"Don't Outrun Your Headlights"

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I would agree that one needs both. I spent time doing both. The argument comes in when someone claims that just competition will be sufficient AND teaches defensive usage or handling complex situations outside of simple gun handling. Since most DGUs are resolved without shots, who needs ammo anyway? You don't hear a beep at night and then full speed to an open door way to get a sight picture.

Most gun carriers get little legal training beyond the carry course if required and little gun training.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

You’re the guy who wanted pattern Mozambique training instead of judging each shot, right?

Nobody is saying USPSA tactics are self defense tactics.

We are just talking about developing mechanical skill that allows you bandwidth for (different) decision making in real life scenarios.

If you don’t know what you are mechanically capable of, that also causes errors and decision paralysis.

No, we weren't just talking about mechanical skills. You are the one who thinks that mechanical skills are the end all and be all. You misinterpret what I said about the Mozambique pattern as a part of a motor memory that one might need if faced with a failure to stop. I guess all the tactical trainers I've been with don't have your great fighting insights about failure to stop drills. Tactical courses give you cognitive skills and perceptual skills that are as needed as mechanical skills. Practicing failure to stop seems to not make sense to you. Dumb SWAT guy that Karl had as a guest and running us such with reactive targets. Dumb NTI drills with similar reactive targets.

I can see why you are on ignore for some.

[blues]

Some of you are missing the point of why I posted this thread. I suppose that's to be expected.

(That Weems guy gets it, though. Can't say I'm surprised.)

[JCN]

The argument comes in when someone claims that just competition will be sufficient AND teaches defensive usage or handling complex situations outside of simple gun handling.

But who is claiming that?

I don’t think anyone (here) believes that competition is sufficient for tactical training.

I don’t think tactical training without good mechanics is sufficient either (see LEO qual standards and the poor hit ratio, Minnesota Kim mistaking her Glock for a Taser, etc) and things like Bakersfield have shown improved mechanics led to improvement in street performance in shootouts.

Where there may be some misattribution is regarding what is “simple” gun handling and what isn’t.

I’m going to say that movement and shooting isn’t “simple” gun handling and knowing what difficulty of shot you can and cannot execute at what range and what stability is more than “simple.” It’s also something that’s better learned in USPSA than most square range LEO quals.

It’s interesting that for Rifle quals there are a lot of full sprint to difficult shot placements. It’s very much like a USPSA pistol movement. Tell Defoor that sprinting and then shooting isn’t relevant.



This is basically like USPSA with a rifle. It’s a drill for mechanics and you layer tactics on it.

If it’s good enough of a basis for Defoor, good enough for me.

[Clusterfrack]

Back to the first post... @Mr White's coursework involves fast, dynamic shooting and also the ability to abort a shot when necessary. I found that approach novel among any of the classes I had taken. I agree that responding and NOT shooting or continuing to shoot is a critical skill for any person who owns a gun for defensive purposes.

More from the Steve Moses article:

Training to shoot at high speed teaches us to get the pistol out of the holster and on target ready to shoot as quickly as possible, and it teaches us to spend a minimal amount of time from shooting one shot to being ready to shoot a subsequent shot. It does not necessarily mean that shooting as fast as possible is always going to be the best response in the event of a real-world lethal force encounter.

A timely reminder...from Steve Moses.

https://ccwsafe.com/news/dont-outrun-your-headlights/

Master instructor Tom Givens urges his students to not teach their own students to “outrun their headlights” by shooting faster in a lethal force encounter than they can perceive and respond to a change of circumstances which may call for complete cessation of shooting or shooting at a more deliberate speed. I was aware of this concept and had experienced it during a Louis Awerbuck defensive shotgun course when he caused a 3-D target to move only a few inches a nano-second before I fully pressed the trigger on my Benelli shotgun, resulting in a complete miss at five yards.

Much emphasis is put on speed-shooting in defensive shooting classes, and most of us nod in appreciation of the skill shown when a shooter can draw from the holster and put six rounds in an eight-inch circle at seven yards in less than three seconds. One of my favorite drills is the Larry Vickers Half-Test, which we shoot from concealment. The goal is to shoot ten rounds into a five and one-half inch circle at five yards clean in five seconds or less. In order to meet this standard and shoot it clean I personally must shoot one round after the first round about every 1/3rd of a second or so. This may be faster than I can perceive and respond to a sudden change of circumstances (most especially in low light) where I am responsible for the backstop of each single round...continued

[JCN]

You are the one who thinks that mechanical skills are the end all and be all. You misinterpret what I said about the Mozambique pattern as a part of a motor memory that one might need if faced with a failure to stop. I guess all the tactical trainers I've been with don't have your great fighting insights about failure to stop drills. Tactical courses give you cognitive skills and perceptual skills that are as needed as mechanical skills. Practicing failure to stop seems to not make sense to you. Dumb SWAT guy that Karl had as a guest and running us such with reactive targets. Dumb NTI drills with similar reactive targets.

I can see why you are on ignore for some.

Because people don’t have good reading comprehension and it’s annoying to them when they’re wrong?

How many times in this thread have I said that mechanical skills don’t replace tactical execution?

I’ve NEVER said that mechanics trump tactics.

I think that mediocre mechanics are mediocre.

Many courses (including SWAT) are still dumbed down.

If SEALS and DELTA practice Mozambiques, I’ll be impressed. I would expect they’re calling and aiming each shot, rather than motor patterning. If the head is available they will take the head without the body.

Plus, if you’re arguing for Mozambique that’s actually against the outrunning your headlights point of the thread.

I’ll put this in BOLD for the comprehension impaired.

MECHANICS DON’T TRUMP TACTICS.

But the better mechanics you have, the more specific and accurate your tactics can be and you have more options available to you.

I’ve been gorging on SEAL and DELTA memoirs and repeatedly they say: don’t be mediocre.

They train the shit out of their mechanics while also learning and practicing tactics.

“Good enough” is never “good enough” for them physically and mechanically.

That’s separate from the tactical part.

[MickAK]

I think that's all fairly well agreed upon and solid.

There definitely are people that use not outrunning their headlights as an excuse not to have an engine worth a damn, but that's true of everything in shooting. Some people get better and some people find justification not to try.

Approaching training your assessment speed seems to vary widely which is interesting.

[DDTSGM]

People who Pooh Pooh it like @jlw just don’t know what they don’t know.

And apparently like to put their fingers in their ears and go “lalalalala I’m not listening lalalalala” instead of trying to get educated.

This kind of stuff is unnecessary and detracts from the point you are trying to make.

[feudist]

Here's a decent thread on Assessment speed with commentary from Bolke and Dobbs. Ayoob also weighs in.

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....sessment-speed

I'd still like someone's thoughts on practicing this task.

[DDTSGM]

I can't presently locate the Force Science study I was seeking. Here is an article about a subsequent study referencing the one I was seeking, but the link is dead:

https://www.forcescience.com/2010/03...is-subtleties/

I once had a district attorney ask for input on a shooting where he was trying to decide whether to charge an officer. Long story short, a foot pursuit ended with a deputy cuffing a suspect on the ground. As the backup arrived on scene he saw the suspect's father with a piece of lumber raised to strike the cuffing officer. The father ended up getting shot in the back.

I immediately told the DA that the backup officer, seeing the threat was drawing to fire to protect his partner, and the father seeing this, dropped the stick and was turning to flee when the officer fired. The officer once the decision to fire was made - justified at the time - simply wasn't able to shut down the impulse.

I told him that I'd seen similar instances countless times during use-of-force simulations and showed him several scenarios where this often occurred on our systems. By the time he left I was certain he was going to rule the shooting justified. He left the case file and I wrote a report. Instead, a coroner's inquest was convened, and he paid an expert witness to say what I had told him for free.

End result was in the officer's favor.