Using Your Fire as Cover

In training, we look for consistency & efficiency, so we train for lateral movement all the time, with the expectation that situational awareness will keep you from sidestepping off a cliff, if you happen to be in that extreme situation.

-RJP
 
The method described by the OP was taught to us for countering ambushes. You end up rapidly closing with a bunch of prone guys, you force the enemy machinegunner to either fire into his own troops or go silent and your survivors will be behind the ambush and standing up while the ambushers have to try and reposition to get you, they are static, you are mobile and have grenades.

Fairburn & Applegate know that of which they speak. Especially since they were instructors for commando unit operations.

Is this a good idea for a CCW situation? Depends upon the situation. You also have to be a lot more... energetic when doing this kind of thing and you sure as hell want to be sure to move in an erratic pattern while moving and firing as fast as you can (yes to both).
 
A fine techneque!

When I served with the Royal Grenadiers my hide was spared from the foul hands of the Thuggis men of battle by a quick rush into their ranks. When left without nary a horse to shield you, go forth, and loudly, into them.
 
Charging into the teeth of 2 or more BG's is something I'd expect of Mel Gibson in a Lethal Weapon movie.

See threat. Evaluate threat. Threat real. Threat Dangerous.
Draw gun. Fire gun. Move sideways. Stop. Fire gun Until no threat.

In the rare instance where one has no real retreat and escape routes are limited, charging them like a wild-eyed shooting maniac may break their ranks enough for you to get past them to a better location.

Of course, if that happens, they'll be hampered in their ability to maintain solid footing, what with all that yellow and brown matter left behind. :D

As for me, I just hope I can float like a butterfly and sting like a 230-grain +P JHP.
 
This is Weaver-specific, but...

OK. Assume you're right handed, so you're "bladed" a bit with your left side forward. This is a natural stance to go to the Weaver from. We'll also assume a strong-side holster of some sort, you're at condition orange but it's not yet time to draw against that...well let's say "agitated gangbanger type".

Oooops, he's pulled up his sweatshirt and you see a gun at his waistband. NOW it's time to draw.

One option:

Take your left (leading) leg and bring it hard right, across your body while taking a "long step" to the right. Your right leg bends and you drop to that knee, right foot hasn't moved but of course it's now on it's toe.

While that's happening you draw and you're twisting your upper body radically left into a Weaver-ish hold. Your left knee is pointing to your right almost 90 degrees from the direction your gun barrel points.

You've got what I've been privately calling a "Kenpo Weaver" because I've seen this type of crossed-up thing used as a punch taught in a Kenpo class.

It feels really "tight" across the upper body and it's an incredibly stable shooting platform. It's also dropped you some and put you about 1.5 body widths off-line. Almost as cool: since your right thigh has stayed vertical through all this, you don't have anything impeding your draw. All other off-line movement jiggles your holster all over the place, including bending it which impedes the draw.

It has some downsides. Once locked into this position, swinging your gun barrel right is easy but left means rolling onto your back and shooting past your knees...which actually isn't the worst possible idea but it seriously limits mobility. Or, to move from the "Kenpo Weaver" without rolling onto your back first really needs a forward roll...hope you know how to do that...I "can", kinda :).

---

Another question: what does an Isosceles-type shooter do to move laterally?

One option: bring the off-side foot (we'll say left here) back and right, so you "blade" right-forward and shoot one handed "Olympic style" while backing up?
 
Take your left (leading) leg and bring it hard right, across your body while taking a "long step" to the right. Your right leg bends and you drop to that knee, right foot hasn't moved but of course it's now on it's toe.
Click to expand...

Thanks, Jim. Now both my back and my knee hurt! :D
Maybe I'm doing it wrong but it just felt awkward as heck to me.

What I think you're getting at is that you are (essentially) using the left leg to turn your body to the right, then pick up "normal" gait from there, dropping to a knee (ouch) if needed.

Another question: what does an Isosceles-type shooter do to move laterally?
Click to expand...

Though some instructors don't recommend it, I use a side-step "shuffle". Move the right foot first and as you move to that foot, the left foot moves to where the R-foot was or just beyond. It's not as fast but it takes me out of line of the shooter. The main issue here is if your right foot snags (curb, tree root, etc.) you can go down.

This works better for me because I can keep better aim as I move versus trying to twist my upper body.
 
firing while moving is a valid technique, but there are limitations, mostly dictated by safety and friendly fire considerations
.
It isn't cover, that was well stated by a previous poster. This technique would actually be suppressive fire.
 
Canuck... that's the point. adapting military Small Unit Tactics to personal self defense rarely works.

J. March,

Most people, regardless of training, revert to isosceles under stress, we know this from empirical evidence (dash cams, etc), and as you've alluded to, it is harder to move laterally while shooting in that position... another reason that I don't advocate shooting & moving.

-RJP
 
I still agree with you, Rob, that a side step while drawing, then shoot, is a great compromise for most shooters.

Just as an exercise in theory, do you believe you (personally) can make good upper body hits while moving laterally?

If so, isn't this the best of both worlds?
 
Rob..neither Fairbairn not Sykes were talking about the military use of a pistol when first teaching this method of shooting.
This advice was for police and armed civilian use of handguns.
Others here are also dead wrong about the accuracy of this technique--especially when used in conjunction with point/target/combat/focused shooting.
I have students making rapid fire COM/head shots while rapidly closing in within a few minutes of training.
And I stress the use of one hand shooting--which makes lateral movement a lot smoother and natural.
Not to mention making the same excellent hits possible while moving in any and all directions.
It is also the method of choice of the Israeli's when distance/cover is not an option.
It is also the method of choice that I learned from Phil Singleton (of S.A.S fame) for CQB and that my friends learned from Eric Haney ( Delta Force) and Mel Perry ( also of S.A.S.)
 
Movement Inside of the Fight Continuum

"The fight will be what the fight will be." There is a definite fight continuum and inside the fight continuum there are a number of other continuums. There is of course, 7677's sight continuum there is a reaction continuum, and a movement continuum. There are even lesser continuums including grip, trigger, etc. but let's concentrate on the main three.

React as you need to react, move as you need to move, and see what you need to see within the context of the specifics of the fight. This is very straight forward and simple, yet each of these are intertwined. Each works in conjunction with the other and each has an effect on the other. The dynamics of the fight will be dictated by your position in the reactionary curve, the proximity of the threat, and the urgency of the situation. How you deal with the specifics of the fight will depend on your mindset, experience, training and skill level.

When it comes to training and skill level, I believe that we should strive to be as well rounded and versatile as possible. To understand the fight continuum and to cover as many bases as possible within that continuum, there needs to be a priority set on "the most likely situations." But training should not stop there. In regards to the movement continuum, I have broken the skill sets into four categories.

Stand and Deliver

Controlled Movement

Dynamic Movement

"Get the heck out of dodge" Movement

Stand and deliver is the entry level skill set. This is where you nail down your fundamentals. You should have stand and deliver skills down cold to truly excel in the skill sets that follow. Many very good men have come home after very tough nights with stand and deliver skills.... a few of them right here on this forum. One should not discount this skill set when it is used within the correct context of the fight.

Controlled movement is an intermediate skill set and would include the groucho (duck walk,) the side step (crab walk,) and "just walk." Controlled movement has it place also. When the urgency is lower and the proximity/distance requires more precision (sighted fire.)

Dynamic movement is the "high priority" movement that I referred to earlier. This is where you will most likely find yourself. Dynamic movement excels when you are behind in the reactionary curve, the proximity is close, and the urgency is high. This movement can range from "faster than a walk," to a jog, to a stride, to a run, and finally to a sprint. This type of movement really works well within the reaction continuum and the sight continuum. The use of threat focused skills takes this skill set well beyond what has been considered "possible" in the recent past. One handed skills are a "must" with dynamic movement.

“Get the heck out of Dodge” movement is simply sprinting to cover without engaging until you are behind cover. This has its place, especially in the military. Its use by a civilian defender is becoming less and less necessary due to the huge advancements in dynamic movement shooting over the past year. If cover is a couple of yards away.....by all means get to it! But do not die trying to get to something that is just too far away.

One should be well rounded. Prioritize your training to the "most likely situation." Work the other areas of the fight continuum, so that if you find yourself in a specific circumstance you will be comfortable there. Stay within the safety level of your skill level, but strive to improve each time out. Find, explore, and push your limitations within the fight continuum.
 
As an instructor that specalizes in point shooting and dynamic movement I have sought out and trained with some of the best guys in the nation. Last month, I trained with Matt Temkin for the second time. Matt and I have batted this topic around on a number of occasions, with him on one side and me on the other. As I progress....as I teach more and more students....I am slowly beginning to see things Matt's way. The biggest factor in this change of heart comes down to the "type" of student that seeks out my courses. I tend to get the most motivated and highly skilled students. They are also extremely aggressive and very serious individuals.

One thing that these "top" students have made very clear to me is that "they are who they are." They were born a certain way and for them to not act as their instincts tell them would be next to impossible. These guys are born hunters/meateaters.....their mindset is that of "rightous indignation."

These guys and some of the guys that were in Matts course last month were the inspiration for my last "Who Are You?" article.

Not only does it matter "Who are you" but "what is your skill level." The guys that Matt, 7677, Gabe, and I train have the skill level to make solid hits with dynamic movement (not controlled movement) out to seven yards while moving dynamically to every direction on the clock.

This may be a relatively new skill set but it is an accurate, reliable, effective and efficient skill set. The "Dynamic Movement Draw Stroke" allows for hits on target area at the same time as a stationary draw stroke. It all comes down to the knowledge and the skill level.

Of course, nobody is saying that "dynamic movement" hits are "as accurate" as stationary hits. But, no one is making that claim threat focused hits are as accurate as sighted fire hits either. What we have here is an excellent balance of speed (of the shots and of the movement) and accuracy.

This is not suppressive fire, this is fast and accurate shooting with dynamic movement. All it takes is knowledge, training, skill level, and most of all......an open mind.
 
Sorry for the repost guys, but this is pertinient to the conversation. Training with Matt for the second time, along with a few of my repeat students, and the conversations at the dinners is what inspired this article.

Who are you?


Over the last seven years there has been some major advancement in the art when it comes to the world of the gun. This is predominantly due to the realization that “one size does not fit all” and that the “situation” is the dictating factor when it comes down to choosing a tactic or technique to deal with a life threatening encounter. It is plain to see that the facts are that the situation dictates the strategy, the strategy dictates the tactics, and the tactics dictate the techniques. The technique based training of the past locked us into a “one size fits all” mentality that simply does not stand up under open minded scrutiny and much less inside of force on force.

As we look at the situation, one of the key components of this situation comes down to “who are you?” As we look at this question we immediately think of the most obvious aspects of it. We think about age, physical ability, size, and training. Of course, these are very important aspects of your personal situation. One aspect, that is less obvious, but none the less important, is your mindset. The question needs to be ask “who are you” in regards to the mental aspect of the fight. What has your past experiences and performances been in physical altercations? Are you aggressive or passive by nature? Did you immediately take the fight to the opponent or hesitate due to denial. Did you only go on the defensive?

These are all very important questions. But the reality is that many people have never had to answer these questions. For those of us that are not as lucky, we have a basic idea of who we are. For really unlucky people and the professionals, there is enough experience to know exactly who they are.

The reason that this question is so important is so that you can prioritize your training to take in account exactly who you are. If you know yourself to be very aggressive, you can train aggressive action as a known priority. This will not only fit your situation very well but it will also further entrench this natural desire to take the fight to the adversary. By ingraining this deeper and deeper, you will recognize the situation, for what it is, earlier and respond quicker. It is my belief that this is what we see in some of the old timers that have prevailed numerous times with stand and deliver skills or while advancing aggressively. Gunfighters such as Fairbairn, Sykes, Bryce, Jordon, and Askins were born hunters/meat eaters that knew exactly who they were and trained with this knowledge to the point that they were “in the fight” before the Average Joe would even know that a fight was eminent. This ability to recognize the fight early and respond to it with decisive aggressive action leaves options of tactics and techniques open that simply are not available to the Average Joe.

You may also know yourself as someone that can shift gears to aggressive action, but only after a slight hesitation. This is where many moderately trained civilians would find themselves. This knowledge can help you prioritize your training to something that gets you off of the line of attack, at a subconscious level, to give yourself some time for the conscious mind to catch up and go on the offense. This is where getting off of the X really shines. The forward oblique’s and parallel tracking works very well for this type of mindset. Visualization while training can improve this hesitation. You need to tap into that inner animal, the one that simply works off of indignation. Visualization of protection of my wife and kids brings me closer to the decisive aggressive action that some of the top gunfighters in history have used to prevail. Reality is that my wife and kids do not even have to be present for this mindset to be enacted. Any attack on me is an attack on my wife and kids.

You may also know yourself as someone that will only act defensively, someone that will simply not go on the offense. While I do not agree with this type of mindset, as an instructor I have to understand that this may be the makeup of some of my students. Skills such as rearward movement or fighting to cover can be taught as their priority tactic. As I give them those skills, I do my best to convey to them the importance of a winning mindset and the option of more aggressive tactics and techniques.

As I said earlier, many people have not had to answer the question of who they really are. For these people it is important to train yourself to be as well rounded as possible. It is also important to work on ingraining a winning mindset. Force of force courses can help you begin to determine who you are. Visualization while training is a very important aspect in cultivating this aggressive winning mindset.

When we look back on the old timers that were so successful in there numerous gunfights, one thing is perfectly clear. They had the mindset to not only win, but to aggressively destroy the threat. They did not shoot to stop. They did not shoot to defend. They shot to effectively obliterate the threat. This is what made the tactics and techniques that they chose to use, as effective as they were.

They knew exactly who they were. They trained and fought with this absolute knowledge.

So the question bears repeating, “Who are you?”
 
Charging the guns as it where was always a move taught to me to break a fight or protect some one who was in your control or care.

Can't say I agree with all the postings , but agree they have some merit,, but I'll stick with what I was taught


DJ
 
Running FOF scenarios has shown me that while rapidly advancing may win the day getting off line wins more of them. YMMV.
 
Sykes, Fairbairn and others are speeking of scenarios were there is not going to be a trial after the fact. The act of pressing the attack may be viewed from a jury box, described by a lawer (who was not there) as over agresive. Getting off the line and seeking cover may be the best advice for the average joe.
Another point is the "profesional" gun fighters being able to identify a fight early ,worked "back in the day". Not so good now with litigation to consider? Draw too early, who is the agresor?
"If you were in fear of attack why did you advance"? The what ifs are never ending.
That said FOF practice is a good idea if you can find it or do it your self.
It is a concern that worying about legal consequences may cause one to pause too long.
 
Last edited:
Sad to say that getting off the line and seeking cover are rarely an option in the typical gunfight.
I also have been taught to shoot while moving in at an angle and that is another option in tight quarters.
After working in the courts for 28 years I have yet to see a case where the type of weapon or the tactic became an issue.
In the real world--as opposed to the gun rags--what matters is wheither or not the shooting was justified
 
In the real world--as opposed to the gun rags--what matters is wheither or not the shooting was justified
Click to expand...

Excellent point.

It is true that how you went about the shooting can influence peoples' perceptions of whether the shooting was justified, but on the whole, the question should be: Is this shooting justified? Can I avoid shooting, without harm to innocents or myself?
 
Also true about the real world is that while the shooting involing the intended target may be ruled justified the one(s) resulting from the errant rounds may not. Something to think about when evaluating "acceptable rates of accuracy."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top