July 11th, 2006 09:49 PM
If you have not read any of Lt. Col. Grossman's books, this IS one you must not pass up.
Even if you have read his others (On Killing etc.) this is a must read.
This book looks at all angles of combat, and prepares the reader to deal with both stress and combat, as well as prepares the reader to deal with the aftermath of combat in the event you do indeed have to apply lethal force.
He also looks at many of the harsh realities of combat, and force the reader to consider these.
Many verses of advice are also intertwined in the text, providing many inspirational quotes.
A definate must read in my opinion.
July 11th, 2006 09:58 PM
I am in the middle of it now. As with On Killing I believe LTC Grossman exaggerates the effects of stress on the combatant. That is not to say that the effects are not present, just not to the degree he profers.
Other than that, it is a good read.
July 11th, 2006 10:19 PM
I agree, he may over-emphasize the effects of stress, but I believe it has the effect of making the reader focus more on these factors, and therefore helps the reader prepare to deal with combat stressors.
July 31st, 2006 12:46 PM
Problem with Grossman
I do have a problem with Grossman. He seems to really believe that video games train kids to "kill." I can only speak from personal experience, but I can not fathom being more likely to go out and kill someone just because I have played violent video games.
By his logic, we should be "less" likely to kill nowadays, because we are more removed from actual killing like many of our grandparents growing up in rural areas were on farms - ie more livestock slaughter and hunting.
Does that make any sense?
July 31st, 2006 02:16 PM
I dont know if video games cause people to kill or not, but I do know that training with more realistic targets and scenarios is proven to increase the likelyhood that a raw soldier will shoot at an enemy.
We use simulators for training, and they are essentially video-games. While I dont believe that they cause anyone to kill, it does certainly familiarize them with that aspect.
That said, I played video-games since I was 5....havent killed anyone yet.
Who knows, doctors and psych people cana rgue about that stuff all day. All I care about is that the crim is being committed and, and what needs to be done to stop it. Grossman also addresses this aspect in his book, by preparing recruits to deal with shooting.
It would not be required reading at the FBI academy if it didnt have some value.
August 1st, 2006 11:23 AM
I don't think he says that video games train kids to kill, but says that they are similar to the ways the army trains which increased the firing rate from 50% in WWII to 90% in Viet-Nam. It is just a piece of the puzzle. In playing certain video games and watching violent movies it desensitizes kids to killing. Since they are desensitized to it then they may have less qualms about actually doing it in real life. Not that they are more likely to go do it, just that if put in that situation they would be more likely to shoot than not to shoot.
Originally Posted by Ridge Runner
Our grandparents had more first hand experience with killing, such as slaughtering animals, and so know that it isn't like the video games and when someone or something dies there is no re-set button, it is game over. Hence, they have a better understanding of the finality of death and would be more reserved in actually killing someone.
At least that is what I got out of what he said in "On Killing". I think it has merit.
To get the soldiers to go from 50% shooting in WWII to 90% shooting in Viet-Nam just took different training. They went from bullseye shooting to pop-up sillouette targets where you had to shoot quick and were rewarded for hits with the target falling and perhaps weekend passes. Then when in the field the soldier's training took over and the people were the sillouettes and would fall down with hits just like in training. Video games are similar, especially first person shooters (my favorite), where you have a gun and the enemy soldier, bad guys, or monsters pop out in front of you in some way and your reaction time to getting good hits on them prevents you from being hit and loseing health. Similar training. I think this was his point. Again I think it has merit. Who knows, but it does sound plausible.
August 1st, 2006 11:41 AM
Roc - keyword IMO is ''desensitized'' - in as much as the act of killing is ''fun'' - and if that transfers to real life, forgetting about blood and guts, then I can see it being a distinct possibility.
The situations that bother me are kids who have ''couldn't-care-less'' parents who, realizing the computer is keeping the kid out of the way - let it go on with no advice and morality input. So, kid spends countless hours on his own - getting ever deeper and more involved in his cyber world - never actually having anyone tell him the difference.
End result could be - a kid with attitude, low on affection and discipline - who decides that if he has a gun he can go play for real.
Chris - P95
NRA Certified Instructor & NRA Life Member.
"To own a gun and assume that you are armed
is like owning a piano and assuming that you are a musician!."
- a portal for 2A links, articles and some videos.
By G19inLV in forum Defensive Carry Holsters & Carry Options
Last Post: August 11th, 2009, 06:26 PM
By Rustynuts in forum Defensive Carry Guns
Last Post: November 16th, 2008, 06:48 PM
By harley91 in forum General Firearm Discussion
Last Post: January 20th, 2008, 09:42 PM
By JT in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
Last Post: May 11th, 2006, 03:50 PM
» DefensiveCarry Sponsors