|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
March 14, 2007, 10:01 PM | #151 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 12, 1999
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado, USA
Posts: 2,682
|
Matthew,
I can only speak for myself, but I used the exact same aiming techniques I use in competition, practice, and training, which range from aiming using a physical index (kinesthetic awareness) to strong front sight focus. As for Weaver.. I never shoot Weaver, the iso is more versatile and more natural.
__________________
Zak Smith . DEMIGOD LLC . THUNDER BEAST ARMS CORP . COLORADO MULTI-GUN My PM inbox full? Send e-mail instead.
|
March 14, 2007, 10:05 PM | #152 |
Junior member
Join Date: June 7, 2002
Location: NYC
Posts: 363
|
In other words Zak..you use both sighted and point shooting.
Which is a good thing. I still think the last two photos show bad tactics..meaning it appears the good guy is planted rather than trying to shoot while moving offline. ( And if he is, in fact, in motion, he would find it a lot more natural to move with only one hand on the gun.) And, IMHO, he would be better served with one handed shooting in these situations, so as to have a free hand available for a strike/parry/block. I would also love to place a Weaver trained shooter in these type situations and see how they would react. Are all of the photos of you, or are other shooters being shown? |
March 14, 2007, 10:16 PM | #153 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 21, 2006
Posts: 943
|
I think part of the problem for some derives from the term "stance". Stance is just a word used so that people can understand what you are trying to convey. What we teach is a "natural" stance. It differs from an isoceles stance even though it looks similar. A true isoceles has both feet in line, facing the target. A natural stance typically has the weak foot slightly forward. The natural stance is a "stance" only in the sense that it is a platform for the gun. It is standing the way the body naturally does. It is never fixed or rigid. In fact its biggest advantage is fluidity. From a natural stance, you can move easily in any direction. Partly because you are relaxed to begin with, so unlike Weaver, you don't have to relax to move. Your upper body and lower body are totally independant of each other. That's what allows you to shoot from any position on any terrain, standing, kneeling, sitting, prone, smooth ground, rough ground, inclines, declines, you name it.
|
March 14, 2007, 10:20 PM | #154 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 21, 2006
Posts: 943
|
Sky the problem with your premise is that fear of death requires conscious thought. Many don't have time to experience fear (or conscious thought) because events unfold too quickly. If you are trained to the point that your actions are subconscious, you will not have conscious thought. That is my whole point.
Fear only exists in the future, it cannot exist in the present. It is based on one of many outcomes. If you live and exist in the present moment, you banish fear. |
March 14, 2007, 11:43 PM | #155 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 12, 1999
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado, USA
Posts: 2,682
|
Quote:
As for shooting one-handed, I'll leave it up for debate. For me: not yet at grappling distance (out of arms reach) and ability to deliver multiple hits while moving fast = good two-handed grip. Quote:
-z
__________________
Zak Smith . DEMIGOD LLC . THUNDER BEAST ARMS CORP . COLORADO MULTI-GUN My PM inbox full? Send e-mail instead.
|
||
March 15, 2007, 12:05 AM | #156 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: August 13, 2005
Posts: 266
|
Quote:
The X represents the best directions to move off the X....diagonally if possible and not just straight back. Training should also incorporate one handed shooting. Quote:
There is no "logic" in our instinctive responses to 'real' fear of dying. We all will automatically crouch and try to move. Many will scream. Because there is no fear of dying or pain involved, FoF is great for learning some tactics, less so for learning stress-driven responses. Train in the way your body will instinctively respond to being shot at....and you'll be well served for self-defense. .
__________________
First off.....'she' is a weapon, not a girlfriend; a genderless, inanimate mechanism designed to mete out mayhem in life threatening situations. |
||
March 15, 2007, 12:22 AM | #157 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 13, 2005
Posts: 266
|
Quote:
But we all have an instinctive fear of dying....and we all will react in certain predictable ways, both physically and mentally. Best that we train in those predictable ways. Like using gross motor skills because the fine skills won't work in extreme danger. .
__________________
First off.....'she' is a weapon, not a girlfriend; a genderless, inanimate mechanism designed to mete out mayhem in life threatening situations. |
|
March 15, 2007, 06:55 AM | #158 |
Junior member
Join Date: June 7, 2002
Location: NYC
Posts: 363
|
Zak..are any of those other people trained in the Weaver stance or are they all mainly MI shooters?
I ask because it is my belief that quite often it is the Weaver that falls apart under stress...even if one is well trained in it's use. |
March 15, 2007, 07:41 AM | #159 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 28, 1999
Location: USA
Posts: 1,163
|
How many times have they run through the simunition shoots? Just an observation from some one who has run sims in training and took those same people to war later. The first time they run sims most are a soup sandwich, I mean literally guys dropping their rifles, doing the helicopter while pulling the trigger, etc. The more they run through it, the better they get. This is part of the "stress inoculation" that LtCol Grossman discusses. When those same people get into their first fire fight, they perform closer to the first time they were under sims, but not nearly as spastic. As they see more combat, their performance improves.
__________________
God truly fights on the side with the best artillery |
March 15, 2007, 09:24 AM | #160 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 13, 2005
Posts: 266
|
.
Crouch .
Move off the X
__________________
First off.....'she' is a weapon, not a girlfriend; a genderless, inanimate mechanism designed to mete out mayhem in life threatening situations. |
March 15, 2007, 10:54 AM | #161 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 21, 2006
Posts: 943
|
Sky
The question I have re: your picture is: Have those guys been trained to crouch while or before moving? Also, are they crouching because they were behind cover? The guy in the foreground obviously isn't shooting. Their level of training is also a consideration. You can't expect those who are not well trained to respond the same way those who are would. It's like the difference between a cherry and a veteran. Also: Quote:
Think about it this way: I'll use the Son Tay prison raid as an example. A nearly exact replica of the prison was built so the raiders could reherse their actions. When the actual raid occured, things went exceptionally well. Part of the reason is because the raiders spent so much time rehersing. If they hadn't it would have been nothing but a clusterf**k on the ground. Take that down to a smaller scale: think about just rehersing the mechanics of shooting to the point where you never have to consciously think about them. Your mind makes the association that every time I have a firearm in my hands, this is what I do. We will probably never reconcile our views on the issue. You will not convince me that fear of death is even a consideration until and unless you are wounded, down to your last rounds or see your executioner approaching. I also know from personal experience and from talking with others that it is just as likely that you will perform as you are trained to as not. I don't really believe it is fair or accurate to say that at this point in time there is definitive proof either way. The jury is still out. I'm sorry, it really boils down to what you believe. But if you watch, you will see more and more evidence supporting the contention that it can be overcome. You will see more and more emphasis on the mental aspect of training. Hopefully, one day, mental training will become part of a system of standardized training for those who depend on firearms every day. |
|
March 15, 2007, 10:56 AM | #162 | |||||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 12, 1999
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado, USA
Posts: 2,682
|
Quote:
#1. student is retreating more or less straight to the rear and getting shot #2. student is moving backwards and drawing at instant assailent draws knife #3. cont. from #2, student continues to move away from knife assailent while continuing to deliver fire. note that knife assailent is no longer visible in frame, distance has been gained. the next thing student does is to move sideways (left) #4 student has moved back and to the right, though at this point he is moving slower than he should (note proximity of knife assailent). #5. student started out near front left bumper when assailent drew knife, he backed up around the front and right-hand side of the car (presumably used as obstruction) while delivering 5 rounds into knife assailent. you can see the last UTM marker impacting the knife assailent's shirt in this picture. student is moving pretty fast right here. As far as what worked and what didn't work.. in some of these students and got shot or stabbed and in some of them they didn't. I am pretty sure the student in #1 sustained multiple hits. The guy in 2, 3, and 5 didn't get stabbed or shot in those two scenarios. I don't remember if the knife guy made it to the student in #4, but he is really close... Quote:
The only reason I posted was to refute your statement, quote Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Zak Smith . DEMIGOD LLC . THUNDER BEAST ARMS CORP . COLORADO MULTI-GUN My PM inbox full? Send e-mail instead.
|
|||||
March 15, 2007, 08:31 PM | #163 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 31, 2000
Location: Texican!
Posts: 4,453
|
Isn't it passing strange Bill Jordan, of the Border Patrol, the same one who wrote, "No Second Place Winner", wrote that one should stand erect when shooting in a gunfight. Now I kind of think he was in quite a few gun fights, and he would know if one crouched or not.
So I would not spend much time worrying about if you are gonna crouch or not. Bring the dang gun up and shoot.
__________________
“To you who call yourselves ‘men of peace,’ I say, you are not safe without men of action by your side” Thucydides |
March 15, 2007, 09:58 PM | #164 |
Junior member
Join Date: June 7, 2002
Location: NYC
Posts: 363
|
From page 106 of Applegate's book Kill Or get Killed..
.."There will be times when immediate circumstances will not allow the shooter to use the crouch, but in most cases this will be his basic firing position. The instinctive pointing method, however, can be equally accurate and effective from an upright standing position." And I am sure the same applies to sighted shooting. |
March 15, 2007, 10:43 PM | #165 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 6, 2002
Posts: 263
|
Quote:
My "taking hits/cuts" ratio dropped dramatically once I threw out my "conditioned" response with almost no loss to my "making hits" ratio. What I reverted back to was the natural reactions of a kid that grew up with BBgun/rock/orange wars..... for the hell of it. "To hit and not be hit"..... because being hit was usually a lot more substantial than it is with airsoft or simunitions. From what I see in the pictures we are seeing a good example of the lessons of what not to do and why. What I see in the pictures is "mutual death." But that should be the first lesson inside of any quality FOF. Hopefully the lessons were learned and the students progressed into something much more effective and efficient than the conditioned responses.
__________________
"Situations dictate strategy, strategy dictates tactics, tactics dictate techniques.....techniques should not dictate anything." Roger Phillips, Owner and Operator of Fight Focused Concepts |
|
March 15, 2007, 10:47 PM | #166 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 12, 1999
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado, USA
Posts: 2,682
|
Agreed. I actually posted my AAR of the class here 9/2005. Also note that only one assailent in those pictures has a gun, and the one guy fighting a pistol-armed assailent sure is a bullet sponge.
__________________
Zak Smith . DEMIGOD LLC . THUNDER BEAST ARMS CORP . COLORADO MULTI-GUN My PM inbox full? Send e-mail instead.
|
March 15, 2007, 10:55 PM | #167 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 6, 2002
Posts: 263
|
Quote:
__________________
"Situations dictate strategy, strategy dictates tactics, tactics dictate techniques.....techniques should not dictate anything." Roger Phillips, Owner and Operator of Fight Focused Concepts |
|
March 16, 2007, 09:52 AM | #168 | |
Junior member
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: SW Louisiana
Posts: 2,289
|
Quote:
|
|
March 16, 2007, 09:56 AM | #169 | ||
Junior member
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: SW Louisiana
Posts: 2,289
|
Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by David Armstrong; March 16, 2007 at 10:58 AM. |
||
March 16, 2007, 10:03 AM | #170 | ||
Junior member
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: SW Louisiana
Posts: 2,289
|
Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by David Armstrong; March 16, 2007 at 10:53 AM. |
||
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|