Shoot ‘Em til They Drop Theory…

[techres]

[tongue_in_cheek]

Brian@ITC you've sold me.

My gun fighting skills are useless. I should stop carrying a Glock, and should immediately replace it with a bunch of melee weapons. Because guns don't win gun fights, sticks win gun fights.

[/tongue_in_cheek]

Do I expect every shot to stop a bad guy immediately? Foxtrot NO! Does that mean I shouldn't shoot them? Foxtrot NO! If somebody needs to be shot I'm going to shoot them. If they don't stop being dangerous I'll shoot them again.... Better.... And if they still don't stop being dangerous, I will shoot them again.

I'm not going to remain with my boots cemented in place while the above is taking place. People with bullet holes move slower than people without. They leak more too....

Don't forget that you always have melee weapons as a choice. Believe me, I will use all at my disposal to save my life. In other words, if my firearm runs dry and I am cornered, I am fully willing to stove in the guy's head with the heavy ceramic lid to the toilet!

And yes, running is fine too. I knew a guy once who believed that his NAA .22 mag revolver was better than nothing calling it his "over the shoulder gun". He figured 1-5 rounds in the torso, legs, etc. would make just about anyone slower than him in a running race.

 

[Disposable Heart]

Techres is right on the thing that has kept my annoying, small builded yet living family alive: Getting the fark out of there to safety. Shooting until the guy stops being a threat is key then getting the heck out of dodge (and assuming you are informing the police first, a cellular is key).

What is this other crap? Shoot a drill and evaluate? I think 9/10 of us arent uber-danger-rangers that have been in hundreds of firefights and understand/control adrenaline's effect on us. Please tell me what is easier, more effective and DO-ABLE in an "untrained" mindset of those of us who may need to fight but aren't accustomed to it? Shoot until guy drops while getting to safety so an administrative loading is possible and cellular call to police OR shoot/evaluate/shoot/evaluate while standing in one spot? It was not until recently did I realize that my static training, while a good way of learning drills, WAS NOT going to keep me out of their three-dots. Moving and shooting until target is not a threat is a reasonable and sound theory.

I am not an expert by any means and I am sure my sophmoric attitude pisses alot of folks off, but I have been in a few stick ups. They are not fun and while I did not have the opportunity (nor the need to) draw and fire, the experiences taught me alot about how crap goes down. Moving and firing is key. I would say alot of the guys here are 100% correct: Dont go looking for trouble, dont get into any trouble. Drawing the line and determining how/when you would draw your weapon is a difficult one and I dont believe in drawing that line for anyone else. But I will say this, I have been at knife point with a gun on my person. I let the guy have my wallet. Cowardice? Yeah probably. But I am alive and kicking. Learning how to stay out of trouble and NOT getting your gun out unless your life is TRUELY threatened is key. Had I gave him my wallet and he stuck around, he would have caught some hell. But he took off, all I did was call my credit card company and went to the DMV the next day. Sucker didnt even get one cent from me as I had no cash. But what I learned from the experience was more than he would ever get with his lifestyle. Use of communication and such is something that has kept my ass alive and a lot of folks dont like me. Why wont it work for anyone else?

Training to fight is important, but staying out of a fight is important too.

 

[mercop]

Being aware of danger without having options to respond to it are worthless. Avoid if you can, if not be violent fast and be done with it.

 

[Disposable Heart]

Being aware of danger without having options to respond to it are worthless. Avoid if you can, if not be violent fast and be done with it.

Very succint and to the point. Repped.

 

[sjstill]

It appears the gent in this video subscribes to the Shoot until they Drop 'theory'.

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...ing_in_self_defense_drug_addict_bites_it.html

 

[jfed85]

yep

I was thinking about the OP's response the whole time I was reading this thread. It may not happen all the time, it may not even be common, but that guy sure dropped quick.

 

[Chefcook]

Wow New Smyrna Beach that's where I camped out last bike week lol...

 

[INRanger]

Shoot to brain matter is great! But I would not recommend it to the average shooter. What works for SOCOM does not work for everybody. We spend thousands of hours developing/honing our skills. As for controlled pairs. It's often misunderstood and taught incorrectly. I taught my soldiers to fire controlled pairs in series as a matter of control. After all if your going to give someone the good news may as well tell em twice.

 

[dross]

I wonder how much of all of this people can actually take into a gun fight. My reading indicates that cops often empty their magazine in a few seconds and miss often. I suspect that for most people it takes multiple gunfights to learn how to stay calm and thinking. That's why combat experience is so valued in the military. Nothing can replace that experience of being under fire. Some people do great their first time, others don't do as well. You never know for sure.

You hear so many theories out there that it's hard to know who to believe. Most of the people who put these theories forward have good credentials and make reasonable arguments. Who do you believe? I think you have to pick a technique that makes sense to you from a creditable source, and practice it, and think about the real situation, and then, if things kick off, who knows? It's kind of like the stopping power argument. Some people seem to think that the 45 ACP will put a guy down if it just passes close enough to the body, and of course we all know that a 22 is a terrible weapon for self defense, yet there are incidents of multiple 45 hits to vital areas and guys kept fighting, and there are other incidients of one 22 putting the guy down instantly. I'm not saying one isn't better than the other, but simply that in that one moment, that worst day of your life when you're facing death, or worse maybe facing your loved ones' deaths, and you have a gun in your hand, the most important thing boils down to can you hit what you aim at all the time when there's no stress. Even if you can, you might still die. If you can't, your only chance is that the other guy can't either.

 

[dross]

One more thing. I carry a 9mm with 14 in the mag, and 1 in the chamber. If I can put 15 center mass, I might not stop him before he kills me, but I might just have given him something better to do with the next few minutes than take the time to find my wife and daughter who will be taugth to run away when the shooting starts. If he kills me and I've put 15 into him, I'll see him in Valhalla, where I'll kick his ass every morning and night for eternity.

 

[INRanger]

Everyone has heard "Train as you fight." Its true. What you put into training is what comes out the other end. Once a certain action has been conditioned into muscle memory it becomes "automatic". That includes the bad habits too. There is no "the way" Just different ways. If your way works keep it! Keep an open mind. The lowest member of the team has an opinion. If someone brought up an alternate way of doing things we would drill it until we had it right, and then directly compare it to the original and keep what worked better. Made for some late nights but I'm proud of the end product. A professional does not let ego get in the way. Theres a lot of this "I've been doing this for xy years so I know what I'm talking about." Bad sign find a new instructor.

 

[SigSense]

Shoot to brain matter is great! But I would not recommend it to the average shooter. What works for SOCOM does not work for everybody. We spend thousands of hours developing/honing our skills. As for controlled pairs. It's often misunderstood and taught incorrectly. I taught my soldiers to fire controlled pairs in series as a matter of control. After all if your going to give someone the good news may as well tell em twice.

First off, thanks for your service! The brain matter does work for SOCOM, and it most assuredly would work for the average shooter. I say that based on medical science, not training. Medically, if the brain leaves its cavity, there's a good chance the human body will cease functioning (and stopping the attack). I think what you meant (and I agree with) is that the TRAINING the average average shooter or homeowner receives does not afford them the ability to accurately engage a target. Like you, I have been taught to engage center mass. With the advent of new lightweight body armor, this has become problematic...and we saw this in theater (OIF/OEF). The brain matter shots occur AFTER engaging center mass. Typically the target collapses (whether or not the impacts are lethal) and a presentation of the human head is afforded. This is the opportunity to (as you pointed out) give some good news....as you advance to other objectives. You are ensuring that this dude/dudette is not going to pull an AK out (or initiate a IED) as you roll your squad past them.

 

[jeremy]

First off, thanks for your service! The brain matter does work for SOCOM, and it most assuredly would work for the average shooter. I say that based on medical science, not training. Medically, if the brain leaves its cavity, there's a good chance the human body will cease functioning (and stopping the attack). I think what you meant (and I agree with) is that the TRAINING the average average shooter or homeowner receives does not afford them the ability to accurately engage a target. Like you, I have been taught to engage center mass. With the advent of new lightweight body armor, this has become problematic...and we saw this in theater (OIF/OEF). The brain matter shots occur AFTER engaging center mass. Typically the target collapses (whether or not the impacts are lethal) and a presentation of the human head is afforded. This is the opportunity to (as you pointed out) give some good news....as you advance to other objectives. You are ensuring that this dude/dudette is not going to pull an AK out (or initiate a IED) as you roll your squad past them.

Exactly!
A controlled pair COM. Followed by 1 to the head. Worked every time I seen it used.

 

[revance]

students should be placed in “no win” situations because this is reality.

I strongly disagree with this... students should ALWAYS win. You can make it hard, you can even make them get shot several times, but they should ALWAY win. Nobody should ever die in training exercises. If they do, you are only training them to die. Who cares if they get shot 5 times in the exercise... they should keep fighting. I think you might have meant don't give them easy situations where the "bad guy" just drops, but they should always come out victorious (even if they have a few extra imaginary holes).

I highly recommend reading the book "On Combat", it addresses various training theories that all show that dying in training exercises is detrimental to being successful in combat. If your training says you are dead after getting shot, guess what you are going to do when you get shot? You guessed it, lay down and die.

Plus, both sides continuing to fight after being shot also helps teach the main point you are making that people don't drop immediately. Let both sides go at it for a while and then call it a tie, but don't have people "die" in training.

 

[INRanger]

Col. Grossman came to hunter and I had a chance to meet him. A very intelligent individual. He gave the same advice, only stop when the scenario is over. Getting hit and going down/stopping is as much a conditioned response as changing magazines. Going down should be completely involuntary. People are capable of amazing things but only if mind is. It trains you to get the one the one that got you. Thats just therapeutic.

 

[revance]

After re-reading the OP, I don't think I interpreted the "no-win situation" statement quite right. I think the OPer was just making the point that the "bad guy" shouldn't just drop after getting hit, but it sort of came across as meaning "put them in a scenario that they won't win". As I said, by not letting anyone lose, you even further push the fact that when you shoot someone, they don't drop, and when you get shot, you shouldn't either.

 

[dburkhead]

Col. Grossman came to hunter and I had a chance to meet him. A very intelligent individual. He gave the same advice, only stop when the scenario is over. Getting hit and going down/stopping is as much a conditioned response as changing magazines. Going down should be completely involuntary. People are capable of amazing things but only if mind is. It trains you to get the one the one that got you. Thats just therapeutic.

There are several problems with that, however. One is that if there's no significant "penalty" to getting hit in training, it can lead to carelessness. Another is that you are often training not just the individual, but the group. In real combat you will lose people. If you never "lose" them in training exercises, then you run into problems when reality catches up with you.

As is usually the case, there's no one right answer. You need some training exercises where you keep going regardless. You need some where there's a suitably unpleasant consequence to being "hit" that you try really hard to avoid it. And you need some training exercises where the unit has to deal with "battlefield losses and continue on to complete the mission anyway.

 

[INRanger]

Mr. Burkhead, Your absolutely right about the need to take casualties in training, I'm afraid I did a poor job describing Col. Grossman's work. The "keep fighting" approach is used for a very specific type of scenario training. It is certaintly not SOP for all training. It is an excellent tool when used correctly. The OPFOR are cadre members who do go down after recieving the appropriate number of rounds, placement depending. We are not teaching technique(sp) but mindset. Once a canidate becomes a member of the unit he will rarely train in non live enviroments. Col. Grossman's aproach is but one tool in the box. I hope I've done a more adequate job of explaining the method. If you would like you can e-mail me and we could set up a better dialog. I'm always looking for new tools.
JD

 

[Brian@ITC]

students should be placed in “no win” situations because this is reality.

What I meant by that statement was that you could potentially find yourself in a real life no win situation. However, through mindset you can survive the situation if you keep fighting and have the will to live.

Placing people in no win situations will show their true mindset. Are they going to just give up and say oh well, or are they going to fight for their life?

Sorry that I may not have stated that as clearly as I wanted to, but not every training exercise should be designed to have a happy ending. That's not reality. But can you still win? YES!

__________________________
Brian K. LaMaster
Innovative Tactical Concepts
Modern Warrior Talk
Your mind is the weapon. Your body is simply the delivery system for the tool you choose to implement into the fight.
Marksmanship is a hopeful skill, FIGHTING skills are a must!
"What you don't know won't hurt you - it will KILL you!" General Gerry Prather, USAF, XOK (1982)

 

[esrice]

Sorry that I may not have stated that as clearly as I wanted to, but not every training exercise should be designed to have a happy ending. That's not reality. But can you still win? YES!

Gotcha!