Do you "scan and assess" after each drill?

[F-Trooper05]

Do you scan and assess after each drill when you're training alone? If so, how involved do you get? Do you just do a quick scan to the left and right of your target, or do you do a full 360? If you don't bother scanning and assessing at all, why not?

[Mitchell, Esq.]

I try to, but it depends on what I'm doing. If I'm testing a gun, or working a specific drill, I won't.

If I'm doing a more free style practice, then yes.

[zRxz]

Do you scan and assess after each drill when you're training alone? If so, how involved do you get? Do you just do a quick scan to the left and right of your target, or do you do a full 360? If you don't bother scanning and assessing at all, why not?

I only ask because I've noticed some pretty high speed guys don't seem to get too involved with it, while others believe that it's a flat out training scar not to.

As I'm ending each drill? No. I neither see the advantage gleaned nor have the time to spend the extra ten seconds (or so) performing a full, 360-degree scan for having shot a draw, shoot two; shoot one, reload, shoot one; or similar whereby I am completing several repetitions in a single minute's practice. By lumping on something extra, I'm drawing my focus away from the skill set I am trying to improve and onto something which, I believe, should be a purposeful movement, and not something that concludes every iteration (in the same vein that, whatever your position on "tactical reloading" or reloading post-fight, you don't simply begin to unload your firearm unconsciously out of habit for having fired the last shot).

Having said that...When I do practice my scan and assess, it involves:
-Lowering the muzzle slightly, as in Bill Roger's full extension/confirmed alignment, or going to a high-ready position, as in the transition point to the press-out, to unobscure the target and see him, his hands, and his belt line.
-Swiveling my head (and not my gun, too) from left to right several times, as if I were about to cross the street.
-Bringing my firearm to high-port (or Norte, or Sabrina, or whatever you want to call it) and turning myself all the way around (sometimes), or checking over my shoulders several times. Here I'm not just looking for other people that need shooting, I'm also looking for hard cover, a place to make distance while I make a call, and trying to break the inevitable tunnel vision. Perhaps I reload. Mayhaps I don't.

What I don't do:
-If I am practicing scans, I do not simply shake my head back and forth once, as if going through the motions. I saw this a lot on the Magpul DVDs. No bueno. Sort of like looking up while you're crossing the street having had your eyes down on a text message and expecting it to be enough to avoid being run over. Part of the scan is to break your focus on what you were doing before it.
-Wagging my gun to and fro. A number of switched-on dudes do this, but if you are suffering from tunnel vision AND your heart is racing AND you just had to pull the trigger on another human being, do you really want to be getting the muzzle of your firearm anywhere near an innocent bystander? But you will stop it a metre outside their periphery.. With tunnel vision, might you not see them until they are "standing" on the end of your muzzle (assuming you've gone to a low-ready).
-Making it automatic, as I described above, or in any way trying to game the technique to save time. Paper targets, gravel floors, and sand berms don't actively seek your flank, exploit your blind spots, and sneak up on you. I could get away with all these mistakes, but when faced with a thinking, breathing adversary with a will to end me, I don't want to be "run over".

But for the main, this is all personal preference.

[LittleLebowski]

At classes, yes. Not at the indoor range.

[ToddG]

Wow, my approach is so close to zRxz's that it saved me a ton of typing! The only difference is that I do not normally go to the norte/Sabrina for rear checks. I bring the gun into more of a compressed ready position for checking over the shoulder or turning around. I'll also always reload the gun (unless I reloaded from slidelock before beginning the scan) and then perform a status check before holstering.

As for how often I practice it, that depends. Sometimes I'll literally do it every single drill just to reinforce the sequence. But 9 days out of 10, I'll generally do it after my last run of a drill (e.g., when I've just done 100 1-R-2's). In other words, before I holster "for good," I go through the sequence.

Having a good post-shooting ritual is very valid. Mine was essentially stolen from SLG years ago and then was tweaked a bit by Failure2Stop (Jack Leuba) back in '09 (http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?41-AAR-Aim-Fast-Hit-Fast-Culpeper-VA-August-2009) when he kindly agreed to share some of his experience during an AFHF class. The best part about Jack's version is that it begins with: "You just shot someone, he's dead, and you are feeling AWESOME about yourself!" :cool:

But turning that ritual into a blind mindless habit is bad. I can't even begin to guess how many dozens and dozens of students I've seen in class who "scan" after every drill but wouldn't see you standing next to them if your clothes were on fire. They're going through the motions of looking but they're not seeing. When you scan during practice, actually try to pay attention to everything in your field of vision. Otherwise, you're only building bad habits.

[LittleLebowski]

Jack's lesson on search and assess was funny, from experience, and the kind that sticks with you. I think he's going to do great things and soon.

[ToddG]

Jack's lesson on search and assess was funny, from experience, and the kind that sticks with you. I think he's going to do great things and soon.

Couldn't agree more. Jack is a phenomenal instructor.

Pardon a little self-promotion, but Jack & I are doing a class together in November: Control Under Simulated Stress (http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?1746-VA-C.U.S.S.-November-2011). Jack brings years of real world CQB and combat experience, a no-nonsense teaching style that's about results rather than feel-good buzzwords, and great humor to the class. I bring... well, I'll be bringing the targets. That has to count for something. :cool:

[zRxz]

As far as I have strayed from what Tactical Response has taught me (Fighting Pistol was my first firearms class) , the one thing I have kept has been the F.A.S.T. protocol:
Fight: engage your adversary. Self explanatory.
Assess: ensure he is no longer a threat.
Scan: ensure there are no other threats.
Tactical reload: perform a speed reload, a tactical reload, or a reload with retention. Whichever you prefer, or whichever the situation dictates.
+Take cover.
+Treat injury.
+Talk.

[Al T.]

If so, how involved do you get?

As previously mentioned, I try hard to SEE* not just scan. As to what I'm looking for exactly, that would be pretty situational dependent.

* On another board, IIRC, someone had an excellent post about a technique called SEE. It was Scan, Evaluate, Engage - sort of a mental note that just looking at someone doesn't cut it, you have to be an "quick active evaluator" for a possible threat or in case of your team mates, injuries. The original poster of "SEE" posts here as well. I welcome any corrections or comments he would like to make.

I've also heard it expressed as "hunt for someone else that might need shooting".

On a personal note, I am a huge believer in getting out of the target focus trap when appropriate and looking around. Had a personal incident where my failing to scan could have been very bad. Essentially it scared the bejebus out of me when I realized it. :mad:

[NickA]

IIRC some of our scans at the Farnam class involved the instructor (behind us) holding up a number of fingers that we had to call out. Not a bad way to make sure that you're "seeing" instead of just looking.

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk

[jetfire]

Of course I scan! I've got to make sure everyone on the range saw how awesome I look with my Taurus Judge in its new SERPA holster and my tactical Mosin-Nagant.

[rudy99]

I probably should scan and assess more than I do. I should do it often enough to not forget to do it. I've also seen two lines of thought on the scan/assess in the past year. At a CSAT rifle class w/Paul Howe, he had us scan front with the rifle and look to the rear. I just finished a pistol class with Scott Warren this past weekend and when asked about looking behind you during a scan/assess, he said if you have to look behind you to see if it is ok to holster your pistol, it isn't safe to do so. Meaning, your head and weapon should move together, so if you have to look behind you, your weapon should move that way too (finger off trigger). Obviously you cannot do a 360 scan/assess with your head and weapon at the range and things are always facts and circumstances driven. In the end, we did scan/assess to the front only moving head/weapon together.

[MDS]

Of course I scan! I've got to make sure everyone on the range saw how awesome I look with my Taurus Judge in its new SERPA holster and my tactical Mosin-Nagant.

PIX!

I don't have a lot to say about the value of scanning/assessing. I have noticed, though, that I seem to do a lot better in my drills if I really pretend like that target is armed and will kill me if I don't shoot him first. I've also noticed that when I do that, I tend to scan/assess automatically, and actually pay attention to what I'm scanning.

It seems to me that if I were in a real gunfight, I'd be feeling pretty vulnerable and scanning/assessing would come naturally, like it does when I'm pretending. Only more so.

$.02

[rsa-otc]

Of course I scan! I've got to make sure everyone on the range saw how awesome I look with my Taurus Judge in its new SERPA holster and my tactical Mosin-Nagant.

Caleb; Some times you're just to much! LOL

In all seriousness, after all these years I have found myself a slave of muscle memory. So anything I want to do in a gun fight I do in training. Anything I don't want to do in a gunfight I avoid like the plague in training & competition.

For me to do a new technique takes hours and hours of repetitions and I still find that under stress the old technigues come out to play:mad:. LOL

[Al T.]

I'd be feeling pretty vulnerable and scanning/assessing would come naturally

From personal experience and lots of reading, nope. :)

In general and IMHO & IME, your response to a lethal threat is going to be to focus on the threat with laser like intensity. Lots of folks preach scanning to prevent the threats buddy from sneaking around on our flanks and blindsiding us. I like to quick scan after shots fired, then a careful scan when my firearm moves from position 4 to position 3 and I get in a covered position.

zRxz's FAST mnemonic looks like a very good tool for organizing your game plan.

[Maple Syrup Actual]

I generally do, but not always. In some cases, I've done something like blown a drill really badly partway through, realized it, thought about it, and then, honestly, I'm not putting my head back in the "just shot somebody" mode because that's just an unrealistic mental leap at that point.

I definitely agree that there is no point to doing the "fake scan".

In fact, what I do after almost every drill is ask myself a couple of questions, like:

How do my hits compare to the guy 3 lanes over?

Is anyone standing behind the line watching? How many people? One? Five?

Who is the closest person in a baseball hat?

I figure that way, I get a quick drill in shifting my brain to "really look around mode". Does it mean I'm the last guy to reholster? Well...usually, yes. But thankfully my ego is large enough to safely support the belief that I'm the most important guy there anyway.

I scan starting from a high ready, nearly fully extended, but I drop the gun enough to see 200% of the target stand because on the million to one chance I ever have to shoot somebody, if there's one thing I'm going to be really embarrassed about it's if I don't look past my gun enough to notice they are still trying to kill me, and then they do. How awkward!

Once I'm not checking over the target I go to a pretty compressed ready, sometimes a pretty Sul-ey position depending on what's around and how much I'm moving.

[theblacknight]

I use binos

[gtmtnbiker98]

Honestly, nothing screams "IDIOT" louder than watching someone "scan and assess" on the range. Maybe I'm not tacticool enough, but take for example, some of the "I want to be an idiot, too" shows on the Outdoor Channel and Sportsmen Channel. The first time I see somebody "scan and assess" I usually turn the channel. Once that occurs, their credibility is lost. Something about the "tacticool" attitude associated with the practice really irks me to no end. That and 5.11 pants. Really? Do people actually wear them outside the range environment?

[LittleLebowski]

IIRC some of our scans at the Farnam class involved the instructor (behind us) holding up a number of fingers that we had to call out. Not a bad way to make sure that you're "seeing" instead of just looking.

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk

I think that is an awesome drill for buddies shooting.

[LittleLebowski]

That and 5.11 pants. Really? Do people actually wear them outside the range environment?

Yup :D I'm not good on following the wind of fashion and I like lots of pockets.

[Dagga Boy]

When we are training, I am a firm believer in building in hard wired habits. When the flag goes up for real, you need to be on total auto pilot, and that auto pilot will be built around your training habits. If you have crappy range habits, take short cuts regularly, or are working off a mindset of how to win at gun games as opposed to street fights, these will all rear their ugly heads IF you are ever in a lethal force confrontation. Know that going in and train accordingly. The reality is that for most competitive shooters, winning matches is more of a priority than training for a fight that will in most cases will never materialize. Same for many civilian shooters who should be concentrating on lone person tactics as opposed to what works for those working in team environments and tasked with going to gunfights as opposed to avoiding them. On the other hand, for those who go in harms way on a regular basis, you better be habit building for a fight that will likely come at some point.

I have a lot of pet peeves on this one.

"Painting the fence", where post firing you drag your gun up and down the line while rapidly scanning in (and most are not seeing a thing). What did all those other people do to deserve having a gun pointed at them.

Full Sabrina and turning in circles......who came up with this? Really, you just shot a bad guy into the ground and you are going to put your gun up by YOUR face and turn your back to them....not likely. I have not only shot several people, but been at enough of other peoples shootings to be nicknamed the "bridesmaid" for a couple of years. Trust me, that is not going to be your reaction.

Turning circles for no apparent reason, and scanning without SEEING. I teach a version of the NRA Safety circle. We call it "Indoor ready", and it is simply executed with a pistol and used in similar places to where we use it with a long gun. It simply ALLOWs for 360 movement without covering things that shouldn't be covered and for safe operation in the real world. It allows me to run 360 degree hot ranges. With my people, I demanded a full scan and assess as well as a reload prior to holstering. This builds good habits that helped my people to uncork after shootings. It helps to find other "people" around (who may or may not be threats), you can find better cover (and I allowed my people to move to it if they found it during drills......yes, on a flat line range we had people moving around with guns). The whole point was to build better situational awareness, which you have to train for. The same with reloads. Holstering partially empty guns is not good tactics. Fights can restart, and the scenes after gunfights with bad guys can go to full chaos very rapidly.

When I had situations where my people were just going through the motions of a scan, we gave test questions. Clothing or actions of other range personnel or people and things around the range. I would hold up fingers along with my co-instructors and we would single guys out for math problems ("my fingers multiplied by Instructor Baily's fingers equal what"). I would make my people communicate during and after shooting (which is a very difficult task to do for real, which is why we practiced it).

So my point is this-train with purpose. Train fully for what YOUR goal or task is in life. Don't do stuff because Nija Delta SEAL Squad II is "rumored" to do it that way, but because it makes sense to what your "mission" is. You should also dedicate time to simple skill building that is dedicated to working on very specific fundamental tasks and is different than "training". I would also HIGHLY recommend going out once and a while and just shooting for recreational fun.

The fact is that you should be shooting opponents into the ground and training to win. I have never seen seven bad guys who are all obvious "shoots" lined up in a neat row on the street. Keep things in a realistic perspective. You will be stressed and looking at the world through a toilet paper tube after a shooting, train to deal with that. Scanning and assessing is part of that.

As a disclaimer, I may be totally wrong, because I don't wear "Operator" clothing.

[ToddG]

Actively looking for a specific predetermined expected person, object, signal, etc. is of minimal value IMHO. "I look over my shoulder to see how many fingers my buddy is holding up" isn't teaching you to see everything in your field of view and assess it. It just teaches you to race to your buddy's hand with your eyes.

edited to add: I didn't see nyeti's post before typing the above, and it was not directed at his much more involved version of multiple instructors/ROs + math = scanning suggestion.

[Jay Cunningham]

Do you scan and assess after each drill when you're training alone? If so, how involved do you get? Do you just do a quick scan to the left and right of your target, or do you do a full 360? If you don't bother scanning and assessing at all, why not?

It depends.

Some drills don't lend themselves to it - I do when practical, and when I do it's a full 360 degrees.

[LittleLebowski]

I really wish we had a video of F2S's lecture on this.

[LittleLebowski]

Actively looking for a specific predetermined expected person, object, signal, etc. is of minimal value IMHO. "I look over my shoulder to see how many fingers my buddy is holding up" isn't teaching you to see everything in your field of view and assess it. It just teaches you to race to your buddy's hand with your eyes.


To be sure, I wasn't saying that the finger counting idea was optimal but it's a nice start and doable between say, two guys training together.

[rudy99]

To be sure, I wasn't saying that the finger counting idea was optimal but it's a nice start and doable between say, two guys training together.

Seems like it would be very difficult to effectively practice this without it turning into a situation where you are going through the motions. What about having two drop turner targets at 10 o'clock and 2 o'clock to the shooter that activate at the end of the string. They would either be 2 shoots or 1 shoot/1 no-shoot targets. Not sure how you'd activate both the drop turns at the same time though.

I guess you could also use a discretionary target (http://www.letargets.com/estylez_item.aspx?item=DT-2A), but it looks like you are back to the finger issue. Plus they don't appear to make targets that have different numbers/colors (ie they all have the same colors, shapes and numbers, just in a different order so you wouldn't be able to really do a no-shoot).

[Jay Cunningham]

Or you could shoot at a range with a jogging trail behind you that gives you some real motivation to check things out.

;)

[LittleLebowski]

Seems like it would be very difficult to effectively practice this without it turning into a situation where you are going through the motions. What about having two drop turner targets at 10 o'clock and 2 o'clock to the shooter that activate at the end of the string. They would either be 2 shoots or 1 shoot/1 no-shoot targets. Not sure how you'd activate both the drop turns at the same time though.

I guess you could also use a discretionary target (http://www.letargets.com/estylez_item.aspx?item=DT-2A), but it looks like you are back to the finger issue. Plus they don't appear to make targets that have different numbers/colors (ie they all have the same colors, shapes and numbers, just in a different order so you wouldn't be able to really do a no-shoot).

You could also have your buddy hold up different objects, pictures, etc. It's a start though not optimal. I'm not married to the idea; just saying it's a good start and could help.

[Dagga Boy]

Todd, we started out with just the finger thing........and I ended up with 20 guys turning around to look at my fingers, which was not the point. That's when we went to simple questions about "what was going on" around the range. This did a couple of things. It made my guys really SEE what was going on (See, Evaluate, Eliminate was our core threat assessment teaching), and to learn to actively think and communicate while shooting or post shooting (which they would have to do for real anyways). I tried to do what I could to incorporate problem solving and thinking into all aspects of training as opposed to turning bullets into noise. Shooting is actually an easy thing as far as the mechanics, it is doing under stress that is hard. We see how difficult it is for some people to shoot on a flat range covered in one dimensional cardboard, and you can imagine what happens when we try to do these things in very chaotic scenarios. It is why I tend to try to limit the amount of crap in my tool box down to the minimal things needed to get the job done.....because complexity under complex situations is a recipe for failure.

[Maple Syrup Actual]

Honestly, nothing screams "IDIOT" louder than watching someone "scan and assess" on the range. Maybe I'm not tacticool enough, but take for example, some of the "I want to be an idiot, too" shows on the Outdoor Channel and Sportsmen Channel. The first time I see somebody "scan and assess" I usually turn the channel. Once that occurs, their credibility is lost. Something about the "tacticool" attitude associated with the practice really irks me to no end. That and 5.11 pants. Really? Do people actually wear them outside the range environment?

I do. I work in construction and have to spend a lot of time outside, in lots of different weather, with lots of tools and equipment, and in awkward positions. The 5.11 taclite pros dry very fast, have a lot of pockets, and I can keep knee pads in the pants themselves, making my day substantially more pleasant. I'm sorry you don't think it looks cool. Most people don't seem to notice, and probably fixate more on the high-vis vest if they're looking for fashion failure.

[F-Trooper05]

The last class I took our assistant instructors would occasionally stand behind us and hold up a knife or red gun just to see if we were paying attention. The only problem I had with it was what the Hell were we suppose to do after we saw them? Turn around and smoke them?

[zRxz]

Full Sabrina and turning in circles......who came up with this? Really, you just shot a bad guy into the ground and you are going to put your gun up by YOUR face and turn your back to them....not likely. I have not only shot several people, but been at enough of other peoples shootings to be nicknamed the "bridesmaid" for a couple of years. Trust me, that is not going to be your reaction.


As far as I know, it was originally Andy Stanford out of Options for Personal Security that invented the 360 (plus one*) scan. The "plus one" comes from the overlap you are supposed to establish at the scan's conclusion. Before you began it, you would dip your muzzle and confirm the status of your target. No point in looking for others when you haven't finished dealing with the first one.

But your point is a valid one. Turning your back on the one guy in your environment who has demonstrated a definite willingness to end your life while searching for others gives me the heebie jeebies. That I just filled him with pistol calibre-sized holes doesn't give me much confidence, either. And given how many top-tier instructors teach a frontal scan with shoulder checks, I think I'll be truncating my scan appropriately.

I think, though, that Sabrina has gotten an unfair rap as compared to SUL. Simply because it can look silly doesn't invalidate the technique (of course), nor does its use by controversial instructors. That, however, is a whole 'nother topic to discuss


Honestly, nothing screams "IDIOT" louder than watching someone "scan and assess" on the range. Maybe I'm not tacticool enough, but take for example, some of the "I want to be an idiot, too" shows on the Outdoor Channel and Sportsmen Channel. The first time I see somebody "scan and assess" I usually turn the channel. Once that occurs, their credibility is lost. Something about the "tacticool" attitude associated with the practice really irks me to no end. That and 5.11 pants. Really? Do people actually wear them outside the range environment?

This is totally on you, dude. While its important to me not to look like an asshat while operating a firearm, it comes second to what I believe are proper techniques and tactics. If someone criticizes how it looks without regard to what was done, simply how it appeared, well...I don't really have much to say to them, now do I?

[TGS]

When I'm at the indoor range, I don't.

When I'm at a class, I try to do it after some amount of the drills. Like some others in here, I would try to pick out something, usually concentrating on what people are doing with their hands(where a weapon would be). I have no idea what all these techniques are that you guys are talking about......I just make a conscience effort to look over both shoulders and see what people are doing.

While performing said uber-tacticool-better-than-you ninja move, I bring my gun into the compressed ready and decock as I'm looking. When I'm done looking, I've not only seen whats going on around me but I've decocked my weapon and performed a hard-break for reholstering in the AIWB position. Seems like a good idea, so I do it. I don't see any reason not to practice it every once in a while, and will usually make it a mini-KIMS game. I've never heard anyone in the know say that KIMS games are useless. I think that practicing being aware will at least keep you from becoming less aware.

I can see the hate for the scan that Magpul does in their videos, but at the same time I can also see why they do it(quick check to see if anyone is coming at your side while tunnel-visioned, no details needed). I certainly don't see the danger in doing a scan, nor is my day so ridiculously packed with fun filled activities that performing a scan after some drills during a class is going to throw off my whole schedule because it's really THAT time consuming.

At the same time, I think counting my rounds as I shoot them is absurd and completely stupid/useless, lending me to hate Todd's 13-round figure-eight drill he does in "Get SOM" although that is also for a similar purpose to increase your mental acuity. So, I guess it's a YMMV thing.

It seems like there's a lot of hate and condemnation towards the practice in here, as if it's not only useless but somehow actively contributing to the destruction of mankind. I guess I'm just going to keep doing it just to piss people off and raise their blood pressure. I know of one particular police officer in Ohio that I'm going to be following around all day while wearing 5.11's and performing scans while stopped at a traffic light next to him ;)

[Dagga Boy]

The last class I took our assistant instructors would occasionally stand behind us and hold up a knife or red gun just to see if we were paying attention. The only problem I had with it was what the Hell were we suppose to do after we saw them? Turn around and smoke them?

If it was on my range you would be turning and issuing a challenge. I wouldn't be pointing one at my people, because I would get a gun pointed at me. Sometimes instructors do things that are not fully thought out. If you want to stand behind me and "shoot" me with stuff to add realism......that is a two way street. Same with fire commands-my favorite is yelling "gun" to initiate shooting. If I, or my partners, fired everytime one of us yelled "gun" during a search or on a traffic stop, we would be stacking bodies. "Dry fire" is another one........its Dry Practice.....the key is to not fire. I am very anal about correctly communicating exactly what we want done and precise communications. Communications is one of those things that goes to total crap in a crisis, and we should try to work it in to our training as well.

Andy Stanford...........I shot with Andy for a lot of years. If he is advocating something based on his wealth of experience, then something must have changed a lot recently. Just because the gun media declares somebody an expert doesn't mean the folks who do this stuff day in and day out do. I wouldn't be using Andy or others as a base for why Sabrina works.

[SLG]

Not looking to start a fight, and not picking on anyone, but "experience" can be a tricky thing. Many people are blinded by their own experiences, rather than seeing them in the greater context. There are a lot of experienced people out there, teaching a lot of awful stuff. I've seen it on both coasts, as well as in the middle. Military, LE and civilian, "elite", and novice, no group is exempt.

The better instructors are the ones who have experience (in what they are teaching) and who understand where their experience fits in. They tend to teach solid, workable stuff, since they know they're not the be all end all. Most of those instructors are frequently mentioned on this board, so I won't rehash it here.

[fuse]

At the same time, I think counting my rounds as I shoot them is absurd and completely stupid/useless, lending me to hate Todd's 13-round figure-eight drill he does in "Get SOM"



In AFHF after the reload I actually counted my rounds out loud. There was no discrepancy, no chance of forgetting or miscounting under stress. Todd said I was the only student he's ever had to do this. And that it was super gay.

[Dagga Boy]

Not looking to start a fight, and not picking on anyone, but "experience" can be a tricky thing. Many people are blinded by their own experiences, rather than seeing them in the greater context. There are a lot of experienced people out there, teaching a lot of awful stuff. I've seen it on both coasts, as well as in the middle. Military, LE and civilian, "elite", and novice, no group is exempt.

The better instructors are the ones who have experience (in what they are teaching) and who understand where their experience fits in. They tend to teach solid, workable stuff, since they know they're not the be all end all. Most of those instructors are frequently mentioned on this board, so I won't rehash it here.

I look at it a little different than most. To me it is very much a teaching within your experience, and this is where I see most problems crop up. I see people teaching L/E tactics who have little or no actual experience. Same with military stuff and other areas. I rarely teach to civilians, because I haven't really been one for most of my life. Tactics that work for me are going to not be as relative to others. The fact is there are some very qualified folks to teach CCW geared stuff, but somehow don't find it cool enough and need to be teaching as a LEO with a nifty "Reserve" rank or a two man department in Barney Fife county USA.....and then spew their TTP's as what works "on the street".

The way we "scan and assess" and what we are looking for or trying to attain will most likely be very
different between a Metropolitan SWAT officer, a rural deputy, a legally armed civilian, and a soldier working in an overseas combat operation. I always encourage people to REALLY think through what is applicable in your world and then apply it properly. Good instructors will be willing to cater their training to the needs of their students.

[SLG]

I look at it a little different than most. To me it is very much a teaching within your experience, and this is where I see most problems crop up. I see people teaching L/E tactics who have little or no actual experience. Same with military stuff and other areas. I rarely teach to civilians, because I haven't really been one for most of my life. Tactics that work for me are going to not be as relative to others. The fact is there are some very qualified folks to teach CCW geared stuff, but somehow don't find it cool enough and need to be teaching as a LEO with a nifty "Reserve" rank or a two man department in Barney Fife county USA.....and then spew their TTP's as what works "on the street".

The way we "scan and assess" and what we are looking for or trying to attain will most likely be very
different between a Metropolitan SWAT officer, a rural deputy, a legally armed civilian, and a soldier working in an overseas combat operation. I always encourage people to REALLY think through what is applicable in your world and then apply it properly. Good instructors will be willing to cater their training to the needs of their students.


Exactly.

[TGS]

In AFHF after the reload I actually counted my rounds out loud. There was discrepancy, no chance of forgetting or miscounting under stress. Todd said I was the only student he's ever had to do this. And that it was super gay.

Ingenuity, I like it!

[Failure2Stop]

To scan or not to scan? Depends on what I am doing.

Am I doing an engagement simulation or working on a skill-set?
I see no reason to "reinforce" the post shooting sequence with every round fired when doing 50 yard fundamental work.
I absolutely see a reason to do it after running a multiple target, multiple movement angle course of fire.
I try put effort into what I am doing, not what others are pretending to do.

[gtmtnbiker98]

I try put effort into what I am doing, not what others are pretending to do.Amen!

[MDS]

From personal experience and lots of reading, nope. :)

In general and IMHO & IME, your response to a lethal threat is going to be to focus on the threat with laser like intensity. Lots of folks preach scanning to prevent the threats buddy from sneaking around on our flanks and blindsiding us. I like to quick scan after shots fired, then a careful scan when my firearm moves from position 4 to position 3 and I get in a covered position.

zRxz's FAST mnemonic looks like a very good tool for organizing your game plan.

Fair enough, thanks for the tips!