Combative Solutions Church Security Shooters Class

Previously we'd used Combative Solutions, headed by Tyler Christian for a 20 hour instruction block to train our team on basic security concerns and stratagems, concentrating on threat recognition and non-shooting confrontations. Impressed with the caliber of the instruction, this class was specifically for those who choose to carry a handgun while performing church security duties, which is primarily during weekend services; we're a medium/medium large church in a major metropolitan area in the Pacific Northwest.

This instruction dovetailed in with the previous instruction, building on the concepts established, but adding in the dimension of armed response. Given the disparity of skill level and experiences of the individuals concerned, Tyler oriented this towards the basics, but the course was challenging for all. A strong tenant of the instruction and exercises were immediate responses to close-in threats, with an emphasis on controlled, but fast reaction firing, concentrating on intuitive firing, indexing on the gun and hand/thumb positioning for rough aiming, as opposed to utilizing the sights per se.

Further in the instruction, sighted/more precision firing was discussed and exercised, with both types encountered in the shooting exercises, both separately and then intermixed. Reacting through physiological flinch reactions was stressed, modeled and exercised.

The session concluded with a "figure 8" drill, where students walked in a figure 8 pattern, and the instructors called out specific target(s) to be identified and engaged. Subsequent to completion of the drill, all participants successfully qualified on a local law enforcement qualification, which was a very good confidence builder, as all demonstrably saw how what had been taught throughout the course made the qualification easy to achieve, with superior scores by all participants, far above the minimum passing score required.

The course was conducted on an indoor range, and consisted of 5 hours; approximately 1/4 classroom and 3/4 shooting. Round count was approximately 400 rounds per person; handguns were in 9mm, .40, and .45 ACP, with 9mm and .40 predominating.

I strongly recommend this course (which was specifically tailored to our needs) and Combative Solutions/Tyler Christian. Material was very well presented, and the range superbly conducted and controlled. All participants were additionally provided with a flashdrive containing the salient instructional materials for individual review and refreshing.

Best, Jon

That sounds great. I am curious as to the folks who took the course. Are they already in the training cycle (as pointed in many places we see the same folks at events and classes). Or are they new to the training game and not enthusiasts.

While due to theological convictions of a different sort, I'm not tuned into local churches but a good friend is. They are interested in church security but he and I don't see many signing up for such intensive training. Their folks will pocket carry and listen to a class presentation of what to do but not get into the actual shooting class with FOF, scenarios, etc.

What's the magic trick to get the pocket rocket folks to get out there? Or at least some of them.

When I took over the team over a year ago, one of the first things I did was to conduct a thorough assessment of all things security-related in the church, both in terms of the team and the physical structures. I then charted out a proposed course to the senior pastor and Elders, and began by totally revamping and re-writing the security team manual. In it, I codified that while concealed carry/weapons carrying was not mandatory to be a member of the security team, if you in fact chose to do so, there were some standards to be met, including participation in a specified minimum of dynamic shooting sports activities in a year (such as IDPA matches) and that there was an annual qualification/classification requirement with the duty weapon. I also established a minimum and maximum cartridge platform (9mm/.38 Special, .357 Magnum .40, .45 ACP as the standard selection palette, with other cartridges considered (such as .357 SIG or 45 GAP on an individual basis-so far, everyone has remained with the standards). We also mandated that carry cartridges had to be selections from DocGKR's current duty ammunition list.

We had some members drop off, because of after years of carrying a gun, when forced to demonstrate proficiency in anything but a placid square range, people discovered that they were not quite up to par, especially in pretty much anything beyond 3-5 yards distance. That was a pretty humbling experience, and several were incapable or unwilling to step up to the plate to do what was necessary to improve.

In your friend's situation, I'd suggest clearly thinking out what reasonable standards are, getting the church leadership's buy-in, and then putting things clearly in writing and have a tracking system to establish accountability. Running members through a classifier/qualification course can be a great diagnostic, and can help identify and orient training. If he/she would like a copy of our team manual, I'd be happy to share it; just let me know.

Best, Jon

Jon
Looks like you have it pretty well figured out. I had never heard of Tyler Christian or Combative Solutions, does he have a facility, or is he a strictly traveling instructor?

Question: Is the requirement for "action shooting sports" a hard one? Would, say "steel night" at the local range qualify? And can one substitute "continuing education"?

Not a church goer myself, but I know enough people that are that it wouldn't surprise me if one asked my advice. (Of course, in this case I may simply contact you, being in the next neighborhood over and all...)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drang

Jon
Looks like you have it pretty well figured out. I had never heard of Tyler Christian or Combative Solutions, does he have a facility, or is he a strictly traveling instructor?

Question: Is the requirement for "action shooting sports" a hard one? Would, say "steel night" at the local range qualify? And can one substitute "continuing education"?

Not a church goer myself, but I know enough people that are that it wouldn't surprise me if one asked my advice. (Of course, in this case I may simply contact you, being in the next neighborhood over and all...)

---

Drang, Tyler Christian is a active duty Sergeant with the Auburn WA Police Department, and also has his training LLC, Combative Solutions; he'll train at your site.

Regarding my definition for our team as to what constitutes a "dynamic shooting sport match/activity" IDPA or ASI easily come to mind, where you are shooting on the move, drawing from concealment, distinguishing between targets and no-shoot targets. I probably would not accept "steel night" or a GSSF match as acceptable alternatives, but if someone provided me a compelling case, I'd at least listen.

Regarding other substitutes, I've told team members that if they can provide me with an adequate description of the activity, and the name/phone number/email of the instructor/match director of the activity I'll consider it as an acceptable alternative. So far, IDPA has provided the best solution, especially since in my area there are at least 2 IDPA club-level matches providing an average of 6-7 stage scenarios.

For classifiers/qualifiers, we've used the IDPA, Washington State LEOSA Qualifier and the modified Wisconsin State LEO Classifier; for IDPA, a minimum classification of Marksman is required. The current 72-round IDPA Classifier is quite good (I haven't personally run through the new 5 X 5 X 5 Classifier yet, but I suspect it'll also suffice).

Let me know if I can be of any help.

Best, Jon

I know of a church where a fledgling group of civilians and former LE folks are trying to put together a security team. Unfortunately they seem to think their pocket carried LCPs are best for a primary weapon. I'm trying to find a way to ease in the idea that they need to consider some proficiency benchmarks before they get too carried away. I can see that it would probably steer several of them away if they actually had to try out to be on the team, but that's not a bad thing. Just don't want to ruffle too many feathers.