An outstanding article in "Handguns" magazine about shooting on the move - or not!

[Tangle]

After nearly 300 hours of training at the likes of Blackwater, Thunder Ranch, Gunsite, and Tactical Shooting Academy, and especially FOF scenarios at Gunsite in their advanced handgun classes, I have come to some definitive conclusions about shooting while moving.

But, the article in this month's "Handguns" said it as well, if not better, than I could and with more authority and support. It is interesting that the author, Dave Spaulding, after experiences in SWAT, etc., observation of combatants in FOF scenarios, and interviews with people who have been in gunfights, arrives at the very same conclusions I have, in a nutshell - if you have to move, move as fast as you can, if you need to shoot, stop plant and shoot. As a civilian, except in rare, extraordinary circumstances, NEVER move toward a shooting threat, that just makes it easier for the threat to hit you.

The article is well done and well supported. Before you judge my statements above, read the article to get the whole picture. Shooting and moving is a bad combination and is primarily a tactic for SWAT/Military type units. Read the article.

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[Sweatnbullets]

After nearly 300 hours of training at the likes of Blackwater, Thunder Ranch, Gunsite, and Tactical Shooting Academy, and especially FOF scenarios at Gunsite in their advanced handgun classes, I have come to some definitive conclusions about shooting while moving.

But, the article in this month's "Handguns" said it as well, if not better, than I could and with more authority and support. It is interesting that the author, Dave Spaulding, after experiences in SWAT, etc., observation of combatants in FOF scenarios, and interviews with people who have been in gunfights, arrives at the very same conclusions I have, in a nutshell - if you have to move, move as fast as you can, if you need to shoot, stop plant and shoot. As a civilian, except in rare, extraordinary circumstances, NEVER move toward a shooting threat, that just makes it easier for the threat to hit you.

The article is well done and well supported. Before you judge my statements above, read the article to get the whole picture. Shooting and moving is a bad combination and is primarily a tactic for SWAT/Military type units. Read the article.

Is there a link to the article?

I would hate to pay for something that IMHO is sooooo very incorrect at so many levels.

Knowledge, training, and "putting in the work" over rides any lack ability to make solid combat hits with dynamic movement. I prove this with every course that I put on.

I would like to read the article, but I will not pay to read something that I know to be absolutely incorrect.

[Tangle]

I'll tell you what Roger, I've seen this same attitude too many times. The 'master', himself posted a thread on another board that irritated the other member/trainers so badly that "he" finally volunteered to leave that board.

There is no link to the article. The article appeared in the Guns & Ammo, "Handguns" magazine.

[QKShooter]

Hummmmmmmmm....if one makes the argument that moving in the direction of the known threat makes a defensive shooter an easier target to hit - then wouldn't one also have to logically accept the fact that planting yourself in order to return fire does make you a stationary target that is also much easier to hit?

Just trying to stir up the soup here.


May I suggest one additional variable to be tossed into the pot?

That would be that the chances are greater than 50/50 that the adversary will be a very poor shot yet possibly have a high capacity firearm that will be unleashed (somewhat haphazardly) in your general direction.

My conclusion is that bullets emanating from the deadly threat could VERY LIKELY be all over the place and that no matter exactly HOW an individual trains...one can just as easily move into volumes of misdirected gunfire as to stand stationary and be missed.

This is especially true these days when the adversaries are determined killers but, not marksman with even rudimentary target acquisition skills.

Much will always depend on exactly how Lady Luck will deal your individual hand as to if you'll go home for dinner or to the morgue for a toe tag.

[Captain Crunch]

I would like to read the article, but I will not pay to read something that I know to be absolutely incorrect.

The magazine costs a whopping $3.99 on the newstands.


It's a good article. Several more in this issue, too.

[PaulG]

Shouldn't we also define the mission of the good guy before we judge?

Who are you? A SWAT guy, a body guard, a citizen trying to get out of there alive?

If you are a SWAT guy, your mission is to neutralize the bad guy. You NEED to get hits. I know the SWAT guy doesn't want to get shot, but he may end up getting shot in order to accomplish his mission.

A body guard's mission is to protect his VIP. He can't move if it would put his VIP in danger. No shooting much on the move here.

If you are a citizen being attacked by a bad guy, your mission is DON'T GET SHOT!!! It doesn't matter if you hit the bad guy; you simply are trying to survive. If FOF shows that you have less chance of getting hit by shooting on the move, that's what I'll do if my mission is that of a armed citizen.

I can't put in much about force on force until after this week (I taking my first FOF class next weekend). Then I can give you a rookie's perspective.

About the magazine, I might get it whether I agree or not. I always want to know what others think. Plus, I just love to argue.

[QKShooter]

For me personally (as an armed citizen)...I would like to stay alive...to live to moderate...yet another day.
Also...as things are now in Pennsylvania I am legally bound to a first obligation to retreat a perceived deadly threat. That is the way it is here.
Whatever gets me to the EXIT sign asap is my most viable option.

[Gunnutty]

Tangle. how do you do it? Just kidding!!! Believe it or not I was working on this while shooting this week. I didn't realize how weak I was on being able to connect with the target while moving.
In a real scenario it isn't just about missing the target while moving; it's also about the fact that your round is going to hit something if it misses the target.
Right now in a public situation my skill level demands that for the safety of others, I need to stop and plant before I fire. This is not about anyone else just me. I'm working on improving my skill level but I'm not to the point of shooting on the move confidently.

[SIXTO]

Dave has some unconventional ideas, but I have to say that 95% of what he comes up with is correct. Keep in mind the article was written for the common denominator, not the practiced advanced shooter.

[Sweatnbullets]

I'll tell you what Roger, I've seen this same attitude too many times. The 'master', himself posted a thread on another board that irritated the other member/trainers so badly that "he" finally volunteered to leave that board.

There is no link to the article. The article appeared in the Guns & Ammo, "Handguns" magazine.

Tangle,

My apologies if my post appears to have attitude, that was certainly not my intention. The written word is obviously the very worse form of communication. I am a self proclaimed "nobody" so I have no concept of "the master."

This is just a difference of opinion .....nothing less and nothing more. I am all for well thought out reasonable debate on topics such as this. I do not have to have people see things my way, I just make sure that everyone can see both sides of the issue. Since this is all "user dependent" there is no right or wrong answer, but there are two sides to the issue that are equally correct inside of the context of the fight.

This is all about context.

Many of the magazines have featured articles that are online. My request for a possible link was a simple request.

If I buy the magazine would you be interested in my opinion on it? Or would you rather me not reply to this thread again? As we see from the responses this seems to be a "user dependent" topic. I feel that it would be a disservice to the readers to only discuss one side of a "user dependent" skill set.

Respectfully, Roger Phillps

[Dave James]

I thought it was a decent article,but basically nothing new, but hell you got to sell the mag's some how

[Tangle]

Roger,

I think it only reasonable that if someone is going to critisize or disagree with an article, that he read it first. The article points out that the threat may be bobbing and weaving and we may be too. How many of us civies shoot regularly at targets like that, even when we're standing still? Seldom. Even if I go to a school for five days we don't do that the full five days. Then what about the rest of the 360 days of that year? I shoot stationary targets - that's all that's availabe.

I think it is highly likely that none of use shoot as nearly as well moving as planted. Now, that doesn't make moving wrong or planting right. But I can say this, if the situation gives me a choice, I'm gonna plant, I simply can't afford to miss.

I can say this too, I know for a fact, I can shoot much better not moving than moving. I can move better, faster, and more securely without trying to shoot at the same time.

It takes some time to develop shooting on the move, it takes time to retain it. Most of us civies simply don't have a place where we can shoot and move.

[Sweatnbullets]

Tangle,
I have spent the last couple of hours driving around looking for the magazine and the article. I can only locate March and April editions and I could not find any articles on movement in those.

Am I correct that this article is in the February addition?

As you see I am making the effort to read the article.

Until then.....

[Pete]

It's the April/May edition, page 20.

[Sweatnbullets]

http://www.policeone.com/writers/col...ticles/250660/