Bad habits can get you killed
- Thread starter Willie Lowman
- Start date
- Status
bamaranger
New member
judge
I learned along time ago that you can't win an argument with the judge in his courtroom. I'm done.
I learned along time ago that you can't win an argument with the judge in his courtroom. I'm done.
Willie Lowman
New member
Speaking of bad habits that can get you killed.
Having a back and forth "yeah-huh" "nu-uh" argument with the staff will get a thread killed.
Having a back and forth "yeah-huh" "nu-uh" argument with the staff will get a thread killed.
zincwarrior
New member
So in summation when it comes to training is it fair to say:
Each person's needs, capacity, and desire are different.
or we can just do like my wife. She needs no training. She has the Minivan of Death, and curbs are merely guidelines to be ignored when inconvenient.
Each person's needs, capacity, and desire are different.
or we can just do like my wife. She needs no training. She has the Minivan of Death, and curbs are merely guidelines to be ignored when inconvenient.
"Complacency guys...complacency can get you killed quicker than a bullet." --- Travis Haley
Travis also says this about firearm training sessions: "We find that its the most experienced shooters coming in burning and making the most mistakes. We can't tell what goes on in you're mind --- So it is up to you too police yourselves."
Travis also says this about firearm training sessions: "We find that its the most experienced shooters coming in burning and making the most mistakes. We can't tell what goes on in you're mind --- So it is up to you too police yourselves."
Last edited:
bluetrain said:
It would appear that using a handgun is MUCH more difficult than playing a piano.
My 10 month old granddaughter loves to pull herself up on the piano and play the piano. Admittedly she doesn't play it very well (random banging on keys, actually).
I doubt very seriously if she could use a handgun at all. Just figuring out how to load it would be FAR beyond her abilities.
FireForged
New member
I think many people do not understand what this thread is... or [was] about.
I think the op was highlighting the fact that some people consider what they are doing to be self defense training when really, it isnt and others simply do not train how they expect to fight which lends to an environment where bad practice habits can foster real self defense failures.
I think the op was highlighting the fact that some people consider what they are doing to be self defense training when really, it isnt and others simply do not train how they expect to fight which lends to an environment where bad practice habits can foster real self defense failures.
OldMarksman
Staff
Posted by BlueTrain:
One can make noise with all of them with no instruction and no practice.
The retort misses the point completely. Cooper did not compare the relative skill levels required, or the amounts of time and effort required to develop them.
Both start with learning the basic functioning of the instruments, and becoming familiar with how they work. Both go much father.
The best way to gain an appreciation of the benefits of defensive pistol shooting training is to attend a session; perhaps watching one for a day or two, or maybe watching a really good, lengthy, and well narrated video would help in that limited regard. But that's not all. One should then go to the range and watch the people standing still and firing at a stationary target directly in front of them at a distance of 21 feet or thereabouts.
Then, one should (1) contrast the training with shooing at the square range, and (2) think very hard about how shooting at that stationary target 21 feet out differs from very markedly from defending against rapidly moving violent criminal actors engaging in a completely unexpected, very violent, and rapidly unfolding attack, most probably within a distance of three to five yards.
As Claude Werner says, one thing about training is that one does not know what one does not know.
That's obviously a retort to Frank's sig line, which is based on the old Jeff Copper quote, which continued with "there is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully", which should be self evident. Jeff also said "owning a handgun doesn't make you armed any more than owning a guitar makes you a musician”.
One can make noise with all of them with no instruction and no practice.
The retort misses the point completely. Cooper did not compare the relative skill levels required, or the amounts of time and effort required to develop them.
Both start with learning the basic functioning of the instruments, and becoming familiar with how they work. Both go much father.
The best way to gain an appreciation of the benefits of defensive pistol shooting training is to attend a session; perhaps watching one for a day or two, or maybe watching a really good, lengthy, and well narrated video would help in that limited regard. But that's not all. One should then go to the range and watch the people standing still and firing at a stationary target directly in front of them at a distance of 21 feet or thereabouts.
Then, one should (1) contrast the training with shooing at the square range, and (2) think very hard about how shooting at that stationary target 21 feet out differs from very markedly from defending against rapidly moving violent criminal actors engaging in a completely unexpected, very violent, and rapidly unfolding attack, most probably within a distance of three to five yards.
As Claude Werner says, one thing about training is that one does not know what one does not know.
zombietactics
New member
There is something of a progression I have noticed (and have subjectively experienced as well):
1. People get a gun and shoot it a couple of times. Maybe they even take a minimalist CCW class or NRA basic. They considered themselves to be "trained", even thought there is nothing in the way of demonstrable skill (or anything else) which they can point to ... except for the ability to put 8-out-of-10 rounds inside a USPSA target at 5 yards, and some vaguely communicated second-hand, fuzzy notions about "what might happen".
2. Somewhere along the way, they might notice how badly they shoot, or how incomplete the thought-process and training were, regarding whatever training (if any) they have received. They start going to the range a bit more, but don't really improve much.
3. They suspect it's the fault of the gun. Surely that explains that "no matter what they try" they still continue to shoot "low and to the left". So they buy a different gun ... which is really awesome 'cuz a gun writer or internet reviewer said so, or a USPSA champion has one, or Navy Seals ...
4. They still pretty much suck, so they pursue endless combinations of guns and modifications. A lot of people discover that they can shoot a 1911 marginally better at some point, so it becomes the "love of their life".
5. The notion of paying for knowledge and training becomes a distant thought. After-all, they've been "shooting for years", and they have a 1911 just like the one so-n-so wins matches with. Maybe another gun will be the answer ... a NightHawk this time ... with the kung-fu grips ... or they need a stipple-job and red-dot sight on their Glock in order to shoot better.
6. The focus on equipment has become such an obsession (happens to musicians too, BTW) that the notion of attaining skill is really nothing but a far way concept ... and so far we're just talking about raw fundamentals absent any defensive context. Any discussion of fighting skill, tactics, etc. .... you might as well be talking about the weather on Mars.
There's far more to this progression ...
1. People get a gun and shoot it a couple of times. Maybe they even take a minimalist CCW class or NRA basic. They considered themselves to be "trained", even thought there is nothing in the way of demonstrable skill (or anything else) which they can point to ... except for the ability to put 8-out-of-10 rounds inside a USPSA target at 5 yards, and some vaguely communicated second-hand, fuzzy notions about "what might happen".
2. Somewhere along the way, they might notice how badly they shoot, or how incomplete the thought-process and training were, regarding whatever training (if any) they have received. They start going to the range a bit more, but don't really improve much.
3. They suspect it's the fault of the gun. Surely that explains that "no matter what they try" they still continue to shoot "low and to the left". So they buy a different gun ... which is really awesome 'cuz a gun writer or internet reviewer said so, or a USPSA champion has one, or Navy Seals ...
4. They still pretty much suck, so they pursue endless combinations of guns and modifications. A lot of people discover that they can shoot a 1911 marginally better at some point, so it becomes the "love of their life".
5. The notion of paying for knowledge and training becomes a distant thought. After-all, they've been "shooting for years", and they have a 1911 just like the one so-n-so wins matches with. Maybe another gun will be the answer ... a NightHawk this time ... with the kung-fu grips ... or they need a stipple-job and red-dot sight on their Glock in order to shoot better.
6. The focus on equipment has become such an obsession (happens to musicians too, BTW) that the notion of attaining skill is really nothing but a far way concept ... and so far we're just talking about raw fundamentals absent any defensive context. Any discussion of fighting skill, tactics, etc. .... you might as well be talking about the weather on Mars.
There's far more to this progression ...
FireForged
New member
Well said Sir
Frank Ettin
Administrator
An excellent summary. Folks have a tendency to try to solve a software/education problem with hardware/equipment.zombietactics said:
zincwarrior
New member
Indeed these are two things to watch out for.
zincwarrior
New member
Welcome to the wonderful world of...every hobby ever.
What it sounds like to me is the arrogance of the expert. It happens in all fields of activity. There is no place for the amateur. These things we do are so difficult and dangerous that expensive and time-consuming training are required, even though it is highly unlikely that it will ever be used. It is as if we aren't trained well enough to drive in a race, so we shouldn't even have a car. Yet we manage and generally cope with everyday emergencies even though some drivers indulge in competitive commuting, which sometimes turns into adjudicated commuting. But I see accidents all the time, once or twice a week, undoubtedly because of a lack of situational awareness!
But Mr. Zombietactics (!!!) is spot on with the equipment, which also happens in other activities. That's the hobby aspect of the thing, which is not necessarily a bad thing but it does make it more expensive. But another aspect of the hobby or recreational is the learning. There is so much to guns and shooting that you'll never learn it all. There's always something new, if not necessarily better. Even that little lever that's in the front of trigger on a Glock was found in at least one gun something like 90 years ago.
If you do go shooting frequently and don't overdo it, you will inevitably become more familiar with your pistol and you'll be better at operating it. All the functions will become more automatic and natural and smoother and from all that will come speed. That can be both good and bad. The bad is if you pick up a bad habit along the way and I can't think of one, it will be difficult to overcome. It has been stated a long time ago that army recruits who have never handled a weapon before were easier to train, especially on something new. Recruits, particularly Americans, who grew up shooting and were somewhat familiar with firearms, could be a little difficult, although sergeants are used to difficult trainees and know how to deal with them. Take my word on that.
None of that necessarily has anything to do with tactics, if tactics enter into most shootings. The bad habits probably are habits that make for poor target shooting but good gunfighters are not necessarily good target shots. The only thing is, many of them are or were. In fact, many of them were also competitive target shooters (not competitive "combat" shooters) and some were exceptional shots before even entering law enforcement.
But Mr. Zombietactics (!!!) is spot on with the equipment, which also happens in other activities. That's the hobby aspect of the thing, which is not necessarily a bad thing but it does make it more expensive. But another aspect of the hobby or recreational is the learning. There is so much to guns and shooting that you'll never learn it all. There's always something new, if not necessarily better. Even that little lever that's in the front of trigger on a Glock was found in at least one gun something like 90 years ago.
If you do go shooting frequently and don't overdo it, you will inevitably become more familiar with your pistol and you'll be better at operating it. All the functions will become more automatic and natural and smoother and from all that will come speed. That can be both good and bad. The bad is if you pick up a bad habit along the way and I can't think of one, it will be difficult to overcome. It has been stated a long time ago that army recruits who have never handled a weapon before were easier to train, especially on something new. Recruits, particularly Americans, who grew up shooting and were somewhat familiar with firearms, could be a little difficult, although sergeants are used to difficult trainees and know how to deal with them. Take my word on that.
None of that necessarily has anything to do with tactics, if tactics enter into most shootings. The bad habits probably are habits that make for poor target shooting but good gunfighters are not necessarily good target shots. The only thing is, many of them are or were. In fact, many of them were also competitive target shooters (not competitive "combat" shooters) and some were exceptional shots before even entering law enforcement.
FireForged
New member
If a person has a willingness to defend themselves with a firearm [and] at the same time has no desire or inclination to learn anything other than basic functionality and marksmanship.. if that is the extent of their desire I have no harsh criticism to offer and think no less of them. Its simply a personal choice to learn more.
However, if a person does have a desire to learn self defense related techniques, tactics and methodology. If they want to develop a [better] skill set in regards to being a proficient or at least an erudite defender.. if that is what they are trying to do and if that person happens to find their way into a discussion forum about tactics and training- I think it very reasonable for others that they find there to offer their opinions for the purpose of meaningful debate. Within that context, there will certainly be widely varying opinions.. its the nature of dynamic discussion.
If some opinions seem arrogant, inflated or exaggerated, maybe we can examine that possibility on its merits or at least offer the author of such opinions to expound on his/her point.
However, if a person does have a desire to learn self defense related techniques, tactics and methodology. If they want to develop a [better] skill set in regards to being a proficient or at least an erudite defender.. if that is what they are trying to do and if that person happens to find their way into a discussion forum about tactics and training- I think it very reasonable for others that they find there to offer their opinions for the purpose of meaningful debate. Within that context, there will certainly be widely varying opinions.. its the nature of dynamic discussion.
If some opinions seem arrogant, inflated or exaggerated, maybe we can examine that possibility on its merits or at least offer the author of such opinions to expound on his/her point.
Well, let me just elaborate on that.
I made a remark about the arrogance of the expert. While arrogance might not be right word and it does sound a little strong, you still get the basic idea. The basic idea is that the certified expert considers himself both the font of and guardian of all knowledge. Often as not they are even the creators of the knowledge. This is by no means limited to the field of guns, shooting and self-defense.
There naturally arise different schools of thought and practice of technique. These are frequently expounded on in contemporary gun literature (gun magazines, that is). Sometimes there is mile name-calling involved. But it should not be assumed that the competing experts, as they might be called, would come to blows were they to meet face-to-face (on a dusty cowtown street). Hardly. So don't get too hot under the collar when it sounds like the discussion becomes a little brash. Only the good guys read this forum. Right?
The question of professional training is a question of value received for money and effort put forth, first and foremost.
I made a remark about the arrogance of the expert. While arrogance might not be right word and it does sound a little strong, you still get the basic idea. The basic idea is that the certified expert considers himself both the font of and guardian of all knowledge. Often as not they are even the creators of the knowledge. This is by no means limited to the field of guns, shooting and self-defense.
There naturally arise different schools of thought and practice of technique. These are frequently expounded on in contemporary gun literature (gun magazines, that is). Sometimes there is mile name-calling involved. But it should not be assumed that the competing experts, as they might be called, would come to blows were they to meet face-to-face (on a dusty cowtown street). Hardly. So don't get too hot under the collar when it sounds like the discussion becomes a little brash. Only the good guys read this forum. Right?
The question of professional training is a question of value received for money and effort put forth, first and foremost.
OldMarksman
Staff
Posted by BlueTrain:
All of the "experts" on whom I rely are quick to credit, cite and share the work, findings, techniques, and opinions of others, and to identify sources. They also change their minds as new information becomes available to them.
OldMarksman
Staff
I'll say again that in my opinion, most "bad habits" that can"get you killed" are things that you do, or do not do, that can lead to your being selected as a victim, or to your not being able to react timely.
But the OP referred to things that he had done in training, or practice.
I would suggest bad shooting habits might include shooting the same way that one shoots at the range--deliberately, while standing still, worrying about sight picture, failing to realize that the timing is no longer up to you, waiting to see hits before shooting again, perhaps shooting too slowly, etc.
And that, I think, is where defensive training can make its greatest contribution.
I do hope that I never have to find out.
But the OP referred to things that he had done in training, or practice.
I would suggest bad shooting habits might include shooting the same way that one shoots at the range--deliberately, while standing still, worrying about sight picture, failing to realize that the timing is no longer up to you, waiting to see hits before shooting again, perhaps shooting too slowly, etc.
And that, I think, is where defensive training can make its greatest contribution.
I do hope that I never have to find out.
OldMarksman
Staff
I'll add to that acting in a pre-rehearsed, scripted manner in the same manner as one has practiced, rather than recognizing and evaluating the real situation and acting accordingly.
- Status