8/12/2013 2:28pm, #21
- Join Date
- Mar 2006
I'm down with all that.
Here's another question for you guys, though. Do you think the things that make an accurate shooter accurate translate well to faster, combat oriented shooting? I would have to argue that they do.
If you can't hit it slow, you probably can't hit it fast, right? If you can hit a target at 25 yards you should be able to put rounds on the same target faster if it's three feet away, no?
Or another way to look at it. If a guy is all over the place on a man-sized target at say, 10 yards during slow, controlled fire - add stress and force the pace and there's a good chance he won't get off an effective shot before he gets wasted. That's how it seems to me, anyway.
I agree it's hard to miss at arm's length but that's just one of many possible scenarios.
Last edited by Devil; 8/12/2013 2:46pm at .
8/12/2013 3:03pm, #22
Speaking as a civilian: it depends. At 7 yards, I look through the sights at the target, with my carry pistols all bearing 3-dot configurations, it's easy enough to hold them in a squat triangle below what I'm shooting with enough accuracy to drop steel plates at a rate of almost two a second.
7 yards is far farther than I will ever be shooting at that rate-of-fire, so the real-world translation of the above is the ability to pour bullets into COM at about twice that rate at half that range or less.
I do have the fundamentals to shoot more accurately and farther, but the faster, defensive shooting is more "athletic," muscling the sights on target long enough to slap the trigger as quickly as I can hold a 6" group. We were taught specifically, if our groups were tight, shoot faster. One COM hit is roughly equivalent to another, so trying to pick out the aorta on a moving target trying to kill you is wasting potentially lethal milliseconds.
Maybe other people shoot fast exactly the same as they shoot slowly.
OT: I can do a wicked mag change from slide lock, it's way cooler, and almost as useful as kata.
8/12/2013 3:13pm, #23
- Join Date
- Mar 2006
Good points, but you said it yourself - you have the capability of shooting accurately. That makes a difference IMO.
I think jerking the trigger is a big factor when you get out more than a few yards. At arm's length you can just about snatch on that damn thing any way you want. But you don't have to get a whole lot of distance between yourself and your target before that same snatching can cause you some serious problems.
If you're a trigger jerking bastard, speeding things up will just make you more of a trigger jerking bastard. If you start with solid trigger control, you can play with your speed and find that sweet spot where you're as fast as you can be while maintaining control, then build on that through practice. It's just much harder to polish a turd, IMO.
Last edited by Devil; 8/12/2013 3:19pm at .
8/12/2013 3:56pm, #24
Absolutely, trigger jerking and clutching the stocks are bad news under any circumstance, put anticipation/flinching in there too. Those fundamentals are indispensible, IMO.
8/12/2013 4:18pm, #25
With our guys...when we see that their groups are very tight we push them to go faster.
When it comes to shooting well faster Id say "it depends" (as I do with most things). Trigger reset and getting back on target after recoil (or transitioning to another target) and shooting a moving target while you are moving are things that you have to do to get good at.
All shooting should start with the fundamentals and all training should incorporate "warm-ups" with fundamentals (IMO), but "accuracy" is sort of a fluid concept against the living.
8/12/2013 4:23pm, #26
I took a page from Larry Vickers (I think it was him who does this) and I start every pistol session with 5 rounds at an IPSC target head at 25 yds. I don't go on till I get all 5 in.
Once I start working close and fast though Im only interested in "A Zone" hits, not "one ragged hole" accuracy.
I try to end the session with 5 more head shots, but that depends on what ammo and time I have left. I always start my own personal session with some sort of fundamental accuracy shots.
Thats why I like steel targets. I'd prefer to see guys "ringing" a "realistic sized" steel plate at a good speed than get too crazy with paper groupings.
But that does assume a foundation in the basics.....
Last edited by tgace; 8/12/2013 4:28pm at .
8/12/2013 4:27pm, #27
- Join Date
- Mar 2006
8/12/2013 7:10pm, #28
An interesting drill my Team does is called the "Melt Down Drill". AR with 2 mags (we use mag clamps) loaded with 8 rounds and G22 with 1 Glock Mag with 15.
On command to fire, at 7 yards at an approx 3" circle (we use a spray paint cap as a template) drawn in the COM of a human silhouette we fire 1 rifle round...transition to pistol...fire 1 round...sweep and scan...holster...mag swap the rifle. Repeat. Repeat. Repeat. Till the ammo runs out.
There's a $1 fine for every round outside the circle. This is done at the shooters pace.
Once the whole team can put every round in the circle we move back a couple of yards.
It's a "static drill" but it's a good fundamentals under (financial :) ) pressure drill.
8/14/2013 1:20am, #29
I think there's a "third heat" that bears discussion within this topic. That of serious combat experience. People with all three are much more likely to rise to the occasion than sink to their individual levels of training. That is, they are able to combine adrenaline, instinct, and skill (in this case, good enough and fundamental style shooting) to something greater than the sum of its parts. That's a fairly noncontroversial statement on Bullshido, and probably not what this thread was intended to get at, but **** it. I've been a member for a long time, so you're all going to indulge me. I want to take a moment to highlight the god damnedest bit of shooting that I have ever seen in my life.
Without getting into the sensitive topic of who, where, or when: Our org did a night raid to kill or capture an HVI in the area we were working in. I'm a support type of guy, but was with the main assault force due to the peculiarities of my job. At any rate, the people in the compound decided to make a fight of it, and they responded to our call out by running out of the compound, guns a'blazin. The lead element dropped the first guy out the door (turned out to be the HVI), and a female who turned out to be his wife (now widow) ran out next, picked up his AK, and started shooting. She wasn't a particularly good shot, but anything inside 50 yards pretty much counts as effective fire. Point being, most people would have either sought cover or shot her center of mass. Instead, the main assault element decided as a whole to assault through, and the lead man (would have been position 1 on the stack if they had actually gotten to the door) purposely shoots her in the leg from about 30-50 yards out.
So to recap: element shoots bad guy. Bad guy's wife picks up gun, starts shooting. element lead takes note of shooting, keeps going. Discerns that shooter is female, decides not to kill her. Takes aim, fires one round. Breaks her leg and takes her out of the fight. At night. Under NODs. Yes, he had an IR laser. No, that doesn't make it any less impressive.
Once again, thank you all for indulging me."No. Listen to me because I know what I'm talking about here." -- Hannibal
8/14/2013 1:26am, #30
Again, that last story was just meant to highlight an amazing feat of human performance that comes from "realistic" training, practice of fundamentals, and reams and reams of combat experience.
If it had been me, I prob. would have ducked for cover or tried to shoot her in the chest. Or pulled some goober move and gotten shot. Myself included, people usually do parts of what they've trained for correctly when they get into a firefight, but rarely do they do almost everything correctly.
Last edited by Cassius; 8/14/2013 1:29am at ."No. Listen to me because I know what I'm talking about here." -- Hannibal