I hope I am never this "highspeed"

Training Training and Tactics
21

I couldn’t agree more, context is everything. Unless you’re part of a team then there really is no reason to do this or any other close proximity shooting.

I’m very luck that I have a couple of shooting buddies that are former military, infantry not REFMs, that I’d trust to do any team drill you can dream up.

Once you run live fire ops at the fire team level up to Company these things just are not that big of a deal. But again, context is in order. I’m talking with trained, disciplined troops. 19 year olds sure but a cut above the crowd. Once you have a 19 year old running an M60 over your head as you advance, then shift his fire as planned you settle down quite a bit.

22

I can see what that would do, but no way I’m doing the drill with people I’ve just met 3 days ago.

I think you tapped into the real reason why its done. Honestly, though. I think everyone here can agree that looking at it from a purely mechanical point of view, there is very little danger. Who here can recall the last time they missed an entire silhouette with a long gun at ranges of 25 yds and under while facing the same direction the whole time? (Here is a hint, it had better be never) But its the psychological reality check thats kind of frightening. But that highlights an often overlooked fact. If you are in a team situation, you are gonna have to learn to not shoot your buddies. I honestly doubt that high speed low drag guys say “Shit, Bob is in front of me, I guess I can’t take the shot…” I think I’d have to know how fast the movement was, how fast they were shooting, etc. before I’d put it in the “hardcore” bin or the “stupid” pile.

23

I’ve done a couple of classes with Gabe and Yeager is on my list; hopefully for later in the year. I’ve never felt a “needless risk” in a Suarez class. Training for gunfights is a serious endeavor. I’ve done drills that involve more risk at BW and Gryphon Group than at SI(albeit with guys I’ve trained with for over a year most 3-4 years) SI and TR push the envelope on mindset and SI relies on airsoft FOF to bring the risk down to an acceptable level as well as to help with the mindset. Gabe understands the different levels of skill he gets in training and adjusts accordingly in my experience. It also helps when people sign up for classes that are appropriate for their skill level. At the end of the day everyone has to evaluate their skills as well as those they are training with and make their own decision on how far they are willing to push and what amount of risk they will accept.

Just my $.02

24

Training that you get at TR is for fighting. Not saying that the three-gunner would learn from things like fighting rifle or fighting pistol but the classes are designed to keep you alive on the TWO WAY range. Yes, that sound is bullets coming AT you. By no way should anyone who is not sure of their skill level be involved in drills like the one pictured. I personally wouldnt want to be going into a fight with someone who I can’t trust to be shooting in close prox. to me. Just a lurker here… FWIW

25

There are times when the training looks nasty, and I too have stepped back from the outlandish. But, I’d trust my life to a small number of people I’ve worked with form both the pointy end and the support world. Not as high speed as most, but I’ve also met a lot of infatry guys who have no business holding a BB gun.
The matter of REMF’s is that it really doesn’t fit the model anymore. I’m currently in my third time on the two way range. Invasion of Iraq as Artillery turned ammo humpers and MPs, then working with State Dept and a bunch of top notch contractors, and now as a full blown loggy in the wilds of trashcanistan. Been shot at all three times. Hit the roads and it’s game on. Just an update from the current state of war.

26

Driving your car at 60 mph on a 2 lane road, 3 feet away another car is closing with you also at 60 mph, NOTHING seperates the two of you except a little paint and the good judgement of the operator of the other car…120 mph wrecks frequently result in fatalities. Yet, you don’t see photos of cars passing each other and then see posts like “Gawd that looks awful dangerous, I wouldn’t do that”.

Now, think about all the drunks, drugged, medicated, insane and brand new teen drivers that are “in your lane”. That pic looks pretty controlled really. Level ground, clearly defined lanes, not raining, daylight…

We do a very similar drill quite often and I’m actually a much safer shooter because of it. The absolute criticality of muzzle awareness, keeping a straight finger and only shooting when on target are now burned into my psyche.

The term “stay in your lane” becomes fully meaningful.

27

I think it’s important to note that, unlike some of the other courses from other providers, the pictured drills occurred at the end of a two-week SWAT school, where you spent the nine previous days training a minimum of ten hours with the other officers. I KNEW exactly what those officers were going to do based on hundreds of dry repetitions performed earlier.

The first three days consisted of dry drills, holding your weapon at high-ready, performing movement drills wearing all your armor and helmet, sometimes PPE mask, for four hours with only a ten-minute break for piss and water. Most of us could not physically hold the rifle up after the third day. We had to brace an elbow against a pouch on our armor. Ibuprofen and desire not to wuss out kept my 37 year old butt going.

I do not think a three-day class and open enrollment is conducive to these types of drills, no matter who is running them. I saw a 61 year old grandma come very close to putting a 5.56 round through a guy during a peel drill at one of the mentioned trainers. She should have never been there and that drill should never have been taught in that three day open enrollment class.

Do grandmas need to know how to perform peels? Probably not. Do most SWAT guys? Also, probably not. Realistically, suppressive fire is not allowed for US LEOs. Kidding yourself about Walter Mitty fantasies can be fun if it doesn’t get you killed.

28

That sounds about where I’m coming from. A unit training together for weeks and months is quite a bit different than strangers in a 3 day class.

Oh, BTW…

If TR and Suarez “teach you how to fight” then what do Pat and Larry teach? Not quite how to fight?

:rolleyes:

29

I don’t think myself or anyone else suggested that they were any better or any worse than any other trainer. We suggested they push the envelope of training a bit further than others and that it has it’s merits. I’ll agree that dynamic drills have no place in a 2-3 day course with total strangers of unknown skill level, so I won’t sign up for a class that has that in the curriculum. I’ve not seen that in an SI course with the exception of airsoft FOF. Gabe has a “reputation” it’s no secret, but I won’t get into a my instructor can kick your instructor’s ass type discussion it serves no purpose. There are many good instructors out there and people are limiting themselves by only taking instruction from one source. Like I said before, everyone has to evaluate their skills and the skills of those they are training with and make their own decision on what they will and won’t accept in training.

30

I’ve been through a few classes with Tactical Response so I’ll respond. In all honesty you sound like a commerical for the company. While Tactical Response likes to talk a lot about mindset and such, I hardly find them to be the best people out there when it comes to it.

31

I don’t mean to disparage ANY other trainers out there. My experience is very limited, so I’m sure there are a lot of good guys doing good training. Specifically, Pat and Larry didn’t get their reputations for nothing!.. and I didn’t mean to imply that they don’t teach a person how to fight.

Mindset… maybe some other trainers sort of assume you have the mindset already handled or you wouldn’t be training, but for “civilians” like me, I think outfits like TR do a great job of trying to instill a fighting mindset, as well as teaching the mechanics of shooting in combat mode. Different training styles with different focus… doesn’t mean one is better than the other. More like one compliments the other.

32

Especially as a civilian I would rather go home after a training class with exact the number of holes in my body that I started with, than have the doubtable profit of a bit more “realism”. Not every safety violation leads automatically to desaster, but ingraining safety violations by a “its not that bad”/“shit happens” mindset will bite you sometime. Every safety violation is bad- and some should end the class for the student (if not for the trainer). Does it really have to take a casualty to question this? IMHO its a lame excuse to think that only in an unsafe class the points of fighting with a weapon can be brought across.

Btw, from the few classes I have taken, I have gotten the impression that “realism” has taken a major nosedive in the post 9-11 training industry as team drills and Australian peels enter civilian classes.
Pat has always made it clear upfront that his classes are oriented towards LEO/military but that he accepts civilians for adding some diversity and that he simply enjoys teaching a mixed class (please correct me if I am wrong, Pat). So students know what they are getting.
But some outfits have only recently begun to offer more and more militarized techniques and drills while abandoning a systematic approach even while training beginners. What good is a diffuse fighting mentality if you haven’t learned trigger control or malfunction clearing- or even muzzle awareness? They should ask themselves if its their job to instill default responses which hopefully work in 90% of the scenarios civilians are going to face, or to provide fun and the illusion that here everybody can be “Jack Bauer”. Anyhow, as often as the muzzle of my “team member” (who I didn’t know before the training class and never will meet again after it) may sweep my body, I still wouldn’t embrace this as realism.

33

I think we need to be very careful here, as what may be technically considered unsafe on the square range, is only mild realism in the real world. Not siding one way or the other with the subject of the original post, just saying that this must be kept in mind.

Also, instructors are free to teach what they want. Its up to me as the student, to research them, and seek out training from those teaching what I want. Instructors should try and gauge the level of people entering a clas though, and make sure that they are up to the level of training thats to be conducted. Thats where pre-requ’s come into play.
Just because I no longer wear a uniform, doesnt mean that I wont ever have cause to be able to properly execute certain drills. I do not like the idea of having my training limited to what someone else perceives I “need” to know or “dont need” to know, no more than I like the idea of the govt limiting what kind of or how many firearms I can own based on what some politician thinks I “need” or “dont need”. Once again, that “n” word enters the vocabulary.

Maybe I am an extremist, a badge I’ll proudly wear in todays day and age, but I still view myself in the same light as the Minutemen of the mid 1700’s in colonial America. I may not be wearing a uniform as part of my daily life, but I dang sure want to be able to be pulled into service at a moments notice if need be. That means I had better know how to do more than punch nice groups from 5 yards out while standing perfectly still. Until my crystal ball is fixed and can tell me all the situations I’ll face in the future, I’ll continue to try and learn as much as I possibly can in advancing my skills, and strive to perfect everything I learn. I think that all of us, as grown men, regardless of how we derive our daily wages, have not only a responsibility but a DUTY, to be able to protect and defend our family, friends, neighborhood, and country, to the utmost of our abilities.

Regardless of where you fall, I do think that ashooter made a good point earlier.

If you “train”, the fact is you’re theoretically training to FIGHT and to KILL other people who are trying to kill you. If you lose sight of that, or don’t come to grips with that, you’re not really training - You’re just playing.

I dont have a problem with anyone doing it just for fun, but those that do shouldnt loose sight of the real purpose of what they are doing and criticize those who do it seriously.

As for the drill(s) in question… It would depend on the instructor and the other students in the class as to whether I would participate or not. It would be a call I would have to make on the spot.

Just my unsolicited $.03 .

34

By “Larry and Pat” did you mean Larry Vickers and Pat Rogers? I’m going to get in one of each of there course by years end. Already signed up for one. I value their opinions. The kind of opinions that where made while being downrange making this a safer world. I cant wait to get in their classes. I just gotta find ammo, thats gonna be easy:rolleyes: I know lots of folks that have took classes with each and they always comment on how safe they are.

35

I Ken H. sumed this whole debate up nicely when he said that firearms training is dangerous. However, because something is dangerous doesn’t make it unsafe.

36

Affirmative.

37

I’ve been on the sidelines on this thread but have finally decided to post my 2 cents’ worth.

23 years ago, back when I was attending Basic Training at Benning’s School for the Boys (along with other training courses elsewhere), we were put through some very dangerous exercises that could have (and probably has) easily resulted in serious injury or death to a trainee. This cannot be avoided because it is the nature of the beast. They were after all training us to find and close with the enemy in order to kill them - an endeavor that is probably a lot more dangerous than what we experienced in training.

To the credit of our Drill Seargents, they never put us in any such situation unless there was a legitimate training purpose for it. Later on when I became an Aviation Officer (Aeroscout) I came to know this as RISK ASSESSMENT. As the assigned Leader, it was my job to analyze of the risk of a training mission was worth the returns. It was also part of my job to minimize the evaluated risk in order to make the expected training value worthwhile.

As a former (Airborne) Infantryman, I had to do some serious adjusting to the Aviation mentality. In the Infantry, there was no such thing as “crew rest” and it took me a very long time to realize of the importance of this concept for Aviation Operations (I actually fell asleep while flying once - but only once!!).

How risk is analyzed and assessed is very relative to the situation and the background of those who assess it. A civilian who just wants to be able to compete in 3-gun matches or be able to say that they have attended “Tactical Rifle Training” is probably not going to accept as a high a training risk as someone who is going to Iraq as a Soldier or PMC. Even those who are from the same line of work will evaluate the returns differently. A SWAT Operator who works in a very active (read: violent) city will accept risks that a part-time Regional SWAT Operator who may only see one call a year (if that).

The bottom line for trainers is that they are being trusted to minimize these types of risk because it is they who have control of the training environment. Just because nobody had ever been accidentally shot in your shoothouse, it doesn’t mean that you or your students should be allowed to use it without the protection of body armor, does it?

As far as the pictures that started this thread, if I were to take it at face value I would probably see what they are doing as an unecessary risk. But this is only because (a) I really do not know the trainer involved. (b) I have absolutely no idea what the skill-level of the participants are and how much they have worked together prior to the exercise. and (c) I do not know what kind of a briefing they were provided. Without all that information (or more), I really cannot make an honest or accurate judgement. JM2CW.

38

Pat Aherne- were you at this particular class?? My understanding 3rd hand from some that were was that this was a POST cert class, and this wasn’t on the POI. Is that correct/ incorrect??

There is a time and place for training that exceeds the norms. Those exceptions are job title, mission requirements and so forth, but always require strong grounding in basics with those who have been together enough to make it viable.
As always, the Instructor has the ultimate responsibility to ensure that only those who can, do.

The problems with strict POI- doctrine- is that sometimes THOSE WHO KNOW MORE THAN YOU let their dogma override that doctrine.
A good instructor needs to be able to ratchet it up/ down dependent on the student population.

I have sat in the hostage chair on live fire on multiple occasions at my other address. There were reasons for this, and it wasnt because i had nothing else to do at that particular time.

Listed below is in the 3rd paragraph of my course announcement. I have removed people from my courses for safety or attitude, and there are also a number who i will not allow to return- ever. This is not because of a safety issue, but because of an attitudinal issue/ issues that became apparent to the staff or other students.

"Live fire exercises are inherently dangerous. Safety violations will be dealt with harshly. We cannot afford to have an unsafe shooter in a class.
I reserve the right to refuse admission to the class for any reason. I reserve the right to remove anyone from the class for any reason. Questions?? "

The shoot house bring an entirely new dynamic to safety, and what is in place is the result of understanding that this is about fighting, not shooting.

39

Pat makes are three very good points that I meant to, but dont think I got across earlier.

40

+1 to both of you. I’m not very articulate, but that is what I was attempting to get across as well as the shooter has to be honest with himself about his skills.