View Full Version : "new" training....??

Rob Pincus
October 31, 1998, 04:50 AM
This question is especially for Harry, but if someone else has good info, please contribute..

the latest Guru of the week that has been hired by a Nashville suburb to train the PD, specifically their SRT (which has been called out twice in over a year, both no-shoot situations, btw) in handgun techniques supposedly has a SAS pedigree and was a shooter in the Iranian Embassy raid. Anyway, word is that his two techniques involve a sideways stance towards the target. Fine so far, but then it gets more interesting. His primary style is almost like a precision rifle shooter, like you see the STC .22lr guys do, with their off hand under the handgun, elbow tight to the body, forearm perpendicular to the ground, then the firing hand is laid on top with the gun slide release side down (yes, gangbaber style..).
His second technique, while not as "hip" offers more chance fo the officer to injure themselves as it involves pointing the off hand elbow out, towards the target. The firing hand's elbow is pointing in the opposite direction. The firearm is supposed to be under the operators chin and slightly out towards the target. this technique is supposed to be used in CQC scenarios, to keep the bandits away from the firearm.

now, to me both of these techniques seem to bring the weapon far to close to the operators face. In the first, black eyes, inthe second bloody chins. Also, both techniques many weapons would throw the brass right into the operators face. The second technique also puts the operators bicep right next to the muzzle. Does this seem silly, or I am just not high-speed-low-drag-locked-cocked-and-continental enough to get it??

October 31, 1998, 05:36 AM
Rob, do you think (as I do) this SAS guy prob'ly was in fact the " drinks " dude ? Sounds like the closest HE's been to a firefight would be try'in to put out a boyscout campfire ! http://www.thefiringline.com/ubb/wink.gif...HS

November 2, 1998, 10:20 AM
Your kidding, right?

SAS is a big advocate of "Point Shooting" in a combat sit. They have also switched to SIG P-220's by the way... Why would you hold such an accurate pistol sideways?

Maybe he is advocating a "Tilted" hold. Holding the gun tilted in some does have advantages when shooting one handed... having to do with a better natural position?

Or is this guy really as silly as he sounds?

SAS huh? I have people telling me they used to be SEALs all the time... "Uh huh... Okay." You know the SEALS and DELTA force are the biggest units in the military. The Navy must have a bigger SEAL training base than the Army's Infantry Training Center (FT BENNING)

Rob Pincus
November 2, 1998, 11:47 AM
no tilt, this is truly holding the pistol horizontally. I don't know if he is claiming htat these are SAS techniques. He is saying that he was with the 22nd SAS and he has been hired to teach these fabulous innovations to a local PD.

We shoot tilted from the holster at close to contact distance, an extension of a "punch" towards the target. Also when moving away from the target and shooting back (as in when pushing an innocent/client away from the threat). Other than that (and the G-18) I haven't seen a tilt hold to be very much of an advantage or more stable anywhere.

4V50 Gary
November 2, 1998, 12:00 PM
The tilted gun position isn't new. It use to be used by Chinese (both KMT & Commie) during the 30's and 40's when shooting the Broomhandle Mauser - whether it was a full auto model or not. It is unknown whether anybody hit anybody else. I don't believe that the red tassel which was suspended from the lanyard ring contributed anything in the way of stability.

[This message has been edited by 4V50 Gary (edited 11-02-98).]

November 2, 1998, 12:29 PM
Very interesting topic.

Coincidentally enough, I was at a hand-to-hand combat training facility two
weeks ago that does SEALS/ DOD/SOCOM stuff, and the owner was talking with a LE student about a more accurate, more natural way to hold a handgun, that doesn't have as much "perishable skills" problems as the other techniques. I later tried to get him to show it to me, but to no avail. He says he will give classes at a later date on it.
I wonder if they are related?
Also, I love to run into phony SEALs or
Marine snipers. The real ones are usually known for "not being known".

[This message has been edited by DAVID (edited 11-02-98).]

[This message has been edited by DAVID (edited 11-02-98).]

Jason Kitta
November 2, 1998, 12:39 PM

P226s not p220s as far as I can tell.


Rob Pincus
November 2, 1998, 01:40 PM
David, you hit the nail on the head, I love those "I've done some stuff" guys who just look at you like they are supposed to be James Bond and Rambo rolled into one or something. Even better, a guy who knows just enough to impress people who have never shot a gun or dreamed of wearing a uniform, that guy is soo much fun at parties!

Anyway, the tilted thing is not what this new-guru is teaching, it is a purely horizontla hold, resting on the palm of the off hand. The palm of the offhand is facing straight up.

I guess no one else has heard of this either....

November 2, 1998, 01:40 PM
I was under the impression the SAS went to .45's IE P220's... I think I read that in a gun rag. SWAT or GUNS & WEAPONS... But since I don't know any REAL former SAS operators, I have no way of finding out for sure.

As for holding the gun in close to the shooter... WHAT? How can you fire accurately holding the gun close? You need the gun extended out for a proper sight picture. I dont see any advantages this new fangled method is supposed to give you. What is the point? How can you shoot accuratly, smoothly, and quickly while trying to take up an unnaturaly stance and form... the body POINTS with an extended arm in shooting. This is why the old cowboys got some hits in during all those gunfights with out using the sites.
I think this EX-SAS training guy is taking some people for a ride... And for the officers - it will be a long drive down a short road.

Harry Humphries
November 2, 1998, 02:25 PM
Rob I am not sure who this new Guru from Hereford is but from your description, the techniques sounds like an ill conceived interpretation of a legitimate system.

We at GSGI teach a close- in combative system that has as it's basis a common fighting stance. This stance serves as the fighting platform for the hand and shoulder fired gun, the edged weapon and is in fact the base stance for our jiu-jitsu based grappling program. The key here is to eliminate any decision time by incorporating a common stance for the first phase(and most important) of entry into condition red or fight mode. The weapon, any off them, are as effective as the person using them which means stance or fighting platform must be an integral part of the training. The key elements of stance to be considered are: three dimensional stability, optimal use of peripheral vision, rapid weapon deployment for effective use and weapon retention during deployment.

Let's look at your test case for example. He teaches a highly bladed stance which is strong against an on rushing attacker but very unstable against the attack from any other direction especially from the blind side which is quite large as a result of the bladed position. In fact half of the frontal or danger area is not in view. This is why we prefer a modified Weaver stance, a cross between the Isosceles completely frontal and what has been called Weaver which is sometimes taught as completely bladed. Taking the best from both stances you have a knees slightly flexed position that is slightly bladed strong toe in line with heal or mid-foot of the weak foot. The fighter is not committed to one direction and is equally capable of rapid movement in all directions and is now in a position that allows for maximum peripheral view of the entire frontal area.

Your secondary test case uses a pistol presentation that incorporates an elbow block from the weak elbow while bringing the pistol to a high, under the chin weapons retention position. The elbow block is a good thing if conducted properly which I'll explain later. The weapon under or near the chin is not good as any physical encounter will introduce such issues as inter-limb inter-action and grabs to the neck area thus putting the weapon in a precarious if not lethal position to the shooter. And I wonder how many rounds one has fired in practicing marksmanship from the under neck position - not many if any?

The secondary presentation in close quarter battle is the most least understood and poorly taught element of weapon-craft training today. I don't know where the street statistics stand today but since Dr. Fackler and other prominent authorities within law enforcement academia have studied police shooting incidents in prominent cities throughout the US it is generally agreed that most shootings occur during poor light conditions, some 80% inside of 10 feet some 70% inside 7 feet and a hit ratio(from the good guys) under 20%. Shocking is it not? Well if one considers that previously taught Point Shooting, while admittedly effective within the highly trained and continuously training communities 22 SAS etc., simply does not work in law enforcement training, or military training for that matter, unless an unrealistic commitment to maintaining highly perishable skills is supporting. Jeff Cooper's modern technique must prevail in training today. The front sight discipline must be reemphasized if we are to get these hit ratios up to 70% or better. But let's face it there is no way in hell that a shooter will get a weapon out of a level two holster and present the weapon to a flash front site picture and shoot two well aimed shots inside of ten or seven feet - no way in hell is there enough time or space.
Our AFCQC system addresses this close in problem by teaching a presentation that is essentially the modern technique's presentation but we present the weak arm elbow braced with the hand locked against vest or shoulder and introduce one step from the holster that orients the weapon immediately on target, close above the holster with the palm of the shooting hand indexed on some bit of gear or rib. By stressing trigger finger discipline and repeatedly orientating the shooter to this position making sure of the weapon's alignment we than develop an interim firing position and practice firing at the target's lower abdominal area out to ten feet. We than teach the meshing of strong and weak palms at the strong shoulder and roll the weapon out to front site. With this initial presentation the elbow and body create a block from an un-rushing attempt to grab the pistol while enabling the officer or defender to use less lethal alternative force techniques during the evolving full presentation to front site.

I must reiterate this is not a system meant to preclude front sight discipline it merely allows one to get there in the close or surprise encounter. Do not attempt to teach this as a new student can cover the weak hand if the technique is not taught correctly.

Rob Pincus
November 2, 1998, 02:49 PM
I appreciate your response, and I am grealty relieved to hear that you see someof the same dangers/weaknesses I do in this guys "system"

I think it was one of your AIs that told me about the "one stance" system that you guys teach, I think you are spot on with that one.

We practice a close in technique, combined with an off-hand strike or block, that sounds similar to what you are teaching, including the indexing. All of these techniques present some danger of painting yourself and/or friendlies during the presentation and execution of that all important first shot, but this new method I was hearing about seemed to do so at an unacceptable level.

November 22, 1998, 01:02 PM
I hope that this is not to far off the mark, but I am looking for a shooting/tatics school that is "close to home" but also has a good track record. "Close to home" is central Minnesota.

November 22, 1998, 05:39 PM
I really like what I read from your posts and your web sight, Mr. Humphries.

I certainly haven't had the exposure to training and experience or to teaching that you have. But, throughout my involvement with weapons, various martial arts, and law enforcement / emergency services over the last 15 years I have noticed a lack of continuity throughout the use-of-force continuum.

As a training officer I have slowly been developing a martial art I refer to as law enforcement. As a civilian based arm of the government operating in constant association with 'innocent' citizans - law enforcement officers are held to a very high expectation of professionalism. Therfore, I think it is vital that systems of defense and offense be combined into one simple system which easily flows up and down the use-of-force continuum.

We also started with the stance as balance and strength are a prerequisite to any action - except falling or failing. We use the Hsing-I stance (facing at angles). It is also just a modified weaver, much like you describe.

I appreciate all attempts by professionals to provide, to law enforcement officers and trained citizens, complete systems of self defense.

Buck Peddicord

Harry Humphries
November 22, 1998, 09:27 PM
I suggest you contact your Gov. Elect, my shipmate, and tell him you want GSGI to train in the state. Seriously, I don't know of a training academy in your area. Indiana will soon have Dick Marcinko's school but I don't have details as yet. You can be sure that I will announce the opening as soon as it occurs because he will put good information out there.

Thanks for the comments and you are absolutely correct - the force continuum is wrought with inconsistencies throughout the country. May I give you the following on conventional training as we are trying to change the training methodology within law enforcement to comply with our AFCQC fighting system that stresses the less lethal alternative to be habituated within the LE student

Conventional tactical team training does not adequately prepare the tactical officer for the "unknown" behind the door.

The team officer is expected to dynamically enter a room operating at maximum speed usually in low or no light conditions. Entry is almost always announced and often without prior intelligence or benefit of diversionary device. The conventionally trained officer has developed a conditioned, reflexive response which is a product of negotiate mentality, shoot /no shoot split second decision drills and the ever present fear of bad shoot agency reprisal and civil liability should that officer shoot. These mental issues are ever present and result in decision delay. Precious seconds are taken away from that officers ability to save his or her life. History is laden with bad shoot scenarios which were the result of the shoot / no shoot alternative - innocent victims who in poor visibility and heat of the moment have appeared to be a threat.

Our alternative force training program comes from the Special Operations community which is tasked with hostage rescue and counter terrorism. These very high speed entry teams prepare to enter a room fully expecting the hostage will be used as a shield often made to look like the "tango" or strangely enough try to prevent the entry team from neutralizing his or her captures as is often seen in Stockholm Syndrome cases.

The officer learns how to immediately present the weapon in a firing position, either primary or secondary, in a manner so as to maintain weapon retention while delivering non-lethal pain compliance moves to control the unknown individual. In worst case should a lethal alternative be required, the officer is able to deliver accurate fire up to ten yards.

A pragmatic approach to teaching close quarter marksmanship from this position in conjunction with delivering strikes and throws while maintaining weapon control is covered in great detail. Through this training concept the officer acquires a non lethal habituated response to a surprise encounter while maintaining a guarded lethal posture should force escalation be required.

Michael Carlin
November 25, 1998, 04:38 PM

I liked your critique as is falls in line with my training:

(1) Generally better to move than block from stationary position.

(2) Neither bladed (back stance) nor square (front stance are best all around positions).

Let me ask a weight distribution question, in your reply it seems implicit that we are in a balanced position or perhaps slightly towards the rear foot?

Harry, I am not much for engaging in any form of grappling, punching, kicking while I am holding a functional pistol. As a civilian who find himself being rushed, (not a LEO who has as you indicate many other things to consider) I would be inclined personally to shoot. (Somewhat akin to the first lesson of rifle bayonet training, shoot first if possible)! Is this what you are getting at when you contrast HRT versus LEO training?

By the way, they speak hihgly of you over on Glock Talk. I can see why.

I hope we can discuss many things in this arena in the future.

yours in marksmanship


[email protected]
webpage http://www.1bigred.com/distinguished

Harry Humphries
December 1, 1998, 02:25 PM

Thanks for your input. With respect to your weight distribution question we are actually trying to reach a neutral - position on the balls of the feet which essentially places one equa-distant from any braced direction that must be rapidly assumed in meeting the attack or misdirecting the force of an attack.

The decision to escalate to deadly force lies solely with the individual under attack. our AFCQC or Alternative Force Close Quarter Conflict program is designed to meet an attacking opponent with less lethal techniques allowing for the sound presentation of the holstered weapon. As you are well aware, the weapon can not easily be presented from leather if the attacking individual has the upper hand of surprise. It is quite another issue if you have the weapon presented prior to the attack.

Again thanks Mike


December 8, 1998, 03:29 AM
Tilting the weapon at about a 45 degree angle works well for those shooters who are right handed but have a dominant left eye, or vice versa. Makes it easier for these folks to aquire a quick sight picture.