FIGHT! Part II Realistic & Practical Tactics for Concealed Carry
July 9th, 2007 by Syd
This fellow has some interesting ideas and techniques. He also has some techniques that I question. After you watch the video, please leave a comment with your thoughts on his techniques.
Here you go Syd. Not bad, but not for me.
http://warthogswrants.blogspot.com/2007/07/defensive-video.html
It isn’t the worst one of THESE I’ve seen,but not the best either. I will admit, gun trainers who wear the”shoot-me-first” vest I become wary at first sight. Sorry, I think they are corny. The cross step is what got me. You never cross your legs if at all possible,thows your balance off and doesn’t create a stable stance. The distraction thing,not bad,but not your wallet. If you don’t have or are allowed a firearm,then come prepared with something to throw. It is called fore-thought.
This is one of those training guides that looks great on video in controlled circumstances, but pays no attention to the reality of an armed, high stress lethal confrontation.
Having been invovled in a number of these situations in the military, I can tell you that his video utterly fails to recognize the stress reactions of your body. Your world shuts down and closes in, your heart rate goes up significantly, you lose tactile feeling to an extent, side vision to some extent, extremity control to some extent. In some instances you even forget to breathe! How’s that for losing fine motor function despite training it EVERY MINUTE of your life? Your focus closes in to the threat presented and only the threat. You cannot expect to be able to run backwards or sideways crossing your legs and not end up on the ground. You can’t expect your “distraction” throw to even be a fluid motion, let alone to hit your target or cause him any concern. Creating distance is fine, but as he himself stated, actions will always be quicker thatn REactions. We were trained in CQB to actually run AT someone in a CQB situation instead of running away (at close distances). This totally disrupts THEIR OODA (Observe, Orient, Decide, Act) process and forces them to react to you. We created the space AFTER running over or through the assailant in the situation that occurs at distances of less than 21 ft (the Tuell Drill that he mentioned). The assailant cannot react quick enough or gather and process these actions soon enough to mount a reasonable defense, and more often than not, ends up on the ground wondering what in the world just happened. Another advantage to this is the fact that in his scenario, he says the other person is “reaching for SOMETHING”. I’d rather be embarrased by running over someone who might just be reaching for a cell phone than to actually present my lethal force option incorrectly and go to jail. The time following the charge will allow you to assess what he was reaching for and still draw your weapon if needed while he’s figuring all of this out.
Also, I’m a skeptic of video training that totally ignores the less than lethal options. Why does everyone think that presentation of a knife by the other party has to automatically end in you shooting him? There is a plethora of less than lethal options (one of my personal favorites is the new Kimber Guardian) that not only work effectively, but also give you that time to make sure that you’re justified in using lethal force. In my experiences, most criminals aren’t willing to die for what their trying to do to you, so a blast to the eyes, or even a sound thumping with the run through is enough to make them rethink and go the other way.
I could write on this for days, but you get the idea.
Thanks.