The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Tactics and Training

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old July 2, 2010, 07:05 AM   #1
RGR3/75
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 16, 2009
Location: Colorado Springs CO/Columbus GA
Posts: 154
Watch this video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QjZY...eature=related

I laughed out loud several times. Absolutely hilarious. One decent point they make is don't carry without proper training but it goes so far as to say basically, you should never carry a gun if you're a civilian. This video is mainly for shock value but your thoughts and comments are welcome.
__________________
True Grit
RGR3/75 is offline  
Old July 2, 2010, 07:32 AM   #2
45Gunner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2009
Location: Boca Raton, FL
Posts: 1,727
I disagree with RGR's assessment of this video. It is not that I agree with every statement made in the video, but we are wise to heed what is said. One cannot go to the range once a month (or less) and expect to be able to react to a circumstance involving a gun and expect a successful outcome. Even if one were to shoot once or twice a week, it does not guarantee your outcome against a hostile force. One must practice, practice, and practice...and not just at shooting at paper targets. The video tells the story.

And this video also makes the point of those that would second guess (Monday Morning Quarterback) the actions of our soldiers and police. They are under constant stress in situations that none of us would ever want to be in and sometimes people get shot that probably shouldn't have been shot. This video demonstrates what the human mind and body reacts to.

In my opinion, those of us that don't believe every single word that is put out in the media, should garnish a better understanding of the need to train and train with more frequency and intensity.
__________________
45Gunner
May the Schwartz Be With You.
NRA Instructor
NRA Life Member
45Gunner is offline  
Old July 2, 2010, 07:35 AM   #3
Skans
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2008
Posts: 7,766
Bad propaganda. Here's why:

Try running that same classroom scenario mock-shooting, but let's change a few things to make it more realistic:

1. Instead of highly trained cops, make the bad guy one of the participants who have little firearms experience.

2. Instead of only one person carrying a gun, have at least 3 people in the class with a gun.

3. Notice how everyone, except the test subject, was either a cop or a reporter. The cops playing bad guy who entered the class room shooting likely knew who the subject was and targeted that person knowing he had the gun. Again, run this drill with an untrained bad guy and three participants who can't be identified by the bad guy carrying weapons.

4. Let the scenario play out until the BG is shot or disarmed, or until everyone in the room is killed by the bad guy - don't just end it when one guy with the gun gets shot.

..........then let's see what happens.
Skans is offline  
Old July 2, 2010, 08:10 AM   #4
DogoDon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2010
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 368
Skans is right on target. This proves nothing, really.

Do the producers of this video think that not having a gun on one's person would have improved the odds of surviving an ambush like this?

It's absurd.

DD
DogoDon is offline  
Old July 2, 2010, 08:45 AM   #5
coldpointcrossing
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 12, 2009
Location: Georgia
Posts: 246
First off, I do not position my holster on the front of my stomach and along side my crotch...that's because I know that if it were placed there, I may not be able to draw my weapon, depending on my body's position i.e., sitting, crouching, etc..

Second...

Quote:
The cops playing bad guy who entered the class room shooting likely knew who the subject was and targeted that person knowing he had the gun.
...Bullseye! Just where does that come into "play" in the real world?
__________________
CPC
coldpointcrossing is offline  
Old July 2, 2010, 09:06 AM   #6
45Gunner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2009
Location: Boca Raton, FL
Posts: 1,727
I think you guys missed an important point. Whether or not a BG is trained with a gun has no relevance. His gun is out and he is shooting as soon as he entered the target area. The GG with the gun stands up and fumbles which makes him an instant target while the other "players" duck and scramble. Don't you think that is more to real life? If you didn't have a gun, you would have done the same thing...duck and scramble. You have to be tactical when defending yourself and others with a gun. Simply presenting the gun in an untimely fashion will get you shot and killed. Practice is the point of all this. And knowing tactics other than shooting off the bench at paper targets does not make one with a gun a defender of all that is good against all that is evil.

The other thing one has to remember when viewing a video like this or reading a story in the media is that half of what is presented is pure BS and the half of what is remaining is erroneous. You must extract what the valid points are and not take all of it as the gospel.
__________________
45Gunner
May the Schwartz Be With You.
NRA Instructor
NRA Life Member
45Gunner is offline  
Old July 2, 2010, 09:18 AM   #7
TailGator
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 8, 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,973
I am in Skans' camp on this one. The persons representing concealed carry licencees were young people with one training session. They not only had no further training, but no further opportunity to read or reflect on what they would do in various situations. I don't think any rookie cop or soldier would do well being placed in such a situation on the first day of training, either.

Perhaps more important, active shooters do not enter a room knowing which person is armed, where they are sitting, and how they are carrying.

Completely ridiculous scenario, but the twofold problem is gaining a platform with equal exposure, and making the point effectively. The press has much power.

Edited to add: The very fact that the trainees could not draw their weapon without getting it hung up in their clothing means that they were inadequately trained, does it not?

Last edited by TailGator; July 2, 2010 at 09:25 AM.
TailGator is offline  
Old July 2, 2010, 09:51 AM   #8
RGR3/75
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 16, 2009
Location: Colorado Springs CO/Columbus GA
Posts: 154
the main point of the video persuading against carrying a gun. the guy says "i would have been safer without a gun" just kinda funny. also the reporter who does that cop simulator hahahaha
__________________
True Grit
RGR3/75 is offline  
Old July 2, 2010, 12:04 PM   #9
skifast
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 19, 2008
Posts: 226
Pure junk science. The purpose of scientific study is to explain things that happen in nature.

This experiment was set up to prove what happens in the real world is false. In the real world, good guys win gunfights every day. Not saying it hasn't happened, but I can not recall a real world event where the good guy was shot, because he could not clear his holster.
skifast is offline  
Old July 2, 2010, 12:13 PM   #10
Wuchak
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 1, 2007
Location: Shawnee, KS
Posts: 1,093
"One cannot go to the range once a month (or less) and expect to be able to react to a circumstance involving a gun and expect a successful outcome"

Most police officers who carry everyday go far less than once a month. Some go once a year for qualification and that's the only time they shoot all year so let's not pretend that every officer with a gun is some highly trained professional. The vast majority of them are not. Most of the people I know who are CCW permit holders are regular shooters and trust them with their firearms far more than the average police officer.

Want to be scared? Go visit the local range when the police are training and watch all the unsafe gun handling going on. People on the line handling their weapons while others are down range, etc. At our local club one range is designated for the local police forces to use. The roof over that range is riddled with bullet holes from ND's while the regular club member roofs (that are 4x as long) don't have a single hole.
Wuchak is offline  
Old July 2, 2010, 12:14 PM   #11
kodiakbeer
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 10, 2010
Location: Kodiak, Alaska
Posts: 791
Somebody should do a video in response, but don't tell the shooter which of the 30 students is armed. Then the outcome would be realistic.
kodiakbeer is offline  
Old July 2, 2010, 12:18 PM   #12
skifast
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 19, 2008
Posts: 226
Actually that would not be realistic. Active shooters in schools do not even consider that they will face an armed good guy. Schools are considered free fire zones for and by bad guys.
skifast is offline  
Old July 2, 2010, 12:38 PM   #13
kodiakbeer
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 10, 2010
Location: Kodiak, Alaska
Posts: 791
Quote:
Actually that would not be realistic. Active shooters in schools do not even consider that they will face an armed good guy. Schools are considered free fire zones for and by bad guys.
The vid was based on the premise that students could be armed, in fact a propaganda film to counter the movement to allow carry in schools. It's designed so that the carrier can not win.

The student has a gun in a holster in his front pocket seated at a desk while wearing a clinging tightly fitted shirt. The shooter knows he's armed and shoots him first among the 30 other students.

If the student was carrying properly and anonymous among the other students, he'd have an excellent chance of winning the fight.
kodiakbeer is offline  
Old July 2, 2010, 12:50 PM   #14
Deputy Dog
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2009
Posts: 247
I saw the whole segment on twenty twenty I believe it was or one of those shows. Their point was I believe, to show that the common average person without proper training, probably shouldnt carry a gun for self defense. And if you watch the video, you would see how they come to that conclusion. This is why alot of us instructors cringe when people say stuff like I know how to shoot, I dont need to take a class on carrying a firearm. I believe one of the students went to the range on a monthly bassis in the full segment anyway.

We can all learn from this video, the point was loud and clear. Put your ego aside and go get some training. You would be foolish (to put it politely) to think that a basic safety class or no training at all and just basic fundamentals would get you through that ordeal.

DD
Deputy Dog is offline  
Old July 2, 2010, 01:10 PM   #15
dsa1115
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 10, 2010
Location: Illinois
Posts: 428
The BG comes into the classroom and he knows exactly which student is armed. How is that realistic? Why not do the exact experiment but without the BG knowing who in the room is armed? I can't disagree that practice and more practice is critically important. However, you can practice all you want but reality is always different when you have a real gun and real bullets being fired in your direction. This Diane Sawyer/ABC video is nothing but anti-gun nonsense.
dsa1115 is offline  
Old July 2, 2010, 01:13 PM   #16
dnr1128
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 29, 2010
Posts: 166
there were some good points in the video, as in the need for practice and developing muscle memory. But as dsa states, the situation was set up for the students to fail.
dnr1128 is offline  
Old July 2, 2010, 01:28 PM   #17
kodiakbeer
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 10, 2010
Location: Kodiak, Alaska
Posts: 791
Quote:
Their point was I believe, to show that the common average person without proper training, probably shouldnt carry a gun for self defense.
A dozen years ago a family friend was going through a divorce with a dangerous lunatic - a man who had molested her daughter and made numerous threats against her. She went through the whole legal business with the restraining orders and so on, but she and the police knew it was a joke. The police advised her to carry a gun - this was prior to this state doing away with the need for a permit. They told her she wouldn't be charged for illegal carry and they meant it. She would have to had waited months for the next concealed carry class.

She came to me since she was my wife's friend and I had plenty of guns. I lent her a revolver after some very minimal training and felt fine about it.

Sometimes people need a gun NOW. They'd do better with training, but that should not be an impediment to the RIGHT to bear arms.
kodiakbeer is offline  
Old July 2, 2010, 02:18 PM   #18
brickeyee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 29, 2004
Posts: 3,342
The entire scenario is so rare as to be insignificant.

Try doing something more common like a mugging/robbery in the park.

As for not being able to handle things based solely on frequency of practice, how often does the average policeman go to the range and practice?

At about every two weeks are am very sure I have them beaten.
brickeyee is offline  
Old July 2, 2010, 02:31 PM   #19
Skans
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2008
Posts: 7,766
Quote:
The GG with the gun stands up and fumbles which makes him an instant target while the other "players" duck and scramble. Don't you think that is more to real life? If you didn't have a gun, you would have done the same thing...duck and scramble.
You better believe I'd duck! I'm a real good ducker, just watch me. Scramble, no....take cover, yes. Going for my gun under that situation would not be the first thing I'd do. I'd make sure I had good cover first, and then IF and WHEN I felt it was safe to get my gun out, I would. But, even then, I'm not going to stand up and take 20 foot shots at the guy.

The problem is that the GG had minimal training but had the "mindset" drilled into him that he was supposed to somehow fight back. Of course, they never instructed how to take cover or take care of himself first.
Skans is offline  
Old July 2, 2010, 02:39 PM   #20
DogoDon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2010
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 368
The fact that the GG with the gun had freaking gloves on when the attack happened didn't help matters, either! Holy cow! Drawing from concealment is hard enough without gloves on. Could they have come up with any more ways to stack the deck? I'm surprised they didn't handcuff the guy, too.

What a load of bull.
DogoDon is offline  
Old July 2, 2010, 02:50 PM   #21
Jazzninja
Junior Member
 
Join Date: March 8, 2009
Posts: 14
I agree that the importance of training cannot be overstated. However, this is a very flawed and biased experiment designed to support a pre-determined outcome. The active shooter was a trained firearms instructor who knew where the armed student was seated every time he entered the room; the armed student was seated front and center in the exact same location every time the experiment was run. I don’t have time to point out all the flaws, but there are many that destroy the validity of this experiment.
Jazzninja is offline  
Old July 2, 2010, 03:27 PM   #22
markj
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 27, 2005
Location: Crescent Iowa
Posts: 2,967
More anti gun propaganda. Get folks all scared so they will not want to have the ability to even protect themselves. Sheep lead to the slaughter. Running is going to protect you?

I also say put together one that not one person knows about the other, then lets see how it ends. The shooter was targetted in both vids. Why? To justify their poor position on guns in the hands of civilians.
markj is offline  
Old July 2, 2010, 03:53 PM   #23
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,519
Quote:
I agree that the importance of training cannot be overstated.

The importance of training can be overstated if it causes someone to not even bother due to the expense of said training.


The fact is, shown over and over, that a good guy with a gun stands a better chance in most situations than a good guy without a gun. End of story.

Training or no training. If you know how it works, you should carry it.

I have never heard of a defensive incident wherein the defender was a significantly trained civilian. There just aren't a lot of Rob Pincus' getting attacked out there. Most of the civilian defense situations involve a defender with little or no formal training and the VAST majority of those instances end up well for the defender. Physically well, for the time being anyway.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is online now  
Old July 2, 2010, 04:51 PM   #24
Blue Steel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 10, 2009
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 183
Even if you accept the premise of the video (which I don't), how is being shot with a firearm worse than being shot without one.

In a real life active shooter scenario let us imagine the classroom next door with the armed faculty or student. They have more time to respond, locking or barricading the room, taking a position of cover, deploying their firearm. Let see if those people would rather be armed or just waiting in the room for the shooter to kick-in the door.
__________________
"I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts." -Will Rogers
Blue Steel is offline  
Old July 2, 2010, 05:00 PM   #25
Nnobby45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2004
Posts: 3,148
Quote:
........... The video tells the story.
Absolute BUNK!!

We can all agree to the wisdom of training. However, a brief instruction with re: to drawing from under a long bulky shirt doesn't amount to training at all. Training would include actually practicing it until some degree of proficiency was achieved.

Why were they allowed to SHOOT extensively, but not DRAW.

Seems like Dillon's hours of practice shooting the air soft didn't help him when he couldn't, for lack of practice, draw his weapon--no kidding.

Diane Sawyer has done this before. The "attacker", (a firearms instructor whose skills would exceed the typical classroom murderer), knew right where the armed students were sitting and came in and shot them immediatly.

And just like before, the students were given a bulky shirt from which they had to draw from concealed without practice after a brief instruction.

Sawyer then couldn't draw and shoot fast enough to deal with the attacker in the truck and proclaimed that one just couldn't react fast enough. The most elementary training teaches to break for cover and get the hell out of the way--not stand there in the open.

This video was rigged from the start with the outcome predetermined just as it was when ABC aired a similar program some months ago with no difference in the out come at all. Don't know for sure, but could have been the same video.

Just my thoughts on the matter.

Last edited by Nnobby45; July 2, 2010 at 05:16 PM.
Nnobby45 is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:00 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.14220 seconds with 7 queries