How Relevant is LE and Military Experience to Private Citizens?

[Mr_White]

As private citizens, we can enjoy the benefits of training, practice, competition, the pursuit of a high level of technical skill, etc. What we do not get, if things go right in our lives, is experience at anything other than avoidance.

Consequently, we frequently look to the experiences of others for reference, and those people typically come from an LE or military background.

How relevant are those experiences and how might we qualify them?

As an example, Kevin B. recently commented that he had developed the habit of using his professional equipment (war belt, plate carrier, etc.) in training, even though he no longer uses that equipment professionally. He has switched to using what he actually carries and what he actually wears now, perceiving a relevancy benefit in doing so.

TLG has offered an example before too - black sights sometimes being advocated by those whose experiences are shaped being on a team with long guns, NODs, WMLs, and IR lasers - and questioned the relevancy to private citizens without those assets.

The excellent example was recently raised, 'is the best way to get a "conscripts-to-firearms-training-populated-organization" up to a basic level of competency also the best way to train motivated LE, .mil, and private citizen students?

Surely there are a great many aspects of this, from equipment to tactics to desirable skill level, and ranging from direct 1:1 relevancy to total irrelevancy. But perhaps we can discuss it and see what elements of doctrine we think fit best where.

[YVK]

Outstanding question. Identifying with instructors who have spent their carriers armed with rifles and performing offensive team tasks has always been difficult for me.

I think that, at a minimum, we can look at their behavioral and psychologic responses during armed lethal force encounters.

We can look at training philosophy of those units whose tasks we can identify the most with - for example, those that perform hostage rescues (in context of shot precision and bystanders).

We can learn from individual mistakes. Those who haven't read Paul Gardner's' story need to go and find out.

We can learn about physical conditioning and mindset cultivation from accounts of those who persevered and won against odds.

We can seek out training from those who operate in conditions similar to ours - concealment, no one to watch your back, and pistol as an only weapon.

Those are my thoughts.

[JeffJ]

One thing that has been rattling around in my head lately has been along the lines of learning from folks who have a good understanding of the social and professional issues of carrying concealed without a badge. Many of us (us being non-LEO civilians) are expected to dress a certain way in both business and social dealings which makes the carrying of a "real gun" pretty difficult. It seems like there are only a few trainers out there who are taking this reality head-on and doing more than insisting that people "dress around the gun."

Don't get me wrong, I carry a "real gun" and a reload as much as I can, but often it's a j frame in my pocket.

Mechanics, mindset, and tactics are great but I think that often there is a missing component of "living with a gun" as an armed citizen.

I don't think I answered the question at all, but I really am trying to add to the discussion

[John Hearne]

I'd really suggest catching Tom Givens' presentation "Defining The Threat." He spends a lot of time discussing the various contexts that give us most of our instructors and their relevance to the armed private citizen.

[Mr_White]

I'd really suggest catching Tom Givens' presentation "Defining The Threat." He spends a lot of time discussing the various contexts that give us most of our instructors and their relevance to the armed private citizen.

Well I'd love to, but I doubt I will get the chance anytime soon. I don't suppose Tom would like to comment?...

[Dr. No]

In my opinion, almost anyone can teach firearms. Competition guys, LE guys, mil guys, guys who have never done any of those things. Running a gun is not a skill limited to those professions, though there is a large pool of knowledge in those professions because being gunslingers is part of their day to day jobs.

There are amazing instructors... and awful ones. Often times there is little to no "qualifications" needed to teach shooting. You take a class, be "certified", and get out on the range.

All that being said, there are very few people who teach tactics. Very few non-LE/mil folks have lots of experience being involved in situations where gun play is common. If you want information and training on how that experience has shaped their firearms programs, it only makes sense to learn from them.

There are a lot of people who teach. What they teach may never have been tested. If it's never tested, they really have no idea if it really works. If it doesn't work, you may be learning tactics that could really fail you in a time of need.

[Chuck Haggard]

I'd really suggest catching Tom Givens' presentation "Defining The Threat." He spends a lot of time discussing the various contexts that give us most of our instructors and their relevance to the armed private citizen.

^This^

Big time.


I will note that sometimes some of the special guys do end up with a valid level of experience in CCW issues, although they almost always are working OCONUS when it happens.


Others in LE can also have a valid base of experience. That like half of the OISs involving FBI agents are when they are off duty or in plain clothes, and stem from things like armed robbery attempts, is pretty much exactly the sort of thing that folks with a CCW have to deal with.

[AJZ]

Great question OAK! My feelings are that most military/LEO "macro" experience has little to no relevancy what so ever to the private citizen. For former military instructors, now a days there are a lot of "combat" experienced instructors out there. There's a lot of micro-experiences that may cross over, like how long it will be before you actually find your sights after firing in intense situations, or auditory exclusion and its effect on the shooter, etc. But I feel that the macro-experiences are pretty irrelevant. It is unrealistic to think that you're gonna get up in the morning, strap your battle belt and drop-leg on, throw your plate carrier over your multi-cam shirt, grab a carbine and be ready to close with and engage the enemy on your way to your office. I'm a big fan of the the AR platform, but to me, if its getting deployed, it's coming out of a car or my closet. I do feel there is merit to learning the systems, but in context of your life. Not sure about any others no longer in that lifestyle, but I don't throw my kit on when I'm goin to the movies. And that seems to be a hard lesson learned for most former military guys, and the ones that do recognize and get it I give great props. That being said, there are some guys in the military that have/do carry handguns in a covert/concealed nature and they have some definite experiences to draw on. These are few and far between and more often than not, the exception to the rule.

With all due respect, I think LEO's are even worse, because it is very easy for us to rationalize that they lead similar lives to the average person. They get up, they talk to people all day, they drive in cars, all in our home towns, etc. Except they strap an open carry gun, badge, and uniform on everyday when they do these things. Not aware of many uniformed LEO's that have been held up in their squad cars or someone tried to take their wallets in an alley at night while on the job. But again, they have micro-experiences that are very worth while I feel. Dealing with the aftermath of a shooting or gunfight, dealing with someone who has no rational thought process when confronted with lethal force, having to go into a structure alone not knowing what is inside, etc. I think a better group to pull from is probably the UC/plain clothed guys. Granted, you probably aren't doing dope deals or gun deals with Shady McFinnigan, but the fact that they are constantly concerned with people seeing their gun, or bumping into them, or the notion that they may be robbed or have a gun stuck in their face at any minute and the fact that their "TEAM" may not be close enough to do a damn thing has some merit.

Just some thoughts on the subject.

[BJJ]

I think that uniformed patrol officers have some carryover to citizens carrying concealed. Yes the officers are carrying openly but if they have to confront an unexpected threat, it will almost certainly be with a pistol. I also think that detectives and plain clothes vice officers can have a lot to offer since they spend plenty of time in shady parts of town at strange hours. Lots of vice guys get robbed or are present when their informants get robbed while wearing a wire. As far as military, I think some of the super secret special ops people (that's SSSOP for short) who function almost like spies at times have very valuable experience. If you were tooling around East Germany while armed before the wall came down, you have carried concealed when the stakes were very high. I am sure there are more recent examples. Pat McNamara and Mike Pannone come to mind. I have read a couple of interesting AAR's of Mike Pannone's concealed carry class lately and it seems like he has a very well thought presentation based on real world experience. I think Pannone used to train Federal Air Marshalls which I think would also be a group that would have very relevant experience. In short, I think there is a lot to be gleaned but maybe not as much from people using team tactics and rifles to do raids.

[Kyle Reese]

It makes a great deal of sense to evaluate what you, the end user, wish to get out of the training. If you were once in the military, and wish to learn how to effectively employ a handgun as a defensive arm when you assume the role of Joe C. Civilian, it would be logical to seek out a trainer that specializes in that.

If you're a member of the .mil, an OCONUS PSC or LEO, and wish to keep your skills sets current, it makes sense to seek out qualified trainers that can adequately train you up for your next call out, deployment or gig. Kyle Defoor, Tiger Swan and many others do an outstanding job on training warfighters and those who kick doors for a living.

That said, there are truly world class shooters out there that have a lot to offer anyone seeking to improve their shooting. Accomplished shooters seeking training from the likes of TLG, Bob Vogel, Manny Bragg, Frank Proctor and many others stand to gain a lot, regardless of their professional background. Shooting on the move, pushing a student hard on various drills and providing expert individual feedback benefits all involved.