The Firing Line Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old September 26, 2017, 02:24 PM   #26
OldMarksman
Staff
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 3,871
Quote:
On the training/practice range you're expecting to shoot, probably know how to identify the threat target(s) from the non-shoot targets, the safe background has been determined for you and the emphasis is on the task at hand (meaning you're not otherwise engaged in actual activities far removed from drawing and shooting guns).
That is a very good compilation of the conditions in which many people train and practice that are not what we find in the real world.

There's one more: the "threat target" are almost always stationary.
OldMarksman is offline  
Old September 27, 2017, 06:14 AM   #27
Brit
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 29, 2005
Location: Orlando FL
Posts: 1,652
Many times in a physical confrontation, when your opponent is going for a concealed weapon, then you go for yours, you are at a disadvantage, you are playing catch up.
Stepping in, not back, and punching to the throat gives you the advantage back. Really hard to access a pistol, when you can not breathe!

A good program on my TV COPS. Some very good pro Officers, but one tactic I have seen over and over, the Officer exits his vehicle, and instantly draws his/her pistol? The most important hand, is tied up holding a gun?

If a person grapples with the Officer, especially impaired with drugs, or alcohol, there is every chance of losing their pistol or shoots some drunk teen, who was not armed. Just saying.
Brit is offline  
Old September 27, 2017, 01:08 PM   #28
OldMarksman
Staff
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 3,871
Quote:
Stepping in, not back, and punching to the throat gives you the advantage back.
Possibly, but it all creates a risk of your having your firearm taken, or your being slapped, stabbed, struck, or gouged.

Add that to the risk that eyewitnesses may believe you to have been the aggressor, which would of course badly weaken your defense of justification, and it does not sound at all prudent to me.
OldMarksman is offline  
Old September 27, 2017, 05:39 PM   #29
Deaf Smith
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 31, 2000
Location: Texican!
Posts: 4,453
Quote:
Some folks find themselves ending up using a timer to measure how quickly they can make mistakes.
And how FB! I'm so fast I go back in time (and fix my mistakes.)

Quote:
Learn and train to develop the skills. Learn to do it smoothly, and then work to do it smoothly consistently. Speed can be the consequence of proper skills development.
Kind of like Bill Jordan, "speed is fine, accuracy is final". And "Smooth is fast".

Hope things are well with you FB!

Deaf
__________________
“To you who call yourselves ‘men of peace,’ I say, you are not safe without men of action by your side” Thucydides
Deaf Smith is offline  
Old September 30, 2017, 11:31 PM   #30
BigJimP
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 23, 2005
Posts: 13,190
Its my opinion ...that a draw to 1 shot at a 1 sec Par Time....is a highly trained & proficient shooter...especially if they are 95% or higher on A zone hits. ( 1 miss to a B zone out of 20 times running Draw & Fire 1 is 95%...)..if all under Par time.

As I get closer to 70, eyes are not good, arthritis, etc...I'm content with a Par time of 1.85....probably class B/ C range...for draw to 1 shot../ ...and i work hard to keep my rythum smooth & consistent and my followup shots Par time of ( 0.3 sec ).

My personal goal is 92% or better using the ICE target against those par times...if I exceed Par it costs me 2 pts ...so a draw & fire 4 rds is 2.75 sec par time, but I want to run it consistently around 2.5 - 2.6 sec...at around 95% or better in A zone for a fundamental drill like that. ( so run it 5 times, 20 shots, 1 miss to B zone max.../ all under Par will give me 95% ). I train twice a week....to keep that drill ( draw fire 4 at or above 95%).

For a beginner, I think a per time Draw to 1 shot should start at 3 sec...and work it down to 2 sec, if they can keep at least 90 % on the A zone. Build those fundamentals ...and split times of ( 0.5 sec ). If they drop below 90%...move the time back up, make them earn it.

My point is ...set a Par time ...with an accuracy goal. I can shoot to a 1 sec par time, if I can live with a 75% accuracy..../ or 1.5 sec draw & fire 2...

I would love to tell you I'm running my drills at 100% often, but it would be a lie..../ there are a lot of days when 96's - 98's sneak in there...( not that it matters, but I shoot a full sized 1911, 5" gun, in 9mm..). Among my buddies, in our 60's & 70's...we shoot matches weekly amongst ourselves...and I don't lose often ...and my avg hovers around 95% on a rolling 8 week basis...different COF every week...speed reloads, tac reloads, etc..( so i'm meeting my goal of 92% or better for the year....even when I choked a little on 4 matches this year and put up a couple of 90's and a couple of 88's...
BigJimP is offline  
Old October 1, 2017, 02:47 PM   #31
fastbolt
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 9, 2002
Location: northern CA for a little while longer
Posts: 1,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deaf Smith View Post
...

Hope things are well with you FB!

Deaf
Pretty well.

Finally decided to turn in my reserve badge, ID, weapon and instructor/armorer's position at my former agency. They tried to find ways to interest me in remaining to continue to help teach (especially classes), but it was time. (Having been formally separated for several months hasn't stopped some occasional calls asking for advice in trouble shooting, repairs, training, etc, though. )

I've not yet decided whether I want to start writing for publication (after some prompting from someone in the biz), now that I'm no longer officially and actively connected to an agency.

Busy spoiling granddaughters, enjoying riding bikes (MC's), keeping those hard-acquired unarmed, stick and blade skills from totally rusting over, discovering ways to exercise without risking injuries, enjoying cigars and adult beverages with the group at my cigar club, etc.

7 years cancer-free this last July.

Hope you're also doing well. This whole aging thing makes me wish I'd read the fine print some years earlier.
__________________
Retired LE - firearms instructor & armorer
fastbolt is offline  
Old October 1, 2017, 04:43 PM   #32
9x45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 14, 2000
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,089
Quote:
Originally Posted by hobby
I consider myself beginner - intermediate and my fastest time has been 0.65 seconds. I can do with regular consistency 0.75. The fastest I have seen in person was 0.45. These mind you are all at competitive events, knowing the drill.
I shoot with USPSA Grand Masters on a weekly basis and I have never clocked anybody that fast in a match. 1.1's are the normal for GM's. Why don't you post up a video of those times? And what competitive events are you referring to?
__________________
Sometimes my Glock forgets where to look.....
9x45 is offline  
Old October 1, 2017, 05:54 PM   #33
johnwilliamson062
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Posts: 9,996
My understanding of the 21 foot (7 yard) rule is not to state you need to shoot in 1.5 seconds or less. It is to say you can't shoot fast enough even if you are the fastest in the world. Even if you draw and fire, the target will be close enough their momentum will still drive them into you, and, if they have presented a blade, it may still cause you harm.
Unless you 'move off the X'.

To safely stop the threat reliably you would need to shoot MUCH MUCH faster. Maybe .5 or even .25.

I also understand the rule is now taught as 30/10.

Consistent is far more important than absolute speed IMO.
johnwilliamson062 is offline  
Old October 1, 2017, 07:18 PM   #34
Frank Ettin
Staff
 
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,215
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnwilliamson062
My understanding of the 21 foot (7 yard) rule is not to state you need to shoot in 1.5 seconds or less.....
There's really no "rule."

Dennis Tueller (a Salt Lake City police officer) developed the exercise to test at what distances an assailant with a contact weapon could be a credible threat. But folks seem perversely to not want to understand the real meaning of the Tueller data (and it is not a "rule").

The point Tueller was trying to make with his exercises is that an assailant 21(+/-) feet away with a contact weapon needs to be taken seriously as a threat. You need to take him seriously as a threat because (1) he can cover the distance between you and him in a short time; and (2) it will take you a roughly comparable amount of time to draw and fire your gun.

Tueller's original article may be read here. Notice that Tueller talks about how being able to recognize what your danger zone is and that someone in it is a credible threat allows one to take early, appropriate defensive, risk mitigating actions.

As Tueller says in the article:
Quote:
...How long does it take for you to draw your handgun and place two center hits on a man-size target at seven yards? Those of us who have learned and practiced proper pistolcraft techniques would say that a time of about one and one-half seconds is acceptable for that drill.

> With that in mind, let's consider what might be called the "Danger Zone" if you are confronted by an adversary armed with an edged or blunt weapon. At what distance does this adversary enter your Danger Zone and become a lethal threat to you?

We have done some testing along those lines recently and have found that an average healthy adult male can cover the traditional seven yard distance in a time of (you guessed it) about one and one-half seconds. It would be safe to say then that an armed attacker at 21 feet is well within your Danger Zone.
...
So the real point of the training exercise is to help understand one's danger zone -- how close an assailant with a contact weapon must be to be considered a lethal threat. And so the exercise and data can help define the problem, and once the problem is understood, we can consider strategies to deal with it.

And so, as Tueller says:
Quote:
...the following suggestions come to mind: First, develop and maintain a healthy level of tactical alertness. If you spot the danger signs early enough, you can probably avoid the confrontation altogether. A tactical withdrawal (I hesitate to use the word "retreat") may be your best bet, unless you're anxious to get involved in a shooting and the consequent legal hassles which are sure to follow.

Next, if your "Early Warning System" tells you that a possible lethal confrontation is imminent, you want to place yourself in the best tactical position available. You should move to cover (if there is any close at hand), draw your weapon, and start to plan your next move.

Why use cover, you may wonder, if your attacker is using only a knife? Because you want to make it hard for him to get to you. Anything between you and your attacker (trash cans, vehicles, furniture, etc.) that slows him down buys you more time to make the appropriate decisions, and, if it becomes necessary, more time to place your shots.

I suggest you draw your weapon as soon as the danger clearly exists. There is no point in waiting until the last possible second to play "Quick-Draw McGraw" if you recognize the threat early on. Also, the sight of your "Equalizer" may be sufficient to terminate the action then and there.

The purpose of the pistol is to stop fights, and whether it does so by dropping a thug in his tracks, or by causing him to turn tail and run, your goal is accomplished, is it not?....
And yes, it appears that the "danger zone" is increasing. At least in part because to the adoption of retention service holsets which slow down deployment of the gun.
__________________
"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

Last edited by Frank Ettin; October 1, 2017 at 11:48 PM. Reason: Correct typo
Frank Ettin is offline  
Old October 1, 2017, 09:53 PM   #35
Deaf Smith
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 31, 2000
Location: Texican!
Posts: 4,453
Quote:
My understanding of the 21 foot (7 yard) rule is not to state you need to shoot in 1.5 seconds or less. It is to say you can't shoot fast enough even if you are the fastest in the world. Even if you draw and fire, the target will be close enough their momentum will still drive them into you, and, if they have presented a blade, it may still cause you harm.
No. CNS shots will drop ANYONE right there in their tracks. Pelvis shots can cripple them and they will fall right there. Different people will react differently. And being cut, if you are cut, can easily be non-fatal.

Deaf
__________________
“To you who call yourselves ‘men of peace,’ I say, you are not safe without men of action by your side” Thucydides
Deaf Smith is offline  
Old October 1, 2017, 10:38 PM   #36
5whiskey
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 23, 2005
Location: US
Posts: 3,158
Draw and fire 1 round on a target at 10 yards? I'm going to posit that the target size should be roughly 8" (to at least get a lung shot). That's what I practice with anyway.

My time at 10 yards is right at 1.5 for an accurate shot from a retention holster. My failure drills (2 center, 1 head) are fairly accurate at 2.5 seconds (with the occasional flyer). Any faster and accuracy suffers. I honestly haven't tried it at 7 yards, I kind of want to now. I always practice at a distance greater than standard, more in hopes that time/accuracy will go up when I drop down to the standard. Kind of like if you want to run 2 miles really fast, practice running 3 miles...
5whiskey is offline  
Old October 2, 2017, 09:59 PM   #37
johnwilliamson062
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Posts: 9,996
Quote:
No. CNS shots will drop ANYONE right there in their tracks. Pelvis shots can cripple them and they will fall right there.
Sorry, that just isn't how physics works. If they are running at you full tilt they don't just drop directly down. I never said the wound would be fatal. I, by a large margin, prefer to avoid knife wounds, even if not fatal.

http://www.policemag.com/channel/wea...foot-rule.aspx
No one here is my professor. Law nor English. It has been colloquially referred to as the '21 foot rule' for longer than I have been alive. It is given as such by many force on force instructors and in publications. I've been cleared to engage with deadly force if the criteria are met previously. Maybe you expect there to be some sort of watchdog such as the ASALE to define such things. I do not.

I will admit my previous statement could benefit from more modal verbs.
johnwilliamson062 is offline  
Old October 3, 2017, 12:29 AM   #38
Frank Ettin
Staff
 
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,215
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnwilliamson062
.http://www.policemag.com/channel/wea...foot-rule.aspx....It has been colloquially referred to as the '21 foot rule' for longer than I have been alive....
So you cite an article in which the author (1) refers to the Tueller exercise as a "rule"; and (2) explains in great detail why it can't be considered a rule. As Dr. Martinelli tells us in the article:
Quote:
...The truth is that the 21-Foot Rule should not be considered to be an absolute rule at all because there are too many variables involved at this point to call it a "rule." Let's discuss them....
So according to the very authority you have chosen, the Tueller exercise should not be called a "rule."

And the fact that many people might share a common, erroneous understanding of something is no reason to perpetuate that error by repeating or defending that misunderstanding. In fact, it's a reason for those who know and properly understand the subject to provide accurate information and correct the misunderstanding.

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnwilliamson062
...I've been cleared to engage with deadly force if the criteria are met previously.....
You've been cleared to use lethal force? Really? By whom? How wonderful for you.

Did you get some sort of certificate calligraphed by hand on vellum to hang on your wall? Do you also have a handy laminated card to carry in your wallet?

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnwilliamson062
...Maybe you expect there to be some sort of watchdog such as the ASALE to define such things....
Of course not. Quite the opposite in fact.

The author of the article you linked to, Dr. Martinelli, understands even if you do not:
Quote:
....As the 1989 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Graham v. Connor (490 U.S. 386, 109 S.Ct) has eloquently stated, each high-risk encounter during a rapidly evolving situation is unique. My sense is that future research may underscore that legal principle with respect to the Tueller Drill....
__________________
"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 October 3, 2017, 01:25 AM   #39
fastbolt
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 9, 2002
Location: northern CA for a little while longer
Posts: 1,853
While I'm not even remotely anyone's idea of an 'expert' in this sort of thing, I have invested a fair number of years in having to keep relatively current on things of this sort (as a LE firearms instructor), and I've listened to Dennis Tueller explain his experience and thinking regarding the development of the "drill" back then (I attended couple classes where he was serving as an instructor for Glock armorer classes).

He's a very interesting person to listen to, especially when you're able to get him aside in a small group, like 2 or 3 people (during a break).

One thing he mentioned one time was that if he were going to go back and "redo" the drill, he'd probably increase the distance to cover more like 30ft.

There are many things to think about regarding some of the important considerations to be learned from his well considered effort, meaning some of the 'variables', such as defender position at the awareness of the perceived threat, attempting to gain distance (from the attacker) and beneficial defender actions (movement, accurate shots fired, etc).

Students (LE, and lawfully armed citizens) would be wise to apply some of the insights he developed, but to always remember that each possible incident is probably always going to be somewhat unique, as circumstances can easily vary from one situation to the next.

Environmental 'problems' can easily change from one situation to another, not the least of which is whether a defender even has the ability to move in some direction, aided or hindered by the presence of 'things', such as cars (parked, or even moving traffic), walls, fences, doorways (doors which can be closed) ... and whether it occurs indoors or outdoors.

Being trapped within a constricted hallway, or being able to take advantage of moving to place "barriers" between the attacker and the defender (furniture, tables, etc), can all present situational variables ... as well as the nature of the weapon an attacker is attempting to use (knife, club, firearm, etc).

This might be best viewed as part of an individual's learning process, meaning being able to apply some of the potential insights gained from things learned in such a "drill" to their other training and knowledge, including experiential knowledge. Not just some "rule" to be held up as a fixed thing.

But then, I'm not anybody's expert, all things considered.
__________________
Retired LE - firearms instructor & armorer
fastbolt is offline  
Old October 3, 2017, 01:53 AM   #40
Deaf Smith
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 31, 2000
Location: Texican!
Posts: 4,453
Quote:
7 years cancer-free this last July.
Outstanding FB. I say enjoy your grandchildren and cigars/beverages more! You have done your share, and more, so you owe them nothing. You can share your knowledge via writing.

Speaking of skills rusting, just picked up a used S&W 642, real cheap, so I can do very close quarters practice on the range, just for those 'Tueller' situations. Practiced with it today using light reloads and my favorite appendix position holster then, being a practice gun, just stuck it in the gun bag and haven't cleaned it yet.

Deaf
__________________
“To you who call yourselves ‘men of peace,’ I say, you are not safe without men of action by your side” Thucydides
Deaf Smith is offline  
Old October 3, 2017, 03:23 AM   #41
fastbolt
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 9, 2002
Location: northern CA for a little while longer
Posts: 1,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deaf Smith View Post
Outstanding FB. I say enjoy your grandchildren and cigars/beverages more! You have done your share, and more, so you owe them nothing. You can share your knowledge via writing.

Speaking of skills rusting, just picked up a used S&W 642, real cheap, so I can do very close quarters practice on the range, just for those 'Tueller' situations. Practiced with it today using light reloads and my favorite appendix position holster then, being a practice gun, just stuck it in the gun bag and haven't cleaned it yet.

Deaf
Thanks. Doing my best. Spent the evening with friends at my cigar club, including another retired cop and his wife (she's still a working cop with 15 more years to go), enjoying a couple of fine cigars.

From a personal perspective, the Centennial style J-frame is one of those quintessential wheelguns that just gets better with age and use.

I own more than half a dozen J's, including a couple of 642's. I also have a couple of M&P 340's (one from their first run, and then a later production no-lock model). I look at the M&P 340's as being sort of an "improved" 642, meaning having a better sight setup and being a couple ounces lighter, even with its PVD blackened stainless cylinder, which can handy for long days of pocket carry.

I always try to keep a dirty J in the safe, so I always have a ready excuse to take one whenever I go to the range.
__________________
Retired LE - firearms instructor & armorer
fastbolt is offline  
Old October 5, 2017, 01:24 PM   #42
johnwilliamson062
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Posts: 9,996
Outside of competition games I think way too much weight is put on raw speed. It is far more important to train to start moving as soon as anything happens and develop a system with consistent times. I have not heard of any place where you can get into legal trouble for moving in response to a threat. They threat may shoot, lunge, or whatever, but at least you are moving if they do. Just like how many shots you need you can't predict how fast you will need to be.

Quote:
Did you get some sort of certificate calligraphed by hand on vellum to hang on your wall? Do you also have a handy laminated card to carry in your wallet?
Of course not. I received assurances of a lawyer, liability insurance, political pressure, and hopes of a short ride in a laundry cart if it came to that.

Quote:
And the fact that many people might share a common, erroneous understanding of something is no reason to perpetuate that error by repeating or defending that misunderstanding. In fact, it's a reason for those who know and properly understand the subject to provide accurate information and correct the misunderstanding.
Every rule, even with firearms, is more complicated than one sentence can describe. Exceptions abound.
1. A gun is always loaded. 2.Never point a gun at something you don't intend to destroy. 3. Always keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on target.
Then you go to a clays event and a guy carries a broke shotgun around muzzling everyone and when he walks up to the line he pulls his release trigger before he even calls for the pigeon/clay/target.

If someone does not understand a person who has been tipped out of their wheelchair, but is still wielding a knife on the ground basically immobilized, is not an immediate physical threat simply because they are 18 feet away; discussing the issue with them is not likely to be effective.

I'm not reciting that article verbatim every time the issue comes up or carrying a copy around in my wallet. When the term is used, if anyone doesn't understand, then a more in depth discussion is warranted. An excess of modal verbs is probably best.

"21 foot observation"
"21 foot guideline"
Reword it in a standard for that is not as definitive as some tend to word it.
This thread is missing a mandatory item:
Surrounded man injures several and kills one armed officer with knife.
Yes, there are a lot of obvious poor training issues in that video.

Last edited by johnwilliamson062; October 5, 2017 at 01:30 PM.
johnwilliamson062 is offline  
Old October 9, 2017, 10:24 PM   #43
Ghost1958
Junior member
 
Join Date: December 15, 2012
Posts: 164
Gaming aside.

If you can draw from concealed and get your first round into your attackers COM, in 1.5 sec, in the real world, your as fast or faster than 90 percent of carriers walking the street.

A 1.5 draw to fire will beat the Tuller drill all day unless you glue the defenders feet to ground.
Ghost1958 is offline  
Old October 11, 2017, 04:18 PM   #44
stephen426
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 11, 2005
Posts: 3,623
I think Frank hit the nail on the head on post #34. The idea is to recognize that a contact weapon is a serious threat at about 21 feet since the average person can close that gap in around 2 seconds. Is it a hard and fast rule? Absolutely not. Some attackers may be faster (let's hope Usain Bolt doesn't turn to a life of crime LOL) and some shooters may be faster (Jerry Miculek anyone?). Keep you eyes and ears open and give yourself as much time to react without being the aggressor.
__________________
The ATF should be a convenience store instead of a government agency!
stephen426 is offline  
Old October 12, 2017, 06:51 AM   #45
Don P
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 17, 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,998
All the training I have taken it is said that, "the average person" can cover 21 feet in 1.5 seconds
__________________
NRA Life Member, NRA Range Safety Officer, NRA Certified Pistol Instructor,, USPSA NROI Range Officer,
ICORE Range Officer,
,MAG 40 Graduate
As you are, I once was, As I am, You will be.
Don P is offline  
Old October 12, 2017, 10:00 AM   #46
Deaf Smith
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 31, 2000
Location: Texican!
Posts: 4,453
Yea.. but what is this "average person"? Average means arithmetic mean... mediocrity... would not even get to pass a test with a 50 percent score.

So did they test 500 individuals on the 21 ft course and clock them? No?

In short it's meaningless as for this drill.

Deaf
__________________
“To you who call yourselves ‘men of peace,’ I say, you are not safe without men of action by your side” Thucydides
Deaf Smith is offline  
Old October 12, 2017, 12:49 PM   #47
ShootistPRS
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 3, 2017
Posts: 1,584
That is 21 feet (7 yards) from a standing start in 1.5 seconds. Yes it's an average as tested by a police sergeant using volunteers. It has been verified many times with runners and shooters under a variety of conditions. The problem I see with this "rule" is that we all know one shot may not stop an attacker and there is no time for a second shot.
If a man has a knife in his hand and starts to run at you, you are going to be stabbed or slashed. You have to be alert to everyone in your "threat zone" and that might be 8 feet for a talented martial artist at the top of his game or it might be half a block for an old man with a debilitating back injury (like me). Your ability to recognize a possible threat and avoid it is what awareness is all about. Look into the face of people as they enter your threat zone and look at their body language, their hands and where their attention is. Don't approach blind corners close to the wall, give yourself time to react.
ShootistPRS is offline  
Old October 12, 2017, 01:24 PM   #48
OldMarksman
Staff
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 3,871
Post # 47

Post 47 is worth reading two or three times or more, and considering carefully.

That last sentence is really important.
OldMarksman is offline  
Old October 12, 2017, 03:28 PM   #49
Deaf Smith
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 31, 2000
Location: Texican!
Posts: 4,453
Quote:
police sergeant using volunteers.
So they used old arthritic people? Obese people? Short legged? Pygmies? Or just police recruits?

Just what kind of pool of 'volunteers' did they use?

Deaf
__________________
“To you who call yourselves ‘men of peace,’ I say, you are not safe without men of action by your side” Thucydides
Deaf Smith is offline  
Old October 12, 2017, 04:13 PM   #50
Frank Ettin
Staff
 
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,215
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deaf Smith
...So they used old arthritic people? Obese people? Short legged? Pygmies? Or just police recruits?

Just what kind of pool of 'volunteers' did they use?....
The Tueller drill has no doubt been done in countless classes countless times.

A number years ago I was helping Massad Ayoob with a class in Arizona, and he did the drill with the students. The student ranged from young and fit to old and not very fit at all. The times for the for the 7 yards ranged from about 1.3 seconds to about 1.7 seconds.

We did it in our Personal Protection in the Home class a few weeks ago. The students were generally younger middle age and moderately fit. The times of those who chose to participate were all between 1.4 and 1.6 seconds.
__________________
"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  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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 10:49 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.11077 seconds with 8 queries