Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 61

Thread: Don't Shoot to Kill - Israeli Perspective for Americans?

  1. #41
    Full contact first day was my experience.

    Quote Originally Posted by UNM1136 View Post
    I dunno about Israel, but I went to Japan for a couple of weeks to do martial arts. 1-3 lessons a day at different Dojos, half a dozen or so different instructors. Sword work, knife work, kunai, grappling, striking.

    Not a single liability waiver to sign. Anywhere. Instructors taught at private dojo, public dojo (the Tokyo Budokan was awesome!), and public parks.

    It seems, that the Japanese believe that if you are participaing in something, like say, learning fighting styles, that you might get hurt. There is no civil liability if you voluntarily participate in such things. You would be laughed out of court and publicly humiliated if you tried.

    So reduced lawsuits based on culture and legal philosophy are a thing.

    On a side note: convictions are much easier to get when you are allowed to beat confessions out of people. True story.

    pat
    I'll wager you a PF dollar™ 😎
    The lunatics are running the asylum

  2. #42
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Quote Originally Posted by Ed4032 View Post
    Just like Roy Rogers. My hero.
    Yippee ki-ayy, motherfucker!

  3. #43
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    SC
    The GIGN had some similar things from some reading I saw.

    Anytime I hear someone say shoot a weapon or try to disable a person. The credibility is gone. Especially because realistically most of us have not and will never been in an actual gun fight (civilian here).

    I’d feel irresponsible telling a house mom or whatever “shoot the gun out of their hands” because honestly the blood is on your hands for that non-sense. Maybe not criminally or liability wise, but ethically. Also, that basically almost all defensive shooting laws in the states are built around self-defense and it’s hard to articulate that when you do that.

    I would think the empty chamber non-sense comes from a large conscript based military in Israel. Also, I’d imagine often it’s officers carrying them.

    Just speculation on my part.

    This and Krav Maga. There must be something in the water over there.

    ETA: I’ll never forget a guy telling me he’d just rip somebody’s throat out and gouge their eyes out in self-defense. I was like “You practice that a lot?”.

    Alright, back to work.
    God Bless,

    Brandon

  4. #44
    Site Supporter JohnO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    CT (behind Enemy lines)
    Quote Originally Posted by BWT View Post

    ETA: I’ll never forget a guy telling me he’d just rip somebody’s throat out and gouge their eyes out in self-defense. I was like “You practice that a lot?”.

    Alright, back to work.
    Forever I've wanted to see a tough guy rip off someone's head and defecate down their neck.

  5. #45
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Erie County, NY
    Such tactics are used in Chimp H2H. Pull off your face and testicles.

  6. #46
    Quote Originally Posted by 4RNR View Post
    The reason they carry, or carried, an empty chamber is because traditionally they had a plethora of different style handguns. The only way to do uniform training, without standardizing on one handgun, was to carry an empty chamber

    Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk
    You know where else you see that? Every American law enforcement academy for the last 60 years. In one class you might have striker fired, SAO, DA/SA, DAO, and of course varieties of each. My academy class (which was minute ago) sure did. Granted we're not "shoot dudes in the knee" good, but I think neither are the Israelis.

    Edit to add...

    As I think through it, my class had:
    1x 1911
    1x P220 DA/SA
    1x PX4
    2x USP DA/SA
    4x P229 DAK
    3x P226 DA/SA
    1x XD
    1x S&W third gen DAO
    1x Taurus PT92 (top shooter...no joke)

    Most of the rest were Glocks. We had 9mm, .40, .45, and one .357 SIG. I'm probably missing a couple of guns that weren't Glocks. There were 46 of us.

    Again, it was a minute ago...nobody had a weapon light (two guys had Insight M3s in belt pouches), there were definitely no optics, the M&P was not commercially available yet. Everybody thought the .40 and .45 we're really hot shit. Those were the days.
    Last edited by DaBigBR; 06-14-2022 at 09:58 PM.

  7. #47
    Quote Originally Posted by DaBigBR View Post
    You know where else you see that? Every American law enforcement academy for the last 60 years. In one class you might have striker fired, SAO, DA/SA, DAO, and of course varieties of each. My academy class (which was minute ago) sure did. Granted we're not "shoot dudes in the knee" good, but I think neither are the Israelis.

    Edit to add...

    As I think through it, my class had:
    1x 1911
    1x P220 DA/SA
    1x PX4
    2x USP DA/SA
    4x P229 DAK
    3x P226 DA/SA
    1x XD
    1x S&W third gen DAO
    1x Taurus PT92 (top shooter...no joke)

    Most of the rest were Glocks. We had 9mm, .40, .45, and one .357 SIG. I'm probably missing a couple of guns that weren't Glocks. There were 46 of us.

    Again, it was a minute ago...nobody had a weapon light (two guys had Insight M3s in belt pouches), there were definitely no optics, the M&P was not commercially available yet. Everybody thought the .40 and .45 we're really hot shit. Those were the days.
    I'm guessing that's bring your own and not issued. When your dept is going to be issuing guns like that you'll be carrying chamber empty because today it may be an XD but next month it might be a HiPower or a Beretta Cheetah 380 or a CZ 70 32acp. An old CZ75 with no decocker, Sig 226, 228, Tokarev, back to HiPower and end with a home grown Jericho!! Some of their guns weren't designed to be carried chambered. Is that anything like what you've seen here in the last 60 years? The only way to get everyone trained the same way regardless of if the gun was made in 1902 or 2022 is to train to carry on an empty chamber

    My city PD (several thousand) has been Glock 17 since 88. Today they allow any Glock other than 9mm provided you pay for ammo.

    Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk
    Last edited by 4RNR; 06-14-2022 at 11:09 PM.

  8. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by 4RNR View Post
    I'm guessing that's bring your own and not issued. When your dept is going to be issuing guns like that you'll be carrying chamber empty because today it may be an XD but next month it might be a HiPower or a Beretta Cheetah 380 or a CZ 70 32acp. An old CZ75 with no decocker, Sig 226, 228, Tokarev, back to HiPower and end with a home grown Jericho!! Some of their guns weren't designed to be carried chambered. Is that anything like what you've seen here in the last 60 years? The only way to get everyone trained the same way regardless of if the gun was made in 1902 or 2022 is to train to carry on an empty chamber

    My city PD (several thousand) has been Glock 17 since 88. Today they allow any Glock other than 9mm provided you pay for ammo.

    Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk
    These were mostly issued guns at a state run academy. Of several hundred agencies in the state, only a handful (the largest) have their own academies.

    No American law enforcement agency that I am aware of anywhere authorizes, encourages, or trains carrying with an empty chamber. None. This includes places with thousands of guys carrying one gun and places with several types authorized. Basic handgun safety and marksmanship is 95% the same regardless of trigger mechanism. If this type of poor logic is what led the Israelis to choose to train this way, so be it, but it doesn't make it a good idea, or common.

  9. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by DaBigBR View Post
    These were mostly issued guns at a state run academy. Of several hundred agencies in the state, only a handful (the largest) have their own academies.

    No American law enforcement agency that I am aware of anywhere authorizes, encourages, or trains carrying with an empty chamber. None. This includes places with thousands of guys carrying one gun and places with several types authorized. Basic handgun safety and marksmanship is 95% the same regardless of trigger mechanism. If this type of poor logic is what led the Israelis to choose to train this way, so be it, but it doesn't make it a good idea, or common.
    Large departments issue guns to recruits. Small departments also issue guns to officers but they typically go through the academy on their own dime and with whatever firearm they own. So you may go through the academy with a Taurus or a desert eagle but you'll get whatever the department that hires you uses. In this case the gun you used in training is irrelevant. It's not going to be what you'll carry, not even if it happens to be the same gun that your agency issues.

    Very very few departments here allow you to bring your own. I know of 2 and both are small. We're talking 3-5 officers. One department is underfunded, they still use donated mini 14s from the 90s. The other is in a wealthy area but it's redundant. It's a department within a department. Everywhere else the gun is issued.

    I never said it was a good idea, or common. Just why they do it



    Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk

  10. #50
    Whatever you say, man. Those are massive generalizations that do not prove out on a national scale.

    It was unclear with your previous post whether this "empty chamber = uniform training" thing was something you personally agreed with since you essentially posted it as fact in your reply.

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
  •