Category: skill

The Down-Range Video

Posted by Mostly Genius – June 20, 2009

So there has been a lot of discussion about this Tactical Response video that shows an instructor standing between two targets during a live fire exercise. James Yeager responds to the criticisms of his detractors. Below I will examine the major points of his response and justification for having an instructor taking photos in front of the firing line.

Evaluating Risk. Yeager explains that driving to the range is more dangerous than standing between the targets. While it is true that there is some risk associated with driving there is a benefit (transportation) that we deem to be worth the risk. I fail to see what the benefit is for the students (or the instructor) by having the instructor stand down range.

Stress Inoculation. Yeager explains that this practice better prepares students for ‘real world’ gunfight pressures. I certainly believe that if a skill is going to need to be performed under stress then some portion of the practice of that skill should be performed under stress. There are a lot of ways of inducing stress such as time pressure, distracting noise, testing, ambiguity, sleep deprivation, etc. None of these require putting somebody in the position taking a bullet should a student make a mistake or stumble. If the goal is to simulate a gunfight for stress inoculation purposes then why not have two parallel berms and have the instructor shoot at targets that are behind the students while they are on the firing line? If ‘realism’ trumps safety then wouldn’t that be a better drill?

Safest Training. I am not going to dispute the safety “record” of Yeager or his staff, but I fail to see a procedure or system that makes this training inherently safe, or at best any more safe than that of any other shooting school. A person getting shot during training is a big deal, and some of the larger training schools have had people get shot. Generally they shoot themselves holstering or drawing the gun and in rare circumstances a student will shoot someone else. If you have cycled through 50,000 or more students one of them is bound to be an idiot – regardless of how strict the range rules might be.

Makes People Safer. I am sure it makes people think and focus a lot more about keeping the gun on target, and where the muzzle is pointing when the instructor is a foot away from the target. The student that trips over his own feet is an open question as far as “safety” goes. Safety is a process, not an event.

Jabbering of Internet Commandos. Having discussed this video with some actual (non-internet) commandos they don’t see any utility in the increased risk of this particular training “method” because it doesn’t meet any particular training objective. I don’t think the risks are worth the benefits unless you are going to be shooting targets in close proximity to your teammates – and have gone through a slow progression building up to running the drill live.

I don’t believe this training accomplished anything other than stir up some controversy, and generate some potential marketing buzz. My overall impression (based solely on the videos) is that Tactical Response isn’t particularly concerned with safety, and that Yeager’s response was more of an attempt at justifying an unsafe act.

The Modified Farnam Drill

Posted by Mostly Genius – June 16, 2009

Named for John Farnam, this is probably the best general purpose defensive shooting drill that I have seen. This is a good benchmark for measuring your shooting performance and progress. You will need some inert/dummy cartridges, at least two magazines, and a shot timer. The total round count for this drills is eight live rounds and one dummy round. The setup is as follows.

In the Gun:

  • 1 live round in the chamber.
  • 5 live rounds in the magazine. (Some sources say 4 live rounds.)
  • 1 dummy round in the magazine. (Not the first or last round.

In the Reload:

  • At least three live rounds.

The drill is shot as follows:

  • On the buzzer draw and start shooting.
  • Perform immediate action when you encounter a malfunction.
  • Speed reload when you reach slide lock
  • Shoot twice more.

If you followed the directions correctly you will end up with two empty magazines (one on the ground, one in the gun) and one live round in the chamber.

The “standard” is shooting a 8.5″x11″ sheet of paper at 8 meters with a disqualification for a miss. Farnam expects his students to complete this in 18.25 seconds and his instructors to complete it in 12 seconds.

Now for the “modified” part of the drill:

  • Add one second to your total time for each miss. This allows you to capture your progress. It’s not perfect but it is kind of helpful to see improvements.
  • Change the distance. Both closer and farther away.
  • Reduce the size of the target.
  • Add a step of movement on the draw, immediate action, and reload.
  • Add verbal commands throughout the drill.

The people that seem to have the best success at this drill are the ones with the most efficient gun handling. Being able to quickly and precisely clear the malfunction and speed reload will give you more time to get your hits.

Self Defense Scams

Posted by Mostly Genius – June 2, 2009

I stumbled across another bad self defense article: “Women’s Self Defense Against Men” (which I am not going to link to, but I will quote from below) that is clearly written by some sort of marketing flack. I see this sort of thing published on a lot of self defense oriented spam blogs that are hawking pepper spray and stun guns. Frequently I see the same content or copy on several different sites.

When looking at the increasing numbers of reports about violence against women, it is clear that women’s self-defense against men is becoming an important issue in today’s society. There are many products and techniques designed for women’s self-defense against men, from mace guns to judo and assertiveness training. Unfortunately, these things are becoming increasingly necessary, and it is essential to stay informed of the most effective strategies for women’s self-defense against men.

I guess they are repeating the title over and over again to try and improve the search rank of the article. Otherwise there really is no content in the opening paragraph other than a vague reference to “increasing numbers of reports about violence against women.”

Since more and more women are working overtime and at late hours, extra attention should be given to women’s self-defense against men. Dark parking lots are among the most dangerous places, and it is good idea to walk into a parking lot with a special device, such as a small alarm, whistle or light, or where it is legal, a mace gun or stun gun. The mace or stun guns should not be shaped like actual guns, but should be disguised as cell phones, pens or key chains which can be carried by hand without attracting undue attention.

So having a weapon that looks like a weapon would cause undue attention, and women should have a James Bond-esque cell phone that shoots electricity or pepper-spray? Clearly a concealed firearm isn’t even considered by the author.

It is important to principle of women’s self defense against men always to look straight ahead and always to appear alert. Potential attackers are always on the lookout for women who seem unaware of their surroundings, so give an impression of confidence.

I guess that in the authors opinion nothing projects confidence like locking your gaze on the horizon and marching in a straight line.

Women’s self-defense against men is not always focused on strangers, but, more often than not, an attacker is someone the woman knows. Before making the attack, the person usually stalks the woman to find out her habits and where she is the most vulnerable.

It is therefore a good idea to change your route frequently if you jog or walk for exercise. Be on the lookout for people who are watching your activities and make sure that you are aware of potential dangers. Like fire drills, women’s self-defense calls for identifying potential danger spots, so, as you go through your day, look for those places where a person can easily intrude.

Actually, the non-stranger attacker doesn’t do a multiple day reconnaissance and surveillance, but rather becomes “familiar” and exploits a convenient vulnerability. This isn’t a guy hiding in the bushes with a spotting scope and a notebook. This is the guy she lets carry her groceries because he lives across the street.

Many strategies for women’s self-defense against men include some kind of martial arts training. Although many critics complain that techniques learned in classes can not be adapted well to the street, martial arts give women strength and confidence to be able to ward off an attacker.

The rest of the article goes on to try and sell a number of different martial arts without an real knowledge or analysis. The whole article is just a little bit of fear-based marketing copy designed to pad someones website and sell pepper spray disguised as lipstick or a block of Tae Kwon Do classes.

So why am I bothering to call this out? Because there are a lot of people who have a scary experience, throw a few keywords at google, and end up buying a stun gun (that doesn’t work) or enroll in some less than reputable martial arts class for a couple of weeks.

Firearms for the physically disabled

Posted by Mostly Genius – May 8, 2009

Since this stirred up enough controversy amongst the advocates for the disabled I figured I would address some of these issues in a separate post.

The wrong gun. There are guns that are just wrong for some people. If you are smaller and/or weaker than a lot of larger guns are going to give you problems. A gun that doesn’t fit your hand and doesn’t let you reach the trigger properly isn’t going to work for you. If you can’t rack the slide then you have the wrong gun. All firearms require a certain amount of strength and dexterity to operate, and some require more than others.

Exchanging the problem. If the starting place is having the wrong gun, the next step is to start making modifications. A lighter recoil spring will make the gun easier to rack, but the gun won’t function as reliably. Adding some external lever or handle might make it easier to manipulate, but it will make it harder to carry and more prone to malfunction (should the lever get hung up on anything.) This isn’t an apparent liability if all you do is square range target shooting.

Shooting is only part of the process. Getting the gun ready to shoot isn’t the whole equation. You still have to keep the gun running. Clearing malfunctions and reloading are also important skills. If we discount these operations then we could simply start with an unmodified gun in Condition One (loaded chamber, loaded magazine, and all safeties engaged) and hope for the best. There are also a complete set of techniques for one handed manipulation of a semi-auto handgun that work if you have the necessary strength and dexterity to accomplish them.

Consider a revolver. Depending on the existing limitations a revolver might be the answer, since there is no slide to rack, basic malfunction clearances are simple, but reloading can require a bit of dexterity. The trigger pull on a double action revolver is going to require more strength than most semi-autos.