Clint Smith On Revolvers

I'd like to know some more of the details of that shooting. Was the BG buggered in behind cover? Was he lying in wait for unsuspecting officers? Was some of the fire the officers were doing, done while on the run while attempting to find cover?

Not sure how that situation plays into the revolver vs semi auto in as much as it pertains to marksmanship under a high stress/volatile and dynamic situation.

When a couple of recent LE shootings were being discussed among some instructors, it was commented upon on how the suspects had quickly hit their intended targets with only 1-2 rounds, with immediate effect. Sadly ironic.

Proactive versus Reactive

When a couple of recent LE shootings were being discussed among some instructors, it was commented upon on how the suspects had quickly hit their intended targets with only 1-2 rounds, with immediate effect. Sadly ironic.

Click to expand...

I think there's an actual explanation, rather than simple irony - the person who is in predator mode seems to score better hits than the person who is in prey mode. Point shooting, for example, seems to work spontaneously for aggressors but has not always worked consistently for defenders, some of whom have actually had some training in it. While the philosophy would not likely stand up well in court, "Don't get mad, get even," seems to refocus the shooter from emotion to intent. A more politically correct expression might be to shift as quckly as possible from a reactive to a proactive mode.

That kind of commentary pisses me off. It's a very rare and fearless man who can marshall each shot when under fire, and anyone who hasn't been there ought to just shut up.

YUP!!! Better to have a few that will work than a lot that won't. I attened Clint's facility and the man knows his stuff! In a society where everyone percieves more and bigger as being better, well folks...it's not always so.
I contently carry 5 shots in a revovler and have yet to feel lessened by it's capacity. Even the auto I carry has but 8 rounds of capacity. People simply need to take the ime to actually learn how to shoot thier firearms effectively and accuartely rather than rely on 13 or 15 shots that might hit thier intended target.
then...ppl should also partake in QUALITY courses as well not just the bare minimum required for thier carry permits. Gota love all those with 6 or 8 hrs of classroom discussion thinking they're the latest and greatest Tactical Ted.

*

A respectful disagreement...

That kind of commentary pisses me off. It's a very rare and fearless man who can marshall each shot when under fire, and anyone who hasn't been there ought to just shut up. -- krs

krs, I appreciate your sentiment. I do believe that we have the tendency to oversimplify the stress level during a shooting. I presume that you have had the misfortune of being in the horrible predicament of being under fire and I will never disregard the terror of such an experince. However, I do expect everyone who chooses to carry a firearm to marshal each and every shot. I am not expecting it for the sake of accuracy (that is an important but secondary reason). I am obligating everyone to do so because I grew up in a neighborhood where innocent bystanders were hit due to carelessly fired rounds. The police shot a 22 year old man 19 times for reaching for his wallet while he was in his home!!! Do I concede that an unwise move will get you shot? Yes. But 19 times!!! :banghead: The man was unarmed so none of the shots were intended to "return" fire. For this reason I resonate with Clint Smiths wording. There is a difference between shots needed and shots fired. They fired this many times because they pulled the trigger without any marshaling, which may have resulted in 1, 2, or 3 rounds instead of 19. If you carry a firearm (LEO or CCW) marshaled firing is a duty. If this were a presumed responsability of all gun carriers, then the revolver would recieve its due respect.

Sorry about the soapbox.

Heavy

First, I still think C. S.'s original S&W TR21 was gaudy looking - so, I guess I'm still a 'turd sucker'! I enjoy some of C.S.'s comments, writings, and, even his TV presentations. We are both entitled to our opinion.

Now, one thing that always must be in the back one's mind - especially if he/she launched the errant rounds, is where did they go? Whether you are Joe Blow the homeowner or a LEO, you are responsible for every round you fire - and should be held legally responsible for them, too.

The shooting through a closed door of innocent Amidou D'Allou (sp?) several years ago by NYPD detectives should be taught in every LEO department. There was no excuse for that... they even reloaded.

Stainz

Until Smith apologizes for calling those who disagrees with him Turd Suckers, his opinion doesn't mean doodlly to me.

Click to expand...

I was on the shooting line at Thunder Ranch, doing an endless series of draw--get on target--maybe shoot--recover/resafe/reholster reps. As he passed, I mentioned to him that one of the steps some of us were taking (we all had different guns) might cause a one-in-a-million safety problem. He listenened to me without interrupting, paused a moment, and then said, loudly, "Cease fire. Listen up, everyone. We're going to make a small change to the drill." Just like that.

We did the drill with the Loosedhorse modification the rest of the week; I have no idea if he reverted to the old drill after our class left, but I like to think the change stuck.

I also witnessed him react to another shooter, who (I came to assume--I didn't hear the original exchange) had opined that the method he was recommending for jam clearence would not work dependably. He (not exactly angry, but clearly now in competitive mode) then asked us all to create double-feed jams on our pistols (we had previously been instructed how to do this safely) and place them in front of us, and proceeded to walk down the entire line clearing each gun and placing two rounds on target. Continued instructing (with QUITE a sharpness to his words) the entire time. I don't think he ever took as long as 10 seconds to undo a jam, and mostly it was closer to 4 seconds per gun.

In other words, I've seen him adjust his training regimen on the fly to one criticism he agreed with, and take a few minutes of class time to demonstrate as clearly as possible the falseness of another criticism.

"Turd-sucker?" Never heard him direct that term at anyone. Read the same article you did, and found that he used the term to refer to a vague class of people who spend much of their time looking for something to complain about, seeing the bad and not the good.

Just one person's experience, and my limited time in his class does not qualify me as a Clint Smith expert.

stainz is right on by stating "Whether you are Joe Blow the homeowner or a LEO, you are responsible for every round you fire - and should be held legally responsible for them, too." Darn right. One of the first things Clint said at his class I took was comparing a pencil to a gun. The pencil can erase it's marks with the eraser. The gun has no such ability. The marks it leaves are permanant.
You shoot, you better be darn sure where those bullets are going.