Are you Training or Entertaining?

[Punisher84]

I thought I'd borrow a line from a recent article in one of the gun rags for this thread and ask an important question, Are you training or just entertaining?

It's been a big topic at the range lately and around here as well, as it should be. Training is important, we all need it, but to what degree and to what end? That means, what are you training for? Are you going to Iraq or Afghanistan? Are you Swat? (or are you not? hahaha) Are you training for possible real world scenarios? A la robberies, home invasions, or God forbid something like Virginia Tech.

I was thinking about this tonight while I was doing some practice shooting and was (not proud to say) fumbling a bit with my new Blackhawk CQC holster. More than a few times I didn't get the gun clear because the button stuck and after the third time it happened I stopped and said to myself, "I'm dead." In a real-life scenario I would not have been able to deploy my gun quickly enough if I needed to do it fast. This made me rethink some of my tactics and choices on the ride home. So here is what i came up with...

There are 2 types of training Realistic and Entertainment. Both can be fun, but one is definitely more serious than the other. Now what is realistic is going to vary by the type of person who is training. Example being, I'm not going off to Iraq so intense combat training, while still beneficial, would be primarily entertainment for me as it would be for most civilians. Realistic training falls more in the Street Survival School and Fighting Pistol type of classes for most people.

Let's start with the average citizen. We carry guns to protect our families and ourselves. So we need to train for the types of scenarios we will most likely be in right? Ok let's start from the ground up. We need a quality firearm. A good, comfortable holster. If it's not comfy you won't wear it. A mag carrier and of course, an extra mag. Then let's round it off with a good carry ammo that feeds reliably in your firearm. Now, what is reliable? For me a gun that jams is unacceptable, period! It either gets fixed or replaced.

On to training! So let's train. What are we going to most likely run in to? High speed chases? Lengthy gun battles with heavily armed assailants? A 30 floor shootout on broken glass while wearing no shoes and only our trusty Beretta duct-taped to our back hair?! Probably not. How about a run in at an ATM or maybe a car-jacking? What about a madman in a restaurant or a school? Bet your bottom dollar. So your basic training should probably consist of drawing from odd positions, shooting from abnormal positions, reload drills, malfunction drills, low light tactics and engaging multiple targets. This is realistic training!

Now for the entertainment! SWAT and Military style training is awesome and we all love it correct? Why do we take it though? That's what you need to ask yourself. Could it come in handy? Oh sure, because hey you never REALLY know what could happen. All training has it's place, but don't fool yourself into thinking because you take "Advanced" training you're ready for it all. I've said it before and I'll say it again "You can look cool in your 5.11 and thigh rig all day long, but if you can't shoot straight you're just playing."

So what am I trying to say? SSS, are you saying advanced training is worthless?!! No of course not, but think about why you're taking it. if you're taking it to have fun and do some stuff you might not otherwise do, hey go at it, I'll see ya there! Just don't confuse what's realistic and NEEDED for your day to day with advanced tactical training. So in closing be safe, be alert, and I'll see you on the line!

[TGO David]

Excellent article, SSS. Lots of insight and wisdom in those few short paragraphs and it touches on something that I'm afraid a lot of people fall victim to when they get wide-eyed and giddy over the ideas of taking tacti-cool training that has absolutely no application to civilian life.

Is it fun? I bet! Is it worthwhile? Probably not!

I'd rather spend my money taking practical training from as many different, legitimate, respected training outlets as possible. I say respected because I'd prefer to stick with places with renown... not take training from Bob's Shooting School and Screen Door Repairs. The more you train in one discipline, from more than one instructor, the more proficient at it you become.

"I fear not the man who has practiced ten thousand kicks once, but I fear the man who

has practiced one kick ten thousand times." --Bruce Lee

Something to think about isn't it?

[Marswolf]

Good post SSS!

For most people, tactical training has potential for real world use, but is probably something that will never be used. Add to that, a lot of training schools really don't teach usable tactical techniques very well. On another board, a number of real world people currently involved in tactical operations are critiquing a photograph from one training school. These are people who are involved in tactical operations around the world. We represent several different countries and training techniques. The training school is being picked apart for numerous bad techniques obvious in the photo. What you learn in civilian tactical training may not be as good as you think it is.

I guess my thought is that you should take such courses for fun or as a primer for other more advanced training. In my experience, military tactical training is the best in the world. There is an attention to detail that can make the difference in whether you live or die. It also takes the time to learn properly and with sufficient repetition rather than trying to squeeze the training into just a few days. Law Enforcement training is sometimes very good, but sometimes lousy. It depends on who is doing the training and how much time is devoted to doing it. The better LE trainers have military experience too in my view.

I admit to being very critical of training programs, military and Law Enforcement as well as civilian. Particularly in the civilian programs, I've just seen too many "graduates" do far too many dunderhead things that would result in their likely becoming casualties in a real firefight. More than one person I've observed doing stupid things are instructors. That's why I'm so big on checking out the credentials of the instructors. Just because you are a training junkie, doesn't mean you know what you are doing.

Be realistic about what you will get out of a civilian course. You will probably learn some useful stuff, but realistically you aren't likely to learn enough to handle hostile operations where you get shot at in foreign lands. You probably won't learn enough to handle hostility in the inner cities of this country.

I think attendance should be mostly for enjoyment and expect to pick up some useful technique at the same time.

[Guest db99wj]

Great post SSS!

[Punisher84]

Thanks for the feedback guys!

Marswolf, you touched on something I heartily agree with! I have a tough time accepting training tips from someone who hasn't put their tactics to the test. I believe U.S military and SWAT team training is the best you can get save for a few places like Blackwater, etc. One thing I can say about our instructors at Range USA we can boast a Marine Scout Sniper, a SWAT tactical entry team leader who has trained at Blackwater and several military complexes, and a SWAT team member who works with the other instructor as well. They practice what they preach.

I think any civilian instructor worth his salt knows that you can't train people in a few days, but you can lay the foundation and they can then advance upon that training. I've had military training and civilian training and both have their pros and cons. Like I said you just gotta figure out what's good for you and then train,train,train.

[GhostDog]

In my opinion...

Too many people want to do the "high speed" stuff to the detriment of the "foundation" stuff. Good tactics is just all the simple stuff done smoothly/well.

Like driving a car, one can only respond quickly to changing conditions on the road AFTER learning to operate the car without having to think about every simple action (ie. take foot off gas, apply to brake). Since none of us shoot as much as we drive, this is a constant battle for all of us. A good example is speed vs accuracy. We all know that when the target is farther away we must shoot slower to get good hits. Knowing is not doing. It takes constant practice. It is not so simple when you have to do this while doing several other things (in competition for example).

I shoot competition at a small indoor range in Kingston. We have a small group of regular shooters. The shooting is IDPAish but we are not an IDPA club and are not bound by their rules so we have more latitude in the type of matches we set up. The matches are usually short (no 75 round stages) and try to simulate "real" shooting problems as much as possible. These are some of the things we do to help "train" ourselves better:

1) Low light shooting

2) Using different "go" signals (not just buzzer but lights and other signals)

3) At the "go", shooter must move/seek cover BEFORE drawing a firearm

4) Moving off line to the threat before engaging (just to name a few)

We do this to try to keep from conditioning ourselves to set responses as well as to train ourselves to manage different problems while using the firearm. This is not "high speed" stuff. It is really simple but hopefully these kinds of simple skills will help us prevail if we ever have to defend ourselves with or without a firearm.

[towerclimber37]

I agree with just about everything said here...

I will admit that I'm no longer the Highspeed, gortex covered soldier I was years ago..

when I do get a chance to hone my skills, I do it in such a manner that reinforces the basics of shooting...for me its "really basic" stuff that enhances my accuracy with a pistol and rifle. the fastest draw in the world means nothing if s/he can't hit what s/he is aiming at.

Real world situations require a person to "keep their head about them", find a solution to a known problem quickly and adjust their defensive tactics accordingly. The military looks at it a little bit differently. For them, there's not going to be a lawsuit after a fight, so they train to win.

thats one of the biggest difference between a civillian shooter and a military shooter, in my opinion. Depending on the situation, that can be a chasm.

Its such a hairy problem, learning what tactic to use and when..but Like Ghostdog said...

its the simplest, most basic tactics that, when practiced, allow a person to put "steel on target" and win the fight.

[saintsfanbrian]

SSS - very good points, I have applied for a couple of new jobs and if I get either of them, I will plan on taking the Street Level Survival course offered at RangeUSA

[Guest jackdog]

I train basically to keep my shooting skill up to speed as well as daily practice sessions of drawing my weapon, and getting on target. I do not train to be an operator in Iraq, or for high level urban war fare. I try to be very real about why I carry, and the types of situations I may encounter. I've seen various pics on the net about tactical training, except in a couple of rare circumstances, these training pics are of guys just wanting to play like there real combat vets. I also here a lot of hype/talk about how certain training facilities give you the correct combat mindset. That to me is nothing more than a BS sales job. Any body that wants to train with the idea to have a different experience, and a little fun, is doing it with the proper attitude. If your taking this training so you can become an operator, then your probably going to get your butt in a sling. People who are true operators by in large are ex military, with real combat experience, they know combat tactics, from on the job experience, not from some 3 or 5 or 7 day macho class.

[GhostDog]

I didn't mean to say that training is bad, quite the opposite. My teacher taught me that you can always learn something no matter what kind of training you are involved in (if you keep your eyes and ears open while keeping your mouth shut). The problem, I think, is that we sometimes spend too much time on advanced skills when we should be working on basic skills.

To be honest, I don't know enough about some of this stuff (what Jackdog is referring to) to even know if it's good or bad. I'm an ex Air Force guy and an ex cop so what I know about small unit tactics would fit into a thimble with room to spare.

I do, however, know this. If you can't handle the firearm (gun handling skills vs shooting skills) while doing other things (moving, getting to cover, watching the threat, ect.), you probably don't need the super ninja spook class just yet. I'm talking about myself as well as anyone else, so I'm not looking down my nose when I say that. I'm just a dumb ex cop, not an expert.

[Rifleman]

I'm afraid a lot of people fall victim to when they get wide-eyed and giddy over the ideas of taking tacti-cool training that has absolutely no application to civilian life.

Is it fun? I bet! Is it worthwhile? Probably not!

Something to think about isn't it?

Tungsten, may I offer another perspective? In your signature line you have a quote warning people of being enslaved by tyranny. And you issue the challenge "COME AND TAKE THEM!" What will you do it THEY come to take them?

If you believe the "keep arms" part of the second amendment it would silly to ignore the "bear arms" part. If you own a weapon that was designed to fight with, and that is the one of the purposes you own it for, learn to do so.

Simply owning cool guns does not keep evil in check.

[TGO David]

Tungsten, may I offer another perspective? In your signature line you have a quote warning people of being enslaved by tyranny. And you issue the challenge "COME AND TAKE THEM!" What will you do it THEY come to take them?

Someone who is in a business like yours should obviously understand that there is a time for discretion and that there is value in not speaking too loudly of certain things on the Internet. What I would do if "they" came to take my guns is irrelevant to the issue at hand and not something that I care to openly discuss.

For the sake of legal record, I'd pursue every legal means of retaining my firearms. Beyond that, my plan of action remains between me and God... and I know that HE isn't going to tell anyone else about it.

If you believe the "keep arms" part of the second amendment it would silly to ignore the "bear arms" part. If you own a weapon that was designed to fight with, and that is the one of the purposes you own it for learn to do so.

Tactical training is not a requisite for bearing arms and should NEVER become a requisite for it either. What training I have had or will take in the future is another personal matter that I choose to keep quiet.

People should certainly train themselves to be proficient in whatever mode of self defense that they choose to employ. Whether it's unarmed combat or armed. If they opt for professionally instructed training at any point in their life, that's nice and a good thing. But you know, I'd rather see a person shoot often on their own than not shoot at all.

Many of the people who fought for the founding freedoms of this country weren't professional soldiers and had no formal training. Here's another quote that I like:

“Before any standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because

the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States…

[The people] will instantly inspire the inclination to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive.” --Noah Webster

Just regular people. Home makers, farmers, doctors, lawyers, shop workers, you name it. Not professionally trained, not weekend warriors, just regular folks.

Training is good! Training is not required, however.

PS: I would absolutely love to see your dad on here, especially now that we're going to start hosting articles on 2nd Amendment related issues. Talk him into it!

[Rifleman]

Many of the people who fought for the founding freedoms of this country weren't professional soldiers and had no formal training. Here's another quote that I like:

“Before any standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because

the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States…

[The people] will instantly inspire the inclination to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive.” --Noah Webster

Just regular people. Home makers, farmers, doctors, lawyers, shop workers, you name it. Not professionally trained, not weekend warriors, just regular folks.

Training is good! Training is not required, however.

Excellent point.

edit to add: I did not intend for you to actually respond as to what you would do if it came to bearing arms. Purely rhetorical. Excellent answer though.

[TGO David]

And I don't mean to sound like I'm shooting down training. Training is an excellent tool and people really should avail themselves of it any time that they can.

[Punisher84]

Gonna jump back in on this real quick for a quick clarification. Quality training is great. Take it, use it, but know WHY you are taking it. If you wanna take a "high-speed tactical training course" go ahead, hey it could come in handy. I just don't like people who have completed the 2 day "High-Risk Tactical Level 8 Responsive Defender Course" from "Tacti-Cool U" and then walk around the shop or range like they know it all and then they can't hit an 8" pie plate at 3 yards. Get training, but be able to shoot before you think you're all "high-speed."

[GhostDog]

While at the range I shot some training drills (which reminded me of this thread). Triple S makes a good point. Know why you're training and what you want to gain from it. One will learn something from any training but certain training will be of more use to YOU in particular.

Which brings something else to mind. I've often heard the argument of "training vs competition". I don't see as an "either/or" situation but as a "both is better". Competition is not a substitute for training, but training alone leaves something to be desired as well. It depends on the shooter (if they know what they hope to gain and how to get there from here). Competition stress is a training aid just as training drills are. This will not apply to the shooter who sees competition shooting the same way he views his golf game. That doesn't mean it has to be the same for all of us. In addition to this, different types of competition are more applicable than others as far as a permit holder is concerned. Shooting 25 targets on a single stage while running around in the open doesn't "do it" for me (take it easy IPSC shooters, don't gang up on me!) but that's not to say that it has no training value. It teaches gun handling, marksmanship, and shooting on the move. Unfortunately, it can also teach standing in the open and not knowing when to advance to the rear! It's up to the shooter to glean the useful and discard the rest. If this is ALL one does (no other type competition or training) then it will probably condition the shooter to bad habits (things that get you hurt) but, again, it's up to the shooter to understand this. On the other hand, if one sets up a competition stage with a specific goal in mind (what you want to teach/learn/condition), then competition can be a very useful form of training. It won't replace training but it will supplement it. For example:

A man on man match: on signal both shooters draw and engage, first to knock down last (steel) target wins. Set up: one large steel target at 7yds, one paper at 3yds, and one small steel target at 10-12yds. Shooter must knock down large steel, engage paper with 2 rounds (at least one "5" hit), mandatory reload and knock down small steel. This does the following:

1) Conditions the shooter to gunfire other than his own in close proximity (which will crank up the stress)

2) Teaches shooter to adjust speed of fire (try to shoot the last target at the same speed as the paper and see what happens!)

3) Teaches speed reload under stress

4) Tests fundamentals (draw/presentation/ect.)

5) Shooter must THINK while shooting (gun handling/shooting fundamentals)

If the shooter can't operate the pistol like "second nature" then he will get a mental overload when you throw in variables.

So... please don't bother telling me that competition has no training value. It depends on the competition.

Man, that was longwinded. Sorry guys.

[Daniel]

i like that comp. you described. I miss shooting on a regular basis and im really glad i joined here.

[Im Neero]

I spend most of my time entertaining, but have spent enough time taking courses at Rangemaster to feel confident in my "training." Federal law enforcement is my current career plan, so I'll get plenty real tactical training when the time comes, for right now I spend most of my time shooting at golfballs and stuff.

[Daniel]

are you really shooting golfballs? with a handgun? if so at what distance?

i used to shoot bowling pins from ~100 yards with iron sights on a .22 i had when i was growing up wasnt hard at all id imagine golfballs would be tough.

[Im Neero]

Some friends and I invented a game that involves shooting golfballs. You tee off at 10 feet, and have 5 shots to get the ball down to the 50 foot mark, so I am shooting from 10 to 50 feet. It's loads of fun, but those things sure seem little when you have it way out near the 50' mark.

When we go to longer ranges with rifles it's normally coke cans or something. We shoot paper too, but I spend a lot more time with the instant gratification targets than is probably productive.