20 rules for winning a gunfight article...

K

Koda94

New member
what is it that I am missing from this article to take this serious? Does the gun rights community really need this kind of publication from a pro gun magazine?

http://www.guns.com/2014/12/01/editorial-20-rules-for-winning-gun-fights/

excerpts from 20 rules for winning a gunfight:
1) do we really want to put an emphasis on thinking about shooting a friend, relative or pregnant lady in our training program?
2) do we really want to put an emphasis on thinking about "having a plan to kill everybody we meet"?
3) are "Mexican standoffs" really something to even bring up?
9) dont hesitate but dont shoot too fast.... what?
17) don't be "a wuss".... ?
18) be aggressive, violence is your friend....
 
I read it. There were some pretty stupid comments made in that article.

In another article written by the same author, I note that the author takes exception to terms like "plinking" (plinking is for amateurs); and feels the need to school us on who is and who is not an "operator". Yet he likes to use the phrase "tactically speaking....tactical weapons.....tactical companies":D:D:D

I suppose I better stop plinking, because I might lose my professional status as a gun owner and firearms operator. How am I going to make a living plink...I mean shooting targets if I'm only an amateur?:confused:

Maybe I'm being too harsh on the fella - seems like he's just trying to firearms blog and has put a decent amount of time into it.
 
Last edited:
I think anyone who carries a gun or has a gun for home defense has to spend some time thinking about whether he or she could pull the trigger if need be. If not, buy pepper spray or something else. That said, the idea of actually planning to kill everyone you meet or thinking about killing pregnant women is over the top. And I cannot even fathom killing one of my children. I would, quite literally, rather die.

The author's bio says he is former SWAT, etc. Maybe they need that mindset but his enunciation of that mindset is, IMO, symptomatic of the widening gulf between the public and some members of the law enforcement community.
 
Are we sure this is not satire?.....
:D

I don't accept the mindset that one needs to be trained to SWAT / Delta Force levels in order to be both safe and competent with a defensive firearm.

I won't argue with the underlying ideas of the points made, having & carrying a firearm is certainly a serious matter. But I don't need to obsess on them, the way a professional "gunfighter" needs to.

Police, and military training is not ALL applicable to ALL of us. Advice on room clearing drills is for those who will do that kind of thing, on purpose!

I'm a low speed, high drag operator, if I even operate at all these days, but that doesn't mean I'm not competent, even if I can't compete in American Ninja...
 
Wow, that is problematic on so many levels.

I don't know who the author is, but I would opt NOT to follow his 20 rules. While some are okay, some are stupid, don't apply, or are flat out wrong.
 
KyJim said:
The author's bio says he is former SWAT, etc. Maybe they need that mindset but his enunciation of that mindset is, IMO, symptomatic of the widening gulf between the public and some members of the law enforcement community.
Click to expand...
Perhaps more to the point -- the fact that he wrote this suggests that the mindset of the police is perhaps a bit too heavily oriented toward the "Kill everyone you meet" side and not enough to the "Protect and serve" side. I understand the underlying truth of the statement, but the fact he couldn't enunciate it clearly (in fact, not at all) is emblematic of the current shift in the direction of militarizing the police.

Shooting until the threat stops is valid. But ... training to do a magazine dump is probably not a good approach for a "civilian." That's effectively what Darren Wilson did. He's a cop, and look what it did for him. [Okay, technically he was a cop.] Think how badly a "civilian" would be crucified for doing a magazine dump on a mugger. What's so bad about doing a double or triple tap, stopping to evaluate, then opening fire again if the threat is still a viable threat? The other downside to doing a magazine dump at center-of-mass is: What if center-of-mass is wearing body armor? That's a major reason for the "Mozambique" triple tap, and it's a major argument for firing a double or triple tap and then stopping to evaluate. That gives you a chance to see that your opponent must be armored because your center-of-mass shots didn't stop him. You need to know that before you've used up all your ammo shooting at a hardened target.
 
Last edited:
You need to know that before you've used up all your ammo shooting at a hardened target.
Click to expand...

Mag dumps are never a good idea. You never know if you might be facing multiple attackers, and if you used up all of your shots on one guy, then that's it! Oh, I know, 10% of those who carry claim to carry extra magazines. Good luck with actually being able to use them.
 
Thanks everyone, I'm glad I wasn't missing anything here but I was disappointing to read such an article from a gun publication.

I understand there might be some underlying sentiment behind items in his list but yeah the author completely failed to articulate those to the point of looking in the wrong direction. I really feel sorry for new comers who start looking for material and find this first.

and I have to ask, do SWAT team leaders really train to shoot their own co-worker, friends, or relatives?

44AMP said:
Are we sure this is not satire?.....
Click to expand...
well a quick peek at guns.com didn't come across anything like theonion.com. But rawstory posted a response that was satire... http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/12/gun-zine-writer-has-20-fun-tips-for-how-to-kill-everyone-you-meet-including-pregnant-ladies/
 
Scary that the person that wrote the article actually walks around armed expecting to kill everyone??? I once knew a fellow who was waiting for a chance to legally shoot someone. He prowled the outbuildings at work looking (hoping) to find a vagrant. I thought he was spooky enough till I read this article. Rather than expecting to shoot everyone I meet, I devote myself to using common sense to avoid situations, and people, that could cause trouble. Works so far! :)
 
He lost me at "have plan to kill everyone you meet." Please.

I notice he doesn't mention the best strategy of all: not getting in a gunfight. No mention of situational awareness or de-escalation. Just plenty of "don't be a wuss" chest beating.

What worries me is that some folks will take this as valid advice.
 
It struck me as generally sound advice, if you are a MARINE clearing a hostile village! Seems more than a bit overboard for my real world situation though.

Again, I simply don't get what ever the disconnect is that prompts people to think that the tactics of warfare should apply to everyone in all situations.

Those 20 rules seem to me to have come from the "kill them all, let God sort them out" school of thought.
 
Scary that the person that wrote the article actually walks around armed expecting to kill everyone??? I once knew a fellow who was waiting for a chance to legally shoot someone. He prowled the outbuildings at work looking (hoping) to find a vagrant.
Click to expand...

Ok, I know the guy made some stupid comments and even poked fun at him for it, but I think most of us here know what he was trying to say: be alert, aware of your surroundings and don't let your guard completely down just because you think everyone around you is friendly. A number of things he said were ok. Yes, some of the comments are way over the top and could have been stated better, but I still get what he is trying to say. I think we would all agree that it would be nice to know well in advance of any attack who is going to attack and where. In reality, that rarely happens so it's best to always be a little on guard....thinking about it at least in the very back of your mind.
 
The problem with this article isnt what "we" would get out of it, its what a new person would.

Essentially, he used those topics in the complete opposite (wrong) direction a citizen should be thinking of. Instead of saying be aware of your surroundings and situation he said be ready to kill everyone you meet. Instead of elaborating on the psycological effects of using deadly force he said to prepare yourself to kill a pregnant lady.

The takeaway from this article isnt thinking about situational awareness and de-escalation its contemplating why one has to think about killing everyone he meets including pregnant ladies. What could go wrong?

Even his reader comments agree. The editor of the magazine must be blind....
 
Instead of saying be aware of your surroundings and situation he said be ready to kill everyone you meet.

Instead of elaborating on the psycological effects of using deadly force he said to prepare yourself to kill a pregnant lady.
Click to expand...

He's simply saying anyone can become a threat, instantly, and if you're not prepared to react quickly you can die.

He's not a psychologist, so of course he isn't discussing psychological effects in depth, but he did mention it:

This emotional, mental and psychological decision must be made long before the incident arrives
Click to expand...

Reality is he said exactly what you wanted him to say, but he didn't word it in a PC, feel good manner

It's not much different than what most of those teaching handgun classes preach, and certainly no different than comments made by people on this site at times
 
He's simply saying anyone can become a threat, instantly, and if you're not prepared to react quickly you can die.
Click to expand...

A true sign of being paranoid. Generally speaking, nobody becomes a threat, instantly. You may fail to recognize the signs for a period of time, but the transformation isn't instant.
 
Yeah... so... I will say that even LEO should not necessarily walk around with this exact mindset in the forefront all of the time. When I interview a victim I don't plan out how I'm going to kill them if they become rabid and attack me with an ink pen. If I'm going on a high risk warrant service, most of this applies (most of it... still a little iffy on 6 shot rhythm and planning on shooting pregnant ladies... also can't hesitate but can't shoot too fast either???), but most of this is not running through my head on the day to day.

You do have to have a tactical mindset. Pulling a car over leaving a high crime area at 1am? Probably need to go into that situation knowing that it could get ugly and plan accordingly. Writing a ticket to the pregnant lady caught stealing candy bars at Wal-Mart... yeah sorry I'm not thinking of how I'm going to kill her if she moves the wrong way as I write the ticket. I get what the guy is saying but it's asinine. You need to stay alert and pay attention to your surroundings to pick up on potential threats... but taking the adage of "planning to kill everyone you meet" seriously unless you're going to war is pretty out there.
 
If everyone around you seems like a potential threat, it might be time to move to a new area. Alaska and Nevada have some places that you would literally have no one around you. Of course, extreme boredom might set in.

In Alaska you could play with the bears and in Nevada you have jackrabbits for entertainment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top