This is a discussion on Position SUL within the Defensive Carry & Tactical Training forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by semperfi.45 I teach elbows in for all weapons work. IMO; it is the way for handgun shooting and ready positions and transitions ...
Tom, your description is very useful, but the pictures posted by other members really solidified what you're talking about. Thanks to all posters. I'm looking forward to training with you again soon, DCJS!
A man in the hands of his enemies is flesh, and shudderingly vulnerable. - author unknown
You guys are training folks for a living these days so correct me if I'm wrong but, regarding handguns equipped with Crimson Trace laser grips - the more correct position for the gun hand index/trigger finger would be:
Outside the trigger guard and resting at the top of the trigger guard in the angle where the front of the trigger guard meets the frame.
That way you can always (and at any time) do an additional laser "visual" to verify the POI just by slightly tightening the grip on the firearm.
That would be even if the POI is possibly yer own feet.
With the CT Laser grips it's always better to memory ingrain the index finger position where it never blocks the beam.
It's "as safe" but, just a slightly different "out of the guard & off the trigger" finger location.
Just my personal opinion on that - and I'm really not certain how relevant or applicable my post is to this thread except to say that (good or bad) it's a given reality that the Crimson Trace grips are becoming incredibly popular for the armed citizen self~defense crowd.
Liberty Over Tyranny Μολὼν λαβέ
BAC, from the photo, I see you've met John Krupa. He's an outstanding trainer and shot!
Never have, sir. Found his pic from another site and tossed it up here as a reference. Reading up on him now, though, and holy Christ has he received some training in his time... My "training short list" keeps getting longer...
Keep in mind the background of "SUL". As I understand it from Brosnan and Joseph (the former with New Zealand SAS experience and the latter USMC), they had Brazilian students (hence the Portuguese) who were operating in crowded barrios with substandard holsters and needed a way to stand and move with their pistols both ready and secure. That was the impetus... it was never meant to be an end-all be-all ready position. This was how they taught it together at TEES when I first encountered them and the position. The story was told with pictures showing the early uses in context.
Today, it is taught by a lot of people for a lot of different reasons.....many people find it to work well in a "stack"....
Personally, I teach it to Executive Protection personnel as a low-profile ready position that would like better and be more responsible than pointing the gun into a crowd of Madonna fans when looking for a threat.
The British S.A.S. were using SUL decades ago in Northern Ireland as a weapon retention technique when running in the open.
Phil Singleton teaches one and two handed SUL--which he learned decades ago with the S.A.S.--in his room clearing courses.
That's the second time in one thread that you have asserted that concept. Apparently, you think it is important.... Why?
Do you know Why they were using the position? Is your claim based on documented training to that end? A picture of guy with his gun pointed down towards the ground? Hearsay (ie- Singleton said so or otherwise)? Guess?
Why did they perceive a stated need for retention when running "in the open" ???? (and why does he teach a technique for running in the open during "room clearing"?? Is that an evolution of the technique, suggesting that change and progress are good????)
(Logic can be a troubling thing sometimes... sorry)
If it is a fact, did they call the position "Sul" decades ago (which would be an odd coincidence or mean that Alan and Max were liars.... both of which I strongly doubt, especially the latter....) ??
Phil Singleton was also in that unit at the same time.
Phil also told me that it was Mel who did most of the killing that day at Princess Gate.
According to Mel they were using SUL ( no, he did not call it that but was showing the technique) when running through the streets of N. Ireland with drawn handguns to avoid gun grabs by civilians. (this would have been in the mid 1970's)
The Swedish cops got a kick out of this, since they found it amusing that credit is being given to certain people who claimed to have "invented"--and named-- the position decades later.
Sort of like seeing Fitz in a "Weaver" stance on page 352 of his book
"Shooting" which was published in 1930.
As to Singleton, I took a room combat class with him in Detroit two years ago and noticed that he was using a one handed SUL position when stacking up for a room entry.
Or, rather, what has become to be called SUL (naturally he did not give it any special name, but just did it.
Now this does not mean that Alan and Max are liars since I truly believe that they are convinced that they came up with this on their own.
As I am sure that no one but them came up with the catchy name of SUL
Which kind of backs up the old saying that those who are ignorant of the past are doomed to reinvent it.
In other words, don't be too quick to name something that was being done without a fancy name long long ago and far far away.
This is not an attack on what has become to be called SUL, since the position has many advantages, although mainly for the military and police.
But I do think that people have the right to know the truth and the history as to where certain techniques come from.
Maybe you should contact Mel Perry and Phil Singleton for more info if you want further clarification.
I'm not sure its origin is really important, which is what I think Rob is getting at.
I have seen quite a few "modern inventions" which were considered old hat decades ago.
I also like to see where a self defense method comes--and who was using it-- from before I consider its combat validity.
Naturally just IMHO.
Matt and I have a difference of opinion on whether WHY someone said something or WHO said something is more important. See HERE.
My concern was that there might have been an integrity question of who coined the term and why the position was taught by a couple of friends of mine.
Matt, please be more clear next time about terminology. Glad to hear that you weren't asserting that they were actually using the term "sul", which is what you first couple of posts said.
I was quite clear that the S.A.S. were teaching WHAT HAS COME TO BE CALLED SUL decades before your pals gave it a name.
Which sort of leads one to believe that your buddies were claiming to have invented it, eh?
As I have said before, those who are ignorant of the past are doomed to reinvent it.
Then again, sometimes I wonder if this is done due to actual ignorance or a marketing scheme....
Last edited by Matthew Temkin; November 15th, 2008 at 08:08 AM.
.... is the least of what I was looking for. Good job. Knew you could do it!....WHAT HAS COME TO BE CALLED SUL...
What you actually had said, if you scroll up to remind yourself, was that "sul" was being taught.