[badgerw]

Last Saturday I took an advanced concealed carry course. The primary instructor is retired USAF Security Police, now a cop with a local PD.

The last drill was shoot and move to cover, reload, and then continue engaging. I was using my Kimber Ultra Carry .45 ACP. I started from Condition One with a full magazine and a spare magazine on my belt. I had fifteen rounds available to me.

The drill began at about 5 feet. Cover was about 15 feet behind me at 4:30. On the command of "GUN!" I drew and began shooting for center of mass. I also began moving back towards cover.

After three rounds CoM, I shifted to head shots for a couple of rounds. I fired my last rounds CoM, ducked behind cover, and changed magazines.

The instructor had told us to resume engaging the target from behind cover with at least five rounds.

I leaned around the cover enough to get a clear shot and fired three rounds (2 x CoM, 1 x head). I ducked back behind cover. I leaned out again from a crouch and fired two rounds at the pelvis. Back in, then out again for two more CoM.

The instructor said, "Well, Mr. Kimber here used an interesting solution." He then went on to say that a SWAT team would have just poured in fire until the threat was neutralized.

I didn't get a chance to discuss it with the instructor afterwards, as he had his hands full with a couple of the below-average students.

Here's my question: Did I make a good tactical decision or not?

I'm not a cop and I'm no longer a soldier. I'm a private citizen, legally responsible for every bullet I fire in anger.

I sure didn't feel comfortable with the idea of exposing myself to hostile fire from a BG who isn't going down. Not for the time it takes me to fire five or more aimed shots. I felt a lot more comfortable with bobbing out from behind cover, exposing myself for about two seconds to fire, and getting behind cover again.

I have to admit that I didn't make a conscious decision to NOT follow the instructions. I just did what felt right.

If I made a bad choice, I'd like to know it. I can reprogram myself to do something different in the future.

Bill

 

[Miggy]

Truth be told, I cannot see fault with your shooting. I would have shot 3 COM and then hip shots while retreating to cover (head shots on the move on a moving target might be too hard) and then headshots, COM and whatever it takes to bring the BG down but that is MY opinion.

And you are right, you are a civilian responsible for the bulltes you shoot and you are not carrying full tactical gear including body armor. Your first order of business is not get shot.

Unfortunately we see many LEO trainers that love to teach just shooting for shooting's sake and not to shoot to make it count. Anybody remember the case of LEO's shooting 100+ rounds to a suspect in a van and only connecting twice and minor injuries to boot?

You are legally, morally, ethically and financially responsible for the terminal resting place of every bullet you fire.
Randy Cain

 

[Gelicious]

I dont see any fault in it at all. you shot for COM and thouse shots made their mark i assume. Then you shot for the head then for pelvis. If thouse shots diddnt stop the person then your in a scary movie and need to wake up.

As for the choice of head shot you would really have to take into account the situation. If there were other innocent people around or if you were in a downward pos. and missed his head, would the bullet do any dammage to anyone else? But If you have hit COM and the perp is not stoped, then i would shoot for the head if i could too. I have not been through any advanced ccw classes yet so this is just my opinion from common scence. Im sure other more skilled shooters will chime in here and give you more usefull info!

 

[rocky]

sounds ok to me. You used cover and acurate shooting to hit the target. Ina real situation , you may not have time to bob from cover a few times if the BG is still advancing. But , each situation may be diffrent.
Perhaps some drills with air soft or simunitions might help you practice realisically too.

 

[ExSoldier]

Don't change your style unless you violate DOCTRINE

He then went on to say that a SWAT team would have just poured in fire until the threat was neutralized. Here's my question: Did I make a good tactical decision or not?

He sorta answered the question FOR you in the first sentence:

A SWAT TEAM would have poured in fire until the threat was neutralized.

Well, you're presumably all by yourself. You don't have any buddies to pour in suppressive fire to keep the BG's head down so some other TEAM members can manuever for a better angle and a final shot. You do what you must do to stay alive and as far as I can see, you did. Don't simply modify your technique for anybody. There really is no single right or wrong answer to any tactical scenario. Everything is technique. You can violate tactical doctrine by exposing too much of your body to an aggressor or dropping a partially filled mag on the ground and then moving away from it and stuff like that. But you didn't do any of that. So don't worry about it.:comeandgetsome: :congrats:

 

[P95Carry]

Welcome badger :smilez:

I think you were doing good actually. Minimizing exposure is probably as or more important than just saturating the air with lead. After all, incoming is very deleterious to health!!

You were not shooting IDPA - it was meant to be a real scenario and not a game - your survival would be in mind. Add to this, we are probably not relating to a time frame, within which I'll guess things were running pretty fast so, shoot, duck, assess and reshoot sounds more logical to me.

An ''OODA loop cycled'' we may call it.

 

[madmike]

SWAT team would have just poured in fire until the threat was neutralized.

Unless there's something you're not telling us, you are not a "SWAT Team," and will likely be by yourself, should you find yourself in a shooting situation.

Presumably, said SWAT Team would also be wearing body armor while going "toe to toe" with a shooting BG. Do you normally wear body armor?

Sounds like it must be a lot fun but, are you really taking the right course from the right teacher?

mm

 

[David III]

Sounds to me like you did fine. Get to cover, use controlled shots, continue to assess the situation.... I'm going with madmike on this - if it were me, I'd give some thought to other teaching styles.
The guys (and one girl...) who taught me were very cognizant of me being a single individual who would be in a situation without backup or other allies. I was taught a lot about not getting shot while stopping an attack, rather than pouring in suppressive fire, etc.

 

[Blinky]

Cover is important. If you are shot, your ability to defend yourself (and others) is minimized.

Each situation is going to be different. For example, if there were individuals behind the bad guy, you may not opt to go for head shots.

I find it interesting that the instructor made the SWAT team comment. Given this was a concealed carry class, how many SWAT teams would be hanging out together at the exact moment a bad guy arrived on the scene?

The scenarios should be those that an individual citizen is likely to face. If a SWAT Team was available, I wouldn't be bobbing at all, but would be away from the situation.

 

[vzwnnj]

I'll be sure to let the BG know that he's lucky there's no SWAT team here and he'll just have to be satisfied being stopped with three or four hits COM...you did nothing wrong

 

[QKShooter]

I don't see anything wrong with what you did.
At that distance I probably would have initially put 4 fast ones COM & then another one on the way up to finish w/ 3 head shots.
Then I would have got behind cover & taken a nap.:biggrin2:

 

[badgerw]

Appreciate the input

Thanks to everyone for their responses.

I had a lot of these thoughts, but I couldn't articulate them as well as y'all did.

I particularly appreciate the OODA loop comment. I've been trying to incorporate Boyd's thinking into my personal mindset.

Bill

 

[Panic215]

I think you did a good job.

 

[frankmako]

when in a gun fight "take cover", shoot to control the problem. you did what you had to do. good job.