WARRIOR TALK NEWS

The HK Machineguns

By Chris Upchurch, Suarez International Director of Marketing

Soon after HK began producing the G3 battle rifle for the Bundeswehr they began working on a machinegun design.  The resulting family of weapons are still close cousins of the G3.  They use the same roller delayed blowback design and many parts can be interchanged between the battle rifle and the machineguns.

While most machineguns derived from battle rifles are fed from box magazines the most common variants of the HK machineguns are the belt fed versions: the HK21 in 7.62x51mm and the HK23 in 5.56mm. Unusually for a belt fed machinegun, the belt is below the bolt, rather than above. This makes changing belts more cumbersome, but it allows the belt feed unit to be switched out for a magazine well that can accept standard G3 magazines or 50 round drums (HK33 magazines for the HK23). The switch requires only the magwell, a new bolt, and a recoil spring assembly. In this form the 7.62x51mm MG is the HK11 and the 5.56mm version is the HK13. The level of modularity extends even further, allowing the 7.62x51mm HK21 to be converted to a 5.56mm HK23 (or the box fed HK13).

Parts required to convert between belt fed and box fed.

The HK machineguns fire from a closed bolt. This means the barrel does not have as much opportunity to cool between shots as it does in an open bolt machinegun. Having a live round in a hot chamber does present the danger of a round ‘cooking off’ (firing due to heat, without the primer being struck by the firing pin) but heating up the gun to that degree requires around 1000 rounds of continuous fire. The closed bolt design, combined with a free floated heavy barrel makes these weapons very accurate. Sub-MOA accuracy is typical.

They are equipped with a quick change barrel, allowing a hot barrel to be swapped out for a fresh one in a matter of seconds. Unlike some other designs, only the barrel needs to be removed, as there is no gas system and the sights and bipod are attached to the charging handle tube and barrel shroud respectively.

The earlier versions came with an SEF trigger group allowing single shots or fully automatic fire. The newer HK21E adds a three-round burst option, as well as a forward assist, a new belt feeding mechanism and numerous minor improvements.

 

The HK21 series is light for a 7.62x51mm General Purpose Machine Gun. The original HK21 weighs in at only 17.46 pounds, with the newer HK21A1 coming int at 18.3 lbs. Compare this to the contemporary M60 at 23.5 lbs or the FN-MAG at 26 lbs.

The HK21 came along too late for widespread adoption by the Bundeswehr, which had already standardized on the MG3 (basically a 7.62x51mm version of the WWII era MG42). However, the HK11 and HK11A1 were adopted by both the Bundeswehr and the Bundesgrenzschutz (Federal Border Guards) as a designated marksman’s rifle and support weapon under the designation G8 and G8A1. There aren’t many machineguns accurate enough to be used as a DMR.

The HK21 family saw widespread adoption around the world. It served with Portugal, Mexico, Greece, Sweden, Thailand, Peru, Ecuador, and others. Generally it was adopted by nations that had also adopted the G3 or HK33, taking advantage of the commonality among the HK family of weapons. Portugal and Mexico both produced the design under license.

In the United States, the HK23 lost out to the FN Minimi (adopted as the M249) in the Squad Automatic Weapon competition in the late 1970s. However, the HK21 did see service with U.S. Special Operations units, including Delta Force, which deployed them during Operation Eagle Claw, the 1980 attempt to rescue American hostages in Iran.

More than any other area of the HK family, the machineguns highlight the modularity of the design. The ability to go between calibers as well as between belt and box fed just by changing out a few parts is really quite amazing.

Discuss the HK machineguns on Warriortalk.

The HK Sniper Rifles

By Chris Upchurch, Suarez International Director of Marketing

The G3 was scarcely in service before it began being adapted to serve the needs of snipers and designated marksmen. Thanks to it’s free float barrel design, its well suited for applications where more precision is required.

G3A3ZF

The first move from the standard G3 battle rifle towards a sniper or designated marksman’s rifle was the G3A3ZF (ZF for ‘Zielfernrohr’: ‘Telescope’). This was simply a standard G3 with a Hensoldt 4x optical scope attached via a claw mount. With updated optics the G3A3ZF is still in service with the Bundeswehr as a designated marksman’s rifle (DMR).

G3SG/1

The next adaption for the sniper role involved some modification of the rifle. When G3 rifles were tested at the factory, HK set aside the ones that shot the most accurately for conversion to a G3SG/1. They were equipped with a Zeiss 1.5–6 telescopic sight and a cheek rest on the stock. They also received a special trigger group that included a button behind the trigger which allows the shooter to ‘set’ the trigger before firing. Setting the trigger in this manner reduces the trigger pull to approximately 1 lb. Despite this the G3SG/1 retains the full-auto capability of it’s battle rifle predecessor.

HK33SG/1

The HK33SG/1 is an adaption of the same modifications applied to the G3SG/1 to the 5.56mm HK33 design.

 

 

 

PSG1

The PSG1 was born out of tragedy. When Palestinian terrorists took Israeli athletes hostage at the Munich Olympics in 1972, the police officers assigned as sharpshooters to shoot the terrorists at the airport had only iron sighted G3s. The first shot, aimed at the terrorist leader, missed its target. In the ensuing gunbattle, all the hostages were killed. The debacle led to the formation of GSG 9, Germany’s first dedicated counter-terrorist unit. Recognizing the need for a precision rifle, HK created the PSG1.

The design is based on the G3, using the same roller delayed blowback action. Modifications are far more extensive than the G3SG/1, however. It has reinforcing rails to help stiffen the receiver and a heavy barrel, intended to increase accuracy. There is a new, highly adjustable stock and a target grip. It has a trigger mechanism designed specifically for the sniper (though unlike the G3SG/1 this one has no full auto capability). The rifle also has a bolt closure device, (basically a forward assist) intended to ensure the bolt locks up properly when it’s being eased forward silently, rather than being allowed to slam home. It was originally fitted with a Hensolt 6x42mm scope.

All of this results in a very heavy rifle. It weighs in at 17.86 pounds, about eight pounds heavier than a standard G3. This is less of an issue for counter-terrorist or SWAT applications, where the sniper will probably be delivered to the area by vehicle and shoot from a rest. Evidence of its intended use can be found in the fact that it came with a tripod fore-end rest (though it can be fitted with a bipod if desired). This is not a rifle you’d want to carry long distances or shoot offhand.

All that weight does buy some truly great accuracy however. HK guarantees 3 inches at 300 yards. One MOA at 300 yards is definitely a good rifle, but the real eye opener here is that HK guarantees this for a 50 round group. That is exceptionally consistent.

In 2007 HK introduced an updated version, the PSG1A1. The main update was a replacement of the old fixed power Hensolt with a new Schmidt & Bender 3–12x50mm optic. To accommodate longer scopes, the charging handle was relocated counterclockwise so it would now clear the optic with the bolt locked open.

 

MSG90

The MSG90 was designed as a lower cost version of the PSG1. Unlike its more expensive cousin, the MSG90 was more oriented towards military use. The MSG90 is closer, in both appearance and design, to the G3. It’s somewhat lighter than the PSG1, though it still weighs in at a hefty 14.11 pounds. It’s equipped with a fixed power 10x optic. A modified version, the MSG90A1 entered production in 1997. It has G3 style iron sights as a backup and can be fitted with a flash hider or suppressor.

MSG3

HK developed the MSG3 for the Bundeswehr as a designated marksman’s rifle. It is much closer to the G3 design than the PSG1 or MSG90, using the standard G3 receiver and fore-end. It also retains the G3’s iron sights. It uses a PSG1 trigger group and an MSG90 adjustable stock.

Discuss the HK Sniper Rifles on Warriortalk

The Difference Between The HK and the AK

With our new involvement with the G3 and HK33 rifles, we have received questions about the differences between these, and the AK we are famous for developing. 

In short, the AK became popular in the USA because it was a cheap gun. Period. One could buy a kit for $50, and assemble a reasonably adequate gun for about $300. Or one could buy a pristine kit and have a very nice gun for about $500. Sadly, the "cheapskate persona" remained with the AK up until today even after the kits disappeared and the quality of manufacture - even custom - went down. That persona has severely stiffled the development of the AK in the USA.

Today if you want a good AK you will be looking at an Arsenal, or a converted VEPR. There may be a few custom shops that turn out good rifles as well. Example would be Krebs. But these will be in the realm of $1200 - 1500. Anything under $1000 today is a gamble on quality. 

Advantages of the AK are as follows - 

1). Very simple weapon to operate and maintain

2). Magazines (surplus ones) are still plentiful for the 7.62x39, and top tier US Palm are available under $30.

3). You can get great weapon specific training at Suarez International

The main problems that persist with the AK are as follows -

1). Very few quality accessories have been made in the USA. There are a few companies such as Midwest Industries, that are making top shelf accessories for this rifle, but most others are focusing solely on price...again reflecting the interest of the mass AK market.

2). Since many rifles are built on de-milled parts, the age and quality of those parts is in question. We have seen some very nice rifles and some absolutely unsatisfactory rifles. As well, since very few of these rifles enter the country as sold, the assembler/builder will determine the quality.  And that is as unpredictable as the weather. 

3). Number two, coupled with low grade ammo, leads to poor performance.  The development of ComBloc ammo has simply not been developed by the ammo companies as they cannot compete with the cheap training ammo imported from the east.

4). There is no uniformity between rifles and magazines or parts between countries may not
interchange.

The AK is an excellent rifle concept, and could be a very fantastic rifle (witness the Finn's Sako 95), but such a rifle is not likely to be made here in the USA at a price anyone could justify paying.

Now to the HK. The HK systems were around long before the AWB of '94, and were the epitome of the Assault Rifle then. The HK-91, 93 and 94 (AKA G3, HK33 and MP5) were the benchmark for special operations and SWAT. When the AWB errupted on the scene, HK lost a great deal of money and, disgusted with the American civilian gun scene (and after something like that who would blame them), took those guns off the market and sold them overseas.

The HK family was used and is still used in a great many countries. A search on wikipedia for G3 or HK33 will show. I have seen them in almost every country I have visited and they have been built by various nations under license from HK and on German machinery. Being German, the design and tolerances are far superior to the AK systems, and a magazine from Thailand will fit into a Greek rifle, and a Turkish handguard will pop right on to a German rifle with no issues.

Advantages of the HK Over AK -

1). Uniformity of design and fabrication.  All one has to do is examine the two systems with an open mind.  It would be like comparing a Russian Lada with a German Audi.

2). Has not been co-opted by the "Hills Have Eyes" crowd.  There are no cheap accessories or "trashtical" add-ons to the HK platform.

3). Just as simple to operate and maintain as the AK platform...perhaps more so.

4). Dramatically enhanced accuracy capability compared to AK due to weapon design, and use of
very prolific and highly developed NATO ammo.

5). True weapon family available in 9mm, 223, 7.62x39, and 308 in SBR, rifle, and DMR
configurations. That is something that has been tried unsuccessfully by the AK world.

6). Magazines still very available for all the platforms. A new G3 magazine will cost less than ten dollars.

With the HK, we hear many of the same "yeah buts" that we heard with the AK when we began studying that system.  Here are our ripostes to some of those.

Ergonomics:  These are a matter of what one is used to. Just like an AK is not an M4, neither is an HK and AK. What is needed is to learn the system. The HK safety, for example, is far easier to operate than any AK safety and it is substantially easier to make it technically ambidextrous, which has not proven possible with an AK.

Optics Addition: I think we can rule out stock rifles since none of them are optimal. But once we realize that things can be added for enhancements.  Investment Grade Firearms, our choice for any and all HK work, can easily weld a picatinny over the top of the receiver without the need for pivoting top covers, zero retention concerns, or anything else.  Thus the HK is head and shoulders above the AK with optics. 

Today, these rifle systems are available from Vector and PTR. And like anything else, they can be substantially better with some additions. We have several PTRs and Vector 93s and 53s in house with the staff and the consensus is that they rival the original and virtually unobtainable HKs. Those "legacy" HKs by the way are as pointless to the discussion as original Israeli Army UZI are
to a discussion of that platform as they are not available at any reasonable price point.

Incidentally, if a PTR or Vector has an issue, they will take it back immediately and either fix it or replace it. Something the original HK factory would rarely do. So in a sense, this is a better time for HKs than what we had before.

Disadvantages of the HK System -

1). These weapons are not for the economically challenged. You won't be getting a good HK rifle for the price of a used WASR ten.  And magazines for the 223 and 9mm versions will exceed the cost for a comparable AK magazine.

2). Few schools have any experience running the platform

That is it in a nutshell. I am glad I have rediscovered this platform and am making a personal shift toward it and away from the AK platform. I have obtained a G3 copy (PTR-91) with enhancements, and a pair of V-93s, one of which will be an SBR. These will be my main working guns.

I will say that had the HK platform been quickly available in 2004, there would have been far less
interest in the AK system, and much more focus on the G-3 and HK-33. 

Gabe Suarez

Blessed be The Lord My Rock - Jesus Christ
To Whom I Owe All That I Am, All That I Have Been, Or Will Ever Be.

COMMENT ON THIS ARTICLE AT WARRIORTALK 

VISIT ONE SOURCE TACTICAL FOR MORE INFO ON HK-BASED RIFLE SYSTEMS

The Fog Of War - A Lack Of Certainty

Clausewitz wrote about it as "The Fog Of War". SunTzu wrote about it as "not knowing yourself or the enemy". It is a lack of certainty. It comes from a lack of information about what is actually
at hand. Without information, accurate decisions are very difficult to make. What happens is you get a bunch of educated guesses and then a tentative decision based on those guesses. 

That is why military planners spend more on gathering intell than on the weapons to exploit that intell. How does that play out for the individual operator?

I wrote an email to a friend recently about this topic and how it plays out in events like what happened in Aurora. Quite simply, if one is denied the suitable intell to make a decision, no decision will tend to be made. And at such a time, unless there is an ingrained, and trained default response, the subject will liklely freeze in place...as if he is on pause waiting for more information.

Put aside the 4S issues of a midnight movie is a questionable hood and follow. Think of the circumstances there. Sitting in the dark, focused on the screen. Loud movie sounds all around.

Then you hear shooting. Information! Is it the movie? You think it is. People now screaming...what scared them from the movie...you weren't scared by the scene. Smoke in the theatre. What is this? Gun shots but not from the movie. Where are they coming from? People screaming and running.

Can you tell what is going on? Can you see the gunman through the smoke? How close is he? Too far to reach? Or is he close enough to touch? Unlikely as the gunshots were not close to you otherwise you would have noticed them sooner. The exit is clogged with people, the smoke makes
visibility impossible, and you cannot tell where the shots are coming from yet.

Do you understand the lack of certainty affecting actions? So your work now involves two things.

One is making sure that you have as much intell as possible, of an actionable sort, given the circumstances. You won't get alot, but the art of determining what is happening from bits and pieces of information is an essential one. The same event as Aurora, but in a well lit threatre where  someone is giving a speech makes for a different set of information and certainty of decision does it not? Darkness and the intentional self-removal from reality called for in a movie contributed to the situation.

Two is to have a default response in the event that you have no actionable intell. What that default response should be I cannot say...but to have neither actionable intell nor default response will lead to confusion and probably inaction, which could be a fatal thing.

One of our members at Warrior Talk called it "Efficiency in Ambiguity". Excellent phrase! So how do we obtain efficiency in ambiguity? I think a number of things need to be in place for that.

Moral Certainty – “What I am about to do is the right thing and I need to do it right now”. That comes from clarity of mission and pure focus brought on by a clear decision based on what has been observed. And that impending action is executed without getting clearance or permission from anyone.

That is a rare thing indeed today in police, military, and civilian worlds. I suspect that had the theatre been filled with “average gun guys”, or "average (Unarmed) off duty police", the outcome would not have been much different. And lets not forget the events of Fort Hood. Thirteen died there, and they were soldiers.

The factor of “being taken by surprise” is of course an important consideration, but I think there is more going on. Very few people, in any walk of life, see themselves as fighters any more…and I suspect that includes cops and soldiers. You guys in the service correct me if I am wrong,
but not everyone has the mindset of a Ranger or a Force Recon dude do they? And I can tell you from quite personal, and distasteful, experience that fighters are quite rare in police work.

As well, since all three groups today get beaten over brow and genitals with the fear of liability, the desire to close with and destroy anything, especially if there is any ambiguity over the events, or one has not received official sanction to go and do that directly by a superior, is rare as well.

Actual Capability –  What do we need? To be able to run up to another man, like Holmes, and shoot him in the face without any deleterious emotions interrupting us. Unless we have personal experience, or train in killing regularly, we will not  succeed in these events. And by that I mean meaningful training as is seen in strenuos force on force, hunting large game, or prior personal experience in combat of some sort where one has killed an enemy close enough to know that it was his bullet or his blade that did it. Even the ambiguos gun-pop phrases of "self defense", "shooting to stop", etc., while fine for court, will lead to an incorrect mindset.  

From Sun Tsu - “If officers are unaccustomed to rigorous [training] they will be worried and hesitant in battle; if generals are not thoroughly trained they will be inwardly quail when they face the enemy.”

 

The HK33

By Chris Upchurch, Suarez International Director of Marketing

In some ways the HK33 is the forgotten middle child of the HK family. While it doesn’t have the same level of recognition as the G3 or the MP5, this relatively unheralded rifle has a long history of service around the world.

The HK33

With the rise of the 5.56x45mm round in the 1960s, Heckler & Koch designed a rifle around the new cartridge. The HK33 drew heavily from the design of the successful G3 battle rifle, scaled down for the smaller round. It uses the same roller delayed blowback action and some parts are interchangeable between the two designs.

The HK33KA3

The original HK33 was followed by the HK33K, which sports a slightly shorter barrel. This led to the more radically redesigned HK53, with the barrel cut down to 8 inches. The ’53 sports many features from the MP5 submachine gun. Indeed, it’s practically the same size as the MP5 and it packs a lot more firepower.

The HK53A3

The German Army never adopted the HK33 (they stayed with the G3 until it was replaced by the 5.56mm G36 in the 1990s). It did see adoption as the standard service rifle in a variety of armies, including Thailand, Malaysia, and Chile.

Where the HK33 really found its niche was with special operations forces around the world. The SEALs fielded imported HK33s under the designation T223 in Vietnam. It was favored for its 40 round magazines (at a time when only 20 rounders were available for the M16) and greater reliability. As one SEAL put it, “It was a lot easier to clean and maintain than the M16 and worked well in the jungle environment. While other men of the platoon would be just starting to clean their weapons after an op, I would already be done and moving on to something else.”

 

 

The HK53 also saw service in the UK with the Special Air Service and Special Boat Service. Its adoption no doubt aided by its commonality with the MP5. It saw extensive service in Northern Ireland with the SAS and SBS., as well as 14 Int. a covert surveillance unit. It was particularly prized for its handiness when operating inside vehicles. In his book Immediate Action, Andy McNab describes a running car chase/gun battle with HK53 armed SAS troopers pursuing a van of IRA gunmen. The HK53 continues in British service today, particularly in dignatary protection roles.

 

 

Some police agencies in the U.S. adopted the HK53 for their SWAT teams, particularly during the 1990s when the increasing prevalence of body armor led many of them to transition away from 9mm submachine guns to .223 rifles. Again the HK53 had the advantage of having the same manual of arms as the familiar MP5.

Although somewhat in the shadow of its better know siblings, the HK33 series has seen wide service under some very demanding conditions. This is definitely a true fighting rifle along the lines of the AK.

Discuss the HK33 family on Warriortalk

The HK G3: A Historical Perspective

By Chris Upchurch, Director of Marketing

The G3 battle rifle is the progenitor of HK’s family of roller delayed blowback firearms. From humble origins it has risen to become one of the most widely used battle rifles in the world and spawned an incredible variety of derivatives and descendants.

The STG45(M)

The G3’s roller delayed blowback design traces its roots back to the MG42 machinegun of World War II. The MG42 was a recoil operated design that used a roller system to keep the bold locked to the barrel until pressure dropped enough to be safely opened. During the final years of the war, Mauser engineers were working on a new assault rifle as a successor to the StG44. They began with the MG42’s action and attempted to adapt it to gas piston operation (a recoiling barrel was considered undesirable in an assault rifle). They found that with the correct design of the roller system, the gas piston was unnecessary.

The CEAM Modéle 1950

The war ended before the new assault rifle, the StG45(M), could be produced in any numbers. Some of the engineers working on the design were relocated to France after the war, where they worked on an assault rifle design that went through several potential chambering before finally settling on the U.S. .30 Carbine round. The CEAM Modéle 1950 was scrapped in part due to the financial demands of France’s war in Indochina (the first of many new weapon designs that lost out to the war in Vietnam).

The CETME modelo A

One of the designers, Dr. Ludwig Vorgrimler, moved to Spain, where he created the CETME rifle. As with the French design, this rifle went through several chamberings, including 7.92x33mm Kurz, 7.92x40mm CETME, and 7.62x51mm CETME (dimensionally identical to, but less powerful than the 7.62x51mm NATO round). Spain, not being involved in a war in Southeast Asia, adopted the CETME rifle as their standard service weapon.

The HK G3A3

When the German armed forces were reformed after WWII as the Bundeswehr, they initially wanted to adopt the FN-FAL (at the time used by many other NATO members) as their standard service rifle, but the Belgians refused to license it for production in Germany. Instead they evaluated the SIG SG 510, Armalite AR10, and CETME. CETME won the contract and after it was adapted to fire the full power 7.62x51mm NATO cartridge it entered production as the G3.

While today the G3 is closely associated with HK, up until 1969 production was split between HK and Rheinmetall. Nevertheless, HK were the ones to help redesign the rifle to take the full power 7.62x51mm NATO round, and to carry roller delayed blowback the design forward into submachine guns (MP5), machine guns (HK21), other rifle calibers (HK33) and even pistols (P9).

The HK G3KA4

In addition to the standard battle rifle, HK also produced the G3KA4, a carbine model with a 12.4 inch barrel. Another notable variant is the G3SG/1, an sniper variant with a cheek rest and enhanced trigger group.

The G3 was also the father of a large variety of HK firearms. Closest to the G3 in design are the PSG1 and MSG90 sniper rifles. The G3 was essentially scaled down to produce the 5.56mm HK33 assault rifle, as well as the MP5 submachinegun. While there are more differences, the G3 also lent many features to the HK21 and HK23 family of machineguns. The roller delayed blowback system even made its way into HK’s P9 pistols.

The G3 design has been widely adopted, seeing service with over 50 armies, particularly in Latin America and Africa. Germany encouraged other countries to adopt the G3 in part by being very willing to license production and sell tooling to make the guns. Starting with Portugal in the 1960s, the G3 was eventually produced in more than a dozen countries. Tooling from the plant in Portugal was eventually brought to the U.S. and is now used to make the PTR–91.

The U.S. Army’s Aberdeen Proving Ground evaluated the G3 and its 5.56mm little brother, the HK33 in 1969. The results were favorable and they concluded, “Compared to other automatic weapons, the variation that can be tolerated in the cycling of these weapons is extremely large. These weapons should continue to fire under adverse environmental conditions and with large variations in the ballistic performance of ammunition.”

The G3 saw service even with nations that had their own battle rifles. The British SAS and SBS adopted the G3 as their 7.62mm rifle and used it extensively in Northern Ireland. They made use of the short barreled G3KA3 versions for vehicular use, and even had their own 9" barreled version called the MC51.

Thanks in part to its relatively simple stamped construction the G3 remained in production for military use longer than its 7.62x51mm rivals, the FAL and M–14. It remains in service with many countries, either as the standard service rifle or in niche roles like a designated marksman’s rifle.

The G3 has a long and distinguished history of service. It has probably spawned a bigger and more varied family of related firearms than any other rifle, including the AK. Truly one of the classic fighting rifle designs.

Discuss the history of the G3 on Warriortalk.

Team Tactics with Eric Pfleger in Anaconda, Montana

By Chris Upchurch, Director of Marketing

This weekend I took Eric Pfleger’s Team Tactics class in Anaconda, Montana. This is a class I've been looking at for a long time, but we don't offer it all that often, or at all that many venues.  I had some time this summer before moving to Prescott and Eric was teaching the class up in Montana, so I jumped at the chance.  I'm glad I did it was really a blast.

Gear

I brought a pair of AKs both in 7.62x39mm. My primary rifle for the class was an SGL–21, with a TWS forend and dogleg rail. I’m running a SWFA SS 1–4 on the dogleg, on the American Defense QD mounts. The stock has been replaced with a TSD hinge carrying a Magpul CTR with the 3/4" cheek riser to provide the proper cheek weld for the optic. This means that using the AK irons I’d have to mash my head way down on the stock, so I put on a pair of flip up Midwest Industries AR BUIS (eventually I’m going to have the AK front sight tower removed, but I haven’t gotten around to that yet). My backup rifle in case the first breaks (or I just get tired of carrying the thing around and want something lighter) was an SLR–107F, with an Ultimak gas tube rail mounting an Aimpoint Micro.

To feed these rifles I’ve got an Insurgent chest rig that I’ve converted to run bungee retention rather than the flaps. My sidearm is an RMRed G17 in a Bladetech WRS thigh rig. This is the first time I’ve run a retention holster or a thigh rig, so we’ll see how I like it. Primary water source (and a counterbalance for the chest rig) was a 3 liter Camelback.

The majority of the class were running AKs, but there was a substantial minority of ARs. One student was running a SCAR 17. Given the nature of the class, most students’ support gear was very tactical: about a 50%/50% mix between chest rigs and battle belts.

The class was held south of Anaconda, Montana, on a piece of land owned by a long-time SI student. For a range we had a long clearing running up the slope of a hill (so we got to do all our bounding drills running uphill, yay!). The surrounding area is a moderately dense pine forest, giving us a great venue to do some patrolling stuff. This is some really beautiful country and being out here really added to the enjoyment of the class.

Most of us stayed at the nearby Sugar Loaf Lodge. This is a really nice facility. They’ve got a couple of cabins, which are very nicely furnished and decorated (as I write this I’m sitting under a mount of a 12 point bull elk). When you load up one of the cabins with a bunch of guys the price ends up being very reasonable. They also provided all our meals (at a very low price). This is kind of the slow season for them (they mostly cater to hunters in season and cross country skiers and snowmobilers during the winter) so they cut us some very good deals. If you’re attending one of Eric’s classes in Anaconda, I wouldn’t hesitate to recommend staying at the Sugar Loaf Lodge.

Thursday Night

Most of the class showed up sometime Thursday afternoon or evening. The lodge laid out a nice spread of hors d’oeuvres which most of us turned into our evening meal. Everyone hung out for a bit and shot the breeze and we generally enjoyed the good fellowship that comes in a gathering of like-minded folks at an S.I. class. No real business to conduct but Eric did stress the point of making sure you drank plenty of water to pre-hydrate for the class tomorrow.

Friday

After a hearty breakfast at the lodge we headed over to the training venue. Eric handed out the waivers and had us promise not to sue on the video release. Eric also introduced Jesse, a long time S.I. student and former police officer who would be assisting with the class.

This was followed by an extensive medical briefing. The Team Tactics class is one with a lot of potential danger, and the venue was fairly far out in the sticks, meaning it would probably be a while until the official ‘first responders’ got there. So for the initial response to any serious injury we were effectively on our own. Eric designated two people to fill each role in the response (two incase on of them was the one who got shot) from providing the initial treatment, to calling 911 (itself a tricky business in an area with little or no cell service), to taking notes on the patient’s condition. He pointed out the main trauma kit, and talked about the sort of personal kit (IFAK) that people should have with them for these sorts of operations.

This also provided an opportunity to promote our medical classes, which Eric delegated to me as the newly minted SI Director of Marketing. I talked a bit about the program and the Trauma Care for the CCW Operator class. Eric’s girlfriend Linda who was taking the class had also taken the first Advanced Trauma Medicine (our second level medical class) in Orange, TX earlier this year, so she talked about that (made me want to go to the class even more than I already did).

Eric also appointed a few people to a fire watch, since the fire danger this time of year was very high (I’d passed at least five fires on the drive up from Prescott). The property owner had a trailer with a water tank and a portable fire pump on it that we used to wet down the impact area before and after shooting.

Next up was the standard safety briefing, covering the four rules of gun safety. This segued into a discussion of slings and sling carry. The majority of the folks in this class were set up with two point slings, but there were a fair number of single point slings as well.

Eric talked about the nature of this class. Most S.I. classes are about improving our individual skills, but Team Tactics is a bit different. The only way to learn how to function in a team is to work as part of one. To this end, Eric had us form a two-man team with a buddy. In addition to being our partner for some of the exercises, we were also to stick together outside of the drills. I teamed up with John Betancourt, a longtime S.I. student who I knew from some previous classes.

We talked about pre-operational gear inspections, and eliminating anything that might give you away, especially shine and noise. You also want to make sure all your kit is functional, including checking batteries, verifying the zero on your weapons (if possible), etc.

With the lecture material out of the way, we started with some actual drills. Before starting with any gunhandling we emptied out the rifles and triple checked that our rifles and mags were unloaded. Eric went through the carry positions that were appropriate in the context of this class (primarily patrol ready and high noon ready). Once everyone had those down we moved on to an extensive set of muzzle aversion drills.

When you have people moving around each other with live weapons it is absolutely vital that they adjust where their gun is pointing to keep from muzzling each other. From most positions Eric had the students do this by raising the muzzle up to high noon ready. The exception was prone, where he had them ground their muzzle instead. He lined the students up and walked back and forth in front of them, requiring them to avert their muzzles. During these drills I noticed a dropped TSD pistol on the ground. It turned to be John’s, and since I’m his battle buddy Eric had both of us run up to the targets and back.

In addition to the muzzle aversion he also added in removing the trigger finger from the trigger whenever your eyes come off the target. Eric had the students circle up, facing outward, and do muzzle aversion and eyes/finger drills from the various positions. After he was satisfied with everyone’s muzzle and finger discipline, we moved on to some actual team tactics.

We started off with one of the drills we often do in other rifle courses to introduce students to the team tactics material: the peel. Fundamentally, a peel involves a group of guys lined up in a file. The first guy in the file engages the enemy (usually until he expends all the rounds in the gun or suffers a stoppage) then peels off and moves to the back of the stack. The next guy in line steps up and does the same. This kind of thing can be used by a small unit responding to an unexpected contact, or in a variety of other contexts. We worked a lot of variations on the peel drill in this class.

We started out doing the peel in a very tight stack (like one might use for a SWAT entry), then opened up the distance to more realistic levels. Once everyone had the concept down Eric set us up in two parallel files (as if walking down either side of a road, for instance) and do a paired peel down the center. He also introduced the concept of a lateral peel (from a line abreast and peeling left or right. This also brought up some discussion of team leaders positioning particular assets (belt fed MGs, grenadiers, etc.).

With this we broke for lunch. After everyone was done eating we talked about various methods of communication. Non-verbal communication is useful when you’re trying to be sneaky, or after the fight has started and the volume is too high for verbal commands to work. Verbal, on the other hand, is quicker and easier.

For the verbal communication we use a pretty simple set of commands. “Moving” indicates that the person yelling it wants to move and is asking for cover fire. “Covering” declares that the other person is able to provide cover fire. When the moving person gets to their next position they yell “set” to let their parter know that they’re there. If your rifle goes down while shooting, “Checking” lets your teammate know so they can make sure to lay down fire for you. “Up” announces that you’ve fixed the problem and are back in the fight.

The non-verbal communication is a kind of pantomime, pointing at yourself or the other person to indicate who is doing something and miming walking with your fingers for movement or pointing at your eyes to indicate the area they should cover. The key here is to take your time and make sure you’re understood.

We put these to work in dry drills first moving up and back about a seventy yards between conveniently located barrels and pallets as pieces of cover. We did it with voice commands first, then ran it using the hand signals. After everyone had done it a couple of times Eric sent our two-man teams out through the woods and down the road towards the house to put this into practice in other environments more realistic than the open clearing of the range.

With enough practice, Eric decided that everyone was ready to do this live. We did this in a very controlled manner, with clear lines of fire (defined by orange spray paint on the ground). Each student had an instructor (in body armor) bird dogging them all the way up and all the way back.

We moved up towards the target using non-verbal commands and at some point Eric let off a shot from his pistol, indicating we’d made contact. We engaged the targets with our rifles and started using verbal commands as we bounded up to the target then bounded back.

The under-appreciated key to this drill is the ability to reload on the move. If both team members keep their rifles topped up by reloading as they move back, they can keep up continuous fire. If they don’t reload appropriately, they’ll run dry when they’re supposed to be covering their buddy. This requires a bit of a different mindset than the individual operator. You can’t just do the reload on your schedule when you think you’re running low. You have to take advantage of your buddy covering you and do the reload when you move, even if it’s sooner than you’d really like. Some folks managed this really well, others not so much. Some folks also needed to either reposition their dump pouch or to get more practice using it. I saw a lot of magazines end up on the ground.

When John and I ran the drill, we did a good job doing this. Neither of us ran dry at an inopportune moment. The odd thing is that I realized halfway through the shooting portion of the drill that I was running it left-handed. I’d switched hands to get a better view of John when we were communicating using hand signals, and then when Eric lit off the round to initiate the shooting portion of the drill I kept on with the rifle on the left side. We were most of the way through the drill before I realized what I was doing. I’ve put in a lot of time on running the gun left handed, I guess I’ve internalized it to the point that it’s second nature.

Finally, we did one more peel drill, this time live fire. Everybody had a chance to blow off some steam and rattle off quite a bit of ammunition.

This was a nice high note to end the training day on. We adjourned to the lodge for a very nice dinner. After dinner one of the students who is a former intelligence officer gave an interesting lecture on aspects of HUMINT (human intelligence).

 

 

Saturday

To get warmed up we started off Saturday by running the two-man bounding drill again, dry. We quickly moved on to working with four-man teams. Eric really likes four man teams for the guerrilla operator. It’s a realistic number of people to get together, fits nicely in an SUV, and can accomplish a lot of stuff that a two-man team can’t without having too high a profile. It allows more specialization within the team (one man can be the medic, another the commo guy, the sniper, etc.). When moving in a rural environment it also allows much better 360 coverage than a two-man element.

We put this into action by doing the bounding drill with two of our two-man teams. One member of each time acted as the controller, communicating with the other team. The other team member acted as the primary rifleman. We ran this dry, bounding up towards the target and back, switching off roles to give each person a chance to act as the controller.

To put a little more emphasis on the command role, we ran this again using two three-man teams. In this case we had two shooters and one team leader in each team. To emphasize the team leader’s role, he did the drill with his rifle slung. He was there to command and coordinate with the other team, not as a trigger puller.

We ran it this way dry a bunch of times to give everyone a chance to rotate into the command position, working both with hand signals and verbal communication. After everyone had a chance to command while running it dry we did it live fire.

With four men dedicated to shooting it was a lot easier to keep a steady cadence of fire on the target. For the live run the team leader had his rifle out so he could step in and shoot in case one or both of his shooters ran dry. In one case a team member had a nasty stoppage in his AR (a case stuck in the chamber that we had to pound out with a range rod) so the team leader stepped into the rifleman role and the student with the malfunction took over as team leader. They accomplished this very smoothly on the fly.

After everyone had a chance to run the drill live, Eric brought out a suppressed AR and the student with the SCAR put his suppressor on his rifle and they did a bit of a demo showing how much easier communication was if your outgoing fire was a lot quieter.

With that, we broke for lunch.

After lunch we spent a bit of time working with movement formations. This is something we do a lot more of in the Rural Patrolling class, but here we just had a taste of it. Eric brought out his ‘team leader admin kit’, a bag with bits of colored paracord sponges, and other little stuff he can use to lay out a little impromptu map in the dirt. It’s not quite as cool as the little plastic army men that Randy Harris has been known to use, but it fits a bit better in a cargo pocket.

Eric used his bits of paracord to lay out the different movement formations. To this point we’d done a bit of work with the file for the peel drills yesterday (a file has folks lined up in the direction of travel). It’s good for confined spaces like a jungle trail or moving through an urban environment. He talked about how to divvy up sectors of responsibility. With four men you basically have the point man take responsibility for the front, one man on either side (and this being S.I. we advocate that one of them have his long gun on the left shoulder so he can keep it pointed at his sector) and one watching the rear. There was some discussion of different ways for the tailgunner to keep an eye on what’s behind them without having to spend the whole time walking backwards.

The flip side of the file is the line (everyone lined up perpendicular to the direction of travel) which is good for large open areas. You can bend the line into a wedge formation (or a V if you bend it the other way). A variation of this is echelon right or echelon left, which weights the wedge towards one side other the other (whichever side presents the greatest threat of enemy contact). Finally, we talked about the diamond formation (or if you have more than four guys, the wagon wheel). With the basics covered Eric grouped everyone into four-man teams and set them off to take a walk and try out these varying formations.

After everyone returned from their walk in the woods, we moved on to talking about ambushes and counter-ambush drills. This is another subject we cover in more detail in the Rural Patrolling class, but Eric wanted mainly to cover the counter ambush stuff here, and you can’t get into that without learning at least a bit about ambushes. He used his bits of string to lay out a map of a chokepoint and diagramed out an L-shaped ambush.In terms of counter-ambush drills, the key is whether this is a near ambush or a far ambush. What counts as near and far depends on terrain, but a good rule of thumb is a near ambush is close enough to charge while a far ambush is out of range. In moderately forested terrain like we had here, figure 35 yards and in for a near ambush and beyond 35 yards for a far ambush. From the point of view of the ambusher, a near ambush is really designed to annihilate the opposing force. It’s a very committed attack. A far ambush could be just taking a few potshots at the enemy (a sniper attack would be an extreme example of a far ambush).

 

In responding to a near ambush, the immediate response is to charge the enemy position. Get in among the ambushers where you can shoot at them and you’re not in their preplanned fields of fire. Charging into the enemy’s guns may not seem like a good idea, but it’s better than remaining in the kill zone, and if it’s a well designed ambush, you won’t have any other viable choice.

For a far ambush, you have more time and distance. Here it’s appropriate to take cover and use fire and maneuver and take advantage of terrain to either escape, or to close with the enemy.

When escaping from a far ambush, or simply from unexpected contact with a superior force, things like smoke, CS gas, mines, etc. are very useful. We discussed these, and Eric passed around some examples. With smoke in particular there are versions that we can acquire as civilians. ATF has made the true military grade stuff harder to get of late, but there are versions for marine signaling or made for airsofters that we can actually buy.

Eric also took the opportunity to talk about some signaling methods for communicating between teams. You can start out pretty simple with things like whistles, or a length of brightly colored webbing that you can weight at one end and throw up in the air. Flares can serve a similar purpose, particularly at night. Radios obviously offer a lot more flexibility and covertness in communications, if they are available. However, as technological devices they do break or fail to function, so it’s important to have a backup plan.

Eric ran everyone through a couple of staged ambush scenarios, both near and far, to help everyone understand how these work. With this, we wrapped up for the day.

We had another a fine dinner over at the Sugar Loaf Lodge. After dinner Linda (who can be seen in Die Less Often and several videos of Dog Brothers events online), talked a bit about using sticklike improvised weapons. Even if you carry a firearm, these are good skills to have, particularly if you find yourself in an NPE. As part of this she showed some of the stuff she carries in her purse for self defense in California, including her pink-handled ‘Goodbye Kitty’ purse hatchet. With some help from a student who’s a long-time martial artist and some demonstrations using Jesse and Eric as demo dummies, this developed into a more general discussion of hand to hand skills.

Sunday

There wasn’t a whole lot of time to practice some of the movement formations yesterday afternoon, so to start up the day today Eric formed the students into two six-man teams and sent them out on a patrol. I followed one of the teams to get some pictures.

They headed up the wooded ridge to the right of the range then worked their way uphill (downrange). As they were swinging around the end of the range, they ran into the other patrol coming around in the opposite direction. Neither team had planned for this. Both immediately took cover when they spotted the other and waited for about five minutes while the team leaders tried to figure out what to do and quietly communicate their intentions to their teammates. Finally, the patrol that I’d followed up the mountain initiated a simulated firefight (yelling ‘bang’ in lieu of actual fire) and withdrew back the way they came.

Once everyone made their way back to the range we spent some time debriefing. One lesson I pointed out is that one student spent a lot of time with his (tape switch activated) weapon light illuminated during the patrol. If you’re setting up a rifle for this sort of thing, first consider whether you need a light at all. If you do, make sure it can be locked off during the day, and consider either a QD mount or lens cap to avoid both accidental activation and having the shiny reflector give your position away.

One thing that came up during the patrol exercise was how to move across a linear open area like a road. Eric described the ‘patch to the road’ method for doing this. Essentially you have one guy on the far side of the road with his left shoulder (the one where the U.S. military puts the unit patch) towards the road providing security in one direction. Another guy is on the near side with his left shoulder to the road providing security in the other direction. The next guy in line replaces the guy on the near side, allowing him to go over and replace the guy on the far side. There’s a bit of special choreography with the point man and team leader. This method allows a small unit to move across the road with each man providing security for the man in front of him and behind him, instead of halting and deploying security elements in both directions.

Eric had them run patch to the road a couple of times to get the idea. This is the sort of thing that we cover more extensively in the Rural Patrolling class, but Eric wanted to go through it since it came up during the patrol.

Next up was our big exercise. Eric broke out the bits of colored paracord to map things out. The objective was to retrieve a 5 gallon water jug from near the target (in this case a painted piece of wood rather than our usual steel plate to avoid ricochets). The exercise would involve three teams: an overwatch team (including a sniper element), an ambush team, an assault team.

The plan went like this:

 

 

1. The overwatch team and the sniper element move through the woods to their designated position (on the left side of the range about 60 yards from the target).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2. Once they’re in position providing overwatch, the ambush team moves up to a closer firing position (about 30 yards from the target atop a rise to the right side of the range).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3. The assault team takes up position about 50 yards from the target, screened from the target by a small ridge.

 

 

 

4. Once everyone is in position the overall commander (the leader of the overwatch team) orders the sniper to fire.

5. The sniper shot is the signal for the ambush team to open up on the target, rapid fire.

6. After the members of the ambush team have expended about 1/3 of their ammo load (2 mags each) the they lift their fire.

 

 

7. The assault team moves in, shooting as they advance, and retrieves the water jug.

 

 

 

 

 

8. After the assault team clears the target area, the ambush team opens up again, expending another third of their ammunition.

 

 

 

 

 

 

9. When they’re down to 1/3 of their ammunition, the ambush team ceases fire and withdraws toward the rally point. The overwatch team opens up to cover their withdrawal.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10. The overwatch team ceases fire and withdraws to the rally point.

 

 

 

In the real world, this would be done with continuous fire on the target from the first sniper shot until the overwatch team withdraws. For training purposes, we had some pauses built in for safety, to make sure that the ambush team didn’t shoot the assault team and the overwatch team didn’t shoot the ambush team. These pauses, combined with carefully delineated lanes of fire and close supervision by the instructors are what allows an advanced live fire exercise like this to be carried out in a training setting.

In addition to these precautions, Eric had everyone run the entire operation dry before doing it live, to make sure everyone was on the same page. Pictures of the dry fire walkthrough are above, pics of the live fire exercise are below.

Overwatch team moves up to their position.

 

Ambush team moves up.

 

Assault team moving into position.

 

Ambush team in position.

 

Eyes on the objective.

 

Sniper element with the overwatch team, firing the first shot.

 

Dust kicked up by muzzle blast obscures target for ambush team (lesson learned here).

 

Assault team closing on the objective.

 

Assault team returning with the objective.

 

Ambush team opens up again.

 

Ambush team begins withdrawal.

 

Overwatch team opens up.

 

Sniper and last element of Overwatch team covering withdrawal.

After lunch, we did some work with vehicles. The host provided his Mitsubishi Montero as a practice vehicle.

The important thing to remember with vehicles is that the stuff we’re talking about here should be a last resort. If the vehicle is still operable and you aren’t totally blocked in, driving out of trouble is almost always the better choice. That said, this isn’t a driving class, so we concentrated on how to bail out from a vehicle while under fire.

One thing that quickly becomes apparent when working with rifles in side vehicles is that a short barrel and/or folding stock are worth their weight in gold. A full length rifle just isn’t very handy inside even a big SUV. The ideal gun for this sort of thing would be something like a Suchka, or even a small SMG like the MP5K. Absent something like that, a pistol with an extended magazine may be a good choice for working inside a vehicle (see this thread, for instance). Slings can be even more of a problem, and Eric recommended using rubber bands or bits of bicycle inner tube to secure or shorten up the sling so it doesn’t catch on stuff.

Given that driving ought to be our default response to a threat, and this could well lead to crashing, seatbelts are extremely important when traveling at highway speeds. A car wreck can kill you just as dead as incoming fire. At lower speeds (traffic jams, back alleys, parking lots, etc.) the belt should be off to allow quick egress if necessary. Eric demonstrated a method for getting the belt off without tangling yourself or your gear in it.

We generally want to work with long guns muzzle up in the car. This makes it easer to go back and forth between the right and left sides, and when you exit the vehicle it makes it less likely you’ll muzzle one of your team members (particularly if they’ve gone prone).

The basic idea when bailing out of a vehicle is for those nearest the incoming fire to begin (or continue) shooting back while those on the opposite side get out and get to positions where they can provide cover fire. When they’re ready to take up the slack, those still inside the car stop shooting and bail out (generally through the non-engaged side of the vehicle if possible). There are a lot of smaller nuances, such as when to leave doors open and when to close them, what good points to provide cover fire are, etc.

 

We worked the bail-out drills with threats to the front, rear, left and right, giving everyone a chance to experience getting out of the car in different directions.

I mentioned to the students that S.I. has a very good Vehicle Gunfighting class. Although it’s a little more pistol focused than what we were doing here the fundamentals are still the same. The coolest part is it will give you the chance to do live fire from your own vehicle (you’ll be finding the odd piece of brass in weird places for a long time afterward though).

 

 

The vehicle drills were the last thing on the schedule, so we wrapped up the class. We policed up the brass that we’d scattered hither and yon up and down the range and Eric handed out the certificates.

 

 

While the class was over the weekend wasn’t quite done yet. Some of us were sticking around until Monday morning. We had a great dinner over at the lodge. Several of us started up a friendly poker game that ran until midnight. We passed around some Wild Turkey and fine tequila and a great time was had by all.

Final Thoughts

This was definitely the funnest S.I. class that I’ve attended (and I’ve attended a lot of them).

All my gear ran well. I wasn’t really a fan of the chest rig before, but counterbalancing it with a Camelbak really makes it a lot more comfortable. The fact that I was running a nice light rig (just four AK mags) probably contributed to that as well. I didn’t really have much opportunity to use the pistol much, but the BladeTech WRS kept it solidly in the holster even during drills that involved lots of movement and getting up and down. The rifle ran great, as expected for a decent AK.

The curriculum for this class is really great. Someone who doesn’t have any background in this sort of thing will get a thorough understanding of the fundamentals of team tactics. It takes you to a surprisingly high level after just a few days. We had several veterans in the class and they confirmed that you’d spend months or more likely years in the service before getting a chance to do some of the live fire stuff we do in this class. The key to this is close supervision by the instructors and carefully designing the drills so that lanes of fire and movement are clearly delineated.

Eric is one of the best instructors I’ve had the pleasure to train with and he did a spectacular job teaching this class. He does a great job explaining these concepts and showing how to put them into action. The breadth of Eric’s expertise is just incredible, everything from sniping and team tactics to hand to hand. He’s probably S.I.’s most well rounded and versatile instructor. He’s also an all around great guy, who I’m really happy to get a chance to hang out with.

Jesse provided a lot of supervision when we were running the live fire drills and helped keep everyone safe. The student hosting the class has some experience in this sort of thing and he provided some excellent insights and helped supervise during some of the drills as well.

We had a great group of students for this one. Speaking as an instructor that really has a big role in making a class great. Everyone came into the class with the right skillset (the kind you can get at an S.I. rifle class). They all had solid gunhandling skills, which is vitally important in a class like this.

Finally, the Sugar Loaf Lodge was a big factor in how fun this class was. Having the lodge right next door where everyone could gather for meals and fellowship really turned this from a simple class into a gathering of like minded folks. The food and accommodations were excellent. It would make a great vacation spot even apart from an S.I. class. I know Eric is planning several more classes that will take advantage of this great facility next year and I’d highly recommend it. I’ve always loved the fellowship aspects of S.I classes and the lodge really takes it to another level.

All in all, a great class. Suarez International’s team tactics program really takes it to another level, stuff that you won’t get at most other gun schools. Eric is one of our best instructors and I’d highly recommend anything he teaches.

Discuss this class on Warriortalk.

After an encounter....see a doctor!!!

Dr. John Meade

Director of Tactical Medicine, Suarez International

In the most recent set of developments in the prosecution of George Zimmerman for shooting & killing Trayvon Martin, we see the release of some of Zimmerman's medical information. Let's analyze this in light of the advice we in Suarez International give our students about what to say & do after a fight for your life.

Specifically, let me address certain medicolegal issues from the multiple perspectives, including those of an Emergency Physician, reserve cop, and SI Instructor.

I have selected a few quotes from published news stories to illustrate my points.

Also today, a trove of documents are being examined by lawyers for both the defense and prosecution as part of discovery in Zimmerman's trial -- including 67 CDs worth of documents, video of Martin on the night of the shooting, his autopsy report and videos of Zimmerman's questioning by police.

Some people still believe that the sanctity of the doctor-patient relationship is inviolate. Sorry, but when you are involved in any violent encounter, everything you say to me "can and will be used against you in a court of law". Not just what you say, but how you say it, as well as what you don't say. Even more, my opinion about the whole situation will carry a huge amount of sway with a judge and jury. As a presumably objective person without particular interest in a case, and as a certified expert, I will be impelled to not only testify as to facts, but my interpretation of everything. If I believe you, good for you. If I think you are lying or exaggerating, bad for you. If you luck out with a doctor who believes in self-defense, bonus! If you happen to get some bleeding-heart liberal doc who hates guns, you better play up your victim status.

The morning after the shooting, on Feb. 27, Zimmerman sought treatment at the offices of a general physician at a family practice near Sanford, Fla. The doctor notes Zimmerman sought an appointment to get legal clearance to return to work. 

Zimmerman refused emergency medical care after the event. Much was made of this in the press, saying that if he was beaten in such a manner that he was in fear for his life, how did he not need to go to the Emergency Dept? It helped contribute to the surge of opinion against him, undermining his claim of self-defense. 

I think many of us alpha-types tend to minimize our injuries and illnesses. We joke about them, and say "it will buff right out". We want to continue being the same tough guy that survived, or in fact triumphed, in the immediately preceding lethal force encounter. It suits our egos to downplay any injury, and we don't want to appear weak. 

Instead, we need to understand that different rules apply to different portions of the encounter. While actually in a fight, we must indeed ignore our own pain and bleeding in order to win. Once the fight is over, we have a different battle on our hands. The battle to ensure that we are viewed as the victim who turned the tables on the aggressor, and survived. This may mean actually pointing out every little bump, bruise, strain and emotional discomfort to support our cause. 

A medical report compiled by the family physician of Trayvon Martin shooter George Zimmerman and obtained exclusively by ABC News found that Zimmerman was diagnosed with a "closed fracture" of his nose, a pair of black eyes, two lacerations to the back of his head and a minor back injury the day after he fatally shot Martin during an alleged altercation.

You will note that the day after the shooting, Zimmerman was found to have several significant injuries, and these seem to support his claim that he was being beaten aggressively by Martin. Why would he downplay these things initially? Denial? Macho? Wanting to put it behind him and move on with his routine? Yeah, how is that working out for him?

Am I telling you to lie or pretend to be hurt when you are not? No, as a physician, I despise having a patient lie to me. As I mentioned before, my opinion will be part of whatever proceedings happen down the line, so you don't want me to have a negative one about you.

What I am telling you is that we who tend to internalize our feelings, hide our pain, and be the strong silent types are our own worst enemies at a certain point. After the shooting, or stabbing, or empty hand incident, we must realize we are still in a fight, but with a different set of rules. It is time to ask for medical evaluation and treatment immediately!

What can you gain by this? First, you tend to limit the amount of in-depth questioning that the officers and detectives can do with you. You give your very brief information to the cops, and say that you need to go to the hospital. When they try to ask more, you say you want to be helpful but you really need to go to the hospital and would prefer to have your attorney present after that for any more discussion. No cop wants the liability of delaying emergency medical care for someone.

Secondly, you gain the fact that you are making it clear that you suffered legitimate injuries. If you don't have a cut or bruise, perhaps you are just feeling lightheaded, having chest pain, nausea, or "are all shaken up from this". Again, I am not telling you to lie. After such an encounter, it would be shocking if you didn't have some combination of adrenaline-induced shakiness, hypertension or weakness. Just go. And don't do like Zimmerman, and end up seeing his family doctor's physician assistant the next day, where it is documented you really just wanted a note to be allowed to return to work. Go to the Emergency Department, and have it documented you are there as a crime victim!

Lastly, when you see the doctor, you need to avoid minimizing your concerns. Imagine you are making a case for your own disability hearing. You don't need to try to get an Oscar for Best Performance by a Crime Victim, but you need to ensure that the medical report that is written contains the information that will help your case. If you are asked if you hurt anywhere, list them out! Even if it is documented only as a list of places that you hurt without apparent injury, it is recognized that early injuries might not show. The doctor want to refer you to an ENT doctor to check out your broken nose? Go! A couple days off from work is reasonable, so ask for it!

Don't allow your toughness to make it tough on you afterwards! In our Trauma Medicine for the CCW Operator classes (TMCO) we train you how to survive all aspects of the fight, from the pre-fight clues, to the actual encounter, to the after-fight medical care. We also cover this material on “How to interact with the police afterwards” in great detail. Sign up for a TMCO class near you!