|
No, I asked the question because it makes no sense to me. You say "less agile" but the whole point of the squared stance is agility. Moving in a bladed stance is more difficult and returning fire on your off side is more difficult. Squared up, you can swing to engage in either direction - a tank gun isn't mounted off to one side after all. In the sense that you are a "bigger" target, you go from approximately 20" wide to 12" wide; but you now have a lot of vital zones stacked on each other.
I think people are too dismissive of the utility of this stance because it doesn't fit their expectations of how a self defense situation will happen. You state single citizen vs. single criminal - that's exactly where being able to shoot on the move is important. You don't have a base of fire to maneuver around; but you'll probably have to move in a gunfight. Certainly, it is a bad idea to run around like a one-man CQB team trying to clear your own house if you have other options; but a lot of single citizen vs. criminal(s) are very dynamic situations. It is absolutely an important tool to have; but understanding when and where to use it is important as well. That last thought rarely gets much exposition - Wyosmith's post being the rare exception.
In training, I watched a guy go prone behind a truck tire to engage another person. He had a nice stable position that presented a minimum target - except when the other person ran to his off side and button-hooked around the back of the truck he a) was unable to track the person as the protection the tire offered blocked his field of fire too; b) was not very mobile compared to his opponent; and c) when that guy cleared the end of the truck, he wasn't no longer a small target lying on the ground at less than 7m.
|