View Full Version : Shooting drills from retention...
February 3, 2006, 12:27 AM
Here's the scenario: 4 yards away, 3 stationary threats standing side by side. From this range would it be "tactically" practical to engage these threats by getting a full press or shooting from retention? Thanks in advance for your opinions.
February 3, 2006, 05:35 AM
What would Chuk Norris (http://www.chucknorrisfacts.com/) do?
February 3, 2006, 08:46 AM
Talon...3 against one, if your not talking IDPA but real life, shot and move.
Weeg... Thank you for making me spit up my coffee while reading your link. Best ones are;
Chuck Norris does not hunt because the word hunting implies
the probability of failure. Chuck Norris goes killing.
There is no chin behind Chuck Norris' beard. There is only another fist.
Chuck Norris once roundhouse kicked someone so hard that his foot broke the speed of light, went back in time, and killed Amelia Earhart while she was flying over the Pacific Ocean.
February 4, 2006, 11:13 AM
I want to smoke some of the same good s**T that you are!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
February 4, 2006, 12:46 PM
Um... yeah, but I doubt Talon66 has Chuck standing by his side, so... back to the original question: Should he engage 3 targets...? ;)
February 4, 2006, 01:50 PM
Talon, . . . go to the decision matrix:
Question: Are they perceived to be life threatening, . . . and/or if I don't engage them, is it probable that I will die or be grievously harmed?
Yes, at leastone weapon is present and/or enough of a verbal threat has been communicated to me that I fear for my life: draw and shoot the closest one first, regardless of weaponry they posess, . . . the closest one is in most probability the most dangerous to you at that moment. The type of shot you will take will be directly proportionate to the methodology of your training, . . . but I would probably make my first shot just as I have cleared leather and leveled the weapon. I would probably attempt to get it up to a reasonable facsimile of a combat stance, . . . but it may not be until all three either are on the ground bleeding, . . . or some combination of some bleeding and some running.
No, at this point, it is only three thugs who have not as of yet made any threats or displayed any weaponry: try disengaging by moving laterally to the best and closest cover. I would try to move to my strong side if all is equal, . . . but then again what cover is available? Getting to cover will also probably separate them, . . . so you will have to contend with that scenario also.
May God bless,
February 4, 2006, 02:34 PM
Weeg... Thank you for making me spit up my coffee while reading your link. Best ones are
Heh heh heh...Glad I could assist :D
My favs are:
"Chuck Norris doesn't sleep...He waits..."
"The Boogeyman checks his closet every night...For Chuck Norris"
All kidding aside...
Guys...4 yards is 12 feet(step it off)...Even a bigfatobeseslob can cover that distance in a second or two...
February 4, 2006, 07:33 PM
Chuck Norris has counted to infinity. Twice. LOL. Thanks for that Weeg.
12 feet away...3 threatening...here is the scream like a little girl and run away scenario if I have ever seen it. :)
EDIT: I am assuming by "fire from retention" you mean "gun low and close to the body and point shooting". Also, by "full press" you mean "press the gun away and use aimed fire". Correct?
February 4, 2006, 07:53 PM
The 3 targets are of equal threat. The point of my question is: at this distance would one not attempt to press out rather than shooting from retention? This question was debated at our last local defensive pistol league. My argument was that if distance permitted pressing out it would make more "practical" sense to do so, as opposed to attempting to get good "stopping" hits with the shots from retention. Am I being "practical"?
February 4, 2006, 07:56 PM
"I am assuming by "retention" you mean "clear leather and point shoot". Also, by "full press" you mean arm extended and "aimed fire". Correct?"
Full press=not entirely "aimed fire" but more "aimed" in comparison to muzzle clearing holster and rotated toward threat.
February 4, 2006, 08:47 PM
Personally, If in danger, I would pull and shoot with my inside elbow against my side, and shoot for hip area to put as many on the ground as fast as possible. That is something I was taught many years ago and still practice to this day at ten feet and less. 12 ft is close enough, I would not notice the difference.
It does work.
February 4, 2006, 09:10 PM
I would say this may depend on the person answering the question. Assuming the minimum requirements for a legal shoot are present, my opinion is yes. It is to your practical advantage to use a "full press" as you have described it.
I always carry IWB and can draw the gun while moving. I think I would move off of the line of force to their flank while drawing so they couldn't get to me all at once. Bringing the gun up to confirm my point shooting with the front sight before pulling the trigger. I am not talking about "aimed fire" just confirming with the front sight, shooting the closest threat in turn. I would argue that missing the targets with the few shots you may have will not do you any good.
If they are on you (near contact or contact) by the time you get the gun drawn, firing from "retention" may be your only option. That may be the only time it is appropriate.
EDIT: Reading your responses again, I believe I may have misunderstood. Confirm for me that "firing from retention" DOES NOT MEAN "shooting from your holster without drawing the gun"?
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.