How Do You Decide What to Train For?

[freyasman]

That would tell something about the likelihood of a violent attack, but that would be of little use in deciding what to train for.

Disagree; if you know what the most common type of predatory attack is for someone in your area, and of your demographic, then that helps you decide on what your training priorities are.

 

[Kleanbore]

...if you know what the most common type of predatory attack is for someone in your area, and of your demographic, then that helps you decide on what your training priorities are.

I don't know what you mean by "most common type of predatory attack", but violent attacks vary in nature, there is no reason to expect their nature to be related to one's specific area, and one should be trained to defend against any attack that is reasonably plausible.

 

[freyasman]

I don't know what you mean by "most common type of predatory attack", but violent attacks vary in nature, there is no reason to expect their nature to be related to one's specific area, and one should be trained to defend against any attack that is reasonably plausible.

Types of assaults will trend in certain areas for a certain amount of time; as people become aware of this and adjust their responses, the types of assaults will change as a result. Crime is done by criminals, and criminals adapt. As LEOs and others become aware of certain types of crimes in a given area, and start looking for that, the criminals will venture out into new territories. Plus different predators are attracted to different prey; a 44 yr old hispanic woman who cleans houses for a living and gets around by bus, gets attacked in a different way, and by different criminals, than the ones who try to carjack a 30 yr old Iraq vet in his Dodge Ram who lifts weights as a lifestyle.
You have to know what kind of criminal activity is endemic to the areas you live, work, and travel through. And then you have to do a realistic self-assessment, and try to figure out what types of crime are most likely to be directed at someone like you, and then start training to make yourself as unattractive a target as possible.

 

[Kleanbore]

Types of assaults will trend in certain areas for a certain amount of time; as people become aware of this and adjust their responses,...

What do you mean by "types of assaults"?

Plus different predators are attracted to different prey; a 44 yr old hispanic woman who cleans houses for a living and gets around by bus, gets attacked in a different way, and by different criminals, than the ones who try to carjack a 30 yr old Iraq vet in his Dodge Ram who lifts weights as a lifestyle.

How would that help me decide "what to train for"?

You have to know what kind of criminal activity is endemic to the areas you live, work, and travel through.

What one defends against is violent criminal attacks, on parking lots, coming out of buildings, at service stations, leading the car, etc. One trains to recognize them and to react to them effectively and timely.

I cannot imagine what attributes of the kinds of criminal activity that might be endemic to an area would impact any priority decisions regarding how to train.

The information might, however, impinge upon a decision on whether to go somewhere or not , or when.

There is one possible exception: in a crowded area, if one finds oneself being focused on by someone with a cellphone while walking, it should be a good idea to change pace and direction and turn, instantly. Good indication of a pending surprise attack. But I would not be influence very much at all by whether "knockout game" attacks had been "endemic to the area".

 

[hdwhit]

Corporal Agarn wrote:
Before I continue, I want to start with the disclaimer that I do not claim to be what I would consider an "expert" on mentally preparing for a combat experience.

Again, let me open by saying, "Thank You."

Your disclaimer is noted. But, I'm not looking to sue anyone.

I'm also not expecting anyone responding to be an expert. As we have already have someone post, it is not possible to train for every eventuality (if I were planning to train for every eventuality, I'd be training; I wouldn't have put the OP up in the first place) so I appreciate you taking the time to understand my question and share how you evaluate the threats and plan for what to deal with.

 

[Chasbo00]

Two things first: 1. I know it's the 21st century and the age of the internet and all, but reading books is still a great way to learn. 2. Don't assume my low post count is indicative of my knowledge and experience.

OP, I recommend you get the below linked book and read it.
https://www.amazon.com/Straight-Talk-Armed-Defense-Experts/dp/1440247544
Start with the chapter by Tom Givens 'Finding Relevant Training'. It's a great answer your question in this thread

 

[hdwhit]

Telekenesis wrote:
What country and how recent was this?

Early 1980's.

The country no longer exists.

I was embarking on getting credentials in forensic medicine to add to my credentials in forensic engineering. After I was asked to leave, I was unable to find another forensic medicine program to take me so I stayed in forensic engineering.

And, yes, I agree that trauma care has not only changed from the 1980's until now, but also what was available in former Warsaw Pact nations has also changed dramatically since the collapse of the Soviet Union.

 

[hdwhit]

Rexter wrote:
Regardless of the threat we are “most likely” to face, we do not get to choose the threat we will actually face.

Agreed.

And that was the entire point of my original post.

An individual clearly cannot train for all possible scenarios he/she might reasonably expect to encounter. So, the question is:

• How do YOU decide which of the many possible scenarios are the ones you will train for?
  
• What goes into your decision to formulate the possible scenarios?
  
• From those possible scenarios, how do you decide which is most likely?
  
• Having decided which is most likely, how to you decide what training is needed and how to get it?

Or, is it a case that you don't actually do any analysis similar to what I have described above and you use subjective criteria to choose the scenario? And if so, what are those criteria?

 

[hdwhit]

Kleanbore wrote:
There would be a difference in the amount of ambient light between scenarios 1 and 3.

To be frank, I regard that as a flippant and disrespectful answer to what has been a serious post.

Other than that, should the need to threaten or use deadly force arise in any of those scenarios, your training needs would not differ. The fundamentals are the same.

In my CCW (not called LTC) training class, I was taught to de-escalate so as to avoid the use of deadly force. And if we approach the scenarios from that standpoint - rather than simply assuming the first response will be to threaten or use deadly force - they are clearly distinct.

To review the questions:

1. If I am in downtown Dallas at 2:00 p.m. on a weekday, what sort of scenario(s) would I expect to face?
   
2. Would it be different than what I would expect to encounter in the suburban city of Frisco (34 miles to the north) while I'm on my nightly walk at 7:00 p.m.?
   
3. And would either of those be different from what I would expect to encounter on a farm 21 miles outside Mammoth Spring, Arkansas, at 3:00 a.m.?

Looking at these separately:

1. The principal problem is overly-aggressive pan-handlers. They may get too close, they may try to pick your pocket but the likelihood of any of them threatening your life is extremely low. I found buying an ex-French Foreign Legion jacket at the surplus store and putting it on while I walked from location to location while mumbling to myself made the pan-handlers think I was crazier than they were and I was left completely alone. No need for a CCW, no need for training beyond how to mumble. No problem.
2. Again, these have all been crimes of opportunity and rather than a CCW, a Mag-Lite flashlight that I have been able to wield as a club has been easier to bring into action as it doesn't need to be concealed. The police also seem to appreciate having their suspects beaten to within an inch of their lives to having them shot. Apparently there's a lot less paperwork.
3. In the final scenario, you're dealing with people intimately involved in the drug trade. There will be between three and five of them. A semi-automatic weapon is essential otherwise they will attempt to rush you. Approaches to the house should be well illuminated as they will likely attack at night. Unless you are also involved in the drug trade, they will have to wrong address, so a sharp, aggressive response is necessary to get them to realize their mistake. Unlike the border region, they will withdraw when they realize there is nothing to be gained by pressing the attack home. This is due to the peculiar culture of the region where you may be in church the next morning after trying to kill someone the night before.

So, yes, there are distinct differences between the three scenarios requiring very different approaches which differ from one another in several fundamental ways.

So, rather than saying that there's a difference between ambient light between 2:00 p.m. and 3:00 a.m., how about contributing something substantive towards answering the original question, which is: "How do you decide what to train for?"

 

[Old Dog]

An individual clearly cannot train for all possible scenarios he/she might reasonably expect to encounter. So, the question is:

• How do YOU decide which of the many possible scenarios are the ones you will train for?
  
• What goes into your decision to formulate the possible scenarios?
  
• From those possible scenarios, how do you decide which is most likely?
  
• Having decided which is most likely, how to you decide what training is needed and how to get it?

Hmm ..
I can't help but think many here are overthinking things a tad. I would hope that most here who've made the choice to carry a handgun for defensive purposes had already thought through the possible scenarios they might encounter, i.e., walking into a convenience store robbery, coming home to find your home was broken into, hearing a bump in the night and getting out of bed to investigate, walking away from a restaurant or theater with the wife when accosted by a rough-looking individual, shopping in the local mall on a mellow Saturday afternoon and hearing gunshots ...

There's so many possible scenarios that exist today with regard to incidents of public violence that if one stops to try and figure out which is most likely, one might go into brain-lock because the reality is --- today, anything can happen. If you're carrying a pistol while riding your bicycle down a city bike path and some terrorist comes up behind you in a rental truck mowing down all the cyclists like bowling pins, how do you defend against that?

Personally, I cannot decide what particular scenario might be the most likely that I'd encounter ... so I train on the fundamentals, continually working to be a better marksman while practicing drawing from concealment and shooting on the move. Competition helps get the adrenaline up and while it cannot simulate an actual gunfight, certainly in increases one's skill levels. I'm also fortunate to be the beneficiary of some awesome training courtesy of Uncle Sam and a few state, county and local governments ...

I don't typically stay out in public after midnight; I avoid public drinking establishments, I don't frequent shopping malls and I watch my movies after they come out in Blu-Ray ... I don't frequent bad parts of the city, nor do I socialize in public. I do go to restaurants, but we usually eat early dinners. The only time I ever feel really exposed is while hiking in the wilderness, fishing or hunting in remote areas or on long road trips, but there's a lot of ways to mitigate risk while participating in those activities.

I guess my answer is: I don't train for specific scenarios. I think about specific scenarios, and consider possible responses ... I train to shoot accurately, quickly and seek cover. Most of all, I practice avoidance.

Finally, though -- I totally believe in acquiring as much worthwhile training as one can afford both monetarily and time-wise. A recognized defensive handgun course taught by one of the masters is not only terrific fun, it'll usually turn you into a training junkie. But it's not just the tools -- courses taught by guys such as Massad Ayoob and Marty Hayes that lay the legal groundwork for you on defensive uses of firearms and teach you how to deal with the aftermath of a defensive use of firearms are, to me, just as valuable as that fun weekend carbine course ...

 

[Trunk Monkey]

I read an article a week or so ago by I think Greg Ellifritz to paraphrase my understanding the average concealed carrier should work on

Solid Draw.
Shooting Acurately / Shooting while moving
Clearing malfunctions
Reloading the weapon without fumbling

If you work on those basics they will translate to almost any scenario you find your self in

 

[freyasman]

What do you mean by "types of assaults"?

How would that help me decide "what to train for"?

What one defends against is violent criminal attacks, on parking lots, coming out of buildings, at service stations, leading the car, etc. One trains to recognize them and to react to them effectively and timely.

I cannot imagine what attributes of the kinds of criminal activity that might be endemic to an area would impact any priority decisions regarding how to train.

The information might, however, impinge upon a decision on whether to go somewhere or not , or when.

There is one possible exception: in a crowded area, if one finds oneself being focused on by someone with a cellphone while walking, it should be a good idea to change pace and direction and turn, instantly. Good indication of a pending surprise attack. But I would not be influence very much at all by whether "knockout game" attacks had been "endemic to the area".

Strong-arm robberies vs. bank jugging vs. express kidnapping for instance.....

You probably won't need to take a vehicle-based course will you?

How are you going to recognize it if you don't know what that crime looks like? Or even what it is?

 

[coloradokevin]

I did a search of this forum and while I found lots of posts about the importance of training, recommendations for training classes and opinions about various training techniques, I found scant advice on how someone who has never been in an SD situation goes about deciding what kinds of threats to train for given their particular environment.

So, how does someone go about deciding whether they need to train to deal with a former employer who has returned as a lone active shooter and a trio of thugs who have broken into your house at 4:00 am and ate now between you and your kids?

How does someone identify the threat they are most likely to face? How do they determine whether it will be one or multiple attackers? How do they determine whether the threat is more likely at home, office, or on the street?

Thanks.

My thoughts aren't unlike some of the answers that have already been posted:

1) Training for the fighting mindset is critical, as is training to be aware of your surroundings.

2) Learning how to operate the equipment you expect to carry is also critical. You need to know your gun, know your holster, know you can draw with the clothing you're wearing, etc. Along those same lines you'd always do well to practice some shooting under pressure, practice some malfunction drills, and so on.

3) It never hurts to expand your training horizons beyond shooting. Get a combat first aid class (or, better yet, a TCCC class if you can find one available to you).

As far as the biggest risk YOU face, that depends a lot on your own lifestyle. For example, if you live and work in an affluent area of outlying suburbia, your odds of getting car jacked are dramatically lower than they might be if you drive through the ghetto every night on the way home. If you make a lot of late night deposit runs to the bank's ATM your risk of a street robbery is probably higher than it is for the guy who only hits the mid-town bank branch on his lunch break. Those are just some arbitrary examples, but a lot of things come into play here.

 

[Kleanbore]

Strong-arm robberies vs. bank jugging vs. express kidnapping for instance.....

Why would any of those be more "endemic to the area where you live" than any other?

Strong arm robberies occur wherever there are victims. Bank jugging occurs in and around banks, regardless of area. Express kidnapping occurs wherever there are victims--we have had several in parking lots up-scale neighborhoods, but they can occur anywhere.

I try to stay alert and prepared for any of those and for a few other things. I would not use data regarding the frequency of occurrence in any one area to set my training priorities.

How are you going to recognize it if you don't know what that crime looks like? Or even what it is?

What?

There's so many possible scenarios that exist today with regard to incidents of public violence that if one stops to try and figure out which is most likely, one might go into brain-lock because the reality is --- today, anything can happen. ...

Personally, I cannot decide what particular scenario might be the most likely that I'd encounter ... so I train on the fundamentals,...

Yep!

 

[1911 guy]

I've thought more about it. Here's my training list, based on my own perceived needs, which I think are ordinary. Nothing unusual about my day to day life, no high risk activities.

Medical trauma class. If the last one you had was in the service or high school a decade or more ago, it's outdated.
Handgun classes. I CCW regularly. If I am ever in an armed confrontation again, it will likely be with a handgun. Draw, manipulation, malfunction clearance, handling pressure, etc.
Knife classes. If you carry a knife and have no training at all, someone is going to make you regret carrying a knife.
Shotgun and carbine classes. Lower on my list than handgun because I'm far less likely to need them.

Before, during and after these classes, read everything you can get your hands on (reputable stuff, anyway) about mindset and situational awareness. That's something you can apply daily.

You cannot train for three muggers in Suspicion Alley, Tucson Arizona at 11 P.M. on Tuesday, May 30th.
But you CAN train to make informed decision about whether you really need to be there, how to recognize suspicious and potentially threatening behavior, how to avoid such bad actors and, if needed, the skills to defend yourself effectively and clean up the aftermath.

 

[Kleanbore]

You cannot train for three muggers in Suspicion Alley, Tucson Arizona at 11 P.M. on Tuesday, May 30th.
But you CAN train to make informed decision about whether you really need to be there, how to recognize suspicious and potentially threatening behavior, how to avoid such bad actors and, if needed, the skills to defend yourself effectively and clean up the aftermath.

That puts it pretty well.

 

[SteadyD]

I see training videos of folks online doing things that don't seem likely in a defensive scenario. Shooting while advancing, using a full size handgun in a bulky OWB kydex rig, etc. It seems like training more useful for LEOs. Shooting while retreating with a diminutive pistol carried IWB or in a pocket seems a lot more likely in a defensive situation. Perhaps these folks also train for that.

 

[Kleanbore]

Shooting while retreating with a diminutive pistol carried IWB or in a pocket seems a lot more likely in a defensive situation.

A good two or three day practical defensive pistol training course or two will likely leas to the realization that a "diminutive pistol" is probably not the best choice for self defense.

Shooting while moving--to provide time and distance, to avoid endangering innocents in front of or behind the target, or to take a advantage of an ad hoc backstop--should be part of a good training regimen.

 

[SteadyD]

A good two or three day practical defensive pistol training course or two will likely leas to the realization that a "diminutive pistol" is probably not the best choice for self defense.

Shooting while moving--to provide time and distance, to avoid endangering innocents in front of or behind the target, or to take a advantage of an ad hoc backstop--should be part of a good training regimen.

I certainly agree, but we all must balance size and capacity with the ability to realistically carry a firearm given our own set of circumstances. For many, myself included, that means small guns with low capacity.

 

[freyasman]

Why would any of those be more "endemic to the area where you live" than any other?

Strong arm robberies occur wherever there are victims. Bank jugging occurs in and around banks, regardless of area. Express kidnapping occurs wherever there are victims--we have had several in parking lots up-scale neighborhoods, but they can occur anywhere.

I try to stay alert and prepared for any of those and for a few other things. I would not use data regarding the frequency of occurrence in any one area to set my training priorities.

What?

Yep!

I see certain types of crimes occurring in clusters in certain areas for certain periods of time. I pay attention to those trends. If you don't want to, fine..... do whatever you want, I don't care.
How many people can tell when they are being sized up as a potential crime victim? How many are able to recognize the interview process? How many of them are aware that that group of teens (or even younger kids) are a danger to them?
Everybody should be training on the fundamentals.

 

[1911 guy]

I see training videos of folks online doing things that don't seem likely in a defensive scenario. Shooting while advancing, using a full size handgun in a bulky OWB kydex rig, etc. It seems like training more useful for LEOs. Shooting while retreating with a diminutive pistol carried IWB or in a pocket seems a lot more likely in a defensive situation. Perhaps these folks also train for that.

I have an unpopular opinion. If you carry a "diminutive pistol" out of choice, rather than necessity, you have chosen badly. Carry the largest size pistol you can comfortably conceal in the largest caliber you can comfortably shoot. That will mean different guns and calibers to anyone and everyone. But if you're 6 foot tall and choose a tiny gun, you have made a poor choice.

I would agree that the bulky kydex rigs are a non-starter for defensive shootings. Most of us will be wearing leather or kydex IWB with a bit less than half carrying OWB and none of those are going to be duty rigs. Drawing from the holster you will actually use is a skill most are severely lacking in. Most CCW folks are downright incompetent on drawstroke. Speed can best be defined as "glacial".

Movement will be dictated by the threat, not by the definition as a "defensive shooting". If advancing is the best way to protect me and mine, that's what will happen. Plan "A" should always be to avoid a violent situation. Always. Avoidance, deescalation, bravely running away. Whatever. When that fails and the other party has made non-violent options untenable, there are no half measures. Full steam. Balls to the wall. To the hilt. Whatever phrase rings with you. The fight is over when they capitulate. Until that moment, every action you take should be meant to incapacitate, disable or destroy the will to fight of your assailant.

 

[Kleanbore]

I see certain types of crimes occurring in clusters in certain areas for certain periods of time. I pay attention to those trends.

So do I.

That knowledge influences decisions about where to go, where not to go, and when.

I can see no way to use such observations of trends in certain areas to decide "what to train for".

How many people can tell when they are being sized up as a potential crime victim? How many are able to recognize the interview process? How many of them are aware that that group of teens (or even younger kids) are a danger to them?

I have not idea--not nearly enough, thought. But those are very important things to which to pay attention.

 

[freyasman]

So do I.

That knowledge influences decisions about where to go, where not to go, and when.

I can see no way to use such observations of trends in certain areas to decide "what to train for".

I have not idea--not nearly enough, thought. But those are very important things to which to pay attention.

To clarify, "training" to me encompasses a lot more than just skill with a firearm.

 

[Kleanbore]

To clarify, "training" to me encompasses a lot more than just skill with a firearm.

Yes, it certainly does.

 

[Trunk Monkey]

I have an unpopular opinion. If you carry a "diminutive pistol" out of choice, rather than necessity, you have chosen badly. Carry the largest size pistol you can comfortably conceal in the largest caliber you can comfortably shoot.

I recently had a chance to attend a training class and was surprised at the number of subcompact pistols. Out of 20 participants there was 1 1911, 3 double stack Glocks (19,23,26), 2 full sized Ruger Semiautos (type Unknown) and 1 3913.

Everything else was a Shield or the XD variation of a Shield and I think 1 bodyguard .380. One guy even expressed amazement that I would carry something as "large" as a Glock19.