February 9th, 2013 10:40 AM
An essay on moving and shooting
A different perspective that disputes all the forum warriors that I've seen before. From a very resume'd individual
Curious to see thoughts here from those more qualified than me.
February 9th, 2013 11:29 AM
Wow, a really surprising read. Very different technique than seems to be taught here. Very sound advice. Thanks for sharing with us .
I shoot with a pistol and a Canon. We must all hang together amigos, or we will all hang separately. NRA life member.
February 9th, 2013 03:51 PM
I did not read to whole article but I'd say he needs to do his testing in FOF not on the range shooting at paper. My findings from what FOF I've done is "he's wrong." That's what I like about a free world you can do as you wish. Which I will, he's free to do his thing.
It's gotta be who you are, not a hobby. reinman45
"Is this persons bad behavior worth me having to kill them over?" Guantes
February 9th, 2013 03:59 PM
Let your plans be dark and impenetrable as night, and when you move, fall like a thunder bolt...... Sun Tzu.
The supreme art of war is to defeat the enemy without fighting........ Sun Tzu.
February 9th, 2013 07:27 PM
Paul Howe of Combat Shooting and Tactics (CSAT) has written some insightful info on this as well.
February 9th, 2013 10:32 PM
February 9th, 2013 11:17 PM
Interesting perspective, his experience is in Israel. The Israelis also do not carry a chambered handgun. As Bill pointed out "moving and shooting" is the preferable tactic in FOF especially in the 0-5' range. Why would you not seek to cover? Especially in his 50 yard example. There are way to many variables to dictate before a fight what tactics you will use everytime, that is why we are taught multiple tactics to cover the widest range of possible encounters.
Hate to say it but if you are shooting someone or being shot at by someone you are in a gunfight with them. I would also think that you would count heavily on instinctive pointing and shooting if exploding from the "X", I do. The guy comes across to me as arrogant.
Not only do we not use this concept in Israel, simply because it does not lend to an efficient resolve in a real life gunfight, shooting a threat, and, being shot at by a
threat, and being in a gunfight with a threat (where the majority of the world is experienced with the first two points, in Israel the majority of our engagements are the
third point) but the concept also negates both instinctive response and tactical capabilities under stress.
My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon.
“Moral indignation is jealousy with a halo.”
- H. G. Wells -
February 10th, 2013 08:30 AM
Originally Posted by 40Bob
Maybe a tad...seems like his word is Law, eh?
February 12th, 2013 11:50 PM
The "you do not know what you do not know" runs strong in this one.
The proof of this is his suggestions to run "tests" that do not include FOF. Take your theories into properly structured FOF and then come back and talk at us.
Context is everything! Military context is very different from civilian context. The refusal to accept that fact is the main reason why many of the military experts can not comprehend what the civilian self defense experts are teaching. Since they refuse to admit that their context is different from our context, which is often caused by ignorance and arrogance, they will never understand why we teach what we teach.
His lack of knowledge and understanding in this skill set is very telling and really easy to see. Not only does he not know what he does not know.......he does not even want to try to learn in order to be able to make an informed decision.
Ignorance is bliss!
February 13th, 2013 03:15 AM
and while you are running to get out of
the line of attack, it may, and I emphasize may, not hurt to raise your weapon and fire
off some rounds in the direction of the enemy fire
So you are engaged by an unknown target, so blindly fire in the general direction, while moving, of the threat and hopefully get lucky and hit them? In one paragraph he quotes statistics and talks and talks about hit ratio's then says to pop off rounds in the general direction of the target while moving. I think I will just stick with what works and concentrate on sustained, accurate fire while moving of the X.
The focus is not on the conventional moving and shooting platform or concept,
since you do not have a target to focus on, the focus is on getting out of the danger
area as fast as possible and by blindly shooting in the direction of enemy fire, you might
get lucky and distract the enemy buying you time to safely get to cover.
"A first rate man with a third rate gun is far better than the other way around". The gun is a tool, you are the craftsman that makes it work. There are those who say "if I had to do it, I could" yet they never go out and train to do it. Don't let stupid be your mindset. Harryball 2013
February 13th, 2013 03:24 AM
Just me but other than backing a little off line to keep distance between us as much as I can Im not a big advocate of moving around a whole lot. Being shot at isnt nessacarily being hit. Being hit doesnt equal being dead or down unless it gets you in the right place. If i can get to cover fine but in a parking lot with 10 feet between us I may move off the X but I want my first couple of shots in the BGs engine room even if he is shooting at me. Most common thugs dont practice much and a lot have the same mindset some CC folks do. That because they have a gun Im going to just wilt and give up.
Mr BG is in for a surprise and though I may lose he better bring his A game.
" It is sad governments are chief'ed by the double tongues." quote Ten Bears Movie Outlaw Josie Wales
February 13th, 2013 03:40 AM
There's another consideration. An Israeli soldier is using an Uzi. You're using a snubnose .38 or a compact 9 mm or .380. You cannot "terminate a threat" with a concealable handgun without extreme accuracy and/or luck, and you have to expect being shot at even after you have fired your round(s). If I was in a position with a rifle or shotgun I would concentrate on making that first shot being the only one necessary, but in a street fight with handguns I'm going to assume we're both going to get a chance to empty our magazines, and I'll take my chances being a moving target.
February 13th, 2013 06:05 AM
Originally Posted by Ghost1958
Wow...I spent a long time being unculcated (and it kept me and my team-mates around) never to underestimate the bad guys' abilities...
Good to see you know BGs TTPs.
February 13th, 2013 08:40 AM
I've learned to never underestimate my opponent, because you just don't know how well trained they may be, or how much they practice their skills.
Reminds me of a poster I used to see in the U.S. Marshals offices. It had a photograph of some convicts pumping iron, and fine tuning their hand to hand combat skills, and the message was "Your enemy practices and trains daily to take your life. How much effort do you put into your training?"
Having said all of that, 99% of the BG's I've encountered have been sloppy, undertrained, and basically cowards when confronted with skilled officers and overwhelming force.The toughest bully in public, will usually wet himself when confronted by someone who is ready and prepared to put him down.
This guy is clearly very well trained and experienced, but I'm not buying what he's selling. I'm a big believer in listening to anyone more experienced then myself, in case there's something I can take from that experience, to put in my own tool bag. Because it works for him, or for you, doesn't necessarily mean it will work for me.
I know that cover stops bullets. I know that my survival of a critical incident depends on my ability to accurately hit my target, as quickly as possible, and to avoid being hit by his, to the degree possible. I know that extreme violence carries the day, and trumps tactics every time.
As the patch created by the late Navy SEAL Chris Kyle says "Despite what your momma told you - violence does solve problems." Have a plan, execute that plan.
" But if you are authorized to carry a weapon, and you walk outside without it, just take a deep breath, and say this to yourself... Baa." Col. Dave Grossman on Sheep and Sheepdogs.
February 13th, 2013 09:34 AM
A military engagement at 25 + yards and a mugging at 2 yards are completely different things. If you do not understand that then what I am about to say might as well be written in sanskrit because you will not understand it.
Most civilian gunfights (meaning NON military-criminal vs civilian and criminal vs police) take place at less than 5 yards. Standing still at that distance and playing "Rock 'em Sock 'em Robots" with bullets is going to get you shot unless you can guarantee you shoot them first.... But even shooting them first does not always guarantee they do not shoot back....people get shot all the time with handguns and fight on. So if standing still is likely to get you shot ...then do you REALLY want to stand still?
But it is not a bumper sticker sized answer. There are very rarely "always and never" answers to this stuff. Sometimes standing still works...if you are behind hard cover it makes sense. But standing still at 3 yards when the other guy starts the fight makes little sense.....
What do you do there? MOVE to keep from getting shot and either shoot them back or get to cover if it is close enough to get to. Again though...what is the context? If they are 3 yards away you probably won't be able to get to cover unless it is 1 step away or less. If cover is not an option, then we need to stop him from shooting and we do that with shooting him. And that can be done if he is close.
But like I said things are complex. What if he is far away? If he is far away then moving to cover (assuming there is some) makes more sense than shooting and moving because you can move faster to cover just MOVING than you can while moving and shooting. But how many civilian gunfights take place at 15 to 20 yards? Very few.
Moving and shooting at targets that are 20 yards away will not usually get very good results. Moving and shooting at targets that are 2 yards away is like dropping a golf ball into a swimming pool....kind of hard to miss if you pay attention to what you are doing. Different problems ...different solutions.
So when Paul Howe says he never shot and moved at same time in Mogadishu I believe him...because the nature of the engagement (Military rifle engagement vs civilian concealed carry pistol) made moving to cover and using the sights the RIGHT answer. But trying to move to cover and use sights at 3 yards when the BG starts the fight does not make nearly as much sense...
So what paradigm are we training for? Are we training to deal with close range criminal assault or are we training to deal with opponents that are farther than 25 yards away?
Define YOUR mission and train accordingly.
Search tags for this page
shooting while moving is bad idea
Click on a term to search for related topics.
» DefensiveCarry Sponsors