|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
March 6, 2006, 01:35 PM | #1 |
Junior member
Join Date: March 1, 2006
Location: Tampa,Fl
Posts: 4,000
|
Is Duane Thomas a knowledgable gunwriter?
Is Duane Thomas a competent gunwriter? Does he know his stuff about combat tactics?
|
March 6, 2006, 01:47 PM | #2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 28, 1999
Location: California
Posts: 3,925
|
I Would Rate Him As About Average.
__________________
"I swear to defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemeis domestic or foreign WHOMSOEVER." |
March 6, 2006, 02:40 PM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 6, 2006
Location: Pensacola
Posts: 759
|
he's my favorite gunrag writer
__________________
"You cannot invade mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass" Admiral Yamamoto "You have enemies ? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life" Winston Churchill |
March 6, 2006, 06:57 PM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 8, 2001
Location: North Central Florida & Miami
Posts: 3,209
|
He has a lot of real world experience, and has written articles for many years. I bet he knows more than most of us.
__________________
Nemo Me Impune Lacesset "The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so.".........Ronald Reagan |
March 6, 2006, 07:29 PM | #5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 15, 2004
Location: Madison, Wisconsin
Posts: 715
|
Duane Thomas used to write LOTS more articles,10 or 12 years ago, and then was dormant for a while, although I've seen his byline in "Handguns" Magazine a few times recently.
About 10 years ago or so he wrote a book called THE TRUTH ABOUT HANDGUNS that had some interesting observations.
__________________
You can only learn from experience if you pay attention! |
March 7, 2006, 06:30 AM | #6 |
Junior member
Join Date: March 1, 2006
Location: Tampa,Fl
Posts: 4,000
|
On another chat site with some extremely smart and competent gun guru's a question was asked something like (are shooting schools needed). I responded by saying that if one could afford school go for it however it was not needed to become proficient in the art of defensive shooting. I added that one could be better served shooting Action Pistol, IDPA, IPSC, Threegun matches provided they also learn the proper tactics through books, friends who have attended a formal course, video's, these websites, ect. Match shooting gets you as close to the stress level one can be expected to feel during a gunfight as possible, I added. I was lambasted by these guys and called everything in the book. Many asked for my credentials to be saying such things while posting their laundry list of schooling. Finally I had enough and forced moderators to ban me. Then I read Duane Thomas's article, the one in the April/May issue of Handguns titled "Are you ready for a gunfight?". In this article he agrees that people who shoot competitively are more prepared for a gunfight than people who simply attend gun schools. He repeated almost word for word my postings. That is why I wanted to know if Duane knows his stuff. I found it odd that so many very smart guys failed to see the value of competition. Anyway I feel better knowing that I was vindicated. I just hope some of them (yes you G.M. and D.A.) read this article and understand that my attack was uncalled for.
|
March 7, 2006, 11:29 AM | #7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
Folks can go to Glock Talk and read the debate in their tactics forum.
One point is that there are courses and courses, exercises and exercises. Matches are great and most of the high level folks do them. However, there is universal agreement in civilian training, police and military circels that students of the art need some serious FOF. The level of pressure in those far exceeds any match. No IDPA or IPSC match has opponents that shoot back from 360 degrees. No match leaves you with significant bruises and bleeding. You don't see serious stress reactions in an IDPA match. I'm not putting down matches but I don't buy the match stress level being close to a real fight. Even in FOF, you know it's not real but you can get hurt some. Never in an IDPA match, have I had to shoot a charging bad guy with a ball bat at 3 feet and then get shot in the back by his girl friend, who I then shot at retention. It was ruled that I was killed but I went for it to the end. In an IDPA match, you don't stand on line in the Stop and Go and the dude in front of you shoots the clerk and you engage him and then his secret backup starts shooting at you. You learn alot from those. Matches also don't have serious room negotiation with opponents. I could go on. Matches are great fun and have some utility in training. There is more. The IDPA journal has made this point repeatedly. I'm doing a regional match in a month and will do some local matches before. However, I'm doing a class with Givens for more skill development. I suggest a regimen of both, if one can afford it. However, if I had some decent guns, before I bought another expensive one, I would take a good tactical course.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
March 7, 2006, 01:29 PM | #8 |
Member In Memoriam
Join Date: March 17, 1999
Posts: 24,383
|
I am not sure it is relevant, but I once knew a pro football player, a big guy and very athletic. Used to pound quarterbacks into something that looked like hamburger. Got the hell beaten out of him in a street fight with two guys who didn't together outweigh him.
There is a difference between games and the real world and there is no one to throw a flag in the real world. Jim |
March 7, 2006, 02:46 PM | #9 | ||
Junior member
Join Date: March 1, 2006
Location: Tampa,Fl
Posts: 4,000
|
Glenn, You once told me that the 25acp was adequate for the everyday concealed weapon carrier for most situations. The senarios you describe are excellent training and every LE officer should attend it. Not needed for the average concealed carrier however.
FOF training is not real either. Unless that man charging you with a stick is going to crack you skull open full force if you miss, the training won't rise to the level of a life and death struggle. Plus many FOF schools require that basic and intermediate courses be taken first. Quote:
Quote:
|
||
March 7, 2006, 03:41 PM | #10 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
Whatever, threegun - if you want to replay the past arguments - enjoy - they are all on Glocktalk to be read. Look, dear reader for Glock'n'himer.
Duane having your back - fine. Chose him - I'll chose Yeager, Farnham, Givens, Rehn, the entire NTI, Stanford, Moses, Gonzalez, Gomez and others on the utility of FOF training. I would repeat also that the IDPA organizational folks don't regard matches as really tactical training. As far as the scenarios described not being relevant to a civilian - huh? Being a convenience store robbery or a guy attacking you a bat? Never happens in real life.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
March 7, 2006, 04:44 PM | #11 | ||
Junior member
Join Date: March 1, 2006
Location: Tampa,Fl
Posts: 4,000
|
Quote:
Quote:
Sometimes you have to consider the bias of a source. In this case those you mentioned make a living by you attending their schools. The good thing is all professional training is great. Competition is great (greater to me). There are no losers in either group. Who's right? If someone isn't willing to learn proper tactics on their own, then the school is best. For those who already understand tactics, competition is the best tool to keep them sharp (in my opinion). |
||
March 7, 2006, 04:47 PM | #12 | ||
Junior member
Join Date: March 1, 2006
Location: Tampa,Fl
Posts: 4,000
|
Quote:
Quote:
Sometimes you have to consider the bias of a source. In this case those you mentioned make a living by you attending their schools. The good thing is all professional training is great. Competition is great (greater to me). There are no losers in either group. Who's right? If someone isn't willing to learn proper tactics on their own, then the school is best. For those who already understand tactics, competition is the best tool to keep them sharp (in my opinion). |
||
March 7, 2006, 04:55 PM | #13 | ||
Junior member
Join Date: March 1, 2006
Location: Tampa,Fl
Posts: 4,000
|
Quote:
Quote:
Sometimes you have to consider the bias of a source. In this case those you mentioned make a living by you attending their schools. The good thing is all professional training is great. Competition is great (greater to me). There are no losers in either group. Who's right? If someone isn't willing to learn proper tactics on their own, then the school is best. For those who already understand tactics, competition is the best tool to keep them sharp (in my opinion). |
||
March 7, 2006, 05:08 PM | #14 | ||
Junior member
Join Date: March 1, 2006
Location: Tampa,Fl
Posts: 4,000
|
Quote:
Quote:
Sometimes you have to consider the bias of a source. In this case those you mentioned make a living by you attending their schools. The good thing is all professional training is great. Competition is great (greater to me). There are no losers in either group. Who's right? If someone isn't willing to learn proper tactics on their own, then the school is best. For those who already understand tactics, competition is the best tool to keep them sharp (in my opinion). |
||
March 7, 2006, 05:29 PM | #15 |
Junior member
Join Date: March 1, 2006
Location: Tampa,Fl
Posts: 4,000
|
sorry about the duplicates. The stupid computer never said it had posted the darned thing.
|
March 7, 2006, 06:55 PM | #16 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 6, 2000
Posts: 587
|
I don't esp. care for Thomas, but I believe the general point of his article was that the progressive steps from 1) no practice to 2) range practice to 3) formal training to 4) competitive shooting to 5) real gunfights built upon one another, not that one stage in the progression was superior to the other on its own.
|
March 7, 2006, 06:57 PM | #17 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 12, 2002
Location: MO
Posts: 5,457
|
Quote:
Thomas is evidently an excellent shot. I read an article by him a few years ago where he advocated 'gamesman' matches as decent preparation for an armed encounter. He shot them with his Sig 226, and the leather he carried it in daily. Makes sense. He ain't Skeeter, Long Bill, Charley Askins, Jeff Cooper, or Jim Wilson though. People who pack a gun regularly in harms way, usually take a more pragmatic approach to the problem. You will find them less concerned with tenths of a second or "Comstock Count" than with situational awareness, and the ability to commit to shoot when the situation calls for it. I have worked with several such men over the past 30 years, and known a few more. I can't see any of them writing the kind of stuff that Thomas writes. My advice to anyone perusing the work of any gunwriter, is simple. If what they advocate is uncomplicated, requires common sense, and does not require special equipment- pay attention. If they have survived for a long time in unfriendly environs with a gun on their belt- pay more attention. Then if wwhat they write appeals to you, try it in a safe environment- and see if it allows you to operate safer/faster/easier with your gun and equipment. By then you might be about ready to decide whether to give it a try 'for real.' Under stress, you will do what is second nature. If training or tactical theory is to benefit you, it will have to become ingrained into your subconscious, to be available when needed.
__________________
People were smarter before the Internet, or imbeciles were harder to notice. |
|
March 7, 2006, 07:45 PM | #18 | |
Junior member
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: SW Louisiana
Posts: 2,289
|
Quote:
Last edited by David Armstrong; March 8, 2006 at 01:49 PM. |
|
March 7, 2006, 10:03 PM | #19 | |
Junior member
Join Date: December 16, 1998
Location: Titusville, FL, USA
Posts: 1,030
|
I thought Thomas was okay until I caught him plagiarizing Ayoob, word for word, in the early 90s, in a Handguns magazine article.
Does Thomas "know his stuff about combat tactics?" You be the judge: http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/...of_tactics.pdf Quote:
Last edited by Shawn Dodson; March 7, 2006 at 11:04 PM. |
|
March 8, 2006, 06:56 AM | #20 | ||
Junior member
Join Date: March 1, 2006
Location: Tampa,Fl
Posts: 4,000
|
Shawn,
Quote:
David, No comment about the financial bias from those who push training as the "only" way to go? Glenn go running to you buddy LOL? Quote:
Tree, I agree. When my post was blasted on glock talk, I clearly posted that proper fundamentals and tactics should be learned first. I was blasted because I believe that thunderranch is not needed to achieve them. Schooling are great but not necessary. Duane Thomas's article better explained my belief that competitors would fare better than the academician in an armed confrontation. |
||
March 8, 2006, 11:40 AM | #21 | ||
Junior member
Join Date: December 16, 1998
Location: Titusville, FL, USA
Posts: 1,030
|
Quote:
Anyone who attends a training course with the expectation that he/she will emerge from it an expert is fooling himself/herself. A training course is simply an introduction to concepts and techniques. Training drills merely provide the opportunity to learn how to perform correctly, which must be further developed by the student after the course if he/she desires to increase proficiency. Quote:
I have no doubt that competing in shooting sports has the potential to make one a better shot, over a wide range of conditions that challenge one’s marksmanship abilities against paper and cardboard targets, in a safe, controlled environment. However marksmanship is only part of the equation. Good FoF training will put you in the middle of an ambiguous, emotionally charged situation where you learn it is the bad guy who controls the fight, not you. More than once I’ve seen cocksure people suddenly find themselves in over their heads because their preconceived notions are inappropriate to the situation. |
||
March 8, 2006, 01:28 PM | #22 |
Junior member
Join Date: March 1, 2006
Location: Tampa,Fl
Posts: 4,000
|
My point is, how do you practice FOF on your own? How can I develope the knowledge or experience at home? Most people can't afford a single weekend at thunder ranch much less the multiple trips that would be needed for the material in FOF to sink in.
I know this for sure. FoF training that I have taken in karate would have been useless if it was only a one day session. Kinda like a boxer only getting one round of sparring. The "new tactics" are practiced at home and at the range. Competition is for shooting under pressure. Occassionally, especially with the 1911, those tactics like jam clearing (LOL) are needed during the competition. I use my carry gun to shoot the competitions mostly. Sometimes I use a Glock 35 and carry a Glock 23. Pretty much the same thing. |
March 8, 2006, 01:42 PM | #23 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 25, 2005
Location: Northern Wyoming
Posts: 343
|
Training, but no experiance isn't great.
Experiance, but no training isn't ideal either. "Gunfighter" schooling can be wonderful training (been thru a couple). However, if all of the followup shooting is done occationally at a range where one is only allowed to shoot from a standing, ready position what's the point? Practice should include drawing from concealment under time pressure, engaging multipule targets, shoot/no shoot drills, non-standing positions, etc. Going into a IDPA type setting without some sort of firearms training can be frustrating, or even extreamly dangerous for all considered. But compatition shooting can add an element of stress to the "practice" that is difficult to produce on your own. Arguing that one is excessively superior to the other is pure ego and bias. Imagine an airline pilot flying a plane with only training but no experiance, or the reverse. Not a plane that I would like to be on. When I would sign off a student to take their final FAA ride I would tell them the old avaition truism... "now you will have a license to learn". They have gotten the training, now it was time to get experiance. Firearms training and competition shooting should be looked at the same way. |
March 8, 2006, 01:55 PM | #24 | |
Junior member
Join Date: December 16, 1998
Location: Titusville, FL, USA
Posts: 1,030
|
Quote:
Depending on how deeply you want to understand FoF training, Ken Murray's book "Training at the Speed of Life," is a splendid resource. It's not light reading, nor do I recommend it if you have only a casual interest in FoF training. Murray is co-inventor of Simunition FX Marking Cartridge system, and has extensive experience in FoF training. He goes so far as to suggest that projectile firing training weapons are not required to obtain great training value from FoF firearms training. |
|
March 8, 2006, 01:56 PM | #25 | ||
Junior member
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: SW Louisiana
Posts: 2,289
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
|
|