WARRIOR TALK NEWS

The Bullpup And The SMG

This last weekend we conducted the SMG Gunfighting Class at the tail end of our yearly corporate staff meeting and in-service training.  We had 20 Suarez Staff Instructors involved in teaching the class.  When you get a group of minds like this together, all looking at the same concept, amazing discoveries are made.

One of these paradigm shifts was the application of many of the Bullpup rifles we had in attendance.  We had several FN FS2000s in various configs., we had one FN P-90, and a couple of Steyr AUGs (one SBR and one standard length). Anyone that disdains the bullpup or its combat application is foolishly ignorant of the weapon's capabilities.

The Bullpup bridges the worlds of the very compact SMG and the more powerful assault rifle.  It is as short as an SBR without any need for NFA documentation, can be shot like a handgun, yet reaches and penetrates like a rifle, and is unparalleled in the ultra-close range dynamic CQB environments of vehicular combat and any confined spaces. We developed some very interesting material for this rifle.  Think "evolutionary" rather than revolutionary. More to follow very soon.

 

Looking At The Holster

Looking At The Holster

The issue is looking at the holster on the reholstering. I know....I know...we are told its bad its wrong, ect. But why? Let me lay my case out.

1). According to our research, half of all unintended discharges resulting in shooter injury occur during the holstering process.

Sure...sometimes it is due to trigger fingers not being properly indexed, but there have been many times when it has happened due to some sort of obstruction in the holster, or misplacement of the pistol into the holster.

2). If the threat was still a threat, only a stupid idiot would be holstering his pistol. Read that again guys. Please enlighten me if there is any tactical reason to holster the pistol while facing a threat because I cannot think of any.

3). Often the police guys (I was once one) will say they have to holster to handcuff someone. That changes nothing. You do not point a gun at someone and then holster to handcuff. You hold them there, proned out, face down in the dirt, until your back up arrives and he points his gun at the bad guy. Then you holster and go handcuff. So the ability to keep eyes on target before holstering is of dubious necessity.

So, is it a big deal if a shooter looks at his holster briefly prior to holstering his piece?
No, I don't think so.

Now we are not saying to sit there gazing at the kydexial splendor of your holster for hours as you slowly holster, but simply a quick glance to verify everything is as it should be before introducing the pistol into the holster.

I spent 15 years in LE service and I saw many many guys who had been drilled to NOT LOOK at the holster, still do so very briefly when holstering. It is the same principle
we see in other actions under duress. The eyes want to see what the hands are
doing.

So are instructors being foolish to tell the students that "there is no threat in the holster"? That they should keep their eyes downrange while they holster the pistol?

In my never humble and always opinionated opinion, yes. There is nothing wrong with looking at the holster when placing the pistol back into the holster. If there was a threat, your pistol would remain in action. If there is no threat, your safety is better
served by holsering safely.

When you train with S.I. you will be looking at the holster briefly prior to reholstering. Why? Because it makes more sense, cost you nothing tactically, and gives immediate feedback of any clothing/obstruction.

Thoughts?

 

FS-2000 TACTICS - CLEARING MALFUNCTIONS

FS2000 Malfunction Clearing

I was asked today about this, and thus this post. Apparently some of the "gravel pit kids" have been bemoaning the FS (probably becase I like it, or because they cannot understand it). Those interested in the FS as a serious weapon read on.

The FS2000 is very reliable. I have run quite a bit of mixed 223 through it and have had no issues at all. And this includes everything you can imagine thrown into 50 cal ammo cans after a class.


Anything man-made can malfunction.

Here is the simple solution - pull magazine out, run the bolt twice, reload. That is it. Not as simple as an AK, but then again...nothing is. If a malfunction is severe, say a failure to extract (what the uneducated call a double feed), it's easier than an M4 but you need to rethink the process.

Type three solution - Run the bolt making sure the trigger group is cocked. Push the retention pin from right to left. Slide the upper 1/2 way forward on the receive rails but not all the way off. You now have awesome and superior access directly into the chamber...get your fingers in there, clear out the offending cartridge case, smash the upper back into place and push the retention button back closed. Reload, keep shooting. Quite simple actually.

Now consider that this is time and distance dependent. In CQB nobody clears malfunctions mid-fight, they go to pistol as you would with anything else. The capability to use the weapon in a truly ambidextrous manner (which is not really possible with an AUG) more than makes up for any perceived difficulty with clearing a rare type three problem.

The gun does not “break” as some silly Sams claim. Even an AK will break if you do a Mark McGuire into a telephone pole with it. Its a rifle not a baseball bat. Use it accordingly and just be an educated first world person when disassembling and reassembling and it will last your whole life.

The FS2000 is perfect for point shooting  during dynamic movement, as well as for CQB ops. 

BUY FS-2000 WITH TEN MAGAZINES AT ONE SOURCE - SHIPS IMMEDIATELY

The TSD Red Dot Glock in Action

 

Discuss the TSD Red Dot Glock on Warriortalk.

Buy the TSD Red Dot Glock at onesourcetactical.com

The Responsible Gun Owner

By Don Robison

Suarez International Tier1 Staff Instructor 

I’ve been surfing the web and various gun forums this week and I don’t know if it’s a new phenomenon or just something I recently picked up on. Lately it seems that every time someone does something with a gun someone else disagrees with I hear the cry “You’re not a responsible gun owner!”, “A responsible gun owner wouldn’t do that!”  I recently was involved in a discussion about a guy who had some guns stolen from inside his house.  They weren’t locked in a safe and it was decreed by these self-appointed responsible gun owners that he was an irresponsible gun owner and it was his fault someone stole his guns out of his house because he didn’t have them in a safe.  Really, I mean REALLY, is this what we’ve come to; blaming someone for their house being robbed?  On a different forum I was in another discussion that involved the use of the word firearm or gun versus using the word weapon.  Once again the self-appointed responsible gun owners decreed that a responsible gun owner wouldn’t use the word weapon because it might make some people uncomfortable. Really, politically correct much?  Firearms were designed as weapons; punching pretty little groups of holes in paper was a secondary use.  No scratch that; it was a tertiary use right after killing people and killing animals. Punching holes in paper came about as a way to practice for killing people and animals; not the other way around.  

What is a responsible gun owner?  If you ask thirty different people you will likely get thirty different answers. From what I’ve noticed recently are the answers will generally be divided among two camps; those who go along with the thinking of the antigun movement, and those who go with a more traditional view point.  One side of the fence will tell you that all of your weapons need to be locked in a safe and should never be outside the safe unless you are using them.  Doing anything less makes you an irresponsible gun owner and you deserve to have your house burgled.  The other side will tell you that locking them in a safe is a smart practice, but if you have some outside the safe on display or for other purposes it’s acceptable.  After all, it wasn’t that long ago that glass front wooden gun cabinets were the norm in many people’s homes.  I fall into the second camp; I blame criminals for their actions and not crime victims for the actions of criminals.  I asked the question; what is a responsible gun owner?  Here is my answer.  A responsible gun owner is a person who responsibly handles their weapons and takes reasonable care in securing them.  What is responsible handling to me?  It’s handling them in a manner that isn’t reckless i.e. they follow the four rules for safe gun handling as appropriate to the situation.  Why do I say appropriate to the situation? Contrary to the beliefs of some there are times when at least one of those rules will be broken because of the situation. We at Suarez International teach point shooting which wouldn’t be possible without breaking Cooper’s rule number 3; Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on target. Instead we say keep your finger off the trigger until you’ve made a conscience decision to shoot. This is because you may be firing from half hip, ¾ hip or indexing off the slide and never see the sights. What makes Fairbairn, Sykes, and Applegate wrong and Cooper right?  Ever holstered your gun? Every time you holster your gun in a traditional type concealed carry holster you’re are pointing your muzzle at something you don’t want to destroy (rule 2 violation); typically your hip, thigh or calf.  If this weren’t true people wouldn’t be injured when they have an accidental discharge in their holster.  What is reasonable care in securing a weapon? To me as well as the legal beagles it is defined as “the degree of caution and concern for the safety of himself/herself and others an ordinarily prudent and rational person would use in the circumstances.”  Just because locking them in a safe is the most cautious doesn’t mean not having them in a safe isn’t reasonable care.  If you have your TV stolen or other valuables stolen from your home should you be blamed for not taking reasonable care by not locking them in a vault? The same goes if your car is stolen from your garage.  For most of us other than our home our vehicle is the most valuable thing we own and they are routinely the target of theft. A reasonable person would consider a locked home or garage reasonable care for securing their other valuables; why does a home suddenly become fair game for robbery just because someone owns weapons.  

I’m often told that words mean something; the next time you are told or are telling someone what it means to be a “responsible gun owner” stop and think about what that means to you. Also stop and remember that just because it means one thing to you it doesn’t mean you are right and everyone else who disagrees with you is wrong, stupid or irresponsible. 

For the record I think it’s a sound practice to secure weapons in a safe that aren’t being used, but admit to having weapons that aren’t in my safe. Some of them are out for home protection in addition to my every day carry gun, some are used to dispatch varmints around our property and some of them are used to plink a few times a week on my small home range. 

 

 

The Enhanced Proactive Reload Pistols and SMG

It is simple in concept.  If you can help it, don't get caught empty. Of ocurse if you have to shoot to empty due to circumstances, do so, and then fix it as soon as you can.  But that is in fact a seperate problem.   

The "tactical reload", or as we call it, the "proactive reload", was first written about in an obscure book called a Rifleman Went To War by McBride.  It is a very dry book, but one that should be read as it has some very insightful stuff in it.  McBride influenced Cooper a great deal, and Cooper of course influenced many others.   

McBride noted how he could remove the on board magazine from a 1911, slip it in his pocket and replace it with a full magazine with a minimum of trouble compared to the revolvers of his era. 

Americans being a speedy people began devising all manner of shortcuts to get this done, some bordering into the realm of card tricks with guns and magazines.  Still, the concept is valid.  It defines a state in the fight where things have quieted down.  Most likely from one or both sides deciding they don't want to fight and running off...or being in a state of death.  It could also be during what some have called a lull.  This means simply that there is a pause in the shooting to see what has happened.  This does take place and I have seen it.  There is a burst of fire and screaming...then a pause to see if it worked...followed by another flurry. 

Most people will be quite jittery at such times and asking them to do things requiring fine motor dexterity may be asking too much.  I have seen the hands and legs shaking.  I even felt my own legs shaking once as the residual adrenaline was burned off as I stood over the body of a freshly killed robber after a lengthy pursuit and gunfight. 

That said, there is also a place for the enhanced proactive reload, and prepping the magazine.  The two maneuvers are actually very similar. Now I will say right away that if one tends toward shaky hands under stress, or has some age-related or injury/disease related shaking or tremors, stick with what we already teach.  That is the very simple - spent magazine out and placed into the pocket, fresh magazine accessed and inserted into the gun, slide or bolt racked as needed. But if you want to go a little faster and can manage the stress well, try these. 

The prepping, or staging of the magazine is actually a modification of the old African White Hunter's method of holding a couple of extra rounds between the fingers as they moved to contact with an angry Cape Buffalo.  In our case, it involves looking ahead to the need to reload (always a good tactical thought process) and staging the magazine ahead of time.  Then when needed, the time to reload is reduced considerably. 

This is easily done with the pistol, and the SMG, but unless one has the hands of Andre the Giant, it will be more difficult to pull it off with a rifle.   

This leads us to the enhanced proactive reload (EPR).  The EPR involves shortening the actions required to remove the depleted magazine, stow it, access a fresh/full magazine, and insert it into the weapon.  For the pistol we can access the fresh/full magazine first, and bring it alongside the pistol.  Ejecting the delpeted magazine into the palm of the hand, you trap that magazine between the ring and middle fingers.  A slight movement of the hand aligns the fresh/full magazine with the pistol for insertion.  The slide can be operated if desired or one can roll right into a firing grip still retaining the depleted magazine.

 

 

 

 

 

 

With the SMG…an UZI in this case, the use of the “L-Clamp” takes care of this before hand and the reload is efficient and easy.  If the L-clamp is not in evidence, one can stage the magazine as with the pistol. There will be a slight change due to the heel-based magazine release on the UZI.

The Uzi magazine will sit between the index finger and ring finger.  The thumb will be used to operate the magazine release lever as the depleted magazine is trapped between the thumb and index finger.  A slight articulation of the wrist will reposition the magazines correctly.  Insert – seat – operate the bolt as needed…all with the depleted magazine in hand.

Try these and see if you can make them work for you.  If you can, then interject some stress.  Other than enticing some friend to actually try to kill you, you can do pretty well with physical exertion.  Bust out 25 burpees and then do some magazine change drills.  Or sprint 100 meters as hard as you can and then work the drills.  If you find you do pretty well with these, include them in your repetoire.  You will be a little faster and a little more efficient.

COMMENT ON THIS AT WARRIORTALK.COM

FOR UZI SMG

  

 

The Floating Gun

If you’re going to take your point shooting skills as far as the fight needs them to be, you’ve got to have it.

Suarez International Instructor CR Williams

I see it over and over again, and I still do it myself (not as often as I did, but I still do). I see them at classes, on the range practicing, in groups, watching others work, and when working by myself. Once you know what to look for they’re pretty easy to spot. They’re like chronic or recurring illnesses.

Let's call them the 'Welded Hand Syndrome' and the 'Locked-In-Position Syndrome'.

Welded-Hand Syndrome is characterized by an unconscious but nonetheless strong and determined reluctance to release the support hand from the grip of the gun. The shooter beset by WHS acts as if his or her hands have been super-glued and duct-taped to the grip such that they are unable to let go and shoot with one hand despite the position they are in or the angle to the target they are engaging. They will twist and turn and step, bend and flex, and move the wrong way trying to keep their gun on the target, unaware that they are in the grip of the Welded-Hand Syndrome.

Related to and often seen in conjunction with Welded-Hand Syndrome is Locked-In-Position Syndrome. LIPS is characterized by the unthinking drive to keep a pre-set arm and upper-body shooting position under any and all circumstances and no matter where the target is or how they are moving (if they’re moving) whether it is appropriate to the circumstances or not.

WHS and LIPS do occur in isolation but will most often be observed appearing together. Both syndromes have the same three primary causes: A lack of experience or training, a history of training that is totally or almost totally devoted to the proactive gunfight, and the tendency we all have to want to remain ‘squared up’ to something or someone that is trying to kill us.

Diagnosis of either or both conditions involves observation of the shooter in question to answer these questions: Is the position and placement of the gun appropriate to what the shooter needs to be doing with it? Does the shooter appear to be ‘bound up’ or in an awkward position? Is the shooter moving more slowly and awkwardly than they should be or in a different direction than they intend or that is appropriate to the situation? If the answers are ‘No’, ‘Yes’ and ‘Yes’, then WHS or LIPS should be suspected. Further observation is then necessary to confirm the presence and severity of the conditions.

Examples of Welded-Hand Syndrome and Locked-In-Position Syndrome:

Moving from right to left while attempting to keep a two-hand grip and squared torso. I did not deliberately cross-step, it occurred naturally as a result of my conscious desire to keep the same grip and upper-body position. You will see this unconsciously with those suffering from WHS and LIPS. If I had continued out of camera range, I would end up walking backwards.

Here I am moving properly to about 1:00, but because I refuse to release the grip or alter extension I would end up doing two things: putting the gun in range of a still-standing opponent, and curving back into the target instead of properly flanking it like I would prefer to.

(Full-size versions of all photos available at: http://photobucket.com/FloatingGun)

Effects of these conditions range from being frustrated about your ability to easily get good hits on a target that’s other than directly in front of you to your being killed in a fight because you can’t maneuver properly, move too slowly, are unable to get the gun into line like you need to, or from ineffective use of cover that exposes too much of your body to incoming fire. Given the potential severity of the effects, serious thought should be given as to how to avoid falling victim to these conditions. Fortunately, effective treatments are available and are simple (not always easy, but simple)  to apply.

Treatments are both corrective and preventive and may need to be applied on an ongoing basis.

 Treatments are as follows:

Learning and practicing ambidextrous use of all weapons. (At the least, getting as near to full ambidexterity as is possible.)

Learning and practicing one-handed shooting (of the handgun).

Learning and practicing to be able to shoot accurately with the gun below the eye-line, in other than dead-ahead directions, and held at distances ranging from in contact with your body to full extension.

The aim of the treatments is to develop the ‘Floating Gun’. This is a state in which you will automatically and without much if any conscious thought put the gun at the level you need and extended to the distance required in any direction of the clock face as the situation and the target you are engaging dictate. Sometimes one-handed, sometimes not, sometimes in one hand, sometimes in the other, sometimes held far away and sometimes in contact with your body, high, low, in-between, getting hits where you need them as you move where you need to without binding, bending, or twisting unnaturally. Furthermore, that point, that extension, that position, that direction, can and will change the moment the situation changes and the moment your relationship to the target changes. As you turn, as you change direction, as you change levels or speed or distance, or as the target does, so does your gun. It goes where it needs to be so that it can do what you need it to do.

 

 

 

This is a simple illustration of letting the gun float. Beginning in arm's reach of the target, I displace left as I draw and fire the first shot at waist level with the gun close in. I will continue to fire as I bring the gun up to eye-level to first a close-in two-handed shooting position and then, as I cross the 'T' of the target and then turn to advance along a parallel track, move to a more standard two-hand position. (Because of restrictions necessitated by the camera view range, I maneuvered in a much smaller area than if I were running this as a full-speed drill.)

 

 

 

Another way to answer the same question is to switch hands. Beginning from the same position and with the same initial displacement, I move the gun from right to left and continue the engagement. For complete development, both options should be learned and practiced.

Note that, unlike in the first examples, I was able at all times to move normally and naturally and did not have to cross my feet or become awkwardly 'bound up' to get the hits.

To best develop and keep updated on the use of the Floating Gun concept, therapy under the guidance of a qualified Suarez International instructor is highly recommended. Formal courses of treatment include Point Shooting Gunfight Skills, Close Range Gunfighting, Point Shooting Progressions, Advanced Close Range Gunfighting, and Advanced Point Shooting Progressions. Ongoing practice and training and refresher training is advisable, as without re-emphasis of the concept, Welded-Hand and Locked-In Syndrome will often re-occur. It’s happened to me; don’t let it happen to you.

Don't forget to work on 'floating' the long-gun as well:

 

 

PSP graduates will recognize this as the parallel-track approach to evasion and counterattack. I use a rifle here to illustrate that the concept of 'floating' is not limited to handguns. Long Gun Point Shooting Progressions will teach you more about this and is recommended for those wishing to become more facile in the quick and sure handling of the rifle or shotgun.

(I’ll get a bit more serious now: I believe there are two fundamentals that should not change no matter what you’re doing with the gun, and one fundamental that almost never should but can sometimes. The two things that should not change are your grip (the way you grip, not the tension of the grip), whether one or two-handed, and the way you work the trigger; these should always be consistent. The one fundamental that should almost not change is eye-hand, or eye-weapon, alignment. Even if the gun is below your line of sight, it should as much as possible be aligned with the dominant/shooting-side eye in order to have the best chance of hitting the intended target. As long as these fundamentals are satisfied, then the gun should be allowed to ‘float’ to where it will best get the hits you need.

Being able to float the gun does more for you than just to enable you to make hits from any position in any direction in an emergency, though that would be more than enough to justify the acquisition of the capability. Where employed deliberately, ambidextrous and one-handed facility with the weapon specifically will give you tactical options you will not have otherwise. For all these reasons, having the ability to float the gun is an all but must-have skill to everyone that carries and a definite must-have skill for the serious student of the gunfight.)

Take the time, make the effort, get the skill, and learn the Floating Gun. You will not regret it.

You be safe out there. And if you can't be safe, float like a butterfly and hit like the Hammer of Thor.

Cross-dominance, RMRs and point shooting



By Alex Nieuwland, Suarez International Staff Instructor

Earlier this year, I had TSD install a Trijicon RMR sight on my primary Glock 19 carry gun. When I started practicing with it, everything was as expected when it came to sighted fire: I was keeping all of my shots in the silhouette at 100 yards, plinking at 8” plates at 50 yards, etc. Point shooting while moving, however, did not feel right. It felt as if something was slowing me down. I recently figured out what it was, and thought I’d try to explain it here in case others are in the same situation.

Now, point shooting looks and feels different to different people. That’s why you should come to a point shooting class to experience it for yourself. If this is not how it looks and feels to you, move right along.

I'm cross dominant: my primary hand is on my right side, but my dominant eye is on my left side. If you’re not already cross dominant, you may be in a similar situation when you are shooting with your support side hand. During sighted fire with iron sights, I solve my cross-dominance issue by holding the gun in my primary hand (right) and closing my dominant (left) eye. During sighted fire with the RMR, cross dominance is a non-issue: I just keep both eyes open and use the red dot which is only projected into one eye (my right eye).

While moving, I like using point shooting from the half-homie position (gun canted about 45 degrees to the left). Shooting from the half-homie position rather than trying to keep the gun straight up and down allows for much faster movement. To aim the gun, I keep both eyes open and line up (or rather, lined up) the corner of the slide with my right eye. An imaginary line drawn along the corner edge of the slide indicates where the shot is going to hit. The image below shows pretty much what this looks like for my right eye.

Meanwhile, my left eye is sending a stronger image to my brain, but the image doesn’t contain useful aiming information, so I have no difficulty ignoring it. The image below shows pretty much what it looks like for my left eye.

The images below show the analogous images with the RMR sight.

Right eye:

Left eye:

As you can see, with the RMR sight BOTH images contain useful sighting information. The right eye is seeing the corner of the slide. The left eye is seeing what has been referred to as “the TV screen of death.” When I move with the gun in this position, my eyes are vying for dominance.  This is what was slowing me down.

The solution is simple: push the gun further to the left, so the corner of the slide is aligned with my dominant (left) eye. The image from the right eye now has no useful sighting information and is easily ignored, especially since it is my non-dominant eye anyway. The image below shows what it looks like to my dominant eye.

 

Aside from solving the eye dominance conflict, this combination has some additional advantages: the image coming from my dominant eye is stronger, so the imaginary line coming from the corner of the slide to the point I want to hit now really pops out at me, and I feel even stronger holding the gun in this position. Compare it to doing push-ups with your hands together compared to spread out. Which is easier? The push-ups with your hands together, right? The same thing applies here.

I like this hand and eye position so much, that I have switched to it for my point shooting with iron sighted guns as well. I have been using a modified version of the “walking drill” from the Close Range Gunfighting course during dry fire practice to ingrain this hand-eye cooridination while moving.

As I said before: If this is not how it looks and feels to you, don’t worry about it. If you’d like to try this out, however, come on by. On March 17-18 Chris Upchurch and I will be teaching another Close Range Gunfighting course in Columbia, SC. This course will also serve as a prerequisite for Randy Harris’ “Beatdown Extravaganza” (better known as Zero to Five Feet Pistol Gunfighting) on April 14-15 in the same location.

Flashlight in the Hand

Avoiding  the Profile Individual/Deterring the Profile Individual/Dominating the Profile Individual by Roger Phillips, Suarez International Specialist and Tier One Instructor

This is basically the same lecture that I have been giving since 2005 inside of my low light courses. This lecture is a combination of Col. Cooper's lecture that I heard through a third party back in 1999, teachings from Gabe Suarez from 2002, and some very recent formatting tips from Randy Harris. This information has been around for a very long time, but I have never seen it combined with the "flashlight in the hand" philosophy.

 

"The flashlight in the hand" philosophy is the tactic of carrying a small, powerful, tactical flashlight  in your non-dominant hand whenever you are in a risky area after the sun has gone down. Whether you are walking the dog, exercising, or making a run down to the grocery store/Wal-Mart, if you are going to be in a public place after sundown, it is the tactic of always carrying your flashlight in your hand.

The main reason for you to do this is because the vast majority of the times that you may need your flashlight, in a self defense situation, if it is not already in your hand you will most likely never get it into your hand. The number one reason for carrying a flashlight is for making the identification (ID) of the hands and the waistbands for weapons, since our visual acuity is cut in half in low light.  It is the hands that kill and the waistband is where bad guys (BG) usually keep their weapons. The number two reason for carrying a flashlight is to disrupt the vision of the adversary. A bright light in the eyes not only disrupts the adversaries vision but it allows the good guy (GG) to work behind a wall of light. When the adversary can no longer see you, that causes doubt and uncertainty. This uncertainty may be all that you need to deter an attack.

 

A flashlight is not necessarily a fighting tool. I do not need the flashlight to make the hits. It is much more valuable as a physical deterrent (BG cannot see GG) and a visual disruptor (BG's vision is 5% of what it was just a second before.) If you need to fight with the light on you are creating a constant focal point to attack. If you can disrupt that adversaries vision, turn the light out and move, there is no focal point to follow, there is only blinded bewilderment! Even if they recover, you can take their vision again. We have all heard "A flashlight is a bullet magnet" but this does not have to be the case if you "see what you need to see" and "blind as you need to blind" then turn the flashlight  out. If you remove the constant focal point the liabilities of the bullet/knife/club magnet decrease. It is the lessons of when to use the flashlight and when not to use the flashlight that are the most valuable of the lessons. Being able to shoot with the flashlight in conjunction with the gun is mildly interesting, that is entry level knowledge. Knowing when to blind, when to turn the flashlight off, when and where to move, and when to turn the light back on is the advanced knowledge. This knowledge is not possible without thorough testing inside of low light FOF and from both sides of the coin. You have to be both the GG and the BG to learn the lessons as they need to be learned. The reality is that all of this knowledge is useless if your flashlight is at home, in your car, or even in your pocket. If it is not in your hand when you spot the profile individual, it will probably never make it into your hand.

The term "profile individual" (PI) speak for itself. This has nothing to do with race or sex. Trouble and danger comes in all races and in both sex. Trouble and danger has a very distinct look and feel, if you have been around the block a couple of times, you know what I am talking about. If you cannot recognize trouble and danger you may just need to be removed from the gene pool. Recognizing  trouble and danger starts with profiling. Forget about all of those politically correct idiots out there and let's get down to the bottom line. If you do not profile you are a fool! There is a very low danger level from a well groomed man in an expensive business suit or a elderly couple taking a walk in a park. But there is a higher danger level from groups of urban youths, especially in bad parts of town or where poverty is rampant. This is all just common sense here.

If you are out at night, doing whatever it is that you have to do, and you see a PI that is going to cross your path here is a very quick overview of how to handle the PI.

 

Profile; It always starts with profiling! We must profile who is in our general vicinity while we are out after sun down. BG use the cloak of darkness to hide themselves and to hide their intent. Without profiling everything else that follows is worthless. Making the ID on a PI is the first piece of your back story. Back story is very important stuff, nothing happens inside of a vacuum. Collecting and building good pieces of back story allows you to build the information to facilitate making  the decisions that you are going to have to make. The more pieces the better the back story, the better the back story the quicker you will be able to work through your OODA loop. If you make a PI and he has orientated to you, the next thing that you need to do is as follows.

Avoid; Make a directional change to your movement and begin looking for other players. Choose a direction that will require the PI to re-orientate to you. If there is no re-orientation, that is a good thing, but keep your eye out for any other players/accomplice's along with the original PI. If the PI re-orientates to you, you have just succeeded in forcing the BG to show you his hand. You have created the second piece of the back story to further facilitate your decision making process. You now know the BG is keying on you. There are not coincidences! In low light you cannot allow the BG to close ground on you. You must stop his ingress! Here are some basic concepts to help stop the BG from closing ground you. The next two thing listed may need to be put into action simultaneously, but they are set down in order of importance.

 

Command; With a commanding voice and in conjunction with a flashlight in the PI eye's order them to "Back off!" In low light, with a quality flashlight the PI will see nothing but the light. You will have disappeared to him and all he will see is the source of the light and you will be cloaked behind a wall of light. If the first "Back off!" and blinding does not work, that is the third and another huge piece of the back story. Give them one last chance (the fourth piece of the back story) and  get louder and more "street." Sometimes the street only understands "street"........."BACK THE F**K OFF! While the commands and flashlights are being used you will most likely want to doing two other things simultaneously.

Move/Monitor; It is my opinion that you should mitigate the urge to stop and square up to your adversary. I feel that you should keep moving in order to disrupt the adversaries ability to begin working through his OODA loop. By continuing to move you take away the adversaries ability to take a snap shot of the battlefield which is very important to developing a plan of attack. As you command/blind/move you should again monitor the area for any other accomplices. Since you are hidden behind a wall of light to your primary adversary, you should be able to look around quickly for other players, without the primary adversary even knowing that you have taken your eyes off of him. If the PI is still re-orientating to you, you probably have enough back story (fifth piece) to articulate reasonable fear. Some people feel that they need to ID the weapon, but FOF training has proven that action beats reaction. If you are unable to ID that something is very wrong, with all of the back story that has taken place, you may be deep into the very worse of positions.......denial! This is where all of your training comes to the forefront. This is where you find out if "your line in the sand" has been thought through well enough. This is where all of your "what if" mental preparation has really prepared you well enough. This is where you find out about the reliability of your gut feeling, and your ability to act on it. This is where it gets as personal as anything that you have ever dealt with.

If in your mind you can articulate that it is go time, then it is on.

If the threat or weapon has been identified that leads us to the next phase of the fight.

 

Access; When the line in the sand has been crossed, keep moving, access your weapon, and get to work. It is time to fight with everything you have. Accessing your weapon, from concealed carry, with a flashlight in your hand is a skill set that you must own. There are two methods that you need to know, the one hand draw stroke (circular flagged thumb) and the clearing of the garment with the flashlight hand (three digit crab claw.) Which one you use is situational and user dependent. This draw stoke from concealment is the most likely thing that you are going to blow, your "flashlight in the hand" draw stroke needs to be to the point that you have it down cold while moving. With these two draw stroke methods you have the option of keeping the flashlight in the eyes or turning if off. Either way, the adversaries vision is going to be extremely limited. If you keep the light on and draw, everything that you do is cloaked by the wall of light, but the direction and pace of your movement can be tracked through the visual connection to the light source. If you turn the light out, you cannot be tracked periodically, but the adversaries vision will eventually return. Of course you can always give him another blast of light and take it away again. Once you have accessed the weapon and driven it to the focal point it is time to take care of business.

Negate; Negate the threat with fast and accurate hits while either hiding behind the wall of light or under the cloak of blinded darkness. I cannot possibly express how important it is to have the "double edge sword" knowledge and experience of fighting from both sides of this confrontation. Without this firsthand knowledge and experience, you have no clue of the true dynamics of the fight and the power and the limitations of the "flashlight in the hand" philosophy. Experience leads to confidence, confidence leads to absolute knowledge, absolute knowledge leads to total domination. This is where you want to be, anything short of that means that you have not put in the work and you are not as ready as you think are. Fighting at night is a skill set that can only be obtained through proper preparation to prevent piss poor performance. If you have not put in the time......face that fact for the fact that it is. Reading this article is simply not going to get it done!

Once the  primary adversary has been negated and determined out of the fight it is time to move on to the next progression.

 

Scan; BG's tend to travel in packs. Just because you did not make any accomplices early on does not mean that there are none. You are going to need to scan 360 degrees to make sure that there are no other players that may need your attention. Scanning may  best be done while moving to a place of cover or tactical advantage. Whether you scan with your flashlight or not depends on the ambient light and the presence  of darkened areas. Remember the rule of thumb, "if you are in the dark, stay in the dark, if you are in the light, light up the dark." Once you have verified that there are not other players to engage and verified that the primary has not reanimated it is time to move onto the next step of the progression.

Reload; Now that there is a lull in the fight it is time to top off your gun. If we accept the fact that "if the flashlight is not in your hand at the start of the fight, it will not make it into the hand" philosophy then it would seem wise to be able to load your gun without stowing your flashlight. The "three digit crab claw" allows for a "reload with retention" all while keeping the flashlight in your hand. If you are concerned about the effects of the adrenaline dump, you can stow the flashlight for your reload. Either way, get that gun topped off.

Evaluate; The next step is a medical evaluation of yourself. Since the fight is still not guaranteed to be over I would try to mitigate lighting yourself up or putting away the flashlight. The "three digit crab claw" can still feel the body for wet spots. Another option is to shove the flashlight in between the pinkie and ring finger of the gun hand, bezel up (consistency across categories) A quick lighting of the ground for blood droplets may be acceptable. If you find a wet spot in the groin area, you are going to have to ID the color of the fluid. If you find yourself to be ok medically, it is time to proceed to the next step.

 

Proceed/Police; Due to the fact that there are some places that if you do not get the heck out of there immediately , you could be fighting the whole neighborhood. It is not always as clear as "call the police and wait for them." Sometimes you are going to have to get the heck out of there, then call the police and arrange to meet them somewhere. Unfortunately, it can be even worse than that. You may have to get out of there and never say a word to anyone. There are places in this great Country that do not allow good people to defend themselves or their loved ones from evil. In this case, since you primary mission is to get home and continue to take care of your loved ones you may just need to proceed on with your life without bringing the police in. It is a shame that there are places in America that are like this, but it is what it is! A good person needs to make it home to his/her family and not allow laws that are contrary to God's law from keeping you of fulfilling your primary mission in life.

 Like I said at the start of this article, much of this has been around for a very long time. I have just put my spin on it from within the "flashlight in the hand" philosophy. If we look at these ten things that we need to do to make it through dealing with a profile individual, it may look like it is next to impossible to remember. This is where Randy Harris suggests uses a mnemonic device to help aid this philosophy in being easy to remember. Most mnemonic devices are a little cheesy but easy to remember.....this one is not different.

PACMANSREP

Pacmans rep was if you were smart enough and fast enough you could succeed in life and avoid all of the goblins. From the very start of the encounter......and all the way through the encounter, If you can remember this cheesy little mnemonic device, you can avoid the profile individual, deter the profile individual, and dominate the profile individual.

See Roger's schedule here

Discuss this here

 

“Only You Are Responsible For You”

By Roger Phillips, Suarez International Specialist and Tier One Instructor  

This is the last sentence inside of the Suarez International videotaped liability release. These are not just words! It should be the very core to your gun safety philosophy. It does not matter what you know or where you learned your safe gun handling habits. It does not matter where you train right now. Only you are responsible for your own safety habits.

This means that you need to look at what you have been taught or what you do and decide if it is really good enough. Remember, the most likely person that you are going to shoot IS YOURSELF!

“How good is good enough?”

 Is your gun handling safety habits really good enough?  When it comes down to putting unexpected holes into vital areas of your own body are you really doing the best that you can to mitigate this possibility, all while still learning to be combat effective?

Gunfighting is dangerous! Training to gunfight is also dangerous. The reality of the matter is that the more advanced that you get inside of your training, the more dangerous your training becomes. When we look at the reality of the fight and the likely issues that will arise inside of a fight, it is clear that we need to learn a lot more than just the optimal skill sets for the optimal situations.  The reality of the reactive gunfight puts us in sub-optimal positions that require our safety habits to be the very best that they can be. We need to understand that the whole competition based safety habits simply may not be good enough inside of a fight or inside of fight focused training.

 

We all should be at the point where we at least know the Four Basic Rules of Gun Safety.

(1)    Treat every gun as if it was loaded.

(2)    Do not cover anything that you are not willing to destroy

(3)    Keep your finger off of the trigger and outside of the trigger guard until you have made the conscience decision to shoot.

(4)    Know your target and what is in line with your target, behind and in front.

But these are very general rules that do not nail down specific safety habits.

In the past, Gabe Suarez has done an outstanding job of bringing a little common sense and reality to these rules. I would highly recommend that you check into Gabe’s take on the Four Basic Safety Rules. 

The point of this article is to talk about overlooked liabilities and bad habits, more so than rules. It is the overlooked liabilities and bad habits that really define your personal safety level. The mitigation of liabilities and bad habits are what allow you to proceed into advanced levels of training, all while keeping yourself as safe as you possibly can. I will be covering the top five overlooked liabilities and bad habits that I see inside of my courses.

Overlooked liabilities can be fixed inside of a two day course, but as an advanced instructor teaching advance students advanced skill set, I should not have to constantly babysit people through their safety awareness. I should not have to constantly point out that safety issues are being over looked. These are all issues that should be taken care before the course by wrapping your head around the safety concerns involved with overlooking basic concepts. Sure I will remind you, but really, shouldn’t this be something that I should not have to remind people of. The whole “You know that you are jeopardizing shooting yourself because you are overlooking some very basic concepts” conversation gets very old, very quickly.

Top Three Overlooked Liabilities

Loose Garments Around Your Holster

This is by far the most commonly overlooked liability by the students. It feels as if I could spend an entire course reminding people to tuck in their loose garments around their holster. Getting a loose garment caught inside of the trigger guard while reholstering will but an unexpected hole in you. Why would you risk such a thing over something so simple as keeping your under garment tucked in tight and your over garment clear of the holster?  All of my under garments tuck in a good 12” past my belt line to insure that that do not come untucked and end up in my holster or trigger guard.  When I reholster it is seen as an administrative process that is all geared toward a “Don’t shoot yourself stupid” mindset. My over garment is cleared completely before any reholstering is done. I have zero concern for speed or coolness factor. If I need to look, I look, because it is just administrative. It is my opinion that every time you head back to ammo up, you should take a look at your garments around your holster. A couple of seconds of cheap insurance mitigates your risks substantially. If your under garment is coming untucked, tuck it in. Furthermore, take that lesson to heart, go home and find a garment that will not come untucked. It is not brain surgery or rocket science, it is basic common sense! This is something that an advanced instructor should not have to point out!

 

Why do under garments come untucked?

They come untucked because of the “elbow up” portion of the draw stroke and the pivoting during “the turret of the tank” concept.  “A” shirts and Under Armor type garments work very well for me. They are tight, tuck in deep, and deal with the manipulation of the shoulder, without coming untucked.

Dress around your gun and test your garments before you show up in a course.

An instructor should not have to show you how to dress.

Untested Gear Inside of a Course

When you show up for an advanced course, it is all about the skill sets and the corresponding mental aspect of the fight that are being taught. Your entire focus should be on these two things. Heck that is what you paid for, right? This is not the place to try out untested gear! This is not the place to “try this and try that!” This is not the place to experiment! This is the place that you show up with what you know best and put it to use inside of the framework of the course.  It is my opinion that you should plan on working with the one set up that you know the best, plan on working one gun, one holster, and one ammo supply method that you know the best. This is not the place to try out four different guns or four different set ups. You are there to learn what is being taught. Take that knowledge home and dry practice with all of your other gear. Inside of a course, where the learning curve is steep, concentrate on the course…..not your gear. Some of the most unsuccessful students that I have ever had were hardware focused and not software focused. While everyone else progressed rapidly…..they struggled to keep up. While struggling to keep up, their safety levels suffered. An advanced course is a challenge all in itself. Do not make a difficult and dangerous endeavor even more so because you are hardware focused.

Some will read this and think that it is contradictory to the whole “Dual Appendix” form of training inside of SI’s most advanced courses. That would be a huge misconception! It has been written out many times to not show up in an advanced course expecting to go dual appendix unless you are absolutely ready for this type of training. These courses are not where you learn to go dual appendix, they are designed to take your advanced skill levels to the next level. You learn to go dual appendix in your dry practice, your airsoft training, and inside of the basic courses. If you are not ready to hit the ground running, do not participate in these advanced applications. Just because some students in the course have prepared themselves appropriately, does not mean that you have. And if you have not prepared yourself appropriately, deal with that reality and learn what you can without needless putting yourself at risk by biting off more than you can chew.

Having the intellect to say to yourself “I am not ready for that” is a positive trait. SI will never force you to do something that you are not comfortable with. We want to challenge our advanced student base, but even more so, we want you to go home with the same number of holes that you showed up with.

Watch for and get rid of any gear that might impede with your draw stroke. There should be nothing above your holster that could cause a snag on the gun or the hands. Take the lessons that we learned about chest rigs and CCW holsters and apply the same concepts across the board.

 

Untested Skill Sets Inside of a Course

The last topic touched on this issue. It is very common to learn untested skill sets inside of a course. The vast majority of the time this is not a safety issue. The vast majority of time that is perfectly ok and acceptable. It is when we get to the advanced training and the increase safety concerns that these issues need to be looked at more closely. This is the point where we (the instructors) need honesty from our student base. This is the point that we need the student to be honest with themselves and with us on what they are truly and safely capable of.

Everything that we learn should be run through a natural progression. This natural progression is what keeps us safe and what keeps us from biting off more than we can chew. Let’s look at one single skill set and take a look at the progression that should be involved to reach the advanced levels of the skill set. Let’s look at “Completely Ambidextrous” with the handgun skill sets. This is not something that you look at for a couple of minutes and then plan on jumping into an advanced SI handgun course to put into action.  That would be very unwise for everyone involved. Even if you are an advanced student, there are skill sets that require you to step back to the basics, to nail down the skills that will allow you to be safe. I went through a very specific progression to be at the point that I am comfortable with my skill level, to head into completely ambidextrous shooting with a handgun.

Here is what I would recommend.

Step back to the basics and run a “secondary hand” Defensive Pistol Skills course. Run the whole two day course with your off hand. All manipulations, all draw strokes, and all shooting with your secondary hand. Take those skill sets and bring them home and dry practice them until you have it down cold. Have the ability to run your secondary hand at, at least 80% of your primary hand. Take a “secondary hand” Close Range Gunfighting course and do the same thing, including the dry practice. Only then, after you have put in the time, step into an advanced course that runs dual appendix. We all need to recognize that it is secondary hand draw stroke and the uneducated secondary hand trigger finger that makes the dual appendix training a very high skill level skill set and high safety risk.

Put in the work and never bite off more than you can chew!

Inside of an advanced course is not the place to try to figure this all out!

Top Two Bad Habits

 Slamming Your Gun Back Into Your Holster

In the past, I have covered in depth my concerns with this epidemic.

I've trained a lot of places and proportionally Suarez International students are the most squared away group of students I've ever worked with. But even some the very best have ingrained slamming their guns into their holster.

Ingrained "slamming your gun into the holster" is not something that I can fix in two days.

The solution to the problem is not going to come out of taking a course with an instructor. The only solution has to be made by the person that has ingrained such a reckless and dangerous habit, to reprogram not just the way that they reholster, but to reprogram the way that they think.

The slamming of the gun into the holster comes across like an exclamation point at the end of a sentence. It's like the final emphasis put on something explosive.

The thing is that our explosiveness of the draw stroke, our movement, and our fast and accurate hits needs to be separated from the reholstering process. The "reluctant reholstering" process begins with our after action drills. We need to ingrain the fact that we pulled our guns out for a reason, in defense of life. We need to take that thinking and realize that you never want to reholster until you know for a fact that the confrontation is over. "Is he down?" "Did it work?" "Does he have any friends?" "How’s my 6:00?" "How’s my ammo?" "How am I?"

"Is this really over?"

This process allows us to change gears from the explosiveness of our initial response, to the slow, methodical, administrative act of reholstering the gun safely.

Let me make this clear. I am reminding myself just as much as I am reminding everyone else. As an instructor, when I am giving demo's, it is possible to think so much about the technique that I am teaching that I do not run through the after action drills as much as I should. But it is the after action drills and the mental aspect attached to them that allows for the down shifting the will dramatically cut down on the desire to slam that gun back into your holster.

IMHO, there is no way to over stress the dangers of slamming your gun back into your holster.

Murphy is a ruthless bastard. He will jump up and pound you mercilessly if you are not careful. I do not care if you have slammed your gun in the holster one hundred thousand times without a problem......eventually Murphy will take his pound of flesh!

 

Non-Robust Trigger Finger Index

This is my new pet peeve and the real catalyst for this article.

I am seeing all kinds of trigger finger indexes that would be considered all well and good inside of “The Four Rules.” But once again, this is not about target shooting holes into pieces of paper…..this is about preparing for a fight! How robust your trigger finger placement needs to be during target shooting is completely different from how robust it needs to be inside of the reality of the fight. This in turn, is simply not good enough for advanced fight focused training.

It is my opinion that your trigger finger should be indexed completely straight and up as high and possible/reasonable on the frame/slide.

If the trigger finger is straight, it is less likely to be effected by any sort of impact, jolt or jostle.

If the trigger finger index is up as high as possible/reasonable, this leaves us a larger “margin of error” if the gun is snagged on something during the draw stroke. This snagging, which could be due to an unwise gear choice or a Murphy moment on your garments, can lead to the gun feeling as if it is going to be ripped out of the hand. At speed, the gun feeling like it is being ripped out of the hand will probably lead to a convulsive gripping/tightening of the gun hand which can lead to a non-robust indexed trigger finger ending up inside of the trigger guard and on the trigger.  

Even something as simple as a grasp reflex, out of the startled response, can allow one to blow right through a non-robust trigger finger index.

This is something that I lecture on at the start of every course. But it is also a habit that I will simply not be able to reprogram out of an advanced student inside of an advanced course. The proper robust trigger finger index is something that needs to be ingrained before the student ever arrives inside of an advanced course. The more advanced the training is, the more important a robust index is. When we are talking about speed of the draw stroke, speed of the movement, versatile drawing/shooting positions, and possible awkward drawing/shooting positions we need to make sure that we are mitigating our risks. One of the very best things that you can do for yourself is to ingrain a robust trigger finger placement.  

As it stands, I have not “sent anyone packing” from inside of my courses. But this one issue (robust trigger finger index) may change that very soon. If you think I am making sense here, great! Show me your robust trigger finger index inside my courses. If you strongly disagree and plan to show up to one of my courses with a non-robust trigger finger index, please do not be surprise if I send you packing.

Remember, shooting yourself affects more people than just you!

If your overlooked liabilities and bad habits look as if they might affect Suarez International, my other students, or myself……I will ask you to leave.

This is the optimal trigger finger index that Suarez International  is now looking for.

 

Discuss this here

Find Roger's schedule here

 

 

 

Where Modern Technique Went Wrong

By CR Williams

 

Jeff Cooper intended for his Modern Technique Of The Pistol to be adaptable to any battlefield and to the needs of the day, whether the past day when it was developed, or the present day and the kind of threats we face now in the streets as we go about our daily lives. He meant for his instructors to grow and develop the art and make it a living thing that learns as it grows. But of the instructors that Cooper brought up and of the schools that he directly or indirectly got started, only Gabe Suarez (who once taught for Cooper) and Suarez International are doing what Jeff Cooper intended. Others were content with what was, and for various reasons have 'locked' Modern Technique up. They have turned it into a Traditional Martial Art, still useful, but fit more for the battles of the past than of the present.  How did they do that? Why did they do that?

 

It started before Modern Technique even had a name. A consideration of things Decided, and of things just Allowed, and why they're important to us today.

 

Colonel Jeff Cooper is remembered as the developer and founder of what is now called the Modern Technique of the Pistol, usually referred to as simply Modern Technique or MT. In the development of the system of techniques, concepts, and principles that were codified, collected, organized, and then at some point named Modern Technique, if he was not the primary mover in that effort, he was certainly the first among equals in the group of originators. To the Colonel, therefore, goes the credit for moving the Martial Art of Gunfighting forward in a definitive way.

That forward movement was not carried on after he died, however. Instead, Modern Technique was all but locked into place, it's methodology and skill-sets, concepts and philosophies codified and set firm and deep. As a result, today's Modern Technique has the same 'look and feel' as what are now called Traditional Martial Arts styles, often abbreviated as TMA, which are styles which have been kept (mostly) as exactly as possible the way their founders first developed them.

How was this allowed to happen?

Cooper believed MT to be a complete system and fully 'sufficient unto the day'. He said as much, more than once, in his Commentaries:

I am sometimes asked why I do not do more literary work on the subject of defensive pistolcraft. I hate to say it, but the answer is that I believe that I have discovered what I need to know about defensive pistolcraft.

Just so, I learned what I needed to learn, as did many others, by the same process, and now we know how to use the combat pistol. The purpose has been accomplished.

We did, over a period of some 30 years, discover the best techniques and systems for the use of the combat handgun.

In those same Commentaries, however, he acknowledged the possibility of gaps in the system:

No subject of this sort may ever be considered completely and finally closed...

Truly, pistolcraft has taken tremendous strides in the past thirty-five years, but we have not achieved the perfect solution even yet--mainly because there are too few people asking the right questions. (My emphasis.)

That acknowledgement, however, was apparently not taken to heart by those who followed the Colonel. Instead, it appears that they heard and remembered only the part about completeness, perhaps not understanding that completeness is sometimes relative to time and circumstance. The 'battlefield' that I, as a non-military-non-law-enforcement civilian, expect to face today is different than it was then. But like the long-historied martial arts that comprise the TMAs, Modern Technique has, for the most part, been locked into a battlefield displaced in time and space, becoming less relevant to me and people like me.

This does NOT mean that Modern Technique is totally useless. Like the Traditional Martial Arts it now mirrors, MT has saved uncountable good guys and I expect that it will continue to. So will the Traditional Martial Arts. But just like there are now ways to fight without guns that are more suited to the current environment than TMAs are, there are now ways to fight with guns that fit the needs of people in our time and our space, and not that of the military, of law enforcement, or of the past.

What troubles me is that the Modern Technique Of The Pistol could have been one of those ways. The factors were present when Colonel Cooper was examining and experimenting and conceptualizing and constructing his system. MT could have come from that past into the present just as flexible and 'alive' and adaptable as either Mixed Martial Arts or the renewed and updated Combatives that were originally developed during World War II are. It could have been just as applicable to a wider range of current and possible gunfight situations as MMA and Combatives are to the kind of empty-hand fight you'll have to handle in the 21st Century.

But--it is not.

I don't think that Colonel Cooper intended for MT to be, or become, less than adequate to any kind of gunfight the practitioner would face at any time. In that, he was like the old masters, who built their systems to fit what they saw as the fight that had to be faced, looked upon the fruits of their labors, and saw they were Complete. But the masters died, the students ‘froze’ the systems, things changed, and the systems that were locked in couldn’t stay current and equal to the kinds of fights that we see today. And so we have the Traditional Martial Arts. And so we have Modern Technique.

So what makes it, what made it, less than useful to today's civilian defender? What decisions were made, deliberately or not, that makes today's Modern Technique inadequate to someone who isn't fighting to make an arrest or overcome the enemies of the United States (such fights being proactive as much, maybe more, than reactive), but who is fighting to live and win and go home to his or her family when the fight is over?

Of the various decisions made about what to look at, what to test, how to test it, what information to accept and discard, what evidence would be valid, what to leave in or keep out of the system...of all the decisions made, I believe that three are important, perhaps even critical, to understanding how and why the Modern Technique system first became what it is and then how and why it got locked up the way it was. These three key decisions were:

Core concepts and key elements of Modern Technique were based as much, perhaps more, on the results of competition than of combat.

Actual combat results and reports from life-or-death fights were not ignored completely, mind you; they were part of the evidence and research that the Colonel gathered all through the creation, formation, and maturation of the MT system. But Cooper himself, in relating a brief history of the development of the best way to fight with a handgun, points to competitions he developed and oversaw as being core components of his research and development:

...In 1959 the Bear Valley Gunslingers were established in California with the avowed purpose of introducing realism and variety into sporting pistol competition. In due course the Gunslingers evolved into the Southwest ("Combat") Pistol League......The purpose of all this was to "get real" and to evaluate the systems by which fighting skills with the handgun could be properly evaluated and rewarded. (My emphasis.) The next step was IPSC (the International Practical Shooting Confederation) founded in 1976 in Columbia, Missouri, in an attempt to spread the new doctrine worldwide...

In other parts of his Commentaries the Colonel says the same thing in different ways: That he developed competitions with the central idea of researching methods and techniques best suited to fighting--not competing, but fighting--with a pistol. The Weaver stance, for example,  was one of the core elements of MT that came directly out of those competitions. Cooper took great care to design courses of fire, when he was in direct control of a contest, that mirrored actual fight situations in order to best use them as research tools. And he was much saddened and frustrated when IPSC competition devolved into the sophisticated game that it is to this day because it could no longer be used to develop the fighting method of the pistol like he wanted to it to do.

Understand something here: The use of competition as a primary research and development tool does not invalidate the usefulness, however limited it may be today, of the Modern Technique system. To this day, the strictly combat-oriented world of gunfighting continues to look at what is done in competition, and has drawn several useful things from that competitive world. Neither am I saying that any and all information/examples/evidence that came from combat experience, either direct or reported, was categorically rejected. What I am saying is that Colonel Cooper said plainly that core principles of Modern Technique were based directly on techniques used to win competitions. Competition results were apparently weighted at least as heavily as combat experience in the process of developing the system of gunfighting that eventually was called Modern Technique.

Further evidence of the primacy of competition results in the development of the Modern Technique comes from another of the three important decisions made that locked MT more in the past than the present:

Point-shooting techniques and principles were not integrated into the Modern Technique system.

As a matter of fact, the Orange Gunsite rules for instructor conduct included formal proscriptions against speaking favorably of point-shooting and provided for penalties to be applied against any instructor who made positive comments about point-shooting. This is especially interesting in light of the fact that Cooper previously taught point-shooting, which he called "pointer fire". The decision to not integrate point-shooting and to impose these proscriptions was made in spite of three kinds of evidence that supported the idea of including it:

A proven history of combat effectiveness.

It is possible to say that the revolution in pistolcraft in the 20th century began with Fairbairn in China, though his pioneering did not achieve wide acceptance.

Cooper was aware of Fairbairn's work in China and later in Britain in World War II. Not only that, but Col. Rex Applegate was a fellow NRA board member with Cooper. Perhaps Applegate's work training operatives for the OSS was still classified at the time, but Colonel Cooper would still have been well acquainted with what Applegate was teaching and I believe would have known something about Applegate's wartime experience. Still, this was apparently rejected, despite the fact that:

Both Cooper and the men that helped him develop MT could point-shoot very well indeed, thank you very much.

Cooper called it pointer-fire, but it was point-shooting by any other name, and they were very good at it. They knew the method, they knew the principles, they knew the concepts, and they knew it was combat effective. And some of what they thought was sighted fire that won their competitions was actually a point-shooting technique. Don't believe me? Look up Type 1 and 2 Focus sometime. It's used by top-line competitors to this day, and it's point-shooting. It was not left out of the MT curriculum because they didn't know how to do it. It was a deliberate choice, made despite the fact that:

They were fully aware of the most probable kind of fight you'd face with a handgun, which was the kind that point-shooting is most applicable for. At least the Colonel was:

I have been studying this matter of personal combat for many decades, and I have almost never run across a case in which outstanding marksmanship was influential in the conflict...Ordinarily lethal confrontations take place from arm's length to across the table, at distances at which the quality of marksmanship is almost irrelevant.

When we remember that real gunfights take place at very short range - across the room - and that there is usually plenty of time, we see that the brilliant pistolcraft evident in competition is perhaps irrelevant.

As the after-action reports keep coming in, we notice that most defensive shooting situations take place under circumstances which do not call for expert marksmanship. Of course the shooter must know the fundamentals of hitting a target, and he must know correct gunhandling, but in a street fight he is almost never called upon to shoot with match-winning precision.

Colonel Cooper did make a valid point--that becoming confident of your 'sighted shooting' ability provides a great and good help in even an across-the-room face-off situation. Not only that, in his book Fighting Handguns  he recommended his pointer-fire methods for just those situations. Still, point-shooting techniques that were ideal for that combat environment were not integrated into the Modern Technique, a factor that has held MT in the past instead of pushing it to the present.

The third key decision, one the Colonel made, that concerns the development of Modern Technique, and one that I believe to be the most critical to it's being frozen in time as it is today, is simply this:

 

Colonel Cooper stopped working on it.

 

He did not stop completely, but if you read through the Commentaries, you will notice a place in time where the Colonel in a practical sense stopped paying much attention to developing the fighting methodology of the handgun any further. He did this despite, as quoted earlier, acknowledgement that what he had discovered to date might not be all there is to it.

This, I believe, is the key decision that locked Modern Technique into its current 'TMA mode'. It was not an abrupt, instantaneous decision, nor was it a conscious one in my view. It was just something that happened gradually over time. But it was a decision made nonetheless, and a very important one.
Why did he, mostly, stop? I can only speculate, but an examination of the Commentaries indicates three reasons why the Colonel turned his attention mostly away from the development of the art of fighting with a handgun and toward other areas of inquiry:

In spite of acknowledgement that more could be learned, he decided that he knew what he needed to know and that was enough.

His quest for how to fight with a handgun started as a personal investigation that developed into a public and commercial success, but still apparently remained a personal investigation throughout. It is possible that he developed the training program he did as much to provide ongoing feedback about the validity of his conclusions as it was intended to propagate and spread the method to others who would find it useful. What I cannot see, but suspect, is that the feedback was unconsciously filtered to support the conclusion that what there was was Enough, and that little more if anything was to be found or was necessary to add to the perfected methodology.

He was always more focused on the rifle and ways to properly employ it.

The more I read the Commentaries, the more I become convinced that Cooper was in heart and soul a Rifleman and nothing else. So much so that some aspects of Modern Technique practice appear to be a subconscious attempt to make a pistol into a handier, very portable rifle. Yes, he had an interest in and a focus on the handgun, but that only went so far. I read much more in the Commentaries about the rifle than about the pistol, especially as the Colonel travelled through the latter years of his life. The method of the Modern Technique was interesting, yes, but mainly a necessity. The Method of the Rifle was a thing of both interest and a kind of beauty to him though, and once he had what he needed of the first, it was to be expected that he would devote himself more to that which called him the strongest.

The most important reason he stopped? He probably expected his successors, the instructors and students he trained, to move the art forward after him.

I say 'probably' because it's not clear to me that he did, in fact, expect this. It's possible, though evidence does not support it, that he did not encourage additional research, experimentation, and innovation because he really did think that Modern Technique contained all that was necessary. What does seem clear is that he did not take pains or go out of his way to encourage additional development of the art after a certain point. Evidence such as the very careful crafting and control of the curriculum and course content and his careful training of instructors to do certain things a certain way, supports the possibility of a lack of such encouragement. I don't believe it was a deliberate thing to not encourage additional development, though. I think instead it was that he was satisfied with what was and that there were other things on his mind.

So the Colonel stopped. And because the Colonel stopped, so did those who followed him, students and instructors both. So large was the forward step in gunfighting that Cooper had made, so large his contribution to the method and ways to teach that method, so great was his contribution and so large had the Colonel become in the eyes, minds, and hearts of his followers, that when he stopped his personal investigations they, not understanding what he really was doing, also stopped their forward movement in the art. His satisfaction with his own work became their satisfaction with the entirety of the system, and so the Modern Technique of the Pistol became stalled on the battlefield of the past.
In this, they misunderstood, I think, both the man and the intent. Colonel Cooper was not as rigid and dogmatic about technique and methodology as some people think:

Over the years I have concluded that certain body and hand positions are helpful to deliver better and quicker hits, but if a student chooses to disregard my teachings it is all right with me, as long as his results are good.

Statements like this are confirmed by those who knew him and who worked for him. But because of the way he conducted himself and because of the way he conducted his work of training and taught others to conduct it not everyone that was close to him, personally or professionally, came to understand it. So Modern Technique stopped moving, and other developments, other instructors, other thinkers and innovators and experimenters went ahead of it and beyond it.

Think of what Modern Technique would be today if those others had understood.

 

There would be ongoing investigation, research, and testing. Every concept that was a part of it would have been re-examined. The concepts that were discarded would be re-examined. All of this would be undertaken in the light of what went on in today's threat and combat environment. New technologies that allowed combat simulations and testing against independent, thinking, resisting opponents such as Simunitions on the LE side and Airsoft on the civilian side would be incorporated into not just the research and testing, but actual training curriculums. Feedback and communication between class and test and the street and the field and the alleyway would be ongoing and regular. Martial disciplines such as knife and sword fighting and empty-hand styles would provide ideas, concepts, and techniques for incorporation. Everything would be tested by experienced fighters and instructors, and nothing that worked would be discarded because it didn't somehow fit someone's idea of The Way It Should Be.

 

It would be what Jeff Cooper wanted it to be. It would be what Suarez International is teaching today. SI is continuing Cooper's legacy. SI is doing today what Jeff Cooper wanted his students and his instructors to be doing from the beginning. And we will keep doing it in the future.

 

The others? They appear to be content to join the ranks of the Traditionalists. They appear to have succeeded in doing so.  And so there is what Suarez International does, and there is Modern Technique. Present and past, ongoing and stalled, open and locked...

Will Modern Technique ever be completely superseded? Will MT move into the historical records of gunfighting systems and become something to be studied only by scholars and hobbyists interested only about how it was done, not how it is? In some ways it already has. If and when it finally goes into memory, though, it won't be because of Jeff Cooper. He did not intend it to be that way. If MT does go onto the shelves of history, it will be because those that followed him--some of them, at least--for whatever reasons and rationales they had, were unwilling to do what the Colonel was doing until the day of his death, which was pushing forward and looking ahead.

That, in the end, is Colonel Cooper's real legacy and his most important message: To Go Forward.

It is sad that some people did not get that message.

The Double Edge Sword and Force on Force Gunfighting at Night

By Roger Phillips, Suarez International Specialist and Tier One Instructor

“You do not know what you do not know!”

  This has become one of Suarez International’s (SI) top catch phrases. The reason for that is because it has been the absolute reality of the firearms training industry since the middle of the 1900’s. When we see skill sets or tactics that are staunchly defended, beyond any common sense, that we know does not work against a living, thinking, and resisting adversary “you do not know what you do not know” is the very core of the discussion.

 The difference between the SI student base and most of the other students of the gun is that we accept the fact that everyone is ignorant about something. We understand that the word “ignorant” is not an insult…….it is an obstacle that most be surpassed…….it is a challenge that must be met and conquered.

  Unfortunately, there is some training out there that is so difficult to get, that even SI students have not stepped up to the challenge. This leaves many of them in the position where they may not be as squared away as they think they are, and you know what that means.

 ”You do not know what you do not know!”

  One of those training opportunities that are often missed out on would be low light force on force (FOF.) The reason for this is clear, it can be a logistical nightmare for the student and for the instructor. But really, is inconvenience a legitimate reason to miss out on some of the most important training that you can possibly receive?

 When we look at the “most likely” of a civilian encounter it is going to be a reactive event in low light conditions. If you have not tested your skill sets against a live, thinking, and resisting adversary you are not near as ready as you think you are. I’m sorry if this hurts your feelings, but I am not here to baby my students, hold their hands, or powder their little tushies, I am here to make them as deadly as they can possibly be. My students know that I will tell them the truth……good or bad! I am the only SI Instructor to have been running low light course every year for the past six years. I know how many students have actually trained with SI in low light. Straight up, the numbers are not good considering the quality of students that we have.

  One of my biggest concerns is that the student base has not had a chance to experience “the double edge sword” of FOF and fighting at night. “The double edge sword” is loosely defined as “what works on you will work on your adversary and what works on your adversary will work on you.” This means that we must experience everything that is in our war bag, from the bad guy’s perspective. We must also know everything that is in the bad guy’s war bag so we know what may be coming, along with its effects that it may have on us, so that we may steal his tricks and skill sets and use them against him. Whatever they can do…..we can do!

  As Sun Tzu said in “The Art of War”

So it is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you can win a hundred battles without a single loss.
If you only know yourself, but not your opponent, you may win or may lose.
If you know neither yourself nor your enemy, you will always endanger yourself.

 There is no way to experience these invaluable lessons unless you take them into low light FOF. Without this firsthand experience as the good guy and as the bad guy it is nothing more than speculation and theory.

 In the past we have seen flashlights marketed as tools just short of laser beams that can immediately blind, disorient, and vaporize the adversary. How can you possibly understand the effects of a good flashlight or your ability to fight through those effects if you have not personally experienced them? You have probably heard that “the flashlight is a bullet magnet.” How would you know whether this is true if you have not been on both the giving end and the receiving end of the confrontation? We have heard that if you have good point shooting skills it is best to fight in the dark because you have superior skills over your adversary.  How would you know if your skill sets are good enough to meet that challenge if you have not put them up against a resisting adversary?

  How do your dynamic movement skill sets hold up against an adversary that is moving dynamically……in the dark? Do you know the best way to use your flashlight after you have made the ID? Do you keep it on and engage? Do you turn it off and engage? Or do you use something in between those two concepts? Do you know the tricks that bad guys use to hide their accessed weapons? Have you seen those tricks used at night and do you know what the tattle-tells are? Have you learned how to do it yourself? How do you handle a profile individual at night? What are some easy tricks to help you remember how to deal with a profile individual? Do you know what flashlight position is best for each situation? Do you have your handgun/flashlight manipulations down pat? Have you figured out all of the body mechanics to be as good as you can possibly be with a flashlight in one hand and a handgun in the other? How do you search with a flashlight? How do you take that corner? How do you engage after you have clear that corner? How helpful are your night sights in a reactive situation? How does the RMR compare to the nights sights?

 I could go on and on!

  If you do not definitively know the answer to each of these questions, you may not be near as deadly as you think you are. 70% of all gun fights happen in low light! Have you trained properly for this reality? This is not target shooting……this is not a bright sunny day at the range! This is the down and dirty reality of fighting for your life or the lives of your love ones.

If you have not trained for a reactive gunfight at night, you have trained for substantially less than 30% of the fight!

Reality is a ruthless bastard! Train accordingly!

Discuss this here

Sign up for a Low Light FOF course here

Check Rogers schedule here

The RMR and Point Shooting Progressions (PSP)

Written by Roger Phillips, Suarez International Specialist and Tier One Instructor

I have been asked by many of my student base to tell them what I thought about the RMR when it comes to point shooting. When I was first asked, I made it clear that I did not have enough experience with the system to make an informed decision. Most of the people that know me know that I am an instructor that really concentrates on software, because it is the brain that allows us to be as deadly as we can possibly be. If you have your head straight you can kill a man with a stapler. But there is no doubt that the better the gear is the better the mind can kill.

When it comes to the RMR, this is something that I knew that I needed because my aging eyes have not been able to get a crisp sight picture for nearly ten tears. As a Suarez International (SI) Instructor, not only do I need to be able to bust of the X and make fast and accurate hits, at a full run, out to ten to twelve yards I also need to be able to make a hundred yard shot with my pistol on demand. I can do it with iron sights, but nowhere near the percentage as a RMR. This portion of the evaluation was a no-brainer. There is simply no comparison between my marksmanship between the RMR and iron sights. The sight acquisition is faster due to no need to change the focal plane off of the threat and back to the sights. The hits are more consistent and the follow up shots faster due to the red dot being a more accurate form of aiming a gun over iron sights.

All of this has been well documented and well established, but this is not the focus of this article. The focus of this article is on taking the RMR to the most advanced levels of point shooting. The focus is on running the RMR in a PSP course and seeing how it compares “apples to apples” with what I have been doing for the last five and a half years with iron sights.

Right off the bat, I’ll level with all of you, I was concerned. I was concerned that I would give the RMR setup a fair shake and not have anything good to report. I was concerned because the perception of my favorite point shooting aiming method “aligning down the top of the slide” was being changed due to adding the RMR to the top of the gun. During this period of concern, I kept hearing myself constantly lecturing people on the hazards of comparing brand new skill sets with long established skill sets and how it was “bad science” unless the time and the work had been put in to give a truly informed evaluation. I realized that I would have to get over my concerns and just get busy, put in the work, and figure it out. The value of what the RMR does for my marksmanship could not take a back seat to my established point shooting preferences. To not be able to make a small adjustment in my point shooting skill set to facilitate a vast improvement to my marksmanship would have been closed minded, shown a lack of versatility, and a lack of fluidity……..everything that I constantly preach against.

I hate hypocrites! I hate them even more if it is looking like I am going to be one.

  At first, I struggled! My “below line of sight sweet spot” was gone. I kept looking for it but it was no longer there for me. My hits were consistently high, because I wanted visual input on the top of the slide. I finally figured out what I was doing wrong. I was simply over thinking it! Once I decided that I would just clear my preconceived notions off of the table and just run it on auto pilot, everything began to fall in place.

I just recently had an excellent opportunity to finally put my new skill sets to a significant test. I was running the PSP course at night and under the lights. There was a light turnout and the guys that did show were very squared away, so I decided that I would participate in the course at a much higher level than I usually do. 90% of my point shooting is not affected by the RMR, in any manner at all. It is just the “full extension, below line of sight, with my dynamic movement” that is affected. But the answer is as simple as just lowering the gun from mouth level, to chin level. This is all that I had to do to get the visual input from the top of the slide that I like so much. When we accept the fact that the dynamic movement drills inside of the PSP course are run beyond logical distances, it is clear that dropping the gun from mouth level to chin level is not that big of a deal. We are running five yard skill sets out to twelve yards in order to instill confidence and to extend the learning time frame.  When we look at what I lose due to this small adjustment, compared to what I gain with the RMR, it is crystal clear that the RMR is a huge asset to have added to your pistol.

 

Let’s look at what the sight continuum looks like with iron sights compared to what it looks like with the RMR.

1)      Hard focus on the very top edge of the front sight = use the red dot

2)      Hard Focus on the front sight = use the red dot

3)      Flash sight picture = use the red dot

4)      Shooting outside of the notch = use the red dot

5)      Type two focus = use the red dot

6)      Below line of sight, nose level = use the red dot (high in the screen) or metal and meat

7)      Below line of sight mouth level = window of death or metal and meat

8)      Below line of sight chin level = align down the top of the slide

9)      Below line of sight throughout the retention concept = align down the top of the slide

As you see the RMR simplifies and is more accurate at all of the line of sight shooting and just below line of sight (nose level). Mouth level takes some getting used to but it does work if you think about “the window of death” or “metal and meat.” Anything below that the RMR has zero effect on your point shooting skill sets.

This is all going to be individually dependent. What works for me may not work for you and the other way around.

The reason that I wrote this is because I know for a fact that there are many “point shooters” that are concerned with the RMR. They are concern that they are going to pay the money and not be able to make their point shooting work. I know this for a fact because they have personally told me. Guess what? You do not have to worry about that any longer. I took care of that for you. If you have learned to point shoot from another SI Instructor or I, you will not only be able to make this work, you will make it work really well with point shooting and improve your sighted fire skill sets exponentially.

I know some of you out there have waited quite some time for me to get this tested and written. I wanted to take the time and put in the work so that I could speak from a position of absolute authority on this subject. I know due to my specialty and how far outside of the box that I usually roll, there are a good number of people that believe that I move on things without putting in the time or the work. That perception is absolutely incorrect and anyone that has ever trained with me could probably vouch for that fact. I do not but my name behind anything without putting in the work and looking at from every angle. I have been working with the RMR for five months now. Due to all of the personal requests by my student base to get this evaluation done, I wanted there to be zero doubt……..and there is zero doubt!

The RMR is perfectly compatible with your point shooting skill sets and will dramatically increase your marksmanship skill sets.

That work is done, move forth and make yourself more deadly than the day before.

See Rogers Schedule here

 Discuss this here

Vehicle Fighting: The Draw Stroke

By TN Staff Instructor Ryan Acuff

The necessity to be able to fight in and around vehicles is a binding thread that’s shared by military, police and civilian operators alike.  The automobile in America has become the very symbol of our freedom and the mobile nature of our society.  We all either drive or are passengers in vehicles for hundreds if not thousands of hours every year, but rarely do we ever train to fight in and around the confines of what is such a peculiar environment. 

Part of that environment that is so peculiar is the physical posture we find ourselves in that is so different from how we normally train.  I’m referring to the seated position.  How many times have you had the opportunity to drive your car to the firing line and practice shooting from the draw, while seated and buckled in?  There are a few problems we need to work through to practice this smoothly, but there’s no problem that can’t be solved.

When you can…cheat.  A .45acp weighs on average 230 grains or 0.032857lbs. The average car in America weighs 3,000-4,000lbs or 13999980.555 grains.  So if you’re attacked while in a running vehicle, run the bad guy over with the car.  Now let’s move on to when you can’t run over the bad guy. 

I carry everywhere I go and almost always in an appendix holster, specifically an Archangel holster.  Quite frankly the best holster to draw from while seated and buckled.  Wearing the seatbelt does have a tendency to interfere with pistol carry; however, it does me no good to die in a car crash on my way to a gunfight, because I didn’t wear my seatbelt.  Like I said, there’s no problem that can’t be fixed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I find that “staging” my cover garment helps to clear the seatbelt.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Let’s break down the draw from the seated position.

Clear the cover garment and get your grip.  Your final fighting grip, in other words the one you’ll be married to.  You know, not “Ms. Right Now”, but “Ms. Right”…that grip.  We don’t want to have to squirm, fidget and juggle the pistol after the next step.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The next step is “Clear”.  Clear the pistol from the holster.  Simple as that.  Straight up from the holster, finger off the trigger and into the “Ready” position.  There’s no need to windmill the pistol over the steering wheel.  Bring the pistol from the holster and drive it to the threat with as short of a distance between the two as possible.  “But wait, that means I’ll cover myself with the muzzle”…yep!  My advice is don’t shoot yourself and you’ll be OK here.  The shortest distance between two points is a straight line.  If you must reactively draw and fire from inside your car, you have precious little time to get hits on target. We’re talking about fighting, not shooting.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

From the moment the weapon is indexed on threat we can and should start firing all the way through the extension of the draw stroke.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

After the bad guy is no longer a threat we need to scan for other carjackers.  

A good gunfighter is always looking for work.  Scan left and right, then behind.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

After Action Assessment:

IS HE DOWN…?

DOES HE HAVE FRIENDS…?

HOW’S MY AMMO…?

HOW AM I…?

 

We have a series of new 1 day classes entitled “HITS” or “High Intensity Training Schools”.  One of these classes that I’ll be teaching is Vehicle Gunfighting Fundamentals in TN.  This and other “HITS” classes were developed to give the student of self-defense an opportunity to get their feet wet and build a solid foundation of skill to make them better prepared.      

VEHICLE GUNFIGHTING FUNDAMENTALS  $200:

http://www.suarezinternationalstore.com/august6-2011-vehiclegunfightingfund-cookevilletn.aspx

 

 

 

Vehicle Fighting:

The Draw Stroke

By TN Staff Instructor Ryan Acuff

 

 

 

The necessity to be able to fight in and around vehicles is a binding thread that’s shared by military, police and civilian operators alike.  The automobile in America has become the very symbol of our freedom and the mobile nature of our society.  We all either drive or are passengers in vehicles for hundreds if not thousands of hours every year, but rarely do we ever train to fight in and around the confines of what is such a peculiar environment. 

 

Part of that environment that is so peculiar is the physical posture we find ourselves in that is so different from how we normally train.  I’m referring to the seated position.  How many times have you had the opportunity to drive your car to the firing line and practice shooting from the draw, while seated and buckled in?  There are a few problems we need to work through to do practice this smoothly, but there’s no problem that can’t be solved.

 

When you can…cheat.  A .45acp weighs on average 230 grains or 0.032857lbs. The average car in America weighs 3,000-4,000lbs or 13999980.555 grains.  So if you’re attacked while in a running vehicle, run the bad guy over with the car.  Now let’s move on to when you can’t run over the bad guy. 

 

I carry everywhere I go and almost always in an appendix holster, specifically an Archangel holster.  Quite frankly the best holster to draw from while seated and buckled.  Wearing the seatbelt does have a tendency to interfere with pistol carry; however, it does me no good to die in a car crash on my way to a gunfight because I didn’t wear my seatbelt.  Like I said, there’s no problem that can’t be fixed.

Listerine Combat - In Your Face Gunfighting

By Frosty26

The other day during one of my very tedious physical therapy sessions, I took my mind somewhere else since the session was not particularly pleasant and started pondering 'What gaps do I have in my current skill Set's?"

The one that came to mind the quickest is what we called in the details "Listerine Combat" or Bad breath distance shooting. The reason I say that is it is a skill that most folks like to shy away from..the reasoning..it is unpleasant and brutal. I learned while in the Marines, that the guys who survive the longest are typically the ones that are willing to put the time in on the stuff that sux..the drills that absolutely suck to do, the drills that are painful and cost you something after you are done, sometimes a bucket of sweat, sometimes a little blood.

When we capture a mind's eye picture of combat with a pistol, most folks picture a nice "reactionary gap" between them and the BG..because we are always in "Condition Yellow" and no BG is going to catch us unaware..right??

We picture ourselves executing the perfect draw with no fouling and putting shots on board with outstanding combat effectiveness. The funny thing is, I actually thought this exact thought, until the first time a maniac tried to knife my principal coming out of a theater at 2am one summer night OCONUS...Then, suddenly, my whole plan and concept of "CQ" Combat went down the crapper.

I remember vividly the stench of this guy. He wreaked with with the odor of stale beer and urine. His eyes bloodshot and wild, the 3" blade in his right hand, glimmered in the streetlamp.. and all the time I was thinking: THIS GUY IS RIGHT ON TOP OF ME!! Where was my situational awareness? Why did I not keep a stable reactionary gap? All that crap went out the window...you see he had reset my OODA loop..he had caused me to react and not act..he now had the upper hand. In this minuscule moment of time is where life and death happen.

The neurons in my brain fired wildly..my right hand starts reaching for my Glock, but this guy is so close he fouls my elbow. The 3" blade now looks like a machete. I reach out and grab the wrist with my right hand, almost losing my grip because of the sweat on this guy. My Principal, behind me, clutching to my leg, is screaming her head off, complete chaos takes over. The BG grits his teeth, intent of sticking that blade in my principal. I shove down on his wrist, with my right arm but I can get no momentum due to my elbow being jammed. I try to move my left arm for a elbow strike, but it is pinned by this mob surrounding us, including members of my detail trying to stop this madman.

The only move I had was my head, I swung it back as hard as I could and planted it in this guys nose. I felt the cartilage in his nose move upon impact, his head jolting back, his eyes closing and leaking with water at the same time, his nose spewing blood all the way. I felt him release my right elbow and like a heat seeker it went to my Glock in a AIWB. When I cleared, all I still saw 3 ft in front of me was that 3" blade imitating a Machete..in my peripherals I saw my wing men and behind me was my principal..behind the BG a tunnel of space had formed from people trying to get away from this idiot..all this information calculated in a nano second.

I fired 3 rounds in quick succession when I cleared up.. the gun completely sideways, due to not being able to execute a full draw within the confines of this mob. All the rounds struck him in a 2" circle center of the sternum, on top of the Xiphoid. I remember his eyes went wide and he exhaled loudly as he hit the deck..he was done. This all seemed like 5 minutes, but in reality it was more like 5 seconds.

In retrospect, I remember thinking while this was happening the headbutt should have knocked him on his ass..that was a mistake..NEVER think empty hand no matter how brutal is going to trump knife. Always be prepared to go guns immediately after creating a gap. This type of thinking causes a delay in the swift Violence of Action necessary to win.

What I always take away from that night is no plan survives contact with the enemy...NO PLAN. We talk allot about resetting the BG's OODA loop, but talk little about when ours gets reset. We drill according to HOW WE THINK it is gonna go down, but often, that plan gets shelved. We drill on distances that we feel comfortable with, but shy away from ones that push us or make us uncomfortable.

My Short List:

1. Tight Force on Force with fouled draws at distances well under 5 ft.
2. Empty hand combatives that force you to think outside the box. (Head butts, ear/nose biting, eye jabs, nut smash etc..)
3. Firing from AIWB one handed 3-5 rounds off balance at 0-5 ft distance. (After this, we started drilling on the Jack knife, both initiating it with pistol and the counter)
4. Firing through presentation to tight compression at 3 ft in tight quarters.
5, Point Shooting from a sideways "gangster" draw under 5 ft (forgive the term)..I have found this is a shooting position I found myself in alot in tight spots.

Part 2 Coming Soon

The Drawstroke

Is it important to focus on it? If you don’t get the gun out, you might die. Is that important to you?

CR Williams

I wonder sometimes if we, instructors or students, give enough attention to the drawstroke.

Oh, sure, we practice it endlessly—I hope you do, anyway—but practice is not study, and study is what makes the technique sound when we practice it. And we need a very sound drawstroke, I think, just as soon as we can get it.

There are two seemingly-obvious questions I need to ask so that you can better understand how important it is to get this down:

Why, outside of practice and training, would you need to draw the gun to begin with?

Obvious question, obvious answer: You draw the gun because there’s a threat to your life or someone else’s life right there, right now. It’s a lethal-force threat, however you and/or the law defines that, and the only way you can stop it is to introduce your own capability to project lethal force if you have to. So, you draw the gun.

So: Given that you are only drawing the gun because you are responding to a right there, right now need to (probably) shoot somebody, what do you need the drawstroke to do?

Think about that a little before you answer.

 

Now that you’ve thought on it, see if you agree with this:

The drawstroke needs to get you from the holster to on-target shot(s) as quickly and surely as possible.

Think about what that answer does—and does not—cover.

It DOES cover getting the gun—not necessarily the sights, but the gun—on-target.

It DOES cover getting the gun ready to fire as soon as it’s clear of the holster, not some time later in the movement.

It DOES cover the need for the right grip, trigger control, and eye\hand coordination.

It DOES cover drawing to any direction, from any position you may be in, whether you are standing still or moving, on demand.

It DOES NOT require you to ‘get on the sights’ for every single shot no matter what.

It DOES NOT mean you need to end in the same exact position or posture or stance for every shot.

It DOES NOT require you, specifically, to face the target and square up.

It DOES NOT require you to be still when you draw and/or when you shoot.

Some things to consider about the drawstroke:

We hear and read about and see so much of the ‘X-count’ drawstroke that we may forget that it’s one continuous movement from in-the-holster to ready-to-shoot. The drawstroke is taught in counts and positions so that the student can learn it more easily and so that each part of the whole movement can be, as needed, examined and practiced and corrected separately. I break it down by steps in my own practice and recommend you do the same. Still, never forget that it’s all one continuous movement.

Work for efficiency and quickness before smoothness and speed. Everything should be kept close, movements should be only as large as necessary to get the weapon up and in line to fire, motion from holster to extension/final firing position should be continuous and without pause at any point. If you get efficient, you will most likely look and feel very smooth indeed. It is possible to be very smooth at an inefficient movement, though, so look at efficiency first.

The drawstroke has to set you up to get rounds on target from wherever you are and from whatever position you’re in when the fight starts even if you can’t ‘square up’ on the target. How many of you have looked at what it will take to get good shots on someone who’s at a 45-degree angle to you when you can’t even turn toward them? How about 90 degrees? 135? 180? 225? 270? You’ve got to get the gun ‘on’ and the eye/hand alignment right even when you don’t have the perfect whole-body index to work with.

Speaking of ‘drawing to the angles’, look at the drawstroke from these two perspectives: Most direct muzzle-to-target plane of draw/line of extension and muzzle-sweep potential. If you’re drawing to the side, for example, but the muzzle goes level first and then turns to the target as you extend, you have extended the possibility of some problems either getting the hits you need and surviving, or with the ‘third fight’, the one that may take place in court if a shot gets triggered before the muzzle is around on target. It’s not the most efficient way to orient, either. Look at all of that now.

Things that don’t change no matter what your position is, where you are or where your target is when the fight starts: The ‘Master’, or firing-hand, Grip (whether you use the other hand or not will change, and amount of tension in the firing grip will vary, but the shooting grip, the way you hold the gun in the firing hand, will not), trigger (control), and getting on target (eye/visual center to hand/weapon alignment, whether you’re going to sights or not). Make sure this is all consistent no matter where you’re drawing from or drawing to, every time.

Some things that will help you to refine your drawstroke are:

Working the parts of the drawstroke in isolation. I do this: I spend a couple of minutes just raising the cover and getting the grip on the gun. Or I work the release from holster and initial rotation. Or the extension, to either one-or-two-hand shooting position, out and back and out and back. I check for a level gun and whether the sights come up in the right spot. I will also check the alternative sighting positions such as metal-on-meat; did I bring the gun up so that it’s straight ‘on’ and straight in for the shot? I check the extension to the angles, looking at how the gun will best rotate to position so the muzzle stays in the target plane. I do these things in isolation as well as put them together.

Overspeed training. One caution: I would not even think about doing this live-fire, at all, period. Overspeed training is basically the performance of an action, in this case the drawstroke, as fast as you possibly can do it. It is a deliberate attempt to run past your normal performance limits.  The goal here is pure quickness, a lightning-fast snatch of the gun from the holster into extension or other firing position. It will help you in more ways than just to accelerate your regular draw. Overspeed training has shown me snags in the movement and some problems with where I have put things on my belt, for example.

Record yourself. Until I started doing short demonstration and instructional videos for others, and now to put on my website, I didn’t know that I was ‘scooping’ on the extension to target. That’s just one thing that seeing myself on video has helped me with. All you need is a camera and a tripod and some way to run it back to see what and how you’re doing. I would recommend that you don’t run video very often. Run the camera, look and see what you need to be working on (or let someone else look at it; sometimes that outside view can be very helpful), work on the inefficiencies and mistakes you have seen for a while, then down the road re-record yourself and check for progress.

And get some training! What…you think I was going to leave that out?

Think about this: Most of the time, we’re starting from behind. Even police and military personnel are not allowed to have their guns ‘out’ and ready to go with as often as they might like to. The rest of us are even more restricted in when and whether we can get the gun in hand before the (physical) fight actually begins. So we’re starting from behind. Our drawstroke, combined with things like dynamic movement off the line of first attack, is one of the most important ways we have of getting from behind to even and then to ahead. In cases where our movement is restricted, it may be the only way. Because of that, it is important, perhaps vital, to make it as good as we can get it.

We may not ever need it, but if the time comes that we do, we will need it to be the best one we’ve ever made.

Be safe out there. And if you can’t be safe, be dangerous.

 

Aligning Down the Top of the Slide

By Roger Phillips, Suarez International Specialist Instructor

 When it comes to point shooting, there are many tricks used by accomplished point shooters in order to get the job done. I’ve tried them all and constantly use a number of them in concert with each other. But, I tend to rely on one trick more than any other. That is “aligning down the top of the slide.” It is an amazing versatile concept of aiming that works beautifully within the reality of the fight. It is a single method of aiming that allows you take your skills to an entirely different level inside of a huge portion of the fight continuum.

This method works well at “line of sight” in correlation to the eye/hand coordination drawstroke. This is often seen as the entry level to point shooting. This is how I first began point shooting inside of my old Modern Technique courses.

Lock onto the focal point.

Use solid body mechanics and eye/hand coordination to be as efficient and effective as you can possibly be.

Drive the gun to the focal point out of a two handed, high pectoral, linear draw stroke.

Look right over the top of the gun to make the hit.

As I began to study dash camera video, gunfight videos, and force on force (FOF) encounters it became clear that most people did not come up to line of sight when the action was close, fast, and chaotic. It became clear to me that there was a phenomenon going on that most people tended to try to ignore. It became obvious to me that people were starving for “visual input of the entirety of the encounter.” This phenomenon had many of the fighters shooting from positions below line of sight. They often shot from nose level, mouth level, or chin level. The height of the gun seemed to be directly relative to the amount of visual input that was needed to understand the entirety of the situation.

These positions (nose, mouth, and chin) are the optimal “aligning down the top of the slide” positions. By dropping the gun just below line of sight, the platform of the top of the slide begins to be revealed. It is this platform that leads to the gross visual input that gives the shooter such outstanding aiming capabilities. “It’s like an aircraft carrier out in the middle of the open ocean.” The visual input of that platform just screams at you and your eye/hand coordination. By dropping the gun out of the line of sight, you are able to see more of what is going on. You do not have the gun in your face, blocking out important visual information. You also are not tunnel visioning in on the gun. This opens up your peripheral vision and allows you to see the things that you need to see inside of a fight.

If you train these positions incrementally, you will find that you can take these skill set out to some very amazing distances, distances much further out than what is logical inside of a fight. Since point shooting is all about confidence, it is a very good idea to push your practice session past logical distances. “If you own a four yard skill set out to twelve yards…….do you own that four yard skill set?” It is also this incremental approach to your training that will allow you to take the aligning down the top of the slide into the advanced applications of the retention concept.

It is the concept of aligning down the top of the slide that will help facilitate you being the very best that you can be inside of the retention concept. We need to recognize that retention is a fluid concept…….not a technique or position. If you cannot make the hits anywhere throughout your extension, then you are not using the most optimal skill sets that the situation will allow. The retention concept is loosely defined as “extend the gun out as far as the situation will allow, without opening yourself up to an attack on the gun, gun hand, or the gun arm.” The further we extend out the better accuracy we will have, yet the further we extend out the more of a retention problem we create. It is a balance……a perfect balance of accuracy, speed, and level of retention.

Once you recognize the importance of the retention concept inside of the reality of the fight, it becomes very clear that we need to learn to be as deadly as we can possibly be throughout our extension. Look at the level of your extension as an A-Z continuum, with no one point being more important that another. That is the only way to be as good as you need to be inside of the retention concept.

As the gun comes down out of your line of sight and back throughout your retention concept, it is the aligning down the top of the slide that allows you to be as efficient and effective as you can possibly be. This is what many of the dogmatic “always come out to full extension” advocates are missing. They do not have the understanding of the visual input of aligning down the top of the slide, they do not have the understanding of the basic geometry of point shooting, and they do not know the correct application of the grip or trigger continuum to guarantee that you have enough mass behind the gun so that it functions correctly. It is not just that they do not believe in the retention concept…….within the reality of the fight…….they do not have to knowledge, skill sets, or training to work within the retention concept to the levels that we need to be at.

The more that we know about aligning down the top of the slide, the higher a skill level that we can reach. The higher the skill level that we can reach, the further we can push the envelope inside of the skill set.

The more we know about aligning down the top of the slide, the better we are at shooting anywhere throughout the two handed, high pectoral, linear draw stroke. In correlation, the better we are at shooting anywhere throughout the one handed, off of the top of the holster, linear drawstroke.  It is all about the knowledge, the training, the correct application of the training progression, and the correct application of the context of the skill set. I even see my gun when I am shooting at half hip and I am still using the visual input of aligning down the top of the slide.

Aligning down the top of the slide is also an outstanding concept for dynamic movement point shooting. I am not talking about controlled movement such as “The Groucho”………I am talking about when your reptilian brain is screaming at you “Don’t get shot stupid!” and you are moving very quickly trying to dodge the adversaries aim. By dropping the gun out of the line of sight, and relying on your point shooting skills, you mitigate the negative visual input of the gun bouncing around in your face. This allows you to move quicker and work the trigger quicker, all while getting combat accurate hits.

Aligning down the top of the slide at the most advanced of skill levels is not something that everyone can “just do.” There is a methodology, there are nuances, and there are diagnostics. Some people will say “just point the gun like it is your finger” and that will work for some people. But we are not just talking entry level stuff here. To take the skill sets as far as you possibly can it may require more than just some simply explanation. From what I have seen by teaching this stuff for the last five years+ is that the better the understanding…….the further you can take it. 

Discuss this here.

Some Thoughts on Point Shooting

By Roger Phillips Suarez International Specialist Instructor

Recently there has been a decent amount of anti-point shooting talk in some circles. While some of this talk comes from people that do deserve a good deal of respect, I feel that it would be wrong to not address some of the misrepresentations that have been made in order to cast a bad light on point shooting. The way that I look at it is, it does not matter how elite you are, if you are going to dismiss the accomplishments and skill sets of the elite that came before you, you have put your comments into the position to be judged by others, the same way that you have judged others. The bottom line is that point shooting as been used successfully by some of “the elite of the elite” for a very long time. It is a combat proven skill set used by some of the greatest gun fighters this world has ever seen, people such as Col. Askins, Jelly Bryce, Bill Jordan, Col. Fairbairn, Col. Sykes, British SAS, and Darby’s Rangers, just to name a few. To suggest that these men did not know how to get it done would be extremely presumptuous.

  I am going to give a point by point counter to some of these recent anti-point shooting statements and misrepresentations, my comments are in bold.

 “Some of the stuff that we are seeing on the range that is a concern to those of us that are out there as trainers in this industry is that people want to talk about point shooting.”

 Some of the stuff that concerns me as somebody that is out there as a trainer in this industry is when combat proven skill sets are dismissed out of hand, without the training necessary to make the distinction on whether the skill sets have merit. It concerns me when trainers are unable to see the successes of the past or feel that they cannot learn anything from the elite that came before them. It concerns me when closed mindedness keeps the student of the gun from honestly understanding how some of the very best got it done. This closed minded “exclusive” approach only gives the student a partial view of the reality of the world of gunfighting. If you do not know about the skill sets that some of the greatest gunfighters used, then you do not know the history of gunfighting. If you do not know the history of gunfighting, then you do not know what has been extremely successful.

  “You do want to see your sights every chance you get.”

 …..anybody that would say anything different than that would not be very smart. I know that I teach “if you can get to your sights…….get to your sights!” The difference between what Suarez International (SI) teaches and what anti-point shooters teach comes down to being either open minded and “inclusive” or closed minded and “exclusive.” Suarez International teaches to “get to the sights if it is at all possible……but do not die trying to get to something that may not be there or the situation may not allow for.” When we look at the realities of the fight inside of typical civilian CCW attack (because that is what SI focuses on) it is very clear that we are most likely going to really be up against it. We are most likely going to be reactive and not proactive. This is the key difference between elite military unit application and typical civilian CCW application.

 Let’s take a look at “the most likely” of the reality of the fight for typical CCW civilians.

 Behind in the reactionary curve due to the fact that we are going to be reacting to what the bad guy is doing

  Low light

 Both you and the adversary moving dynamically

 Activation of the sympathetic nervous system in the fight or flight response leading to a dilation of the pupils causing a probable inability to focus on anything small or up close

 Adrenaline dump that reduces the quality of our fine motor skill sets

 Instinctive desire to visually lock onto the person or thing that is trying to kill you

 A retention problem that is fluid and ever changing

 High possibility for the needed integration of hand to hand along with the use of the handgun, since over 50% of all gunfights happen inside of three yards.

 These are all issues that can substantially affect your ability to get to the sights. The philosophical question is, as an instructor inside of this industry, do you teach the student what to do if the situation does not allow you the ability to get to your sights, or do you teach a closed minded “exclusive “ approach that leaves the student with an inferior skill level when the student cannot get to his sights? That is the question! Do you leave your student out there with no quality skill sets to fall back on if he cannot get to the sights?

  We teach the student to be the very best that they can be when they can get to their sights and when they do not have the chance to get to their sights. That sounds like teaching that takes care of the students needs even when the student is in the deepest of trouble……..unlike the closed minded “exclusive” approach.

 “It is a sad state of affairs to start teaching our LEO’s or Soldiers to generally shoot in an area that they think that there might be a target.”

 I do not know one person that has actually been trained in quality point shooting that would consider that statement as something that is even remotely accurate to the philosophy, skill sets, and actual application of the point shooting skill sets that they use. This statement here is either over the top marketing, using over the top verbiage in order to try to make point shooting look stupid, or a sure sign of how little is actually known about the actual skill set.

 Trained point shooters target a dime size focal point on the threat using eye/hand coordination. The bullets go where the eyes go just as a baseball thrown by a pitcher, a three point shot taken by a basketball player, or an arrow shot from a long bow. The idea that point shooting is not accurate aimed fire is absolutely false. It is aimed fire using a methodology that is based on pure science. Anyone that has had quality point shooting instruction knows this to be so. While it is based on solid science it is also very natural, instinctive, and reflexive. This means that it is relatively easy to learn and the retention of the skill sets is outstanding.

 The concept of “shooting in the general area” would be a failed concept used by those that do not have point shooting knowledge or skills. This would be what is done by those that are only taught a closed minded “exclusive” training philosophy and suddenly find that they cannot get to their sights. That is what somebody with no point shooting knowledge, instruction, or skill sets would do. Let’s not misrepresent the skills of the open minded “inclusive” trained student with the skills of the closed minded “exclusive” trained student. Suarez International will make sure that you will have the skills, no matter what the situation is. The ability to get to the sights or not…….we will make sure that you have your bases covered. You will not be out their floundering just because your pet technique was not accessible due to the reality of the fight.

 “For LEO’s, point shooting is probably not the road to go down, for liability issues for one. We need to make sure that we account for every round that is fired.”

  Sighted fire “always” has been the predominant training methodology inside of Law Enforcement (LE) for a very long time. The national recognized hit ration inside of LE is 15%-25%. That means out of every 100 rounds fired there are 75 to 85 rounds that miss the adversary completely. I do not blame the LEO’S for this…….I blame the predominant training methodology. If we look at the Civilian CCW list above of “most likely” is becomes clear that LEO’s deal with many of the same issues as the civilian. “Sighted fire always” methodology leaves the officer with nothing to fall back on when the situation does not allow for the officer to get to his sights. The officers need to own sighted fire and have the necessary skill sets when they cannot get to the sights. The only way to do this is to train in an open minded “inclusive” manner. When you train within the reality of the fight you are in a much better position to rise to the level of the situation. If the situation does not allow the LEO to get to the sights, we need to make sure that he has the skill sets so he can still go home at the end of the shift. I have real concerns that these highly successful, combat proven skill sets are being held back from those out there that go into harms way. If their Department won’t teach them due to having more concerns for liability, than that of officer safety……I will!

 When we look at liability and the nationally recognized hit ratio, it is clear to see that the liability to only teach sighted fire is a major concern. Our LEO’s should be given the very best training available to deal with the reality of the fight. They need to have skills that cover the situations where they are unable to get to the sights. Training to get to the sights needs to be the priority, but training when getting to the sights is not possibly, needs to be addressed also. To not do this leaves our men and women in a very dangerous position, a position where they are required to attempt something that they have never received any training to do.

 “That does not mean that if we are at contact distances that we would not just point our weapon and squeeze the trigger until we have eliminated the threat. What that means that if we have a target that allows us to get to our sights on that target, we need to make every effort to see those sights.”

 The debate about point shooting has been a debate cursed by ignorance and semantics. The ignorance part of it deals with people that have zero point shooting knowledge, skills, or instruction offering up their uneducated opinions as fact. The semantics portion of this comes down to people changing the definition and name of point shooting in order to not give point shooting it’s due credit. This also causes confusion as to what point shooting really is. I work off of the historical definition of point shooting, which is……. “If you are focused on the threat, then you are point shooting. If you are focused on your sights then you are using sighted fire.” “Contact shooting” is a term developed so people did not have to admit to the fact that they do actually point shoot. If you admit to point shooting, you simply cannot debate against point shooting.

  The question arises, “what is contact distance?” Many people believe the answer is two yards.

 From what I have seen, people with good instincts begin to instinctively consider retention at around four yards. If two men were to stand apart, at four yards and reach towards each other, the distance between the men would actually be less than two yards. So it is my opinion that we need a retention concept that allows us to be the very best that we can be inside of four yards. This retention concept should allow you to extend the gun out just far enough to guarantee the hits, but not so far that you leave yourself open for an attack on the gun, the gun hand, or the gun arm.  This retention concept could be called “contact shooting” due to the desire to not project the gun unnecessarily into contact distances. But the reality of the matter is that the retention concept would be nothing more than point shooting. If you look at the reality of the retention concept and it’s absolute fluidity, it is plain to see that you need solid fluid point shooting skill sets in order to be the very best that you can be. The further out you extend, the more accurate that you can be. Yet, if you extend out unnecessarily, the more open you are to a retention issue. It is all about the perfect balance of speed/accuracy/retention properties.

 In my opinion, to say that it is ok to point shoot at “contact distances” means that it is ok to point shoot out to four yards, out of the retention concept. If you agree with this concept then you are going to need point shooting skill sets. If you disagree, you may want to test your opinions inside of Force on Force (FOF.) Run the Tueller drill with a training partner that is trying to take your head off. Run it down to six yards, then five yards, then four yards, then three yards. Once you have done that then come back to me and we will discuss the retention concept again.

  Retention is not a position……it is a fluid concept.

 Contact shooting is not a position……it is a fluid concept.

 Contact distance is not a position……it is a fluid concept.

 The average gunfight happens at three yards. That means that half of all gunfights happen inside of three yards. Do not project your gun into contact distances due to the fact that you do not have quality point shooting skill sets. Being a slave to any pet technique can get you killed.

 Situations dictate strategy, strategies dictate tactics, and tactics dictate techniques……techniques should not dictate anything.

 If your techniques are dictating your response to a situation……you may not be as ready as you think you are. The situation is the dictating factor and you are going to need versatile, fluid skill sets in order to be the very best that you can be inside of the fluid reality of the fight.

 “We need to make every effort to use those sights, I think you will have better down range results once you do that.”

 Once again, we recognize the fact that there are times that getting to the sights will not be possible. The question arises again, “do you teach your students what to do when that happens?” I know that SI does.

 Every point shooting instructor at SI knows that getting to the sights will allow you to be more accurate. But, inside of a fight it is not all about accuracy. It is all about the perfect balance of speed and accuracy……dictated by the dynamics of the fight……..inside of the balance “to hit and to not be hit.”  Being accurate means nothing if you are too slow in your draw stroke, too slow in your movement, too slow in your initial shot, and too slow in your follow up shots. The quality use of our sights should be a priority inside of our thinking. Making sure that we do whatever needs to be done to guarantee that we go home needs to be our priority inside of the fight. Staying fight focused does not necessarily mean that you have to stay sight focused.

  “Point Shooting, I’m not a big fan of that”

  I am not a big fan of closed minded “exclusive” training, especially when it is recognized that the sights will not always be there for you. If the student cannot get to his sights…. that means that the student is in really deep shit. Is it really wise to not give the student the tools to deal with the deepest of problems? It would seem to be a disservice to the student to say “there are times that you will not be able to get to your sights……..sorry I got nothing for you in the curriculum on that.” Is that really the best way to handle that when some of the greatest gunfighters of all time have already shown us how well point shooting works?

I guess this all comes down to perspective.

Discuss here

DYNAMIC SIMULATION TRAINING

 
I have no interest at all in gun games.  There is nothing wrong with them, but personally, I find them boring.  Same thing for the entire gun apologists we see during the elections. These are the NRA types parading themselves in duck hunter suits and such in an effort to explain why it is OK for them to own guns as sportsmen. My focus, our focus at SI is the development of gunfighting skill...period.

Gunfighting skill does not mean shooting a group on a piece of paper, nor scoring a certain arbitrary score on someone's "bitchin guy" course of fire. 

No my friends, gunfighting entails the ability to bring your gun out from concealment, quickly and under duress, and use to kill another man, or men bent on doing you harm.  That, and nothing else, is what it is all about. Sometimes that directness puts some students off.  Well, I will not compromise our focus so someone with a tenuous hold on reality can feel better.  We teach gunfighting.

A part of gunfight training involves skill development.  This skill entails gun handling such as the draw...the freaky speed fast draw from concealment is paramount.  If you are not drawing from concealment, you are fooling yourself. Even if you can open carry, the day will come when you cannot.  In AZ I could walk into Starbucks wearing a full LBE with an AK across my back and it would be perfectly legal.  But everyone here...just about, still conceals.

Just as important is the ability to move dynamically off the line of fire.  Sometimes we have guys complain about having to move, and that at such and such school, they could shoot standing still, or from their lawn chairs.

Look guys...the fight is going to be what the fight is going to be.  You have no control over that.  The bad guy will not take it easy on you because you have a bad back, or because you are 50 years old, or because you have constipation or whatever.  If anything, he will come at you doubly hard.  It’s your job to be up to the task. 

Maintaining the gun in firing condition is also an essential skill.  But not the magic tricks you see the holy-rollers of the gun mafia do for their admirers.  We are talking about the gun manipulations that require little or no analytical thinking, that require gross motor skills, and that are possible when you are so scared you are about to create a POTUS in your shorts.

All three of those very basic, but very crucial skill sets, can be done on your own time via extensive repetitions. Don't come to an advanced class in the hopes that we will tune up your draw, or your reload.  Dude....that needs to be in place before you step through the door.

Now then.  With the above in place, you need to spend some time on the range.  You can do a great deal on your own.  If you are a beginner, go to a beginner's class.  Being a newbie is not a sin, and using ego to select your class is a stupid course of action. If you are advanced, by all means come to an advanced class. 

But when you come to class you need to remember this.  There are guys that will come to advanced class unprepared.  Their holster will be new and untested.  Their pistol will not be zeroed.  They will not have practiced at all since the last class they took that hand held them through everything from loading their magazines to wiping their noses during breaks.  And their lack of prep will cause one of two things to happen.  They will either be asked to leave, or they will in effect steal the training time from the other students. 

The other 19 people there are not assigned to help you.  They are there for their own reasons. They want to become better and learn new things, not be held back by someone who came unprepared.  So don't be that guy....train at the correct level.

Aside from range training, there is an extreme need for Dynamic Simulation Training.

No matter how advanced a class is, there is a clear and obvious limit to what can be done live fire on a shooting range with multiple students.  If you disagree, please go run a few classes yourself and then report back. 

Most schools will reach that limit and stay there.  Thus their gunfight training involves gunfighting at the range against predictable pieces of cardboard.  Look at most modern technique schools and you will see what I mean. Their methods are great for the range, but suck for reality. 

In order to push beyond the inevitable safety limits of the live fire range, students must do dynamic simulation training.  DST includes but is not limited to the following evolutions -

1).  Dry work with or without an assistant

2).  Dynamic drills with "gas only" airsoft guns, with or without an assistant.

3).  Dynamic and interactive drills with airsoft

Those three evolutions are what has served as the main developmental structure to build our existing gunfighting framework.

In addition to the three above are -

4).  Dynamic Scenario Work with Airsoft

5).  Dynamic and Combative Scenario work with airsoft. 

As you see, the greatest development is away from the range. 

Shooting vast amounts of ammo on the shooting range is actually detrimental to the development of the gunfighter since he will be forced to operate within the safety framework of the shooting range.  Such is not the case in the freeform expressions of combat seen in the force on force simulation world.

Occasionally, you will hear someone say that airsoft is not real enough....that there is no recoil and such and such.  Well...we could say that range work is even less reality-based because nobody is shooting back at you and there is no penalty for a mistake.  Airsoft work is as close as anyone can economically get to the real thing in our day and age.  Will that change tomorrow?  Maybe, but anyone who denies himself dynamic simulation/force on force training because they think it is not real enough is simply looking for an excuse to remain in the dark about the gunfight.

Complete development was once the purview of special operators in the military and police worlds simply because nobody else could afford it.  Today, it has never been more available to the civilian operator.  Step into the light.  Organize your training along these lines and see how far your development goes.