I can somewhat understand why people don’t want to do Force-on-Force (FoF) training: the prospect is intimidating. Most of us want to avoid the fight. We want to avoid getting hurt. We really don’t want to deal with it. So why would we go and pretend to do it? I don’t want to get hurt. I don’t want the pain and the stress.
I totally understand.
There was a point in time where I didn’t want to do that stuff.
I got over it.
Let’s look at empty hand martial arts. Any martial art that just has you memorize a bunch of moves and “dance” with a partner? Well, there’s something to that yes, but if your goal is to learn how to defend yourself, you’ll never learn how. Having a partner that cooperates isn’t realistic, because your attacker certainly will not cooperate with you. That dojo isn’t going to have the pressure. It isn’t going to bring the pain. There won’t be the stress of time, the need to prevail, and yes… the lumps that will teach you lessons that no other means of teaching will make. And if you can participate in sport-based variants of the event? All the better.
Does a basketball player learn to play basketball by sitting on the court alone calmly shooting hoops? No, they have to get out there in the pressure of a game, with other people, and play.
So can you really learn self-defense by dancing in the air? Nope. It’s one reason I stopped my Kuk Sool training, because it was just cooperative dance and the organization perpetuated that notion (tho there were some within the org that wanted to do more realistic training). Can you learn how to use a gun in a pressure-filled situation of an attack by just sitting at the range and calmly and slowly shooting your gun at a paper target? Nope.
There’s something to these activities, and of course they are better than nothing. But they are close to nothing. If you want to learn how to do X, you have to do X. Yes you may have to work your way up to X, but so long as you work towards X then you’re good.
I understand that scenario training can be a scary notion at first, but there will be nothing more eye-opening and sobering, and nothing that will change your mindset and improve your chances of survival.
Physiologically, no caliber or bullet is certain to incapacitate any individual unless the brain is hit. Psychologically, some individuals can be incapacitated by minor or small caliber wounds. Those individuals who are stimulated by fear, adrenaline, drugs, alcohol, and/or sheer will and survival determination may not be incapacitated even if mortally wounded.
The will to survive and to fight despite horrific damage to the body is commonplace on the battlefield, and on the street. Barring a hit to the brain, the only way to force incapacitation is to cause sufficient blood loss that the subject can no longer function, and that takes time. Even if the heart is instantly destroyed, there is sufficient oxygen in the brain to support full and complete voluntary action for 10-15 seconds.
Kinetic energy does not wound. Temporary cavity does not wound. The much discussed “shock” of bullet impact is a fable and “knock down” power is a myth. The critical element is penetration. The bullet must pass through the large, blood bearing organs and be of sufficient diameter to promote rapid bleeding. Penetration less than 12 inches is too little, and, in the words of two of the participants in the 1987 Wound Ballistics Workshop, “too little penetration will get you killed.” Given desirable and reliable penetration, the only way to increase bullet effectiveness is to increase the severity of the wound by increasing the size of hole made by the bullet. Any bullet which will not penetrate through vital organs from less than optimal angles is not acceptable. Of those that will penetrate, the edge is always with the bigger bullet.
So there you go. This is why calibers such as .25’s, .32’s, .380’s, and stuff like bird-shot aren’t considered ideal for self-defense, because they just can’t get down where they need to be. All pistol rounds suck, and some suck more than others.
Of course, the real important thing is accurate placement in the right spot because a deep wound in the foot doesn’t do much to stop your attacker. Must be accurate, then must penetrate, then the bigger you can make that hole the better such as with modern hollow-point ammo or just larger calibers (and cue the .45 is king flame fest!). 🙂
Note as well tho, this doesn’t just apply to handgun rounds and self-defense. When I go hunting, I need a toolset that will travel the distance and still have enough energy and ability to penetrate as deeply as necessary. Big game animals are man-sized or larger, with potentially tougher hides and structure. I won’t take a .22 LR deer hunting in the Texas Hill Country, but my 6.8 SPC with Barnes TSX bullets can do the job just fine. So can .308 Winchester, so can a lot of other proper rifle calibers. But on the flip side, you still have to worry about over-penetration or being too much for the job. Oh sure, I could hunt a deer with a .50 BMG but I’d ruin lots of meat and that bullet would keep travelling right through the deer and come to rest who knows where. That too could have lots of problems. Firearms are more specific in their application than people tend to believe, so make sure you choose the right tool.
Bottom line: consider the intent behind the tool and ensure to use the proper tool for the job at hand.
I’ve been thinking about my AR in 6.8 SPC. While it certainly gets the job done, I’d like to outfit it a bit more specifically for hunting.
The biggest change I can think of is changing the stock to a Magpul PRS. The main reason? The adjustable cheek piece. My only reserve? I need to first do some measurements and see if my kids could still shoulder it with the PRS because if they can’t, then the PRS can’t be used. The intent of the rifle is so it could be used by either my kids or me (tho primarily me).
I’m also thinking about taking the Bushmaster lower off and building a new lower from the ground-up. I figured as long as I was doing this, it’d be kinda cool if I could get the lower etched with my own design or wording, something totally custom. Any reader know of a place that does this? or perhaps in 2 parts, one that makes a good blank lower and another that could etch? My Google-Fu has been weak.
Then I think about putting the Bushy back together since it’s got the lightweight profile and turning it into a lightweight home defender. Put something like Magpul’s MOE handguard, inexpensive and lightweight. Add something like their Angled Fore Grip and figure out a solution for a light (got a light, just a matter of how to activate it), a way to strap a second magazine onto the gun (Redi-Mag/Mod?) and that could be alright. Just keep it light and minimal.
What spurred all of this? I received a Aimpoint Comp M4s for test and eval for TacticalGunReview.com. When I have my review, I’ll be posting it to the TGR website. But finally getting the red dot of my dreams got me thinking. 🙂
If readers have any suggestions on a stock for the hunting gun, be it how well the PRS would work or how another solution might better fit my bill, or on a way to get a custom-made AR lower, please let me know.
You called a semi-automatic handgun an “automatic”. I can half-way forgive that because I know the history of where the nomenclature comes from. But calling a magazine a clip? Sorry, but no.
Most people use semi-automatic handguns. So in order to make your semi-automatic handgun ready for defensive purposes you must remember to cycle the action twice? Good luck with that when the flag is flying. That’s precious time and seconds lost, and what if you forget? It’s a non-standard action to undertake, and sure you can train yourself to do this so it’s truly your reflexive motion, but the precious seconds still lost to this remedial action are unacceptable. If the average gunfight lasts 3 seconds, if getting the first shot off quickly and accurately matters most, this setup is not setting you up for success…. it just sets you even further behind the curve.
What if the fur is flying, you forget to cycle the action twice, fire, and now all you’ve got is a glorified paperweight? There is no way you will get the gun back in action in time.
How about with a revolver? How are you supposed to quickly bypass the chamber with the Safety Bullet so you can quickly and immediately get your revolver into the fight?
I assume this is intended for a home-defense gun, not a gun you carry. But what if someone uses the same gun for both purposes? Now you’re causing that person to do a lot more fiddling with their gun than is necessary. They will have to remember to always check their gun, cycle their gun, load and unload, replace rounds, take out “Safety Bullets”. There’s just too much handling here, and with all the ammunition manipulation this is just asking for a negligent discharge (which runs counter to the intent of this device).
Why would a youth or intruder have access to your gun in the first place?
Oh, I don’t like the inventor/demonstrator muzzle flashing the camera, nor his finger on the trigger as the gun dangles about. I’m sorry, but if you cannot demonstrate basic gun handling safety, how should that extrapolate into your “safety” device and us trusting it? Do you really understand gun safety?
I’m sorry, but there’s just too many things wrong with this device.
I browse the company website. Q&A Section:
Question: Isn’t education and training the real answer to this problem?
[…]OK, then why are we still having Accidental Shootings? What I found after a year of reading hundreds of cases, is that most Accidental Shootings are caused by those people that did not have the benefit of a Safety Course. Rarely do those of us who have had the education and experience get involved in an Accidental shooting.[…]
So what you’re saying is, keep the ignorant ignorant, but use my device and problems will go away! Of course, to properly use your device in a self-defense situation, that requires a good deal of education and practice… and you’re basically saying these are people who won’t get educated nor practice. I don’t know. Seems like a bad situation all around.
From the order page:
We are in no way recommending that you keep your gun loaded. What we do recommend is to lock up your gun unloaded of all lethal rounds. Keep one Safety Bullet in the firing chamber and one in the top of the clip.
Maybe that’s the lawyers and/or marketing department talking, but that’s a bad recommendation. Granted, if this is a historical gun, a range gun, target gun, hunting rifle, or any other gun that sees rare use, yes keep it unloaded and in a manner that is as safe as possible (e.g. remove the bolt). But if this is your defensive weapon? What good is an unloaded gun?
Does the device have application? Perhaps. If say I kept a gun out on display and the gun was to be for display only, I could see a mechanism like this being useful because it does lock up the gun’s action and render the gun useless, yet I could keep the gun in a “closed” manner that’s prettier for display.
This device was created with the best of intentions, but such paves the road to Hell. There are better ways of dealing with kids and guns (check Kathy Jackon’s CorneredCat.com website).
Just did some Googling on the product. I’m obviously late to the “whoa, this is a bad idea” party. But it seems to have come up in the news recently (maybe the company is hitting up news stations for product informercials disguised as news?) and it is the first I’ve heard of the product. There’s even a recently created website called Why The Safety Bullet Sucks. And it does seem Mr. Worley and company are avid salespeople and don’t take kindly to being rejected. Guess I’ll wait and see if they find this posting and how well they respond to it.
With the changing of the weather, so changes how most people dress. Colder weather mean big heavy coats, gloves, and other things that could change what and how you carry, and/or how you might access your gun.
Do you practice with these changes? Can your finger enter the trigger guard with those thick gloves on? Can you get all that coat and clothing out of the way and perform a clean and fast draw? If you’re using a different gun, are you familiar and proficient with it? If you don’t know you should find out. Fifteen minutes of dry fire in your garb will tell you much.
According to the game show, Family Feud, the (almost) last thing a burglar wants to see when he breaks into a house is… no, not a gun… a naked grandma.
“I don’t think they should be able to, there’s too many people out there who make very irrational decisions, and I don’t think most people have the quality and intelligence to carry fire arms on campus,” said Jacob Wyers, a WTAMU student.
There’s so much wrong in that statement. It’s depressing.
Some interesting upcoming classes, including a defensive knife class as well as Personal Tactics Skills, which I’d highly recommend for anyone that may have a CHL or be getting a CHL but haven’t had much “real life” training. If all you’ve done is patiently shoot holes at paper targets at the gun range but you have a gun with the expectation that you may need it to defend your life, you’d do well to get some training in more “real world” situations. Personal Tactics Skills is a good introduction. There’s no shooting (just uses plastic guns for simulation), it’s low-speed, pain-free, and conducted indoors. But it helps you get started in learning how to apply defensive tactics in real-life situations. Highly recommended.
Lots of other stuff coming up too. If Tom Givens will be back in the Spring for a shotgun course, I’m there.
Stuff From Hsoi 