"Fighting With a Gun"

[Dropkick]

That's kind of how I look at things... Will this make me a better fighter, or a better shooter? Two different skill sets that can be trained, and also intergrated together.

Just thought of a simple but great example... The scenario is of Good Guy and Bad Guy faced off at each other. Good Guy is right-handed, and makes a side step to his right. This does the following:

Fighting: Gives better access to the Bad Guy's chin line to throw a good right knock-out punch.
Shooting: Good Guy just "Got off the X" of attack.
Integrated: A 3 o'clock holstered firearm is farther from reach of the Bad Guy.

If you were just a fighter or a shooter, you might know one or the other. Taking the time to train in multi-disciples, and integrated training is where things like that come together and makes sense for several reasons.

[Jay Cunningham]

I've seen it used in so many ways that I don't pay attention anymore, it has become a cliche to me.

Perhaps the most appropriate ones are those who try to imitate and cultivate mindset, behavior and tactics that are expected to win a firefight. There are obvious questions about instructor's credentials, real life experience and generalizability of content.

What are the "obvious questions" about instructor credentials, real-life experience, and generality (I *know* this is a word ) of content?

[phil_in_cs]

Have you had training that was *supposed* to be "fighting with a gun" where the above did not get covered?

No, but I've had training that was sporting related that did not cover these issues. There is a lot of overlap, much more than the "fighting only" crowd would admit. Being able to hit your target quickly while moving is covered more often in sporting oriented classes, but is still a vital skill in fighting. Conversely, some "fighting classes" talk about "getting off the X" but spend 75% or more of the time working on "stand and deliver" type shooting.

[markp]

What is "fighting with a gun"?

The above phrase has become the de rigueur descriptor in AARs and recommendations when attempting to make the point of differentiating from "square range" or "competition/gun game" training.

But what does that phrase actually mean in a training environment? What does training to "fight with a gun" look like compared to training that does not claim to teach you to "fight with a gun"?

I think it would include using empty hand/edged & expedient weapons before turning the altercation into a gun (solution) fight .

[Mr_White]

Definitely an interesting topic.

To me, “fighting with a gun” implies dealing with hand-to-hand issues (a gigantic, deep, and difficult subject unto itself), dealing with an opposing will, maneuvering against an opponent, dealing with an opponent who will maneuver against you, and managing the space within which the fight occurs.

I will not address the hand-to-hand issues, and instead would simply give TPI my sincere, but inexpert and meaningless, endorsement on that important part of the subject.

Outside of hand-to-hand, I think we are talking about the fairly simplistic management of time, distance, barriers, movement, lighting issues, shot angles, and recognition of emergent and fleeting opportunities to maneuver against a threat and to counter its maneuvers against us.

Distance, barriers, and movement are factors that mostly allow us a little more time to apply our speedy marksmanship to stop the threat, rather than just briefly delaying it by hiding behind a barrier or moving - the benefit of those tactics can be abruptly negated by a threat that maneuvers against us, has a high degree of marksmanship skill, or simply gets lucky - and moreover, to utilize shot angles that increase bystander safety, or create those safer shot angles if they do not exist at the outset. Use of distance, barriers, and movement can put us in a temporary position of advantage from which we may better be able to decisively end the fight.

Force-on-force is one way to train some of the above, but a lot can also be done live fire if the square range is used creatively.

Marksmanship and manipulations need to be unconsciously competent in order to free up the conscious mind to manage the space and manage the opponent(s) as described above.

Just my non-BTDT opinion.

[Jay Cunningham]

Training to "fight with a gun" involves emphasizing manipulating the gun in a manner that promotes heads up awareness and integrating the handgun into an overall defensive skills program.
Basically training the mind to see things from a fighting perspective in addition to a pure shooting skills perspective.
Examples are:

• Performing manipulations at eye level rather than at chest or belt buckle level. These methods aren't only faster and more positive, they also help you maintain awareness of your surroundings.
• Drawing the gun up to the pecs and then punching out rather than in a straight line from holster to extension. Basically retention position "press out" vs. pure competition speed IPSC draw.
• Immediate action drills vs. the old aim in a safe direction and wait 30 seconds before assessing a malfunction.
• Shooting on the move and from compromised positions.

Everything you described in your list has been covered in coursework (I've participated in) from civilian instuctors with no gunfight experience, who never claim in their curriculum to teach "fighting with a gun". Did I de facto learn "fighting with a gun" from them? Does instructor background and experience have anything to do with it?

[ffhounddog]

Fighting with a gun...lets see movement and cover while getting to an objective while moving, shooting, and communicating. Gun can be anything from a pistol to a Mk19. After that gun becomes a cannon.

Now Rockets, Missles, and M320/203 rounds can be fighting with a gun as well.

[jetfire]

Training to "fight with a gun" involves emphasizing manipulating the gun in a manner that promotes heads up awareness and integrating the handgun into an overall defensive skills program.
Basically training the mind to see things from a fighting perspective in addition to a pure shooting skills perspective.
Examples are:

• Performing manipulations at eye level rather than at chest or belt buckle level. These methods aren't only faster and more positive, they also help you maintain awareness of your surroundings.
• Drawing the gun up to the pecs and then punching out rather than in a straight line from holster to extension. Basically retention position "press out" vs. pure competition speed IPSC draw.
• Immediate action drills vs. the old aim in a safe direction and wait 30 seconds before assessing a malfunction.
• Shooting on the move and from compromised positions.

Those are all things that I've been taught in classes that were specifically geared towards competition shooting.

[JodyH]

Those are all things that I've been taught in classes that were specifically geared towards competition shooting.

I've never shot from retention or the supine position in a class geared towards competition.

[jetfire]

I've never shot from retention or the supine position in a class geared towards competition.

Then you should have been specific and said that, instead of "compromised positions". I've shot from urban prone in at least one "competition" class I can think off the top of my head.