Fundamentals are hard…to describe

Last night I finished the first draft of the text for the next non-fiction book I hope to release by the end of this year. It’s the hardest non-fiction project I’ve done so far because for this one I had to get away from concepts and principles such as I focus on in my “Gunfighting, and Other Thoughts about Doing Violence” book series (number four of that series is next in the project list, by the way) and focus on describing nuts-and-bolts here’s-how-to-do-this subjects.

There is a benefit to making myself do this the same way there is a benefit to me teaching classes to beginners or covering really basic shooting and gunfighting subjects in a class, though. Remember that bit about we learn by teaching? That’s it right there. And it works even if you’re teaching the same thing you’ve been teaching and working on teaching and thinking about teaching for over a year as I have. Better than that, it still applies to things you already know very well and things you are very competent doing.

Want to make sure you really-for-certain know how to do something? Teach it to someone else so that they can be as good as you are with it.

(The book, incidentally, will be titled Bare-Bones Gunfighting and covers the material in written form of the course I teach with the same name. I’m looking at a release date now sometime in November. Actual release of each format depends on how much processing I have to pay for to get the pictures right for the Kindle version. As for the books I have available already, do an author search on Amazon and it will list everything I’ve got so far. Forth volume of ‘Gunfighting…’ series should be expected early in the third quarter of 2016.)

Two Comments

“Anyone who studies the matter will reach the conclusion that good marksmanship, per se, is not the key to successful gunfighting. The marksmanship problem posed in a streetfight is ordinarily pretty elementary. What is necessary, however, is the absolute assurance on the part of the shooter that he can hit what he is shooting at – absolutely without fail. Being a good shot tends to build up this confidence in the individual. Additionally, the good shot knows what is necessary on his part to obtain hits, and when the red flag flies, the concentration which he knows is necessary pushes all extraneous thinking out of his mind. He cannot let side issues such as fitness reports, political rectitude, or legal liability enter his mind. Such considerations may be heeded before the decision to make the shot is taken, and reconsidered after the ball is over; but at the time, the imperative front sight, surprise break must prevail. Thus we have the paradox that while you almost never need to be a good shot to win a gunfight, the fact that you are a good shot may be what is necessary for you to hold the right thoughts – to the exclusion of all others – and save your life. This may come as a shock to a good many marksmanship instructors, but I have studied the matter at length and in depth, and I am satisfied with my conclusions.”

Jeff Cooper
From Jeff Cooper’s Commentaries
Vol. 5, No. 1
January 1997

Now frankly, I think you can become a good shot one of two ways: Either by using “the imperative front sight, surprise break” of Cooper’s Modern Technique of the Pistol or by using any of a group of point-shooting systems available for current study. My preference is to be as good a shot with both as I can be and able to as necessary and desirable move from one to the other system seamlessly whenever the situation dictates that.

That’s what I want to be able to do and what I strongly recommend that all of you work to be able to do.

Not Complication, ORGANIZATION

I have an entry on Short Barrel Shepherd’s blog:

Masterpiece Arms 30DMG and the Weapons-System Concept

What’s most important to me about this entry is not the gun and accessories I evaluate. What’s important to me is the concept I introduce in the first the paragraphs of the entry: The idea of the need to think of Weapon’s Systems and not just guns. I think even non-military/non-LE gun-carriers should do this consciously to avoid getting tripped up with things they don’t need and have to replace down the road and things that lessen their ability to fight for life.

What I want you to understand here is I am not for a moment over-thinking the process of getting a gun or accessories for that gun. Even when I subdivide Weapon’s System into Gun System and Transport/Carry System I’m not doing that. What I’m doing is organizing my thinking and reducing the complexity of the process of getting and equipping a counteroffensive firearm. Outlining whether on paper or screen or just in my head is a time-honored method of organizing items so that they are easily referenced and remembered and taken care of in the best and most efficient order. It’s taking a process that too many people start doing on-the-fly and systematizing it.

And systems are what we study when we want a coherent whole that fits together more. Systems are what help us come up to speed and obtain competency most efficiently and quickly.

Unarmed combat systems – a way to organize and structure the weaponless fight.

Shooting and gunfighting systems – a way to structure and speed up the process of being able to fight effectively with a gun.

Weapon’s Systems – a way to organize and structure the planning for getting and then setting up a gun that saves money and time and gets the gun ready to fight effectively and efficiently with.

Simple as that.

Contemplating Rules

So we have the shooting in Chattanooga at the recruitment center a while back. One of the characteristics shared by that shooting with others is that it took place at a location and among personnel that did not allow anyone to have in reach or to carry firearms that could otherwise have been used to respond to the attack with.

Two things to note first:

There have in fact been such shootings in places and areas where people were allowed to carry. So being in a place or area like that is still not guarantee that someone won’t select it as a target. (Don’t let that blind you to the overwhelming difference in locations between can-have and can’t-have targets, though.)

Even if they had guns available in Chattanooga (or wherever else these have occurred) the probability is that the shooter would still have wounded or killed one or more before they could be engaged and killed. (Don’t let that blind you to the fact that casualties are far lower where shooters are taken under fire early on, though.)

So I wonder again about breaking the rules. I’ll admit right now that I don’t break them where I work for now. What I do have is:

Items that I have designated for use as weapons including items that can be used at distance that are not formal ‘weapons’ according to the rules.

Some (maybe not enough) plans for what to do if something happens where I am.

Redlines such that if I were to get certain information or see certain signs of high(er) threat level/probability, I would be more likely to break the rules despite the associated risk involved if the rule-breaking is discovered.

Continued consideration of ways and means to conceal and obscure such rule-breaking if it ever took place.

If you are in a similar situation to mine and you see situations where you will break rules of your own, start thinking now and periodically review the ways you can conceal your weapon(s) more than you normally do, including finding hiding places or carry systems both on and off-body and camouflage methods for those weapons you decide to break the rules with.

Also, make sure you understand the risks and the penalties you will face if you are caught. These are not always insignificant and what rates as insignificant and not is different between us. If you can’t in honesty deal with the penalties, you may, frankly, be better off not trying.

All of this is, of course, up to you.

Not saying that everybody should definitely start breaking their rules here. Not saying that. Probably never will as a blanket recommendation. Just want to remind you to think about it and what you can and will do before you decide or have to do it.

That’s my thinking on this right now.

Getting Comfortable With Chaos

In the upper right corner of this blog:

http://hcstx.org/

(Which blog, by the way, I recommend to you as a resource for information that could be useful to you for awareness and help with threat analysis.)

is a quote space titled “Words to Chew On…”.

…in which one day the following quote appeared:

“You must train in chaos in order to thrive in chaos”. -Hock Hochheim

I think this is true. I also think that if it is taken too much to heart it will get you in trouble.

The reason is that I have come lately to differentiate more than I used to between training and practice. They are not really the same thing. Training takes place when you are learning a skill or skill-set or acquiring some kind of knowledge you didn’t have or didn’t have a lot of before. It can also be training when you are reviewing and refreshing a knowledge or skill-set you already know. Practice is where you apply what you have trained as or in an exercise. You do repetitions of the skill-set or application of knowledge to make it more natural and automatic and to check your level of competency and what you have learned during the training. An example often debated is the use of shooting competitions to someone who focuses primarily on fight shooting. The fight shooter can use competition as a medium to practice subsets of fight shooting that he has previously trained in. They cannot use that as training, however, because no skills are taught in competition.

Training requires a pattern and/or structure to be most effective. The student, especially during first exposure to a given skill or skill-set, needs a progression from part to whole, from simple to complex, from basic to advanced, from single step to combinations of steps performed simultaneously. If you don’t give them that, you don’t teach the right and they don’t learn well and maybe not at all.

It’s easier to become comfortable with Chaos if you have first learned the Patterns properly.* It’s as simple as that in concept, though the practical application of that concept can be quite difficult. (Doesn’t have to be, but it can be.)

For these reasons I would, if I were making a quote about this, change the sentence to read:

“You must practice in Chaos in order to be able to thrive when you encounter it.”

That, I believe, is a better way of saying it.

*I have a chapter in the first book of my “Gunfighting, and Other Thoughts about Doing Violence” series that considers the learning of Patterns in preparation for encountering Chaos in more detail. (All three volumes to date combined here.)

Things Change

I see a need to get additional training in a different direction as regards CQB. The training I’ve had has not become invalid but I am aware now of a dimension, I guess I’ll call it, that is missing that could make a difference if I’m ever having to use this to stay alive some time.

I’m not going to like doing this because it requires me to get past a fear and an internal limiter I have noticed about cornering that I have that is currently pretty strong. But it’s also a potentially fatal limiter I’ve placed on myself. So it has to go. I’m simply going to have to deal with the discomfort that is coming in the learning and training and work until that limiter is either gone completely or reduced enough that I can do what is best for whatever situation I’m in at the time.

I try to keep an eye out for such gaps or lack of knowledge and capability and address them as often as I can when I find them.

I try and keep a watch out for any knowledge or practice that is better than something I’ve written about in the books I’ve published in the same way. When I find that and after I’ve determined as best I can that it really is a better or at least as good as what I’ve written about before I will either replace the current with the new material or add the new material as an addition to what’s in the books already. I do this and want to do this whenever I either create a new version of a current book or other production or when I do periodic reviews and updates.

It might be that changing the material bothers me as much as the new CQB training emphasis will. It may be that I want to hang on to the old stuff for some reason. But if the other is better, if the other adds something to the current, if the other is more effective….It has to go in. It has to.

Simple as that.

Reluctance? Inertia? Limiters?

I have to get over that.

So do you–if you want to be as good as you can be at defending yourself and your loved ones.

My feelings about something are not as important as that.

Neither are yours.

Proper Packaging Is Important

“It’s not just the gun.”

That’s true in two ways. What is usually meant when it’s said or written is that there is a package of skills and training and practice and experience and attitude and conditioning and…that should, if we’re going to do this properly, go with whatever gun you carry or get to fulfill a particular role.

There is also a physical equipment and accessory aspect to this statement as well. I am more conscious of it from when I purchased an Aero Survival Pistol and now a Masterpiece Arms 30DMG pistol. With these two especially I was looking at what I need to add to the stock weapons and what I needed to get to go with those stock weapons before I made a final decision on the purchase. These pistols could do what I wanted them to out of the box, but they would do what I wanted them too much better with some add-ons and some modifications. By thinking about this and planning this ahead of time I could have a much more task-appropriate weapon in a much shorter time than if I had just bought the guns and then starting thinking about what I wanted to put on them.

Pistols as well. I run Glocks and I will from time to time change out a stock part for something made by someone else that I believe will provide a more task-appropriate system and give me a better ability to keep myself or someone else alive. It’s not necessary to do that for the gun to work and do the job I might need it to do one day. But if it can make it easier or more efficient or safer for other goods guys and innocents that might be in the area it does seem better to do it than not.

Rifles? Optics, slings, carry systems. Maybe rails and trigger replacements. If you occasionally carry that long gun out somewhere that’s not a range, some kind of bag or other carrier that won’t draw attention if you drop it at your feet while you get a latte at Starbucks. Lockable storage you can still get open quickly for the vehicle.

Pistols? What’s the role? Home-defense dedicated, maybe a weapon-mounted light and a way to mount it in reach near the bed. Carry gun, a modification to the trigger to makes it more accurate and maybe change the stock sights out and maybe grip modifications to make your grip more consistent. And the holster you’re going to carry it in and the belt that holster is going to go on to.

Bags with additional gear that will not raise suspicion when carried in public for both of those. Magazine carriers of different types.

These can all modify the weapon choice and be modified by them. But only if they are considered ahead of time.

Stop thinking gun. Start thinking ‘weapon system’. Because that’s what it is.

Cross-Over Learning

Learn to point-shoot and it will make it easier for you to learn to use the sights.

Learn to use the sights and it will make it easier for you to learn to point-shoot.

What to learn first? More instructors teach sighted shooting than do point-shooting but those who can teach point-shooting are more numerous than you might think. But what really determines that is your best idea of what kind of shooting you want to be capable of.

Counteroffensive shooting for non-military/non-law enforcement types like us? I recommend you start with point-shooting, move to training with sights as soon after that as possible. That plays off the averages for criminal attacks in the US.

Other kinds: General fun stuff, hunting, sport/competition of some types–work on getting on the sights.

But key here is: One WILL help with and reinforce the other. It is NOT and either/or proposition.

Don’t go the “it’s good enough” direction if you don’t have to.

Get the best you can. Of Everything.

The best training.

The best weapons.

The best equipment.

The best you can. The best you can afford. The best you can do. The best you can build.

It may not be the very most best of whatever that the very most bestest fighters have and do. It may not be the most expensive top-of-the-line whatever-it-is. As long as it’s the best you can do.

We’re talking your life and the lives of others behind what you get and what you have and what you can build.

You are worth the best. So get it.

On Grip and Trigger

Part-formed thoughts:

Grip is more important than trigger control.

By ‘trigger control’ I mean that the trigger is fully controlled throughout the movement. A surprise break is not a part of trigger control the way my new definition is forming up. Not in the short-range/short-notice gottashootNOWNOWNOW kind of fight that I believe we’re most likely to face in the US.

I’m just not as convinced about the utility of training or aiming to get a surprise break as I used to be. Not since I saw a comment by a soon-retiring operator who has spent a long time shooting people that needed to be shot. His statement was that he does not want a surprise break–he wants to control the break just like he controls everything about the shot from set-up to end-result evaluation. For those times when there is time to set up and ‘set’ the shot, I am not leaning more his way about it.

This must be more thought-upon but it’s the way my thoughts are going right now. Maybe that’s the wrong way to go. If it is, I go back at some point.

But for now, I think about it.