Is this a thing?
An insanely dangerous "thing".
Is this a thing?
Russia’s Federal Security Service, called the FSB – and successor to the KGB – shoots their agents center mass to give them confidence in a terrorist-controlled situation where bullets might be flying by their heads.
So I have a friend who is a combat veteran. He has stated that he would be interested in sharing some combat training tactics he received in the military.
One of the training tactics he says he used in iraq was a particular live fire drill,
Whereby one person fires on a target at 30 yards,
While their training partner walks downrange and stands next to the target as it is being fired at
With live ammunition.
I have never heard of this being done in the US military and frankly I don't see the utility.
Is this a thing?
You're the only one here (I assume) who knows what kind of experience your buddy has. "Combat veteran" in itself, doesn't really mean anything. That could range from once hearing a few mortar impacts 500 yards away to a CAG operator with 20 combat deployments. I'll let you guess which one I'd be confident in receiving training from and conducting "down range" drills with.So I have a friend who is a combat veteran. He has stated that he would be interested in sharing some combat training tactics he received in the military.
You're the only one here (I assume) who knows what kind of experience your buddy has. "Combat veteran" in itself, doesn't really mean anything. That could range from once hearing a few mortar impacts 500 yards away to a CAG operator with 20 combat deployments. I'll let you guess which one I'd be confident in receiving training from and conducting "down range" drills with.
According to the comments on YouTube, the instructor who sent up this travesty is James Yeager.Photographer on the Firing Line
I was not reacting to the tactical training discussion, but to the video showing a photographer between the targets during live fire.This is not a bunch of guys at the local range doing something stupid.
Thanks for this, I was waiting to see what you would say.This training is not conducted the way everyone thinks it is. It's planned with safety in mind and conducted with a lot of safety measures in place. No one just goes downrange and stands by a target. It may surprise those who have never served but the Army has put people downrange while other people were shooting forever. Way back in 1974 when I went through BCT (Basic Combat Training) everyone went through IMT (individual movement techniques) training. The final training event for that block was the live fire IMT lane. A pair of soldiers maneuvered on a machine gun nest a couple hundred meters downrange. There was a propane operated machine gun simulator in the machine gun position and two "F" silhouette targets on knock down target mechanisms. The soldiers started 20 or 30 meters apart and advanced on the machine gun position, one firing while the other moved. The machine gun simulator stopped firing when you knocked one of the silhouettes down. The team maneuvered to hand grenade range and threw a practice grenade into the machine gun position. This was run with blanks a couple times before live fire. An instructor followed the soldiers through the lane to make sure they didn't point weapons at each other. These were the newest soldiers in the Army and the only experience they had was Basic Rifle Marksmanship. And this was for all soldiers of all MOS. It wasn't in Infantry AIT.
There are plenty of other training exercises that place soldiers downrange while other soldiers are shooting in the same direction. You have to remember that we do this in combat. There are control measures in place to prevent fratricide in both offensive and defensive operations and you have to train on those measure. These exercises are meticulously planned, the safety measures are usually briefed and approved two levels up the chain of command.
This is not, "Hey Joe, go stand by that target while we shoot the target." It's planned, briefed and approved. The training event has to meet the standards in appropriate regulations, if it's conducted on an installation it not only has to be approved by the chain of command but also by range control. The safety officers are assigned, briefed, trained and certified. Yes boys and girls you don't just get tapped on the shoulder and told you're safety NCO today. There is formal training and certification and the battalion and range control keep a list of safety certified officers and NCOs. The exercise is run dry (no ammunition) with blanks and finally with live ammunition. You only get to live fire after you've ran it dry and with blanks until you can do it safely. We liked to use MILES during the blank fire runs so we could tell who was getting shot by their buddy.
This is not a bunch of guys at the local range doing something stupid.
What do you think a civilian "should be training for"?I agree there are tactical team training activities that are way beyond what any civilian should be training for.
Marksmanship for competition, self defense, home defense, legal aspects of self defense (Law of Self Defense), interaction with law enforcement, and possibly active shooter reaction (especially if on a school or church security team).What do you think a civilian "should be training for"?
I see. I believe the 2A's primary purpose is to maintain the ability of the people to defend themselves against tyranny. You disagree, I presume?Self defense, home defense, and possibly active shooter reaction (especially if on a school or church security team).
What civilians do not need are tactical team activities like clearing rooms, and assaulting facilities. Squad tactics are not what we civilians need, even if it may be fun. I have no problem with folks taking those team tactics course for challenge and fun, but consider them fun extras, as opposed to defense skills need.
Before we go too far down this rabbit hole I'd like to remind everyone that more then half of the states have Paramilitary Training laws that criminalize civilians conducting that type of training and there are a couple of provisions in the USA Patriot Act that could make it a federal crime should the US attorney see it as such. It's a very gray area.I see. I believe the 2A's primary purpose is to maintain the ability of the people to defend themselves against tyranny. You disagree, I presume?
If you think that's scary, imagine being expected to make the same downrange movement, in the same proximity to your partner's line of fire, while accurately operating your weapon, and under enemy fire incoming from further downrange.. . . and frankly I don't see the utility.
Not at all. What leads you to infer such in my personal philosophy?2A's primary purpose is to maintain the ability of the people to defend themselves against tyranny. You disagree, I presume?
If you expect to be able to do it under fire, you need to train for it.