That stuff will get you killed on the street!

After a very tough but enjoyable USPSA match a few weeks ago, Catfish and I were reviewing what we learned and what we needed to improve in our shooting. You see, all of us on this Blog are competitors. We enjoy and look forward to shooting. USPSA, IDPA, 3-Gun, pistols, rifles, shotguns it does not matter.

But what we all strive for; is to improve. To be a competitor you have to have the ability to look at yourself in the harsh light of reality and make an honest assessment of what you do well and what you need to improve. Now, I know I will NEVER be a World Champion - for that matter, I’m OK with not being a National Champion. But, I want to be better tomorrow than I am today.

BUT WAIT! That stuff will get you killed on the street!

How many times have you heard that? Or at least read that? It seems on the Internet this is a recurring statement of the shooting experts. It is often repeated and passed on with blazing speed. I’m sure you have read the same posts, “I could take him out with my Whizbang 2” snubbie from 400 yards with one shot to the left eye.”

WHAT?

That’s right, we have our one truth in the shooting world and that is, competition shooting is bad for you. Shooting competition, according to those that spout such knowledge, is bad for you if you are ever involved in an armed confrontation. You will read this many, many times on the Internet. From all sorts of experts that have insider knowledge on what is required to survive. Again, what?

So let me see if I have this correct. If I want to survive a gunfight, the best thing to do is not practice? The answer from many of the self proclaimed shooting experts is that competition shooting will get you killed on the street. That’s right - killed.

Now one of the things that I have learned is that I don’t know everything. But I really need someone to explain this to me. The ability to shoot fast, and shoot accurately is NOT what we’re looking for in a self defense situation? And let me go further by saying, this is the act of shooting. Tactics matter not; this is when it has become impossible to avoid a self defense gunfight.

Not buying it. How will you ever know what your abilities are if you never put them to the test? How will you be able to make that self evaluation of your skills to determine what needs improved if you don’t use those skills? Will you simply hide within your own ego and convince yourself that you truly are the baddest of the bad until it’s that ultimate pass or fail test of real life?

And if you are an Instructor, it’s either put up or shut up. If you can’t walk into a shooting match and whip everyone there, your system doesn’t work. It doesn’t matter which shooting sport, IDPA, USPSA, even Cowboy Action Shooting. Show me. Prove to me that I should take a class from you. That’s what it should come down to. Are you good enough to win? Or even, are you good enough to show up? The current thinking in the shooting sports is that tactical instructors do not attend because their skills are honed to such a razors edge that they would ruin years of hard work by attending a single match. And people buy this Snake Oil?

Show me that your system is the best and I should start using it by putting it to the test of competition. Does your system increase recoil control, increase accuracy, increase speed or what? How is it an improvement over what I am using right now?

We shoot with some of the big dogs in the sport. And we have taken classes from those big dogs. And there is one truth that cannot be avoided. The people that lead the shooting sports can flat out shoot better, faster and more accurately than anyone else. And that is what it’s all about. The ability to put rounds on your target as fast as possible. We can’t make it any clearer than that. If you had the misfortune to be involved in a gunfight, wouldn’t it be better to be faster than the other guy? Wouldn’t it be better to be more accurate than the other guy? Wouldn’t it be better to be able to move better than the other guy? Wouldn’t it be better to know your equipment works better than the other guys?

Equipment problems are a serious issue you really should address now rather than later. Ever draw your gun from your carry holster? Do you know how many people I’ve watch draw the gun and the holster comes out with it, and then didn’t know what to do? Believe me it is more common than you think. Or the gun falls out of the holster when you bend over to pick something up off the ground, like your keys. You’re at the gun show, buy a new Blaster 454 Magnum and figure “why spend 100 dollars on a holster; there’s one for 5 bucks. That will do you.” Until you actually have to use it.

Does the gun work? We see people all the time that buy a new gun, shoot 6 rounds out of it and NEVER fire it again. Then when they do venture out on the range they discover that the gun is rusted solid and won’t function. And this is what they’ve been carrying for years.

How about that Blaster 454 Magnum? Just because it’s all the rage of the gun magazines doesn’t mean it’s the gun for you. Have you shot it? How many rounds? Have you shot it moving, kneeling, strong hand only, or weak hand only? What about reloads? You know things don’t always go as planned in a gunfight; you may need to reload the gun. Have you ever reloaded? Does it even come with a spare magazine or speed loader? Do you know how to use it? How will you carry it? Do you have a mag pouch or speed loader holder? What if you were sitting down and didn’t realize that you accidentally pressed the magazine release and there is no magazine in the gun? What then? Tell the bad guy I can’t be in a gunfight today, I have no bullets. Maybe you would shoot more if you had a gun you could handle? Something with a little less recoil, maybe lighter weight, or smaller size to fit your hand better. Or maybe something as easy as lower operating cost. If ammo is too expensive you won’t shoot as much. Perhaps something in 9mm or .38 special. In a full size gun, recoil is very controllable, and you need to shoot a lot if you want to stay proficient.

Because someone saw a video clip of one shooter, shooting one stage, at one match, where they did something that you wouldn’t have done during a bank robbery with 12 Terrorists and attack dogs, all competition shooting is bad. It doesn’t work that way. Tell me your scenario, how many bad guys, where are you, what does it look like. We all would be happy to go to the range and set it up as best we can, and then let’s see how you do. Show me how you would have taken out the Terrorists and attack dogs. And then I’ll go and we’ll see who does what better. Or Catfish will shoot it, or maybe even The Girl. Remember, we only score hits, misses are just noise.

We see new shooters all the time get to the line and they are shaking like a leaf. They are so nervous they don’t know what to do and freeze, or do really stupid things like forget where they are and start pointing loaded guns at the crowd. And the only stress they are dealing with is a timer! How will they react when someone is trying to hurt them or someone they care about? Worried about people watching you shoot; how about someone trying to shoot you? We know from people that have been there, what adrenaline is like and how it affects your skills. Stress will hit your fine motor skills, making simple tasks seem extraordinary. Increasing your subconscious gun handling skills will make handling that stress less problematic. You won’t have to remember to disengage the safety, or tell yourself to find the front sight. It will be natural, automatic, without thought.

Now if you go to the range every month with a bunch of ammo and your favorite guns, that’s great. You’re out there practicing, which is always good. What I’m suggesting is that you give a match a try just once. See how you compare to the other shooters that are there. See if there are any weaknesses in your skills or your training. USPSA and IDPA are great ways to test yourself and your equipment, and also to see if you are on the right course with your training. You may also enjoy being around other people that enjoy shooting. It’s also a great place to let your ego rest. It’s OK to not be number 1. And if you mess something up, someone will be right there to tell you nice try and talk about how to improve. It’s all about learning and improving. And having fun!

Just don’t hide behind the thought that stuff will get you killed on the street. Get out there and give it a try.

Government figures 'missing' two million violent crimes

Ah, the island utopia of England.

It turns out that crime reporting in the UK has been somewhat distorted for some time now. In what can only be described as a "truly bizarre" practice, crime statistics are "capped." That is, after you've been victimized 5 times, no more crime reporting for you! How do those extra two million crimes break down?

Violent crime is 82 per cent higher at 4.4 million offences compared with 2.4 million in the BCS, the survey claims, including a 156 per cent rise in " acquaintance violence" from 817,000 incidents to 2.1 million.

Domestic violence is 140 per cent higher, up from 357,000 incidents a year to 857,000, the authors said, while there are nearly three million common assaults a year rather than the 1.5 million estimated by the BCS, a rise of 98 per cent.

Burglary is 20 per cent higher than currently estimated, at 877,000 a year, and vandalism is 24 per cent higher, the report calculated.

Robbery is 7 per cent up on the official estimates, or an extra 22,000 crimes bringing the yearly total to 333,000.

So, in the context of gun crime, what's that mean in the ban-happy United Kingdom? I suppose it's hard to say, given that statistics are manipulated there. If I had to guess (and I suppose I will), I'd guess banning guns hasn't helped deter crime one iota. In fact, it would appear that it's actually had the opposite effect. I guess I'll look for some statistics to support that position...

Golf anyone?

It looks like I need to start playing golf.

Stroudsburg Area Regional Police are investigating complaints of a private golf outing featuring lap dance stations, threesomes and naked women at the Cherry Valley Golf Course on Monday.

And yes, there's video!

Accidents happen: Three in county unintentionally shoot selves over weekend

I have a better headline:

Stupid people shoot themselves

Three different people in three different places (all in Collin County) all suffered .22 caliber wounds from firearms that apparently fired themselves. I just love the descriptions, as provided by Lt. John Norton of the Collin County Sheriff's office:

...the 46-year-old man identified as Mark Sirkel of Blue Ridge was loading a .22-caliber rifle in his living room at his home in the 9500 block of County Road 501 when the weapon discharged and a bullet struck him in the left knee...

...Denny Davidson of Lucas showed up at the MCM emergency room with a gunshot wound to his left hand and thigh. Davidson told officers he was sitting on his couch at his home located in the 1800 block of Country Club Road cleaning his .22-caliber Beretta handgun. He was putting the gun back together when the gun discharged and the bullet went through his left index finger and struck him in the thigh...

...Jennifer Rose of Lavon, accidentally shot herself at their home in the 500 block of Lincoln Avenue. Norton said Rose put a magazine into a .22-caliber pistol when it discharged and the bullet struck her in the leg. It is not known which leg was injured in the accident.

Well, that's all bad enough, but here's the advice from the sheriff:

“Obviously, anytime you deal with a firearm, you’ve got to be very careful because it’s subject to go off at any time,” Norton said.

Yeah, obviously, because guns just go off by themselves. Especially ones that have been disassembled for cleaning.

Here's what really happened, in all three cases: the people holding the loaded firearms pulled the trigger. No detective work needed here, no other explanation required. Guns do NOT go off by themselves - someone must pull the trigger.

Enough already!

Man, this is really starting to suck. Thank God I live on top of a hill.

Outlaw?

An Apache's version of the fly by...

Oz rocks

Having been fortunate enough to know some Aussies personally, I've always liked the land down under. Great sense of humor, friendly people, and they like beer.

Considering their support in the ongoing struggle, I'm liking them even more. And unlike our good friends the Brits, it would appear that they don't give up quite so easily...

It turns out that Iranian forces made an earlier concerted attempt to seize a boarding party from the Royal Australian Navy.
The Australians, though, to quote one military source, "were having none of it".

The BBC has been told the Australians re-boarded the vessel they had just searched, aimed their machine guns at the approaching Iranians and warned them to back off, using what was said to be "highly colourful language".

Too bad the Brits didn't learn from this lesson....

IDPA Rules Rant

We've been shooting USPSA for almost a couple of years now, after shooting IDPA for several years before that. Catfish and I have been discussing some aspects of matches for both sports, and from these discussions and my own personal observations, I've reached an inexorable conclusion: IDPA rules are silly.

Not all of them, mind you. The safety stuff goes without saying. I like the self-defense aspects of the sport, where you learn about tactical priority, use of cover, things of that nature. I like that the COF limits the round count, believe it or not - more people can shoot with real-life gear. There are many good things about the sport. So let me amend my original assertion: IDPA rules can be silly. Seriously, a sport that has a FTDR (Failure To Do Right) rule in addition to procedural penalties should raise more than a few eyebrows.

Where it all breaks down for me is when subjectivity is introduced to the rules, and by extension, to the courses of fire and the sport in general. Let's take the proper use of cover as a beginning example. The rules stipulate that 100% of your feet (I assume both of them), and 50% of your upper body must remain behind cover at all times. This sounds all fine and good, but it's typically a subjective call. Where does the upper body begin? Where is the Safety Officer positioned in relation to the shooter, in relation to cover, in relation to the target? I've seen the "cover" call made in some ridiculous situations, based solely on the whim of the SO on the stage. It's not so much that it's a silly rule, it's that it's subject to too many variables. Therefore, the evaluation of proper use of cover is subjective. How would you make it objective? Use a shooting box. Oops - they do that in USPSA, don't they? We can't have that, then.

Another example might be the infamous holster rule: no light should be visible between the holster and the shooter's belt/body. Unless you're a woman, of course. Then the whole thing is moot (AKA the "boobie rule"). I've had my holster both pass and fail inspections of this rule. The same holster, different matches, different observers - again, subjective. Don't get me started on what an "appropriate" cover garment might be - there are subjective rules for that, too. I believe USPSA does a fair job of defining legal and illegal equipment.

How about the ability (I'd even assert "requirement") of an IDPA COF designer to specify shooting positions, target engagement specifications, etc.? "Stand here, engage these 3 targets with 2 rounds each, move here, engage these targets in tactical sequence with 2 to the body, one to the head," etc. These sorts of things do nothing but generate endless questions (based on the confusion that this creates) from shooters about what they can and cannot do. In USPSA, most COF descriptions are something to the effect of "start at position A, and engage all targets as they become visible." 2 rounds on paper, knock the steel down. Easy. It puts the burden on the course designer, not the shooter, and removes ambiguity.

There are the downright silly rules, too. Tactical reloads, or reloads with retention. You must retain your magazine, unless you're at slide-lock, even if the magazine is empty. What a terrible habit to develop. Drop the empty mag, ram a full one in there, and get on with the gunfight. If you think you're gonna need those 2 bullets in the mag you just wasted 2 seconds stowing away, well, your gunfight priorities might be in the wrong place. No movement of more than 10 yards between any 2 points, because...wait, what? Isn't movement a fundamental tenet of defensive shooting?

I guess most of this discourse gets down to the old argument about whether IDPA is a game, or if it's some sort of training. Let's put it this way: you keep score. Any time you keep score, someone will want to find a way to win. That's all fine and good, but there are many in the sport that say this position flies in the face of the "spirit" of IDPA.

I've tried to chronograph this "spirit," but have yet to get a tangible reading. However, there are PLENTY of shooters who are willing to give us the benefit of their opinion on matters of "spirit" or "intent." I've seen all sorts of opinions up and down the spectrum, and most of them devolve into dogma based on intepretation of a rule. That's the important part: interpretation.

Yes, the sport has created fundamentalists of its own. How scary is that?

It's this sort of nonsense that gets generated whenever subjectivity is allowed to creep into a sport. Either you can measure it consistently, or you can't. Either it is, or it isn't. Either you do, or you don't. Everything should be a binary decision: yes or no, wrong or right, hit or miss. And those decisions should be repeatable, measurable, and finite for all involved, both competitor and adjudicator. Ambiguity leads to dissenting opinions, and opinions lead to arguments - every time. Heck, it doesn't even matter if the rule is stupid, as long as the rule is the same for everyone, and is measurable, repeatable, and finite.

Okay. I feel better now. Please use the comments to add to this discourse if you feel so inclined. Facts are welcomed, but silliness will be made fun of.

Take one minute and send an email

Take a minute to cut and paste this email address and send a thank you note to the Marines in Iraq right now.

Send the mail to: RCT-6lettersfromh@gcemnf-wiraq.usmc.mil

Cut and paste the email address and you'll do just fine. Seems the jarheads are tired of getting the same old shit sandwich the media is making them eat every time the turn around and catch some news on TV.

Let the Devil Dogs know you appreciate their sacrifice.

The Nuge Rocks!

Here's Ted, telling it like it is. Cliff's notes version is that the left is the group in this country that is intolerant, not the right. And I've gotta say, he's right on the money here.

You don't think I'm (we're) right?? Try smoking a good cigar in any one of many cities, including Dallas, that has banned public smoking. Wanna carry a gun for your own defense? Better not live in one of the many liberal cities that has determined guns are more dangerous than cars. Wanna listen to talk radio?? Better get in on that quick before the lefties make that illegal too through the so called "fairness" doctrine. How about celebrate Christmas?

And now, the Nuge lets us know that certain roadies were canned by Sir Paul - an econazi of the nth degree - for sneaking a hamburger in on tour. That's right, eating red meat on tour with the Beatle will get you fired.

You heard that right. Fired for eating meat by an animal-rights maniac, hard-core vegan bass player.

Examine the agendas of the liberal "party of peace." Its members clearly don't believe you and I are smart enough or capable of making our own choices in life.

While conservatives "live and let live," the left arrogantly thinks it knows better than we do and will burden "we the people" with more government control until we are taxed to death.

With a whisper

Less than three hours later, [Thursday, June 14, 2007] the bill passed by a voice vote. The bill in question, H.R. 2640, is a massive expansion of the Brady Gun Control law, the subject of many previous alerts by Gun Owners of America.

The bill's supporters can talk all they want to the contrary, but forcing the states to hand over to the federal government millions of records of Americans for the purpose of conducting a background check is certainly an expansion of gun control.

This is a bill designed to make the gun control trains run on time. Problem is, the train's on the wrong track. We don't need greater efficiency enforcing laws that for years we have fought as being unconstitutional.

And this, gentlemen (and ladies) is how it begins.

You officially suck!

Obviously, someone is in dire need of some sensitivity training.

USPSA Area 4 2007

A few videos from the Area 4 Championship. Yes, actual shooting on our blog. Imagine that.

The Gas Bag on Iraq, 1992

Wow, who would think it? If you were to substitute the gasbag for George Bush, both speeches calling for a war against Iraq sound remarkably similar.

CBS? ABC? NBC? CNN? Fox?? Bueller? Bueller? Bueller?

A Long Time Ago....

Just about 30 years ago, May 1977, Star Wars debuted. Probably about 30 years ago to the day, my dad took us to see the movie. I remember waiting in a line that wrapped around the movie theater and seeing things on the big screen that up until that point, had only been hiding in someone's imagination.

Wow. Time flies.

When Tactical isn't Tactical enough

Thank God I don't know anyone in this video.



Considering that they are from up here in the Metromess, I would assume it's only logical that I've probably rubbed shoulders with some of these, um, ninjas at the local gun shows.

I guess I should consider myself lucky I didn't get stabbed.

Carry a gun? Read on

Excellent information here for anyone who carries a gun.

New findings from FBI about cop attackers & their weapons

[From Force Science News provided by The Force Science Research Center 5/9/07]

New findings on how offenders train with, carry and deploy the weapons they use to attack police officers have emerged in a just-published, 5-year study by the FBI.

Among other things, the data reveal that most would-be cop killers:

--show signs of being armed that officers miss;

--have more experience using deadly force in “street combat” than their intended victims;

--practice with firearms more often and shoot more accurately;

--have no hesitation whatsoever about pulling the trigger. “If you hesitate,” one told the study’s researchers, “you’re dead. You have the instinct or you don’t. If you don’t, you’re in trouble on the street….”

These and other weapons-related findings comprise one chapter in a 180-page research summary called “Violent Encounters: A Study of Felonious Assaults on Our Nation’s Law Enforcement Officers.” The study is the third in a series of long investigations into fatal and nonfatal attacks on POs by the FBI team of Dr. Anthony Pinizzotto, clinical forensic psychologist, and Ed Davis, criminal investigative instructor, both with the Bureau’s Behavioral Science Unit, and Charles Miller III, coordinator of the LEOs Killed and Assaulted program.

“Violent Encounters” also reports in detail on the personal characteristics of attacked officers and their assaulters, the role of perception in life-threatening confrontations, the myths of memory that can hamper OIS investigations, the suicide-by-cop phenomenon, current training issues, and other matters relevant to officer survival. (Force Science News and our strategic partner PoliceOne.com will be reporting on more findings from this landmark study in future transmissions.)

Commenting on the broad-based study, Dr. Bill Lewinski, executive director of the Force Science Research Center at Minnesota State University-Mankato, called it “very challenging and insightful--important work that only a handful of gifted and experienced researchers could accomplish.”

From a pool of more than 800 incidents, the researchers selected 40, involving 43 offenders (13 of them admitted gangbangers-drug traffickers) and 50 officers, for in-depth exploration. They visited crime scenes and extensively interviewed surviving officers and attackers alike, most of the latter in prison.

Here are highlights of what they learned about weapon selection, familiarity, transport and use by criminals attempting to murder cops, a small portion of the overall research:

Weapon Choice

Predominately handguns were used in the assaults on officers and all but one were obtained illegally, usually in street transactions or in thefts. In contrast to media myth, none of the firearms in the study was obtained from gun shows. What was available “was the overriding factor in weapon choice,” the report says. Only 1 offender hand-picked a particular gun “because he felt it would do the most damage to a human being.”

Researcher Davis , in a presentation and discussion for the International Assn. of Chiefs of Police, noted that none of the attackers interviewed was “hindered by any law--federal, state or local--that has ever been established to prevent gun ownership. They just laughed at gun laws.”

Familiarity

Several of the offenders began regularly to carry weapons when they were 9 to 12 years old, although the average age was 17 when they first started packing “most of the time.” Gang members especially started young.

Nearly 40% of the offenders had some type of formal firearms training, primarily from the military. More than 80% “regularly practiced with handguns, averaging 23 practice sessions a year,” the study reports, usually in informal settings like trash dumps, rural woods, back yards and “street corners in known drug-trafficking areas.”
One spoke of being motivated to improve his gun skills by his belief that officers “go to the range two, three times a week [and] practice arms so they can hit anything.”

In reality, victim officers in the study averaged just 14 hours of sidearm training and 2.5 qualifications per year. Only 6 of the 50 officers reported practicing regularly with handguns apart from what their department required, and that was mostly in competitive shooting. Overall, the offenders practiced more often than the officers they assaulted, and this “may have helped increase [their] marksmanship skills,” the study says.

The offender quoted above about his practice motivation, for example, fired 12 rounds at an officer, striking him 3 times. The officer fired 7 rounds, all misses.

More than 40% of the offenders had been involved in actual shooting confrontations before they feloniously assaulted an officer. Ten of these “street combat veterans,” all from “inner-city, drug-trafficking environments,” had taken part in 5 or more “criminal firefight experiences” in their lifetime.

One reported that he was 14 when he was first shot on the street, “about 18 before a cop shot me.” Another said getting shot was a pivotal experience “because I made up my mind no one was gonna shoot me again.”

Again in contrast, only 8 of the 50 LEO victims had participated in a prior shooting; 1 had been involved in 2 previously, another in 3. Seven of the 8 had killed offenders.

Concealment

The offenders said they most often hid guns on their person in the front waistband, with the groin area and the small of the back nearly tied for second place. Some occasionally gave their weapons to another person to carry, “most often a female companion.” None regularly used a holster, and about 40% at least sometimes carried a backup weapon.

In motor vehicles, they most often kept their firearm readily available on their person, or, less often, under the seat. In residences, most stashed their weapon under a pillow, on a nightstand, under the mattress--somewhere within immediate reach while in bed.

Almost all carried when on the move and strong majorities did so when socializing, committing crimes or being at home. About one-third brought weapons with them to work. Interestingly, the offenders in this study more commonly admitted having guns under all these circumstances than did offenders interviewed in the researchers’ earlier 2 surveys, conducted in the 1980s and ’90s.

According to Davis , “Male offenders said time and time again that female officers tend to search them more thoroughly than male officers. In prison, most of the offenders were more afraid to carry contraband or weapons when a female CO was on duty.”

On the street, however, both male and female officers too often regard female subjects “as less of a threat, assuming that they not going to have a gun,” Davis said. In truth, the researchers concluded that more female offenders are armed today than 20 years ago--“not just female gang associates, but female offenders generally.”

Shooting Style

Twenty-six of the offenders [about 60%], including all of the street combat veterans, “claimed to be instinctive shooters, pointing and firing the weapon without consciously aligning the sights,” the study says.

“They practice getting the gun out and using it,” Davis explained. “They shoot for effect.” Or as one of the offenders put it: “[W]e’re not working with no marksmanship….We just putting it in your direction, you know….It don’t matter…as long as it’s gonna hit you…if it’s up at your head or your chest, down at your legs, whatever….Once I squeeze and you fall, then…if I want to execute you, then I could go from there.”

Hit Rate

More often than the officers they attacked, offenders delivered at least some rounds on target in their encounters. Nearly 70% of assailants were successful in that regard with handguns, compared to about 40% of the victim officers, the study found. (Efforts of offenders and officers to get on target were considered successful if any rounds struck, regardless of the number fired.)

Davis speculated that the offenders might have had an advantage because in all but 3 cases they fired first, usually catching the officer by surprise. Indeed, the report points out, “10 of the total victim officers had been wounded [and thus impaired] before they returned gunfire at their attackers.”

Missed Cues

Officers would less likely be caught off guard by attackers if they were more observant of indicators of concealed weapons, the study concludes. These particularly include manners of dress, ways of moving and unconscious gestures often related to carrying.

“Officers should look for unnatural protrusions or bulges in the waist, back and crotch areas,” the study says, and watch for “shirts that appear rippled or wavy on one side of the body while the fabric on the other side appears smooth.” In warm weather, multilayered clothing inappropriate to the temperature may be a giveaway. On cold or rainy days, a subject’s jacket hood may not be covering his head because it is being used to conceal a handgun.

Because they eschew holsters, offenders reported frequently touching a concealed gun with hands or arms “to assure themselves that it is still hidden, secure and accessible” and hasn’t shifted. Such gestures are especially noticeable “whenever individuals change body positions, such as standing, sitting or exiting a vehicle.” If they run, they may need to keep a constant grip on a hidden gun to control it.

Just as cops generally blade their body to make their sidearm less accessible, armed criminals “do the same in encounters with LEOs to ensure concealment and easy access.”

An irony, Davis noted, is that officers who are assigned to look for concealed weapons, while working off-duty security at night clubs for instance, are often highly proficient at detecting them. “But then when they go back to the street without that specific assignment, they seem to ‘turn off’ that skill,” and thus are startled--sometimes fatally--when a suspect suddenly produces a weapon and attacks.

Mind-set

Thirty-six of the 50 officers in the study had “experienced hazardous situations where they had the legal authority” to use deadly force “but chose not to shoot.” They averaged 4 such prior incidents before the encounters that the researchers investigated. “It appeared clear that none of these officers were willing to use deadly force against an offender if other options were available,” the researchers concluded.

The offenders were of a different mind-set entirely. In fact, Davis said the study team “did not realize how cold blooded the younger generation of offender is. They have been exposed to killing after killing, they fully expect to get killed and they don’t hesitate to shoot anybody, including a police officer. They can go from riding down the street saying what a beautiful day it is to killing in the next instant.”

“Offenders typically displayed no moral or ethical restraints in using firearms,” the report states. “In fact, the street combat veterans survived by developing a shoot-first mentality.

“Officers never can assume that a criminal is unarmed until they have thoroughly searched the person and the surroundings themselves.” Nor, in the interest of personal safety, can officers “let their guards down in any type of law enforcement situation.”

Breaking it down

One of the benefits of competition shooting is that you break everything down about the gun. Everything. Experiment, seek consul, and learn what the fastest way to do "X" is. Take what works and discard what does not. That's why you see 100% of the best shooters in the world shooting in some version of the modern isosceles stance and no one worth mentioning shoots Weaver anymore.

Today we shall discuss how to pick up your handgun. There's basically two schools of thought that work and I'll actually use either one, depending on the stage situation and tactics.

First up, what we'll call the "scoop", it looks something like this:



In the scoop, you basically stab your thumb under the beavertail/backstrap of your pistol and get your fingers under the front strap of the grip, pinching the gun off the table and up into your hand. In the picture above, you can see my index finger is also hooked slightly over the trigger guard.

Another version of the scoop without getting close to the trigger guard would look like this:



It relies more on getting your thumb under the gun and is easier to hit the pistol and either cause it to move along the table or push down hard enough to engage the mag release which will cause your mag to fall out rather unceremoniously after the first shot is fired.

Pluses to the scoop are that it is very natural and instinctive, and easy to do - you really don't have to "learn" anything to do it right; just always be aware of where your trigger finger and middle finger are grabbing and you'll be fine. I've seen folks get in a rush and hit the trigger with both of those fingers which is never a good thing when you're not ready to shoot.

Minuses are that in a hurry, it's easy to grab the trigger if you are not paying attention; it's easy to push to hard and engage the mag release; it's also easy to miss your grip and end up either having to re-grip the gun once you have it in your hands or push it along the table until you get a grip on the pistol.

We'll call the 2nd example the "lift" method. Here's what it looks like:



In this method, your weak hand lifts the pistol slightly using the sights or slide as a contact point. Your strong hand is then free to grab the pistol and get a good grip on the weapon. To do it right, you have to get your weak hand moving slightly ahead of your strong hand, which takes some practice. However, once you get it down, it is (for me anyway), clearly a quicker way to get a good grip on the gun - probably in the line of 2-3 tenths of a second or so. Done right, the "lift" keeps the pistol secure on the table, you won't hit the mag release button and you'll end up with a better grip on the gun than if you were going to do the scoop.

The big minus to the lift is that it is not necessarily instinctive and it takes some practice getting used to. It's also a perishable skill, so if you stop practicing it, you're not going to be very good at it.

If I'm shooting from one position, I will use the "lift" method 100% of the time. However, if I'm grabbing the gun and moving to another position to shoot from, the scoop is often times faster because you can just grab the gun and go - and fix your grip if necessary on the way to the first target.

You might notice that the difference between the two methods described above is only a couple tenths of a second. While on face value, that's not a lot of time, there are plenty of other places in the course of the stage that you can shave tenths off here and there and the next thing you know, you're shooting the stage 2 or 3 seconds faster than the other guy - and as they say, it all adds up!

Fun in the desert

Here's some match vids from my little trip out to the desert in Albuquerque, New Mexico, for their state's big match of the year. They put on a great match and the range is one of the best I've ever been to. Hard to beat the view of the Sandia mountains to the east and temps in the low 80s with only 8% humidity.

This was my first big USPSA match shooting Single Stack (with a 1911) and I had a blast. I think I've found a home for me to shoot USPSA in!

I waited up for this?

What a pathetic ending to a once great series. Everyone's hopes were buoyed last week with a fantastic episode, and then crushed mercilessly tonight with an episode that frankly sucked ass.

Yeah, it was nice seeing Phil get whacked and then squished. Other than that 15 seconds of what we expect out of a mob movie, the rest of the episode was a pathetic attempt at a Jr. High level screenplay.

David Chase sucks.