The case for the assessment pause

[BehindBlueI's]

I've been mulling this over and felt like it was something PF may want to weigh in on. I think it's time to return to the shoot/assess cycle in training vs the shoot them to the ground that is widely viewed as best practice now. I get the why of it. The fear was that during your assessment phase the bad guy was still acting and maybe you get hurt or killed during that lull. I concede this is a possibility. However, here's what I'm seeing from both the general citizenry and police. This results in a shit ton of misses. Which then feed the narrative of the need for high capacity carry guns (note need vs desire, if you want to carry a 50 round x-tendo mag, you do you, but all to often that goes hand in hand with if you're carrying less than X you're gonna die). Mag dumps occur with magazines of all sizes, but bigger mags result in higher round count mag dumps which result in even more misses.

The shoot 2/assess cycle is now old and busted. Everybody knows you'll be shot in the face while you are looky-lou at the bad guy without pulling the trigger. But will it? If we're seeing something like 3 for 17 as a fairly common mag dump hit rate...is that faster trigger pulling helping you? During the assessment phase the gun is settling out of recoil and you're getting back into the mind set of decision making vs just keep doing what you're doing because it hasn't gotten you killed yet. So should we dust off that old and busted 'best practice' and see how it works in the day of the wunder9, a litigious society, and the very real scenario that 'lawful but awful' shootings damage the liklihood of robust self-defense laws (and policies) remaining on the books? Ridiculous? Look how many departments now say you can shoot someone in the fact in situation X but can *NEVER EVER EVER* apply any sort of "choke hold" in the same situation X?


My contention is hit rates would likely go up, stray round would absolutely go down, and outcomes would be better for the vast majority of skill levels of shooters in self defense/defense of other situations.

This is mostly just for my own benefit. I know cool guy trainers at all levels aren't going to stop the Instagram splits, but maybe, just maybe, PF may consider working more decision making in to their drills and in their mental run throughs.

[Trooper224]

I will simply like and agree.

[breakingtime91]

I've been mulling this over and felt like it was something PF may want to weigh in on. I think it's time to return to the shoot/assess cycle in training vs the shoot them to the ground that is widely viewed as best practice now. I get the why of it. The fear was that during your assessment phase the bad guy was still acting and maybe you get hurt or killed during that lull. I concede this is a possibility. However, here's what I'm seeing from both the general citizenry and police. This results in a shit ton of misses. Which then feed the narrative of the need for high capacity carry guns (note need vs desire, if you want to carry a 50 round x-tendo mag, you do you, but all to often that goes hand in hand with if you're carrying less than X you're gonna die). Mag dumps occur with magazines of all sizes, but bigger mags result in higher round count mag dumps which result in even more misses.

The shoot 2/assess cycle is now old and busted. Everybody knows you'll be shot in the face while you are looky-lou at the bad guy without pulling the trigger. But will it? If we're seeing something like 3 for 17 as a fairly common mag dump hit rate...is that faster trigger pulling helping you? During the assessment phase the gun is settling out of recoil and you're getting back into the mind set of decision making vs just keep doing what you're doing because it hasn't gotten you killed yet. So should we dust off that old and busted 'best practice' and see how it works in the day of the wunder9, a litigious society, and the very real scenario that 'lawful but awful' shootings damage the liklihood of robust self-defense laws (and policies) remaining on the books? Ridiculous? Look how many departments now say you can shoot someone in the fact in situation X but can *NEVER EVER EVER* apply any sort of "choke hold" in the same situation X?


My contention is hit rates would likely go up, stray round would absolutely go down, and outcomes would be better for the vast majority of skill levels of shooters in self defense/defense of other situations.

This is mostly just for my own benefit. I know cool guy trainers at all levels aren't going to stop the Instagram splits, but maybe, just maybe, PF may consider working more decision making in to their drills and in their mental run throughs.

I simply couldn't agree more. I have trained with more people than I would like to admit that think faster splits are better than accurate hits in small vital zones. You see it all the time on YouTube videos also... they look at their splits, overall time, but gloss over their hits. I tend to gravitate to the way Kyle defoor does things reduced A zone, realistic time standards that are a high rigor with his expectations.

[Coyotesfan97]

I was trained in the academy and at my department in the fire two/assess. I’m not sure when it went to the shoot until the threat goes away. But we had the expectation that you were making good hits while doing it.
.

[Clusterfrack]

Great post and thread, BBI.

Are we talking about assessment on the same timescale as the difference between a predictive (feedforward) split < 0.25s and a reactive (feedback) split of > 0.35? As in assessing (confirming) that the sight is on target each time we press the trigger? Or something more, such as observing the effect on target, stop and scan, or ?

[CCT125US]

This happens to dovetail nicely with a thread I decided not to post.. I would have entitled it "The psychology of capacity". Looking forward to the discussion. I'll share some thoughts when time permits.

[JCN]

Welcome back BBI!

[blues]

I agree with this, BBI, and it has always been a personal standard...especially now that I am no longer a serving LEO.

This goes hand in hand with the "don't outrun your headlights" caution, imho. ("Headlights" being both one's eyes and what's between one's ears.)

I don't know where along the way that capacity began to trump judgment but it's time for a return to accountability on several levels.

Good stuff..

[JCN]

Great post and thread, BBI.

Are we talking about assessment on the same timescale as the difference between a predictive (feedforward) split < 0.25s and a reactive (feedback) split of > 0.35? As in assessing (confirming) that the sight is on target each time we press the trigger? Or something more, such as observing the effect on target, stop and scan, or ?

I’d love to see “call two good hits and reassess.”

Shooting two if it helps hitting two is great.

Throwing two wide and reassessing might not be great.

Throwing two wide instead of throwing 6 wide is probably better for bystanders.

How do you train LEO to shoot two and hit two? That’s the crux of the issue.

[Totem Polar]

FWIW, I think you’re spot on, BBI. I also think you sort of opened/closed the thread all at once with your excellent OP.

But that’s not a very P-F response, so I’ll also say that the skewing of the trainer pool more towards the GWOT literati, as opposed to the LE/Civ literati of yore has been a major contributing factor. Which sort of makes sense: if one is in a gunfight in-theater and a pile of extra rounds go downrange, it’s a different standard and spectrum of possible outcomes to a defensive shooting (LE or private) here in civilized Opticsville, USA.