Running with your Gun: More Ayoobian Goofs

[Double Naught Spy]

In the Nov 2005 "Guns & Weapons for Law Enforcement," Ayoob appears to be trying to show examples for and against a cop running with a gun in his/her hand versus running with it in a holster. So which is better? Ayoob provides 7 cases.

Of couse, since the title are focus of the article are on running, then you would think that all 7 cases dealt with officers running with their guns drawn versus running with a holstered gun. In 3 of the 7 cases, no running was involved, so I am not clear why they were in an article entitled "Running with Your Gun." In a 4th case, the officer had been in foot pursuit, caught the suspect, and then a scuffle occurred that resulted in the discharge.

Case 3: Officer in passenger seat discharged the gun in his hand when the driving officer hit the brakes. So, the officer was seated, not running
Case 4: An officer making entry was pulling himself through a door of a mobile home, not running, when he discharged his pistol
Case 5: SWAT cop approached another cop while walking and carrying his loaded gun in his hand when he unexpectantly collided with the fellow cop and in an attempt to keep the gun from falling, discharged it, killing the fellow officer. Let's see...nope no running there either.

Ayoob notes that in many cases, the guns would not have discharged had the officers kept their fingers off the triggers. He then introduces Case 6.
Case 6: Officer with drawn gun chases suspect. They scuffle and the officer's gun is turned and fingers depressed such that the gun discharges, killing the suspect. The claim is that the gun was still in the officer's hand when he caught the suspect as he would not holster it while running.

And here is where it gets really weird. Following Case 6, Ayoob notes that in neither case (I assume he means in Cases 5 and 6) had the officer started with his finger on the trigger and in neither case had the autopistol been cocked. So, in Case 5, the dropped gun managed to get cocked and the trigger pulled while the gun was falling. In Case 6, the scuffle cocked the gun and discharged it too. That is some really amazing happenings. Either Ayoob has some of the information wrong or the source of the information isn't being truthful. In both cases, the only two people who might know whether or not the gun was cocked or if the officer had his finger on the trigger would be the officer and the person he killed unintentionally. The first was definitely a wrongful death (Case 5) and the second (Case 6) resulted in a "nightmarish lawsuit" against the officer. I have no doubt both claimed to not have their fingers on the triggers and that the guns were not cocked as otherwise they would be admitting to having screwed up.

Case 7 is the only case presented where an officer was shown to have made good use of a drawn gun, shooting a rioter who was being chased by the officer, after the rioter stopped, turned, and fired on the officer.

So which is better? Do you run with a gun in your hand or with the gun holstered? Ayoob never says. In the Final Notes section of the article, there is a brief comment on a holstered gun only being slightly slower as indicated in the New Hampshire Police Association's annual shoot. Otherwise, the section deals with talking about the match, what a good job was done by NHPA in putting on the match, and what the results of the match were. I guess this should be as no surprise as all but one paragraph of the Introduction was dedicated to discussing the match, who set it up, where it was, who manned it, and the rules. Of the 22" of column text in the article, >9" were devoted to discussing the match and 4 of the 7 pictures provided were pictures of the match. This article was nearly as much about Ayoob talking about his fellow officers in New Hampshire and the match they shot as it was about the concerns of running with a drawn gun.

And what did I learn from the article? Based on Ayoob's presented materials, I have to figure that anytime an officer is in motion with an unholstered gun (riding in a car, walking, or running) and there is a discharge, chances are that it was some sort of screwup by the officer as obviously officers cannot be counted on to safely handle guns most of the time. It is unlikely that anything good will come from an officer running with a drawn gun. Of course these impressions are wrong compared to reality, but that is the impression.

But wait, not all the screwup discharges were by the officer's running with a gun out! It seems that in Case 1, a reserve constable deputy in civie clothes was chasing a suspect while running with a gun in his hand. A county deputy spotted him, mistook him for a suspect, and ordered him to stop and drop his weapon. He failed to comply and was killed by the county deputy. Since Ayoob never provides references and since I recognized the case, here is a link...

www.policeone.com/news_internal.asp?view=116711

So was running with a gun the reason this shooting? Not in the sense of the other cases and competition described in the article that pertain to deployment issues, speed, and handling mishaps. The reasons for the reserve constable deputy getting killed were because he failed to follow the instructions of the county deputy who ordered him to stop and drop his weapon. He failed to comply and the county deputy perceived him as a threat and responded accordingly. Go figure.

 

[Walt Rauch]

Excellent analysis!

I read the article as well and couldn't figure out the point of it but, gee, it did say nice things about this New Hampshire LE match.

 

[c_yeager]

I think you are meant to come to your own conclusion based on your own experiences with the demonstrated incidents providing food for thought.

 

[thunder]

Am I missing something here? Why all the Ayoob bashing? All I see stated in your post is supposedly made writing errors by Ayoob. Maybe a couple opinion orientated topics, but nothing to discredit him. I don't see what the need was for your post... Couldn't you have just asked people's opinions on the topic? Maybe something along the lines of "What do you think about running with your gun?". How'd you feel if the general readers of THR picked apart each post you made for errors and such? I'm truly sorry if I'm not seeing something as well, I'm just rather confused.

 

[Walt Rauch]

A uniquely American phenomena; find or create a hero; then pull him down for his alleged mistakes or failings.

 

[FIREARMZ]

I think Ayoob writes some good stuff and provides room for you to come to a conclusion There is no set "this is the way you have to do it" merely providing information and you can come to your own conclusion.

 

[pax]

Am I missing something here? Why all the Ayoob bashing?

I guess everyone's got to have a hobby...

Oh, the article? Looked like pretty good food for thought. I like articles which explore a topic and let readers come to their own conclusions, considerably better than I like articles which simply tell readers what they should think and do.

pax

To avoid criticism do nothing, say nothing, be nothing. -- Elbert Hubbard

 

[Marty Hayes]

I have e-mailed Ayoob, making him aware of this thread. Hopefully he will make it on the board to respond.

 

[Ryder]

Couldn't you have just asked people's opinions on the topic?

It's going to go there anyway

There are downsides to running hard with a holstered gun too. Imagine ending the pursuit and reaching for a weapon that isn't there when you need it.

I am not in LE but I've done plenty of running with guns. With handguns I leave it holsered but learned early on that it is wise to keep it pressed against my body with one hand. Not much choice with long guns but I've never had one go off due to running.

 

[ctdonath]

Sounds like you were itching for a reason to bash Ayoob, found one, and then went all-out trying to rip apart every little thing you could.

Obviously he was trying to consider the issues of movement while holding a gun (aside from moving to immediately facilitate target aquisition or avoid being an aquired target). "Running" was presumably meant to include more than rapidly putting one foot in front of the other. Better to condemn the English language.

Obviously he also was just bringing up relevant facts, issues, and anecdotes with the goal of encouraging the readers to consider the issue and make up their own minds given circumstances.

Obviously he also was noting a wide range of consequences of the action, ranging from obvious things like accidental discharges to not-quite-so-obvious things like arousing suspicion.

Some people bash Ayoob if he comes to a conclusion AND if he doesn't. Somehow I don't think the problem is Ayoob.

Having trained under Ayoob (fair disclosure: LFI-I thru -IV), his main goal is to give you information, tools and options, and let you figure out what's best for your situation. Whining at him isn't.

When asked about those who pay for his opinion and then pointedly disregard it, Mas observes that he tells the detractor that at that point he has done what he has been paid to do, has the money, and the person can do whatever they want - at which point they usually and suddenly do what Mas suggested. How much did you pay for that magazine containing that article which you spent time reading?

 

[Andrew Rothman]

Following Case 6, Ayoob notes that in neither case (I assume he means in Cases 5 and 6) had the officer started with his finger on the trigger and in neither case had the autopistol been cocked. So, in Case 5, the dropped gun managed to get cocked and the trigger pulled while the gun was falling. In Case 6, the scuffle cocked the gun and discharged it too. That is some really amazing happenings.

I haven't read the article, but since few cops carry single-action pistols like 1911s, I would assume that "not cocked" means a full double-action trigger pull, as opposed to a lighter, shorter single-action pull.

 

[Mannlicher]

tsk tsk, all this defending Ayoob.
My take on him has as always been that he is a wannabe, with virtually no real law enforcement experience, that he pontificates for profit, on subjects he is not really an expert on.
I have met him twice now, in person. I was not impressed with his personality or presentation in either case.
Rule of thumb has always been, if you put your stuff out on the street, then be prepared to take a few backhanded comments along with what ever positive comments you might garner.

"I have e-mailed Ayoob, making him aware of this thread. Hopefully he will make it on the board to respond.
__________________
Marty Hayes, Director
The Firearms Academy of Seattle, Inc.
www.firearmsacademy.com

Gee Marty, are we in trouble now? Do all you experts stick together?

 

[Marty Hayes]

Yes, we "experts" have a computor system interlinked so whenever one of us is the brunt of specious, anonymous criticism on these flamewar boards, it automatically goes into superdrive, notifying the group that one of it's members is underattack, and to reward it's efficiency, we feed it a little more RAM.

 

[cxm]

Heros

Of course Ayoob has never been my hero... so maybe a few comments would be ok?

Ayoob is a commercial writer... and has a a gimmic... which makes him a fair income I'd guess. Nothing wrong with that... a bunch of guys write for the gun rags and to do that they have to write stuff that sells. I'd also note writers make mistakes, and even worse editors mess writer's work up "improving" what the writer wrote.

Anyway, my view is Ayoob probably does decent teaching, but I worry his advice will cause people to be way too cautious... and that is the rub... from what I have seen honest people are already very careful about shooting... often to their detrement.

Of course shoot/no shoot is one of those things you have to get right the first time...err or the side of caution and you get hurt or dead... err on the side of acting too agressively and you have troubles too.

From reading a little of Ayoob's writing I think he could better strike a balance when it comes to his advice on when force should be used.

V/r

Chuck

Lioninwinter wrote:

"A uniquely American phenomena; find or create a hero; then pull him down for his alleged mistakes or failings."

 

[twency]

tsk tsk, all this defending Ayoob.
My take on him has as always been that he is a wannabe, with virtually no real law enforcement experience, that he pontificates for profit, on subjects he is not really an expert on.
I have met him twice now, in person. I was not impressed with his personality or presentation in either case.
Rule of thumb has always been, if you put your stuff out on the street, then be prepared to take a few backhanded comments along with what ever positive comments you might garner.

tsk tsk, all this bashing Ayoob.
My take on Mannlicher has always been that he is a keyboard jockey, with virtually no real gun-handling experience, that he pontificates for pleasure, and on subjects he is not really an expert on.
I have read Mannlicher's comments multiple times now. I have not been impressed with his personality or presentation.
Rule of thumb has always been, if you put your stuff out on the net, then be prepared to take a few backhanded comments along with whatever positive comments you might garner.


Now when I write something like that, doesn't it come across as an unsupported ad hominem attack? How about providing specific information about how he's a wannabe, etc.?

-twency

 

[insidious_calm]

2 cents...

I won't speak to Ayoob and his credibilty, mainly because I don't read the magazines he writes for very often, if at all. I did take a suggestion from one of his columns many years ago and got an Alessi ankle holster for my glock 26 BUG, something I recommend to others as well.

As for running with your gun I will offer my 2 cents. I am not a self proclaimed expert. I do not teach "professionals" how to do what they do. I am not, nor have I been, a member of some uber tacticool ultra secret government task force. My opinions are based upon a lot of time spent shooting on the move both with long guns and handguns. YMMV.

In regards to running with a handgun in a one handed grip, don't do it. The physical actions that occur when you run, both voluntary and involuntary, make it an unsafe gun handling practice IMO. For starters, most people run with a closed fist. Years upon years of repeating this over and over again make it unlikely you would do otherwise in a high stress 'oh crap' situation. This makes it difficult if not impossible for all but the most disciplined to keep their fingers off the trigger. Add in the 'handle' factor of the pistols grip and it's just natural to grab it in order to prevent dropping the gun. This results in a much more likely chance to discharge the gun when you didn't want to.

In addition to problem number one, when you run full out you move your arms in a swinging motion. This means that you will be 'sweeping' yourself with the business end repeatedly. Having watched this phenomena first hand I conclude that the gun will turn inward toward your body while you run sweeping your legs during the lower part of the motion and sweeping anyone/anything immediately in front of you and to the inside of your gun hand during the upper portion of the motion.

The third major problem with this is that you cannot return fire while at a dead run with a one handed grip. I would think that unless you are in a foot persuit you would rather trade the ability to return fire for a little less speed.

Running with two hands on the gun is a different story though. For starters it makes it much more difficult to sweep yourself. Note that I did not say impossible. This means you aren't swinging your arms normally and that changes the manner in which you use your legs. My obeservation is that you are less likely to starighten your knees when running in that fashion because of the way you move your upper body. This means you don't have the jarring up and down effect, or less of it anyway, that makes it impossible to shoot accurately while moving. Which, for those of you interested, is the key to shooting accurately while on the move. Keep yor knees bent so your legs act like shock absorbers and try to move without allowing your shoulders to change elevation. If you have martial arts training you'll know exactly what I mean.

Additionally, with a two handed grip, I believe you are much less likely to 'forget' trigger discipline and place your finger on the trigger until you actually mean too. There are several reasons I believe this to be the case. First, you most likely spend the vast majority of your training time with a two handed grip. This means muscle memory will remain in effect while you move if you maintain your standard grip. Second, the gun will feel more secure in your grip meaning you are less likely to grasp tighter to maintain control of it.

So what do you do? There are only a few scenarios in which you would be realistically attempting to run with a gun in your hand. Obvious first is if you were moving to cover or concealment or making a tactical retreat. It seems obvious to me that you would want to be either a) covering the area of the threat while you move, or (b) actively engaging the threat while you move to prevent them from getting accurate shots at you. That scenario pretty much precludes anything one handed unless your other hand is wounded IMO.

You could also be advancing on a known or suspected threat. In which case you definately want the ability to cover the threat and provide fire if needed. This also precludes a one handed grip.

The situation where the officer is chasing a suspect seems pretty obvious to me also. Holster the gun and don't draw it until you have a reason to fire. Otherwise you may lose it, or worse, shoot yourself or someone else unintentionally. Running with a gun in one hand? Don't do it. FWIW. YMMV.



I.C.

 

[rasko solsky]

Not much to add to that, clam.

The rule I've followed is that anytime I break into a dead run with a pistol, I holster it. If it becomes inconvenient or unsafe to move about in the ready position, the pistol also goes into the holster. If I anticipate only a short interval, I may keep the palm of my hand on the butt rather than fastening the holster. This prevents me from losing the piece or contacting the trigger, something less certain if the gun is in my hand.

I can't shoot accurately or safely when running, climbing, recovering my balance or jumping. If I find myself in those situations, I find I'm best off with the pistol holstered with any retention device engaged.

BTW, we may recall that Bill Jordan recommended that the only time the retention strap should be used is when the pistol might be lost from the holster, such as during strenous activity. For reasons I can't fathom, many shooters eschew the old "snap strap" because it takes too long to bring it into play.

I don't use it unless I need it. I merely snap it around the side of the holster, where it rides out of the way, ready for use in an instant.

 

[Seven High]

I wonder how many of those accidental discharges involved Glock weapons with their 5 lb trigger pull. A DAO weapon with a 12 lb or there abouts trigger pull has a lot less chance of an accidental discharge. Glocks are not DAO weapons.

 

[pax]

My take on him has as always been that he is a wannabe, with virtually no real law enforcement experience, that he pontificates for profit, on subjects he is not really an expert on.

This "wannabe" with "virtually no real law enforcement experience" who is "not really an expert" on the subects in which he lectures has an interesting resume.

• His resume lists nine pages of professional experiences and credentials. (How long is your list of credentials in this field, oh anonymous internet critic?)
  .
• It cites teaching experience going back more than three decades, at dozens of schools, including multiple venues in which he was responsible for training law enforcement professionals. (How many police academies have you taught at, oh anonymous internet critic?)
  .
• It cites instructional experience which includes literally hundreds of hours training professional trainers. (How many professional trainers think you have what it takes to teach them something they don't already know?)
  .
• Ayoob's list of personal training which he has taken lists dozens of schools, and honestly looks like he got bored before he finished listing it all. The names on there read like a "who's who" of the firearms training world. (Would you, oh anonymous internet critic, consider yourself "well trained" if you had taken courses from every single one of the big names in the industry -- multiple times? Be honest now!)
  .
• He has been a police officer since 1972. His current rank is Captain, and he is in charge of training for his department. Granted, that is "only" part-time work -- but even "part time" hours add up when you've been working at the same job for over 20 years, don't you think?
  .
  As for whether small-town police work is real police work, I would love to hear you try that opinion on THR's LawDog and I'd really love to listen to his reaction ... from a safe distance.
  .
• Can Ayoob shoot? His resume says he can. No doubt he just made most of that stuff up, since he's "not really an expert" on shooting. (How many National Tactical Invitationals have you competed in -- and how'd you place?)
  .
• Ayoob sure has a lot of professionals fooled as to his expertise. While anonymous internet critics sneer that he "pontificates for profit" and isn't "really an expert," Ayoob has literally dozens of Law Enforcement professionals willing to put their hard-earned reputations on the line by allowing him to cite them as references as to his expertise in the field.
  .
  As to whether those guys are themselves "really experts" or not, or are really qualified to state that Ayoob is in fact an expert himself, I really think the Commander of NYPD's Firearms and Tactics Unit -- or the Senior Deputy AG in the LA AG's office -- or the retired Commander of the LAPD Firearms Training Unit -- or the Director of Firearms Training at the Ohio Peace Officer Training Academy -- or the Senior SWAT Instructor of the Metro-Dade Police Special Response Team -- or the Executive Director of the American Society of Law Enforcement Trainers -- or even the fellow who created the Lindell system of firearms retention -- I really think that the credentials, experience, and expertise of any one of those guys who are willing to testify to Ayoob's expert status in this field absolutely trumps the unsubstantiated opinion of some anonymous internet nobody.
  .
• Ayoob has a dozen lawyers in as many different states ready to swear that he is, in fact, an expert about firearms and the use of deadly force. (Gee... for a guy who is "not really an expert," he sure has a lot of big name professionals fooled!)

There's more I could say, but there's no point. The folks who love to hate Ayoob aren't going to be persuaded by mere facts anyway.

Am I an apologist for Ayoob? Not really. You could run a search on my user name and keyword "Ayoob" to see what I think of the man and his training (hint, I've got a few criticisms of my own that I've levelled at him). But good grief, if you're going to criticize the man, you could at least get your facts straight. There's no professional in the entire industry who would say Ayoob doesn't know his material.

pax

Although I cannot lay an egg, I am a very good judge of omelettes. -- G. B. Shaw

 

[Spreadfire Arms]

well, im not for or against anyone in this discussion who is pro- or anti-Ayoob.

my thought to share is that most, if not all of the AD's, occurred due to sympathetic reflex when the finger was on the trigger.

so with the finger off the trigger, many of these situations would not have resulted in accidental discharges.

i am former LE and know of a few people personally who had AD's, some resulting in injuries. it is one of those things we all hope to reduce or eliminate.

 

[1911 guy]

Wow! a real live flame war!

Well, I can't throw fuel on the fire as I really don't have an opinion about Ayoob either way. Some things I like, Some I don't. My wife says the same thing about me. Anyhow, I'd have to second the opinion that the shots fired were the result of reflexive action during strenuous activity. Solution: Keep your booger hook off the bang switch. I wish I remembered who on this board said that so I could give them credit. As for weapon retention, "suicide straps" and auto-retaining holsters are the norm for on duty carry. I still have from the Navy a UM-84 holster that has a flap covering the entire handgun. One of the holsters I use for concealed carry is a Fobus, which is auto retaining. My other two are leather and fit tightly enough that a few jumps up and down will not dislodge the pistol. If I expect more activity I'll wear the Fobus. I'd like to think that anyone writing about carrying a gun would use this train of thought to make us think about those issues.

 

[Jeff White]

Enough!

We will have a civil discussion of the issues brought up in the article. We won't continue to flame and bash the author. If you want to do that take it to General Gun Discussions. The mission here in Strategies and Tactics is to discuss the nuts and bolts of an issue so that we can all learn.

Everyone is capable of intelligent input on a subject. We need to stop crediting a person with special knowledge based on their resume and discrediting what they say based on the same. We need to be smart enough to look past that stuff and evaluate ideas and training concepts on their merit.

Jeff

 

[FPrice]

Why all the Ayoob bashing?

Mas Ayoob seems to attract more than his fair share of detractors. Some with a vengence. Since I have not read the article I cannot comment on it directly (I will try to find it) but I will comment on the general subject.

Running (or moving) while holding a loaded firearm is a potentially hazardous event but may be necessary from time to time. As an Air Force Combat Controller I trained to move, patrol, accomplish my wartime tasks, and respond to Immediate Action (IA) drills while carrying my firearm. Situational awareness (we did not use the term but the basics were the same), muzzle control, fire discipline, and trigger finger control were drilled into me by many men who were not nationally known or authors of learned texts but nonetheless were highly knowledgeable and skilled in their field. Oh, I never did get to do this in an actual combat environment, much as my youthful enthisiasm wished for it.

In IPSC shooting I learned how to move quickly (and safely) while holding a loaded pistol, although in a less-than-hostile environment. However the potential for a serious accident was still there.

In both examples situational awareness, muzzle control, fire discipline, and trigger finger control were what kept me (and my team mates) safe. So it can be done. My experiences and those of many millions of other people prove this. But there are many (thousands or more) who have suffered the hazards involved. As in many things you have to weigh the need and the risks and determine if the need justifies the risks.

But you shouldn't let your dislike of Ayoob be the central focus of your analysis.

 

[Robert Hairless]

Ayoob's article in his "First Responder" column for the November, 2005, issue of Guns & Weapons for Law Enforcement is entitled "Running with your Gun: In the hand or holster--which is better? Seven cases try to answer the question." Another article, far different from the one Ayoob actually wrote, might be entitled "Running with your Gun: In the holster is better" or "Running with your Gun: In the hand is better."

I understand and sympathize with an inability to make connections among examples and ideas from the context in which they are presented. Case Four in Ayoob's article, for example, does indeed involve a cop "who was making entry in a raid and pulling himself up and through the door of a mobile home." Double Naught Spy is quite right: the cop was not running at that very moment. In context, however, it seems clear that the cop had arrived at the threshhold to said mobile home by rapid movement of his nether limbs. But to dwell on the cop's means or pace of movement at the moment he arrived at the doorway is to miss the point. The point, in context of the article Ayoob actually wrote, is that the cop had his gun in his right hand while "pulling himself himself up and through the door of a mobile home when 'interlimb response' caused his right hand to close as his left hand did." What Ayoob attempted to communicate was the concept of "interlimb response" as it applies to a situation in which the gun is being held rather than holstered during movement from hither to thither. In the context of an article on "Running with your Gun" the rapid hither/thither-up/down nether limb movement by which the cop brought the gun to the point of discharge might safely be assumed. It is true that Ayoob did not say "and the cop ran higgledy piggledy down the lane to the mobile home while holding his gun in his right hand" but he seems to have written for an audience that did not need him to move the cop for them in order to perceive the point.

There's no reason to analyze the other objections. The Socratic method is a useful technique for helping intelligent people perceive relatively complex issues that might not have a single answer applicable to every situation. Pose a question or raise an issue, define some of its apparent boundaries, provide a few examples for the purpose of illustration, and intelligent people should be able to pursue their own ways. It's one of the oldest, and still one of the best, ways to help people with native intelligence learn for themselves what is important for them.

Unfortunately the Socratic method is easily distorted by people who either honestly don't understand what to make of it or who have their own agendas. It's easy to promote one's own agendas because this way of arriving at knowledge doesn't provide spoonfed answers. The issues it deals with often depend on situations and awareness of them. Not everyone can handle such situations or that way of learning.

"Is it wrong to run with a gun?" Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't, and you need to develop situational awareness--taking into account factors such as "interlimb response" and "postural disturbance" that you might not have considered--so you know which is which. Rigid people don't like that. It's interesting, though, that most people who responded previously in this thread understand the method and aren't bothered by it.

"So which is better?," asked Double Naught Spy. "Do you run with a gun in your hand or with the gun holstered? Ayoob never says." Right. Ayoob never says. Here is what Ayoob does say, at the very beginning of the article he wrote:

Running with a drawn weapon can be dangerous in more ways than one. However, there are times when a good cop will feel it imperative to have a gun in hand. Seven actual cases explain the controversy.

No matter how you feel about Massad Ayoob, you must admit his cleverness: he entitled his article so that people realize that he wasn't going to say which is "better," he opened the article with that thesis, he wrote the article to expand the thesis, and its concluding paragraph says "The controversy must be decided by each department." What are you going to do with a writer who does what he says he will do?

I can't answer the question asked in the first message: "And what did I learn from the article?" But I can say that I'm in absolute awe of anyone who calls Massad Ayoob a "wanna be." Such a person must be even more accomplished than Ayoob, have even greater achievements during at least as many decades, and even greater recognition.

 

[Preacherman]

Personally, I think highly of Massad Ayoob. I've taken LFI-1, -2 and -3 with him (see here for my review of the latter two courses, if you're interested), and I'll happily go back to him for more training whenever possible.

That said, I think his ideas have merit. I like the way in which he lays out various scenarios, gives his opinion, but also leaves you with the ability to make up your own mind.

I think that rapid movement with a gun is an excellent argument for an external safety on the gun, for example, the 1911. By applying the safety, you're protecting yourself (and potential innocent targets) against an accidental or negligent discharge. It's a lot harder to accidentally fire a gun with a safety catch applied than it is to fire, say, a Glock, under the same conditions and circumstances.