absolutist.
Since I am the guy trying to get you away from being an absolutist, that was a pretty silly post.
I guess you were even absolute in what you would tolerate as a response to your post 10.
Anyone who follows the firm advice you gave them in post 10, could find themselves in deep trouble.
What advice did I give?
People would do well to avoid your advice and not absorb your “observations” to incorporate them into their knowledge of threat risk.
Don’t know I could here in print. But basically, up until a few months ago, I shot about 50 rounds a day in a pit where I could set up targets as I choose, run drills etc.
What was my "advice," Skippy?
You are offended by the fact that I called bad guys "cowards."
The only reason you would be offended is because you have probably participated in criminal activity.
I'm right, aren't I?
So it turns out that you are just an internet troll.
Post ten was overboard, which made it inaccurate, you can naively cling to whatever fantasies fill your head, the important thing is that normal people not listen to you.
You seem to quite the troll yourself.
There are conversations where that generalization can apply and be useful as part of making a point, but the strong way you used it, is completely wrong, a lot of bad guys love danger and excitement and by no means do they always operate in packs. When you hear of bad guys being armed to the hilt and security obsessed, it isn't cops they are afraid of, it is the other bad guys that scare them, the bad guys who know that they are armed to the hilt with guns everywhere.
34 posted on 9/12/2014 1:10:12 PM by ansel12 (LEGAL immigrants, 30 million 1980-2012, continues to remake the nation's electorate for democrats) [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 |
You should teach her the right way—to be just as judicious with the ammo. Would she have another mag handy if there were multiple and determined perps who waited till she was empty?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.