Since my State finally decided to allow rifle hunting in my area, I decided to get myself a stick for hunting whitetail. I went with the American Classic, a Marlin 336C with a Leupold Gold Ring 2-7X33. Expect a few posts about it in the future.
January 19, 2013
branching out
Posted by tgace under equipment | Tags: firearms, weapon skills, weapon training, weapons |Leave a Comment
October 10, 2012
fine..gross..lets call the whole thing off
Posted by tgace under skills, weapons | Tags: weapon skills, weapon training |[8] Comments
Another interesting post over at Vuurwapen Blog. Andrew talks about one of my favorite “tactical sacred cows”…the whole “you won’t be able to do that fine motor skill in combat” meme.
http://vuurwapenblog.com/2012/10/09/dexterity-motor-skills/
I was first told about “fine motor skills” while in the military; the explanation I was given was that anything to do with using my fingers under stress was a bad idea. That doing so would not work, that I just wouldn’t have the dexterity. I was told to use the bigger parts of my hand, or my fingers bunched together, to do any sort of weapon manipulation. This, they said, was a “gross” motor skill that would be better under stress, which apparently makes your fingers turn to jello.
However, I was also taught by other people to do things like punch buttons on military radios and put tiny needles in small veins, both of which require dexterity. In addition, both are skills which might be critical to saving lives under stress (or taking them, in the case of calling for fires). I also found, on my own time, that I could manipulate safeties and slide releases just fine with my thumbs.
…
The author goes onto explain that in his opinion the issue all comes down to ones familiarity and recent experience with a weapon system. I agree 100%. If you are unfamiliar with a weapon, finding the small buttons and levers under stress will indeed be more difficult than grabbing a slide and slingshotting it home. However, if you know the weapon like it’s part of your hand, it’s stupid to loose time doing “gross motor movements”.
I did some comparisons of handgun reloads back in this thread:
http://tgace.com/2011/01/14/variations-on-a-themeemergency-reloads/
To be honest, I now use the slide release lever so unconsciously that I doubt I would ever do the overhand slingshot technique under stress.
July 2, 2012
Carbine Standards
Posted by tgace under skills, weapons | Tags: carbine, weapon skills, weapon training |1 Comment
The summer reloading/shooting season has opened. 
I have been trying out Redback One’s Carbine Standard.
RedBack One Carbine standards
Preamble: The following shooting standards have been designed to prepare students for advanced training with Redback One. These standards will serve as Go/No Go for enrollment to RB1 advanced weapon training. Students should strive for 100% speed and accuracy, however the entry standard will be 80%. These standards will be conducted ‘Cold and on Demand’ on day 1 of all RB1 Advanced Weapons Training. Failure to meet these standards may result in removal from the course. The final decision will be made by the Senior Instructor running the training.Instructions for shooting the RB1 Carbine Standards.
- All strings are shot from the ready positions detailed in each serial.
- Distance: as per requirements in each serial.
- Target: RB1 silhouette (preferred).
- Scoring zones: head box & A zone as detailed, 8” chest circle.
- Total score possible: 80 points
- Passing score: 64 points
Scoring the target:
- Each round in scoring zone = 1 point
- Each round outside scoring zone = 0 points
- Rounds fired after time limit = 0 points
———————————————-Serial 1 – 7 meters (Low Ready)
- 1 round to the body – 0.80 sec
- 2 rounds body, 1 round head – 2.00 sec
- 6 rounds to the body – 2.00 sec
Serial 2 – 7 meters (High Ready)
- 1 round to the body – 1.20 sec
- 4 rounds body, 2 rounds head (A zone) – 3.00 sec
- 1 round body, 1 round head, 1 round body – 2.00 sec
Serial 3 – 7 meters (Low Ready)
- 1 round body, transition, 1 round body – 4.00 sec
- 1 round body, reload, 1 round body – 6.00 sec
- 1 round body, transition, 1 round body, reload, 1 round body – 11.00 sec
Serial 4 – 7 meters (High Ready)
- 10 rounds body, reload, 10 rounds body – 12.00 sec
Serial 5 – 10 meters (Low Ready)
- 3 rounds body, transition, 3 rounds body – 6 sec
Serial 6 – 10 meters (Weapon unloaded on ground)
- Load weapon and fire 1 round to the body – 5.00 sec
Serial 7 – 20 meters (High Ready)
- 2 rounds body (standing) – 2.50 sec
- 4 rounds body (standing to kneeling) – 4.50 sec
- 6 rounds body (standing to prone) – 8.00 sec
Serial 8 – 25 meters vertical cover (High Ready)
- 2 rds body strong side cover, strong shoulder, 2 rds body weak side cover, support shoulder – 6 sec
- 5 rounds body strong side cover, transition 5 rounds strong side cover – 16 sec
This is my second go at it and the first time I had to read the stages and shoot them myself..so that alibi is out of the way.
Result. I wasn’t tallying points just yet, I was just metering myself on my time and rounds on target so… this time I had all rounds on target with 5 outside of the “A zones” on an IPSC target. Most times were within standard but many were slow by a fraction of a second and a few by a second or more. Overall not a discouraging start, next time I will start tracking my score and see how I improve over time.
June 17, 2012
skill goals
Posted by tgace under skills, weapons | Tags: weapon skills, weapon training |Leave a Comment
I better buy more ammo….
May 25, 2012
full-time attitude
Posted by tgace under law enforcement, skills, work | Tags: law enforcement, training, weapon skills, weapon training |[2] Comments
English: A Picture of FBI SWAT officers. Origionally from http://buffalo.fbi.gov/specialty_programs.htm (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Having just completed a tactical leaders course I found myself revisiting a thought that crosses my mind from time to time about police tactical units and training. By a pretty large percentage, most police SWAT teams are “part-time”, meaning that the officers train 1-2 days a month and otherwise work as patrolmen, detectives, etc as their “full-time” job.
The thing that I seldom see addressed, in SWAT courses, literature or even over a beer with others in the tactical circles, is the issue of “off-duty” training. There’s plenty of talk about what “should be trained”, how vital PT is and how perishable weapon skills are, but WHEN is seldom addressed. Face it, formation running or group PT during a training day is nothing more than a team building exercise if your operators are not conducting physical conditioning on their own. Weapon proficiency of a SWAT standard isn’t going to be honed with the range time a part-time team gets. If a tactical unit member wants to seriously consider himself an “operator” he needs to have a “full-time attitude”. Just putting on your ACU’s and going off to your monthly training isn’t enough. Being “elite” isn’t a uniform or duty assignment, it’s what you DO. If you are only thinking about improving yourself 1-2 days out of the month than you are “part-time” between your ears.
The problem is…not all team members have the time, facilities, money or (sadly sometimes) the interest to pursue weapons training on their own “dime”. Add to it the fact that many departments (or certain key members within departments) are so risk/lawsuit averse that they wont give the departments stamp of approval to any training activity not supervised by department trainers and the result is many operators only shooting when their department provides it. Sure they get more trigger time than their co-workers who are not on the team, but not enough IMO.
Many of the best shooters I have met were good because of their personal interest in shooting/hunting. They would probably be good shooters even if they had never become cops. Fortunately many of those “types” are drawn to tactical teams within PD’s, but there are other SWAT coppers who, while not as “gun-nutty” as their brethren, would still love to shoot/train more often but are not provided with any sort of official support from their PD’s.
If it were a “my way” world and money were no object, I would love to see things like these available;
-PD ranges ran like civilian gun clubs where officers could go at anytime and shoot with department provided ammo/targets/gear.
-Departments providing their operators with take home training gear like SIRT Pistols, and/or training magazines, timers and dry-fire curriculum.
-The ability to use ranges, simulators or other department facilities without the approval of a Captain, two lieutenants, a sergeant and a letter from your mother. “If you build it they will come”…
In the end though, there are no excuses. There are things you can and should be doing ON YOUR OWN to keep up your skills.
May 20, 2012
the stuff that’s out there (aka caveat emptor)
Posted by tgace under bad budo, skills, weapons | Tags: firearms, skills, training, weapon skills, weapon training |[2] Comments
The popularity of tactical firearms training is on the rise. Thanks to the internet, people looking for instruction in weaponcraft have many sources to refer to and training groups are easy to find with a simple “Google”.
That being said…do your due diligence. Research the people you are considering training with and compare them to other sources. Take a look at this video:
This is the same group/guy mentioned over a papadeltabravo.com back in 2010.
One would think that with all the stuff available for the watching on the net, that these people would have been exposed to videos like this:
Nuff said?? I know that not all the students are going to look as sharp as the instructor, but compare the stuff they are teaching and how they are teaching it.
Now…when if you come across a web page advertising instruction in “tactical firearms” and see the teacher has all sorts of tactical/LE/military credentials, and you see the first video as a sample, wouldn’t you be skeptical when you know that guys in the second video are out there teaching too?
May 10, 2012
don’t confuse skills with deeds
Posted by tgace under code of conduct, philosophy, warriorship | Tags: mindset, philosophy, quotation, warriorship, weapon skills |[13] Comments
Image via Wikipedia
The Hagakure says the following:
In China there was once a man who liked pictures of dragons, and his clothing and furnishings were all designed accordingly. His deep affection for dragons was brought to the attention of the dragon god, and one day a real dragon appeared before his window. It is said that he died of fright. He was probably a man who always spoke big words but acted differently when facing the real thing.
This passage makes me think about the tendency to confuse the trappings and the skills involved in “warriorship” with the deeds that are the REAL substance of it. How many times have you seen the IT/web professional who accumulates helmets, plate carriers, chest rigs, 2K carbines and attends 3-5 “tactical carbine” courses a year? Nothing wrong with that, but don’t confuse the trappings with the “doings”. And beyond that, to me this passage talks about the difference between the “appearance” and the “guts”. The webdude with the tactical firearms hobby who “dies of fright” when the Tactical Gods drop him into a real firefight illustrates that skills and mindset/attitude are two different things.
It’s the same with the martial arts, strutting around like you are “SOMEBODY” because you have a black belt shows me that you have a self-esteem problem. You are a person with a skill. Your skill is no more or less important than a person with a skill in carpentry, dance, accounting or electrical engineering. Show me what kind of person you are by what you do in the world. You don’t have to be a SEAL or a tactical guru to be “someone”. The type of person you are will always be more important than the skills you acquire.
April 27, 2012
tactical preschool 25
Posted by tgace under tactical preschool, tactics | Tags: law enforcement, martial arts, military, tactics, weapon skills, weapon training |[2] Comments
Im re-posting this older tac-preschool lesson because this part of the blog has become more popular lately. This topic in particular was one that I was hoping to get more discussion on.
The tactical world is full of various debates.
.45 vs 9mm, 1911 vs Glock, point shooting vs aimed fire, you suck vs I am high speed.
Another issue that crops up is how to engage multiple opponents. There are various schools of thought on the best way to deal with this situation.
One method is known as “boarding house rules”. Which is stated as “everybody gets firsts before anybody gets seconds.” What that basically means is that, starting with the most immediate threat (which usually is the closest bad guy) you “serve” one shot to all opponents then go back and deal with the first target if it’s still there. A common training method is to hit the last target with two shots then go back and give the other targets one more. So in the illustration below the sequence would be: 1, 2, 3, 3, 1, 2 repeat as necessary.
A different version of this engagement sequence calls for you to “double tap” each target from near to far then back again. 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3….
The biggest problem I see with this idea is the presumption that you have actually hit the first targets before moving onto the next. Range/competition shooting at plates, poppers, silhouettes etc. isn’t the same as dealing with moving and shooting human beings. I am a decent shot, but I’m not fooling myself into thinking that I can guarantee hits like that when the SHTF.
Another school of thought is that due to stress, tunnel vision and the natural human reaction to combat; that a better solution is to shoot each threat, in order of severity, until it no longer is a threat. In the illustration below this is shown as: 1, 1, 1, 1 then onto 2, 2, 2…and so on till all threats are dealt with.
I tend to side with the second approach, but what dogmatic people fail to acknowledge is that there is nothing saying that you cant mix these approaches up. Perhaps I may go: 1, 1, 2, 3, 2, 2, 2, 1, 3, 3, 3, 3 depending on what the hell theses guys are doing.
What I find troubling in most training of this sort, regardless of the method you like, is the “training in” of standing still in the midst of multiple armed opponents and shooting it out. What I think should happen is that you should be MOVING. Move to cover and deal with the closest threat. If he gets behind cover deal with the next available threat. And be thinking about your next move. If they are maneuvering on you or decide to keep shooting it out you are in a loosing proposition. Think about bugging out.
April 5, 2012
holy @#$%..thats fast!
Posted by tgace under skills, weapons | Tags: carbine, weapon skills |Leave a Comment
March 26, 2012
speed and accuracy
Posted by tgace under skills, weapons | Tags: carbine, weapon skills, weapon training |1 Comment
