PDA

View Full Version : Training vs Common Sense!


Avenger11
February 25, 2008, 07:33 PM
I've read with great interest many threads on this forum and others stressing the need for tactical training for those of us that own a firearm for personal protection. It runs the gamut from regular range time to advanced situational awareness, Ninja type exercises, and a whole host of non-sensical terms used to describe how one should react in a given scenario.
Oh, yes the SCENARIOS. Advanced by those who make their living training the less informed or a figmant of some Machismo's imagination.
Responsible gun ownership and self protection is 99% common sense and your inate ability to know right from wrong.
If you were born without common sense, then no amount of training will overcome it's absence.

Playboypenguin
February 25, 2008, 07:36 PM
Common sense and training must go hand in hand. Without one the other is meaningless. All the training in the world is worthless if you don't have the common sense to know when to use it and to what degree and all the common sense in the world is useless if you do not know how to use the tools.

I do agree with you that so many people take it to an extreme. All the nija stuff and planning for firefights is just not needed for the average gun owner.

NGIB
February 25, 2008, 07:43 PM
Be safe, be responsible, practice, and think before you do...

Erik
February 25, 2008, 08:12 PM
Ah but what to "practice?"

For most the abilty to recognize and deal wih a present or closing threat will suffice. That is a large order for many, and "many of the most" will never achieve it.

For many the abilty to deal with a single close contact assailant will suffice. That's a much larger order; "most of the many" will never achieve it.

For some... well, the firearms community has enough difficulty agreeing on what is necessary for the first two categories so I'll leave it at that.

chris in va
February 25, 2008, 09:28 PM
Responsible gun ownership and self protection is 99% common sense

Wish I could believe that as well, but I can't. Training has a much larger role than people believe in how to safely handle/use firearms.

Every day is a learning experiece for me. I've been given some fairly good entry-level training, and I try to expound on that as I go along.

They say, 'knowledge is power'. If you have common sense but no knowledge, it won't get you very far.

MLeake
February 25, 2008, 09:35 PM
Oddly enough, a lot of the scenarios I've seen discussed in here are similar to things that have actually happened to friends of mine, or (on a much more limited basis) to me. Some have been over the top, but many do seem to have some basis in reality.

Not sure what kind of "ninja" tactics are being referred to, but I have to strongly advocate that people who are concerned with self-defense should learn more than just how to assess a situation, or just use a gun well. You may not always have a gun, or you may have to fight to retain or use it. Some people have health issues that prevent any physical training; some don't perceive a need. Hopefully, they will never have that need.

Some of us have already had that need....

kgpcr
February 25, 2008, 10:28 PM
Well i will take common sense any day of the shake and bake schools. One i saw was a weekend course called "Worrior Forge". Now that was funny!! Laughable to say the least. It took me 12+ weeks to become a Marine (boot) alone then Infantry school, and i still had a heck of a lot to learn before i was ready to go! Take a weekend course and be a Mall Ninja!! Rambo wannabees. That is not to say there are not good weekend courses out there! Its just names like that are a sure tip off to being a bunch of guys dressed in camo trying to act like they are going to be a bad ass when they get done for the weekend. Marines take months and they get R done in a weekend!!

U.S.SFC_RET
February 25, 2008, 10:54 PM
Train to become confident with a firearm and to become confident with other types of firearms.
Some people are just not naturals when it comes to shooting and if you are one of them realize it and get the outside help you need to put "steel on target"
Learn how to shoot a Rifle effectively. From the ground. From a tree from any improvised support. Learn to shoot free hand, IMHO the most neglected of the shooting stances. If you can shoot bulls from a bench but you aren't worth a hill of beans at shooting free hand, challenge yourself to shoot freehand and seperate yourself from the rest of the crowd.
Learn to shoot a shotgun. It can be fun so go skeet shooting, sporting clays. that type of training pays off big.
Learn to shoot a pistol like it is a natural extention of your hand and when you do switch to the other hand and start over. Go ambidextrious.
Teach your kids how to shoot. Its their God given right. You want to protect your own family. Teach them to protect theirs when they have their own. Responsibility is taught through several ways and one of them is by example.

Do understand that a pistol is just that A Pistol and nothing more.
I never felt more sorrier than I did whenever I seen military personnel with a pistol deployed. I much rather have a rifle.






Everyone is not coming after you all of the time, its not a doomsday scenario so let it pass the common sense test.

Frank Ettin
February 26, 2008, 12:34 AM
Jeff Cooper used to say, "Having a gun doesn't mean you're armed any more than having a guitar means you're a musician." Training is about many things. It's about learning basic, non-intuitive skills that might come in handy in a bad situation -- like quickly and safely drawing your gun and getting hits on target, safely moving with a loaded gun, shooting on the move, shooting from unorthodox postures, etc. Training also helps foster mindset.

In a bad situation, you will probably be jacked up on adrenaline and subject to other physiological stresses. Things will be happening quickly. Because of the speed at which the event is unfolding, the adrenaline dump you've just experienced and the physiological stresses to which you will be subject, you will probably not be able to think and apply common sense. You will react, and you will react as you've trained.

I do suspect that there are a bunch of nonsense courses out there, and God deliver us from the Mall Ninjas and Gun Range Commandos. But there are some fine, professional schools out there. I've been to Gunsite twice (once for pistol and once for rifle). I've taken a class with Louis Awerbuck. I've had some other classes with well regarded professionals. These have all been good, solid experiences. I've learned things every time, and for me it was time and money well spent.

Avenger11
February 26, 2008, 08:13 PM
Chris,
Knowledge can be aquired. Training can enhance knowledge.Common sense cannot be taught or aquired thru training.

BreacherUp!
February 26, 2008, 08:22 PM
Common sense will help you know when to use your weapon,
Traning and proficiency will help you know how to use your weapon.

Common sense will not help the latter. However, training and experience will help you with the "when."

There's just no substitute.

MLeake
February 26, 2008, 08:24 PM
Actually, common sense can be acquired through training, but it's usually the training given by the school of hard knocks.

I think it was Sands of Iwo Jima where the Duke said: "Life is hard. It's harder if you're stupid."

Or, as Gunny Woodring used to say, "You'll either get smart or you'll get really strong...."

BreacherUp!
February 26, 2008, 08:30 PM
MLeake, the actual Wayne quote is "...tough.." not hard.

Common sense can't be beaten in. It becomes experience through pain, which is the best teacher.

Frank Ettin
February 26, 2008, 08:31 PM
What is common sense? Common sense, insofar as we're talking about taking appropriate action under extreme pressure, may in fact lead to the wrong conclusions. Sometimes one's instinctive reaction is not the correct response. In fact, it seems that one element of training and practice is to overcome instinctive reaction and to learn to automatically do instead what is appropriate.

For example, when driving a car, one's instinctive (common sense?) reaction in the event of a skid is to apply the brakes. We know that is the wrong thing to do; and so, if one is lucky enough to get some training in high speed driving, one learns to stay off the brake, turn into the skid and, under some circumstances, even gently apply some throttle. I remember my first time driving a Formula Ford through Turn 8 at Laguna Seca -- a left-right downhill "S" turn. When hitting the apex of the first half of the turn, you can't see the track. My "instinct" (common sense?) said to back off the throttle. But of course, backing off the throttle under side loading while going downhill is a good way to lose the back end.

I'm very leery of relying too much on so called common sense. For perhaps too many people, it's only common sense that if guns were illegal, there'd be less crime. Of course we know that there are so many reasons why this is wrong, but still to a lot of folks, it's common sense.

In my view training enhances one's knowledge and ability to make appropriate judgments. To me, that's common sense.

MLeake
February 26, 2008, 09:29 PM
You are correct. My bad.

I always liked The Quiet Man better... Blasphemy, I know.

The Canuck
February 26, 2008, 10:00 PM
Oy vey, here we go again with the common sense and the training...

Okay, first of all, in any training I have ever done (usually light hearted stuff like Canadian Forces training with a good amount of FIBUA and CQB (MOUT/CQB)) I have ALWAYS been trained in skill sets, NEVER scenarios. You only ever use scenarios to gain experience in applying your skill sets. If you train with scenarios you will find that the scenrio you trained for will likely not be anything like the one you find yourself in. Remember folks, train skills, not scenes.

There, I managed to put a bit of common sense in there, didn't I?:)

Now, common sense dictates that when a person is thrown into a violent conflict they will fight how they visualize and train. If you don't practice getting your defensive capabilities (threat assessed, firearm ready, target lined up, etc) up and running, you will be less effective than if you do practice. Now does that lack of practice put you in a better or worse situation? I would say.... worse. Common sense kicks in only when you are cognitive. Most times us normals are running on autopilot (that's where the training comes in y'all) and adrenaline during a conflict.

Just my opinion.

BreacherUp!
February 26, 2008, 10:13 PM
Canuck,I gather what you are saying. But scenario trainng does provide more than testing skill sets.
Since you have done CQB, you know that running a hall/room/ danger areas enough times in scenarios, you begin to learn "pattern recognition." PR decreases judgement time and deployment/employment times. Done enough times with a core group, and everyone begins to recognize these patterns and react as a unit. After all, there are only so many ways to skin a cat.
In the same way, going through enough shoot/no shoot scenarios increases PR.
But, I agree that utilizing training scenarios just to learn and defeat that particular scenario, is amateurish.

kgpcr
February 26, 2008, 11:05 PM
Common sense cant be trained. Your response can be but be trained. common sense is what will keep you out of a gunfight. It will also tell you when you MUST shoot. Training will make it so you dont think just react. The first time i was under fire i did not think i just reacted. Common sense is when you think while you are fighting to plan your next move. Hard to explain!!! Some guys were great with reacting but not so smart with sensing where the threat was before we got there.

Benzene
February 26, 2008, 11:30 PM
I think it is a matter of COMMON SENSE that a firearm owner be TRAINED to make proper use of the tool/weapon. And, just what is "common sense"? Is it that which is empty of "trainng"? I think "training" has to do with properly harnessing "common sense." Why get complicating about labels?

I think if someone decides to, and is eligible to own a firearm, then s/he MUST expose himself/herself to AS MUCH training as s/he could afford.

David Armstrong
February 27, 2008, 04:31 PM
Responsible gun ownership and self protection is 99% common sense and your inate ability to know right from wrong.
Sadly, common sense is far from common, and way too many do not have (or will not follow) that inate ability to know right from wrong. Thus, the need for training. Admittedly most don't need any of the more nonsensical "warrior" training, but most could use a nice dose of realistic, focused training.

As a side note, I frequently find it to be those with the least right to use the term "warrior" that tend to toss it around the most in their training descriptions.

Dwight55
February 27, 2008, 05:00 PM
Don't take this as a personal attack, Avenger, . . . but I think you need to go back and re think your statement:

"Responsible gun ownership and self protection is 99% common sense and your inate ability to know right from wrong."

There is a synopsis for every training class given by anyone, . . . anywhere.

There is no, . . . I repeat, . . . NO, . . . synopsis or syllabus for common sense.

Common sense for Nancy Pelosi is everyone turn in your guns, then no one will be shot.

Common sense for Ted Kennedy is that all guns should be taken from everyone who is not a senator or a Kennedy.

Common sense for Sarah Brady is that you and I should be locked up as we are seriously defective in our thinking capacities.

Common sense for Charleton Heston is "From my cold dead fingers, . . . "

What I am getting at is simple: common sense cannot be defined, . . . therefore, . . . without an agreed upon definition, . . . one cannot assess if it has been followed or not. Training records, . . . training skills, . . . even training scenarios can be graded, defined, critiqued, improved, assessed, etc.

I'm in the camp that says if we define our goals, . . . make them achievable, . . . then we won't sound like Hussein Osomma-bomma. Once defined, . . . we can strive to achieve them, . . . whether it is a two handed shooting skill, . . . knowledge of the difference from a SA, DA, DAO, type handguns, . . . or scenario reaction where you are in one line as another line is being robbed in the bank.

Think about it, . . .

May God bless,
Dwight

FerFAL
February 27, 2008, 05:08 PM
I don’t understand the question here.:confused:
You thing common sense will make you hit your target and react as you should under stress when attacked?
Or that there’s a gun school out there that will teach you what you only learn as you grow up, under the wing of good parents?
My friend, it’s training AND common sense.

FerFAL

Mannlicher
February 27, 2008, 06:25 PM
without common sense, all the training in the world is useless.
By the same token, common sense, with no training, is, well, not really common sense.

RedneckFur
February 27, 2008, 06:49 PM
Personally, I think most of the courses, books, awareness training, etc, only exsists to help guys justify to themselves, family, (or whoever) owning lots of guns that they honestly dont need. (And before somone flames me, realise that Rights, Needs, and Wants are three very diffrent things)

I know a gentleman who owns over 350 pistols for self defense. Chances are, he'll never use even one for its intended purpose. The training videos and weekend ninja courses he does regularly gives him an excuse bring them all out on the weekends, and to purchase more, when he'd be much better served with a small group of pistols that he praticed marksmanship with weekly.

FerFAL
February 27, 2008, 06:57 PM
Sorry RedneckFur, but I don’t agree with you on a couple of points there.
If he says that all 350 guns are for defense, then yes, he’s not too bright.
Could it be, that he simply likes collecting them? I sure do.
Have some guns for defense, some spares, and some that I just enjoy shooting.
Second, does he dress up like a ninja or something? Because if its self defense shooting classes he’s been taking, that’s actually a pretty good idea.
And no, target shooting wont do you any good for defense, you are much better off taking the defense shooting classes instead and practicing what you learn there.

FerFAL

Avenger11
February 27, 2008, 08:31 PM
Practicing with your firearm is a very good thing! Common sense is not something you can acquire thru training, practice, or imagining scenarios.

MLeake
February 27, 2008, 08:42 PM
but it can also be useful to have to move through a police style course, engage targets over cover or through windows, shoot in varying lighting conditions, etc.

And the two are really nothing alike.

From another perspective, I'm a pilot, formerly Navy, now commercial. I meet a lot of people who have private licenses. They enjoy flying, and they fly pretty well. However, the difference in training levels becomes apparent when, say, an engine quits... or something catches fire... or the weather gets suddenly and expectedly bad (and this can happen rapidly in the southeast).

Flying isn't very hard. Flying when conditions go to hell is extremely hard. Training is all the difference in determining odds of survival.

Common sense is a very useful thing, and can help to avoid those situations where training and reflexes become necessary. But sometimes, things just break, and we do tend to fly / shoot / sing karaoke / what have you as we train.

Frank Ettin
February 27, 2008, 08:48 PM
If you don't acquire common sense through training and practice, how do you acquire it? What is it, and how do you know if you have it? How will common sense help you to know when to use your weapon (has proposed by BreacherUp!)? How will common sense tell you when you must shoot (as proposed by kgpcr)?

It seems to me that common sense in this context is a pretty amorphous and borderline meaningless concept. Among other things, if you are being asked why you shot, you're going to need to come up with a better answer than, "It was common sense to shoot him."

And sometimes it sounds like the professed reliance on common sense is an excuse to not bother with training.

Double Naught Spy
February 27, 2008, 10:42 PM
Responsible gun ownership and self protection is 99% common sense and your inate ability to know right from wrong.
If you were born without common sense, then no amount of training will overcome it's absence.

Knowledge can be aquired. Training can enhance knowledge.Common sense cannot be taught or aquired thru training.

Common sense can be useless or wrong without contextual knowledge. While any of us might be able to reason out a common sense response to a threat if we have enough time, there may not be enough time to do so without training on how to make it happen. Without training, in time critical high stress situations, many people make decisions that don't reflect common sense decisions.

Jeff Cooper used to say, "Having a gun doesn't mean you're armed any more than having a guitar means you're a musician."

Wow, that is just one of those analogies that simply doesn't work.

To be armed is to be in possession of a weapon. Having a gun makes you armed. It doesn't make you a fighter. Cooper's saying would have worked had he said "Having a gun doesn't mean you are a fighter any more than having a guitar means you are a musician.

Frank Ettin
February 27, 2008, 10:56 PM
Nope Double Naught Spy, I'll go with the way Jeff Cooper said it. A man isn't really armed unless he can use his weapon effectively. Just having a weapon doesn't mean you can use it effectively. And BTW, what are your qualifications for second guessing Jeff Cooper?

The Canuck
February 27, 2008, 11:27 PM
Canuck,I gather what you are saying. But scenario trainng does provide more than testing skill sets.
Since you have done CQB, you know that running a hall/room/ danger areas enough times in scenarios, you begin to learn "pattern recognition." PR decreases judgement time and deployment/employment times. Done enough times with a core group, and everyone begins to recognize these patterns and react as a unit. After all, there are only so many ways to skin a cat.
In the same way, going through enough shoot/no shoot scenarios increases PR.
But, I agree that utilizing training scenarios just to learn and defeat that particular scenario, is amateurish.


I do not see anything to disagree with here. What I see is, in essence, an expansion of the concept.

We only ever ran each scenario once in the training cycle, they would even keep it out of circulation for several runs of the course (to prevent the next course from doggin' it, or so I've been told). The PatRec did happen, but what they wanted from us was stimulus (PatRec, of course) to skill set activation. When we were clearing buildings we not only had to be safe in the building we were in, but the buildings around us too. The worst was running a stairwell, clearing the landing and the hall and then getting tapped from across the street from another building after smoking a room. The CIs never let us have a break, from your callsign I'd say you know why and how. ;) Hey did you guys have to throw the buttstock over your shoulder for CQB too? Or did you have 4-pos?

kgpcr
February 28, 2008, 07:11 AM
you can train tactics and handgun skills. you cant train common sense. The best fight on the street is one you dont get in

Double Naught Spy
February 28, 2008, 07:19 AM
Nope Double Naught Spy, I'll go with the way Jeff Cooper said it. A man isn't really armed unless he can use his weapon effectively. Just having a weapon doesn't mean you can use it effectively. And BTW, what are your qualifications for second guessing Jeff Cooper?

No, a man with a gun really is armed. Being armed isn't the same thing as being an effective fighter.

What are my qualifications for second guessing Jeff Cooper? First, I am not questioning Jeff Cooper. I am questioning the correctness of the statement. There is a difference. It matters not who said it.

My qualifications have nothing to do with the correctness of the statement. If the statement is accurately reproduced here, it is in error. "Armed" (possession of a weapon) has been confused with (as you put it) being able to fight effectively. You can look it up yourself and by dictionary definition, civilian legal definition, or military definition, to be armed is to be in possession of weaponry. It really is just that simple. The definitions state nothing about the effective ability to use arms.

Frank Ettin
February 28, 2008, 10:34 AM
Double Naught Spy,

I'll stick with Jeff Cooper.

Frank Ettin
February 29, 2008, 01:00 AM
To expand on my prior post and clarify why Jeff Cooper is correct, the word "armed" doesn't mean only "having a weapon."

For example,

[1] Merriam-Webster Online defines "armed", among other things, as follows:

"1 a: furnished with weapons <an armed guard>; also : using or involving a weapon b: furnished with something that provides security, strength, or efficacy..."

[2] Webster's Encyclopedic Dictionary of the English Language (1989) defines "armed" to include, "...prepared for any specific purpose."

So, as Jeff Cooper is stating, a person who merely has possession of a weapon is not necessarily furnished with the wherewithal to provide security, strenght or efficacy, unless he also has had training to effectively use that weapon. Nor is he prepared for the purpose of effectively using that weapon.

Indeed, when a person says, "I'm armed" he usually intends to mean more than that he has a weapon in his possession. He usually intends to also imply that he can use it effectively.

For example, let's suppose that you're walking with a companion at night. You become suspicious of the surroundings, and you voice your concerns. Your companion, to allay your concerns, says, "Don't worry. I'm armed." Is he merely telling you that he has a weapon on his person? Or is he also trying to convey the notion that he'd be able to handle things if they became unpleasant?

pax
February 29, 2008, 01:35 AM
*mild observation*

Y'know, online I'm often somewhat surprised at the contortions people go through in order to talk themselves (and everyone else) out of learning how to use the weapons they own. Some people will stand on their heads to avoid admitting that maybe they could learn something about shooting from a professional trainer who works with firearms for a living.

Here's a blurb from a blog (http://twowheeledmadwoman.blogspot.com/) I came across a few days ago. I think the writer is right on the money:

"What's your life worth?" --People often ask that when the price of a gun is discussed.

Y'know what? Mine's worth about $200, what I paid for a Star BKM in like-new shape. Plus 20 times that in training and range time. And another 20x in ammunition. So far.

The gun is just a tool -- and you do need good tools -- but the true weapon is you. A decent tool in skilled hands beats the finest tool in untrained, clumsy hands.

What's your life worth? Train much with that UtraBlaster 4500?

And here are my own thoughts on the issue: www.corneredcat.com/Learning/class.aspx

pax

Frank Ettin
February 29, 2008, 02:02 AM
Great post, Pax. (And BTW, I visit your site from time to time and recommend it to people looking for pointers.)

I don't think shootings particularly fun unless I'm hitting what I'm shooting at, and there's a good chance that a gun won't be much use in an emergency if you can't hit what you need to hit.

There's a lot about shooting, gun handling and personal defense that's not natural or intuitive -- or common sense.

The Tourist
February 29, 2008, 02:24 AM
training videos and weekend ninja courses

This is the problem anytime you go looking for information, and I don't just mean on the internet. Even in searching through books and magazines you have to do your homework.

And frankly, I've been very disappointed in this area. About seven years ago I honestly went searching for new/better info on self-defense on the internet. I hooked into several SD and MA forums and asked questions and truthfully got involved in discussions.

About three years ago I deleted every stinking one of them from my favorites list. It would have been better and cheaper to have a shaman swing a chicken over my head than to believe anything that I had read. The problems were so bad, so deep and so prevalent that a separate forum started up to research the credentials of guys starting forums.

For all of my wasted time I received no more than posers posing for the camera. I feel silly in even admitting I fell for such hype. To show the depth of insanity, I actually learned more about fighting with edged weapons in a thirty year old book based on prison shiv attacks.

In the end, common sense ain't common. And I'm living proof of that.

kgpcr
February 29, 2008, 07:08 AM
I am all for weekend training courses its just that crap like Warrior Forge, Ninja camp, is just a bunch of testosterone boosted crap. When you see a guy who wants to offer training and only goes by a number instead of his name then thats a tip off! Practice is a GREAT thing! its just you need to go to a course that will teach to shoot and not thump your chest!

Lurper
February 29, 2008, 10:47 AM
lol Tourist, not to make light of my fellow man's suffering. That happens all too often. Part of the problem is that these people are trying to get you to buy into their thinking. If you buy into their thinking, you buy their product.
That includes many of the so called "top notch" schools and instructors. Most try to apply military, MA or LE tactics/techniques to civilian shootings and it doesn't work.

One well known school advocates training and working out to make yourself into a fighting machine. Can that help? Maybe, but common sense tells you that most CCW holders have neither the time nor inclination to do so.

Another claims that seeking cover should be your first concern. Common sense tells you that in civilian incidents cover is rarely available.

Others advocate learning to shoot while moving of off the X. Common sense tells you that shooting while moving is less efficeint unless you practice it to a high degree. Common sense tells you that again most people have neither the time nor inclination to.

Common sense also tells you that the best way to ensure your safety is to remove the threat. The fastest way to remove the threat is to put lead on the target. Common sense tells you that the other guy can't hurt you if he's dead.

buzz_knox
February 29, 2008, 11:08 AM
It's should be noted that one of the benefits of training is an explanation of when not to shoot as much as when to shoot. Movement drills so that one can hit the target without being hit (or hitting a bystander) are an additonal benefit, since many ranges won't permit one to do so in general practice.

Knowing when not to shoot and how not to hit a bystander while "going dynamic" are necessitated by legal restrictions. Such restrictions often are far from common sense, as seen by many of the discussions on this and other forums.

As for common sense, it certianly can be taught. None of us was born with common sense but we were taught it through example and instruction.

The Tourist
February 29, 2008, 12:29 PM
lol Tourist, you buy their product.

And that's exactly what happened. A never-ending cavalcade of products and pictures. He even had the cajones to send me info on fighting with a Sicilian stiletto. Yikes, I've eaten pasta with a Sicilian stiletto since I was eight years old.

My ultimate problem, and this is speaking in general, is that all of these guys have a "plan." Everything else is flawed. Question the postulate of their philosophy and you're a troll. Do it often enough...

I made two observations in that forum. First, I've never seen "karate kid" moves win a bar-fight. The winner is the guy who clubs you with a barstool or other such furniture. I call it "furn-fu." The other observation I made was that the most dangerous brawlers I know are working cowboys. They absorb tremendous amounts of pain from the chores that would crush us.

In fact, I have gone on record, I won't fight a working cowboy, I surrender.

You can imagine how those observations went over in a forum with a sensei.

Here's my philosophy about knowledge and safety. If I know something, I impart that knowledge for free, not for a fee. You want info on knives because you have a need, I'll chat your ear off until the cows come home. I do pro bono work. I have a soft spot for veterans. Even my religion teaches me that those with gifts do not charge.

The answer to a young kid who tells these guys that he needs info on safety, and they know he is out-matched on the street, should not be a quip about "buying my book." It should be a clear recommendation to a dojo in his area where you have no financial ties.

BTW, do I fear these guys about my firm stand? Absolutely not, I have the ultimate weapon to protect myself from their magical combat training.

I carry a wet paper bag.

MLeake
February 29, 2008, 03:43 PM
Lurper feels that common sense tells us most CCW holders have neither time nor inclination to get in shape or take any physical self defense training.

Interestingly, most of the CCW holders I know are military or martial arts training buddies. For me, in my microcosm of the world, common sense dictates that most CCW holders try to maintain some sort of physical regimen, and have at least basic training in hand to hand.

Guess it's all where you come from.

Lurper
February 29, 2008, 03:55 PM
Lurper feels that common sense tells us most CCW holders have neither time nor inclination to get in shape or take any physical self defense training.
Not common sense, experience. We run about 100 people through the CCW course per month. I can tell you that you and you friends are a very small minority of the sample.

MLeake
February 29, 2008, 07:50 PM
I believe you. I hope you won't take this the wrong way, but I find that discouraging.

Of course, in my civilian occupation, the preponderance of former military, plus the requirement for semi-annual physicals tends to keep people in shape. I work with some guys in their early 60's who are still decent athletes.

It kind of depresses me, when I travel overseas. It's easy to pick out the Americans, in general. They are the fat ones. You rarely see fat people in Italy, Japan, the Philippines...

I will point out an advantage to physical training, aside from health benefits. Generally speaking, a predator type will look at my friends and most likely decide it will be a better idea to wait for an easier looking victim. Being in shape provides not only a different look, but a different demeanor that can be quite handy for keeping the wolves at bay.

Again, this isn't about acting macho, or being the biggest and baddest. It is about training to a point where you are confident in your ability to move, to handle typical situations, and to be able to evade/escape if possible or to engage with decisive violence if necessary.

The Canuck
February 29, 2008, 07:54 PM
For all of my wasted time I received no more than posers posing for the camera. I feel silly in even admitting I fell for such hype. To show the depth of insanity, I actually learned more about fighting with edged weapons in a thirty year old book based on prison shiv attacks.


Funny you should mention that. A few friends of mine are scholars of the Renaissance fighting arts/sciences (I am lapsed) and they have made observations that what they have learned from Medievel and Renaissance German fighting texts about dagger (knife) fighting is now being rediscovered in no small part by prisoners. If it works, you win, if you win, you are alive to teach your crew what works, right? Sounds like the Meisters of old. Of strange coincidence, a lot of what I learned about knife fighting in the Army was eerily similar to what we studied in the old German fighting manuals.

Lurper
February 29, 2008, 08:28 PM
Discouraging or not, it's true. Nor does that diminish your points about physical fitness. I'm not saying that some of the training isn't good. I'm saying it's not applicable. You can have the best training system in the world, but if your students won't follow it, it can be worse than no training at all. So, it makes more sense to realistically assess your students and develop a program/philosophy that will work for their lifestyle.

MLeake
February 29, 2008, 08:31 PM
This is true for a lot of activities, not just shooting, so I have to agree with Lurper.

Caveat: If you think a student could realistically benefit from physical training, and would be willing to try it, you should encourage it.

Second caveat: This is easier to accomplish if you lead by example, IE what you do, not just what you recommend.

BreacherUp!
February 29, 2008, 09:04 PM
Canuck: Hey did you guys have to throw the buttstock over your shoulder for CQB too? Or did you have 4-pos?

"Short-stocking" (buttstock over the shoulder), was common years ago when using a 20" service rifle for MOUT. I believe it has very limited utility.
With the wider usage of 10"-14" rifles for MOUT/CQB, short-stocking is not seen nearly as much. Units today tend to teach keeping the butt in your shoulder, and thus, your sights where they should be.

I love it when combat experience nullifies TTPs created in peacetime.

The Tourist
February 29, 2008, 09:31 PM
dagger (knife) fighting

I agree. Most of the stuff I know is simply prison fighting. One biker handing down a few moves to keep another alive.

I also have 'married' knowledge with invention. The knife I carry is an Emerson design he made for SEALs.

The Canuck
February 29, 2008, 10:40 PM
"Short-stocking" (buttstock over the shoulder), was common years ago when using a 20" service rifle for MOUT. I believe it has very limited utility.
With the wider usage of 10"-14" rifles for MOUT/CQB, short-stocking is not seen nearly as much. Units today tend to teach keeping the butt in your shoulder, and thus, your sights where they should be.

I love it when combat experience nullifies TTPs created in peacetime.


Tell me about it. Our Infantry still don't get many carbines, but we did throw (in 2005) a 4-pos stock on our rifles!

The Canuck
February 29, 2008, 10:48 PM
The Tourist,

I still have my original 8" long straight steel fighting knife with the serations along the last two inches or so. It was great to use, it has simple rubber grips and no guard, cost me twenty bucks. A buddy of mine bought a $200.00 Gerber and lost it the second river we crossed!

The one thing I have observed is that when it comes to application, the stuff that works never dies.

David Armstrong
February 29, 2008, 11:34 PM
Discouraging or not, it's true. Nor does that diminish your points about physical fitness. I'm not saying that some of the training isn't good. I'm saying it's not applicable. You can have the best training system in the world, but if your students won't follow it, it can be worse than no training at all. So, it makes more sense to realistically assess your students and develop a program/philosophy that will work for their lifestyle.
Agreed, big time! In fact, it was moving into the CCW training field that caused me to have a bit of an awakening, and changed so much of my philosophy to "what will work best for the common gun owner" instead of "what is the latest and greatest for the high-speed low-drag performer" when it comes to training. Too many tend to think only in the context of the highly dedicated gun carrier, much to the detriment of the more common and typical gun owner.

The Tourist
March 1, 2008, 12:53 AM
the stuff that works never dies.

I agree. Here's what I've been carrying lately:

http://i209.photobucket.com/albums/bb231/TheTourist_bucket/compare.jpg

The top knife is my EDC, an Emerson HD-7. The one below is just inventory left over from reselling. As you can see, I've polished both of the edges. My intent was to use the little knife for opening things like those blister packs. I don't know what they use for plastic, but they are truly hard on a good edge.

However, Emerson's design is one of those that will undoubtedly be a classic. I carry one knife clipped to my right pocket, and the other on my left. I should always be able to get to at least one of them.

My belief is that no matter what your fighting discipline, any place you grab me will be sharp...