Personal Defense Network Forum » Forum: Tactics & Defensive Issues

Personal Defense Network Forum » Forum: Tactics & Defensive Issues - Recent Posts http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/ en Fri, 10 Feb 2012 05:45:22 +0000 swerve on "Flashlight techniques" http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/topic/flashlight-techniques#post-929 Sun, 30 Oct 2011 10:18:32 +0000 swerve 929@http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/ the tail cap light is a VERY bad idea that nearly everyone seems to be fixated upon. Instead, get a AA light with a thumb button (side "push) so that you can hold the gun normally, while the weak hand's thumb both holds the light and works the button. Then you have full control of both the light and the gun, and all your "unlighted" training will carry over. This is FAR better than having to change everything about your shooting, just because you chose a stupid sort of light-switch. swerve on "Shooting Bystanders" http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/topic/shooting-bystanders#post-928 Sun, 30 Oct 2011 10:15:25 +0000 swerve 928@http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/ yes, but they won't necessarily hit innocent people. IN fact, such a thing is remarkablly rare. The Bad Guy normally sees to it that you are alone, and no witnesses are present, except perhaps his buddy (s). It all comes down, really, to whether or not you can hold your nerve and hit what you shoot at. Most attacks are not made with a gun, and nearly all civilan shootings are at ranges well under 5 yds, so one would THINK that most people could get the needed hits on the chest, swiftly enough to prevail, but such ability is actually quite rare. It's about as common as being a successful NFL quarterback. Cooper said that what the quarterback faces (in the way of threat of injury) is what you need to practice (mentally) being able to handle. 3-4 great big apes, coming at you at 30 fps or a bit faster, with lethal intent, but no weapons other than their bodies (which are PLENTY lethal when you have to just stand there, with your ribs exposed while you throw something). :-) parabarbarian on "Shooting Bystanders" http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/topic/shooting-bystanders#post-876 Thu, 29 Sep 2011 04:38:49 +0000 parabarbarian 876@http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/ I guess there are teachers that are telling students they will need at least two or three shots to "stop" an opponent and even the very best shooter will only hit 20% of the time in a fight. That comes out to ten rounds fired per opponent -- two or three to hit with and seven or eight to miss with. If those students have really internalized a "shoot five to hit once" meme then looking for a way to rationalize the collateral damage of a self defense shooting is logical in a macabre sort of way. Those misses will hit something. cshoff on "Shooting Bystanders" http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/topic/shooting-bystanders#post-873 Tue, 27 Sep 2011 09:18:16 +0000 cshoff 873@http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/ Hitting a bystander with a bullet during a scenario in which you were justified in using deadly force is a very unfortunate possibility despite our best laid plans, intentions, and preparations, however, I don't understand how anyone could ever think its "okay". It is NOT okay and it never will be. It should be a significant enough concern that we do our best to work around that possibility to the best of our ability in our training. parabarbarian on "Shooting Bystanders" http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/topic/shooting-bystanders#post-866 Sat, 24 Sep 2011 12:06:05 +0000 parabarbarian 866@http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/ In a couple of recent shootings here in California innocent bystanders were shot. In one incident a San Francisco cop, shooting at a gun wielding thug, managed to hit two bystanders even as he missed his intended target. <a href="http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/2011/09/san-francisco-police-back-officer-s-decision-latest-shooting" rel="nofollow">http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/2011/09/san-francisco-police-back-officer-s-decision-latest-shooting</a> In another -- this one in Gardena -- a store owner shot and killed an armed robber but, in the course of the gun fight, shot a bystander in the torso. <a href="http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/09/gardena-store-owner-recognized-robber-from-earlier-heist.html" rel="nofollow">http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/09/gardena-store-owner-recognized-robber-from-earlier-heist.html</a> What I find disquieting about these shooting is the reaction from some gun owners. There is a minority (I hope they are a minority) that seem to think it is perfectly all right to "accidentally" shoot a bystander. Example threads from the Calguns board: San Francisco <a href="http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=479932" rel="nofollow">http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=479932</a> Gardena <a href="http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=481127" rel="nofollow">http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=481127</a> Maybe I'm just being too anal about the question of responsibility but it just seem wrong to justify injuring an innocent. I am reminded of a story Jim Cirillo told about one of his gunfights. When he confronted some robbers a group of hotel guests were directly behind the gunmen. He didn't shoot because there were innocents in the line of fire. I remember thinking to myself that, if I am ever in a similar situation, I will be able to act as honorably. OTOH, maybe I watched too many John Wayne movies growing up. OTGH, it still seems wrong. Almost as if those arguing it are seeking advance justification. lucus5 on "Best MI5(Spooks) Seasons 1-9 DVD Box Set (Only $47.99!)" http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/topic/best-mi5spooks-seasons-1-9-dvd-box-set-only-4799#post-750 Sun, 03 Jul 2011 23:26:42 +0000 lucus5 750@http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/ Spooks is a British drama television series produced <a href="http://www.dvdtopshops.com/en/action-adventure/mi5-spooks-seasons-1-9-dvd-box-set.html">MI5 DVD</a> by the independent production company Kudos for BBC One. The title is a popular colloquialism for spies, as the series follows the work of a group of MI5 officers based at Thames House service in a highly secure suite of offices known as the grid.<a href="http://www.dvdtopshops.com/en/comedy/glee-seasons-1-2-dvd-box-set.html">Glee DVD</a> In the United States and France, the show airs under the title MI-5. In Canada, the program originally aired as MI5 <a href="http://www.dvdtopshops.com/en/drama/house-m-d-seasons-1-7-dvd-box-set.html">House MD DVD</a>, but now aired on BBC Spooks Canada. The program was created by writer David Wolstencroft and attracted popular guest actors, including Hugh Laurie, Robert Hardy <a href="http://www.dvdtopshops.com/en/thrillers-crime-mystery-/supernatural-seasons-1-6-dvd-box-set.html">Supernatural DVD</a> , Tim McInnerny, Bruce Payne, Reece Dinsdale, Ian McDiarmid, Ewen Bremner, Jimi Mistry, Andy Serkis, Andrew Tiernan, Anton Lesser, Anupam Kher, SIDDIG Alexander, Martine McCutcheon and Anthony Head. <a href="http://www.dvdtopshops.com/en/animation-cartoons/the-simpsons-seasons-1-21-dvd-boxset-1.html">The Simpsons DVD</a> processedin on "Flashlight techniques" http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/topic/flashlight-techniques#post-746 Mon, 27 Jun 2011 01:03:33 +0000 processedin 746@http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/ WOW, that's really new to me, I never know that there are so many useful techniques about flashlight. I have a Xeccon D1, which is very useful to me. ke4sky on "Active Shooter Incidents" http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/topic/active-shooter-incidents#post-431 Wed, 29 Sep 2010 10:31:25 +0000 ke4sky 431@http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/ The Fairfax County (VA) police department was one of multiple stakeholders working with DHS in the development of this booklet and has been conducting training for municipal employees based on lessons learned from active shooter incidents which have occurred in our jurisdiction. <a href="http://www.odmp.org/officer/18306-detective-vicky-anne-owen-armel">Det. Vicky Anne Owen Armel</a><a href="http://www.odmp.org/officer/18312-master-police-officer-michael-e.-garbarino">MPO Michael E. Garbarino</a> <a href="http://honoringvickyarmel.com/">Honoring Lt,. Vicky Armel</a> (Source: U.S. Department of Homeland Security) Recent shooting incidents at various locations of the United States seem to indicate rising violence at work places, and even at hospitals that were once considered safe havens. However, the Emergency Management and Response--Information Sharing and Analysis Center (EMR-ISAC) has no credible evidence of a valid trend or pattern regarding active shooters. According to the Department of Homeland Security "Active Shooter" booklet (PDF, 984 KB), <a href="http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/active_shooter_booklet.pdf">DHS Booklet - Active Shooter How to Respond </a> an active shooter is an individual actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a confined and populated area. The booklet states: "In most cases, there is no pattern or method to their selection of victims." The booklet further explains that active shooter situations are unpredictable and evolve quickly. Typically, the immediate deployment of law enforcement is required to stop the shooting and mitigate harm to victims. "Because active shooter incidents are often over within 10 to 15 minutes, before law enforcement arrives on the scene, individuals must be prepared both mentally and physically to deal with an active shooter situation." The EMR-ISAC verified that the booklet provides guidance to individuals, including responders, managers, and employees, who may be caught in an active shooter situation. It also discusses how to react when law enforcement arrives at the incident scene. Another useful source of information on this subject is the Mass Shooting/Active Shooter First Responder Awareness Card (PDF, 35 KB). <a href="http://www.wiiaai.org/pdfs/august-vernon/mass-shooting-response.pdf">Active Shooter First Responder Awareness Card</a> Taken from the EMR-ISAC CIP INFOGRAM. GrantCunningham on "Flashlight techniques" http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/topic/flashlight-techniques#post-241 Mon, 24 May 2010 10:12:46 +0000 GrantCunningham 241@http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/ Actually, I have. Many times. It's a matter of proper use of the light, which comes down to realistic training. There was an episode of The Best Defense this last season which had a good primer on proper flashlight use in one's home: <a href="http://www.downrange.tv/blog/?p=1628" rel="nofollow">http://www.downrange.tv/blog/?p=1628</a> ZenGunFighter on "Flashlight techniques" http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/topic/flashlight-techniques#post-240 Mon, 24 May 2010 07:21:48 +0000 ZenGunFighter 240@http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/ <blockquote>GrantCunningham wrote: As to not needing a flashlight in your house: I used to think that too. Then I did a little experiment. I had someone who didn't live there hide in the dark, and I tried to find him. Even in a house where I'd lived for 15 years (and we'd not rearranged furniture in 10!), he surprised me before I could find him. We repeated the test at his house, and the results were the same. You may be very used to getting around your house in the dark, but that's a very different thing than trying to find someone. Especially if they don't want to be found. That's why we use flashlights!</blockquote> The 'test' was incomplete. You both should be armed with airsoft pistols. Try searching with the flashlight and see if you can find the hiding intruder before he shoots you. If the intruder hides (not many do, from what I've seen) he becomes a 'defender' and thus has the advantage over the searcher. Why is the intruder in your house? 1. to steal stuff. 2. To harm you. If #1, then he won't be hiding, he'll be moving around. He won't hide unless he has reason to, as in, he thinks someone is looking for him. Like when he sees the light from a flashlight. If #2, then you are much better off being the defender and letting him come to you. GrantCunningham on "Flashlight techniques" http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/topic/flashlight-techniques#post-239 Sun, 23 May 2010 23:25:14 +0000 GrantCunningham 239@http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/ My observations mirror Rob's - when people shoot using the Harries technique, they invariably slow down significantly without an attendant increase in speed or accuracy over shooting one-handed. This tells me that the technique is not in fact giving anywhere near the support that a standard two-hand grip gives. I've seen lots of people do it, with all kinds of variations in technique, and the relative performance remains the same. The Harries technique is inefficient, tiring, incompatible with any sort of search technique, and not at all conducive to keeping the gun in a good high ready/retention position. I know that people really want to hang on to their Weaver stance, and the Harries technique mimics that, but it just has no advantage over 'light in one hand, gun in the other' - but does have the aforementioned operational disadvantages. As to not needing a flashlight in your house: I used to think that too. Then I did a little experiment. I had someone who didn't live there hide in the dark, and I tried to find him. Even in a house where I'd lived for 15 years (and we'd not rearranged furniture in 10!), he surprised me before I could find him. We repeated the test at his house, and the results were the same. You may be very used to getting around your house in the dark, but that's a very different thing than trying to find someone. Especially if they don't want to be found. That's why we use flashlights! ZenGunFighter on "Flashlight techniques" http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/topic/flashlight-techniques#post-236 Sun, 23 May 2010 16:57:00 +0000 ZenGunFighter 236@http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/ <blockquote>GrantCunningham wrote: (One of the criticisms of this technique is that we have to shoot one handed, and thus the various "two hand" techniques like the Harries or Rogers are better. Personally, I think that's horse manure; in those techniques we're not really shooting with two hands, as the support hand isn't offering any support to speak of. It's just pretend, and it leads us to neglect the one-hand training we need for light/gun encounters. Harries & Rogers are in fact shooting with one hand, but without the benefit of practicing with one hand. That seems counter-productive to me, but then again maybe I'm just dense!) . -=[ Grant ]=-</blockquote> If you aren't getting support from the support hand, using the Harries technique, then you ain't doin' it right :) The problem is, that doing it right is very fatiguing. You really need to apply lots of isometric tension to the backs of the hands. The elbows need to be pointing as close to straight down as possible. Most of the pictures I see 'demonstrating' this technique are wrong. All in all, I'm not sure of the apropriateness of using a flashlight. Searching, in general, is a really dangerous undertaking. For the average home owner, there is probably enough ambiant light/knowledge of the home and its occupants, to counter indicate use of a flashlight. Although, I can see some use for a powerful flashlight in the protective context especially on the street. Rob Pincus on "Stoppage Assessment" http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/topic/stoppage-assessment#post-214 Mon, 03 May 2010 21:45:18 +0000 Rob Pincus 214@http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/ Here's a video showing some students NOT needing to look at their gun to deal with malfunctions using the NDLMD that Grant linked to. Of course, they're blindfolded, so they couldn't look if they wanted to: <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xi4PlDXzzxM" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xi4PlDXzzxM</a> <a href="http://www.youtube.com/user/RobPincus#p/u/2/Xi4PlDXzzxM">Link to Youtube, if video doesn't play.</a> I like Travis and Chris and their training is great, but this is an area where we disagree. -RJP David S. on "Stoppage Assessment" http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/topic/stoppage-assessment#post-195 Sun, 04 Apr 2010 19:23:30 +0000 David S. 195@http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/ Grant - Thanks for the link. Excellent presentation with the "whys". Rob's thoughts on this are my guiding principles in this area. However, I try to look at other concepts and try to evaluate them to best of my ability. Consequently, I appreciate your and cshoff's opinions. Take Care, David cshoff on "Stoppage Assessment" http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/topic/stoppage-assessment#post-194 Sat, 03 Apr 2010 10:48:50 +0000 cshoff 194@http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/ I agree with Grant. Going into a "diagnostic" mode requires the shooter to incorporate a complex thought process that is likely going to be near impossible in the middle of a firefight. Immediately responding to a stoppage with the tap, rack, assess technique under any stoppage condition, on the other hand, is a more a matter of conditioning and muscle memory, similar to a reload. K.I.S.S.......... GrantCunningham on "Stoppage Assessment" http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/topic/stoppage-assessment#post-193 Fri, 02 Apr 2010 20:20:26 +0000 GrantCunningham 193@http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/ Rob did a particularly good podcast on this topic some time back: <a href="http://robpincus.libsyn.com/index.php?post_id=468038#" rel="nofollow">http://robpincus.libsyn.com/index.php?post_id=468038#</a> Click the "Pod" icon at the upper-left of the description to listen. I have reservations about the idea of diagnosing a problem under fire. First, you have to take your eyes off the threat for a relatively long period of time. Second, it introduces conditional branches that have to be negotiated under extreme stress. Neither is, IMO, a good habit to develop, and I doubt their success rate in an actual violent encounter. -=[ Grant ]=- David S. on "Stoppage Assessment" http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/topic/stoppage-assessment#post-192 Fri, 02 Apr 2010 18:54:54 +0000 David S. 192@http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/ Recently, I purchased some of Magpul Dynamics training video series. They are top notch! Travis Hailey and Chris Costa both recommend taking a split second to assess a malfunction type; then go directly to to appropriate clearing technique. For example, see you have a stove pipe, you sweep the case out and resume shooting. You do not waste time with a tap and rack. The thought is that the quick assessment and appropriate clearing technique is more efficient and gets you back in action quicker. The technique I use is go directly to a tap, rack, & assess without any effort to identify the cause of the malfunction. If that does not work go to unload reload technique. The reason I have used this is a belief it is most efficient. Also, I attempt to keep my eye on the threat and employ lateral movement. One problem I have with my current technique is I do not always know the malfunction I had to assess the likelihood of a malfunction. I would like to hear your experience and opinions on what you do and why. Take Care David cshoff on "Flashlight techniques" http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/topic/flashlight-techniques#post-188 Mon, 15 Mar 2010 22:20:49 +0000 cshoff 188@http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/ Great thread, guys! Lot's of great information here. This is one area that I would really like to do more training with. I appreciate all of the good info. David S. on "Flashlight techniques" http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/topic/flashlight-techniques#post-187 Mon, 15 Mar 2010 19:06:41 +0000 David S. 187@http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/ Grant - Thanks for contacting Rob on this. My experiments with the technique always held the flashlight high and straight forward. I did not think of aiming the light lower. Duh. Another great article by Rob. Thanks again. David David S. on "Flashlight techniques" http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/topic/flashlight-techniques#post-186 Mon, 15 Mar 2010 18:52:21 +0000 David S. 186@http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/ Grant - Thanks so much for your insight. I am still rationalizing what is the "best" technique for me. Your points are very helpful to the process. I am not sure the value of the physical index to the neck or chin; like you said my hand just seemed to end up there. Any thoughts on the protection from a gun grab by use of the flashlight hand. In the dark, I am concerned about getting into a close quarters confrontation, if I missed someone while searching. All thoughts are welcome. GrantCunningham on "Flashlight techniques" http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/topic/flashlight-techniques#post-185 Mon, 15 Mar 2010 18:07:03 +0000 GrantCunningham 185@http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/ I sent Rob an email about this discussion, and he referred me to an article he wrote a few years ago: <a href="http://www.imakenews.com/valhalla/e_article000413118.cfm?x=b11,0,w" rel="nofollow">http://www.imakenews.com/valhalla/e_article000413118.cfm?x=b11,0,w</a> Interesting. -=[ Grant ]=- GrantCunningham on "Flashlight techniques" http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/topic/flashlight-techniques#post-184 Mon, 15 Mar 2010 17:06:08 +0000 GrantCunningham 184@http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/ "So what power of illumination do we need to purchase for a good defensive light?" I've played with this quite a bit in low light training venues. I believe, for a number of reasons, that the flashlight is the most important non-lethal tool you can carry, but it's not a magic wand. There is no amount of light that you can comfortably carry that will take away all of an opponent's vision, to the point that he cannot pose a threat to you. There are some things that a powerful light will do, and that you can use to your advantage if the light is integrated with everything else you do. While you cannot take away a person's vision you can initiate a protective (flinch) response in the subject, and you can degrade his low light vision for a certain period of time. The degree and duration of those effects will vary depending on the ambient light, the subjects mental/emotional state, his level of commitment to harming you (as opposed to just taking your possessions), and the type and quantity of drugs in his system. (It's very similar to the limits of OC/pepper spray, actually.) Under the very best circumstances, it's possible to initiate a prolonged protective response (hands in front of eyes to shield them, squinting, looking away from the light) by shining the beam directly at his face. I've done this in two street incidents, and in both cases the gentlemen involved put their hands in front of the eyes, turned their heads, and walked backwards away from me (while swearing and professing the noble intentions, of course.) Again, this is a "best case" scenario; the higher the ambient light conditions, the less reaction there will be. Testing "worst case" scenarios in low-light conditions using AirSoft, however, convincingly showed that a person who is very committed to a personal assault can easily work past the eye irritation to deliver contact hits. Gunshot accuracy was significantly degraded, but it was still possible for the role players to land shots on the body. Even when the players were prepared, there was still a flinch response to the first flash of light, but it was fleeting at best - perhaps a quarter or half-second, tops. These experiments suggested a protocol. Deliver a quick flash of light to the subject's face; if the environment allows, move laterally and aggressively as the light goes off. If the subject throws his hands in front of his eyes, turns his head, and stops his movement, the chances are pretty good that you can now turn your light on and use the continuous directed beam, combined with strong verbal commands, to ward him off. If the subject shows a very fast flinch response but continues his movement, and particularly shows signs of aggravation/aggression, more light isn't going to do you any good. Luckily you've moved from your last position, and the second (at most) of degraded low light vision will prevent him from instantaneously acquiring your new location. It's in that reactionary gap that you need to be escalating your response. Let's be clear: he won't be blind, and any decrease in his low light vision won't last. He will easily be able to reacquire his target, and very quickly at that. (If the ambient light is high enough, not only may he not be impaired at all, but the initial flash may not show any effect at all.) No matter how bright it is, the light will buy you a bit of response time, nothing more. Of course the higher the light output, the better it works and the greater the range of ambient conditions in which it can be used. Based on our experiments, I won't carry anything less than a 200-lumen flood beam, or a 125-lumen conventional beam. Of the two I much prefer the flood; though it's slightly less effective in inducing a flinch response, it's much more usable in all other aspects of a defensive encounter. -=[ Grant ]=- DonWorsham on "Flashlight techniques" http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/topic/flashlight-techniques#post-183 Mon, 15 Mar 2010 16:27:22 +0000 DonWorsham 183@http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/ Excellant description of the technique but now you must come up with a one or two word name for "a hammer fist, over the shoulder in the "off" hand". That is the way I hold a flashlight with a tailcap. If however I should pick up the old type with a slide-button(the old D/C cell-type) I hold it "fingers under with the thumb on the slide-button". Why is that? It feels more natural that way I guess. guninformation on "Flashlight techniques" http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/topic/flashlight-techniques#post-182 Mon, 15 Mar 2010 14:26:26 +0000 guninformation 182@http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/ I am fairly new to the art of shooting. However it makes sense that you would want to have a light, either attached to then of a firearms or in one of your hands that is bright enough that the when the light hits a possible assailant it will be strong ewnough to blind them so they first of all can't see who is shining a light at them and secondly, they cant see a firearms pointed directly at them. So what power of illumination do we need to purchase for a good defensive light? GrantCunningham on "Flashlight techniques" http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/topic/flashlight-techniques#post-181 Mon, 15 Mar 2010 13:51:46 +0000 GrantCunningham 181@http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/ I find it helpful when faced with such a dilemma to step back and ask two questions: 1) What do we want to do? 2) What do we already know? What do we want to do? We want to use the flashlight as a vision tool, to help us find and see something. If we find something, we may have to shoot it, so whatever we do must allow for that action. What we know is that the find/see function might be checking the house after a "bump in the night", or it might be illuminating the path to the car on a darkened street. We know that the find/see function is vastly different in terms of physiological reaction than the shooting part; the find/see function often (usually, in fact) ends without an actual shooting part; the find/see function sometimes takes time and flexibility. What we know about the shooting part, should it occur, is that it will probably happen extremely quickly, that it can't be interfered with should it become necessary, that our fine motor skills will be degraded, and that our initial startle response will cause muscles to contract around whatever they are holding. We also know that we will ultimately be dealing with two objects, and we only have two hands. (That's a more important concept than you might think.) Putting all this together, what we need is a technique that relies to the greatest degree on large muscle groups, doesn't require any repositioning, allows us to see wherever we need to see easily, requires no transition from find/see to shoot, isn't fatiguing, and works with whatever skills we already have and with what our bodies are going to do naturally. It seems to me that the ideal solution, the one that has the most compatibility and the fewest failure points, is to carry the flashlight in a hammer fist, over the shoulder in the "off" hand, while the gun is either accessed (public venue) with the other hand, or (private venue) carried in the high ready position that Rob espouses. This arrangement is very flexible, allowing the head to swivel about to see what it needs to see, while the light follows. It can be done for very long periods of time without fatigue. The gun is safely carried, and won't be pointing at anything it shouldn't. If the shooting part happens, the transition from look/see to shoot is completely automatic: the grip on the light tightens (the thumb too), as do the muscles on the arm. My experimentation with such muscle tensioning shows that the light naturally ends up just over the shoulder, about the same height as the ear. This just happens to allow for good illumination of both the target and the sights. Shooting, if necessary, may then commence. I see no reason to index on the neck or anything else; I don't believe that it brings anything to the table. Once the muscles tension with a hammer fist above the shoulder, I think you'll find the light is already pointed at the threat. If you're using a light with a good flood beam and no hotspot (which is pretty hard to find, but they're out there) you'll find that the alignment of the light isn't even a consideration. Your sights, the threat, and most of the room will be lit up with a nice, diffuse light. Gone are any concerns with glare from objects in the room; even a bright nickel-plated gun in your hand will present no glare to you. "Aiming" the light is only necessary with substandard equipment. (One of the criticisms of this technique is that we have to shoot one handed, and thus the various "two hand" techniques like the Harries or Rogers are better. Personally, I think that's horse manure; in those techniques we're not really shooting with two hands, as the support hand isn't offering any support to speak of. It's just pretend, and it leads us to neglect the one-hand training we need for light/gun encounters. Harries & Rogers are in fact shooting with one hand, but without the benefit of practicing with one hand. That seems counter-productive to me, but then again maybe I'm just dense!) It should be pointed out that I have no idea what Rob teaches for flashlight/gun technique, and I'd be really interested in what he has to say. -=[ Grant ]=- David S. on "Flashlight techniques" http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/topic/flashlight-techniques#post-180 Sat, 13 Mar 2010 19:12:58 +0000 David S. 180@http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/forum/ Recently, I have been thinking about defensive flashlight techniques in relation to the skills learned at Combat Focus Shooting taught by Rob Pincus which I recently attended in January. After learning about working with what the body does naturally; I wanted to apply that concept to other defensive skills; in this case, flashlight techniques. I am neither a trainer nor a martial artist; I am simply someone who is interested in the topic and want to focus my practice time on the most efficient techniques. Consequently, I have looked at the flashlight techniques, (I am familiar with), to discover what might be best for me; given I want apply the CFS concepts of efficiency and consistency while working with what the body does naturally. Below are my initial thoughts on what will work best for me. The techniques below assume a standard tail cap modern flashlight operated in the “weak” hand. As well as, in normal use; the light is best utilized in a stabbing / ice pick style with the thumb activating the switch. Harries Positives – With a tail cap flashlight, the hand does not have to change grip to move from search mode to coordinated mode with a gun. When in search mode, (stab grip with thumb on tail cap switch); the hand is naturally high and flexible for searching with the light. In a startle response the hand is in a good position to protect the face naturally. Negatives - Weaver bladed stance that works well with the Harries is only natural in competition and target shooting. Weaver based foot position slows mobility laterally. In high compressed ready, the Harries feels unnatural and the light or gun tends to point off center when held in tight to the body. Transition from search mode to application of force, is less efficient as you need to cross arms to apply the technique rather than just quickly extend. When combining tactics with a gun Harries works best with extended ready which exposes to potential gun grab and fatigue. Conclusion – This was the technique that I practiced. Now after CFS I realize that my normal isosceles style stance was not consistent what I was doing with a flashlight. This technique does not fit my criteria. Surefire / Syringe Style Positives – Light and gun in consistent position for the high compressed ready and application of force with the firearm. The light and gun naturally extend to the target and will attain mechanical lock; cognitive action is not required to halt the aiming process. Negatives – Search mode (stab grip with thumb on switch) is inconsistent with application of the light with the gun. The technique requires the light to be turned in the hand. Getting the light in position is a fine motor skill and subject to fumble. Conclusion – For me this makes total sense on paper or when verbalized. However, when I apply it with other efficient techniques it seems to come up short. FBI – I must admit greater ignorance of this technique. The advantage I see with this is return fire at the direction of the light would be away from the centerline of the body. It seems to require more constant on mode with the light to be at its best. I need more education in this technique. Neck index Positives – The flashlight is in a good position to transfer from searching or the startle response to a neck or chin reference position. The flashlight hand is available and naturally positioned for fending of others. The flashlight use does not force a change in handgun deployment. The gun is drawn out of the holster to high compressed ready or extended to fire as appropriate. If a lanyard is used the flashlight hand is available and in position to perform reloads and malfunction clearing. Vision and light move together as the head moves. In extreme CQB situation where I may strike with the light or other physical technique the application of the handgun would be consistent with normal, greater than two arm length, tactics. The difference would be the extent of the extension of the handgun. CQB would use a gun hand thumb and mag well body index while shooting from retention and normal application would fully extend the firearm. Negative – Due to the height of the light, splash back from inappropriate illumination could hurt night vision. The handgun must be deployed with a single hand only. Conclusion – Based on this initial view the neck / chin index provides the consistency and efficiency, I am looking for. I will continue to refine my selection. Hopefully I have articulated these points so they made sense. I offer these thoughts to get the feedback of the forum and to invite discussion. Take Care David