The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post

anythingshiny · June 23, 2009, 10:51 AM

"What in the world has that got to do with putting people downrange during live fire? Many of the better training facilities are equipped with ranges/shoot-houses that allow a person to engage threats from virtually any direction. That doesn't require putting people next to targets that are being fired upon."

My comment about not choosing the time place etc had more to do with folks opinion of the 360 scan and the high sabrina ready position than the fact that a photographer was downrange.

Regarding the chaff and James Yeager...there is a 'cult of personality' that folks think they see. The ambush on BIAP as a catalyst for hatred is insanely blown out of proportion and that, to me, has spilled over to opinion of his school. The school itself is made up of many quality instructors who are safe, sane and very professional. I consider my self a well educated and rounded individual...do I 100% 'drink the koolaid'? No, I dont..I take what tools and mindset that I see fit and add them to the toolbox and move on.

No where in my post did I say this was 'usual' for the training..in fact I said quite the contrary. "it is NOT any training doctrine nor curriculum that the students must shoot".

In one class, the photographer asked if I was comfortable with him taking pictures next to my target. I made the decision that I was comfortable with my skill set and that I broke none of the 4 cardinal rules. That was my decision. It was not mandated or pushed upon me in any way, shape or form. Had I said.." hey dude, I'm not comfortable with that or I dont feel safe.." it would have ended there.

Could something have gone really really wrong? yes..absolutely it could have...in my opinion it was the same risk that I took even standing on the line with folks I dont personally know. I can control some things and not others...I made that decsion and feel comfortable with it, as did the photographer.

It is not my intention to be defensive on the issue, because I feel there were no 'rules' violated. Were any of the 4 rules violated in that video or at other classes? Don't know..wasn't there and isn't me doing the shooting.

I abhor the ' I am a warrior ' posturing that occurs on the internet and yes some of that goes on at Tactical Response exactly the same as on WT or ARFCOM or GlockTalk, but when I think of why I carry a gun, it is because I want to be prepared. And in my mind, being prepared is a big task.

So, YES there is a risk and YES it could have gone south with huge consequences...but so can everything else whether or not I had a say in it.

June 23, 2009, 10:51 AM	#58
anythingshiny Member Join Date: June 20, 2008 Location: Raleigh NC Posts: 96	"What in the world has that got to do with putting people downrange during live fire? Many of the better training facilities are equipped with ranges/shoot-houses that allow a person to engage threats from virtually any direction. That doesn't require putting people next to targets that are being fired upon." My comment about not choosing the time place etc had more to do with folks opinion of the 360 scan and the high sabrina ready position than the fact that a photographer was downrange. Regarding the chaff and James Yeager...there is a 'cult of personality' that folks think they see. The ambush on BIAP as a catalyst for hatred is insanely blown out of proportion and that, to me, has spilled over to opinion of his school. The school itself is made up of many quality instructors who are safe, sane and very professional. I consider my self a well educated and rounded individual...do I 100% 'drink the koolaid'? No, I dont..I take what tools and mindset that I see fit and add them to the toolbox and move on. No where in my post did I say this was 'usual' for the training..in fact I said quite the contrary. "it is NOT any training doctrine nor curriculum that the students must shoot". In one class, the photographer asked if I was comfortable with him taking pictures next to my target. I made the decision that I was comfortable with my skill set and that I broke none of the 4 cardinal rules. That was my decision. It was not mandated or pushed upon me in any way, shape or form. Had I said.." hey dude, I'm not comfortable with that or I dont feel safe.." it would have ended there. Could something have gone really really wrong? yes..absolutely it could have...in my opinion it was the same risk that I took even standing on the line with folks I dont personally know. I can control some things and not others...I made that decsion and feel comfortable with it, as did the photographer. It is not my intention to be defensive on the issue, because I feel there were no 'rules' violated. Were any of the 4 rules violated in that video or at other classes? Don't know..wasn't there and isn't me doing the shooting. I abhor the ' I am a warrior ' posturing that occurs on the internet and yes some of that goes on at Tactical Response exactly the same as on WT or ARFCOM or GlockTalk, but when I think of why I carry a gun, it is because I want to be prepared. And in my mind, being prepared is a big task. So, YES there is a risk and YES it could have gone south with huge consequences...but so can everything else whether or not I had a say in it. __________________ O.O.D.A Observe. Overreact. Destroy. Apologize.