Do Your Standards Have Integrity?

Evolution usually happens slowly in our firearms training community. Even making forward progress is difficult for some, especially when it means leaving behind truths they held sacred, a guru they thought infallible or a method they thought beyond question.
One thing that many people put a lot of stock in is time standards in choreographed drills or qualification courses. More and more people, however, are coming to the conclusion that Timers may not be as valuable a tool in defensive training as they were once thought to be. I’ve been saying for a long time that all such “standards” are made up and ultimately Subjective…. and therefore, not important… certainly not as important as so many people make them out to be. If people were generally slower, they times would be longer. If people were generally faster, the acceptable performance would be a lower time.
ahero K5173R_2




















To me, this dictates that any individual (who is going to be generally slower or faster than any other individual) really trying to reach their own potential in relation to resources invested, must have their own goals and expectations in training in order to have contextual integrity.
In an article published earlier today, Grant Cunningham, host of PDN’s Training Talk show, very efficiently presents a clear cut example of why your “standards” may not be as objective or valuable as you think they are.

The beginning of his article references a conundrum:

“I was recently told of a defensive shooting “standard” for draw-to-first-shot time, one that a lot of instructors apparently use in their classes: 1.5 seconds if the gun is carried openly, or 2 seconds from concealment. That seems quite odd to me. Not the times themselves, mind you — the fact there are two of them.”

READ THE COMPLETE ARTICLE HERE.

-RJP
Discussion
  • (will not be published)

No Comments