The Pink Elephant (T.R. Video)

[bwframe]

So is pointing the muzzle up actually safe?

 

[Britton]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1R3t0wuLDWQ]YouTube - Firearms Training Safety[/ame]

I am honored to call him a friend.

 

[Boilers]

Watched it.
I did not hear much justification.
He tried to convince of a lot of things. But not really logically justify.
Comparing to cars/risk is a non-sequitur in my opinion. I KNOW cars are dangerous. But, not a relative matter.
Just an ad.

 

[HICKMAN]

I see where Yeager is coming from and I see where the 180 people are coming from.

For example, the Army trains with the common set of safety rules, while at the range.

But, I'm sure all of the combat vets in here will tell you it's quite a different story going house to house. Yeah, they don't sweep each other on the move, but the battle ground is a 360 degree playing field.

I play the games with the 180 rule in mind, but those same rules don't apply when you are carrying. I understand then need for the rules in the games, and I understand what Yeager is teaching as well.

 

[shooter521]

I understand then need for the rules in the games, and I understand what Yeager is teaching as well.

I don't buy it. In order for all the students to get "training value" out of the exercise in question, there should be a live person in between every pair of targets. While you're at it, you could give them guns, too:

 

[kingnereli]

Yeager's argument doesn't hold water. He present's the premiss that increased danger means better training. If that is the truth then why do they stop at only having someone between targets. Why not actually practice hostage shots where the persons head covers half the targets head or something similer? That's even more dangerous so the quality of training and level of safety should also increase. He doesn't really mean those techniques make the students safer. He means that is the level he is willing to forgo safety in the name of training.

The car analogy also wasn't helpful. It is probably true that the most dangerous thing most people will do in their life is be inside a moving automobile. However, circumstances being what they are, there is no better or safer way to travel in a car then to drive within a few feet of oncoming traffic separated only by a lane marker. If there were a better way a person would be crazy to do otherwise. In the case of the training practice he defended here there are better, safer ways of getting the same result. Simunitions and airsoft grants the ability to practice techniques in a 360 degree atmosphere with people "down range" that you don't want to shoot while presenting no more danger then what it takes to leave a bruise. Not only is TR's practice of having someone down range during live fire woefully dangerous it isn't even the best way to get the desired results.

 

[HICKMAN]

Simunitions and airsoft grants the ability to practice techniques in a 360 degree atmosphere with people "down range" that you don't want to shoot while presenting no more danger then what it takes to leave a bruise.

Agreed, I think TR's Force on Force training is done that way.

 

[HICKMAN]

I don't buy it. In order for all the students to get "training value" out of the exercise in question, there should be a live person in between every pair of targets. While you're at it, you could give them guns, too:

Understood, but shooting at paper is much different than shooting under stress. I understand the need for military types to train this way.

The good news is, there are many choices to pick from when you decide what kind of training you are looking for.

Talk about building unit trust and cohesion

 

[Boilers]

yeah, but we don't know what they are shooting, and how armored up they are.
Still, interesting photo.

 

[shooter521]

yeah, but we don't know what they are shooting

MP5 9mm SMGs.

 

[Boilers]

All I see is a static photo, and I wasn't there is what I mean, silly.
That could be stage or anything. I'm just an eternal skeptic on believing photos mean anything.
(totally different story on the OP video, by the way)

 

[phylodog]

So is pointing the muzzle up actually safe?

Not in my opinion. There was a State Trooper who was killed as a result of his training to hold the pistol with the muzzle pointed up and next to his head as is seen in the video. I don't recall if he tripped and fell or if someone ran into him but the story ended with him putting a round through his own head. I would guess that he had his finger on the trigger when he obviously shouldn't have but that is speculation on my part. Hopefully keeping the finger clear would prevent it from happening again but strange things happen.

I don't consider it to be a cardinal sin but it's also not something I condone unless there is some reason pointing it towards the ground is not possible. I don't recall ever being in a situation where it was necessary or even where pointing muzzle up would be preferrable to down.

 

[shooter521]

I don't recall ever being in a situation where it was necessary or even where pointing muzzle up would be preferrable to down.

Reloading on the fly?

 

[Britton]

Reloading on the fly?

Ditto! All my guns stay up, even the rifles and sub-guns. No better way to see your weapon and the surroundings when doing an emergency re-load or tactical re-load. I have also noticed less muzzle sweeps when the weapons are up.

 

[bwframe]

Reloading on the fly?

I don't believe it can be argued that the fastest, most efficient, reloading there is comes from the competition world. The muzzle stays as close as possible to the target and, or next target for immediate follow up. Reloads are nearly always done on the move.

Of course, we all know that competition based reasoning doesn't necessarily apply to the real world. So maybe that methodology doesn't apply here?

 

[kingnereli]

I'm not sure that the guy in the video was really scanning. I obviously don't know how TR teaches scanning but it looked like he was just spending a lot of time with his back to the target. Scanning should be a pretty quick process with your head really on a swivel. Did he really need to turn around and stand there for a while?

 

[Berretta9]

I don't think he was scanning. He looks like to me that he couldn't believe what was going on. Nobody else is turning around.

 

[Pami]

I'm not sure that the guy in the video was really scanning. I obviously don't know how TR teaches scanning but it looked like he was just spending a lot of time with his back to the target. Scanning should be a pretty quick process with your head really on a swivel. Did he really need to turn around and stand there for a while?

I don't think he was scanning. He looks like to me that he couldn't believe what was going on. Nobody else is turning around.

I believe he was scanning.
FAST - Fire, Assess, Scan, Top off.
Part of Assessing before you Scan is to ensure that the original target (the one you just Fired at) is no longer a threat. It's a big assumption, I know, but if you've Assessed that the Fired target is no longer a threat (Ie: the threat is no longer moving), it is possible that you can assess in a slow, deliberate manner to ensure there are no other targets that need to be Fired at before you Top off your magazine (assuming you have the extra ammo/spare mag on you to do so).

 

[shooter521]

I believe he was scanning.
FAST - Fire, Assess, Scan, Top off.

I thought the "F" stood for FIGHT!

 

[Pami]

I thought the "F" stood for FIGHT!

p'raps.... At least I got the FI right, and Fire gives you a similar result...