- Messages
- 2,633
- Reactions
- 4,004
JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
- Messages
- 2,633
- Reactions
- 4,004
- Thread Starter
- #3
Yeah, I thought the same thing, but the info was spot on I thought.
- Messages
- 24,972
- Reactions
- 59,466
The moral of the story is to grow a beard and make a YouTube video about it.
:hide
:hide
- Messages
- 4,006
- Reactions
- 11,422
I think there are a lot of takeaways from this event in addition to the ones the video makes...
For example, members of the security team have stated that they had eyes on this guy when he first came in because it looked like he was wearing a wig/disguise. I'm not condemning them for this as this is a huge issue that we all deal with in our current P.C. culture...not wanting to be rude and possibly offend people. But it's certainly worth considering what the outcome might have been if a couple of the security guards had made direct contact with this guy when he first came in. Now maybe we'd still have two dead security guards. We will never know for sure. But I certainly think this is a good reminder to NOT let politeness deter us when we see something that we know to be out of place or off.
Point #2: Drawing and shooting quickly can be the difference between life and death. So set yourself up for your best chance of success in that regard. Drawing from S.O.B like that first guard had to do is a MUCH slower draw than 3 o'clock or Appendix.
Point #3: Muzzle discipline can be critical. It may just be the camera angle on the videos I've seen, but to me it certainly looked like the guard that walked down the first aisle to the bottom of the pews was muzzling people as they went. Things worked out ok but we certainly want to avoid pointing loaded guns at innocents in high stress situations if it can be avoided.
- Messages
- 23,411
- Reactions
- 112,115
You will need to do what ever it is you have to do to survive...
And also understand that your every action or inaction will be judged 7 ways to Sunday by folks who :
Weren't there..
Have no real clue about you...
May have no real ideal of what happened to you...
Have only a limited viewpoint in which to comment on your actions...
Have no idea of the situation that you were in...
If you lived you did good...if you lived and came out unscathed , you did great....
Mostly I have an issue with someone giving me "standards" to live by , which may work great for them...but do nothing for me and my situation.
Andy
And also understand that your every action or inaction will be judged 7 ways to Sunday by folks who :
Weren't there..
Have no real clue about you...
May have no real ideal of what happened to you...
Have only a limited viewpoint in which to comment on your actions...
Have no idea of the situation that you were in...
If you lived you did good...if you lived and came out unscathed , you did great....
Mostly I have an issue with someone giving me "standards" to live by , which may work great for them...but do nothing for me and my situation.
Andy
- Messages
- 2,902
- Reactions
- 8,011
I figure it this way...until I can consistently hit a 2" circle at 25 yards at 1 second from the holster...I keep training.
That is my standard.
That is my standard.
- Messages
- 23,411
- Reactions
- 112,115
As a follow up to my first post here....
Training , planning and reviewing is always good.
Just don't get caught in the trap of thinking that if "A" happens..."B" is always my next course of action.
A plan is good...but the bad guys and most of the regular folks around you , will not go by your plan or play by your rules.
If you can stick with your plan..that's great...but be flexible in your thinking and always live in that moment of the situation...not stuck how it was supposed to go down.
Its easy to say :
I'd do this if faced with a gunman...
But when faced with an actual threat in real life , all of the internet posts go out the window...
Have a plan , keep your cool , be adaptable in your thinking of the situation at hand...
Standards need to be personal...as no one knows your life and what you need more than you do.
Do you need to shoot as fast or as accurate as Jerry Miculek...?
No...
But you do need to shoot as fast and as accurately as smoothly as you can...
By "smoothly" , I mean to say as if almost without a thought...muscle memory if you will.
What this looks like and means....is do what works for you...and not what works for someone else
You don't have to be the next Wyatt Earp or Clint Smith...
Know yourself ...know your limitations....
Both are over used phrases , but each holds much wisdom and truth.
Know what you can do...with what you have...get good with what you have and what you know.
Andy
Training , planning and reviewing is always good.
Just don't get caught in the trap of thinking that if "A" happens..."B" is always my next course of action.
A plan is good...but the bad guys and most of the regular folks around you , will not go by your plan or play by your rules.
If you can stick with your plan..that's great...but be flexible in your thinking and always live in that moment of the situation...not stuck how it was supposed to go down.
Its easy to say :
I'd do this if faced with a gunman...
But when faced with an actual threat in real life , all of the internet posts go out the window...
Have a plan , keep your cool , be adaptable in your thinking of the situation at hand...
Standards need to be personal...as no one knows your life and what you need more than you do.
Do you need to shoot as fast or as accurate as Jerry Miculek...?
No...
But you do need to shoot as fast and as accurately as smoothly as you can...
By "smoothly" , I mean to say as if almost without a thought...muscle memory if you will.
What this looks like and means....is do what works for you...and not what works for someone else
You don't have to be the next Wyatt Earp or Clint Smith...
Know yourself ...know your limitations....
Both are over used phrases , but each holds much wisdom and truth.
Know what you can do...with what you have...get good with what you have and what you know.
Andy
I figure it this way: gaps in training lead to regression in skill. So I keep training.
And training. And training. And...
- Messages
- 2,633
- Reactions
- 4,004
- Thread Starter
- #11
I have a couple of thoughts that have been bouncing around my head while reading this thread:
Naw, this post is really just to pick on Andy!
Seriously now,
I so appreciate Andy's work here and the wealth (both in quality and quantity) his posts here provide. But if I might do a bit of push back, for the sake of learning and discussion.
I agree with this statement 100% (and the rest of the post I edited out). It was not my intention to indicate otherwise by starting this thread. I was just focused on the single topic of "draw to first hit" standards and not the plethora of other details necessary for a successful self-defense encounter. I think John (the presenter in the video) does a great job of supporting Andy's position regarding the need for a plan, AND the need to be flexible with that plan because the bad guy does have a vote, and rarely will the results be exactly, or even nearly, close to your pre-action plan. You do need to watch his other videos to get the bigger picture.
We are probably arguing semantics here, but I do want to push back on this a bit. Standards should be universal, not personal. A standard gives an objective measure that can be used for comparison and to enhance utility. Take a firearm for instance, there are a ton of standards surrounding chamber dimensions and cartridge dimensions. This allows everybody to measure in a common fashion and vastly increases utility in that we are pretty confident when I purchase or load, say .45ACP ammo, that it will fit and function in the gun.
Of all the folks I see on this site, I think Andy understands the lack of standards the best dealing with the vast array of black powder firearms he routienly plays with. Fitting a ball to the bore is not a direct and easy thing at times since there is so much variatinon.
The standards presented in this video, I think, meet this definition. They are derived from human performance measurements made by the FBI and other researchers. Now, this is totally from memory so the numbers may be off ... but the idea is valid. A highly performing human still takes something like 0.25 seconds to recognize a threat, another third of a second to decide a course of action and another quarter of a second to actually get a signal to the muscles to begin the response (such as pressing the trigger). These are hard stops in the human system. Nerve impulses only go so fast, so no amount of training can speed these up.
Based on these, and many other studies, standards such as the 2.0 second draw to first hit have been developed by lethal force researchers. If you have 2.0 draw you can expect to engage a person, even if they have a drawn weapon, IF they are turned away from you and are looking away. The down and dirty rule I was first trained on is "if a shoulder is pointed at you and you can see his ear hole". If this is the case there is no way the BG can recognize, assess, decide and then react to your counter-assault. In this scenario the human CNS system is not fast enough for him to beat your 2.0 second draw.
Other rules of thumb come into play if you have a 1.5 or 1.0 second draw. Obviously, you don't need a large a window to engage and prevail so the "rules of thumb" become more generous. Understanding these levels of human performance also brings us to a often quoted standard, that is "you can't draw out of the drop". Even with a 1.0 second draw (and who really has this in a stress situation) the time it takes for the bad actor to recognize and react is less than your time to draw. You lose!
So while this presentation did not really attempt to support the quoted standards (and many trainers don't really do a good job of this) the standards are valid and do apply.
Having now wasted a great deal of your life as you all read this I'll try and shut this down with what I THINK Andy was driving at. I'm sure he will correct me if I'm wrong, and I welcome that!
Anyway, I think the idea is that our choice of what standard to strive for is personal. It's also personal in how we utilize the human performance standards that have been derived from research. We all need to understand what we are capable of and where we fall short, as well as we all need to have a plan and an understanding of how those plans might fail. This will be very personal ... in fact each of us here will have a different "standard" that applies to our unique abilities and context.
Does this make sense or am I throwing mud on the lens?
May the New Year find us well!
Naw, this post is really just to pick on Andy!
Seriously now,
I so appreciate Andy's work here and the wealth (both in quality and quantity) his posts here provide. But if I might do a bit of push back, for the sake of learning and discussion.
I agree with this statement 100% (and the rest of the post I edited out). It was not my intention to indicate otherwise by starting this thread. I was just focused on the single topic of "draw to first hit" standards and not the plethora of other details necessary for a successful self-defense encounter. I think John (the presenter in the video) does a great job of supporting Andy's position regarding the need for a plan, AND the need to be flexible with that plan because the bad guy does have a vote, and rarely will the results be exactly, or even nearly, close to your pre-action plan. You do need to watch his other videos to get the bigger picture.
We are probably arguing semantics here, but I do want to push back on this a bit. Standards should be universal, not personal. A standard gives an objective measure that can be used for comparison and to enhance utility. Take a firearm for instance, there are a ton of standards surrounding chamber dimensions and cartridge dimensions. This allows everybody to measure in a common fashion and vastly increases utility in that we are pretty confident when I purchase or load, say .45ACP ammo, that it will fit and function in the gun.
Of all the folks I see on this site, I think Andy understands the lack of standards the best dealing with the vast array of black powder firearms he routienly plays with. Fitting a ball to the bore is not a direct and easy thing at times since there is so much variatinon.
The standards presented in this video, I think, meet this definition. They are derived from human performance measurements made by the FBI and other researchers. Now, this is totally from memory so the numbers may be off ... but the idea is valid. A highly performing human still takes something like 0.25 seconds to recognize a threat, another third of a second to decide a course of action and another quarter of a second to actually get a signal to the muscles to begin the response (such as pressing the trigger). These are hard stops in the human system. Nerve impulses only go so fast, so no amount of training can speed these up.
Based on these, and many other studies, standards such as the 2.0 second draw to first hit have been developed by lethal force researchers. If you have 2.0 draw you can expect to engage a person, even if they have a drawn weapon, IF they are turned away from you and are looking away. The down and dirty rule I was first trained on is "if a shoulder is pointed at you and you can see his ear hole". If this is the case there is no way the BG can recognize, assess, decide and then react to your counter-assault. In this scenario the human CNS system is not fast enough for him to beat your 2.0 second draw.
Other rules of thumb come into play if you have a 1.5 or 1.0 second draw. Obviously, you don't need a large a window to engage and prevail so the "rules of thumb" become more generous. Understanding these levels of human performance also brings us to a often quoted standard, that is "you can't draw out of the drop". Even with a 1.0 second draw (and who really has this in a stress situation) the time it takes for the bad actor to recognize and react is less than your time to draw. You lose!
So while this presentation did not really attempt to support the quoted standards (and many trainers don't really do a good job of this) the standards are valid and do apply.
Having now wasted a great deal of your life as you all read this I'll try and shut this down with what I THINK Andy was driving at. I'm sure he will correct me if I'm wrong, and I welcome that!
Anyway, I think the idea is that our choice of what standard to strive for is personal. It's also personal in how we utilize the human performance standards that have been derived from research. We all need to understand what we are capable of and where we fall short, as well as we all need to have a plan and an understanding of how those plans might fail. This will be very personal ... in fact each of us here will have a different "standard" that applies to our unique abilities and context.
Does this make sense or am I throwing mud on the lens?
May the New Year find us well!
Last Edited:
- Messages
- 2,633
- Reactions
- 4,004
- Thread Starter
- #12
Agreed. Everything you post is spot on, and there is more that can be gleaned. For an early assessment of the shooting made by the presenter in the video that started this thread look at post #17 of another thread here on NWFA:
Other State - Good Guy with a gun ends church shooting.
Have to wonder how many would have been shot if it were not for an armed good guy. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/2-dead-1-critically-injured-after-shooting-at-west-freeway-church-of-christ-in-white-settlement/ar-BBYrlHe
www.northwestfirearms.com
- Messages
- 3,873
- Reactions
- 3,805
JUST ONE ITEM TO ADD:
Having trained in tae kwon do and karate for 25 years [as a 5th degree black belt in tkd] I would add one comment to the videographer's instructional remarks. The first usher was in a very bad "personal" striking space to the shooter. However unlikely the situation would arise, but as close as he was, he was within sucker punch distance and very difficult to defend against an attacker unless he was super alert and "ready" to counter attack. Given that distance there are specific martial arts techniques that a highly trained and alert person may have been able to move in on the shooter as soon as that shotgun appeared. Two key elements may have worked to disarm the shooter in that distance: 1. Super alertness and 2. Offensive techniques to disarm and disable. It takes lots of training in martial arts to do these techniques. However, it is a good idea to add to a defense shooting training program a "routine" of manual combative training to disarm and disable. A routine is not 1-2 classes.
Having trained in tae kwon do and karate for 25 years [as a 5th degree black belt in tkd] I would add one comment to the videographer's instructional remarks. The first usher was in a very bad "personal" striking space to the shooter. However unlikely the situation would arise, but as close as he was, he was within sucker punch distance and very difficult to defend against an attacker unless he was super alert and "ready" to counter attack. Given that distance there are specific martial arts techniques that a highly trained and alert person may have been able to move in on the shooter as soon as that shotgun appeared. Two key elements may have worked to disarm the shooter in that distance: 1. Super alertness and 2. Offensive techniques to disarm and disable. It takes lots of training in martial arts to do these techniques. However, it is a good idea to add to a defense shooting training program a "routine" of manual combative training to disarm and disable. A routine is not 1-2 classes.
- Messages
- 3,873
- Reactions
- 3,805
JUST A SECOND TALKING POINT. The church armed security looks like only men of mature age. I did not see women. I'd think that if I were to set up a security team in a church I'd add several broadly trained men and women who were youthful and agile on their feet and gun and martial arts trained. Older guys like me, however, smart we may be in the arts, are "slow". Our "smartness" helps with tactics but we are moving slow. Just something to think about.
- Messages
- 2,633
- Reactions
- 4,004
- Thread Starter
- #15
There was one woman … about in the middle of the screen when it all happened. She was in the congregation not on the outskirts so was either packing on her own or if part of the team probably not "on duty" that day.
The old guys with the guns that you saw in the video mimics what you see at any range anymore. We older types (I'm part of this group) have done a poor job bringing in the younger generations. In fact it's not rare that I'm met with outright hostility when I take my 14-yr old daughter to the range, for a fair number of the GrayHair division, there is a palpable dislike of younger folks "cluttering up the range".
We are our own worst enemy. The progressives really don't need to do much to make firearms history in this country. They just need to wait one more generation. Unless we can connect with the younger generations and make the firearm culture relevant to them, this way of life will fade into obscurity in not that much more time.
The old guys with the guns that you saw in the video mimics what you see at any range anymore. We older types (I'm part of this group) have done a poor job bringing in the younger generations. In fact it's not rare that I'm met with outright hostility when I take my 14-yr old daughter to the range, for a fair number of the GrayHair division, there is a palpable dislike of younger folks "cluttering up the range".
We are our own worst enemy. The progressives really don't need to do much to make firearms history in this country. They just need to wait one more generation. Unless we can connect with the younger generations and make the firearm culture relevant to them, this way of life will fade into obscurity in not that much more time.
- Messages
- 771
- Reactions
- 1,760
Similar threads
Upcoming Events
New Classified Ads
-
-
-
-
-
NEW - Ballistic Advantage 300BLK Upper for sale
- Started by Texan47
- Replies: 0
-
SIG Rattler 300BLK, GBRS, Holosun, Leupold, Eotech, Midwest Industries, ETC.- Started by notgarandthumb
- Replies: 3
-
-
