Gabe Suarez Classes July 15 to 18, 2005 -Initial impressions

[JimConway]

I have just completed two classes with Gabe Suarez this past weekend, , which included his "Introductio to Gun Fighting" and his "Close Quarters Gun Fighting 1". The first class the "Introduction to Gun Fighting" was basically the normal Gunsite 250 (beginners) class compressed to 2 days. This class focused on the mechanics of hitting the target very accurately. The ranges were from 3 to 10 yards. While I have taken Basic classes a number of times, the class had great value to me personally. Some once said the the Basics are all that you need to know and master and the difference between a great shooter and a novice is only the ability to execute the basics smoother and faster. Two points stand out for me, which are Gabe's Proactive reload (tactical reload) and Gabe's approach to gun malfunctions. To many people these approaches will seem to be totally wrong, but they work in a high stress situation situation, every time.

Gabe's approach to the Proactive reload is to simply remove the partially empty mag, put it in your pocket, and insert a new mag. This approach avoids having to juggle two mags and the possibility of dropping one and time to do it is faster.

Gabe's approach to malfunctions is equally simple. There are four possible malfunctions as follows: empty gun, type 1, type 2, and a type 3. To address these four problems there are only 2 procedures that are preformed. There are no diagnostic steps and there should no reaction times no mention . No matter why the gun did not fire, first tap and rack. This will fix both a type 1 and a type 2. If the gun still does not fire, simply strip out the mag, insert a loaded mag, and rack the slide. The major benefit of this approach is that you do not have to think about what is wrong. You simply act.

For both of these two procedures, the key point is that you are in a potentially lethal situation and are under a lot of stress. Try them, they work.

I will have more details on the first class later this week and a complete report on the second class after I get my thought more in order. As the name of the second class implies, the class dealt with saving your life at distances between touching out to about ten yards. The approaches presented by Gabe are not in any way like what we have all read about. The first class was a clear presentation of Coopers "Modern technique of the Pistol. The second class was an evolutionary step forward from the classic Cooper approach. This class focused on movement and on acceptible accuracy under stress. The only time that accuracy was heavily stressed was for a head shot. Another item that was discussed and practised was the idea of seeing what you needed to make the shot. We shot ar bad breath distances from retention with no use of the sights, from semi retention where all you could see was the outline of the gun.. The best way to describe this is as a continium for point shooting to aimed fire.

I will close with a few words about Gabe Suarez. Gabe is very experienced with shootings and has survived. His thoughts and approaches are based upon his experiences and testing of ideas that work in a real situations. As both a teacher and as an instructor Gabe is very personable, humorous and dynamic. He is one of the very few instructors that demonstrates every drill before the student shoote the drill.

In summary, All of the 20+ students and I had a great time, enjoyed the classes and have an overload of food for thought. What was extremely gratifing for me was that my wife took the first class and enjoyed it. When I got home last night after the final day, she had numreous questions about various aspects of her training and insisting that I let try several of my other firearms.

 

[TonyD]

This is the first course review I've read whereas the instructor's philosophy closely parallels what I have been trained and taught over the years.

It would be very interesting to hear from others on the class but, also, a short compare and contrast from Randy Caine's class. I know Len attended both.

 

[JimConway]

TonyD
As you suggested, I will try to compare Randy Cain and Gabe Suarez.

It is important to remember that Randy's class was a 3 day beginners class while Gabe's classes included a 2 day beginners class and a more advanced Close range Gun Fighting class. Any comparison that follows is to a degree trying to compare apples and oranges.

Both come from a law enforcement background and both stress markmanship. Here the similarities end. Gabe has taken his ideas from the real world of combat and refined these ideas with force on force testing. Gabe's approach to marksmanship can be summed up with the phrase "See what you need to see" and this approach embrasses both point shooting and the traditional aimed fire. Depending on the range from the BG, you may shoot from retention at your chest, a few steps away you may shoot from a close retention position, another few steps back you may shoot partially extended using only the outline of the gun.

Both classes had us moving a great deal. In Randy's class all of our moving was straight back and forward using a "Groucho" walk with the knees bent. In Gabe's classes, all of our moving was either side to side or diagonally toward the target at a normal walk. The idea behind the side to side or diagonal moving was to get off the target line and to interrupt the assailant's OODA loop. It was very hard to get good hits using the "Groucho" walk while when walking it was much easier to get the hits and even included good head shots.

Please do not think that think that either of the instructors was in any way inferior. I would train with either of them in a heart beat without any reservations and would consider myself very lucky. There are a number of other observations and comparisons that i could make, but I do not think that they belong on a public forum. Tony, if you want more detail send me an email.

 

[YogSothoth]

Sounds like a great class. If you manage to get him back to train again, I'll have to put aside some cash and sign up well in advance. Thanks for the report from the line, Jim.

 

[TonyD]

Jim - Thank you for taking the time to respond in such detail. I understand about a public forum and wasn't looking for that much information.

I'm sure you've read my posts' here and know that I'm quite skeptical when it comes to the seemingly over-night proliferation of training courses. As you know, these classes can be quite expensive for folks to attend and are often the only training some of these individuals will ever get. It's for that reason that I try to help the folks of this board to make more informed decisions when considering a class as important as this. More importantly, getting the correct training. It is my opinion that too many people are trying to either reinvent the wheel or, put a new spin (or label) on the basics.

That is why it was refreshing to read your review of Mr. Suarez's class that, with the exception of only two ideas, reflects what I hold to be true in defensive firearms training. (And, I may need to come around a little more on those two ideas that I'm not quite comfortable with).

Thanks, again, and I look forward to hearing more.

Semper Fi!
TonyD

 

[JimConway]

Suarez is coming back in 2006

I am pleased to announce that Gabe will be returning in July, 2006. Our initial thoughts are to have a 2 day Close range Gun Fighting 2 class and a 2 day Force on Force class with Airsoft guns

This will sound like I am trying to sell you, but remember that all of Gabe's classes have been total sell-outs for the last several years.

 

[JimConway]

TonyD
In my opinion the reason that we are seeing so many classes available is the many people have discovered that going to a training site is very expensive and that attending a class near you is quite reasonable in cost.

There are quite a number of trainers out there selling their ideas and even giving their name to some firearm manipulation. The most important thing in selecting a trainer is finding a good quality trainer whose techniques will add to what you already know and thus improve your skill set. In the case of Neshooters.com, we will only bring in top quality trainers who are on the "A List". The cost is almost the same and the quality is both proven and very high.

You are right that it is difficult to select the training program that is right for any individual. Many of us over-estimate or under-estimate our existing skills. One point that I make over and over again is that the "basics" are all the skills that ever needed. As such taking a basics class more than once will always improve the students's shooting. That is a guarantee, if the student is willing to listen and learn.

My only question for you is what are the 2 ideas that you are not sure if you agree with? I would be happy to try to explain and add more detail. Ultimately only you can decide what is right for you.

 

[TonyD]

Jim,

I absolutely agree that there are no techniques other than the basics and the refinement of the basics. I see, or read, of people labeling "new" techniques that we were using in the mid '80's. "Sul" being one of them, we just never thought of giving it a name and marketing the idea.

Concerning the two principles I haven't warmed up to, I'll speak of the IAD's first. Tap, rack, bang has been around since John Moses, I would imagine, as well as changing the magazine if that doesn't work. All of this I agree with whole-heartedly. I've also always been trained, and advocate, of never losing sight of your threat - with one exception. And that being a malfunction. In my opinion, everything is about time. For instance, in an empty hand defensive encounter, if the 'fight' last more than 20 seconds you're doing something wrong. Moreover, I believe that the longer a firearms encounter lasts' your chances of a sucessful outcome disminishes. For this reason I believe it is imperative to identify the malfunction in order to rectify it in the most timely and least manipulative manner possible.

What is difficult to get most people (mainly the novice) to understand is that this only requires a very minute change of focus from your threat area to your firearm. The malfunction can be dealt with after refocusing on your target. Again, this is probably too much for the beginner who will rarely pratice. One example is a recent training session whereupon I experienced a self-induced malfunction after a 'tactical' reload. Long story short, I ended up with a failure to eject, failure to feed, a double feed and a partially inserted magazine during the entire debacle. I utilized a TRB without observing the initial malfunction which led to the rest. Had I observed the initial malfunction I would have been back in battery much sooner.

The second is the 'tactical' reload, or 'reload with retention', whatever they are calling it this week. I'm sure you remember as I do, the proper way to reload a wheel-gun. Though the technique is different, the principle remains. We've all heard the stories of the LEO who was shot and later found with a fistful of empty brass in his hand. A bad habit he picked up on the range so he wouldn't have to go back and police his brass.

I understand the philosphy behind the retention reload. I just don't think it applies to the vast majority of situations that the typical individual will encounter in a defensive firearms situation. During my time in HRT I was trained to never [have to] reload an empty weapon and never remove the magazine with the weak hand during a 'normal' reload. Also, never drop an empty magazine. Meaning, always have a round in the chamber and always having a firearm that will fire with the magazine removed. This is closely related to being able to reload a wheel-gun with one round, knowing which way the cylinder turns, and being able to fire in the 'old' days.

To me, this is just too time consuming (retention). Let's just assume that these classes require the correct attire. Meaning, street clothes from which the firearm and magazines are concealed. I hope these classes stress that because that's how it's going to happen if the student ever finds himself in that unfortunate situation of needing a firearm to defend his life. Most folks make sure they wear loose fitting clothes with big cargo pockets to these classes to be able to have a place to stuff these magazines. The same thing the 'gamers' do in pistol competitions. I also believe this can lead to a bad habit of trying to retain every magazine during the stress of an acctual encounter.

I believe the retention reload may have merit when applied to the individual who is taxed with an offensive engagement instead of simply defending his life and getting out of Dodge as soon as possible. I know we can "what if" a metric ton of scenarios. Again, I say basics and what is the personal protection scenario most likely to occur.

Respectfully,
TonyD

Please feel free to discuss. I'm never closed-minded and you may enlighten me to something I've never encounter or considered.

 

[Lynne]

This is incredibly interesting guys. Do please keep it going. Tony - you've pointed out a couple things I never thought about. Bless you dearheart.

 

[JimConway]

Jim,

Overall, we have no significant differences and I am sure that your reasoning is sound. What you have said is proof positive the you will fight the same way that you train.

I absolutely agree that there are no techniques other than the basics and the refinement of the basics. I see, or read, of people labeling "new" techniques that we were using in the mid '80's. "Sul" being one of them, we just never thought of giving it a name and marketing the idea.

I will not comment on SUL, since there are more opinions that there are experts out there. Even Randy and Gabe disagree in no uncertain terms. It does seem to me that SUL does have it's place and is an acceptible way to check 6 when ther are noncombatants in the area or in a SWAT stack.

Concerning the two principles I haven't warmed up to, I'll speak of the IAD's first. Tap, rack, bang has been around since John Moses, I would imagine, as well as changing the magazine if that doesn't work.

I know and have used the Tap, Rack, Bang phrase many times even though I know that the right way to say it is Tap, Rack, Assess
All of this I agree with whole-heartedly. I've also always been trained, and advocate, of never losing sight of your threat - with one exception. And that being a malfunction. In my opinion, everything is about time.

I could not agree more. The MALF sequence that I described allows you to do everything with a eye on the BG and the Type 3 clearance can be done about 2 seconds faster than the way that we were taught.

For instance, in an empty hand defensive encounter, if the 'fight' last more than 20 seconds you're doing something wrong. Moreover, I believe that the longer a firearms encounter lasts' your chances of a sucessful outcome disminishes. For this reason I believe it is imperative to identify the malfunction in order to rectify it in the most timely and least manipulative manner possible.

The biggest benifit is the elimination of the reaction times and the decision points. In the square range we can tell the student to set up one of the types, and on the go command they can quickly clear it. When you insert a dummy into their mag, watch how much more time it takes

What is difficult to get most people (mainly the novice) to understand is that this only requires a very minute change of focus from your threat area to your firearm. The malfunction can be dealt with after refocusing on your target. Again, this is probably too much for the beginner who will rarely pratice. One example is a recent training session whereupon I experienced a self-induced malfunction after a 'tactical' reload. Long story short, I ended up with a failure to eject, failure to feed, a double feed and a partially inserted magazine during the entire debacle. I utilized a TRB without observing the initial malfunction which led to the rest. Had I observed the initial malfunction I would have been back in battery much sooner.

The second is the 'tactical' reload, or 'reload with retention', whatever they are calling it this week. I'm sure you remember as I do, the proper way to reload a wheel-gun. Though the technique is different, the principle remains. We've all heard the stories of the LEO who was shot and later found with a fistful of empty brass in his hand. A bad habit he picked up on the range so he wouldn't have to go back and police his brass.

There are 2 reasons behind the tactical (proactive)reload. Keep the partial because you may need the ammo later and, even more important, mag failures are one of the most common causes of MALFs and it would be good of have another. Any time that I carry, I always carry a spare mag for the second reason. Remember the old Marine saying about - One is none, two is one.
I understand the philosphy behind the retention reload. I just don't think it applies to the vast majority of situations that the typical individual will encounter in a defensive firearms situation. During my time in HRT I was trained to never [have to] reload an empty weapon and never remove the magazine with the weak hand during a 'normal' reload. Also, never drop an empty magazine. Meaning, always have a round in the chamber and always having a firearm that will fire with the magazine removed. This is closely related to being able to reload a wheel-gun with one round, knowing which way the cylinder turns, and being able to fire in the 'old' days.

I agree and that is why I will never own a weapon with a mag disconnect.

To me, this is just too time consuming (retention). Let's just assume that these classes require the correct attire. Meaning, street clothes from which the firearm and magazines are concealed. I hope these classes stress that because that's how it's going to happen if the student ever finds himself in that unfortunate situation of needing a firearm to defend his life. Most folks make sure they wear loose fitting clothes with big cargo pockets to these classes to be able to have a place to stuff these magazines. The same thing the 'gamers' do in pistol competitions. I also believe this can lead to a bad habit of trying to retain every magazine during the stress of an acctual encounter.

Many in the class were wearing no street clothes. In my clas, I was dressed the way I always am except fot one extra mag pouch and a handful of mags in my hip pocket.
I believe the retention reload may have merit when applied to the individual who is taxed with an offensive engagement instead of simply defending his life and getting out of Dodge as soon as possible. I know we can "what if" a metric ton of scenarios. Again, I say basics and what is the personal protection scenario most likely to occur.

Tony, This is turning into a great discussion and, in my eyes, not any form of disagreement
Respectfully,
TonyD

Please feel free to discuss. I'm never closed-minded and you may enlighten me to something I've never encounter or considered.

Jim's remarks in red

 

[TonyD]

Jim,

I agree, I don't believe we're of different minds. I have stated in previous threads how refreshing it is to hear others (you) advocate the refining of the basics. Mentioning of SUL was merely an example of giving an old dog a new name. I don't believe it has any place in a personal protection firearm class.

In the malfuntion scenario I did not mean to imply that the shooter stop and look things over before acting. Rather, that during the clearance the 'assess' phase comes into play as you mentioned. It's even more difficult to articulate in writing than it is to get new shooters to understand it during training.

It's ironic you mention, "One is none, two is one". I always carry 2 extra mag's and in the Corps I set up my gear by carrying 4 mag pouches and 13 magazines. Standard issue was 2 and 6, respectively. I could never understand having two mag's rattling around in the pouch while you're on patrol. That makes less sense than a half empty canteen, but I digress.

Again, I can understand the merit of retention while acting in the role of LEO or military when it's the individual's duty to be on the aggressive or offensive. I can almost tolerate having the personal protection shooter "retrieve" a partial magazine after it has been dumped and the firearm reloaded. That will nearly cut the reload time in half.

The role of the shooter dictates the training and subsequent pratice needed. I'm just not convinced that the tactical reload has any more place in personal protection training than SUL does. As you mentioned, fight like you train. I believe that students should be wearing the appropriate attire during the class - street clothes from a concealed position.

I'm really enjoying this conversation. It's one of the rare times I've been able to discuss refining basics with a like minded experienced individual rather than rebutting Rescue Ricky's Tactical Techniques that you find on many boards. I hope we can expound on this.

TonyD

 

[JimConway]

Tony

The differences are getting even narrower or we are beating this horse to death

I agree, I don't believe we're of different minds. I have stated in previous threads how refreshing it is to hear others (you) advocate the refining of the basics. Mentioning of SUL was merely an example of giving an old dog a new name. I don't believe it has any place in a personal protection firearm class.

The only place for SUL in a personal protection class is as a way for the students to check 6 without endangering the other students or on-lookers. It is not SUL that is important but teaching and engraining of the Check 6 habit.

In the malfuntion scenario I did not mean to imply that the shooter stop and look things over before acting. Rather, that during the clearance the 'assess' phase comes into play as you mentioned. It's even more difficult to articulate in writing than it is to get new shooters to understand it during training.

We agree

It's ironic you mention, "One is none, two is one". I always carry 2 extra mag's and in the Corps I set up my gear by carrying 4 mag pouches and 13 magazines. Standard issue was 2 and 6, respectively. I could never understand having two mag's rattling around in the pouch while you're on patrol. That makes less sense than a half empty canteen, but I digress.

Again, I can understand the merit of retention while acting in the role of LEO or military when it's the individual's duty to be on the aggressive or offensive. I can almost tolerate having the personal protection shooter "retrieve" a partial magazine after it has been dumped and the firearm reloaded. That will nearly cut the reload time in half.

No one that I know would suggest that an empty mag be picked up, just stow the partial one.

The role of the shooter dictates the training and subsequent pratice needed. I'm just not convinced that the tactical reload has any more place in personal protection training than SUL does. As you mentioned, fight like you train. I believe that students should be wearing the appropriate attire during the class - street clothes from a concealed position.

I disagree. The tactical reload should be performed after the fight is over?? and checking 6. Who knows who else is out there.

I'm really enjoying this conversation. It's one of the rare times I've been able to discuss refining basics with a like minded experienced individual rather than rebutting Rescue Ricky's Tactical Techniques that you find on many boards. I hope we can expound on this.

We have all had that kind of conversation. The ones that I get frustrated over are trying to explain why "Thunderwear" is not good to a mall ninja that does not carry regularly, the endless discussion of the merits of the pelvic shot vs. a head shot, and why shooting IDPA matches prepares you for anything other than IDPA matches (They think that they are very tactical). If nothing else we just may get some others thinking in the right direction.

As you said this thread has been a pleasure and I hope that it does not get hijacked. Yell if you want to discuss any subject, that I can contribute to

 

[TonyD]

Jim,

I appreciate your willingness to participate and this thread won't get hijacked (I know people). I know it may seem that you and I are beating a dead horse but I know many other folks are reading our posts and may be expanding their realizations of self defense and that's what I try to do here in the Training forum.

We used SUL (before it became SUL) so as not to sweep a fellow Team member during movement and entry. I'm confused on how it would apply to checking your six.

I'm not sure how I gave the impression that the tactical reload be done after the fight. Maybe, it's my idea of the procedure that should be clarified. I'm not against retaining a partial magazine, per se. Where I have issues is how that's taught. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but most will hit the release, remove the mag. with the weak hand, stow the mag. somewhere, retrieve a fresh mag. from the pouch with the weak hand and insert. This is very time consuming and I have a hard enough time trying to put my car keys in my pocket when I'm in a hurry. This leaves too long of a duration with no magazine in the firearm, in my opinion.

I guess I should bring up a few questions before proceeding. When do you reload? Where do you reload? When and why would you ever change out a partially loaded magazine?

To answer my own questions, some are obvious. Reload when you're out. Reloading should preferably be done from a position of cover or concealment. Or, at least by making yourself "small" if nothing is available. Relaoding should be done the least amount of times possible or when it's to your advantage. I often hear folks say to reload and retain during a lull in the fight. This is well and good for the individual that must remain in that situation and carry on the fight. For the average individual utilizing a firearm soley for personal protection, a lull in the fight means time to get out of Dodge. It means that, that person is fighting their way out of danger, not in to it.

To make a short story long, what I was describing was drop, crouch, or cover, drop the (partial) mag free while retrieving the fresh mag, insert, pick up and move on. That's what cuts the reload time. Less time without a mag inserted and you have still 'retained' the partial. Obviously, the other time you would drop a partial would be in the case of a malfunction. Which, as you suggested earlier, may very well have been a magazine issue.

I do shoot IDPA, on occasion, and suggest that others do as well. As long as they do so with the proper mind-set. I use IDPA as training session, not as a 'gamer'. The best shooter in IDPA at my range has stated that he's good as long as he doesn't have to think. That's great for competition but not very good in real life. Most folks belong to very restrictive ranges where they can't shoot more than one round every 5 seconds, let alone draw and shoot. This is the reason I advocate that type of competition as a training adjunct.

Please let me know what you think of these ideologies.

TonyD

 

[Lynne]

Not to interupt the thread going (as I am enjoying it), however, I have a question. When folks are going through these classes, does anyone suggest that they visualize the target as a real life scum bag? Practicing and going through these courses are a great thing and I'm not knocking them in the least, but I've found that some instructors I've met (no one that's mentioned here) don't tell people to visualize a real person - they're just shooting at a target. IF a situation were to occur, some folks might freeze because they haven't "preped" themselves mentally for an actual body.

Thanks in advance.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Lynne, to answer your question, YES, Gabe said that to him he treated the target as a real person (threat). I believe that he suggested that we do the same . . . Jim will correct me if I'm wrong.

Tony, I disagree with your assessment of SUL, and I never saw or heard of it until a NH PO in our Randy Cain course used it during a team maneuver and Randy said that it had no place in defensive tactics (but for altogether different reasons).

Gabe's position on SUL is that it is useful in the following circumstances:
- If two of you are armed and responding to the threat. Any movement of one might jeopardize the other person if you don't use something like SUL. [BTW, there were 4 couples in the course, so yes some folks are lucky enough to have a spouse/SO that will also competently react to a threat.]
- If you hear a noise behind you, use SUL to check if it is a "friendly" (family, children or another person stopping to help you) or the police without posing a threat to them or yourself! If you turn around and point a gun at responding LEOs, your chance of getting ventilated are exceedingly high. On the other hand, if you are in the SUL position, the gun is not pointed at anyone and would buy you time to respond without getting shot by the responding LEOs.

 

[Adam_MA]

Can someone please explain to me what a SUL move/maneuver is?

Thanks
Adam

 

[Nickle]

Tony, I find it sad to hear that the "Corps" issues 6 mag's for the M16/M4. The Army standard is for 7 mag's to be carried with a basic load of either 140 or 210 rounds, depending on mag's used.

I don't feel that I'm qualified to comment on some other portions mentioned, but see a LOT of validity to your comments, particularly dealing with Malf's and mag changes in a handgun. I've been taught to change mag's when the gun is empty, and to drop empty mag's and pick them up later (handgun, not rifle).

 

[TonyD]

Len,

I don't see where you're disagreeing with me at all. SUL is for team movement. I do see what Gabe was referring to when checking six but that would be very situation dependent. Although, for that reason I could see the merit of introducing it.

 

[JimConway]

TonyD,

I appreciate your willingness to participate and this thread won't get hijacked (I know people). I know it may seem that you and I are beating a dead horse but I know many other folks are reading our posts and may be expanding their realizations of self defense and that's what I try to do here in the Training forum.

We used SUL (before it became SUL) so as not to sweep a fellow Team member during movement and entry. I'm confused on how it would apply to checking your six.

As I said the important thing is to engrain the Check 6 and a part of the training. Either SUL or a body indexed retention position with the muzzle down could be used to avoid covering the guy next to you or the instructor on the square range. I know that the SUL was used in Brazil training classes to stop the untrained students from waving their guns arround. The other aspect of the SUL is to avoid covering any friendlies or non combatants while checking.

I'm not sure how I gave the impression that the tactical reload be done after the fight. Maybe, it's my idea of the procedure that should be clarified. I'm not against retaining a partial magazine, per se. Where I have issues is how that's taught. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but most will hit the release, remove the mag. with the weak hand, stow the mag. somewhere, retrieve a fresh mag. from the pouch with the weak hand and insert. This is very time consuming and I have a hard enough time trying to put my car keys in my pocket when I'm in a hurry. This leaves too long of a duration with no magazine in the firearm, in my opinion.

Yor description is correct, but you must contrast it with the traditional method where you end up juggling 2 mags in a high stress situation and end up dropping one, hopefully not the full one, I t can happen and I have done it during a timed test. I agree that the old way gives you a fully loaded a little sooner, but with a risk.

I guess I should bring up a few questions before proceeding. When do you reload? Where do you reload? When and why would you ever change out a partially loaded magazine?

To answer my own questions, some are obvious. Reload when you're out. Reloading should preferably be done from a position of cover or concealment. Or, at least by making yourself "small" if nothing is available. Relaoding should be done the least amount of times possible or when it's to your advantage. I often hear folks say to reload and retain during a lull in the fight. This is well and good for the individual that must remain in that situation and carry on the fight. For the average individual utilizing a firearm soley for personal protection, a lull in the fight means time to get out of Dodge. It means that, that person is fighting their way out of danger, not in to it.

The words "lull in the fight" are always used and never understood. I most cases 4 or 5 rounds have been fired and the BG, hopefully out of the fight. After checking the BG, the area near him, and your 6, it is a good idea to have a full mag, considering that there are likely to be more than one BG

To make a short story long, what I was describing was drop, crouch, or cover, drop the (partial) mag free while retrieving the fresh mag, insert, pick up and move on. That's what cuts the reload time. Less time without a mag inserted and you have still 'retained' the partial. Obviously, the other time you would drop a partial would be in the case of a malfunction. Which, as you suggested earlier, may very well have been a magazine issue.

I agree. But from what I know "cover" is rarely, if ever, a factor in the confrontations that we may face as civilians.

I do shoot IDPA, on occasion, and suggest that others do as well. As long as they do so with the proper mind-set. I use IDPA as training session, not as a 'gamer'. The best shooter in IDPA at my range has stated that he's good as long as he doesn't have to think. That's great for competition but not very good in real life. Most folks belong to very restrictive ranges where they can't shoot more than one round every 5 seconds, let alone draw and shoot. This is the reason I advocate that type of competition as a training adjunct.

IDPA if fine and fun as long as the shooter does not confuse a game with reality. I personally know people who think that they are prepared because the shoot an IDPA match well. Just as an aside, at the IDPA Nationals about 2 years ago, some Gunsite graduates built a real fun house as an optional course of fire. Over 100 top IDPA shooters shot he fun house and 97 of the shooters were judged to be dead.

Please let me know what you think of these ideologies.

 

[TonyD]

Well, you have convinced me that in certain circumstances SUL would have merit for the personal protection shooter. Maybe not in the basic course, but certainly the advanced. However, I'll probably stick to my training that where my eyes go, the muzzle goes.

I didn't realize the 'traditional' method was juggling two magazines. I've seen that method and all I could do is shake my head. If someone tried to do that in a real fight I'd bet they'd drop both magazines and their firearm. Then probably shoot themselves grabbing for it.

Cover is always at a premium. What most folks think is cover is nothing more than concealment. That's why I advocate making yourself 'small' during the reload. And, I still have to say, reload your firearm before fumbling around trying to find a pocket to stow the partial, but that's just my opinion.

And, we agree that IDPA can be a good place to pratice certain techniques that you would otherwise not be able to do on a regular range. As long as the proper mind set is used. It's good for practicing draw-and-fire from concealed carry, reloading under stress (time), and shooting while moving. I would bet the individual I was referring to ealier was one of the folks you mentioned at the nationals. He's an outstanding shot while playing the game as long as no variables come into play.

 

[JimConway]

TonyD
Well, you have convinced me that in certain circumstances SUL would have merit for the personal protection shooter. Maybe not in the basic course, but certainly the advanced. However, I'll probably stick to my training that where my eyes go, the muzzle goes.

I agree with the eye-muzzle approach. The SUL is after the fight, hopefully

I didn't realize the 'traditional' method was juggling two magazines. I've seen that method and all I could do is shake my head. If someone tried to do that in a real fight I'd bet they'd drop both magazines and their firearm. Then probably shoot themselves grabbing for it.

Been there - Done that

Cover is always at a premium. What most folks think is cover is nothing more than concealment. That's why I advocate making yourself 'small' during the reload. And, I still have to say, reload your firearm before fumbling around trying to find a pocket to stow the partial, but that's just my opinion.

I agree. My problem is that a lot or training focuses on cover and concealment and teaches the student to look for it. If it were available and near, use it. However the odds of being able to are almost nil, especially considering that the BG will pick the time and the place. We may be programming a response delay into their thinking.

And, we agree that IDPA can be a good place to pratice certain techniques that you would otherwise not be able to do on a regular range. As long as the proper mind set is used. It's good for practicing draw-and-fire from concealed carry, reloading under stress (time), and shooting while moving. I would bet the individual I was referring to ealier was one of the folks you mentioned at the nationals. He's an outstanding shot while playing the game as long as no variables come into play.

 

[JimConway]

Adam
Remind me and I will demonstrate the SUL next time we shoot together

 

[Adam_MA]

Adam
Remind me and I will demonstrate the SUL next time we shoot together

Cool thanks!

Adam

 

[Len-2A Training]

Len,

I don't see where you're disagreeing with me at all. SUL is for team movement. I do see what Gabe was referring to when checking six but that would be very situation dependent. Although, for that reason I could see the merit of introducing it.

Tony, didn't you comment earlier that SUL has no place for civilians? That is what I was trying to point out.

I know of two cases in my town over the past ~3 years where kids were almost dropped by one of my buddies (LE) when they drew out an Airsoft handgun.

- Case 1 - girl threatened her Mother and Sister, SWAT was called and girl left house and was spotted walking in the Square, when police approached she drew out the gun!

- Case 2 - kids were playing with Airsoft in bank parking lot, someone calls police (kids with guns), police approach and kid turns around with Airsoft in hand . . . pointed at the officer!

In both cases, the kids had painted the orange tip black of course!

In both cases, by buddy was taking the slack out of the trigger on his Sig and afterwords was really rattled at how close he came to dropping these two Darwin candidates. Even though I tried to assure him that had he dropped the hammer, it would have been the RIGHT THING TO DO . . . he had no way to know that the guns pointed at him weren't real, it still shook him up.

Back to Gabe Suarez . . . I'm sure that Gabe would say that he SHOULD have dropped these kids. That hesitation would have cost my buddy his life if those guns were real. So responding with SUL can save lives in an ugly situation where the police don't know who the good guys are as they respond. Yet SUL allows for rapid deployment if the movement behind you is NOT friendly!

I'm with Gabe on this one.

 

[Nickle]

Yeah, I'm interested as well. Might save someones life, if I ever get deployed.

 

[TonyD]

TonyD

I agree. My problem is that a lot or training focuses on cover and concealment and teaches the student to look for it. If it were available and near, use it. However the odds of being able to are almost nil, especially considering that the BG will pick the time and the place. We may be programming a response delay into their thinking.

Jim,

I think you may be right. But, I would hope we're not programming them to stand still in a gun fight like the Old West. We need to be programming them to fight towards cover.

Len,

Those two incidents you recited really doesn't have anything to do with SUL.

Firts, these two kids were not involved in a gun fight and pointing those toys at the cops was just plain stupid. Good thing they were to make the distinction before dropping them both.

Second, gun fights don't last as long in real life as they do in Hollyweird. Statistics (and I don't have them handy) suggest that the vast majority last only a few seconds and the average number of rounds fired is somewhere around five, I believe. LEO rarely arrives during the self defense situation.

I believe too much LEO mentality is interjected in a lot of personal protection defensive pistol classes. Again, I believe the emphasis should be on fighting your way out of danger and not into it. Fighting to cover and fighting out of the danger zone.

I also believe that these type classes should focus more on the greatest possiblities most likely encountered. Such as, home invasion, inside or outside of the local Stop & Rob, and the car-jacking scenario.

 

[JimConway]

TonyD

I agree. My problem is that a lot or training focuses on cover and concealment and teaches the student to look for it. If it were available and near, use it. However the odds of being able to are almost nil, especially considering that the BG will pick the time and the place. We may be programming a response delay into their thinking.

Jim,

I think you may be right. But, I would hope we're not programming them to stand still in a gun fight like the Old West. We need to be programming them to fight towards cover.

Len,

Those two incidents you recited really doesn't have anything to do with SUL.

Firts, these two kids were not involved in a gun fight and pointing those toys at the cops was just plain stupid. Good thing they were to make the distinction before dropping them both.

Second, gun fights don't last as long in real life as they do in Hollyweird. Statistics (and I don't have them handy) suggest that the vast majority last only a few seconds and the average number of rounds fired is somewhere around five, I believe. LEO rarely arrives during the self defense situation.

I believe too much LEO mentality is interjected in a lot of personal protection defensive pistol classes. Again, I believe the emphasis should be on fighting your way out of danger and not into it. Fighting to cover and fighting out of the danger zone.

I also believe that these type classes should focus more on the greatest possiblities most likely encountered. Such as, home invasion, inside or outside of the local Stop & Rob, and the car-jacking scenario.

I can not argue that but even more important is that we teach them to move and shoot.

 

[Lynne]

I believe too much LEO mentality is interjected in a lot of personal protection defensive pistol classes. Again, I believe the emphasis should be on fighting your way out of danger and not into it. Fighting to cover and fighting out of the danger zone.

I also believe that these type classes should focus more on the greatest possiblities most likely encountered. Such as, home invasion, inside or outside of the local Stop & Rob, and the car-jacking scenario.

I agree with you Tony on getting out of the danger zone (if situation permits) and also about the type of defense needed. That's what Ed and I focus on in our classes. I'm not trying to teach someone how to be a Marine, just to save their, or their loved one's arse. And I practice to (hopefully) save mine or Ed's if needed. JMHO.

 

[Nickle]

Again, I believe the emphasis should be on fighting your way out of danger and not into it. Fighting to cover and fighting out of the danger zone.

The military has taught me to fight your way to cover, or a better weapon, ASAP, when you're only armed with a pistol. A pistol is a defensive weapon, not an offensive weapon. That's why I'm authorized an M4 (but don't them in state yet), and an M2 (50 cal MG) mounted on top of the track.

 

[TonyD]

TonyD

I agree. My problem is that a lot or training focuses on cover and concealment and teaches the student to look for it. If it were available and near, use it. However the odds of being able to are almost nil, especially considering that the BG will pick the time and the place. We may be programming a response delay into their thinking.

Jim,

I think you may be right. But, I would hope we're not programming them to stand still in a gun fight like the Old West. We need to be programming them to fight towards cover.

Len,

Those two incidents you recited really doesn't have anything to do with SUL.

Firts, these two kids were not involved in a gun fight and pointing those toys at the cops was just plain stupid. Good thing they were to make the distinction before dropping them both.

Second, gun fights don't last as long in real life as they do in Hollyweird. Statistics (and I don't have them handy) suggest that the vast majority last only a few seconds and the average number of rounds fired is somewhere around five, I believe. LEO rarely arrives during the self defense situation.

I believe too much LEO mentality is interjected in a lot of personal protection defensive pistol classes. Again, I believe the emphasis should be on fighting your way out of danger and not into it. Fighting to cover and fighting out of the danger zone.

I also believe that these type classes should focus more on the greatest possiblities most likely encountered. Such as, home invasion, inside or outside of the local Stop & Rob, and the car-jacking scenario.

I can not argue that but even more important is that we teach them to move and shoot.

That is exactly my point, as well, when I say fight to cover or fight out of danger. That is a bad habit the gets instilled by firing at the ranges that are restrictive. It's probably been engrained in almost every shooter to stand still, line up a perfect sight picture, close one eye and sqeeze the trigger.