Just took this course this weekend. Video

[obijohn]

Shooting without eye protection on to "simulate reality" is just about the stupidest thing I've ever read, and I don't care who wants to argue about it. There is probably not an Instructor in the world who does more "real life" training than Henk Iverson does, and eye protection is manditory on his range - even when he trains SF.

Others may do as they will, but NO student or observer will ever be allowed on my range without eye and ear protection - the end.

Frank Sharpe
Fortress Defense Consultants

This. In addition, back in the day, I was involved in some training while in the military, and we ALWAYS wore eye and ear protection.

 

[obijohn]

All I know is contact with Rhino leaves me feeling fresh and clean.

i just thought that was vinegar cologne. hehe

 

[fireblade]

no disrespect but must of the 90's safety glasses was not widely used i can link hundreds of video and troops around weapons training not wearing them .....now in the last 10 years it standard to wear and use

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJXULh4MLhY&feature=related[/ame]

 

[Coach]

This. In addition, back in the day, I was involved in some training while in the military, and we ALWAYS wore eye and ear protection.

John is older school than the 90's. It might have been the 1890's and he said Col. Roosevelt wore glasses, and I have seen the pictures.

 

[Glock21]

no disrespect but must of the 90's safety glasses was not widely used i can link hundreds of video and troops around weapons training not wearing them .....now in the last 10 years it standard to wear and use

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJXULh4MLhY&feature=related

Watching that left me with the same feeling of hoplessness I get watching a "duck and cover" video from the 50's, lol.

 

[fireblade]

lol..... yes we have come a long way.....

 

[Paul Gomez]

n some cases, such as the close quarters shooting, unworkable in less than ideal circumstances.

[C]are to ellaborate on the red section for the OP Paul? or anyone for that matter

Certainly!

At approx .58, you see the shooter executing some sort of speed rock/hip shooting/close quarters position.

The shooter rocks back, giving up his balance and ability to absorb impact.

The shooter projects the gun forward of the torso at hip level. This puts the gun in a position that is difficult for the shooter to defend and a very easy position for the bad guy to avert the muzzle.

Notice the shifting of the forearm to change muzzle alignment to get 'better hits' on the target? That is something that might work on paper but only puts the shooter in a worse position when dealing with a resisting opponent because it, effectively, limits what you can do with your offhand for fear of putting a bullet in it.

And, all of this shooting is done using a car door as a target frame.

Close Quarters techniques must be predicated upon the idea that you are in a fight for your life. If we are lucky enough to have a gun in our hand, great! But, we are in a fight regardless.

Our techniques must provide for minimizing the damage from the incoming attack, keeping us conscious and on our feet, allow us to mitigate him and access our tools while doing all of the above.

 

[Glock21]

Certainly!

At approx .58, you see the shooter executing some sort of speed rock/hip shooting/close quarters position.

The shooter rocks back, giving up his balance and ability to absorb impact.

The shooter projects the gun forward of the torso at hip level. This puts the gun in a position that is difficult for the shooter to defend and a very easy position for the bad guy to avert the muzzle.

Notice the shifting of the forearm to change muzzle alignment to get 'better hits' on the target? That is something that might work on paper but only puts the shooter in a worse position when dealing with a resisting opponent because it, effectively, limits what you can do with your offhand for fear of putting a bullet in it.

And, all of this shooting is done using a car door as a target frame.

Close Quarters techniques must be predicated upon the idea that you are in a fight for your life. If we are lucky enough to have a gun in our hand, great! But, we are in a fight regardless.

Our techniques must provide for minimizing the damage from the incoming attack, keeping us conscious and on our feet, allow us to mitigate him and access our tools while doing all of the above.

+1!

 

[brutalone]

Christ.... 15 pages of safety pissing and moaning and all I can think is.... Damn! That looks fun!

Of course I was one of those crazy kids who played wiffle ball without a helmet.... Back in the "bad old days" when dodge ball was legal.....

 

[Glock21]

Christ.... 15 pages of safety pissing and moaning and all I can think is.... Damn! That looks fun!

Of course I was one of those crazy kids who played wiffle ball without a helmet.... Back in the "bad old days" when dodge ball was legal.....

Well, it's all fun and games until someone loses an eye.

 

[Fenway]

Ya this site really sucks. It's so awful we are averaging 1000 new members a month. Sorry you won't be here to see 20,000

Stop the BS, people like you are the main reason this website sucks!!!

 

[bwframe]

This. In addition, back in the day, I was involved in some training while in the military, and we ALWAYS wore eye and ear protection.

Wow, that was a LONG time ago too.

 

[Paul Gomez]

As trainers, our job is risk management and mitigation. Training with guns is inherently dangerous.

When I see someone playing on the edge of accepted safety protocols, I look at it from a Risk vs Rewards perspective. What is gained? What is risked?

Having caught spall in my ESS glasses, I'm quite happy to wear eye pro! When I was a cop, I wore clear Gargoyles anytime I was in uniform. When I was on Active Duty, eye pro was unheard of. However, I served with guys who had only been issued ear plugs during their most recent enlistment. They all had 15+ years time in service and all had hearing damage.

In the case of this video, what is gained by not wearing eye pro? I do not think anything is gained and, particularly, given the metal drums and vehicles all over the range, a lot is risked.

I see students pushing through a cooperative crowd to draw & engage targets, what I do not see is any technique actually being taught/used to drive through a large, uncooperative mob.

When the students draw, I see a big swooping draw motion that would be easily foiled by any one in the environment who had a mind to do so.

When I see students reloading, I see them looking down because the gun is so low. This is also why we see so many muzzles during the reloading process. This issue manifests itself in the grounded as well as standing evolutions.

When the fellow is shooting from inside the vehicle, after shooting, he pulls the gun into muzzle down/Position Sul and points the muzzle at himself while exiting the vehicle.

Taking all of the above, along with my earlier comments on the Close Quarters shooting drill, my impression is that, while the students certainly enjoyed themselves, the actual value of the event was minimal and they [the students] left with an inflated sense of their abilities.

I haven't typed all of this to bash anyone but, as has been noted, after 15 pages of discussion there are a number of folks who simply do not have a framework to understand what some of us see in this video.

 

[Shay]

As trainers, our job is risk management and mitigation. Training with guns is inherently dangerous.

When I see someone playing on the edge of accepted safety protocols, I look at it from a Risk vs Rewards perspective. What is gained? What is risked?

Having caught spall in my ESS glasses, I'm quite happy to wear eye pro! When I was a cop, I wore clear Gargoyles anytime I was in uniform. When I was on Active Duty, eye pro was unheard of. However, I served with guys who had only been issued ear plugs during their most recent enlistment. They all had 15+ years time in service and all had hearing damage.

In the case of this video, what is gained by not wearing eye pro? I do not think anything is gained and, particularly, given the metal drums and vehicles all over the range, a lot is risked.

I see students pushing through a cooperative crowd to draw & engage targets, what I do not see is any technique actually being taught/used to drive through a large, uncooperative mob.

When the students draw, I see a big swooping draw motion that would be easily foiled by any one in the environment who had a mind to do so.

When I see students reloading, I see them looking down because the gun is so low. This is also why we see so many muzzles during the reloading process. This issue manifests itself in the grounded as well as standing evolutions.

When the fellow is shooting from inside the vehicle, after shooting, he pulls the gun into muzzle down/Position Sul and points the muzzle at himself while exiting the vehicle.

Taking all of the above, along with my earlier comments on the Close Quarters shooting drill, my impression is that, while the students certainly enjoyed themselves, the actual value of the event was minimal and they [the students] left with an inflated sense of their abilities.

I haven't typed all of this to bash anyone but, as has been noted, after 15 pages of discussion there are a number of folks who simply do not have a framework to understand what some of us see in this video.

Paul, well said.

 

[Glock21]

Paul, well said.

Ditto.

 

[riverman67]

WOW!
My internet connection at work is on the fritz and look what I missed.
I'm going to follow VUpd's rule #1 for the most part.

BW and Rhino are why INGO sucks?(I disagree) I didn't realize that it sucked
I'm so delusional.

Back to the safety thing...If you see me without glasses for craps sake stop me and make me put them on. I can't see **** without them.

I won't be training with the group in the original video. I'm high drag and low speed,was never an operator or a member of Delta.

 

[fireblade]

As trainers, our job is risk management and mitigation. Training with guns is inherently dangerous.

When I see someone playing on the edge of accepted safety protocols, I look at it from a Risk vs Rewards perspective. What is gained? What is risked?

Having caught spall in my ESS glasses, I'm quite happy to wear eye pro! When I was a cop, I wore clear Gargoyles anytime I was in uniform. When I was on Active Duty, eye pro was unheard of. However, I served with guys who had only been issued ear plugs during their most recent enlistment. They all had 15+ years time in service and all had hearing damage.

In the case of this video, what is gained by not wearing eye pro? I do not think anything is gained and, particularly, given the metal drums and vehicles all over the range, a lot is risked.

I see students pushing through a cooperative crowd to draw & engage targets, what I do not see is any technique actually being taught/used to drive through a large, uncooperative mob.

When the students draw, I see a big swooping draw motion that would be easily foiled by any one in the environment who had a mind to do so.

When I see students reloading, I see them looking down because the gun is so low. This is also why we see so many muzzles during the reloading process. This issue manifests itself in the grounded as well as standing evolutions.

When the fellow is shooting from inside the vehicle, after shooting, he pulls the gun into muzzle down/Position Sul and points the muzzle at himself while exiting the vehicle.

Taking all of the above, along with my earlier comments on the Close Quarters shooting drill, my impression is that, while the students certainly enjoyed themselves, the actual value of the event was minimal and they [the students] left with an inflated sense of their abilities.

I haven't typed all of this to bash anyone but, as has been noted, after 15 pages of discussion there are a number of folks who simply do not have a framework to understand what some of us see in this video.

In any aspect the instructor and range officer is responsible for safety and the environment thats a given civilian or military.........i agree with you on pushing threw the crowds the way it was taught i seen no value to it at all first it makes no tactical sense the way it was done. Second some had there weapon out exposed going threw some made no attempt to protect there holstered weapon....

 

[VUPDblue]

just for the record, I'm an operator too....but I work for AT&T......

 

[HICKMAN]

BTW, after reading this, I hope you don't think i was in anyway getting in your face there Hickman.

Not at all, we ended up taking the thread off on a whole different tangent anyway.

 

[fireblade]

just for the record, I'm an operator too....but I work for AT&T......

so thats why my phone is not working