The Firing Line Forums

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

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old December 18, 2012, 07:02 AM   #26
Brit
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 29, 2005
Location: Orlando FL
Posts: 854
Most of the time, when we are out and about, my Wife and I are together.

A couple of incidents in the twenty years we have been married, I have dealt with without shooting any one, if I had had to, then I would have done so.

When the threat is against you, or yours, it is easy to act, most loud noises, screams and threats, happening not close to us, very few of these even, I would note, then slide off.

A Glock 19 is a safety net, only to be deployed when required.
Brit is offline  
Old December 18, 2012, 11:41 AM   #27
Panfisher
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 30, 2010
Location: Missouri
Posts: 629
I confess to being happily in the conceal/wait and defend category. I am going to protect my wife and kids and if there are more with me they get protected also. My idea of protecting them from an active shooter situation is to get them to cover and or preferably away from the area completely. That not being an option to find some place out of site and hopefully somewhat defensible, at the very least out of sight, the shooter is likely looking for targets not intent on searching out every single person in the GAP or whatever store we might be in. An active shooter in many instances is better armed (Rifle shotgun, multiple handguns etc.), more than willing to shoot on sight without having to consider who it might be, likely wearing at least minimal body armor, with lots of ammo to spare, so at the very least I am at a disadvantage from the beginning, and I don't want to play their game, its even assuming that they are the only shooter.
Panfisher is offline  
Old December 18, 2012, 05:15 PM   #28
Ghost1958
Member
 
Join Date: December 15, 2012
Posts: 86
Sport of course if its mine. Im a big guy. Even if they rolled me into the yard the buzzards and stuff wouldnt get rid of me before I became aromatic
Ghost1958 is offline  
Old December 18, 2012, 07:15 PM   #29
raimius
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 27, 2008
Posts: 1,325
For me, there certain criteria I want to have met before I get actively involved.

1. I must have a clear understanding of what is happening.
2. I must know who the "players" are.
3. I MUST be able to POSITIVELY ID who is the innocent and who is the aggressor. (Knowing that those roles are not always present during a conflict.)

If I can't figure out what's going on, why, and who the BG is, I'm probably not going to be engaging anyone.

Now, if a guy walks into the church with a shotgun and starts blasting every 3rd person in the aisles, that's clear enough for me! I'll try to stop him, if I have a good opportunity. If not, I'll try to get as many people out of the line of fire as I can. (Assuming I don't just stand there with a dumb look on my face! )

I won't fault people for simply defending "me and mine." That is a reasonable and safer course of action. I would simply feel awful if I knew I could have helped the victims but didn't (which may or may not be the case, depending on incident specifics).
raimius is offline  
Old December 18, 2012, 08:17 PM   #30
pax
Staff
 
Join Date: May 16, 2000
Location: Washington state
Posts: 6,951
Quote:
I would simply feel awful if I knew I could have helped the victims but didn't (which may or may not be the case, depending on incident specifics).
Me too. It's one thing that's driven me to seek good training, and then to turn around and teach others. I never want to be in a position where I could have helped, if only I hadn't been too proud to seek instruction early on. If I'm ever in a fight for my life, I want to be so well-practiced with my lifesaving rescue equipment that I can think about solving the problem, instead of wasting precious mental energy trying to remember how to run the gun. I'm frankly appalled at the number of people who say they'd be willing to jump in, but who aren't willing to do even a minimum level of preparation that would make it more likely that their intervention would be successful. It's ... sad.

Although I beat the drum of preparedness and practice, I'm also aware that stuff happens.

Three years ago, during an LFI class held at the Firearms Academy of Seattle in Washington state, Mas Ayoob brought in a guest lecturer. This honored guest was one of the nicest guys I've met in years -- very soft spoken, very kind, very gentlemanly. I loved getting to know him during the class. He was also a heluva good shot, having put a mass murderer down at a measured 70 yards using a handgun he had literally never fired before. (He was, of course, well-practiced with similar guns, but he had never shot that particular gun until he needed to do so under extreme stress.)

Mas calls it "one of the most remarkable feats of marksmanship in modern times," and it was.

You can hear him tell his story here: http://proarmspodcast.com/2009/09/13...nt-andy-brown/. Definitely worth listening to, if you have the time.

As you listen, pay particular attention to what that man found most difficult after he saved lives that day. It was that, in all of his physical and mental preparation, he had never considered what might happen if he stopped an attacker ... but was too late to save every life. He was undoubtedly and unquestionably a hero, but the lost lives still ate at him.

It's good to be realistic about possibilities. Don't let them paralyze you, but don't engage in unrealistic fantasies either. Learn as much as you can. Then consider your own priorities, count the cost, make your choice.

pax
__________________
Kathy Jackson
My personal website: Cornered Cat
pax is offline  
Old December 19, 2012, 02:03 AM   #31
jason_iowa
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 30, 2011
Posts: 686
The tax payers spent untold amounts of dollars to train me. The least I can do is continue to help defend the defenseless even if I'm under armed and armored for the job. I would rather die trying to defend someone then live with my inaction or inability to do so.

That's my attitude, many don't like it and think that I'm paranoid for carrying because the chance of something happening while i'm in a position to do something is slim to none. Very true, but if most people were prepared then the chance of someone being there to stop something truly awful from happening would grow exponentially.
jason_iowa is offline  
Old December 19, 2012, 06:31 AM   #32
dayman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 18, 2011
Location: The Woods
Posts: 1,101
I guess I'm in the "get to cover" camp. I'm not saying there's no situation where I would intervene to help someone out, but my primary concern is being able to protect my wife and kids. I carry a gun to protect my family - nothing more, nothing less, and I absolutely see using it as a last resort.

If we're out in public and shots are fired I'd grab the kids and run away. If we can't, the plan would be to get between the guns and the kids and hope all the training pays off.
If I was out alone, things might be different, but as those of you with small kids can probably attest, I'm never alone. Trips in to town are far too exciting for them to not ask to come, and time with my kids is too precious for me to say no.

Same goes at home - my first concern in the case of a break in would be to make sure everyone's safe, then call the police (~1/2hr response time for the inept sheriffs deputy, and close to an hour for the state police out here), then I'd probably try to pry the dogs off whatever poor soul decided to ignore the barking and break in anyway.

If someone else was hurt because I was busy protecting my family I wouldn't have to "live with myself"; I'd be living with my children.

I'm certainly aware that lots of you out there feel very differently about your role, but I'm okay with that. So how 'bout I try not to consider you guys "trigger-happy", or "cocksure", and you not consider me "selfish" or "untrained". We all walk our own path.
__________________
si vis pacem para bellum
dayman is offline  
Old December 19, 2012, 12:41 PM   #33
skoro
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 30, 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,745
Difference in attitude about personal defense

Dwight55 covered it well in post #3.

I've lived in large urban environments and isolated rural areas. My attitude towards self defense hasn't been influenced by my address.

The general rule is "stay out of third party situations."

There are far too many variables that I (or any other CHL holder) do not understand in the vast majority of these cases to justify our application of deadly force. That's not to say that if I were on location during a mass shooting that I wouldn't take action. But it would have to a very obvious case before I'd make the decision to intervene.
skoro is offline  
Old December 19, 2012, 05:17 PM   #34
dcwldct
Junior Member
 
Join Date: December 18, 2012
Location: NC
Posts: 3
Caution

Trying to be a hero is usually foolish. That is not to say that one should hide, but that one must exercise caution and good situational awareness. If you have time, I would think the best thing to do would be to assess the situation from cover before engaging. I also believe in engaging only as a last resort.

I CCW because I don't want to be a victim. I had a gun pointed at me in a school incident at the age of 14 (thankfully nobody was shot). Not only do I never want to feel so defenseless again, but I don't want my kids or someone else's to experience that feeling either.
dcwldct is offline  
Old December 19, 2012, 11:48 PM   #35
raimius
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 27, 2008
Posts: 1,325
Trying to "be the hero" is definitely the riskier option. In a "public altercation" situation, I would be inclined to be a good witness and call LE before getting involved, unless it was abundantly clear that one side was innocent and about to be seriously harmed.

In an "active shooter" scenario (statistically pretty rare), I would take a much more aggressive approach to stopping the attack. Personally, I'm willing to assume a lot of personal risk in that kind of situation...largely based on a personal grudge against active shooters and the desire to not have to see families suffer the pain that I've witnessed from such monsters. In such a situation, I have the advantage of not having small children that depend on me.
raimius is offline  
Old December 20, 2012, 12:46 AM   #36
colbad
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 3, 2012
Posts: 318
SFMEDIC...spot on. A world of difference punching holes in paper on the range vs a firefight for your life. Most likely those CCWs who think they will save the day because they have a gun are most likely to get shot by LE or another CCW when they pull out their gun. Simply having a gun does not make you value added.

Last edited by Frank Ettin; December 20, 2012 at 01:37 AM. Reason: remove profanity
colbad is offline  
Old December 20, 2012, 11:05 AM   #37
Tinner666
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 12, 2012
Location: Richmond, Va.
Posts: 345
I was just reading my earlier answer. It almost sounds like I'd go out of my way to join the fray. i won't.
I'm not much for posting long answers, I left out the prudent and normal thongs like freeze to appraise the situation, get between wife and shooter, taking cover, and all that good stuff, not necessarily in that order. Circumstances would decide all that.
__________________
Frank--
Member, GoA, NRA-ILA, SAF, NRA Life Member
Tinner666 is offline  
Old December 20, 2012, 11:32 AM   #38
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
colbad, you have a point. My counter-point would be that those who are unwilling to help also offer no value added.
MLeake is offline  
Old December 20, 2012, 01:49 PM   #39
Constantine
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 5, 2010
Location: Miami, Florida
Posts: 5,188
Quote:
A world of difference punching holes in paper on the range vs a firefight for your life. Most likely those CCWs who think they will save the day because they have a gun are most likely to get shot by LE or another CCW when they pull out their gun. Simply having a gun does not make you value added.

So for the good guys that's not as sufficient as it would be for a criminal?

I doubt criminals go to classes on SD, but they're just fine doing their deeds.
__________________
Sáncte Míchael Archángele, defénde nos in proélio, cóntra nequítiam et insídias diáboli ésto præsídium. Ímperet ílli Déus, súpplices deprecámur: tuque, prínceps milítiæ cæléstis, Sátanam aliósque spíritus malígnos, qui ad perditiónem animárum pervagántur in múndo, divína virtúte, in inférnum detrúde. Ámen
Constantine is offline  
Old December 20, 2012, 02:35 PM   #40
pax
Staff
 
Join Date: May 16, 2000
Location: Washington state
Posts: 6,951
Quote:
So for the good guys that's not as sufficient as it would be for a criminal?
Actually, it's not. That's because the criminal gets to choose the time and place of the assault. He chooses circumstances most advantageous to him, and if the situation does not favor his success -- he simply does not act.

Furthermore, the criminal isn't at all concerned with killing innocent bystanders. You might even say that's part of his job description: indiscriminate killing, without thought for who else he might hit besides his intended target(s). He does not care where his bullets go.

The good person gets caught off-guard, ambushed unexpectedly. Unlike the criminal, we won't have time to mentally prepare for the encounter or ramp up our emotions to deal with the situation. We don't get the option of simply not engaging if circumstances are against us (which we know they will be, because the criminal chooses the time and place). Because we know we will be caught off-guard, we must be well-trained enough that our reflexive reactions will help, rather than hurt, our chance of survival. We also don't have the luxury of spraying bullets all over the place, as criminals do; our bullets must hit the bad guy and they must not hit any innocent people.

All of these factors make the problem we must solve considerably more difficult, more complex and more difficult to achieve than the one faced by the criminal.

pax
__________________
Kathy Jackson
My personal website: Cornered Cat
pax is offline  
Old December 20, 2012, 04:39 PM   #41
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,732
Some studies show that the criminals do practice. Some fire more rounds in a year than police do in practice. I probably have the data somewhere.

When you look at emergency actions in all kinds of disasters, it's clear that practice and stress innoculation works. For gun folks, as Pax, indicated you really need to do it, if you claim the proactive protector role.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old December 20, 2012, 04:43 PM   #42
FireForged
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 4, 1999
Location: Rebel South USA
Posts: 1,185
I have always said that I am not a security force, a policeman or anyones bodyguard. I will not chase purse snatchers, investigate odd happenings in dark alleys or stand between two fighting men.

Its pretty easy for me to know who the badguy is and who the goodguy is when I am the one being attacked. It is not so easy to understand what is happening when others are fighting.

If I felt like a innocent persons life would be forfit right here and right this second if I fail to act... I would act. That is a whole lot of certaintly that would likely be lacking in a situation that does not directly involve me.

Would I step out in front of a bus to save a small child chasing a ball? Yes
Would I chase a man with a gun who is running away from me? No
__________________
Life is a web woven by necessity and chance...
FireForged is offline  
Old December 20, 2012, 10:44 PM   #43
Constantine
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 5, 2010
Location: Miami, Florida
Posts: 5,188
Pax, I understand that. I've actually sided in your favor on that same argument as well, with a discussion in my personal life. To someone.

That still doesn't answer it for me. Why does the majority of people like us, always think if we don't get navy seal style training, our techniques are inadequate against criminals? They're countless cases of that not being true. And average joes taking them on.

I understand that they're on the offensive and we're on the defensive. The hunted if you will.

I think people who carry understand and should get a little more credit than they do. I appreciate a regular citizen that carries.

The way they're spoken off is like they're more liable to shoot themselves or something.


I'm not saying they're immaculate. Obviously that training where you pay money is better than non. But let's me realistic. They're not perfectly defenseless.
Constantine is offline  
Old December 20, 2012, 11:24 PM   #44
pax
Staff
 
Join Date: May 16, 2000
Location: Washington state
Posts: 6,951
Realistically, a huge majority of the times when a private citizen uses a gun in self-defense, they never have to fire a single shot. Sometimes they don't even have to draw the gun, just be confident and move as if they might have a gun. That's the reality.

It's also true that the majority of people who defend themselves successfully by shooting never had any training at all.

But ...

People with training are better prepared to cope with the rare extremes than people without training. And it's the rare extremes we're talking about here: shots at a distant, moving target that is surrounded by innocents in an overwhelming, quickly-changing environment.

For example: Nick Meli did the right thing. He's a smart man and yes, a hero, for trying to save lives at the Clackamas Mall, but also for knowing and respecting his own limits. He'd be more of a hero if he could have dropped that scumbag. Perhaps he could have done so if he had known that he could go down to one knee to change the angle, making it safer to take that shot -- or if he'd had a little more well-trained confidence in his own skills. (I wasn't there, and am going solely by the interview of him that I saw on YouTube, and maybe my suggested fixes would not have worked for some reason I can't picture right now; but it's most probable that Meli didn't think to change the angle because nobody had ever taught him how to do so. Few people think creatively under that kind of stress, and I take nothing away from his courage in trying to intervene or from his wisdom in holding fire.)

Another example: in multiple interviews, the story changed several times, but I think it's safe to say that Dan McKown would almost certainly have done better during the Tacoma Mall shooting if he had the training that allowed him to know that his actions would be legal, and enough confidence in his shooting skills to use his firearm to solve that deadly situation. Again, he's a hero and I take nothing away from that. I simply say that this brave man would almost certainly have done better if he had training than he did without it.

Anyway, my point is that while most incidents can be resolved without a gun, and most incidents that require a gun can be resolved without shooting, and most incidents that require shooting don't require a very high level of skill -- but incidents that involve multiple intended victims in a crowded public area and an active killer on the loose are different. They are incredibly rare, but they do require a higher level of skill and confidence to resolve successfully. That's why, if you're the type of person who absolutely would act to intervene in a situation like this, you should seek training to give yourself that level of skill and well-placed confidence.

pax
__________________
Kathy Jackson
My personal website: Cornered Cat
pax is offline  
Old December 21, 2012, 01:30 AM   #45
Frank Ettin
Staff
 
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 6,770
Quote:
Originally Posted by Constantine
...Why does the majority of people like us, always think if we don't get navy seal style training, our techniques are inadequate against criminals? They're countless cases of that not being true. And average joes taking them on....
As far as the "average Joe" successfully using a gun in self defense, in those cases whatever skills he had were sufficient to solve his particular problem. If his problem had been different, who can say? And we also seem to have very little data on defensive failures by private citizens, although we probably have some decent data for law enforcement.

As for how much training is enough, that needs to be up to the individual, but the basic facts are:
  • If we wind up in a violent confrontation, we can't know ahead of time what will happen and how it will happen. And thus we can't know ahead of time what we will need to be able to do to solve our problem.

  • If we find ourselves in a violent confrontation, we will respond with whatever skills we have available at the time. That might be good enough, or it might not be.

  • The more we can do, and the better we can do it, the more likely we'll be to be able to respond appropriately and effectively. The more we can do, and the better we can do it, the luckier we'll be.
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper
Frank Ettin is offline  
Old December 21, 2012, 01:52 AM   #46
jason_iowa
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 30, 2011
Posts: 686
Shootings like this will continue to rise as long as the economy is bad and people are unsure about the future. Still the chances that you will be involved in one is less likely then getting stuck by lightening.

I read on here from someone "know your carry gun like your tongue knows your teeth". I found this to be very accurate and succinct advice. I don't recall who said it but credit to them or whoever they took it from.

You never know what will go down in a situation but you can know what you are capable of. Training gives us the knowledge and confidence to push ourselves to the limits of our capabilities. Also take your physical and mental health very seriously as the heart attack and stroke will kill most of us so don't let it take you to soon.

Even more importantly pass on your knowledge to your kids and grand kids. Neighbor kids with parental permission. I think we all share the feeling that they will need it.
jason_iowa is offline  
Old December 21, 2012, 02:38 AM   #47
Steel Talon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 30, 2007
Posts: 138
Quote:
DAYMAN

I guess I'm in the "get to cover" camp. I'm not saying there's no situation where I would intervene to help someone out, but my primary concern is being able to protect my wife and kids. I carry a gun to protect my family - nothing more, nothing less, and I absolutely see using it as a last resort.

If we're out in public and shots are fired I'd grab the kids and run away. If we can't, the plan would be to get between the guns and the kids and hope all the training pays off.
If I was out alone, things might be different, but as those of you with small kids can probably attest, I'm never alone. Trips in to town are far too exciting for them to not ask to come, and time with my kids is too precious for me to say no.

Same goes at home - my first concern in the case of a break in would be to make sure everyone's safe, then call the police (~1/2hr response time for the inept sheriffs deputy, and close to an hour for the state police out here), then I'd probably try to pry the dogs off whatever poor soul decided to ignore the barking and break in anyway.

If someone else was hurt because I was busy protecting my family I wouldn't have to "live with myself"; I'd be living with my children.

I'm certainly aware that lots of you out there feel very differently about your role, but I'm okay with that. So how 'bout I try not to consider you guys "trigger-happy", or "cocksure", and you not consider me "selfish" or "untrained". We all walk our own path.
I couldn’t agree with you more...

AS head of family our duty is to them first and foremost, and to those that are placed in our care at the time. Seek cover/defendable position, find exit take it.

However expecting my gun to be the last resort is not for me, my
Sub-conscious mind will tend to make that choice for me. Some refer to it as instinct, or muscle memory.

I'd like to add..

The biggest enemy for the untrained and even the "trained" is the flood of adrenal stress hormones. The primary tool to help you get through it is to make yourself properly breath.. Oxygen and proper respiration calms the mind and body. And if your wounded it will help you cope and help prolong your survival as you await EMS.

Furthermore...

You need to become aggressive and you need to project it forward from you, it provides an edge and can instantly turn the initiative of the battle to your favor.

Lastly..

As many have said in this thread.. You owe it to your family and self to have ample trigger time at the range. Training is battle winning. Seek it out, and work at it on your own.

On static targets you need to be keeping them inside the 9/10ring or you’re not doing it right.

We are trained to shoot COM. but I challenge you to also learn to hit high upon the thoracic tree straight up the chin and to the brain pan. This is in case he has a vest on.

Another area you should be targeting is the groin.. In case he has a vest, the head is covered and he is lacking a groin plate. Shoot a bad guy in his junk it will avert his attention, allowing you follow up more stopping shots. A groin shot is very traumatizing. You have 2 major arteries, 2 ball sockets, the pelvic ring, a coccyx and yards of intestines to strike.
Steel Talon is offline  
Old December 21, 2012, 08:05 AM   #48
Constantine
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 5, 2010
Location: Miami, Florida
Posts: 5,188
Thank you pax, Frank Ettin, and Jason. I was just trying to understand where that way of thinking came from and why. Really appreciate the crisp and clear responses.
Constantine is offline  
Old December 21, 2012, 08:15 AM   #49
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
I am sorry, but the only bearing I could see the economy having on the types of shootings we are discussing would be if we were to have an economic boom, and suddenly put much more funding into mental health care.

Columbine, Aurora, Tucson, Newtown, Virginia Tech, Clackamas - none of these were by poor or indigent people. These atrocities were committed by people who were known to families or co-workers as having mental health issues prior to their crimes.

In those cases where proper diagnoses had not been made, there were plenty of warning signs.

This is not about the economy. That may drive robbery rates, or suicide rates, but it does not drive this type of crime.
MLeake is offline  
Old December 22, 2012, 04:33 AM   #50
Brit
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 29, 2005
Location: Orlando FL
Posts: 854
Let me first point out, I have never shot any one, came close a couple of times, but the situations resolved peacefully, or at least, without gunfire.

Reading responses, that target shots fired in error, good guy hits, etc, below.

Having been in altercations, violent ones, I have on a couple of occasions, attacked an innocent party! Fluid changes in a street, or inside a public place, Club or Bar, or just entering a Restaurant.

Some one moving, stepping one way or the other, could get them hit! Feet fists, a weapon (not a firearm) under the stress of personal combat.

(Sorry, I forgot to mention I was brought up in a Pub, my Dad ran one, me in same Pub from birth till 26 YOA, and I worked as a Bouncer in Liverpool U.K. for 5 years)

I am trained in street fighting (just did a lot of it) and you can misinterpret a persons intent, and kick or punch them (two solutions) but as a third party in a fluid weapons, firearms, incident, there is no saying sorry, and helping them off the floor!

So it is a wait and see, protect your loved ones, first! Kind of deal. But in an attack against you! Do not hesitate, attack right back, if this involves your CCW, you have be competent with that pistol, in my case, I carry the same Glock 19, that I shoot in IDPA matches. IDPA does not a gunfighter make, but I know were the gun shoots, at many different distances, and I have yet to have a malfunction, of any nature with it. So as many have said, you had better know how to run your gun, from concealed.

Lots of bad stuff happens after midnight! Not to us, we go to bed prior to that witching hour! Glock and Surefire close by, house phone, Cell phone on that same bed side table.

Walk and talk softly, but carry a big stick (or a gun!)
Brit is offline  
Closed Thread

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 03:46 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 0.13987 seconds with 7 queries