Killed on the Streets Again....

[JTH]

“This is likely to be my last post. This morning I was told in no uncertain terms that using the sights is slow and I should point shoot ‘cause the fight will be less than three yards and I won’t have time to use the sights and shooting competition will likely get me killed on the streets and fine motor control…”

…such was the post from a friend of mine the other day on Facebook.  (He's on this forum, he'll recognize his words...)

We had a useful chance to test that at the NFOA Annual Meeting the other day, so I thought I'd write about it.

https://precisionresponse.wordpress.com/2015/08/24/killed-in-the-streets-again/

TL;DR version: I shot a steel challenge stage with my carry gun from concealment almost as fast as with my competition gun from a competition holster, beating almost everyone else. For self-defense purposes, getting the gun out and getting accurate shots on target quickly is the primary (and priority) handgun skill set.  95% of my practice is with my competition rig. What part of competition shooting is going to get me killed on the street?

[Mudinyeri]

For self-defense purposes, getting the gun out and getting accurate shots on target quickly is the primary (and priority) handgun skill set.  95% of my practice is with my competition rig. What part of competition shooting is going to get me killed on the street?

For self-defense purposes, I'll take not getting shot over accurate rounds on target quickly.  If you can get accurate rounds on target quickly while taking rounds yourself ... you're a better man than me.

I'll follow up those two sentences with an admission.  I don't shoot traditional pistol competitions so I don't know how much they focus on getting to cover/concealment.  I watched a little bit of the steel match and USPSA at the member meeting and didn't see any focus on getting to cover/concealment.  I did see shooters shooting around barricades, though.  That's at least a step in the right direction.

In the "For What it's Worth" category, I don't think competition will get you killed on the street any more than doing nothing but dry fire will get you killed on the street.

The thing about potentially getting killed on the street is that the situation is completely dynamic whereas competition and dry fire and standing at attention and putting slow fire rounds on an 8" plate 25 yards away are not.  The best thing to keep a person from getting killed on the street is training that mimics what happens on the street.  Unfortunately, that's almost impossible so we make do with less than optimal solutions.

[Lorimor]

I happen to know the guy that penned the original text quoted above. 

The debate originally centered around point vs sighted fire and then devolved into the "competition" thing. 

Inside 3, maybe 4 yards, I am confident at this point in time that my body index is good enough to consistently get COM hits w/o the traditional hard front sight focus.  That of course, is on stationary targets while yours truly is stationary.  Beyond the 3 yard mark, I really try to look at the front sight hard.  The further the distance, the harder the focus.  Moving, at any distance, I really want that front sight. 

My opposition steadfastly maintains that a fast hit anywhere on the torso is better than a slower hit COM.  I'm not sold on the idea that a peripheral hit on the torso can be counted on as a game changer.  Maybe it is.  Maybe it isn't.  It depends, doesn't it?  (Of course, we all know stories of folks who have been hit squarely COM and are very unimpressed.  There are times they even manage to kill the defender before expiring, even after being extremely well ventilated.  Handguns suck.) 

Regardless, I believe COM is the only realistic goal (barring armor and provided COM is visible.)  It's iffy enough already as a fight stopper.  I want to do everything possible to put shots COM.  (It's a smaller target than many folks realize.)  The ability to produce fist sized groups, on demand, perhaps even at distances you wouldn't expect, is paramount. 

I firmly believe it's worth the extra fractions of a second to get good, solid COM hits. 

Naturally, if you practice under the stress of timed fire, you soon get an idea of how hard the front sight focus must be vs distance vs presented target size.  Which is why competition is good.  Even great.   It doesn't lie.  You find out real fast just how good you are.  And you see first hand what a REAL pistolero can do. 

And for the record, nothing I've presented here is unique or original.  Just good stuff I've gleaned from some very knowledgeable people.  And no, I've never been shot at. 

[GreyGeek]

(Of course, we all know stories of folks who have been hit squarely COM and are very unimpressed.  There are times they even manage to kill the defender before expiring, even after being extremely well ventilated.  Handguns suck.) 

Now you've got me thinking of ways I can conceal carry my 20 ga shotgun! 

[JTH]

For self-defense purposes, I'll take not getting shot over accurate rounds on target quickly.  If you can get accurate rounds on target quickly while taking rounds yourself ... you're a better man than me.

Well, the article did pretty clearly say "primary handgun skill" not "primary self-defense skill" so I didn't figure that this topic would come up. 

After all, shooting competitions are tests of shooting skills.  Practicing situational awareness, choosing to NOT engage targets, or very importantly, deciding to run away just doesn't come up much in a shooting competition.

We are testing shooting skills.  That's one of the reasons that many of the arguments about how competition shooting will get you killed make so little sense.  A shooting competition isn't a self-defense competition (whatever that would look like) so expecting it to include all aspects of good self-defense practice makes little sense.   That expectation ("this one thing should include everything!") was not something I ever understood.

It is like someone getting on my case about how my piano practice doesn't do everything I need to help me create a platinum record album.  Well, of course not.  And yet, I'm pretty sure that practicing my piano-playing ability will be important to my music.  Practicing the piano isn't supposed to do everything--but what it does is important.

I'll follow up those two sentences with an admission.  I don't shoot traditional pistol competitions so I don't know how much they focus on getting to cover/concealment.  I watched a little bit of the steel match and USPSA at the member meeting and didn't see any focus on getting to cover/concealment.  I did see shooters shooting around barricades, though.  That's at least a step in the right direction.

In Steel Challenge you stand there.  On the beep you draw and shoot things.  Complete test of pure shooting skills.

In USPSA you do more than that, but it isn't meant to be defensive or tactical.  The only tactics used are when planning stage runs to minimize time.  The "barricades" used were simply walls to force people into movement and into different shooting positions.  Had nothing to do with cover or concealment.

IDPA purports to require cover, but even a cursory look at matches shows that actual use of cover and anything resembling good tactics for any sort of standard citizen self-defense situation is missing.  (The day I win a stage by quietly walking away after the beep, I'll start thinking of it differently.)

That's okay, though, because again, the point is shooting skills.

In the "For What it's Worth" category, I don't think competition will get you killed on the street any more than doing nothing but dry fire will get you killed on the street.

Are there people who think that dryfire will get you killed on the street?  I hadn't heard that one before.  (I know you don't think so, I'd just never knew that anyone thought so.)

The thing about potentially getting killed on the street is that the situation is completely dynamic whereas competition and dry fire and standing at attention and putting slow fire rounds on an 8" plate 25 yards away are not.

No competitions are dynamic?  Huh.  I mean, I know that most targets aren't doing anything, but between shooter movement and some moving targets (both appearing/disappearing and various types of movers) I don't think I'd claim that no competitions include dynamic situations.

If you meant "they aren't force on force because the targets aren't reacting to you or shooting back" sure, I'll go with that.

The best thing to keep a person from getting killed on the street is training that mimics what happens on the street.  Unfortunately, that's almost impossible so we make do with less than optimal solutions.

Agreed, up to a point.  (I think the best thing to keep a person from getting killed on the street has to do with things that happen far in advance of any actual "action on the street."  But I get what you mean.) Although an amazing number of people argue about what "on the street" actually means, many of whom do so contrary to what we actually know based on data, so that makes it somewhat harder to get people to make good training choices... 

What interests me is that every year, literally thousands of people with little firearms training (often no formal training) defend themselves effectively with firearms.  About a year ago, John Johnston (of Ballistic Radio) wrote an article about precisely that.  (And Claude Werner has also.)  In a vast majority of defensive (firearms-based) situations, people didn't need tactical training, practice at using cover or concealment, knowledge of tac reloads, etc.

They needed a gun and the ability to get accurate shots on target quickly.  Period.

I am all for the ability to utilize cover and concealment---but like the concept of shooting on the move, I think that many people strongly over-prioritize it compared to the ability to get the gun out and get accurate shots on target, given the situations that actually occur for citizens.

Tom Givens has a bunch of interesting data about that, and in his experience (and data) cover and concealment falls a distant, distant way behind 1) having a gun, 2) recognizing the problem and having the skill to get the gun out in time, and 3) getting accurate shots on target quickly. 

I personally think that if someone shoots me, my ability to defend myself will drop sharply, at best.  So this is not me saying that I can just take whatever comes my way and shoot back---instead, this is me saying that the situations that normally occur often have no cover or concealment available in the time frame you have to respond, and shooting at bad guys will often tend to make them less likely to shoot you back.

Sure, if they START by shooting, standing there drawing/shooting isn't really optimal.  But that isn't the way most citizen self-defense situations seem to start.  If it was, sure, I'd like to be able to use cover (much more than concealment, though I'll take what I can get).  But considering how rarely the stuff around me is actually cover, and given how self-defense situations seem to mostly occur, I'm still going with "get the gun out and get shots on target fast" as a good training priority for handgun skills.  The ability to get to cover and respond with a gun is much farther down the list.

I also note:  Just because I test my shooting skills in the shooting sports doesn't mean I can't train other things.  Sure, 95% of my shooting training is with my competition rig---but I have never understood why people seem to think that if you shoot competitions, that is ALL you do...

[DenmanShooter]

! No longer available

[Gunscribe]

Most “Shooting Schools” have their school-approved shooting method that requires drawing a certain way and hitting the target on the best spot in the shortest time possible.

Even those that do not attend one of these “advanced tactical assembly lines” tend to get caught up in “this or that method is better than any other hype”. 

These “approved methods” tend to stress that the pistol must be drawn and presented to the target the exact same way each and every time.

The following is not a gimmick, method or style. It is simply doing what you need to do to hit your target at varying distances quickly and effectively.

Is the object of self-defense to use an “approved tactical shooting style” or to hit your adversary in the quickest time possible and best spot available?

Reality tells us that at the close range of most “gunfights” there will not be very many situations where you will be able to draw “by the numbers” and put “two well sighted shots to the center of mass”.

Being extremely near to or in actual contact with an adversary is the RULE not the EXCEPTION!

If the adversary is within contact distance then a “draw by the numbers” alignment will be compromised and you will not be able to use your “approved tactical assembly line” grip/body platform to align the muzzle with the desired impact point.

During any potentially dangerous situation, if time permits, pay particular attention to the hands and waist area of the adversary. The waist area is where any likely weapon will come from.

Pointing - is the physical alignment of the pistol on the target. This is simply getting the gun to point in the right direction without any “seeing” the alignment. We can align the pistol while blind-folded since our eyes are already focused on our adversary.

Any shots this close will be taken to separate yourself from an adversary and reach a point of safety or distance where more accurate shooting may be made.

If the adversary is this close, the alignment of the gun on the intended target already exists.

Aiming – is more refined than pointing in that the shooter is aware of the outline of his/her hands and pistol within the shape of the intended target. Due to the close distance, precise eye alignment of the sights to a specific spot on the target is not necessary to make effective hits.

If the adversary is beyond extremely close or contact distance the pistol can be more accurately brought into line.

As it is brought into the line of vision the silhouette of your hands and pistol will be seen in contrast to the target allowing for effective hits. This alignment occurs regardless of stance, grip, or anything else.

Sighting – is, due to longer distances, aligning the sights with a specific spot on the target.

As the distance to the target increases more precise alignment of the pistol is mandatory to make effective hits. This could mean;

a) Seeing the general location of the sights (flash sight picture) or,
b) On the front sight with less focus on the rear or,
c) On the very top edge of the front and rear sights (perfect sights).

As soon as we begin to align the pistol with the target, we will refine the sight picture as needed to make the necessary hits.

In Conclusion

Practice what you need to on different scenarios at the range learning to do what you personally need to do to make the shots and to hell with calling it anything.

The second you try to call it something, you've missed the point.

Shoot the way you need to shoot to survive and don’t worry what to call it. Shoot your adversary to the ground, stay alive, and don't clutter your mind with labels.

Understand also that shooting in self-defense is only done to stop an immediate otherwise unavoidable threat that would cause death or severe bodily harm.

[Mudinyeri]

Well, the article did pretty clearly say "primary handgun skill" not "primary self-defense skill" so I didn't figure that this topic would come up. 

You brought it up "self-defense" in the TLDR version but, yes, you specified "handgun skill."  I guess my point is that handgun skills are lower on my self-defense priority list than some other skills but that is not necessarily pertinent to this discussion.

Since we're being all specific ... I said "the situation is completely dynamic whereas competition ... are not."  Sure, some competitions have some dynamic elements but they are not completely dynamic - meaning anything can happen.  The course of fire is set.  The scoring is set.  Movement may happen but it is prescribed.  Shooters move from one place to another and frequently are disqualified for stepping out of bounds or shooting outside of specific areas. As I said, this is all done in the name of safety ... and rightly so.

The larger point of your article seems to be that competition shooting won't get one killed on the street.  Perhaps I misunderstood your point.

My, somewhat parallel, point is that competition shooting is no more or less likely to get one killed on the street than any other type of shooting.  Practice is good.  Practicing situational awareness and de-escalation techniques are probably far more valuable to the average person than shooting practice when it comes to being safe "on the street."

I'm not sure how many people actually assume that you only practice competition shooting, Thomas.  Anyone who knows you knows that you teach and practice other skill sets.  Those that don't know you might make assumptions that you spend the bulk of your time practicing for competition shooting based solely on your skill level in that discipline.

I will stand by my statement that training that mimics what happens on the street is the best training for defending one's self on the street.  That doesn't exclude training that addresses things that happen far in advance of what happens on the street.

[JTH]

You brought it up "self-defense" in the TLDR version but, yes, you specified "handgun skill."  I guess my point is that handgun skills are lower on my self-defense priority list than some other skills but that is not necessarily pertinent to this discussion.

{snip a bunch of other things.....}

Um.  Ah.  Well, um....

...he explained what he meant, clarified some things, disagreed here and there but made his points---there isn't anything there I need to argue with!  I might disagree on a couple of points, but where we disagree is based on personal opinions and personal priorities....

...I don't know what to say.

How am I supposed to interact with Mudinyeri if we aren't arguing?!

[Mudinyeri]

How am I supposed to interact with Mudinyeri if we aren't arguing?!

Wanna fight?

[JTH]

Wanna fight?

That would be more normal for us!  ....and we could sell popcorn.  Probably make a bit of money...

Mud said something pretty important here:

I will stand by my statement that training that mimics what happens on the street is the best training for defending one's self on the street.  That doesn't exclude training that addresses things that happen far in advance of what happens on the street.

An amazing number of people spend time (and money) on advanced TACTICAL! shooting classes of various sorts---but have never spent any amount of time on situational awareness training, elementary medical training, defensive driving training, or (weirdly enough, most importantly) pushing away from the snack table and going for a walk.

You are BY FAR more likely to have a heart attack or be in a car accident than to ever need a gun in a defensive situation.  Your chances of being nearby when someone is seriously injured is much higher than your chances of being assaulted.  And your chances of being in ANY sort of emergency situation drop sharply if your situational awareness is trained, alert, and carefully and calmly monitoring your life.

(The above chances change sharply in various ways if you a MIL, LEO, or emergency services, I'll note.)

If someone is REALLY interested in keeping themselves and their loved ones safe and unharmed without wrapping them in cotton batting and staying indoors all the time, there is a ton of non-gun stuff that'll do more to keep you alive and healthy than any number of TACTICAL! classes.

....it is normally a lot more FUN to take shooting classes, I'll admit. 

[Mudinyeri]

That would be more normal for us!  ....and we could sell popcorn.  Probably make a bit of money...

Would this be an NFOA sponsored event?

And to add to what you said about pushing away from the snack table and going for a walk ... fitness is a significant contributor to recovery should you be injured in some sort of accident or altercation.  The mountain bike accident that I had a couple years ago could quite easily have killed or paralyzed me absent a pretty high level of fitness.  Then again, if I hadn't been riding my mountain bike as fast as I was and was just sitting on the couch ... I probably wouldn't have gotten hurt.

[JTH]

I posted this on Facebook and the results were highly amusing---one individual went on a rant about "what really happens on the street" (almost all of which was factually incorrect, and easily checked) and then a number of comments later, admitted that he hadn't actually read the article.

Yes, that's exactly the sort of reasoned discussion that will help us reach understanding.   

Among other things, according to him most self-defense situations with firearms occur at less than 3 feet.  He stated this in no uncertain terms--and later a second person said he thought it at least happened that way most of the time.  (Over 51% was his contention.)

All actual evidence to the contrary.  There is research out there!  People should read it!

 

(That's not a statement that at 3 feet it can't or doesn't happen.  However, that is not the range at which most self-defense situations occur according to what we currently know.  And it isn't a true for LEOs, either--it isn't even the most common range, much less the one that occurs most.  Which is important to note, considering that LEOs are required to close with criminals.)

[Mudinyeri]

... it isn't even the most common range, much less the one that occurs most. 

Most of mine occur at 200 - 600 yards.  Beyond that, I'm not 100% sure of the threat.

[JTH]

Most of mine occur at 200 - 600 yards.  Beyond that, I'm not 100% sure of the threat.

I feel most threatened on the Internet, so it is hard to judge distances accurately.