Article: Building Shooting Muscle

[TGO David]

Found this on PoliceOne and thought it was worth reposting here. It has some good insight on how to train to develop practical shooting tactics not just for law enforcement officers but for anyone who carries a gun for self defense, IMO.

Training Survival: Building shooting muscle

By Ralph Mroz

Since you carry a gun for self-defense or to save the life of another, then you are concerned with combative firearms skills rather than shooting merely for the experience of shooting. To reach this goal, you engage in training, mostly in the form of practice on a range. How close you get to your goal will depend on the effectiveness of your training.

Let’s use weight lifting and body building as an analogy. If you want to get bigger and stronger, we know that you have to concentrate on working the large muscle groups of the legs, back, chest and shoulders. You do this by training mostly with the foundational exercises for these muscles: squats, dead lifts, bench presses, presses, rows, pull-downs and so on. There’s a total of maybe a dozen core exercises on which you spend most of your time. Yet there are hundreds of lifts you could do, and most of these work the smaller muscles. They are useful, but if your goal is size and strength, you use them sparingly, since you have only a limited amount of time and energy. Mostly these ancillary exercises are used to refine your shape and to add variety in your core routine to avoid boredom.

But if you go into any gym, you’ll see people spending their precious training time on these secondary exercises. Either they don’t know any better, or they think they have invented a "better" way, or they read in a magazine somewhere that so-and-so does this exercise, or they’re bored with the core exercises.

Now, go to any range and watch people there. You’ll see a great deal of shooting for tiny groups, with eyes focused on the sights of the pistol — regardless of the range. You’ll see people shooting at ten to thirty yards, rather than at zero to seven yards. You’ll see people standing still as they shoot. And so on.

Now, it is certainly a better marksman and better shooter who can shoot tiny groups, particularly at long ranges. But in the light of our goals, these kinds of skills are secondary. They are far less likely to be needed for our job than other, more foundational, skills. How do we know this? Here’s three sources.

The first is the consistent statistics from law enforcement shootings in which officers were killed. These FBI-compiled numbers have been pretty much the same for many years: 50% of LEOs killed are killed at five feet or less, and 75% killed are killed at ten feet or less. The second source is the Police Marksman Association survey done in 1992 showing the average police gunfight was won at about 20 feet seven yards (but note that this conclusion was from a pretty small sample.) Finally, there is the data from NYPD’s SOP-9 that indicates that from 1994-2000, 69% of their shootings (of all types) were at two yards or less, and 88% were at seven yards of less. These numbers are pretty consistent form year to year.

So what do these statistics mean in terms of training? That the bench press and squats of firearms survival training are the techniques to handle threats at seven yards and in. We detail the techniques relevant to these distances below, but first, a caveat.

We do most emphatically not mean to say that training at long handgun distances (15 to 50 yards) is not useful or even not important. Police officers certainly have to engage in long-range shooting on the job. We are just noting that these long-range skills are less likely to have to be used than close-range skills — that’s just the facts — and thus we suggest that they constitute your ancillary — not core — training. Longer range skills and super-tight marksmanship skills are the equivalent of weight exercises to develop the smaller muscle groups. They are less likely to be used, but they can 1) be useful in and of themselves, 2) they help to keep the training interesting, and 3) they round you out.

Contact distance to 2-3 yards At this distance, if you do not already have your gun out, and you are facing a deadly force attack, you simply will not have time to draw your weapon. The physics of the situation dictate that you will have to at least initially deal with this attack with empty hands techniques. This reality, of course, means that the "equalizing" factor of the firearm — one of its chief advantages — is negated. It also means that life is unfair, as the small, the weak, the injured and the older are at a disadvantage to their undoubtedly younger, more fit attacker. Life is, in fact, not fair. Sorry.

Your only choice here, if you want to honestly deal with your most likely self-defense scenario, is to pick up some vicious empty hand techniques. These, of course, work better if you are in shape, whatever your age. Such techniques are called "combatives" these days, as opposed to "martial arts". The integration of combatives with the use of the firearm generally goes by the term "extreme close quarters shooting", and the leading edge material in this area today comes from a man known as "SouthNarc", for the apparent reason. His DVD on the subject, "Fighting Handgun Volume I" is available from Shivworks, www.shivworks.com, and is highly recommended.

3 yards to 7 yards At this distance, if you are trying to hit an exposed person, the proven method of Applegate-style target focused shooting (as opposed to many other methods of "point shooting") is the most likely technique to be useful. This is for the simple reason that under a lot of stress (some combination of startle and fear), you are hard-wired to look at the threat, not anything less important from an evolutionary viewpoint, like your sights. (Of course, if you aren’t much startled, or not in much fear, you may well be able to focus on your sights.) Here the gun is held very firmly, the gun raised to intersect the eye/target line, and the trigger pulled. The technique works both one-handed and two-handed, and most people find that that the tighter they hold the gun, the better results they get (relaxed, "firm but not too tight" holds work well, by contrast, for precision and non-stressful shooting.) Since most shooters have been trained to look for their front sight, practicing target-focused shooting takes some mental concentration. Interestingly, when I am having a not-good day on the range with semi-sighted fire at these distances, if I force myself to target-focus, I can often improve results. If you are in a law enforcement or military unit, Lou Chiodo of Gunfighters Ltd (www.gunfightersltd.com) is a great source for instruction in this method of shooting.

7-10 yards and out At these distances, traditional sighted shooting is appropriate. And we strongly recommend that you practice it, and not only because longer range shooting may be necessary. When we cite the distances above, we are assuming that you need to hit a man-sized attacker. Hits anywhere on the torso are acceptable, with most instructors insisting on hits within a roughly 8½ x 11 inch area (the size of a standard piece of paper) as the goal. If you have only a part of your attacker available as a target, then the precision demanded of you increases, and thus the effective distance increases. A half a man target area available at 5 yards is about the same difficulty as a whole man at 10 yards, and so on.

[Guest GlocKingTN]

Good reading Tungsten!

[Guest Phantom6]

I've trained with Ralph and highly respect his views. He was originaly a martial artist. He (as well as I) believes that if you only have a hammer then every problem is viewed as a nail. Unfortunately real life can often present you with a screw (pun intended). That is to say that if your only tool is a gun then every problem is solved with a shooting solution. Since many if not most scenarios revolving around self defense will take place at extremely close quarters you need to be able to go hands on with your assailant until you can get an opportunity to safely present your pistol. You must go on the offense. As long as you are reacting to your assailant he is in control of the moment and you are behind the curve. The moment you agress on your agressor the tables are turned in a direction the BG is not expecting and then he is reacting to you and therefore you now control the moment. He is behind the curve now so that you may now terminate the threat.

[Guest Shooting Coach]

Good article!

Steel sharpens steel. Butter can not sharpen steel.

A 350 lb lardo sitting in the corner of a classroom is not capable of getting you past basic shooting skills.

A good trainer lives what he teaches, and walks the walk. Look for them. There a lot of talkers in this industry. Very few walkers.

[strickj]

nice!

when my indoor range is empty i shoot with lights off,and practice drawing,reloading,clearing jams,ect..

makes me more comfortable with those late night trips to wally world

[Guest Boomhower]

when my indoor range is empty i shoot with lights off,and practice drawing,reloading,clearing jams,ect..

makes me more comfortable with those late night trips to wally world

When you say "my", are you talking personally, or a range you are a member of?...and if your a member, they let you do that kind of stuff?? That sounds pretty cool, and I would have never expected to hear something like that.

[Mark@Sea]

Interesting article.

On the other hand, my wife scored better than the chief of police and every deputy at the range when she went for her permit shoot.

You can't miss fast enough to win.

Boomhower, many moons ago when I had shore duty in Norfolk, I was a member of a private range, had my own key, and if I felt like shooting at 2 am it wasn't a problem. Shot from ahead of the line, shot from the draw and so forth...

[strickj]

When you say "my", are you talking personally, or a range you are a member of?...and if your a member, they let you do that kind of stuff?? That sounds pretty cool, and I would have never expected to hear something like that.

a range i am a member of,and i should clarify a bit more.its not complete darknes.the lights down range are on.it would be nearly impossible to shoot in total dark,and i know i could not get away with that

[molonlabetn]

Good points, all.

I've been shooting at 8.5"x11" sheets of paper for targets for a while now, because it's cheaper and about the same size as a torso... this certainly validates that practice.

[The Rabbi]

Good article!

Steel sharpens steel. Butter can not sharpen steel.

A 350 lb lardo sitting in the corner of a classroom is not capable of getting you past basic shooting skills.

A good trainer lives what he teaches, and walks the walk. Look for them. There a lot of talkers in this industry. Very few walkers.

Yeah. Who'd want to learn from a lard-ass like this guy?

[Guest canynracer]

LMAO...

but didnt he do slim fast or something like that?

[Guest Phantom6]

Oops. Wrong area

[Guest Shooting Coach]

Dear Rabbi

Have been busy. The old guy is telling a child how to play a game. He likely cannot demonstrate the technique he is describing.

Demonstrating a life saving defensive shooting technique to an adult, or an Operator is a different ball game (pun intended). LOL

Wouldn't you want a defensive firearms Instructor to ably demonstrate a technique he wants you to try? I may be slow, but I WANT my Instructor to demonstrate techniques. He is (hopefully) showing me techniques I will pass on to my students.

Once you get beyond bare bones basics, it is time to SHOW AND TELL.

[The Rabbi]

He might be able to demonstrate it without being a super-ninja. Take a look at the pics of the older Rex Applegate. Anyone want to tell me they wouldn't take a class from this man?

Being a good shooter/defense "operator" and being a good teacher are not synonymous.

[Cruel Hand Luke]

Agree 100% with the article. Actually I posted something very similar here several months back.

On teachers....there are hard core operators out there that have killed more people than small pox that just do not have the verbal skills to teach. There are also good teachers (think college professors) who have no concept of physical violence or interpersonal conflict resolution. Experience is important but obviously so is teaching ability. You may know EVERYTHING to be known...but if you cannot pass it on so that others understand it and can do it then teaching is not your bag.

Obviously if the guy you are learning from cannot demonstrate on demand (without warming up) what he is teaching then you might question that. While it does not take a master level shooter to teach basic marksmanship and gunhandling the more skill the instructor has the more skill he can pass on. Obviously if your instructor has never done one handed reloads while moving then he probably is not going to be confident in teaching that to you. And if he doesn't shoot well, then you have to question just how much he knows about it if he can't do it on demand. If he can't clean any course of fire he is having you shoot then that might be something of concern.

Referring to Applegate, when he was 70 years old he might not have been physically ready to go hands on with 2 younger and bigger assailants, but he could definitely teach the concepts and techniques because he had done it when he was younger. Same with Jim Cirillo. Unfortunately both have passed on now.

[Marswolf]

He might be able to demonstrate it without being a super-ninja. Take a look at the pics of the older Rex Applegate. Anyone want to tell me they wouldn't take a class from this man?

Being a good shooter/defense "operator" and being a good teacher are not synonymous.

I have to agree. Some of the best teachers I ever learned from had been in the action, but not for a while. They were able to explain why some things had to be done in a particular way. Just calmly explain.

There are lots of folks out there who can do (or think they can do) stuff, but not too many are really good teachers.

[deerslayer]

I perceive a general feeling that older, fatter guys are incapable of doing more than quickly consuming beer. Competitively, I have been outshot, outrun, and outsmarted by guys who had 25 more years and twice my girth. NEVER judge a man strictly by his looks.

[Cruel Hand Luke]

True. I know several guys that are what some would consider "fat" (but not chronicly obese)that would be a bad guy's worst nightmare. But OBVIOUSLY the better shape you are in the better off you are...

[Guest Shooting Coach]

I am dating myself, but have trained with Col. Applegate. An exceptional person, to say the least.

[Marswolf]

I am dating myself,

Uh, that doesn't sound like a lot of fun.

[Guest Phantom6]

Uh, that doesn't sound like a lot of fun.

Probably better for you than french kissing your sister. After all, you get to keep the jewelry after you look into the mirror and say to yourself, "No, no, no. It's not you, it's me. I just need to be movin' on."

Or, was that not the kind of dating you meant?

[strickj]

I am dating myself

norman bates?