Videos show you can repeatedly hit fast moving targets with a hangun.

[brownie0486]

Sky1,

That's right. A 1/4" deviation at the muzzle angles out to about 16" POI off the intended dead center at 20'.
Or is it 20" at 20'.

You are going to try to continue to convince us that 1/4" deviation at the muzzle is going to move the bullets trajectory 1" for every foot the bullet travels? Not hardly, anymore than the bullets trajectory would be off 3/4" of an inch in 1 foot at your stated 16" off center of POA.

Dr Rob,

Shouldn't you get faster AND more accurate over time? More accurate? I could do exactly what was stated in one of the aar's here recently within minutes of learning Quick Kill at McDaniel's hands. Here's what people actually saw me do, and just for edification and clarity, two cops in the class did the same thing opening their full mag total group with QK to 1.25 and 1.375 inches at 15 feet.

Here's the paragraph from HSO's review:

Brownie was much quicker and far more accurate as would be expected, but it gave us an example of what could be further accomplished with practice. Heck, he snapped shot after shot from the draw that made tight little groups of holes in the targets with amazing ease.

and this excerpt from another review by HSO:

we had folks that were producing groups of 1 and 2 inches at ranges of 12-15 feet using 2 hand QK shot at our own pace (not me, I grouped in the 4-6 in. range{Brownie scolded me for shooting too fast} ). Brownie showed us that he could make one ragged hole over and over again at that range and at further distances.

Don't know how I'd teach anyone to 'snap shoot' with a rifle or shotgun or handgun in just 5 minutes if they weren't already very well versed in the use of arms.

Well, there you go. You don't know and I do, it's pretty simple really. Here's an except from Sports Illustrated back in 1968 on the man "Lucky" McDaniel and how he could get people to hit small objects in the air in minutes.

The article was titled "Shooting by Instinct," here's the excerpt from the author named Kane:

"he taught me, in little more than an hour, to shoot with such marvelous accuracy that soon I was hitting crawling beetles and tossed pennies with a BB [pellet] gun, with scarcely ever a miss. The first time I ever wore a pistol I was able to draw it and hit a pine cone in the road, at a distance of some 20 feet, six times out of six, shooting from the hip. "

"This occurs in an incredibly few minutes, usually under a half hour. During that time the shooter has been kept very busy. Lucky gives him no time to think about what he is doing, no time to theorize, no time to tense up. Targets are tossed in fast succession while Lucky keeps up a patter of suggestion pretty much implying that this is just about the brightest pupil he ever has taught. The pupil is inclined to think so, too."

"A true McDaniel follower will go so far as to have the sights removed from his weapons because they are a hindrance to him. He will point rifle or pistol as naturally as he could point a finger, pretty much as good shotgunners do: Looking at what he wants to hit and quite disregarding the cant of his weapon or the state of his breathing, he pulls the trigger. He does not squeeze the trigger. He might even slap it, as shotgunners sometimes do. That is all. He hits the target, which may be a flying dime or an Alka-Seltzer tablet tossed into the air by Lucky."

Having never trained with McDaniel, you would NOT be well versed to be able to understand or make an educated statement as to the time it takes or the effectiveness of Quick Kill. On the other hand I was trained by McDaniel personally, and so can discuss this through experience and first hand knowledge over the last 25 years of performing Quick Kill.

So, we see what was written in 1968 about it, and we see reviews here of the recent training in the same techniques which mirror the information reported some 37-38 years later.

Hard to argue with first hand reports then or now I would think, whether you don't know how or not. Others like myself, do know how and are getting students squared away in very short time frames of training in the system of Quick Kill.

It' that simple, you and others can believe what is written about the system and wonder how, or you and others can be involved in the training I provide and see for yourself like HSO and others here did recently.

There's NO question as the effectiveness, accuracy or speed that can be attained in short order. Only those unwilling to accept that which they find hard to believe in the face of facts presented will continue to argue the point.

Edited to add: Just let me point out once again that I was observed holding 1-2 inch groups at 15 feet and beyond without the use of sights, the gun below the line of sight between the nose and chin, with a full mag of 9mm in the G17 by students. The best group was just one inch and several groups of 17 rds were spread at 1 1/8 to 1 1/4 " extreme center to center on the bullet holes.

I suppose if we now take what Sky1 assumes, to heart, about the muzzle not being able to be a 1/4" off from center when the gun is fired or we create holes that are 16-20 inches off the mark of COM, that this Quick Kill must be letting students shoot superbly accurate for those groups to have occured with students when asked to repeatedly keep the rds as close as possible. ALL without looking at the sights or the gun.

Edited to add this from a review of a student this summer as well:

Brownie settled me down, and we tried some drills to accomplish this...it worked. I was shooting a rock, 12" in diameter at 60yds....did I mention no sights!!! 90% hits...the shots that did not hit were real close, enough to make that rock jump if it had legs.

I wonder what the deviation of the barrel from COM was for this shooter to be able to make this happen at 10 times the distance Sky1 mentioned of around 7 yards. When he says "did I mention no sights!!! , take that literally please, he arrived with NO sights on his own glock 17 for the two days of training with me.

Brownie

 

[brownie0486]

BTW Skyguy,

When are you going to let the members in on where we can get this training you provide with contact information?. I can provide your own statements in quotes from another forum if you'd like, as a reminder, of the training you state you provide.

Looking for pricing, location and contact information from you. I have three people who will come in for that training as soon as you provide us the required contact information and dates you are available.

Brownie

 

[okjoe]

Justin,

You are welcome to pick on me because I am not a shootist or a trainer.

I also have been and still am very critical of some police training past practices, and those who support them, based on real world results in terms of the death and injury of Police Officers.

Keep in mind that the stats on hits on BGs, by those trained to use their sights, is < 20%.

And of those trained to use their sights, the vast majority said that they didn't use them.

Are you unaware of those facts?

..........

One of these days I may start a thread on, what's the big deal about being trained by one who has BTDT? , or what does having BTDT have to do with altering training policies and tactics as related to CQB effectiveness?

The answer to both questions is IMHO, not much.

.........

All I say is that PS works and works very well and even by a seldom if ever shooters like me, given my 400 or so rounds per year, compared with your 10 or 12 K per year.

So relax. The world is not about to end.

..........

And, even my misses (since I use "small" targets), should still hit any BG in front of me given home defender and practical handgun shooting distances.

..........

Went out to the garage today, hung up a sheet, and threw small small balls up in the air and shot at them at 8 - 10 feet. The airsoft pistol used, doesn't shoot that precisely at all. So, not much success. Shot 20 or 30 times in total.

Couldn't tell if the balls were deflected in the air.

Will secure some nerf balls, and try that as they are lighter and may react better to the very light BB's.

I was able to effectively shoot at a 3 inch hollow plastic ball on the ground and hit it with about 1 out of three shots with my imprecise gun. (That's around a 33% hit rate on a 3 inch target) I imagine its just finding around with the right mix of balls and gun, and improving the lighting from not so good to better.

Of course, practice could probably increase my success rate even using the same gun.

The bottom line IMHO, is that PS is simplier than sight shooting, and takes less time to acquire and shoot at a target.

So, it sould garner better results than traditional training methods in CQB situations. Even a 30% hit rate would be a 50% increase in effectiveness.

And since P&S is the simplest of methods, and also can be used to enhance -> ALL <- other shooting techinques if a gun is appropriate to its use, IMHO, it should be considered by home defenders.

It also can be learned with little or no training. It is effective and the technique can be maintained with little if any practice.

..........

I also understand that you have not been trained via an instructor or via self training in either QK or P&S.

If that is true, I find it odd that you denigrate a method about which you really are unaware of in terms of a reasonable amount of "hands on" testing that you would be willing to write up and sign your name too.

However, you have a lot of company in the world of the gun.

..........

Lastly, here's a few questiona for you:

Do you have confidence in using Sight Shooting in a CQB situations??

And if so, why do you think you will have a better result than thousands of police officers, who I am sure with the best of intentions, since their life was in jeapordy, and following their training as best they could, achieved only a 20% hit rate?

Or is a 20% hit rate Ok with you?

 

[LawDog]

Actually, if my somewhat rusty trigonometry skills haven't gone totally paws up -- and if a 0.25" deviation comes out to 2.4 degrees -- then at 240 inches (20 feet) you'd have a shift of ten inches and some change.

Two degree deviation would be 8.4 inches, three degrees would be 12.5 inches and 3.2 degree deviation would come up to 13 and change -- all at 20 feet.

3.8 degree shift would put you at 16 inches at 20 feet.

The shorter the pistol, the more degrees are covered by a quarter-inch shift.

*shrug*

Pretty much a word problem from high-school trig, although someone a little closer to math class may want to check my figuring.

So much for that.

So.

Is this thread going to continue to devolve into a fire-hydrant-marking contest, or is going to head back towards the high road somewhere?

LawDog

 

[brownie0486]

LawDog,

Assuming your trig is correct, it would mean that my 1 inch 17 shot group at 21 feet would then mean that my deviation of muzzle, without looking at the gun at that distance was somewhere around what?--1/10th of .25 inches at the muzzle for 17 consecutive shots?

The calculator tells me that 1/10 of 1/4 [ .25 deviation ]" is what .025 of an inch at the muzzle or less for ALL shots? I think that pretty much clears things up nicely that threat focused skills can be counted on, once trained how to use themto make the hits quite nicely in short periods of time.

That doesn't, nor wold ever be considered spray and pray, hope for the best hail mary shots. Lets assume for all intents and purposes that the groups were no larger than 10 inches by all students within 21 feet with speed.

No student was outside that .25 deviation of muzzle with threat focused skills all weekend once they understood the techniques they were trained in. Pretty good results by anyones standards, No?

The High Road should probably be taken by those who are arguing that threat focused skills are "snake oil" or that it is impossible to know where your shots are going [ meaning one would not be able to keep all shots within that .25 deviation at 21 feet without divine intervention ] without using ones sights and the verification in their alignment.

I've provided quite a bit of documentation to the contrary here. Documentation that may fly in the face of probablilities to some, but are facts that are indisputable nonetheless. The only way for those who don't believe the training brings people to levels of proficiency as stated in the times stated would be for those same people to deny the truth or suggest the students after action reviews are total lies solely for the propagation of the same.

How this will turn out is up to the people who don't understand the skills others are capable of, by those who will continue to deny the facts put forth in the AAR's, or the people who won't accept that because they can't or don't know how to perform at the stated levels using threat focus that it can't be possible.

People write opinions based on the lack of knowledge here where this subject is concerned. Those who know what they can do through the threat focused training first hand are not the people who argue against the possibilities within everyones capabilities once they are shown the way. In other words, the people who argue against the skills that can be performed using theat focus just don't know what they don't know.

Brownie

 

[SkyGuy]

3.8 degree shift would put you at 16 inches at 20 feet.

Thanks for your input, Lawdog. I'll serve the crow.

A 4 1/4" commander barrel angled 1/4" is, indeed, 3.8 degrees which apparently calcs out to a 16" deviation at 20 ft.
But for those who don't like math, the use of a simple laser easily illustrates the deviations that occur at distance with very slight barrel movements.

With that said ......nearly anyone with basic handgun skills should be able to quickly learn to point shoot a decent group from 3ft up to car length distances (15-20ft).

Worthwhile handgun self defense training should be uncomplicated and involve the smooth transit from arm's length distance to disengagement distance.

It is important that training includes movement to cover and various stationary, moving, bobbing and shoot/no shoot targets.
Training is 'seriously deficient' if it does 'not' include shooting in low light, darkness, over/under/around cover and awkward positions.
.

 

[brownie0486]

Come on Skyguy,

You are on the high road, take it, and give us some contact information. Surely one with your talent and penchant with handguns whose a trainer in his own right can't allow your reputation to be compromised by not providing us with a way to connect with you to get this training.

I don't know of any professional trainer who would continuously refuse/ignore requests from prospective students to give out contact information so you can be contacted for training.

t is important that training includes movement to cover and various stationary, moving, bobbing and shoot/no shoot targets.
Training is 'seriously deficient' if it does 'not' include shooting in low light, darkness, over/under/around cover and awkward positions.
.

You keep mentionining this aspect of training. I and others have to assume you train people in these very skills, otherwise you would be admittting to being deficinet in some way yourself as a trainer. I'm asking for contact information to receive these very invaluable skills you seem to suggest you provide.

I would also like to thank you for bringing to everyones attention that a 1/4" deviation is nothing to worry about where threat focused skills are concerned anymore than sighted fire with it's inherent accuracy.

People hold 4-8 inch groups at the most at 20 feet all the time, most in the last class hovered at 4-6 inches, 8 being the largest standard grouping and or less in the class for two days of high speed shooting without the use of sights.

Seems your point of deviations of a 1/4 inch and worrying about threat focused skills not being able to stay well within that limit are unfounded from the reviews of many many students, and the list keeps on growing. We must be doing something very well to keep the students on track and never having to worry about looking at the gun.

I would not have thought about deviation had it not been for your remarks, which seem to now be irrelevant to either sighted or unsighted fire, training and their respective incumbent results.

Brownie

 

[MAURICE]

I do not claim to be an expert, but I thought I would throw my .02 in here.
When we qual at work (AR Dept of Correction) we shoot at targets from 2 yards to 50 yards, using either a S&W .357 or Glock G22 pistols. Every time we have shot (either for quals or at the instructor school) the fastest times (at 2-7 yards) have been those who simply draw and fire from the hip. At that distance any difference in accuracy is minimal. When you have 12 seconds to fire 6 rounds, dump, reload, and fire 6 more with one of the wheelguns (most of the time with no speedloader), shooting from the hip is what will get you in under the time limit.
The instructors and supervisors prefer you do it this way anyway at close distances just for the sake of weapons retention.

Personally, I prefer to point shoot at close targets.

 

[bogie]

Guys, I think that we're getting a little anal here. We're not talking about ones and zeroes. It isn't black and white.

Careful aiming has its place. Point shooting has its place.

If all you do is practice bullseye aiming, if you have some guy running at you and he's 5 yards away, you don't have time to screw with sight alignment, and all that. Likewise, if you're into just point shooting, and some doof is popping rounds at you and your family from behind a car door 30 yards off, well, point shooting just isn't a valid means of engagement.

Practice. Practice. Practice. In all ways.

Guys, I shoot a lot. But I don't shoot a .45 all that much. Like I said, probably under 5,000 rounds... But I carry one. Ergonomically, it just clicked. I can deal with the sights regardless, but point shooting requires muscle memory, and it _really_ helps to start with a gun that fits you, rather than require that you adapt to fit the gun. Since I started playing with point shooting last year, I've run about 1,500 rounds through the .45s, and I'm fairly comfortable with 'em - That's the main thing. I won't carry a J-frame, even if it is just purely easily light, for one reason: At 7 yards, without using the sights, I naturally shoot about knee height instead of chest height. The word here is "naturally." If I'm using the sights, I'm on, but I don't want to _have_ to use the sights...

Nothing is magic. Everything requires practice. I know I've run well over 5,000 rounds of .22s down a pair of Ciener kits... And I shoot a few thousand benchrest rounds every year.

 

[sturmruger]

More proselytizing on Point Shooting

from Dictionary.com
pros·e·ly·tize

1. To induce someone to convert to one's own religious faith.
2. To induce someone to join one's own political party or to espouse one's doctrine.

I believe that PS has it's place so we do agree on that, but I am sooo sick of the PS believers trying to convert the rest of us like we are lost sheep or something. Why not stop saying how much better your way is and start talking about how sight shooting and point shooting both have a place in defensive gun uses. It seems to me that only the proselytizing PS advocates want it one way the rest of us are open to either technique. Next thing you know you guys are going to put up a big tent, and start having altar calls.

 

[brownie0486]

As HSO has gratiously allowed me to use this phrase-------

"The problems drive the solutions"

When time is short, and distances moderate, threat focused skills are the solution to the problem.

Recently while training a class in Easton, Pa., I asked the students at the end of the first day if a person who could effectively use threat focused skills through proper training as well as the sights was well rounded. They all answered in the affirmative.

I then asked them if a person who was not well versed in threat focused skills was well rounded, and they all said no.

I agree with their assessement. Now ask yourself, are you well rounded in your SD skills with a firearm? Only you can answer that question, the students all seem to think after the formal training they are, and come to the realization that before that training they just thought they were.

It's not what people know, it's what they think they know that becomes their reality.

Brownie

 

[SkyGuy]

I am sooo sick of the PS believers trying to convert the rest of us like we are lost sheep or something.

Really man, just how much can be said about point shooting? lol
It's an amazingly simple skill to learn! It's the practice that counts.

Read enough of these touting posts and you realize that it's all about the money.
.

 

[Dr.Rob]

Well if ANY idiot can learn it in five minutes, put your money where your mouth is.

You want to convince the masses here?

Offer this training, free of charge, to a handful of THR members and let's get their feedback... you know we have a forum for just that purpose.

I'd suggest a pool of trainees from ZERO experience up to full n 500+rds a week active duty (or similar) and have them post their experiences.

You've spent hours of typing, where you could have spend a handful of minutes explaining how it works. I realize trainers want to make money, and that specialized knowledge isn't 'free.'

Just a suggestion.

 

[brownie0486]

Dr.Rob:

I'd suggest a pool of trainees from ZERO experience up to full n 500+rds a week active duty (or similar) and have them post their experiences.

http://www.threatfocused.com/forums/showthread.php?t=223
This guy works for a major dept. in California as a firearms instructor. He's had some of the best training out there.

http://www.threatfocused.com/forums/showthread.php?t=226
This guy has been to untold Front sight courses and was taught by Sweatnbullets whose also one of our instructors.

http://www.threatfocused.com/forums/showthread.php?t=255
This guy had NO experience with a handgun at all, except a basic NRA course.

http://www.threatfocused.com/forums/showthread.php?t=312
This guy has been in front of the major instructors in the country numerous times.

http://www.threatfocused.com/forums/showthread.php?t=305
This guy works on a campus as a police officer and shoots IDPA extensively as well as trains with major national instrcutors.

http://www.threatfocused.com/forums/showthread.php?t=368
This guy had very little in the way of handgun training.

http://www.threatfocused.com/forums/showthread.php?t=380
HSO, is right here on this forum, and this is his review. His wife shoots very little and he posts about her there as well. Members can send him a pm anytime from this site.

http://www.threatfocused.com/forums/showthread.php?t=393
This guy was a cop in California, and now works for the fraud bureau on NM. His partner that was there is a state certified firearms instructor, investigator, and with the Sheriffs office for 10 years.

http://www.threatfocused.com/forums/showthread.php?t=374
JMusic is from this forum and everyone can pm him here as well on his thoughts after rading his review. I'll let him explain his background if he so chooses.

http://www.threatfocused.com/forums/showthread.php?t=313
This guy is the new shooter above who also attended Easton, Pa after being out here with me one on one in the other review.

http://www.threatfocused.com/forums/showthread.php?t=151&highlight=quarter
This one mentions the 5 minutes time frame with the rifle qk as do others in their reviews above.

Then this from a member of the 5th SF group, one of our finest who trained with me one on one before heading to Iraq after receiving all the elite organization he belonged to could give him. Now deceased when an IED blew up, he wrote the following 20 days before leaving us.

"One of Brownie's many talents is that he is able to clearly elucidate in writing what he does with the gun. Everything he writes, he showed me first hand. It is truly simple once he shows you the way, because you already know how to do it, just was never cognizant of it.

For those willing to learn, his postings are invaluable in getting you to think differently about shooting.

From the sandbox
ataha



and this from Ayman later as well:

The techniques Brownie and 7677 are using are making all the difference for me over here. Believe me, when you are clearing rooms for real, you definitely want those techniques in your toolbox. Stay sharp,

ataha

You've spent hours of typing, where you could have spend a handful of minutes explaining how it works. I realize trainers want to make money, and that specialized knowledge isn't 'free.'

http://www.threatfocused.com/forums/showthread.php?t=46
The link to the narrative on your suggestion to explain this this. It's been out there for some time now.

Well if ANY idiot can learn it in five minutes, put your money where your mouth is.

I put my money where my mouth is every day Dr. Rob. I let the students speak to the training and what I can get people to do in very short timeframes. I don't need to prove to you or anyone by giving "free" training that what I do works and works in short order.

Learned in just FIVE minutes? That's why it sounds like snake oil when you try to sell it. I've seen point shooting, don't deny it's effective.

I take the high road until people start alluding to what it is I do as "snake oil", then it's time to get down to it. If it is snake oil, its a snake oil that works.

It's not like the information was not out there, you were just not looking on the right forum

Brownie

 

[brownie0486]

It's an amazingly simple skill to learn! It's the practice that counts.

Wife shoots about every two months, 300 rds or so. We get out to the range and I tell her to remember what I told her. She starts making nice tight little groups without the use of sights.

another myth dispelled

I laid off the guns completely for almost 5 years having burned out on competition to the point is just was not fun anymore to shoot. The firstrds downrange got the same results as the day I laid off them. These skills use your natural ability, we only open the door to what you are already capable of doing [ as a few of the reviewers mention like Ataha from the sandbox ].

Myth dispelled again.

Really man, just how much can be said about point shooting?

A forums worth: http://www.threatfocused.com/forums/index.php

And volumes of books starting from the early 1900's. Any other questions?

Try to follow along, do the research and perhaps one day you too will be able to speak intelligently about the subject matter here.

Brownie

 

[hso]

Dr.Rob,

I got nothing to sell. I actually was there. I'm a member and I took the training. So did JMusic who is also a member. So did PWard who is a member. How many more THRoaders need to take it who saw it as a valuable skill is needed?

My previous training is in traditional sight shooting. So was PWard's. So was my wife's. So was the whitewater rescue cop and the jailer and the construction company owner and the engineer and the homemaker and and the whitewater coach and... Well, everyone but Brownie and Paul Gomez (who is a THRoader).

There were people in the course that shoot 100 rounds a month and there were people in the course that shoot 1000 rounds a month, so your request has already been satisfied.

There's nothing magical about it, but it is odd at first and then it becomes natural. It takes practice. It takes coaching. Because it's a physical skill it's not easily explained and more effectively demonstrated. It takes an open mind. It's another tool in the tool box to be used when it's the best tool for the job while at other times traditional sight shooting is the best tool in the tool box to use.

I can say that it works for me and the others for what it's intended for.

 

[Sweatnbullets]

http://www.csicop.org/sb/9812/snakeoil.html

" "Snake oil." The expression has come to be synonymous with a quack remedy."

"In time worthless cure-alls came to be known as "snake oil.""

As a Integrated Threat Focused Instructor, I also take exception to this term. I know my students do not think me a "quack" or that what I teach is a "worthless cure-all." The link posted above from my student RAM, came from a person that was an MP in the Airforce and is a current firearms instructor at Frontsight.

Quick kill can be taught in five minutes, I did it again last weekend. Quick fire also takes about five minutes, as does alternative sighting methods such as sighting down the slide and from the silohuette of the back of the slide. All four of these threat focused techniques take five minutes or less to teach and learn. Last weekend my students saw all four and picked Quick Kill as the threat focused technique that they would use all weekend.

Just because one does not have the knowledge, the experience, or the open mindedness, does not make them an expert on the subject. Our students have all three of these vital characteristics. Their AAR's speak for themselves!

You can either listen to the those that truely know, or those that "assume" they know.

I use my sights, I love my sights, but I refuse to die trying to get to my sights. FOF has shown me time and time again what I will do in a dynamic confrontation, where I am behind in the reactionary curve. It is the exact same thing that I hear from the vast majority of people with combat experience. Training in the use of sights is important, but no more so than training for the times where it is impossible to get to them.

Since the vast majority of people involved in a dynamic confrontation, where they are behind in the reactionary curve, are unable to get to their sights, not only is it "irresponsible" to not practice threat focused skills, it is just plain foolish.

Sighted fire only skills degrades to "spray and pray" because there are no other skills to fall back on. Threat focused skills remain threat focused skills, The knowledge, experience, time, and practice have been put in and you own the skills. You are now well rounded.....opposed to being flat sided. It is hard to just keep rolling along when you have flat sides.

Do not let your past "closed minded" training limit you. Open minded common sense will always lead you to the best alternatives.

 

[brownie0486]

We'll be back to Knoxville this fall. Anyone who has interest in the training can let him know, he'll keep you in the loop here. He'll likely announce the dates here as he did before for everyone who's interested.

We'll also be back in Easton, Pa this fall for those who hail from that part of the country.

If you have read the review links provided and would like to sponsor a class in your area, as HSO has done, email me and we'll get something set up for you as well.

Roger and I also hold one on one classes of one or two days in our respective areas of the southwest US as well. He in the Vegas are, myself in the Phoenix area.

Integrated Threat Focus Training Systems has recently announced a "Fighting at Night" course in the desert if anyone is interested, the link is here:

http://www.threatfocused.com/forums/showthread.php?t=395

This course is going to really be a hit IMO. Imagine being able to fire all night in the desert with no distractions and gaining real world skills in lowlight as well as learning to and making use of those flashlights in the dark while running through the materials with a handgun.

Brownie

 

[SkyGuy]

Integrated Threat Focus Training Systems has recently announced a "Fighting at Night" course in the desert

It's about damn time. I've been yankin you guys' chain about low light, no light shooting for too long a time. Thought you'd never get your act together.

Now's your opportunity to come into the 21st century and learn/teach the immediate tactical advantages of laser sighted shooting.
Show your students how to focus on the threat in the dark.......as you simultaneously and 'accurately' superimpose the POI on the target at all meaningful distances.

Lasers 'rule' in low light and darkness. Teach your students their intermittant and tandem use with white light techniques.

If none of the instructors are capable, I'll teach it all for a minimum fee, a piece of the gate and expenses....in advance. PM me for terms/details.

It would be so worth it just to see everybody's jaw drop in amazement. )
.

 

[okjoe]

From DR Rob:

"....Well if ANY idiot can learn it in five minutes, put your money where your mouth is.

You want to convince the masses here?

Offer this training, free of charge, to a handful of THR members and let's get their feedback... you know we have a forum for just that purpose.

I'd suggest a pool of trainees from ZERO experience up to full n 500+rds a week active duty (or similar) and have them post their experiences.

You've spent hours of typing, where you could have spend a handful of minutes explaining how it works. I realize trainers want to make money, and that specialized knowledge isn't 'free.'...."

..........

Well DR Robb, what you don't know is that Brownie is a natural and brilliant writer who has the ability to calmly, methodically, logically, and simply respond to, and without rancor, jibes and comments that such as me would just not put up with.

I would like to think I am a Zell Miller type of conservative/liberal-liberal/conservative.

I don't readily turn or give cheek, or respond as I am supposed to or should.

It's still a free country, or is it?

You should also keep in mind that even those who may know how to do something and do it well, may never be able to pass that life saving info along to others who could use it to save their lives and the lives of associates, for lack of the ability to express themselves well.

The real judgment should be check it out and and see if it WILL IT DO THE JOB.

That's the only criteria of value.

My site has info on various PS methods.

They work for idiots like me, perhaps they will also work for you.

Why not check them out, test them out, and get back to us???

 

[brownie0486]

SkyGuy

Send me your contact information.

Brownie

 

[Dr.Rob]

I'll be happy to do the research and thanks for the links...

"Rancor" was hardly my intent. These threads, as I've said before always draw ire... we as mods (myself included) shouldn't throw gasoline of the fire.

Posting the link to how it's done, kudos for doing so.

may I quote?

From the passage...

"Find a light switch across the room."

to the passage...

" I don't have need to worry about 0-3 yards or 7-10 yards or beyond 10 yard methodologies, the commonality of one focal point in using Quick Kill with a handgun under the stresses of self defense is easier to ingrain into memory once it has been mastered."

Is remarkably similar to the 'indexing' technique I described at the front end of this thread, and it makes a great deal of sense. I wish you had posted that link a lot earlier in the discussion, seems we have more in common than I thought.

 

[brownie0486]

I'm okay with that Dr.Rob

The information I wrote in that narrative which is now registered copyright with Wash, DC has been available for about 2 years on the net.

Yup, lots of ire on these types of threads, and I was keeping my nose out of this one until it became apparent that whether people agree with okjoe and his ideas/shelf/P+S or not,

I'm not inclined to have others misunderstand that certain systems of threat focused methodologies and the Quick Kill threat focused system in particular that I use and train others in, is neither reliable nor accurate at any real SD distances people will likely encounter where they'll be using a pistol to defend with.

Feel free to check out the threat focused site and kick the tires, there is a lot of good information available for everyone to peruse.

Brownie

 

[SkyGuy]

>>>I'll teach it all for a minimum fee, a piece of the gate and expenses....in advance. PM me for terms/details.<<

SkyGuy
Send me your contact information.
Brownie

It's encouraging to see that you're opening your mind to 21st century equipment and tactics.
It's never too late for an old dog to learn new tricks.

Night-fighting training and tactics by including laser sights is, indeed, cutting edge. Many of the 'master' trainers now teach the techniques. I'd be happy to share my own insights on night-fighting since we did so much of that in Vietnam. For example, a white light is an easy target.

As you know, I teach HTH and basic handgun use to those less able to defend themselves because of gender, age, weakness, poor sight, immobility or impairment. It's done by my arrangement and is always pro bono....unless you're able bodied and fit, like me.

I'd enjoy giving a demo on empty hand SD techniques, canes, keys, pens, walking sticks, etc. and a short tutorial on situational awareness and avoidance.

PM me for terms/details. I'm back and forth between AZ and CO and FL.
.

 

[Justin]

You are welcome to pick on me because I am not a shootist or a trainer.

Joe, I'm sorry, but I've seen you post the same misinformation on this board over and over and over, and yet you continue to advocate the same, utterly unsafe practices.

I also have been and still am very critical of some police training past practices, and those who support them, based on real world results in terms of the death and injury of Police Officers.

I'm not a cop, I'm not concerned with police training tactics. Stop beating that straw man.

Keep in mind that the stats on hits on BGs, by those trained to use their sights, is < 20%.

Source, please? Also, please include the yearly expended roundcount of those people.

And of those trained to use their sights, the vast majority said that they didn't use them.

So what?

Are you unaware of those facts?

I dispute them, because they've been disputed here before, and you have never, ever come anywhere close to backing up your thinking.

One of these days I may start a thread on, what's the big deal about being trained by one who has BTDT? , or what does having BTDT have to do with altering training policies and tactics as related to CQB effectiveness?

The answer to both questions is IMHO, not much.

Are you high?
Again, what do you have to offer me? What possible advantage does your method confer?
Opinions are like skin pores. Everybody's got a million of 'em. Your opinion is not valid. Facts are. Quite frankly, endlessly repeating that you believe that there is no need to train with people who are better than oneself does not make it so. argumentum ad nauseum.

All I say is that PS works and works very well and even by a seldom if ever shooters like me, given my 400 or so rounds per year, compared with your 10 or 12 K per year.

So relax. The world is not about to end.

No, according to what you've posted both here and on your website, the pointshooting technique you advocate does not work well. Your accuracy is abysmal, and the fact that you land hits at all has more to do with the laws of probabilities than any "technique." Any idiot can point a pistol in the general direction of a close-in target, empty the magazine, and land hits. That hardly makes it useful. Spray 'n' Pray is the technique of the untrained, and those who are completely unconcerned with collateral damage. Are you honestly telling me that you would use this technique on a crowded street?

Again, I point out that you have posted pictures of test targets where you admit to missing the target completely! To advocate a technique that results in misses, at close range and under ideal circumstances is, as far as I'm concerned, criminally irresponsible on your part.

And, even my misses (since I use "small" targets), should still hit any BG in front of me given home defender and practical handgun shooting distances.

What was I just saying about you being criminally irresponsible? You miss the paper at close range distances, and consider that "good enough?" And we're just supposed to believe, on your sayso, that those rounds "would" have hit a human-sized target?

Went out to the garage today, hung up a sheet, and threw small small balls up in the air and shot at them at 8 - 10 feet. The airsoft pistol used, doesn't shoot that precisely at all. So, not much success. Shot 20 or 30 times in total.

Couldn't tell if the balls were deflected in the air.

YOU MISSED THE TARGETS!

Will secure some nerf balls, and try that as they are lighter and may react better to the very light BB's.

I was able to effectively shoot at a 3 inch hollow plastic ball on the ground and hit it with about 1 out of three shots with my imprecise gun. (That's around a 33% hit rate on a 3 inch target) I imagine its just finding around with the right mix of balls and gun, and improving the lighting from not so good to better.

In other words, gaming the system until you get the results you want, instead of changing your technique to be applicable in as many situations as possible. 20% technique.

Of course, practice could probably increase my success rate even using the same gun.

A basic understanding of marksmanship of any sort would probably do this.

The bottom line IMHO, is that PS is simplier than sight shooting, and takes less time to acquire and shoot at a target.

Your opinion. Again. Are you willing to put that to the test?

So, it sould garner better results than traditional training methods in CQB situations. Even a 30% hit rate would be a 50% increase in effectiveness.

Oh? So are you planning on using your "technique" in the course of some CQB training? Simunitions, perhaps?

And since P&S is the simplest of methods, and also can be used to enhance -> ALL <- other shooting techinques if a gun is appropriate to its use, IMHO, it should be considered by home defenders.

P&S? Would that be Pray & Spray?

It also can be learned with little or no training. It is effective and the technique can be maintained with little if any practice.

Again, I point out that anyone can empty a pistol in the general direction of a target and make hits at close range. This is the most bottom-of-the-barrel shooting technique extant! Nothing I've seen of your technique shows it to be otherwise.

I also understand that you have not been trained via an instructor or via self training in either QK or P&S.

If that is true, I find it odd that you denigrate a method about which you really are unaware of in terms of a reasonable amount of "hands on" testing that you would be willing to write up and sign your name too.

However, you have a lot of company in the world of the gun.

Joe, I denigrate your method because all I see on your website is sub-par accuracy shot in sub-par times, with a "technique" that amounts to nothing more than emptying the weapon in the general direction of the target. I am utterly confident that I, too, can go to the range and empty a weapon in the general direction of an exceedingly close-in target and score hits.

Lastly, here's a few questiona for you:

Do you have confidence in using Sight Shooting in a CQB situations??

False dichotomy. At point-blank ranges one need not use the sights. That is not validation of your "technique."

And if so, why do you think you will have a better result than thousands of police officers, who I am sure with the best of intentions, since their life was in jeapordy, and following their training as best they could, achieved only a 20% hit rate?

Or is a 20% hit rate Ok with you?

Give me a break. Is that all you've got? A pathetic attempt to introduce doubt into my mind about my own, objectively shown, level of shooting prowess? That's high comedy coming from someone who just posted how they plan to change around the size of their targets, the lighting, and a bunch of other variables that would be unavailable in a CQB situation.

Joe, shooting competitively and practicing on my own has made me firmly aware of the limitations of my skill.

How about you?