The Firing Line Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old August 8, 2013, 06:07 PM   #126
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
Now it seems we are reaching more of a consensus. I would suggest, though, that controlling the weapon can also be approxated by controlling one's relative position to the weapon.

This would be easier to show than describe... May have to try a short video demo when Sixer gets back from vacation.
MLeake is offline  
Old August 8, 2013, 09:13 PM   #127
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague County, Texas
Posts: 10,568
Quote:
I'm not a martial artist, nor a boxer, nor a wrestler. In two different police academies I've taken very short courses in disarming others.
So you are a highly trained professional with a lot of experience. Good for you! Most of the people present in active shooter situations, ironically, are not highly trained professionals, MMA fighters, don't attend multiples of courses on disarming, open hand, closed hand, edged weapon, handgun, carbine, or shotgun fighting, etc. They are ordinary people. They include a subset of ordinary people who are gun owners and who can legally carry, but for some reason don't carry on a regular basis and don't even usually go to the range more than once or twice a year, if that often.

For some reason, the super fighters don't seem to be present in a timely fashion at these sorts of events with any sort of regularity. That leaves the situation in the hands of the ordinary people.
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher."
-- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old August 8, 2013, 09:20 PM   #128
m&p45acp10+1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 3, 2009
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 3,310
I know it did not work out well for the civilian contractor on Ft. Hood. He charged the shooter with a chair. He was shot, and killed. If I remeber correctly the shooter shot him in the head.

A disarm worked in the Kip Kinkle (sp?) school shooting. Kip Kinkle killed his parrents. He then took a 10/22 rifle, and a hand gun put them in the family car. Drove to school. Walked in, jumped on a table, and started shooting people with the rifle. A teacher jumped on the table, grabbed the rifle. He managed to get it free of the shooter's hands.

Myslef I would probably go for cover. If I had the elements of concealment, and surprise working in my favor I would possibly try a disarm, and take down.
__________________
No matter how many times you do it and nothing happens it only takes something going wrong one time to kill you.
m&p45acp10+1 is offline  
Old August 9, 2013, 01:55 AM   #129
SgtLumpy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2013
Posts: 779
I suggest that everyone make their own decisions on what they might do. For me, My 200+ lbs applied with violent force TOWARD THE WEAPON is a better use of force than me tackling them, hitting them with a chair, punching them in the nose etc.

Focus on the threat.

The threat is the weapon.


Sgt Lumpy
SgtLumpy is offline  
Old August 9, 2013, 06:26 AM   #130
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague County, Texas
Posts: 10,568
Quote:
I know it did not work out well for the civilian contractor on Ft. Hood. He charged the shooter with a chair. He was shot, and killed. If I remeber correctly the shooter shot him in the head.
I am not sure what you are saying here other than charging with chairs doesn't work.

Quote:
A disarm worked in the Kip Kinkle (sp?) school shooting. Kip Kinkle killed his parrents. He then took a 10/22 rifle, and a hand gun put them in the family car. Drove to school. Walked in, jumped on a table, and started shooting people with the rifle. A teacher jumped on the table, grabbed the rifle. He managed to get it free of the shooter's hands.
You left out the part about Kinkle getting tackled by students, led by Ryker, who waited until hearing that his gun had run dry. No disarming by a teacher mentioned.

Quote:
I suggest that everyone make their own decisions on what they might do. For me, My 200+ lbs applied with violent force TOWARD THE WEAPON is a better use of force than me tackling them, hitting them with a chair, punching them in the nose etc.

Focus on the threat.

The threat is the weapon.
It wasn't a long post, Sgt. Lumpy, but long enough for you to contradict yourself. First you suggest they make their own decisions, then you tell them that they need to focus on what YOU define as the threat.
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher."
-- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old August 9, 2013, 06:40 AM   #131
Constantine
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 5, 2010
Location: Miami, Florida
Posts: 5,232
Tackling Active Shooters as Self Defense

This is a really good topic. Can I just tweak the verbiage a bit?

The "threat" and "weapon" go hand in hand. If you can take him/her out, do so in whichever way possible. You won't know how unless its happening before your own two eyes.

Also, the threat is a whole. The weapon being a gun or knife is inanimate and can be taken away. Placed in good hands and used against the threat.

The "weapon" can also be the person being a nut job and killing random people.

However you see it in your eyes. Everyone varies.

Whatever poison you prefer, going for the weapon or person...you'll be generally going for the threat. Period. It's just verbiage.
Constantine is offline  
Old August 9, 2013, 11:19 AM   #132
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
The weapon is NOT the threat. The actor is the threat. Focus on the weapon to the point you disregard the actor, and things are not likely to go well.
MLeake is offline  
Old August 9, 2013, 01:22 PM   #133
raimius
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 27, 2008
Posts: 1,360
Considering that there have been many cases where an active shooter came with multiple firearms, focusing on disarmament alone is very risky. (I realize that most posters here who say "disarm" probably intend to disarm first, then detain/disable.)

To me, the preferred solution in the scenario would be to disable the shooter WHILE preventing them from employing a weapon against you. Since I am often in places where weapons are banned, my best bet would be on multiple disorienting/disabling strikes, stabs, or slashes in quick succession (bonus points for getting the shooter off-balance and taking them to the ground). Ideally, this would be done from an angle that would provide good targets for strikes, etc and would surprise the shooter while being difficult to defend against.

From my, albeit limited, experience, keeping a sustained attack going severely reduces an opponent's ability to respond effectively. It's a lot tougher to fight back when taking hits.
raimius is offline  
Old August 9, 2013, 02:31 PM   #134
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague County, Texas
Posts: 10,568
Quote:
The weapon is NOT the threat. The actor is the threat. Focus on the weapon to the point you disregard the actor, and things are not likely to go well.
Right, "Active shooter" does not refer to a gun that is being fired, but to the person firing the gun. The person is the threat. The gun is just a particular tool.
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher."
-- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old August 11, 2013, 01:16 PM   #135
buckshot00
Junior Member
 
Join Date: August 10, 2013
Posts: 10
If you "tackle" a gunman you still have a gunman you are both just horizontal and the gunman still has a gun.

I think a disarm would be the preferred strategy.
buckshot00 is offline  
Old August 11, 2013, 03:33 PM   #136
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague County, Texas
Posts: 10,568
You might think so, but the historical evidence shows this NOT to be the case in terms of unarmed people stopping active shooters.
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher."
-- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
Double Naught Spy 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 08:56 AM.


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 0.09460 seconds with 7 queries