Offense vs. Defense - Do you fire on the move or go for accuracy?

Status
Not open for further replies.
until the "experts" agree on standing still that is LOL.
Click to expand...

Keep in mind that, like you threegun, most of the "experts" that ply their trade for money have 'never' been in a gunfight, have never seen combat nor even been shot at. I'm not sure where they get their 'expertise' from, but it's not from experience.
Think I'm kidding....check it out.

Anyway threegun, please don't take my statements out of context. I never said that "standing still" is the way to go.

I said:

"My advice...depending on distance....is to seek cover first.
If you are too close or it's too sudden...crouch and point shoot.

Odds are 'that' will assure mutual wounding or mutual death. But that's a gunfight."
.
 
Wow, I am impressed at the number and the length of the posts for this thread. Personally, as I have said many times here on TFL, my goal is not to be a hero or take a persons life. If, however, I was somehow miraculously caught in this type of situation. My first and main concern would be to get the hell outta that situation...so, you betcha...I would be moving and firing, moving the hell away from the other guy with the gun. I figure he is concerned with getting shot himself, so would be hiding/covered and not taking the time to aim...just throwin lead. Which would be perfect for me, as I am moving at the utmost of super-humanly speed possible away and firing to keep him pinned. I teach Martial Arts, so I always tell my kids that if a person gets into a fight, there is a very good chance that they are going to be hit, as well as them hitting the other person...the best course of action is not to be in a fight, unless there is absolutely no other choice. I guess the same would go for a shootout with guns, since, from what I have learned here at TFL, most handguns have no One Shot Stopping Power, that gives the BG an opportunity to shoot me, even after I have shot him. Not very good choices. Just my thought.
 
Skyguy, Most of our military prior to the ousting Of Saddam had no combat experience, still they performed like champions. The reason is because they were prepared with excellent training.

Keep in mind that, like you threegun, most of the "experts" that ply their trade for money have 'never' been in a gunfight, have never seen combat nor even been shot at.
Click to expand...

Those that have been in a gunfight recommend movement. A friend of mine shot and wounded a robbery suspect who was raising his gun on him. He recommends movement. The reason he only wounded the guy is because he was moving laterally to make himself a tougher to hit target as he fired. The robber was hit and dropped his gun (and the bag of money) and was captured at the hospital. My point is that while you are ultimately going to do what you feel is correct, the majority of those "experts" both with and without actual gunfight experience agree that movement is the best course of action to enhance your chances of survival. We disagree about what to do if things are "too close" or "too sudden" and thats okay. I will say this, if Sweat'n'Bullets sprint fire works for me, you can bet your last dollar I won't be crouching and firing but rather sprinting away and firing.

S'n'B, Can you PM me with the details of your next training session? When, where, how much, and how long.
 
the majority of those "experts" both with and without actual gunfight experience agree that movement is the best course of action to enhance your chances of survival.
Click to expand...

If distance permits, definitely move. But don't fret, regardless of training common sense alone will force 'movement'.

But most gunfights occur at very close distances where you cannot employ the run and gun tactic.

So, the odds say that at close range you'll 'not' run.....rather you'll react with a startle response and you 'will' crouch out of fear. In that situation you must be able to point shoot.

My advice...depending on distance....is to seek cover first.
If you are too close or it's too sudden...crouch and point shoot.

Ask any "expert". :)
.
 
I was invited to bring our tactical team to participate in a paintball contest by the owner of a local paintball facility. He said he had a group that would like to challenge us in a friendly competition. While discussing the idea, I was pretty confident that he would come up on the short end of the stick. He made the statement that police officers were the first to get shot in their competition. He told me through personal experience that officers almost all stopped, got into their shooting stance and were immediately shot by the other team who were constantly moving. I know accuracy is what wins the confrontation but these guys train to hit the target while moving. My department does some firing while moving, but once or twice a year does not make a person proficient. I know paintball guns hold more rounds and have no recoil than duty weapons, but we need to look at concealment if we are to carefully take aim during an armed engagement. Maybe we can learn something from these shooters of paint.
 
What am I physically capable of?

I believe that there should be continuity to ones movement. I feel that one should train to get hits through the entire movement spectrum. There is no doubt about the importance of "stand and deliver" skills. I have spent hundreds and hundreds of hours on this skill with tens of thousands of drawstrokes. If my body chooses this solution to the problem, that skill will be there.

I also see a need for very controlled movement that facilitates a precision shot on the move. This could include skills such as "just walk", side stepping (crab walk,) or even the old groucho (duck) walk. All three of these techniques have there place (however small they might be) and should be something that you can do on demand, if that demand arises. I practice head shots at logical distances with this type of movement.

I also see a need to be able to get hits with your toes pointing the direction that you are moving. This type of movement has your upper body working independent from your lower body, "like a turret of a tank." Toes point the direction you are headed, body turreted the direction that you are shooting. This type of movement brings in your bi-lateral skills. Shooting to the firing side can be done two handed to a certain point, then you need to go one handed. The possible speed of this movement can cover the full spectrum, from a walk, to a jog, to a stride, to a run, and finally to a sprint. This is where you find what you are physically capable of. This is where the limitations are pushed, and the standards are set.

Feints, jukes, cut backs and directional changes are also part of the movement skills set. One should explore there ability to use these skills and the limitations that different terrain/footing give you.

React as you need to react, move as you need to move, and see what you need to see to solve the problem that you are confronted with. If you train with these basic concepts, you will have covered the vast majority of the possible situations. In covering these situations, your body will chose, with confidence, the appropriate solution.

http://www.threatfocused.com/forums/index.php
 
Skyguy,

My advice...depending on distance....is to seek cover first.
If you are too close or it's too sudden...crouch and point shoot.
Click to expand...

Odds are 'that' will assure mutual wounding or mutual death. But that's a gunfight."
Click to expand...

No thanks. I would rather take my chances going unarmed, begging for my life, than settle for mutual assured wounding or death. Thats just my opinion. Movement is a key component in gunfight survival no matter the range IMO. The faster I can move, while still making contact with my adversary, the better my odds are of ending the threat without getting wounded or killed. If I am correct then the absolute most important time to move would be at close range while even or behind in S'n'B's reactionary curve.

BTW,I always prepare for being wounded (the best I can anyway) by drilling weak hand reloading and shooting and by mentally focusing on how to react if shot. Because "thats a gunfight". I just prefer to use the best tactics that would make those odds as small as possible. You yourself seem to agree that movement is recommended.

If distance permits, definitely move. But don't fret, regardless of training common sense alone will force 'movement'.
Click to expand...

I don't believe that common sense will cause anyone to move though. You must train to move if you hope to move when fear of death causes you brain to go into autopilot. Common sense has nothing to do with it except to tell me that if movement is good from distance, it is vital sans distance. The closer to the threat you are the greater the danger. Anyway thank for the suggestions to you and Sweat'n'Bullets.
 
I don't believe that common sense will cause anyone to move though. You must train to move if you hope to move when fear of death causes you brain to go into autopilot.
Click to expand...

After reading that, my last suggestion is for you to seek training from someone who has actually been in shootouts and/or firefights; like Cirillo.
There's a world of difference between play fighting and real fighting....between harmless paper targets and someone determined to kill you.

...and if mutual wounding or mutual death scares you, stop carrying and just practice the tactic of raising your hands in surrender. Remember, you will most likely be ambushed rather than forewarned.
.
 
Skyguy, Let me ask you some questions.

1. Why is it recommended that we train regularly?

2. Why is it recommended that we move toward cover while engaging the treat?

3. In a super stressful encounter what happens to most well trained individuals?

4. In the same super stressful encounter what happens to the untrained individuals?

My answers are below and are as I believe them to be true. They are also similar to many if not most of the firearms trainers I have looked at.

1. It is recommended that we train regularly so that we are proficient with our chosen weapon and so that when the poop hits the fan our brain will revert back to the training without conscious thought. IMHO

2. It is recommended that we move toward cover while shooting because it is harder to hit a moving target, cover can shield us (further increasing the chances of survival), and firing puts the bad guy under duress reducing his marksmanship. IMHO

3. In a super stressful situation most well trained individuals revert back to their training. IMHO

4. In a super stressful situation most untrained individuals......freeze. IMHO

Based on what I have learned over the course of 15 plus years, common sense has nothing to do with someones response in a life and death encounter. That statement along with your suggestion that I should crouch and shoot so that I can achieve the hope of mutual wounding or death is what has me wondering the above questions. If only common sense is needed to know what to do in a gunfight then training would be as simple as an eight week college course on common sense.

I could be wrong on my answers. If you disagree with the answers please give the source of your disagreement ie instructor saying different etc. Don't take this debate as argumentative. I'm always searching for better ways to do things. If your way is better, I am open to change. Thats why I want the source of your training, so that I can research that\those instructors. A prime example of my quest to get better is S'n'B's fluid response. I never tried to run while shooting one handed behind me. From very close distances (as you and I are discussing) this might work. If it does, I will be better. Thats fine by me.
 
Those that have been in a gunfight recommend movement.
Click to expand...
And those that have been in a gunfight also recommend not moving. That is the problem with these overly broad blanket statements. I've trained with a lot of folks and with some of the best, and I have never met anyone who would suggest that there was only one response to all different situations. In some situations you might be better off moving. In others you might be better off standing and shooting.
 
Just back from Givens' CPII class. We did lots of movement. One thing Tom points out is that most civilian interactions occur close up. Thus, movement is to unhinge the opponent's OODA loopy. There isn't time to move to cover in this type of instance. Most movement is short and lateral for the disruptive factor of moving out of the spotlight of attention and forcing an opponent's reorientation, giving you a time advantage.

As David points out, all these are heuristic. There is no guarantee.

Move to cover is more appropriate in some prolonged fight. When a guy is a few feet away, looking for cover, moving to cover takes a bit of planning(why-that takes a bit of time, doesn't it). Identifying cover will divert your attention from who is shooting at you. Thus, we spent time on lateral moves and shooting.

The drills were very useful. Again, training and FOF are quite a different enviroment from matches. Look at how people misuse cover at matches and then if you do it correctly, you slow down the match - you won't win, blah, blah.
 
David, We were talking about being even or behind in the reactionary curve that Sweat'n'Bullets described. It is my fault for not more clearly explaining myself or assuming that others know what I am thinking. Still I have never read or seen any instructor recommend standing still unless a well aimed shot is needed.

And those that have been in a gunfight also recommend not moving.
Click to expand...

When is this recommended besides when a well aimed shot is needed?

I tell you if an instructor told me to stand still and deliver my return fire, in the face of someone firing back as in (equal or behind in the reactionary curve), I would question his or her reasoning and the usefullness of the rest of their training material.
 
Glenn, Your instructor probably reminded everyone again about the importance of not getting caught even or behind in the RC and about being aware of your surroundings at all times. You're right looking for cover in the middle of the fight at close ranges is not good. Knowing where it is prior to the fight is key. Regardless of cover, movement is vital to increasing the chances of survival (or so I've been told). I asked David when his instructors recommended standing and shooting, can you also answer that? You have the most formal training of the people I talk to and your input would be awesome. Thanks.
 
You can talk to awesome old me, all you want. I strongly, again, recommend, that you save some pennies and go train in such dynamic situations. Listening to my opinion is worth little without experiencing it yourself.

As far as not moving, squatting or whatever - it's all whatever - there is not guaranteed solution. If I tried to squat - my old knees would probably fail me and I would fall and die. Sometimes, you might actually approach your opponent - isn't that contrary to dogma? It depends.

There is a grammar and semantics of skills like there are for language. You try to learn the rules, not as to generate fixed utterances but to produce a fluent story or act coherently and fluidly in an incident.
 
Those that have been in a gunfight recommend movement.
Click to expand...

Actually - those of us that have been in gunfights recommend doing what will keep you alive.

Whether or not to move is going to be a decision that can't be played out until the moment of truth - just like so many other decisions (whether to aim for the head, whether to shoot on the move, whether to shoot to the weak-side, whether to use weaver or isosceles or modified weaver....whatever).

Sitting here arguing about which tactical decision is the best solution before you even have a problem against which to apply that solution is a waste of time. Tactics is not about deciding which solution will work for every situation, it is about developing your bag of tricks and then figuring out how to use that bag of tricks in any given situation. The difficulty with tactics is that you must develop your ability to assess your situation and choose a course of action QUICKLY, and the more tricks you have down pat then the better off you are. You will not have time to think, you will not have time to string together three coherent thoughts, so you need to continuously practice EVERYTHING in your bag of tricks so that you don't HAVE to think about them.
Dynamic shooting has its place, so its only prudent to practice it to the extent that you are able. Stand and deliver has its place, so it's only prudent to practice it to the extent you are able. This goes for everything that doesn't fly in the face of common sense.

At the end of a gunfight, the only right answer was the one that kept you alive. Save the rest for the Monday-morning quarterbacking.
 
Everyone here has made some very good points.

There have been many good points made in this thread, some that I've never even thought of and I have been in a firefight. The bottom line is, everything is situation dependant. I've always been trained in the force and violence of action department, so movement there is always required. Of course, I do cordon & searchs and hard hits for a living, and I have the finest supporting arms in the world that I can't even use because of collatoral damage and the "hearts and minds" thing. But I do have a whole squad/platoon supporting me, and we have belt-fed weapons providing suppresion fire while we move. We also prefer fire and menuever to fire and movement. All of this really doesn't apply to a someone with ccw. There will be times, when you have cover, that you will not move. There will be times, when you are in the open, that you will (or better) move. Most would pop smoke and run while firing to cover their retreat. That's fine. I personally (because I have seen it work well) would probably advance as I fire, because if done properly and violently enough you will petrify your assailent to the point where they can't function. There are a thousand schools of thought on this, but most of the time you have to move to survive (especially if caught in the open). I am a strong advocate that you should always fire while you are moving unless there is a chance of hitting civilians.

So... we have basically all come to the conclusion that movement is good. What we are not in aggreance on is how to move, where to move, ect. I'm sure someone is going to come up and say I'm insane for closing with the target. Even the military trains for one on one engagements (when we do mout and room clearing), and they train to close with the enemy obliquely while firing on the move. Marine Corps enhanced marksmanshep program (EMP for those who know what I'm talking about or have heard of it, which was invented by my old Battalion Gunner) covers dynamic movement while closing extensively. That's what I've been taught to do, and have done.

SNB's system, which I have not studied extensively, may be another viable option. I know for a fact that he is well versed in dynamic shooting from the following statement...

quote
also see a need to be able to get hits with your toes pointing the direction that you are moving. This type of movement has your upper body working independent from your lower body, "like a turret of a tank." Toes point the direction you are headed, body turreted the direction that you are shooting.
Click to expand...

I've heard some other very logical options. Everything is situation dependant, and probably the most important part of this thread that everyone has taken away in this

#1. Dynamic Firing is an important skill that anyone who trains to be in a firefight should cover.

#2 Movement+fire= higher probability of survival... Stationary+careful aim+slow steady squeeze= certain death.

#3 Training is the key. Train to fire while closing. Train to fire while retreating. Train to fire while moving obliquely. Train to quickly eliminate a stoppage. Train to... Train for every situation you can think of, but prioritize to fit your needs.
 
Wheeler,
#1. Dynamic Firing is an important skill that anyone who trains to be in a firefight should cover.

#2 Movement+fire= higher probability of survival... Stationary+careful aim+slow steady squeeze= certain death.

#3 Training is the key. Train to fire while closing. Train to fire while retreating. Train to fire while moving obliquely. Train to quickly eliminate a stoppage. Train to... Train for every situation you can think of, but prioritize to fit your needs.
Click to expand...

Nice. On #2 I would add (while equal or behind in the reactionary curve). As for advancing.......that would be offensive. In the military or maybe swat this is great but for the civilian it would mean a jail cell most likely.

Glenn and David, Many have suggested, as have both of you, that movement equals safety. I stated above that none of the informal instruction I have had has suggested standing still in the face of a gunman (assuming his gun is drawn). I got the feeling David suggested that some formal instructors suggested standing still in this instance. Question to both of you. Have you ever been instructed to stand still while even or behind in the gunfight(assuming not behind cover)?

Glenn, Advancing is moving which is why I left it out. I was taught to advance (with a gun)but only in certain circumstances and most of them are offensive. Thanks for the training suggestion also I know you are trying to help. I also understand that you can't pre-program your course of action as the gunfight includes to many variables. Still you must train the skills you hope to employ if that gloomy day ever comes right? I promise not to move if behind cover or if I have the upper hand in the gunfight(if the situation warrants it),but I can't imagine in my wildest what if scenario, standing still, while even or behind in the gunfight, while in the open.
 
Pickpocket,
Actually - those of us that have been in gunfights recommend doing what will keep you alive.
Click to expand...

I should have clearified my statement better. Those that have been in a gunfight recommend movement when even or behind in the reactionary curve and exposed. We had been talking about being even or behind at close distance when Skyguy recommended crouching and firing to insure mutual wounding or death. I have never been instructed to do so by anyone in the know. IMO Sweat'n'Bullets hit the nail on the head in his fluid situational response post #6.
 
No, I've kept up with the thread and I understood your post. My response was aimed at all of the left or right, black or white arguments. Wasn't meant to invalidate your view in any way.
 
Just to put in my two cents worth:
Given the scenario (both with weapons pointing at each other), you guys go ahead and move. Me, I'm going to shoot my assailant in the head twice. There is only one sure way to guarantee your survival in a confrontation: remove the threat(s).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top