I.C. E. Combat Focus Shooting Course

[Kleanbore]

Posted by SnowBlaZeR2: I don't know the qualifications of those guys.

The qualifications of Rob Pincus are well known. See the link in the OP, or just search the web.

Same for the guys and gals at Gunsite Academy and Thunder Ranch. And Rangemaster.

A really great series of threads right here cover a number of Firearms Trainer Interviews conducted by well-known trainer Claude Werner (our member HeadJunter). Search and read.

I am not an expert on training, but I can speak to the following with confidence:

• Training for target shooting, IDPA competition, police qualification, military combat, and civilian defensive skills are not the same thing, notwithstanding the question of whether they should be conducted as differently as they are; CFS pertains very well to, but is not limited to, the last of these categories.
• Theory and practice have changed markedly over the years in all of the above categories; look at some old videos showing police double action revolver shooting and the way military users fired the 1911A1 one handed.
• Trainers who have the opportunity to observe hundreds of students performing thousands of repetitions have a greater opportunity to learn and to validate their theories on anything than people who do not.
• The person in charge is in a much better position to act on those observations than the person who is not; 3rdmonkey, for example, has had made many very valuable observations based on his experience, but effecting change in a state-run bureaucracy is not easy.

Also, if someone told you that using an external safety is comparable to leaving your firearm unloaded, I'd like to know who.

No one said that; 3rdmonkey mentioned leaving the chamber unloaded as one approach to safety. It is, but most of us obviously do not recommend it.

As it happens, 3rdmonkey and I have discussed safeties and safety on more than one occasion. He knows what he is talking about.

 

[SnowBlaZeR2]

The qualifications of Rob Pincus are well known. See the link in the OP, or just search the web.

Same for the guys and gals at Gunsite Academy and Thunder Ranch. And Rangemaster.

A really great series of threads right here cover a number of Firearms Trainer Interviews conducted by well-known trainer Claude Werner (our member HeadJunter). Search and read.

I am not an expert on training, but I can speak to the following with confidence:

• Training for target shooting, IDPA competition, police qualification, military combat, and civilian defensive skills are not the same thing, notwithstanding the question of whether they should be conducted as differently as they are; CFS pertains very well to, but is not limited to, the last of these categories.
• Theory and practice have changed markedly over the years in all of the above categories; look at some old videos showing police double action revolver shooting and the way military users fired the 1911A1 one handed.
• Trainers who have the opportunity to observe hundreds of students performing thousands of repetitions have a greater opportunity to learn and to validate their theories on anything than people who do not.
• The person in charge is in a much better position to act on those observations than the person who is not; 3rdmonkey, for example, has had made many very valuable observations based on his experience, but effecting change in a state-run bureaucracy is not easy.

I don't know Rob, but I wasn't referring to him specifically anyways. People like Yeager, etc. that put their way out as the best/only way and write off entire weapons platforms will continue to get a pass from me for any training needs I have. I'm sorry if you don't agree, but that's just my opinion on it. Moving on...

I know what works for me because I've spent the last 12 years being trained by and training the best your tax dollars can buy.

No one said that; 3rdmonkey mentioned leaving the chamber unloaded as one approach to safety. It is, but most of us obviously do not recommend it.

Firearms with external safeties: They are no different than not carrying with a round in the chamber

As it happens, 3rdmonkey and I have discussed safeties and safety on more than one occasion. He knows what he is talking about.

I'm sure he does, but I don't know either of you any more than you know me.

 

[Fred Fuller]

I've spent the last 12 years being trained by and training the best your tax dollars can buy.

Having seen "my tax dollars at work" for the past couple of decades, I'm not sure that statement is the ringing endorsement you might think it is ...

 

[SnowBlaZeR2]

I've spent the last 12 years being trained by and training the best your tax dollars can buy.

Having seen "my tax dollars at work" for the past couple of decades, I'm not sure that statement is the ringing endorsement you might think it is ...

That wasn't meant as an endorsement, but thanks for the free training anyways.

 

[Jeff White]

This whole manual safety good, manual safety bad argument has been going on for decades. When I started in LE we were issued S&W Model 65s and 66s. A few years later we ran a department test of autos. I carried a Beretta 92F during that time. Other officers carried a couple different model S&W autos. No auto without a manual safety was considered.

We ended up copying the Illinois State Police and buying S&W Model 5906s. The ISP was carrying the blued version the 4906. We were told to carry them with the safety off and to only use it as a decocking lever. Then a couple years later we were told to carry them with the safety engaged for officer safety purposes the rational being that if someone grabbed your weapon they might not be able to use it for a few seconds while they figured out the safety.

After 10 years the night sights needed replacing on the 5906s and Glock offered the department their autos for the cost of replacing the nightsights with the 5906s as trade ins. The department picked Glock 21s. They were too big for most people but that's what we got.

Later I went to work for a department that allowed 1911s. I went back to carrying the first type I learned to shoot with and never looked back. I never had any problem remembering to swipe the safety off when acquired the firing grip. just as I had been taught.

I never successfully taught myself to do that with the slide mounted safeties on either the Beretta or the 5906.

The problem in organized forces, be it the military or law enforcement is that people see fit to mandate the latest and greatest technique, even when a shooter had years of muscle memory invested in an earlier technique that worked for him.

There are very few things that can only be done one way. In all my years of learning and teaching, both in the Army and in LE, I tried every technique with an open mind. However those trainers who espoused some technique as the only way to accomplish something made my list of trainers never to train with again.

 

[Kleanbore]

Safeties

I did not mean to create a tangent here.

My point was that I have always liked the idea of an easy-to-operate frame mounted safety, that mine slowed me down in the class, and that the instructor indicated that that was not an unusual problem and that it was a major reason why he and many organizations have opted to not use frame-mounted safeties on striker-fired pistols.

There are risks and potential benefits either way. One manufacturer uses a grip safer only, and another is trying to go that way. That approach mitigates one risk and creates other potential problems.

But none of this is the gist of the course.

 

[David E]

I'm curious how/why you had issues with your safety, if you're as practiced as you say.

One YouTube video shows Pincus bad mouthing 1911's and safeties by showcasing a guy having trouble with his apparently never-been-fired-before-the-class 3" 1911, but who wasn't sure which was the slide stop or the mag release.

What was the biggest "aha!"moment you had in the class?

What surprised you the most?

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by DavidE: I'm curious how/why you had issues with your safety, if you're as practiced as you say.

The safety is a small one, with a rather positive detent. The latter of those features is something I consider a good thing.

While I have always been able to manipulate it successfully in a deliberate manner in relaxed circumstances, I had difficulty at the outset at the class, with a higher adrenaline content and with people watching.

I have not had that issue with a "1911" manual safety, which is larger, under similar circumstances.

Whether a few repetitions would have eliminated the problem, I do not know. To what extent doing so might have slowed me down, I do not know.

What was the biggest "aha!" moment you had in the class?

I'm not sure there was one that stands out.

What surprised you the most?

The amazing depth of the instructor's knowledge in, and understanding of, the following areas:

• human physiological reactions (e.g., I had never thought about the causes and advantages of tunnel vision);
• human psychological reactions (e.g., the defender remembers the attacker's movements as if they were in slow motion, and his own as if they happened instantly) and how they affect defensive behavior; and
• teaching techniques and methodology.

 

[David E]

The safety is a small one, with a rather positive detent. The latter of those features is something I consider a good thing.

While I have always been able to manipulate it successfully in a deliberate manner in relaxed circumstances, I had difficulty at the outset at the class, with a higher adrenaline content and with people watching.

No offense, but here is a perfect example of someone who thought they were "well practiced" with something, but never realized all their shooting has been done at their leisure. No stress, no pursuit of speed.

Shooting an IPSC match or two, or buying and properly utilizing a shot timer would've revealed the situation instantly.

People dismiss IPSC matches as being worthless for "real" training, but they do provide a level of stress, people/friends are watching and you must perform on demand.

I'm glad you found his class worthwhile.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by DavidE: No offense, but here is a perfect example of someone who thought they were "well practiced" with something, but never realized all their shooting has been done at their leisure. No stress, no pursuit of speed.

I didn't mean to imply that. Speed, yes, just like draw and presentation. Real stress, no--no one important watching, no one judging.

Shooting an IPSC match or two, or buying and properly utilizing a shot timer would've revealed the situation instantly.

Match, certainly. Timer, maybe, maybe not.

It is true that I have not been trying to practice clearing malfunctions and reloading with speed and without looking. Something else to work on.

 

[3rdmonkey]

Amazing...2 days in a row with a little keyboard time!!

Too many people get hung up on the safety/no safety aspect of a defensive sidearm! Every instructor I have ever trained with or trained will agree that safety or not you have to select a gun that fits your hand and train with it until you are comfortable with it's action!

My number one aspect of defensive firearm selection is reliability! That's why I own 1911's but do not rely on them for defense! Oh...I shouldn't have said that!
I carry a Glock 23 converted to 9mm most of the time because I don't have have to worry about whether or not I cleaned it and oiled it properly! (After the CFS class I now have 2000 rounds through it without cleaning it!)

My summer gun, when I'm wearing shorts and T's, is a Smith Model 60...that's right a wheel gun! After seeing the debate started about safeties I dug it out of the safe. I'm still looking but I have yet to find the safety!

I have decided to leave the competitive shooting disciplines alone! I know I will never be able to convince anyone that there is a difference in discipline!
If you are a competitive shooter, keep shooting! At least you are putting rounds down range and that is a lot more than the average Joe that carries a loaded gun in public!! I will offer this, schedule a CFS class and learn to shoot WITHOUT your sites, then come back and tell me it didn't make you a better competitive shooter!

I would like to apologize if my previous posts seemed a little arrogant, that was not my intent! I have been a self defense, both armed(blades) and unarmed for nearly 3 decades, I am a firearms range instructor for the IL Dept of corrections (where we still train and carry revolvers), I am a member of the IDOC Statewide Special Operations Response Team! I am an 18 year veteran of the IL Dept of Corrections, I spend 5 days a week looking evil men in the eye! I have a pretty good idea how the bad guys operate, that's why I am so passionate about defensive shooting and do everything I can to spread this knowledge! In a true (not hollywood) defensive situation, you will not have time to think about sight alignment and sight picture! You will have milla-seconds! And I am NO expert, I am a student and will die a student!

 

[Kleanbore]

Again, my problem with the safety was a tangential issue. Perhaps I shouldn't have mentioned it.

 

[SnowBlaZeR2]

Too many people get hung up on the safety/no safety aspect of a defensive sidearm! Every instructor I have ever trained with or trained will agree that safety or not you have to select a gun that fits your hand and train with it until you are comfortable with it's action!

Agreed. It's just that some instructors out there discard certain weapons and techniques, instead of teaching their students proficiency with their weapon of choice.

My number one aspect of defensive firearm selection is reliability! That's why I own 1911's but do not rely on them for defense! Oh...I shouldn't have said that!
I carry a Glock 23 converted to 9mm most of the time because I don't have have to worry about whether or not I cleaned it and oiled it properly! (After the CFS class I now have 2000 rounds through it without cleaning it!)

You're right, you shouldn't have said that.

All firearms are subject to failure, and all firearms can be as reliable as any other. My carry pistol sees a few hundred rounds at a time, a cleaning and then the inside of my holster again. If I ever need to shoot my pistol 2000 times without a cleaning, I'll grab a rifle instead. The measure of reliability for me is a functioning gun that gives me quick, accurate hits. For some, that might be a Glock, 1911 or whatever.

I have decided to leave the competitive shooting disciplines alone! I know I will never be able to convince anyone that there is a difference in discipline!
If you are a competitive shooter, keep shooting! At least you are putting rounds down range and that is a lot more than the average Joe that carries a loaded gun in public!! I will offer this, schedule a CFS class and learn to shoot WITHOUT your sites, then come back and tell me it didn't make you a better competitive shooter!

Nope, we're on the same page there as well. We've received training from competitive shooters before, and while there were some valuable lessons to take from that, I only apply what I feel is relevant to my goals.

I would like to apologize if my previous posts seemed a little arrogant, that was not my intent! I have been a self defense, both armed(blades) and unarmed for nearly 3 decades, I am a firearms range instructor for the IL Dept of corrections (where we still train and carry revolvers), I am a member of the IDOC Statewide Special Operations Response Team! I am an 18 year veteran of the IL Dept of Corrections, I spend 5 days a week looking evil men in the eye! I have a pretty good idea how the bad guys operate, that's why I am so passionate about defensive shooting and do everything I can to spread this knowledge! In a true (not hollywood) defensive situation, you will not have time to think about sight alignment and sight picture! You will have milla-seconds! And I am NO expert, I am a student and will die a student!

I don't think anyone here thought this. It's just that a few people from time to time cite this expert or that expert as to why their way is the right way. You're right, and I always try to reiterate that I don't think anyone should ever be satisfied with their training.

 

[Jeff White]

Real stress, no--no one important watching, no one judging.

This isn't directed at you kleanbore, but is a commentary on shooting training in general. I think this is one of the biggest reasons more people don't train. It's all mental. I don't know if it has to to with what I jokingly call American Male Syndrome; a disease most men are born with that makes them think they came from the womb knowing everything there is to know about shooting, fighting, driving and lovemaking. We all know people like that.

Or if people are self conscious enough that they feel embarrassed. It seems like shooting is one of the few activities that applies to though. You don't see people stressing out about taking golf lessons from the pro at the local country club. But for some reason people are afraid they will look bad on the range.

Having taught for years in the Army, law enforcement and private citizens and having taken a lot of classes myself, I can say that unless someone is unsafe or "that guy" who disrupts the class, the instructor isn't judging the students.

If anyone is wanting to go train but is afraid they will be stressed out and embarrassed, don't worry about it. Everyone makes mistakes in training. that's why we train.

In the first EST/TRT class I took the department had bought the two of us who went some thigh holsters made by a company called Assault Systems. They were a poor design and the thumb break retention strap was adjustable with a velcro attachment at the back of the holster. One day on the range we were running an obstacle course where we engaged targets at the end of the run. I got to the shooting station and discovered I had an empty holster. Embarrassed? Yes...I went back, picked up my pistol, did my pushups and finished the course. One time I shot an entire stage of the the MARSOC Qualification on the wrong target during one of Pat Rogers carbine classes. Embarrassed again But I learned something both times, no one yelled at me or teased me unmercifully.

There is no reason for anyone to fear going to training or get stressed out about it. Go, learn and have fun.

 

[Kleanbore]

Excellent points, Jeff.

BUT I find that I experience some "performance anxiety" in a training class, particularly when the instructor is among the best known in the nation. But after a couple of drills, it seems to go away.

 

[Kleanbore]

Book Review

Rob has a book on Combat Focus Shooting, and this book review by Stuart Wayne is a pretty good description of the CFS philosophy.

 

[Jeff22]

A couple good observations from SnowBlaZer2:

"Trainers who have the opportunity to observe hundreds of students performing thousands of repetitions have a greater opportunity to learn and to validate their theories on anything than people who do not."

and

"I've received training from competitive shooters before, and while there were some valuable lessons to take from that, I only apply what I feel is relevant to my goals."

There are many benefits to receiving professional instruction. Each instructor teaches what they teach based on their experience, and the student should take away that information that applies to their circumstance.

 

[Matthew Temkin]

Maybe I am just dumb, but I have forgotten to take off a safety once or twice.
And that was just at the range and on a hunting trip.
After training several thousand students in basic-advanced shooting methods I have seen more than one of them do likewise.
Also,a good friend of mine was almost killed in a gunfight when he forgot to remove the safety of his Browning Hi Power--luckily his friend saved his bacon with a .38 snub.
And my friend is no dummy--he spent 20 years with the N.Y.P.D. and is a genuine firearms expert.
I am a firm believer in Murphy and while constant training may make it unlikely that one will forget to swipe off a safety I do know that it is IMPOSSIBLE
to forget to do so with a Glock or a revolver.
Furthermore, as Fairbairn wrote about in 1942, it is not so much forgetting to swipe it off that is the issue, but having it accidentally put back on during shooting that was the main concern with the Shanghai Municipal Police and their 1911's.
Something else that cannot happen with a revolver or modern semi automatic.
I also do not see any safety issues with good quality semi autos and revolvers which lack manual safety latches, which is why none of my carry guns have safeties.
But to each his own.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by Matthew Temkin: I also do not see any safety issues with good quality semi autos and revolvers which lack manual safety latches, which is why none of my carry guns have safeties.

I think it comes down to risk assessment and risk management.

Do you want to take the chance that, despite practice and training, you might fail to disengage the safety timely at a critical time?

Do you want to trust your life to a firearm that has a safety but that may be somewhat less reliable than one that does not?

Do you want to risk an unintended discharge because, despite your best care, an article of windblown clothing entered your holster and activated the trigger, either upon re-holstering or at a later time?

I'm not fond of any of those possibilities.

One possible mitigation strategy might be a Springfield Armory XD, known for high reliability and equipped with a grip safety.

 

[Matthew Temkin]

One possible mitigation strategy might be a Springfield Armory XD, known for high reliability and equipped with a grip safety.
A lot of the old timers warned against a grip safety and many of them had it permanently pinned down on their 1911's.
When S&W first came out with the Centennial it had a provision for easily disabling it's grip safety.
Bottom line--all guns are a compromise.
Get what you feel comfortable with.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by Matthew Temkin: A lot of the old timers warned against a grip safety and many of them had it permanently pinned down on their 1911's.
When S&W first came out with the Centennial it had a provision for easily disabling it's grip safety.

True.

But the grip safety on the Colt design has to be compressed sufficiently for the gun to fire, and with a two handed grip that can sometimes be iffy. That's the voice of experience.

The Centennial safety, if I recall correctly from handling them, requires quite a firm grip, and not everyone can do it.

The XD safety is either in or out, and if you grip the gun, it is in.

But you can bolster without depressing it.

That will prevent something in the holster from causing the gun to fire.

 

[9mmepiphany]

A lot of the old timers warned against a grip safety and many of them had it permanently pinned down on their 1911's.

That's because the 1911 grip safety works against the high grip that is now commonly taught. Putting upward pressure on the beavertail, levers the lower portion of the grip safety outward.

The best solution for this, I don't think pinning is a good one, is the Bruce Gray Hardtail

...that separates the the lower portion from the beavertail..like the grip safety on the XD does

 

[Kleanbore]

Good put.

 

[SnowBlaZeR2]

A grip safety with a sufficiently raised pad and a proper grip will alleviate any issues. Most modern 1911s come with this feature from the case/box. The 1911 isn't for everyone, and I would never go out of my way to recommend a new shooter carry one, or any pistol they don't want.

 

[Kleanbore]

For More Insight...

Chapters 28 and 29 of this book go into some depth on the concepts behind the CFS program.

There is also a chapter, which is really not on the subject of the title of the book per se, that relates the story of the evolution of the CFS training over the years, and how it differs from traditional qualification work, etc. I had not realized that operatives and instructors from US SOCOM units attended CFS when it was conducted at Valhalla.

Another interesting tid-bit goes into how the increasing prevalence of high res dash cam and security cameras, and the hundreds of encounters recorded on them, have provided insight into how violent incidents often unfold and how the"good guys" respond.