Dave Spaulding's Check 360 - Scan / Assess

[psalms144.1]

Obviously ALL of this can (and my opinion should ) be trained dry with blue guns or with airsoft or Sims in FOF. That will get you reps when your local range doesn't allow anything other than facing down range and shooting 1 round every 2 seconds.

There are a lot of good ideas in this thread, but the quoted comment, IMHO, is the gold nugget here. There are things that we train on the range (fundamentals, speed, and accuracy), and there are things we train in FOF (most GOOD tactics, decision making, etc). The two RARELY mix well in almost any setting, and mixing the two can be troublesome. I like Dave, a lot, and think he's a great guy. But his comment that "in boxing, someone is going to get a bloody nose" turned me off in the extreme. We're not talking about a potential boo-boo here, we're talking about a potentially life ending injury, if someone fucks up the up-range turn with a loaded handgun. I mean, hell, even Dave went to the extreme of ensuring that he only DEMONSTRATED this with a blue gun, and pointed out before he started the drill in front of his camera that it was a blue gun. That, to me, is a clue...

Of course, I don't blog, and God willing, you'll never see me on Youtube, so, what do I know?

[Al T.]

Dave has some great thoughts and runs a good class, but I think he is still seeking his linguistic balance. He articulates it pretty well (better than this video) in person.

[psalms144.1]

Dave has some great thoughts and runs a good class, but I think he is still seeking his linguistic balance. He articulates it pretty well (better than this video) in person.

Completely agree, I've taken training with Dave and thought he was an outstanding instructor. It just seems like, lately, there's been a lot of things going into video (by Dave and others) that should never have been recorded without a script...

[Redhat]

Dave has some great thoughts and runs a good class, but I think he is still seeking his linguistic balance. He articulates it pretty well (better than this video) in person.

Unfortunately for videos...there's no Q&A to hash things out. It would be great if he could drop in here.

[John Hearne]

In my mind, the after action scan is too context dependent to have one scripted response.

If I wake up in the middle of the night to a large noise and without leaving my bedroom, shoot some dude as he comes down the hall, then I don't need much if any of a scan. My bedroom is occupied by my wife and the only threat area is contained within the limited area I can see through the doorway.

If I'm in a convenience store or bank with a lot of folks and I have to shoot someone, an after action scan if hugely important given the concerns of an unrevealed accomplice. If I walk into a convenience store and it's empty save the clerk, and after walking to the back to get something, I see an armed robber enter and engage him, then I don't need much of a scan.

If I'm a uniformed officer or wearing identifying markings, then the scan that Spaulding demonstrates makes a lot of sense. In a dense urban environment, wearing plain clothes, I like that scan a little bit less.

One of the questions we need to be asking is how much information do I need. I think that two or three different scans are reasonably programmable.

[JustOneGun]

We each do our own things and I'm good with that. What I do is see around me after firing, just in case.

Looking and seeing are not that same thing. I did an experiment with every recruit class we had. I would hold up a number of fingers straight over my head behind the recruits in a non-threatening manner. I found that the ones that just glanced around over those with a dramatic tactical movement could articulate how many fingers were in the air.

[cheshire_cat]

For armed private security, both CJTC in WA and DPSST in OR make scanning and assessing / after actions a requirement for certification. Being a requirement, some students just want to get it over with and get on with the shooting, hence the quick swivel of the head without looking. This is why instructors have used various techniques to get them to actually look at their surroundings. I get both sides of the views on whether or not to teach it, but I don't have a choice when it comes to the certification...and I see the validity in it. Similar to the overblown importance placed on tac reloads, but that is a different discussion...

[ST911]

To avoid entangling myself in axles, I break the scan/assess down to its underlying principle:

1) follow the threat to the ground and make sure it stays there
2) look L, R, and around me near to far to find anything else of interest
3) move as needed to accomplish #2
4) point my gun only at stuff that needs pointing at

This works for me, is adaptable to context, and I work concept not kata.

I teach other places that have more structure. I find that the more script and steps, the more it becomes about the process not the problem you're looking for.

[psalms144.1]

I teach other places that have more structure. I find that the more script and steps, the more it becomes about the process not the problem you're looking for.

QFT - another nugget. I always HATE going to a qual run by other FIs who literally read the script off the call card for every engagement. "Shooters, on the next engagement, take one step off-line to your right while drawing, and..." Drives me crazy, and generates all kinds of training scars. Our old qual had SIX one shot engagements, in a row, at the 7 yard line. By the time the qual was over, everyone was moving like they were going to reholster between each shot. Drills were a nightmare, and a lot of shooters acted like they'd get extra credit for being the first one back in the holster - with a lot of P228s holstered WITHOUT being decocked first...

[Edster]

It seems the focus should be getting it through your head that you aren't "done" just because you took care of an immediate problem.

I think it's the same problem in other types of fights. I'm sure many have seen or experienced getting blindsided because somebody thought the fight was over too soon. In a fist fight, you hopefully heal up, learn from it, and don't do it again. In a gun fight, you may not have that opportunity.

I recall a trainer who described it like, "I'm done with that. Now do I have more work?" That seems like the right mindset.

Certainly, being able to safely assess 360 degrees with a gun and an adrenaline dump requires a practiced technique. I'm just humbly suggesting it's a tool best coupled with a mindset of not quitting.