Differences in Types of Training

[Brian LaMaster]

In order to get the proper training, one must first understand the differences in the FIGHT that people encounter. “Civilian” encounters are different from Law Enforcement and Military encounters. Most people do not think abut the different types of “firearms” training that exists. Why is it important to know the differences in the types of training? Simply put, it is the application of the tactics. What works in one environment may not work in another. Each type of training approaches the FIGHT from different aspects in regards as to how the FIGHT takes place, resources available, etc. Quite honestly, the approach to “firearms” training matters more than most realize. Again, what works in a Law Enforcement or Military encounters does not necessarily transfer over to a “civilian” conflict.

For the most part, “firearms” instructors lack in several areas of civilian conflict instruction. The first thing that they lack is the understanding of how confrontations really take place. Just because you have “data” to work with, does not tell you how fights actually take place. Data can tell you how many attackers, weapons used, approximate distance, etc. What it cannot tell you is what type of training the victim has received, what transpired, why the criminal(s) disengaged and fled, etc. In other words, there is no real good data for “civilian” conflicts and how they take place. In addition, they lack knowledge in the area of unarmed combatives which is most important when dealing with a life threatening situation from a civilian perspective. The tactics for civilian conflicts (those carrying firearms) should be developed from an unarmed combatives perspective.

One of the problems with Military and Law Enforcement tactics and training is that they normally only offer solutions if you have a gun. If you don’t have a gun, then the training they offer is pretty much “useless”. In order to get the training that you need with unarmed combatives, you will have to seek out a true combat school. Ideally a good school will integrate the use of unarmed combatives with a variety of tools including but not limited to; expandable baton, knife, gun, etc. Unfortunately there are less than a handful of schools that exist who teach the integration of unarmed combatives with firearms and Innovative Tactical Concepts is one of those schools. Ultimately, unarmed combatives should be the first and last resort for most civilian conflicts.

Alright, let’s talk about the FIGHT from a Law Enforcement perspective. Although LEO’s are civilians, their training is not that of which would ideally be used by the average citizen defending themselves. Not forgetting that we teach tactics to LE. Most of the time LEO’s respond to a civilians cry for help through dialing 911or seeing something take place first hand, when they arrive, they know there is a possibility for violence to take place. This alone is a huge advantage over how most civilian conflicts take place. For the most part, “civilians” are caught by “surprise” and they are behind the curve when dealing with a situation. When called to a situation, LE has a heightened level of awareness. At least one gun is present at every scene where there is an officer. If backup is present, then there are several handguns present which can help calm the situation down very quickly. More assistance may be on the way which will help the officer control the situation.

Furthermore, LE arrives in a car which provides some concealment and cover. LE also can keep their distance in order to increase their reaction time and keep them out of immediate danger. At times a patrol officer may have a long gun present in their vehicle as a backup weapon. Their sidearm is already exposed so they don’t have the issues of clearing a cover garment. Not to mention their hand may already be on their gun! Body armor is pretty much a requirement for today’s LEO’s. How many civilians wear body armor on a regular basis? Not forgetting that criminals are afraid of getting arrested so they may run when the Police show up or the sirens are coming. LEO’s have had firearms training whereas a lot of civilians don’t even shoot on a regular basis and most have not had any type of formal training. A tactical light is probably present and possibly in hand. Misc. resources are available such as SWAT and K9 units.

So, as you can see, when entering a potentially dangerous situation, LE has an upper hand most of the time over “civilian” conflicts. To compare LE and civilian encounters most of the time is unrealistic. Which is why that a lot of things taught in “traditional” firearms training that stems from LE training is not necessarily what civilians need to know and use. Civilians are under the curve and have to use tactics that provide them with the best chance of survival which may mean fighting “dirty”.

As far as the Military FIGHT is concerned, more than likely they know they are in a war zone and have a long gun. Having a long gun is a HUGE advantage over having a handgun for a “gun battle”. Soldiers may also have a backup side arm. Like law enforcement, soldiers may have the luxury of body armor. When in battle, there are normally several soldiers working together. Distance is normally on their side unless they are doing CQC/CQB. And, whether they are using a long gun or pistol, their gun is normally in hand ready to use. How much of an advantage is this?! Two handed shooting stances are used in order to utilize body armor. Again, distance is normally a factor, which requires accurate shots which are normally two handed when using a handgun (keep in mind that most soldiers use rifles and the handgun is their backup weapon). The average distance of a military encounter is about 100 yards or more. This distance requires the adversary to be a “good shot”, especially when the opponent is moving. Not forgetting that they have air and artillery support and possibly even sniper support.

Civilian conflicts. Most of the time we just “find” ourselves in the situation and have to react to is as opposed to knowing that we are heading to danger like LE or Military personnel. We have loved ones to worry about, so everything we do, we have to consider them as well. We are accountable for every round that is fired, so we have to be aware of what is behind the attacker(s). Civilians may face multiple threats with or without a firearm, and normally you will be the only person carrying a gun (if at all) when you are with others. Body armor is more than likely not present. Civilians may not have cover or concealment nearby. Most people do not have a long gun present or nearby while out and about. A lot of people have not received realistic formal training and do not practice drawing from concealment and shooting. What that means, is that they may not have the confidence necessary to attempt to draw their gun and use it. The distance at which most confrontations take place is 10 feet or less. The attacker(s) see you as the victim. Most confrontations take place in low lighting conditions which impairs ones ability to act or react. Civilians have to clear their garment with the possibility of getting the gun hung up on the concealment garment.

Some of the common elements of all three types of conflicts are the threat (single or multiple), victim(s), weapons, and adrenaline. It is the approach to the fight that matters most! There are other elements of the fight that are not present in LE or Military conflicts or that greatly influence civilian conflicts and not the others. We are working on an article regarding the elements of a fight from a civilian perspective.

The following are some things that are not applicable to a lot of civilian situations. Two handed shooting stances because most people do not wear body armor. Two handed shooting stances take longer to obtain and at close distances such as 0-10 feet they do not provide more ‘accuracy” than one handed shooting. Extending your arms out to full extension when an attacker is within 10 feet of you is not a good idea because the attacker could take the gun away. Lateral movement does not create distance quickly enough away from the attacker to provide optimal chances of survival when facing someone with a gun or a knife. Other directions of movement are often a better direction of movement over lateral movement. However, most “firearms” schools teach lateral movement because they want you to get off the line of attack (also known as the “X”). We agree with getting off the line of attack, just not necessarily laterally. Of course, your situation will dictate which way you move, not what the instructor tells you to do!

Speed of movement in a lot of firearms schools is relatively slow because they preach “shot” placement. Well, to be honest, precision shot placement is pretty hard to achieve in a dynamic situation. Statistically speaking, your hit ratio is going to be approximately 20%. And only about 20% of people who are shot die as a result of being shot. The question is what is your goal in a confrontation? Is it to eliminate the threat, or is it to stay alive? Staying alive does not always mean taking the threat out. Taking into consideration the average hit ratio and fatality rate, do you think that you should be moving slower or fast to give you the best chance of survival. We teach that when you move, you should do so as quickly as possible.

[Brian LaMaster]

Traditional Firearms Trainers
Now, let’s take a look at “Civilian” firearms trainers. A lot of civilian trainers have been trained by someone with LE or military backgrounds. Therefore, their training is most likely going to be pretty similar to those who teach LE or military. Again, the tactics and methods of shooting in LE or Military conflicts do not always (or most of the time) transfer over to civilian situations.

In any case, just because someone has “experience” in a real “gunfight” does not mean they have something to teach you. Maybe the tactic they used for that particular moment in that situation was the right thing to do. Truth of the matter is, it could have been one of the worst things they could have done but they survived it with luck. You might want to read that again. Unfortunately there are a number of instructors out there who have been in several gun fights because of their profession and they think that their tactics will work in every or most situations. Again, just because someone survived a situation does not mean it is “the” way to deal with the situation. You can take the same situation and use the same tactic and get killed or seriously injured. In many of the situations these “professionals” have encountered, distance may very well have been greater than most situations the average person will find themselves in. So, regardless of what tactic you learn, unless you train at it, you cannot count on that tactic to work. The reality of it is that it may not work under the “right” conditions because nothing is guaranteed to work!

It is important to take a look at the different types of training in the civilian market. For the most part there are trainers that stem from Law Enforcement and Military training in some manner and there are “reality based trainers”.

As I mentioned earlier, a two handed shooting stance is not a good idea when you are within 10 feet of an attacker—period. Yet I constantly see instructors teaching “realistic” or “close range” tactics with their arms extended fully towards the threat. And yes, this includes some of the “biggest” names out there in firearms training. Traditional trainers are good for teaching basics of shooting and possibly some advanced target acquisition techniques, etc. However, when it comes down to defending yourself in a realistic manner based upon the reality of how most life threatening situations take place, well, this is where most of them fall short. How can we say such a thing? Well, because we used to teach these things too. However, after countless hours of training against someone who is trying to kill us, we found that most of the tactics taught by most instructors will not work under real life threatening confrontations. Not forgetting that the common myth about firearms training is that you will be able to hit your target and take them immediately out of the fight which rarely happens. Normally within the first two hours of Advanced Pistol Fighting students will learn from experience that going straight for your gun is not going to keep you alive in most situations, at least not how most firearms instructors teach doing so. And, even if you do shoot the attacker they are probably not going to just fall down and die. More than likely you are going to incur some type of injury.

Another thing is knowing when to execute a specific tactic. A lot of trainers fail to teach this as well. You can read an article on Implementing a Tactic or Technique Into a Fight here. http://www.modernwarriortalk.com/for...ead.php?t=2053

Traditional trainers have things to offer the average person. They can teach you the basics of firearms safety and shooting. In addition, they can teach you target acquisition while moving and shooting. We are not saying they don’t have something to offer you. What we are saying is that the training is limited and there are a lot of things that “typical” trainers are missing out on regarding the fight aspect of things. Things that are very important in your survival. Your typical firearms instructor teaches to rely on the gun getting the job done. This is something that we feel is not good.

Reality Based Trainers
Can someone who has a background primarily in firearms training truly offer reality based training? It is unlikely (but not impossible) that an instructor can provide quality reality based training if they have a background other than from an unarmed combative system. I am talking about a TRUE combat art and not something that is sport oriented. The primary reason that most instructors cannot offer true reality based training is because most of their training is based around the use of the gun and not surviving the fight. A large number of instructors are claiming to teach reality based training, but are really teaching the same thing as other non reality based instructors. As with all “trends” there is a buzz word and reality based is being abused by those who do not truly offer reality based training. Unfortunately not everyone who claims they are teaching reality based training is indeed offering this type of training.

Reality based training is simply training that deals with some of the most likely situations you might find yourself in. Some firearms training scenarios are so far from “reality” that it is pretty much a waste of time and money for the students. Not to mention that in some of the situations you would die because you are focusing on using the gun to resolve the situation instead of remaining in the fight by whatever means necessary.

In order to truly benefit from reality based training, it has to emulate a real life threatening situation as much as possible. The only way to accomplish that is to have a “free flowing” attacker and victim. That is, you don’t know what the attacker is going to do, as well as the victim. This is normally where force-on-force training comes into play. But again, not all force-on-force training is done correctly and with all types of training there are limitations.

Someone with a strong martial arts background understands fighting. After all, isn’t a life threatening situation a FIGHT? Those of us who train with unarmed combatives understand practically every aspect of the fight from a fight perspective. A true combat system will integrate all tools seamlessly. However, unless you have trained extensively in unarmed combatives, you cannot possibly see and experience most of the elements of the fight that people are most likely to encounter. Again, there ARE differences in the approach to the fight and the elements in a fight for civilians, Law Enforcement, and Military.

Now, if you are interested in learning an integrated combatives system that is realistic and practical, you should check out our Advanced Pistol Fighting course. This course was featured in the April 2008 issue of SWAT Magazine. We currently have the course for sale on DVD for a very reasonable price. Even if you cannot make it to one of our classes, the DVD is a great learning tool for a great price!

If you think that a good presentation with a two handed shooting platform is going to work against a gun or knife wielding attacker, then you should probably attend our Advanced Pistol Fighting course where we will put this tactic to the test.