[Erik]

Still reading:

"Here is what I said that few bother to read:

"
The suggestion was not to blast the ground but to shoot starting low, (and in the event it was way too low that a ricochet might have an effect anyway). It also wasn't suggested to shoot indiscriminately, but to shoot twice - point shooting - on the way up, in an arc, at the perp - and a quick follow-up at center - at the perp. It's rapid point-shooting along a "string" - as the term was used here - moving up the target to gain a pause in the attack hopefully, so as to recover control of aim when one is about to be literally "over-run".

That's not to say this makes it a good technique, but that it is the technique described to me. If something other than that came through in my description -- my error in composition."

---

Shooting low and indescriminantly appears to be exactly what has been advocated, hence the need for all of the "if you miss at least something positive will come of it" justifications. If your instructor friend said them, then it is what it is. If you added them... well, did he or you? I ask because it sounds like you did a good job describing something many happen to disagree with, as oppossed to the other way around.