Page 3 of 19 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 188

Thread: Viability of Pieing

  1. #21
    Site Supporter Cory's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Florida
    I would suggest re-reading what this man has posted. He is a recognized subject matter expert on this topic.

    Quote Originally Posted by SouthNarc View Post
    Your point about mistaking cover and concealment is well made and I certainly don't advocate for exchanging with an adversary holding a piece of real estate that doesn't actually stop gunfire.

    As far as compromised shooting positions that is indeed something I advocate for in an effort to see someone first. There's a balance between a position that is practiced and developed in open training space and closed real world space. Part of what I encourage people to do is adapt their shooting platform to real world space and then understand the compromises they make. I have a range based portion of AMIS that I actually teach in closed coursework.

    On real world feedback I've had my curriculum running since 2006 and it continues to evolve. Clients for closed coursework include the I/C, JSOC, and SOCOM. Most of them seem to find merit in at least some of the curriculum, understanding that everyone has strong opinions on CQB/interior movement.
    I think that is important to realize that a lot of the information on this topic comes from team based environments. Most people who have a solid understanding on this stuff start by learning it during military basic training, SOI, or MP School. The way things are done are often specific to a given team, and a given environment.This stuff is truly best learned in a school house setting where you are being taught fundamentals, practicing a glass house, and then practicing in real buildings, and then going into a culminating event. With a team it takes a lot of work to be able to do it correctly, smoothly, and shoot move and communicate without error. As in weeks of work, all day long. And you'll still have a more than decent chance of getting dead when it's time to go for real.

    Now imagine trying to learn how to do this without a team. With no back up. Anyone with a modicum of knowledge will tell you this is a worse scenario. A no shit, worse case event. What you're trying to do is learn how to effectively handle this worse case event. Without a manual based on decades of actual room clearing and combat. Without a school house of learning to be passed on to you. Without experienced cadre. Without glass house training. Without various scenarios presented. Without dry runs on known buildings. Without practice on unknown buildings. Without a culminating event to test you.

    I am cheap. I don't pay for information I can find out there for free. And believe me, a ton of it is out there for free. I sponge up a lot of it.

    Please believe me, this isn't something you can learn on youtube. Without at least a baseline of knowledge from the team based world to draw on, you won't even be able to tell what sources are trust worthy. I remember people telling me that every "tactical" problem is a room clearing problem. Meaning you can draw from your knowledge of that and apply it to the situation. The inverse is true as well though. A room clearing problem, is every tactical problem. You can not learn it without experiential learning.

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by KEW8338 View Post
    Long time listener, first time caller:

    There seems to be some trends in the current training of singleton movement internal to structures for reducing risk through the utilization of pieing thresholds. Quite a few places preach the "weaponized geometry" or lack of belief in the fatal funnel, for driving their approach to this problem.

    Is this actually viable, practical, effective or efficient?

    Some concerns I have are:
    -Stance/posture/positioning seemed to be built around mitigation of being seen / "seeing more" vice being ready for a fight
    -Ability to deliver effective fire is sacrificed through the use of single hand pistol employment
    -Mistaking cover and concealment

    Curious as to anyone's thoughts on the subject.

    Thanks

    I am just an unejumacaded redneck, so please forgive me, but I have no idea what that means.
    “Those who control the present, control the past and those who control the past control the future.”

    ― George Orwell, 1984

  3. #23
    happy sharps enabler Totem Polar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    PacNW
    Quote Originally Posted by KEW8338 View Post
    Glovers video I think is in contrast to this video, where you see significantly weakened fighting positions in the ploy of utilizing concealment. Vice Glover, that seems more built around fighting at any point time.
    A couple of things, just to make sure that everyone is, if not on the same page, in the same book. 1, the guy running the exercise in the vid you linked is Southnarc, who is already participating in this thread.
    2, while I don’t know Glover, personally, I do know “Southnarc,” and he is squared away as fuck; one of the best instructors I know—in any discipline.
    3, the vid denotes a run on day 1. I have not taken AMIS, but I’ve taken other POI with Craig/SN, and I’m comfortable surmising that runs at the end of day 2 or day 3 look different than day 1. Which is sort of the point.
    4, all that said, I wouldn’t personally take 1-handed grips when a 2-handed grip will do just as well in the same arena. JMO. But, hell, maybe Craig woiuld change my mind in class. That has certainly happened before. But my sense is that Craig and Glover are not far apart at all on this, operationally. I bet that their own optimal/least-worst solutions look very similar, because the design constaints of the task demand that the best results will be largely the same, from expert-to-expert.

    And with that, I’ll go back to lurking.
    ”It's important to remember that ALL news media is a consumer product. Just like soda and fast food, they don't have any incentive to make it good for you, just addictive enough for you to keep coming back for more.”
    -Nephrology

  4. #24
    I've had the good fortune to take a number of "structure tactics" classes despite being little more than a Joe Schmo. These have included AIT and UDC with Paul Howe, shoot-house with Joe Weyer at Alliance Police Range, Force-on-Force with Practically Tactical at Alliance, and the aforementioned AMIS with Craig Douglas, held at a derelict school in Pittsburgh back in 2016.

    ALL were stressful, ALL were great learning experiences. No class that I have EVER taken was more mentally exhausting than AMIS. I still recall sitting down in the hotel after Day 1 to write up some notes and passing out with notebook on my face and all the lights in the room still on.

    In my class, there was SOME use of what the OP seems to be describing as "compromised shooting positions" (although, in the video he linked to, I really don't see any compromised shooting positions....since when does shooting one-handed=compromised???). These were mostly used in situations where we could, due to angles of exposure, get the drop on someone and hit them before they could hit us. So if we were flattened against a wall and, due to angles, could see the adversary's foot, kneecap, elbow, whatever, and he could not yet see us, then it was worth it to be able to get a hit on the adversary. Not to sound like a dork, but John Wick does that in the first movie, hitting what the bad guy gives him (foot in that famous nightclub scene). Usually the ranges were quite short and so shooting one-handed was not much of a handicap. Most of what we did was constant adjusting of the two-handed grip, pulling in toward the chest and pressing out, as the situation dictated. And, of course, when we got to low-light and borderline no-light, your light set-up had an effect here (handheld vs. WML, etc.).

    As for the cover/concealment issue, I think experience has shown and countless CCTV videos have shown that people TEND to shoot at what they can see, and shooting through walls is rarely done, even by the bad guys (at least in a non-MOUT, more stateside context). I've seen shootouts in clothing stores where people did NOT shoot at their opponents through clothing racks, and instead waited for a visual target.

    If you want to read more about my experience in AMIS, feel free to read here:

    https://civiliangunfighter.wordpress...a-49-410-2016/

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by SouthNarc View Post
    Your point about mistaking cover and concealment is well made and I certainly don't advocate for exchanging with an adversary holding a piece of real estate that doesn't actually stop gunfire.

    As far as compromised shooting positions that is indeed something I advocate for in an effort to see someone first. There's a balance between a position that is practiced and developed in open training space and closed real world space. Part of what I encourage people to do is adapt their shooting platform to real world space and then understand the compromises they make. I have a range based portion of AMIS that I actually teach in closed coursework.
    To me, pieing, clearing from the threshold etc, largely sets up a shooter for a gunfight through a wall. With a majority of internal walls being concealment the advantage lies with the bad guy. As an example moving up to a breach/threshold, there are only so many places you can be positioned. If that breach/threshold is going into a corner or center fed room, there is substantially more real-estate on the opposing side for a guy to work you from. So the bad guy has a somewhat specific area he can focus his fire on (if it turns into a gun fight through a wall) vice the good guy who has a huge frontage.

    If anyone can recall the video of the ATF/FBI guys attempting to make entry on the 2nd floor of the Waco compound. Those guys were getting shot through the wall. Largely because they had very limited space. That limited space was known to the guys doing the shooting. Allowing them to focus their effects on a singular area.

    Combine that now, with you are in potentially an unathletic or not good fighting stance. Seems like a bad set up from the ground up


    Quote Originally Posted by Lost River View Post
    I am just an unejumacaded redneck, so please forgive me, but I have no idea what that means.
    Internal to a structure = inside the building


    Quote Originally Posted by 43Under View Post
    I've had the good fortune to take a number of "structure tactics" classes despite being little more than a Joe Schmo. These have included AIT and UDC with Paul Howe, shoot-house with Joe Weyer at Alliance Police Range, Force-on-Force with Practically Tactical at Alliance, and the aforementioned AMIS with Craig Douglas, held at a derelict school in Pittsburgh back in 2016.

    ALL were stressful, ALL were great learning experiences. No class that I have EVER taken was more mentally exhausting than AMIS. I still recall sitting down in the hotel after Day 1 to write up some notes and passing out with notebook on my face and all the lights in the room still on.

    In my class, there was SOME use of what the OP seems to be describing as "compromised shooting positions" (although, in the video he linked to, I really don't see any compromised shooting positions....since when does shooting one-handed=compromised???). These were mostly used in situations where we could, due to angles of exposure, get the drop on someone and hit them before they could hit us. So if we were flattened against a wall and, due to angles, could see the adversary's foot, kneecap, elbow, whatever, and he could not yet see us, then it was worth it to be able to get a hit on the adversary. Not to sound like a dork, but John Wick does that in the first movie, hitting what the bad guy gives him (foot in that famous nightclub scene). Usually the ranges were quite short and so shooting one-handed was not much of a handicap. Most of what we did was constant adjusting of the two-handed grip, pulling in toward the chest and pressing out, as the situation dictated. And, of course, when we got to low-light and borderline no-light, your light set-up had an effect here (handheld vs. WML, etc.).

    As for the cover/concealment issue, I think experience has shown and countless CCTV videos have shown that people TEND to shoot at what they can see, and shooting through walls is rarely done, even by the bad guys (at least in a non-MOUT, more stateside context). I've seen shootouts in clothing stores where people did NOT shoot at their opponents through clothing racks, and instead waited for a visual target.

    If you want to read more about my experience in AMIS, feel free to read here:

    https://civiliangunfighter.wordpress...a-49-410-2016/
    Single handed firing is absolutely compromised.

    You used an interesting phrase "hit them before they could hit us". Thats my point. There is nothing between you and him that would have stopped bullets. It briefs well with sims/utm/airsoft. The reality is, 380, 9mm, 40 is going to chug right through your average homes walls. Except now you are in that compromised position. Your ability to move athletically is limited. You are likely going to flinch and lose balance. That to me is not being set up well for a fight.

    You said taking shots on feet/knees/elbows etc. Can you PID a guy based off his foot? Can you then use lethal force on a guy, because of his foot?

    You have seen his foot, you begin to give him commands. He doesnt listen. A lot of Craig's course work is built on non-consensual adversaries. Aka dudes that will talk shit to you when you are pointing a gun at them. We have now made the fight an even playing field.

    ETA: Your point about not shooting through walls doesnt jive.
    1. I am going to wager he would likely be aiming at an area. Wall or not. The point. That wall wont stop bullets.
    2. That is a great piece of safety rope to cling to. But not one to build an approach around

  6. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by KEW8338 View Post
    To me, pieing, clearing from the threshold etc, largely sets up a shooter for a gunfight through a wall. With a majority of internal walls being concealment the advantage lies with the bad guy. As an example moving up to a breach/threshold, there are only so many places you can be positioned. If that breach/threshold is going into a corner or center fed room, there is substantially more real-estate on the opposing side for a guy to work you from. So the bad guy has a somewhat specific area he can focus his fire on (if it turns into a gun fight through a wall) vice the good guy who has a huge frontage.

    If anyone can recall the video of the ATF/FBI guys attempting to make entry on the 2nd floor of the Waco compound. Those guys were getting shot through the wall. Largely because they had very limited space. That limited space was known to the guys doing the shooting. Allowing them to focus their effects on a singular area.

    Combine that now, with you are in potentially an unathletic or not good fighting stance. Seems like a bad set up from the ground up




    Internal to a structure = inside the building




    Single handed firing is absolutely compromised.

    You used an interesting phrase "hit them before they could hit us". Thats my point. There is nothing between you and him that would have stopped bullets. It briefs well with sims/utm/airsoft. The reality is, 380, 9mm, 40 is going to chug right through your average homes walls. Except now you are in that compromised position. Your ability to move athletically is limited. You are likely going to flinch and lose balance. That to me is not being set up well for a fight.

    You said taking shots on feet/knees/elbows etc. Can you PID a guy based off his foot? Can you then use lethal force on a guy, because of his foot?

    You have seen his foot, you begin to give him commands. He doesnt listen. A lot of Craig's course work is built on non-consensual adversaries. Aka dudes that will talk shit to you when you are pointing a gun at them. We have now made the fight an even playing field.

    ETA: Your point about not shooting through walls doesnt jive.
    1. I am going to wager he would likely be aiming at an area. Wall or not. The point. That wall wont stop bullets.
    2. That is a great piece of safety rope to cling to. But not one to build an approach around
    "Security issues aside, tactics are better demonstrated than discussed. The semantics arguments alone make it a pointless exercise."<<<HCM earlier in this thread.

    I now realize why he posted this.

    If you're going to "stick to your guns" even though you admit to having had ZERO training in this area, there is not much point in continuing this. I have tried and I have failed to explain some of this stuff to you (not blaming you here. I failed.). Cherry picking different comments instead of trying to suck in the whole is an issue here (why would you think that when targeting a foot that we're just shooting randos here? Do you not think that Craig would have set up a scenario where doing something like that would be appropriate? Come on!).

    I never said bad guys don't shoot through walls. I can think of a few instances in PD shootings (besides Waco) where bad guys targeted cops through walls. But it is rare. AND, the strongest part of the wall is right around the door, so there is a modicum of protection there (just like how Will Petty teaches stacking roof pillars for temporary "cover", but I suppose you never took VCQB either, right?).

    I'd suggest you actually get out from behind the computer, DO some of this stuff on your own, and pepper your instructor with your many questions. I, for one, having done all the coursework I mentioned above, find it interesting that all these guys teach pretty much the same stuff. Oh, and I left out doing a half-day of singleton structure work with Chuck Haggard (which looked remarkably like the stuff I learned in AMIS).

    Good luck with your quest.

    Edit to add: I'm not sure I'd use the word "compromised" to talk about one-handed shooting. Are all those 50 yard one-handed bullseye shooters really shooting from a compromised position? It may not be ideal, but I think "compromised" is too strong a word. If we're grappling and I shoot you from #2, am I shooting you from a compromised position? See? We're back at what HCM said upthread. We need to have common vocab to even discuss this stuff.

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Lost River View Post
    I am just an unejumacaded redneck, so please forgive me, but I have no idea what that means.
    An overly complicated, but tactikool?, way of saying "solo clearing" or "one man clearing". (In this day and age, should that be "one person clearing"?:-))


    PS: Can't tell if you were joking or serious. If you were joking, I apologize for not picking up on that and definitely don't mean to insult your intelligence.
    Last edited by SiriusBlunder; 02-22-2021 at 10:10 PM.

  8. #28
    IS WHAT PLANTS CRAVE BehindBlueI's's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Midwest
    Quote Originally Posted by Lost River View Post
    I am just an unejumacaded redneck, so please forgive me, but I have no idea what that means.
    I'm still not sure what a singleton movement is, and I'm at least a semi-edjumakated hillbilly.

    This thread confuses me. There seems to be an intermixing of team clearing of unknown structures with presumably hostile actors and clearing one's own home solo. I'm still not real clear on what the question is.
    Important rule change regarding political discussion here: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....58#post1151858

    Quote Originally Posted by UNM1136 View Post
    Maybe with talented students I would lube up with baby oil and then go at it.

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by KEW8338 View Post
    To me, pieing, clearing from the threshold etc, largely sets up a shooter for a gunfight through a wall. With a majority of internal walls being concealment the advantage lies with the bad guy. As an example moving up to a breach/threshold, there are only so many places you can be positioned. If that breach/threshold is going into a corner or center fed room, there is substantially more real-estate on the opposing side for a guy to work you from. So the bad guy has a somewhat specific area he can focus his fire on (if it turns into a gun fight through a wall) vice the good guy who has a huge frontage.

    If anyone can recall the video of the ATF/FBI guys attempting to make entry on the 2nd floor of the Waco compound. Those guys were getting shot through the wall. Largely because they had very limited space. That limited space was known to the guys doing the shooting. Allowing them to focus their effects on a singular area.

    A lot of guys who served in Iraq in the 2000s shifted to the idea of pieing and threshold evaluation when they started running into hardened rooms and getting chewed up. Evaluating or splitting the doorway before committing to the room is still in practice with NSW and MARSOC. Variations of that are nothing new. What speed one does that is driven by the particular problem.

    And quite frankly one may not even be going into a room. A surreptitious clear, by a homeowner of a doorway in an attempt to maybe bypass a particular problem area, in an effort to get out of the structure and call LE to come handle the problem is a far different mission than SWAT/warfighters assaulting a room. That's just particular one example.

  10. #30
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    SoCal

    Viability of Pieing

    Quote Originally Posted by BehindBlueI's View Post
    I'm still not sure what a singleton movement is, and I'm at least a semi-edjumakated hillbilly.

    This thread confuses me. There seems to be an intermixing of team clearing of unknown structures with presumably hostile actors and clearing one's own home solo. I'm still not real clear on what the question is.
    I’m pretty sure “singleton” is his way of saying “just one person; no team”. The only place I’ve ever heard the term used outside of cards or software development is in Britain; could be the OP is British.


    I’m incredibly impressed by all the patience shown in this thread, and everyone’s willingness to try to consider new viewpoints/ try to generate some useful conversation.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •