The 357 SIG round and Impac ST, or, The Futility of Shooting on the Move [Archive]

InfernoMDM

January 3rd, 2007, 12:24 AM

If you know (or suspect) someone will be wearing body-armor, for CQB range, use a shotgun with a duckbill choke and #1 hevi-shot, aiming for the groin.

Otherwise, use a large caliber rifle to punch through vests, or a pistol carbine for rapid headshots.

That would be a serious waste of time in most aspects. As Defiant said an experienced marksman maybe able to kill you even with body armor, nearly all engagements even by skilled shooters only hit about 10% of the time. Stress and other factors will tense you up and pull rounds off there mark. That being said going for the groin is not a smart plan. Furthermore a shotgun, although called many names from scatter gun, to room broom should never be employed like that. No military, paramilitary, or law enforcement agency even looks at a shotgun like that. If it was effective you would see greater use of that by at least a few organizations.

Also Defiant the 357 SIG comes in various weapons from Glock SIG HK Springfield XD 1911 variants etc. The recoil in the SIG I might add is probably less then you would expect as the mass of the weapon drastically reduces muzzle flip. The SIG is not for the gun manufacturer.

Also I would love to quote a guy about the 5.7 "its the coolest 22 Mag ever!" Not only is it nearly impossible to find the armor piercing rounds for it on the streets, the round itself has been shown to perform less then satisfactory, hence many new PDW rounds and weapons coming to the market. I do not see a beautiful future for the 5.7.

As for the 357 SIG its just an interesting round and I am glad to see debate over the information provided. It is pleaseing to see people at least thinking laterally about firearms.

atlas#11

January 3rd, 2007, 02:56 PM

I figured it would be difficult to find armor piercing rounds for, being fairly new and quite well regulated.

As for the use of the shotty, don't cops carry one in their cruisers? Obviously basic police work isn't goning to run into body armor every day, but just one bb from a 00 buck shotty in the head (or any other part of the body) would make body armor alittle less than effective. Even if you hit them square in the chest plate it's going to atleast slow them down.

Obviously a 12 guage isn't going to be used as an anti tank round, It's not built for penetration, it's built for stopping power and the ability to spread the dammage around.

My cousin is a police officer, in a demonstration at his office they put a 5.56mm nato fmj round through the front and rear plates of a piece of body armor. I have heard alot of stories about the .223 haveing excellent penetration but almost no stopping power, however.

I'm sure body armor has improved significantly since then, but what I would like to hear is some first hand accounts of the 5.56 in action. I read in leather neck magazine that the marines were fed up with the 5.56 and were experimenting with some new round, 7.2mm or something like that. Anyone hear any news on this?

Also, another tactical weapon that's relativly new from russia, the an-94, I wouldn't mind hearing some first hand accounts of this new weapon as well.

InfernoMDM

January 3rd, 2007, 10:00 PM

I posted a little comment and a link in this section, that I really didn't know if it belonged here or not. Either its still in que or its been deleted for wrong section, I am not completely sure yet, but I am sure I will find out.

It shows rounds being shot at a building, and of notable interest were the 5.56 from a M-16 A2 at 0 degrees and 45 degrees. They also shot several walls the same way with the 7.62x39. Youtube has the videos if you are interested.

I moved that post to the Forum pics and videos thread, since it didn't warrant a new topic.

Remember most police and military FMJs are SS109 with a tungsten core. This facilitate body armor penetration, but isn't normal on the market and reduces its overall effects in the human body.

First of the 00 buck is basically a 32acp with less force. Although it can kill the penetration of 00 buck isn't great. The shotgun is most effective when all of the projectiles cause mass trauma. Granted one projectile in a vital area can kill but that goes for any bullet from a 50 cal to a 22 short. They have experiment with rounds that have a heavy core with a sharp ballistic point and a soft coating of lead or other substance. I want to say this is called a SLAP round but don't quote me on that.

Lastly the AN-94 I believe has been canceled for production, due to the complexity of the weapons maintenance, rumors(I heard a few from some Russian military) that it was having several more malfunctions then other weapons, and the notable 5-6 times higher price tag pretty much ended its career.

I probably hate you

January 4th, 2007, 06:08 AM

Most high power rifles can penetrate body armor , the .223 remington or 5.56x45mm (these rounds are not exactly the same but close enough for me)both are actually a highly effective round , I am going to attach a link to a very informative site (http://www.firearmstactical.com/wound.htm) if you scroll down you can see tests in ballistic gellitan with multiple caliber rounds , I have herd rumors of thin bodies not taking much damage from the .223 round and you can see by these ballistic test why that might be so.

The 12 ga slug is something that should never be under estimated , I am a deer hunter , one day I was hunting and I was in a tree stand a deer wwalked directly under me about 15 to 20 yards away I fired at it and had a hit the slug penitrated right behind the shoulder blade it cleaved the deers heart in half after penitrating the lung it then took a path through the rib cage at an angle towards the stomach it ended up coming out at a flat angle ripping a hole about 12 inches in the deers stomach (which was kinda gross the deers guts fell out) the deer ran about another 20 yards then feel dead.

The moral of this I suppose is after that day I had a whole new respect for a 12 ga slug irreguardless if it can penitrate armor or not a human body can only sustain so much energy to a localised spot.

Check out my link , it is very informative if you have not seen it before , and please forgive my poor spelling.

I am sorry to post again but I forgot to mention the new heavyshot buck shot and slugs they may have increased penitration over the older lead slugs and buckshot , I have used heavyshot to hunt ducks and it is so far superior in performance than steel or lead it is crazy , but I have not been able to find any lets say tatical information on it. If anyone has any of this info please post it.When I am able to post pictures I will post a few pitures of my modified weapons and ways to modify your weapons including trigger jobs.

atlas#11

January 4th, 2007, 06:40 PM

You should use the edit feature to edit your posts rather than post a new one.

What size shell do police use? Is it just the 3"? 3, 1/2" magnums can pack quite a punch.

As for the an-94, depressing news. The dual action system seemed quite effective. I can see why russia would have a hard time with it though, another new assault rifle isn't exactly what they need anyways.

As for the 12 guage, my point is that when its a point and shoot weapon it would be easier to quickly point a shotty at an unprotected part of the body and shoot rather than take aim with a rifle or smg. Obviously a shotty has stopping power, its just not fast enough or solid enough to penetrate most armor. Though I bet with a decent sabot and some good powder you could get some penetration, but then you might as well be using a rifle anyways.

InfernoMDM

January 4th, 2007, 08:48 PM

I probably hate you - Your link is discussing the effects of the JSP in .223 (which has very little difference from the 5.56 except head spaceing and which weapons you can shoot it from).

Most rifle rounds will penetrate body armor up to level IIIA. The SS109 (tungsten core) will penetrate III however the JSP which has better ballistic properties then a FMJ can't penetrate level III. This is where things get odd in the world of ballistics. The SS109 does not have the capability to cause the same wound cavities that are expressed in your link. Thus comparing the SS109 a armor piercing round to a JSP or a JHP isn't a good idea. If you hunt with a SS109 and don't hit in a vital enough area I promise you the deer will run far away. Likewise HP, JSP, and other newer hunting rounds will have a drastically better effect, in my experience.

As for the shotgun being a better weapon to hit non vital areas. If you take into account most effective ranges, and the general shot pattern of the weapon, your looking at the same capability to hit the target as if you had a submachine gun, or a 22 rifle.

Most shotguns although spread out are aimed with sights just like any rifle, and transitioning to say a head shot requires the same time and capabilities in either weapon. Trust me ask damn near any SWAT or active response shooter. The only advantage is if you aren't ass accurate you could possibly get a few projectiles to stray off and still hit the target, depending on the round used, and your choke. However you can just as easily risk bystanders etc and this may mean you wont be able to shoot at all.

Most police departments use either the Remington 870(damn near everyone) or the Mossberg 500/590. Those weapons can be chambered up to a 3inch Mag I believe. I know some departments stay with the 2 3/4" rounds for capacity, but the shotgun unfortunately has been relegated to cruisers and breaching these days.

I to am saddened by the AN-94 not coming to the US however I think with all its complexity its just not a great field combat weapon.

defiant

January 4th, 2007, 10:14 PM

IZHMASH makes a semi-auto magazine fed 12 gauge combat shotgun based on the Kalishnikov:

http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/7787/saiga12eh2.jpg

The commercial model is $400, but its toned down (a fixed hunting stock rather than the pistol grip/folder, etc.). A tactical conversion is not difficult but needs to be 922r compliant in order to be legal. Idiotic law, but parts and "how to" instruction are available on the net.

There’s also a full auto short barrel (6"?) version available from Tromix. A full auto 12 is a bit ridiculous, but the video of it is amusing:

http://www.tromix.com/saiga12_fullauto.wmv

atlas#11

January 4th, 2007, 10:26 PM

I get what your saying, my 12 guage is an old jc higgins and it's sawn off at 18 inches (which I think is the legal limit). I can't say that I've had any combat experience what so ever but I would think that the spread of the relativly light hunting loads we use would get enough pellets into the face area to atleast slow them down.

With someone using body armor I think I would aim high, aiming for the groin won't be a quick death. The pain might debilitate them long enough for you to get a second shot in their head before they return fire, but I wouldn't count on it. Atleast with the head shot you have a chance at bringing them down fast.

The smg/carbine/bulpup (or any other compact design weapon) would probably be just as fast and effective. Still, I can get a 12 guage mossberg for $135 at the pawn shop and ammo is dirt cheap. While a reliable auto loader of sufficient calibre and size will run at twice that or more used.

You seem quite well versed in modern combat tactics, are you a cop or military?

As for the an-94, I think the design wasn't spectacular, but the concept was a great idea. What part of it do you think they were having problems with? I'm sure the great minds of this forum could perfect it, there are enough people on here with autocad to design a space station. Though I'm not sure it would help anyone, very few people have the ability to manufacture their own parts. I think this kind of project was mentioned on the forum before, not sure where though.

Edit: Full auto 12 guage sounds crazy. I think there are some models employed by some agencies somewhere, I don't remember details but it doesn't sound like a viable tactical weapon. Recoil wouldn't be as big a factor as you might think, but still, if you're one to care about bystanders then it's probably not an option.

defiant

January 5th, 2007, 12:24 AM

You seem quite well versed in modern combat tactics, are you a cop or military?

Answer: Unorganized militia.

Regarding tactics/body armor, we're talking generalities rather than particular circumstances. Its one thing if (1) your positioned 2000 meters away with a .50; (2) on the street with a handgun; (3) at home with a variety of toys to delight yourself with; (4) etc.

Maybe a 12 guage pistol with a hot depleted uranium load might be the solution ;).

Speaking generally, if I was on the street armed with an ordinary pistol I'd be concentrating on head shots (and cover). If I was at home it would be a Saiga 12 or a high powered rifle - probably the Saiga (and cover). A 12g to the chest would probably floor and knock the wind out just about anybody - and it'd take time for them to recover. If there wasn't time to finish them off with a .22 to the head, its worth remembering that leg shots are an alternative with a 12g.

But the best alternative is not to be "there" when the boys in armor come. Ideally the timing and scenario should be of your choosing - its common sense as much as its tactics.

Finally, $400 isn't a lot for a firearm if your life is going to depend on it. Plinking is another matter.

InfernoMDM

January 5th, 2007, 03:35 AM

Most of my friends are infantry Marine and Army and I have friends who are LE SWAT types. I frequent several sights dedicated to that as well, practice and try to learn from others mistakes.

I to have a love for the shotgun but people think its easier to use then it really is. Hence my points. I think its a great car gun, and awesome how defender if utilized properly. Also I agree groin shots and the like are pointless as they wont truly debilitate and if a man is pissed enough hes going to go down shooting. I would.

As for pistol tactics, no one in the industry really suggest head shots unless the target isn't going down. To use a old idea the Mozambique is a useful tactic for shooting. The USAF finally went to a program promoting the idea. I however don't like it as much because if your shooting with a pistol and you work only with the 2 chest 1 head pattern it wont work out to well. If you hit the guy in body armor and miss the head shot chances are the pattern you have grown into your reflexes will waste two more rounds for a second head shot. Its better to practice the scenarios with a friend who calls out if the target is going down, or make some targets that react to shots differently.

The shotgun posted above is actually on the US market for a bit more then 400. I want to say 600ish. The biggest problem limited import of magazines have slowed US sales. However it is apparently reliable with just about every round from bird to buck shot.

I have a friend, who knows some one who turned a one shot shotgun into a pistol. He said it hurt his hand and he could only shoot it once or twice a day and his hand would swell the first few times he used it. This friend and other friends of his had the same experience and eventually got rid of the illegal weapon.

defiant

January 5th, 2007, 08:48 AM

The sporterized Saiga 12 is going for $399 - do a Google search. That's for the sporterized version - the military model is not imported, and if it was would not be available to the public. Its not legal under 922r.

Magazines are readily available, but be prepared to pay $50 or more.

Its also relatively useless to have a good discussion about tactics without discussing a scenario. Tactics ought to vary with the circumstances - how good a shot you are, how much ammo is available, the number of assailants, whether or not there's time to reload, how well protected positions are, and so forth.

Even if the 2 chest 1 head pattern was the best training technique - its a waste of ammo against five guys if all you have is ten rounds.

Nor should the 12g leg shot be discounted so readily. Most people go into shock when shot (and missing a leg or two is no exception), nor is it likely that they'd get off an accurate shot as they were falling. If nothing else, a leg shot slows the approach and afford more time to take stock of the circumstances. We're talking body armor here.

InfernoMDM

January 5th, 2007, 02:07 PM

I was just quoting two different magazines such as SWAT when it came to the magazine info of the Saiga. I should have said that previously.

Let us talking scenarios, you could create a scenario for every weapon at any time of the day. We stick to generalities for a reason when it comes to defense and combat. This allows the prepared citizen or the soldier to set up his kit according to the normal situation encountered. If your going to encounter mass troops you need to have a good plan and potentially lots of ammo. Likewise most people only need to carry one extra magazine for home personal defense.

This drives me into the why two plus shots are fired. First no matter how good of a shot you are it is possible that your first shot or even ten shots won't kill the guy. Figuring the average shoot out people only hit ten percent of what they shoot you can see why a second shot or even third shot is a good idea.

Also not there are several predominate books out one by a guy from the 70s I believe. I always forget his name, but not the lesson. This guy recounts a shootout where a man was struck 12 times in the head and several in the body. This included 1911s and I believe 38 specials. Thinking the robber was dead they move up on him, but the man sits up shoots a bullet out of his nose like a snot rocket and gives up.

If you had shot once and that man had gotten back up or shot you from the ground, you wouldn't have the luxury of eating your words.

nbk2000

January 5th, 2007, 02:36 PM

Obviously InfernoMDM is unfamiliar with the function of a duckbill choke, which is solely for combat and not something sportsmen are likely to ever have seen.

The duckbill forces shot into a wide and narrow band that greatly increases hit probabilty at close-range, as well as shot concentration.

By aiming at the upper-thigh and groin, you bypass the armor, and will immobilize the enemy (not neccessarily kill), as the shock of the genitals and lower pelvic region (bladder/colon/rectum/intestines) being penetrated should be adequate to drop them, as well as good possibility of bleed out and sepsis.

#1 shot is the best, as it retains enough energy to penetrate deep enough to reach vital organs, while being numerous enough to keep a dense shot pattern. Hevi-shot increases the shot weight by a good percentage over normal lead, making it even more effective.

Within the confines of a building, a shotgun is equal to, or better than, a rifle.

It may not have the ability to penetrate a vest, but a rifle bullet penetrating a vest is just going to a make a neat hole, while the bloody rat-hole of a load of shot in the lower torso is going to make a mess of 'em. :)

Look at the LA bank robbers shootout.

16 wounded by large caliber rifle fire. NO fatalities.

And the old saw of 'Shoot 'em in the head' is much more difficult to pull of when the target is running, likely wearing a kevlar helmet with possibly a ballistic face-shield, maybe carrying a shield, and you're catching fire from his comrades.

And lets not forget the Dragon Skin armor made by Pinnacle Armor Systems, which is capable of stopping multiple AP shots at CQB range from large caliber rifles, and is going to become more available to police SWAT units as production ramps up for the ongoing war.

Then you won't have anything under a .50 capable of penetrating their vest. :p

The lower limbs are a consistantly available target, because they can't armor the legs without greatly impeding their mobility. In combat, Mobility = Life.

Also, the needs of the police are different from that of the criminal.

The cops can't shoot innocent bystanders or hostages without a lot of shit and possible loss of their pensions, so they have to worry about precise shot placement and overpenetration.

The criminal can rock-n'- roll, spray a curtain of lead, and not give a shit if it goes through the pigie, the wall behind the piggie, and into some booger-eating brat in the kindergarten down the road.

But the criminal doesn't need to kill the cops who are trying to get him, only prevent them from getting close enough to capture/kill him before being able to escape.

Police are not soldiers...they're not going to continue pressing the attack after three of their comrades have had their nuts and knees blown off. They'll pull back and set up a containment perimeter to prevent your escape long enough for them to formulate a plan of attack for burning you out and calling it an 'accident'. ;)

InfernoMDM

January 5th, 2007, 05:19 PM

nbk2000 - Yes I know the duckbill is (haven't shot one) and multiple guys from soldiers on down have pointed out its limited use in Vietnam and its subsequent drop of use in nearly every military. It has been a novelty in combat and isn't even fielded by the people who once used it. I'll post in another forum for specifics as to why that device isn't looked on highly anymore if you are interested. I don't disagree the criminals can get away, but remember when you spread shot out like that you tend to loose force as your distance increase alot faster then you would with a standard full choke.

Also people have now been researching the effects of being shot. I wish I had the article, but the actual effects differ so greatly that trying to play that into a scenario isn't a very intelligent idea. The bad guy may just want to get away but if he dumps a cop he still has to deal with a now pissed/scared aggressor.

I'll see if I can get some info on the subjects although most of the articles aren't online.

I probably hate you

January 5th, 2007, 07:46 PM

Infernomdm , If I am not mistaken the m855 is the U.S version of the fn ss109 which would make its ballistics identicle (or close enough) if you explore the link more you will see fragmetation is highly dependant on velocity with the 223 round.

As for 12 ga shot spread I have a 18" barreled semi auto shotgun which I cut so it has basically a cylinder choke.At any range in a house (well my house) you are not going to exceed 10 to 15 yards usually below that unless you have huge rooms , the shot pattern is no bigger than a human chest depositing a devistaing amount of pellets on target so a groin,neck face,armpit shot will be very lethal.

All weapons have there advantages and disadvantages I also have a mini 14 ,which I have been increasing its accuacy,which I love and one definate advantage it has is ammo capacity.This is the weapon that sits beside my bed at night with 4 40rd mags ready to go.

If one truly wants to fight off a stronger more organized force some improvided grenades would be very benificial , I dont care how armored you are even if you achived no penatration with frag the concusion would throw you for a loop giving you more than enough time to finish off you enemy even with a sharp knife.This is just my opinion on these matters and I am sorry if they have been noted in other threads.

InfernoMDM

January 6th, 2007, 12:55 AM

duckbill/oval chokes - Wikipedia can be your friend.

Oval chokes are designed to provide a shot pattern wider than it is tall, are sometimes found on combat shotguns, primarily those of the Vietnam War era. Military versions of the Ithaca 37 with duckbill choke were used in limited numbers during the Vietnam War by US Navy Seals. It arguably increased effectiveness in close range engagements against multiple targets. Two major disadvantages plagued the system. One was erratic patterning. The second was that the shot would spread too quickly providing a very limited effective zone.

Basically you have turned your shotgun, which could be effective against people 50 yards plus into a 5-10 yard weapon. A manufacturer started selling these again, but apparently the military LE and even civilian home defense aren't buying to many of them. If you figure you can't shoot slugs have terrible patterns etc it really turns the shotgun from a multi role weapon to a very limited use device. That really brings home the point that you should keep your weapons multi role.

nbk2000

January 6th, 2007, 01:52 AM

Wikipedia...the massively co-authored encylcopedia of herd knowledge...truely a bastion of accurate knowledge on all esoteric and highly technical matters. :rolleyes:

Everyone agrees (you, me, and the wiki) that the duckbill is a close-range proposition (5-10 yards), but you make that out as a failing, not a strength as I do.

True, shotguns are capable of ranges of 50 yards with buckshot, and over 100 with slugs, but that's not playing to its strengths, and those distances are better served by SMG or carbines, both of which have greater accuracy/terminal effects/firing rates at range than a shotgun.

Where the shotgun is superior is in close range work, as a 'room broom' as it were, to sweep up the enemy in CQB range engagements (as I've previously stated), which is typically in-house fighting.

Also, the modern duck-bill isn't your granddaddy's weapon of the 'Nam.

It's able to much more neatly pattern and does so with modern cupped shot, not the cardboard wads of old.

In fact, a normal rifled shotgun barrel would be good for in-house work, as the spreading of the shot pattern that's caused by the rifle spinning of the shot-cup, which is intolerable in outdoor shooting, works to your advantage indoors, by opening up the pattern which would otherwise make a shotgun a weapon requiring as accurate an aim as a rifle to hit.

Or just chuck a fuckin' grenade and be done with it. :D

defiant

January 6th, 2007, 02:20 AM

NBK: Hadn't heard of a duckbill choke - experimentation is in order. Looks interesting...:

http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/2394/duckbillchokexm3.jpg

...and some Saiga's are threaded for a choke.

Inferno: Don't believe everything you read. A lot of writers are "English majors" who are less interested in research than submitting an article for a $200-300 paycheck - flipping burgers if you will. Not that there aren't journalists out there that don't know their stuff, but you have to be discerning.

Your not totally incorrect about a even the best shooters missing on occassion, but a good shooter who can keep their cool while under pressure misses less often and is observes a miss quicker than an experienced shooter who's still shocked by the recoil or shooting blindly over the hood of a car.

The stats about misses during shootouts are derived primarily from inner cities, where the bulk of shootouts occur. The larger cities I've lived at (U.S.) don't have gun ranges or places to practice shooting (undisturbed). So its no great mystery that stats reflect that people can't hit what their shooting at. I'm not discounting your stats - just interpreting them from a different perspective.

Finally, I indicated above that I'm not military, but I do have informal ties to the military, law enforcement, swat, homeland security, and so forth. We talk from time to time, as I used to work for the government. So let me say right off, these guys are not your friends and they are the one's that are likely to be wearing body armor. That frames the scenario (unless you pissed off a high tech division of the mob). There is always a scenario, circumstances, and generalizing them to the point of utter abstraction is mental masturbation. Instead, think war games.

InfernoMDM

January 6th, 2007, 04:40 AM

I forgot to add that the plates I posted originally would be great for under the arms where cops have died from 22 shots. Mark Coates shot a guy 4 times with I think a G22(40 cal glock) and the guy got one shot under his arm and he died. A lot extra protection for relatively cheap and with two good front and back plates it would take a pretty lucky hit or a lot of rifle fire to get through.

I know the history of most of the writers I read and take stock in what they say. People like Suarez and individuals he has close ties to, and dozens of others. Much like a science journal you have to know who is writing and what there knowledge background is. I could go down the list of names, Suarez just jumped to my mind because I am planing on taking a class from him.

Any modern shooter will tell you no matter how calm and collected you are misses are common. I know of a only a handful of people that really have such talent as to shoot on the move while being shot at, and hit effectively at distance or close up. With all the amateur, professional, and trainers this isn't a high percentage. These guys also shoot more rounds in a day then I bet most people in this forum shoot in a year. They still suggest to everyone and follow the doctrine of multiple shots per target regardless of the weapon. Obviously sniping this wouldn't be accurate but Close Quarters, even ranged shots most professionals would laugh you off there forums. If you don't believe me ask the people at getoffthex.com These days its all about getting as many rounds into the CNS as you can. The more the better.

I agree on the body armor. Although there has been a sharp increase in the use of body armor in violent crimes its still below 1%. Then again I have 3 sets now. One is a plate carrier with top of the line plates that even prevent incendiaries from cooking through, along with nearly every armor piercing round.

Although unusual to see in the hands of a civilian, I can tell you lots of soldiers are selling them at gun shows for dirt cheap. I watched two plates go for 400 rounds, when one plate is worth 1300 alone.

It's more food for thought.

nbk2000 - I agree it is a wonderful weapon for close up work, but seriously everyone in the field of civilian shooters on up to the elitists shun that kind of choke. Just passing on there opinions. I know they have changed and about two weeks ago someone talked about the new choke thats out. They still aren't impressed. If it works for you thats fine, but tailoring a shotgun to that use only drastically reduces its effectiveness overall. In my opinion thats not a good idea, and many people back it up. Take for instance Mr. Reeves comment about them, "A duckbill choke isn't going to have any real effect at EFFECTIVE shotgun ranges other than fucking up your patterning and preventing you from doing a safe transition to slug"

Wikipedia was only the historical recourse as I don't have the time or will to go hunting through old military books.

defiant

January 9th, 2007, 01:00 PM

Shooting on the run is a whole other scenario, and needless to say requires training. There are no public gun ranges I know where that kind of practice is allowed. :D A well placed shot while running wasn't the scenario I had in mind though, but for most people the objective of shooting while running is to keep their advesaries heads down - if there's nobody on your side to provide cover. If someone is providing cover I'd concentrate more on running as fast as possible to my new position.

Frequency of practice is something that also depends on one's circumstances. Endless practice isn't necessary for many shooters to make 3" groups, which practically speaking is sufficient if your not a target shooter or sniper going for dime groups. I know guys who hadn't shot in ten years, but on their return to the range shot out a bullseye from 45 meters. Like riding a bike.

Upon acquiring a new firearm I'll shoot rounds through it to 1) properly break in the barrel; 2) sight the weapon, and: 3) get familiar with it. That takes less than a hundred rounds. After I'm familiar with the gun, going to the range once or twice a year is sufficient for me to do 3" groups rapidfire at 45m and 1"-2" with a rifle at 100m. I haven't done competition since I was a kid, and don't need to make dime groups. Moreover, if I put tens of thousands of rounds through firearm the barrel ld end up with a shot out barrel.

Also, the beat cops in my neighborhood (a major City) are required to go to the range ONCE A YEAR - thats it - while police snipers train weekly.

The amount of practice required depends on your abilities, finances, goals, and other circumstances. A consistent 3" group ought to be more than adequate in most real life situations.

InfernoMDM

January 9th, 2007, 06:11 PM

First shooting on the move is not to keep the attackers head down. It is trained to just about every tier 1 and 2 combatant, most firearms instructors of anything above basics teaches shooting on the move and hitting what you aim at.

Next almost anyone can go out and hit what they are shooting at with little practice. You can teach a person to shoot with a video game to hit paper even up to 1000 yards. Constant dry fire and routine training is very important to a good shot in combat situation.

Also on a side not a good breaking in number is about 500 rounds. That puts a fair amount of stress on a weapon, and like most of the 45 guys will say if its gonna break it will by then.

Cops are terrible at shooting for the most part, and even worse on firearm maintenance. You will see the best shooters in any department spend time shooting regularly.

Lastly look around for outdoor ranges they generally have areas specifically designed for shoot and move drills, or even days set aside.

defiant

January 11th, 2007, 01:09 AM

Now you're just being argumentative :D

Before you said that percentage wise most shots in combat were misses, now your saying that shooting on the run with accuracy is viable. :D :D

Besides, injuries prevent me from running, so I've adopted to shooting with both hands simultaneously with independent target aquisition (pistol). :D :D :D

Again, we're back to scenarios - which is what I've been advocating - critical analysis of scenarios. What weapons are likely to be on hand? Who are the advesaries? Are you alone or with a competent force? Etc.

In a body armor scenario, we both agreed that it would most likely be multiple advesaries (i.e. law enforcement). Even an individual who was skilled at shooting on the run would be insane to do so a multipe of armored advesaries targeting him.

If it's one guy - shoot him in the head and be done with it.

Additionally, as body armor typically implies government forces, it is also not unrealistic to expect a sniper to be deployed. No matter how good you are, running while shooting (accurately) is going to slow you down - better allowing a sniper or marksman to train a round. Sort of like skeet shooting.

While I'm jealous of the advanced shooting special ops training your getting - I don't know a single combat veteran who would adopt the tactics your advocating (except as a last resort). Grenades or an rpg would be preferable.:rolleyes:

Respectfully,

~ defiant

ShadowMyGeekSpace

January 11th, 2007, 03:55 AM

If I was at home it would be a Saiga 12 or a high powered rifle - probably the Saiga (and cover)Defiant, the walls of your house do not provide cover, nor do any objects within it. You might as well be hiding behind pads of butter.

nbk2000

January 11th, 2007, 04:20 AM

Defiant, the walls of your house do not provide cover, nor do any objects within it. You might as well be hiding behind pats of butter.

The walls that won't stop pork bullets from coming in, also won't stop your bullets from going OUT. ;)

Shooting while shuffling your feet or sidestepping isn't what I'd call 'Shooting on the Move'. I'd call that 'Shifting of the Stance'.

Shooting on the move, unless at extremely close range (in the same room range), is a guaranteed miss and waste of ammo, unless you're just making noise with your boom stick to scare off primitives. :p

Trying to shoot on the run...the kind of running you tend to do when multiple people with guns are shooting at you...and hoping to hit anything, is just silly.

If you keep to 2 or 3 second rushes to cover (not concealment), you've got a good chance of not getting hit as long as your movement isn't predictable and are far enough away for some aiming error on their part.

I'd seriously suggest getting some sort of smoke devices suitable for screening your movement. Unless they've TI scopes on their weapons (FBI HRT, Delta Force, etc), smoke will greatly increase your survivability.

InfernoMDM

January 11th, 2007, 06:09 AM

Shooting on the move, unless at extremely close range (in the same room range), is a guaranteed miss and waste of ammo, unless you're just making noise with your boom stick to scare off primitives. :p

Trying to shoot on the run...the kind of running you tend to do when multiple people with guns are shooting at you...and hoping to hit anything, is just silly.

You’re very wrong. Almost all intermediate and advanced courses teach shooting on the move. It’s not a shuffle and I have done the training. You can shoot on the move with either a rifle or handgun although its easier with a rifle.

http://www.therangeinc.com/graphics/range2.jpg

Pictures like this are on nearly every site now, and you can see the first steps for hitting at ranges beyond CQB distance.

Every nuclear power plant in the US goes through the shoot and move course, nearly all the infantry guys I know have had familiarization with the concept. Blackwater requires all shooters to shoot on the move at a fast walk slow jog out to 75 yards, and many do far better then that.

Although I could explain the basic training to acquire this skill on here I doubt anyone in this forum is interested, much less I doubt it goes here. I am not sure who has told you it’s not a good idea, but your recourses or conclusions are extremely flawed. I have a friend who can easily hit targets the size of a average sized paper plate at 50 yards almost at a full run. I have seen him hit the same targets out at 75 yards (the length of the range we can do such drills with). I will be the first to admit my best distance with a pistol has been 15-20 yards while moving rapidly. That however isn’t the case for the people who practice this regularly.

With a red dot and an AK on my first day I was moving at a slow jog hitting targets at 25 yards. We blew about 2000 rounds between the three of us, but I still can hit on the move with some accuracy, and far more then you claim.

Don’t believe me; try telling Gabe suarez, Yeager of ATI, and other such leading trainers. Go to there forums and ask them how far they can shoot on the move. I’ll even PM you the forum links.

You really should do some research into the subject more, as this practice has been around for at least over a decade in civilian classes.

festergrump

January 11th, 2007, 06:26 AM

Although I could explain the basic training to acquire this skill on here I doubt anyone in this forum is interested...
Oh no, that's where YOU'D be wrong. I'd be very interested in just how this is trained for. Links are all fine and good, but I'd like to hear from you about your experiences with such training.

I'm familiar with Thunder Ranch and a few other training facilities but could never afford to put myself through such a program. Maybe you could shed some light on the training procedures so I could attempt to implement them at home, with friends, and achieve a higher understanding of the benefits, myths, and common pitfalls of such training (from home)?

Perhaps, since it would be a little off topic from this thread, maybe you could start a new topic in the Water Cooler to tell us of your experiences and also to gauge interest in this type of training for other members. I'll guarantee you that I'm not the only one interested...

InfernoMDM

January 11th, 2007, 07:19 AM

If nbk2000 says it alright I will do so. I am by no means am an expert and I could probably point you in directions of cheaper training.

By the way thunder ranch has produced DVD's of their training courses. I purchased one about 2 weeks ago that still hasn't found its way here yet. However the DVD is 45-50 dollars.

I probably hate you

January 11th, 2007, 07:35 AM

Infernomdm I am sorry to be rude but you sound like my 15 year old nephew.Everything you say is right your friends or someone you know can do all of these things everyone else doubts.Always trying to get the last word.

Shooting on the run is mainly just cover fire no matter how well you are trained when you here bullets whizzing by your head your first instinct is to duck.There are times you would not want to shoot on the run (snipers or a battle experienced unit attacking you) because you can run faster when you are just running to cover nothing else fancy or kewl.Even if your cover wont stop bullets it obviously hides your bodies position.

Most tactics are fucking gay unless you have experience you need to know what to do when , you cant just say fire now and always use this weapon (because my buddy said so on this forum he is 16 too he learned it from a game he is kewl)

All of this is gay there is no set of rules that are right for every situation sometimes a shotgun would be the preferred weapon other times a small caliber high powered rifle , some times a large caliber rifle.I mean a 50 bmg would be great for body armor but recoil would suck,shooting on the run would be great with a shotgun but a prolonged battle would suck because of lack of ammo, a .223 is great for ammo but if you are actually trying to hit something on the run or shooting very quickly a miss is likely(by the way the people in that pic are shuffling not running)

Basically don't believe everything you read and then come preach it like it is the fucking bible its not true and I don't want to fucking hear it.Lie to yourself not everyone else,get yourself killed as well but as before leave others out of it

I am sure you will try to think up some cleaver responce but all you really need is to get over your complex and quit telling others what is right or wrong.

I hope this doesn't get me banned but my god what a crock of shit I was going to leave it alone but Jesus what a bunch of shit , and I am a firm believer in free speech

defiant

January 11th, 2007, 07:58 PM

ShadowMyGeekSpace wrote:

Defiant, the walls of your house do not provide cover, nor do any objects within it. You might as well be hiding behind pads of butter.

My "house" is a steel boat.

You make a valid point though. If someone were to live a lifestyle where it was a strong possibility that they might face a force equipped with body armor - it wouldn't be a bad idea to armor plate a room, have escape hatches to the basement (if feasible), or even through the wall to natural cover outside. But if an onslaught by a military type force was expected, it might be prudent to make other sleeping arrangements.

InfernoMDM:

Your right about shooting on the move having advantages. It been around since weapons have existed - be it foot soldiers, or soldiers on horseback or vehicles.

The military/law enforcement style training your refering to is a little different than what NBK and I had in mind - which is running full speed while shooting from side to side and behind. In short escaping or fighting one's way to a better position.

The training pic you posted shows a force advancing forward while shooting at a target in front of them. That tactic is well suited to military and law enforcement engagements (or security forces generally), but I don't see it as advantageous for joe homeowner against a body armored division.

Feel free to correct me if the training consists of more than I've portrayed. From what I heard years ago, liability (i.e. accidents and lawsuits) caused trainers to stop programs that involved running/moving quickly while shooting at multiple moving targets and directions.

That's why paint ball guns were invented. :D

NBK:

Practical recomendations given the scenario.

festergrump

January 11th, 2007, 08:39 PM

By the way, thunder ranch has produced DVD's of their training courses. I purchased one about 2 weeks ago that still hasn't found its way here yet...
Any chance that will accidently find it's way to the FTP or rapidshare when it arrives? ;)

Many will be grateful, but none moreso than I.

nbk2000

January 11th, 2007, 11:21 PM

Pictures like this are on nearly every site now, and you can see the first steps for hitting at ranges beyond CQB distance.

In the picture, they are advancing in a direct line TOWARDS their targets, not at angles, and certainly not retrograding.

And while it may be the technique du jour to teach, how many of them are teaching it to you while you're being shot at, paintballs or otherwise? Mmmm...none?

With a red dot and an AK...

That's the problem right there...the reliance upon a device for the skill.

If you can choose the weapons you bring to the fight, and where and when, then you can do anything.

If you have the fight brought to you, where THEY want to fight it, and when you are least prepared, then what?

My philosophy on the subject of guns is make every shot count as if it was the only shot you'll get to make.

If you believe you'll have unlimited ammo, weapons that are excellently maintained and equipped with electronic aiming devices, buddies similiarly armed, and *blah, blah, blah*...then you're in fantasy-land or Special Forces

If you expect to have to fight with a battlefield pick-up weapon that's 40 years old and never been cleaned by the 50 previous peasant conscripts who've used it, with the 3 rounds left in it, at night...you're prepared or in Special Forces. :)

Train for weapons that jam, sights that are misadjusted or non-existant, for darkness/cold/rain/wind, and when multiple oppoponents trying 'High Speed, Low Drag' B.S. tactics that work great on sunny shooting ranges attack...you'll serve them their ass because you've trained for the worst, not the best.

While it's certainly possible for people to develop amazing skill at anything given enough time, do you have the time to develop to this highly specialized skill? Professional gunfighters may (SF soldiers/full-time SWAT), but the 9-5 schmuck?

How often to you intend to be shooting at someone while moving?

Let me rephrase that:

Why would you break from cover (or concealment), waste your VERY limited ammo supply by shooting from an EXPOSED position in the open (moving or not), and expect to not get cut down by the one bullet fired by the man shooting at you from behind cover, using a braced firing position, and taking his time to do it right?

Unless you're expecting to fight someone else equally silly to be shooting on the move while also exposing himself.

If you can't reproduce the skill after having been kicked out of your bed at 3AM, with whatever weapon is handed to you, in the dark, and against an unknown number of attackers armed with an unknown number and type of weapon...it's useless.

The advice of true gunfighters, men who lived and died by the gun in the frontier days of the US, was to take your time and do it right.

For instance, 'Wild' Bill Hickok and Davis Tutt had a gunfight in Springfield, Mo., on July 21, 1865.

At a distance of about 75 yards, they both drew and fired, but Hickok took the time to assuming a braced firing position and killed Tutt with a single shot through the heart, using a single-action Black Powder revolver.

Hickock was meticulous in his aim, and was shot at many times (and missed) by others who couldn't be bothered to take the time to do it right, and this at a time when there was no kevlar, and any bullet wound was more likely than not to kill you through infection.

Someone said once "You can't miss enough to kill". Exactly. :)

While on the subject, I'd also like to mention that, being an individual and (presumably) subject to de facto summary execution if captured after killing any JBT's, you needn't limit yourself in any way, in regards to your weaponry.

Booby-traps, fire, poisonous gases and poisoned blades/bullets, homicide vest...any and all means to kill as many of them as possible before your own death, is a good thing. :D

InfernoMDM

January 12th, 2007, 03:55 AM

Due to you tube being down I can’t show you exactly what I wanted. Please follow the link and you can watch James Yeager and another random guy. I suggest doing this after you have read my replies.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bybVAMJ6J24 Also check out Fighting Rifle Trailer and for shits and giggles XS Sight Demo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxqgOiq6Fz0
This guy is shooting a AK without optics. As you can see hes doing training, so hes going at a moderate pace and practicing the basic footwork etc.

I probably hate you - I am going to go point for point with you. First off if you want to confirm this please take your know it all attitude and trot your ass over to a few forums that deal with everything from Military tactics down to personal defense. If you would like some suggestions I will be more then happy to PM the links as I believe nbk2000 doesn’t like people promoting other sites. When you go there please act the same way you have here. Then you will know how some kid from totse feels when he states he has a cool recipe for gunpowder on here. Maybe your even tell them about all your experiences in OIF since your so knowledgeable about the subject and must be so wise to just know I am full of bullshit. I would suggest maybe not calling me out on my age, and knowledge when you really don't seem to be very well versed yourself. Then again you know all about self defense right? Hell you probably wrote the book. No I don't attempt to state I am a expert, but at least I can back up my knowledge with some form of training and experience can you?

From here on out I will try to be resonable as personal insults really don't teach us anything.

Yes shooting on the run is difficult. Most schools teach a slow build up course of stand, walk, jog, and sometimes run. You would know that if you had any classes recently about threat response etc. James Yeager (check you tube for clips of his training and video) will confidently tell you just how important shooting while moving is. He also will point out you should shoot to kill, not to cover.

As for your point about, “Most tactics are fucking gay unless you have experience”. Well that’s why you train now isn’t it? We can't always train up to the point of first hand knowledge because that might get us killed, but we can facilitate training many ways. TR, Blackwater, and various other schools have there own take on that.

“you cant just say fire now and always use this weapon”

Absolutely right, but we can use certain weapons that work better in many situations then weapons that limit us. It’s better to have a Swiss army knife then a scalpel. Shotguns in my OPINION are great for home defense, and aren’t to bad in the vehicle. However an assault rifle be it the AR, AK or even some battle rifles would be just as good or better in most situations. I personally think a shotgun is great, but I can see why most professionals don’t prefer them as much for home defense.

Also I might point out a little deficiency in your logic. Why the would a 50 caliber be great for body armor? Why would you aim for the body armor and not the head if you were a sniper?

Nbk2000 -

“And while it may be the technique du jour to teach, how many of them are teaching it to you while you're being shot at, paintballs or otherwise? Mmmm...none?”

Several actually teach classes while being shot at or shot around. Gabe Suarez is one of the leading and radical trainers today. A friend Paul Gomez introduced me to this guys teaching style. Needless to say I was shocked. Suarez will have you go down range while others are shooting to look at your target, or to do some drill. He does this specifically to get people who have never had the stress of dealing with live rounds coming near them some coping skills.

Other companies use simuntions which I am sure you have heard about. Needless to say these are paintballs you here the bang and it will scare you as well as hurt far more then a paintball. At point blank range you have to be careful as the rounds can be lethal. I had the fortune to try some basic little intro course with simuntions and I can promise you it is very realistic and very scary the first time.

“That's the problem right there...the reliance upon a device for the skill.”

That isn’t the point and I am sorry I should have guessed you may not be well versed in the newer teaching style. First almost all courses require you to use iron sights for your initial training. This is because if your optic fails they want you to be able to do nearly the same thing with iron sights. Please look up flip up sight, or backup sight. Most classes will test your skills with your optics turned off. That’s why many people like to co witness there sights on the AR. Obviously though optics aren't required as you can tell from the video above.

“If you can choose the weapons you bring to the fight, and where and when, then you can do anything.”

I agree, but please see the comments above about choosing the best weapon all around.

“If you have the fight brought to you, where THEY want to fight it, and when you are least prepared, then what?”

In the US I would agree you can’t easily bring the fight to them. This is why many people have bug out bags, body armor setup with mags at the ready. What you have and how many rounds you have is up to you, and what you think your threat might be. I have some very nice gear so I have the rounds, and the armor to fight for a while.

My average carry for daily life is one pistol and 1-2 magazines. This is where shooting and moving would be most important. If I can drop one attacker while I am moving to cover I am in better shape then if I have to now attempt to fight off 2 or more shooters, and get pinned down at the cover I was so desperately trying to get to. If you just run and don’t return fire someone can either box you, or lead you. Needless to say not a good thing. On that point you will have to provide your own cover. Which means why just shoot at the persons general direction when you can make your limited rounds count?

Cover is important, but so is killing the bad guy as fast and as efficiently as possible.

As for jab about weapons I am currently sitting next to a very nice AR, and a AK in progress. I have a Eotech which although a bit expensive isn’t hard to find, try any local gun store. It’s not impossible to obtain and maintain good weapons, and shoot them regularly if you want to. Even without the ammo you can practice many dry fire drills etc. The highly specialized skills aren’t, and they aren’t to difficult to learn and maintain to a decent degree.

I am going to now ask you some questions.

Why would you sit in a spot of cover while lets say two drug dealers move in for the kill instead of running? What are the chances of survival if you just try to run without firing a shot, as compared to shooting on the move? Wouldn’t it be smart to be able to shoot and hit what your aiming at on the move instead of wasting rounds?

James Yeager probably has put it best, even if I think the guy is a ass. Get off the X. The X being where you are at the moment the shooting starts. He also pounds home the fact that you should be shooting, moving and finding cover. Please watch the videos on you tube and you will here him say that at least once, and states that over and over on his site. Tons of other civilian trainers say the same thing.

Lastly your “true” gunfighters are a bit out of date, and a bit out of times. I would love to know the last time you saw two armed citizens pace out 75 yards with a single shot pistol? By the way you can’t shoot back if your already dead, so its better to miss one then to have taken to much time aiming and get hit.

Obviously a level of accuracy and speed is a far better option.

I probably hate you

January 12th, 2007, 08:20 PM

I am a member of several weapons and tatic forums look me up my user name is Shaun,you were the one coming off as a know it all spewing all this crap well joe blow said this and jack said that,yes I will call you on your age you sound very immature and impretionable , training is exactly what you said it is for , but to me it sounds like your training is based off of a first person shooter game or rambo movie , and you can call me on any tactic or training you want I a am quite well versed , an expert no , I am not military or bacon (not that they are experts either). I am just sick of you having to claim what you say is best , being argumentitive as someone else said , you called me on a the us m855 being a soft point which it obviously is not , sniper where are you getting that from sure it is a sniper/light armor weapon but we are talking about shooting on the run now , not sniper shooting and as far as I know there is no body armor that can stand up to .50 bmg.

Basically you and your knowlage imo are questionable it seems mostly based on forums and self proclaimed experts , I appologize for any thing that I have said that is wrong I also appologize if I came off as a know it all , I know there is some really good training out there I personally like ex seal trainers , but I just dont trust most forum info and self proclaimed experts , If you could post some of your sources and there backgrounds as references I would appreciate it .

Your opinion on cover seems to be a bit flawed . You can lead you enemy by fleeing to cover and limit there movement lets say for instance a hallway or alley then set up a very accurate prone firing position picking them off while they fire wildly , painicing and die .

The training you promote in the hands of someone who doesnt train rigorously (not just reading or watching it then tring it at the range a few times) will get them killed . If you want to have the abilities of a expert (not a book expert) you have to train like one , make sure you mention that so noone is killed while tring these advanced tatics . Just something to add to your tatics never go into a fight with a pistol , it is one of the first things you will ever learn in your training , the only people who need a pistol are ones who cannot always carry a rifle or shotgun like bacon or someone with a concealed weapon permit , I really dont know what is with the weapons forums members wanting to work there way to a good weapon with a crappy one , just some kind of dumb fantacy of battle I guess , imo it is a frightening thought with the posibility of death and letting down my family and all of there deaths as a result.

Sorry to come off as an asshole but I am.

nbk2000

January 12th, 2007, 10:40 PM

First, let me state policy regarding other sites:

If it's not an E&W related english-language forum, post all the links you want.

If it's an E&W board in a non-english language, post it.

ONLY if it is in english, and E&W related, and a discussion board (like us), is it prohibited.

+++++++++

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bybVAMJ6J24 Also check out Fighting Rifle Trailer and for shits and giggles XS Sight Demo

I watched all his videos, and 'mall ninja' is what comes to mind. The idiots who pay this idiot money to play with all their mall ninja gear are...idiots (only appropriate term)...and I love the graduating class photos where everyone is flipping off the camera.

That's a hallmark of professionalism that is oddly lacking from any posed picture I've ever seen in my life of Green Berets, SEALS, SS, Spetnaz, GSG9, SAS, or other elite warriors.

It's also lacking in candid pictures I've seen of soldiers in Grozney, Berlin, Stalingrad, Iwo Jima, Normandy, Somme, Ypres, or a thousand other battlefields.

It's only in the Hippy and Nintendo generations that we see such pride in martial skills demonstrated by one-finger salutes.

To start with the provided YouTube video, the man takes a single side-step, plants his feet in a firm weaver stance, and pumps five rounds sequentially into 3 targets at about 12 feet.

WTF?

The Tueller reaction-drill shows that a single opponent, armed with a concealed knife, can cross 7 yards and gut you before you can draw and fire a single shot from a holstered gun.

To think that you can pump 5 rounds into the first attacker before the other two can either draw and return fire, or stab you, from 12 feet away, is suicide.

This looks like an IPSC shooter thinking he's got the skills to be a teacher. :rolleyes:

If anything, you put 1 round into each of the attackers ASAP, and continue shooting at anyone still moving until everyone is down or you're out.

Even better is to move so that one of the three is blocking at least on of the other two, reducing your threat from three to two, allowing you to deal with the greater danger first.

Best of all is to not allow three threats to get so fucking close, or to have two armed friends yourself. ;)

This guy is shooting a AK without optics. As you can see hes doing training, so hes going at a moderate pace and practicing the basic footwork etc.

He's also advancing across open level ground in broad daylight, standing completely exposed, shooting at stationary targets that aren't shooting back, as well as standing up while changing magazines (rather than getting down to reduce his exposure to return fire), and doing half his shooting while either kneeling/prone or otherwise stationary.

There wasn't any form of cover or concealment in that meadow, otherwise I woulda gotten down behind something big and solid.

That's what PRONE is for! If you're in the open, you kiss dirt, and you do that during training too, no fucking excuses.

If there's even foot high grass, you drop, and roll to the side, so the enemy firing at your drop point is hitting nothing but dirt.

You fire, you roll, so return fire on your muzzle flash/blast/dust kickup is hitting dirt, not you.

Why?

Because you fight as you train, and if you didn't train to go prone when exposed in the open, you'll die when you don't go prone when someone is shooting at you for real.

And, when he's walking backwards, he shoots at targets he passes...targets that presumably represent lethal threats that require shooting...but if they were behind him until he passed them by as he walked backwards, wouldn't that mean they'd have had plenty of time to attack him frm behind, or are they too chivalrous to do so? :p

Oh, and we don't see ANY hits on targets, so we don't even know if he hit them while prone, let alone walking.

Gabe Suarez's having people go downrange of other peoples live fire is stupid, because these other people are likely total strangers, and who knows their level of competency.

Military training involves live-fire, but that's obviously a required risk for soldiers, and you're governent property when you are a soldier, so there's nothing you can do about it, but at least it's with people you know and who know you.

That's not the case at some civilian training school.

The Simuntions training...how many people got shot while trying to shot on the move? How many took cover and stopped being Tacti-k3wL after catching a few rounds in the 'nads?

In the US I would agree you can’t easily bring the fight to them.

What does being in the US have to do with anything? 'They' can be the neighborhood punks at the park or convenience store, or the crazy neighbor, not just JBT's or raghead jihadhi's.

Why would you sit in a spot of cover while lets say two drug dealers move in for the kill instead of running?

Cover, by definition, is able to stop the enemies fire, whereas concealment only hides your location, but won't stop a bullet.

Now, if I'm covered, and the two drug dealers :rolleyes: are 'closing in for the kill', that means they're moving and, thusly, having to expose themselves, however briefly, to my fire.

If I can see them, and my weapon has the range to reach them with lethal effect, then they will die. If my weapon is outranged, I stay in cover until they stupidly approach within range of my weapon, then they die.

You don't shoot just to be shooting, you don't do suppressive fire when you are by yourself, you don't break cover unless you have other cover to go to, and you don't try to manuever against superior numbers.

If there's no cover, and your weapon has superior range, you don't approach them! You maximize the distance between you and the enemy, to take you out of the enemies range, while still being able to kill them.

If they have superior range, either retreat out their range using all available cover, or close on them until you can engage them with your weapon (grabbing the belt as it's known).

Break cover without accurate and/or massive suppressive fire by your colleagues, and you'll die at the hands of a competent enemy.

But now I'm explaining the most basic rifleman tactics, which you should already know.

Speaking of knowing, I've heard of, studied, compared, and ruled as crap most of the stuff that you're telling me to look up, and did so years ago.

James Yeager...pounds home the fact that you should be shooting, moving and finding cover. ... Tons of other civilian trainers say the same thing.

Lastly your “true” gunfighters are a bit out of date, and a bit out of times. I would love to know the last time you saw two armed citizens pace out 75 yards with a single shot pistol?

Every generation thinks its way is the best way, but basic truths are eternal, and not subject to the whims of the day, and I'm only interested in what's been PROVEN true by warriors in war, not the latest civilian fool to let his IPSC trophy go to his head. What do civilians know about war, unless they were once soldiers in war themselves?

How many shoot-outs have you been in? Mr. Hickock was in many, and lived. Listen to the advice of the survivors, and study the errors of the dead.

Oh, and your lexdysia must be acting up again, because I said 'single ACTION', not 'single SHOT'.

A single-action pistol is one that requires the hammer to be manually cocked back to fire each shot. Mr. Hickock used a .36 caliber Colt Navy Black Powder revolver, with 6 shots, but he only needed 1 shot because he took the time to aim.

It wasn't a duel, but an impromptu gunfight. Mr Hickock engaged his enemy at a range where he knew he could kill his enemy and likely not be hit in return, which is smart tactics in action.

defiant

January 12th, 2007, 11:12 PM

This is getting volatile and increasingly enjoyable. And ridiculous.

It isn't difficult to ride a motorcycle with no hands, type 30 words a minute, or shoot while running. But with practice these feats become comparatively easy.

Common sense is more difficult. I can ride a motorcycle without hands (and enjoy doing so for some bizarre reason), but it would be utter foolishness to ride with no hands while evading pursuers at high speeds through traffic. Assasinating a pedestrian in a drive by while riding with one hand is another matter.

TACTICS SHOULD BE SUITED TO THE CIRCUMSTANCES. A tactic that's good in one situation might be foolhardy in another.

Approaching a superior force equipped with body armor is an example of what not to do. It doesn't matter whether you capable of shooting on the mover or not. Its the wrong tactic for the circumstance - one of them is likely to acquire you in their sights and pull the trigger. Its not something someone with combat experience and survival in mind would do unless there was no other alternative. Period.

If you happen to be fighting for a cause, are tired of life, and want to exit this world while making a statement - advancing on a superior force equipped with body armor is absolute genius.

NBK:

When I go to court and such I don't carry a firearm (or haven't yet). Other than that, quality firearms are available. No holigraphic red dot sights, but as advantageous as these devices can be - they can slow down target acquisition. In all likelihood you can point your finger at something with a fair degree of accuracy (within 3-5 inches). If you practice target shooting as if the "barrel was your finger" - you might find that it its allows for rapid target acquisition within (+/-) 3-5" inches.

FUTI

January 13th, 2007, 03:53 PM

InfernoMDM

January 13th, 2007, 03:54 PM

First maybe you don't understand this, but shooting on the move is just one very important skill set. Accurate shooting, and obviously using cover is important. By the way I was the one that posted the Cover isn't always marine video with the AK's and other weapons shooting right through several different walls. I think you deleted it.

Although I don’t agree with everything Yeager states, he has the experience. The guy is former Law Enforcement, became a private contractor. Went to Iraq, worked with British Marines, and former SAS. The guy has more credentials and more experience then probably everyone in this forum combined. Also if you watch a few of the videos he shows he hits continually in a 4” circle.

As for the No Special Forces thing…. First you say only “military and SWAT” shoot on the move. Then I show you someone who caters to civilian training as well as LE. Which one do you want a course for LE, or civilian. They teach it to both. Well just to let you know US Special Forces aren’t allow to publicize their prior affiliation for profit. They can’t say “Hey I am former Delta Force buy my DVD, or come train with me.” Although if you’re in the community you start to find out whom did what, and they will tell you at classes etc, and generally have the paper trail to back it up. Unless it’s appleseed(not the person) course then your pretty set if you go to the big names.

Next I have stated several companies that teach shooting on the move to civilians and you just ignored that. Maybe its time you go have a course or two? When is the last time you participated in a current Self Defense course, 6 months, 2 years, 5? I have been to three in the last two. Two pistol and one carbine course. Not to mention the extra training I get on the side from people who have been to gun site, and other places. Granted they aren’t instructors but I get to learn a little bit every time.

“How many shoot-outs have you been in?” Two different engagements, but I didn’t get a shot off due to where I was at the time. How many have you been in? Also that’s why I said you can’t bring the fight to the enemy in the US, soldiers in other places of the world bring the fight to the enemy.

If you don't want to believe what’s being taught fine. However most courses last two days and its very intensive, better ones last five days. It usually requires 1000-2000 rounds to go through the training.

Please pick any of the sites. The top ones are some of the best right now, and then I grabbed two off the search. Do your own search ask questions.

http://www.gunsite.com
http://www.blackwaterusa.com
http://www.tacticalresponse.com/
http://www.frontsight.com
http://www.awt-co.com/Defensive%20Pistol.htm

Email them go to their forum, and tell them exactly what you told me about shooting every person once and going back. They will all ask what secret is if you can always make one shot and hit the central nervous system, and control the bullet after it’s left the barrel.

Maybe your information is a little dated, ever think of that or is shooting your primary interest, or job?

I hate to come off being an ass, but every time I try to show something you want to poke holes. My objective was to put new and relevant information don not fight with you on who’s got the bigger dick. You don’t believe me that’s fine, I hope you survive, but people with more combat time, experience, and age are teaching these because they find it more effective then what they were taught.

InfernoMDM

January 13th, 2007, 03:57 PM

I must side with NBK although I don't like the way he rub people nose in the dirt when they poo around...but when he is right...I lose my arguments. I don't have any combat or army experience, but the guy that does and whom I respect for that said to me that best way to get yourself killed is... to actually try some of those heroic run and shoot-out that Holywood movies feed your brain with. And those links are just that.

Agreed, but if your trained properly you can "shoot on the move" not run through the building spraying everything. That’s the difference. I think NBK is wrong and I have training and others experience to back it up. He hasn't really given me any recourses then a 1916 shootout. He's not wrong, I just think others are teaching better ideas these days.

festergrump

January 13th, 2007, 05:22 PM

When is the last time you participated in a current Self Defense course, 6 months, 2 years, 5? I have been to three in the last two. Two pistol and one carbine course. Not to mention the extra training I get on the side from people who have been to gun site, and other places.
“How many shoot-outs have you been in?” Two different engagements, but I didn’t get a shot off due to where I was at the time.
I hate to keep on bringing this up, but since this thread was started by you and going off topic seems OK (well, this topic evolved around to it's current state, anyway), I'm still interested in your training experiences, and now also your real life firefight experiences... Would you please tell us about them? Where exactly have you trained? What were the circumstances of the firefights you have witnessed (but not participated in, by your own admission)?

Perhaps by getting it all out there and in the open everyone will better understand where you are coming from. So far, members see someone who lurked for many years then popped their head up almost from out of nowhere and about instantaneously got into altercations with a member of the Administration. Credibility certainly is lacking under such circumstances, I'm sure you will agree.

Who is InfernoMDM and why should we take him seriously all of a sudden? At this point I feel that a definitive introduction is well overdue... Anything short of that will just be a pissing contest with the one of the Admin. Guess who'll win. NBK's credibility has never been in question so far as I recall.

nbk2000

January 13th, 2007, 05:23 PM

How did a gunfight in Springfield, Mo., on July 21, 1865 become a 1916 shootout? :confused:

InfernoMDM

January 13th, 2007, 06:42 PM

How did a gunfight in Springfield, Mo., on July 21, 1865 become a 1916 shootout? :confused:

NBK2000 – Did the date cause confusion with the point I was trying to make? I am sorry that is my fault sometimes I mess up dates and numbers, I should have gone back and reread your post again. Even though I did mess up the date did you get my point? I would love to know what you thought of the sites I posted, and my comments.

Please by all means debate me if you are wrong, I am always looking for new outlooks on things even I don’t agree with certain aspects of the teaching or opinions. I think your self-proclaimed knowledge that really hasn’t been supported isn’t that great, but it isn’t complete wrong. Please by all means continue and I will atempt to keep my calm.

The reason why many people don’t teach what you perceive as the best idea for combat, is because only a handful of professionals can shoot well at distance, and provide one shot kills with out a scoped weapon. There are a handful of individuals that are as skilled as you claim to be under combat and that’s why the masses are now taught what I was discussing.

The standard training technique I believe is called a regressive (retreating) bulls eye. You start at 5-7 feet and fire at 2-4 inch circles, until you can routinely hit 9 out of 10 rounds in the circle. Once your good to go, then you move the bulls eye out. The same training style is done with shooting on the move. However with the retreating target you also walk slow then speed up as well.

Festergrump – I will PM you some forums and other places to look for the info and ask questions. Maybe you can come back and tell the others here what you found, or didn’t find.

festergrump

January 13th, 2007, 07:27 PM

*SIGH*

I'm still interested in your training experiences, and now also your real life firefight experiences... Would you please tell us about them? Where exactly have you trained? What were the circumstances of the firefights you have witnessed (but not participated in, by your own admission)?
Festergrump – I will PM you some forums and other places to look for the info and ask questions. Maybe you can come back and tell the others here what you found, or didn’t find.
Forget it. What I've already found is you sidestepping issues. What I've yet to find, but gave you opportunity to provide, is firsthand accounts and names of your places of training as well as what the scenarios were which you were remotely involved in regarding lead flying in both directions, and also what you may have learned from them...

I don't think I was out of line for asking and would like to be taken seriously, myself. That wasn't too much to ask, was it? By blowing off my requests you only hurt your credibility worse. You brought these issues up, not me. Now I am interested in them.

Pretty fucking please, with sugar on top....... tell me your stories.

InfernoMDM

January 13th, 2007, 08:11 PM

Not trying to side step you, I just don't really want a whole bunch of people that wouldn't be welcomed in the LE Military forum rolling into the places I frequent. The community wouldn’t enjoy it. I just PMed you so you can make your own choice.

nbk2000

January 13th, 2007, 09:03 PM

Well, isn't that awfully elitest.

Do you think we like pork or their associates rolling in here and reading our discussions and taking away our information without giving any in return?

No, we don't.

But we don't get snotty and say 'Invitation Only'. We're open to anyone who wants to learn, even if it's not the kind of people we'd invite in ourselves.

Taking something without reciprocation or compensation is called STEALING.

As for my own experiences (LE related, I can't discuss):

I've twice disarmed pistol armed robbers, bare hand and unarmored, shooting the first one in the back with his own gun as he ran out the door (it was an airshit replica, which is what saved his life), and body-surfed the second one down a flight of concrete stairs to the street below and walked away. :)

These weren't 'I was present, but not involved' situations, not by a long shot.

And why are you PM'ing Fester with the links? He may be curious, but I'm the one who decides who stays here. I'm the one you need to convince, not him.

+++++++++++++

Related to the mall ninja training videos you linked to on YouTube, I noticed the majority of people there were using the AR series rifles...the gun that eats what it shits. :)

AR's are fine for piggy snipers or plinking, but not for combat, despite the lowest bid contract that Colt won from the US military.

For me, it's a G3 (or HK91), M14 (M1A), AK, CETME, FN-FAL, Garand, or even bolt actions like the M1903 Springfield or Lee-Enfield.

Large caliber, reliable, and accurate (maybe not the AK). Rifles you know aren't going to freeze up from a grain of sand and with enough power to drop a man with one shot, unlike the Mattel gun our guys are using in Iraq.

InfernoMDM

January 13th, 2007, 10:39 PM

Well, isn't that awfully elitest.

Taking something without reciprocation or compensation is called STEALING.

As for my own experiences (LE related, I can't discuss):

He may be curious, but I'm the one who decides who stays here. I'm the one you need to convince, not him.

+++++++++++++

Related to the mall ninja training videos you linked to on YouTube, I noticed the majority of people there were using the AR series rifles...the gun that eats what it shits. :)

For me, it's a G3 (or HK91), M14 (M1A), AK, CETME, FN-FAL, Garand, or even bolt actions like the M1903 Springfield or Lee-Enfield.

Large caliber, reliable, and accurate (maybe not the AK). Rifles you know aren't going to freeze up from a grain of sand and with enough power to drop a man with one shot, unlike the Mattel gun our guys are using in Iraq.

If you follow the links and do a little looking, I posted the same thing I sent him. I am not trying to be elitist but they are. I also said if you want the info PM me, but I guess you missed it. As for stealing that’s why I started participating, and posting threads about things I know and may interest the people on here. If you call that stealing, please divulge all of your worldly knowledge as well.

Honestly I don’t really care if you kick me out or not. It ultimately wont hurt my feels as most of this is above my head, and what isn’t I am purely learning at this point. I am not here to cater to you anymore then you are here to ignore my grammar issues. I doubt anyone else would sway your mind on the subject of firearms as you seem to being that you have been elitist about damn near every post I make, not just pointing out error but being down right an ass..

I am not sure how long you have been retired, but most major training facilities don’t follow your line of thought anymore. If you’re so set in your ways fine, but you should take the time to research the new information.

As for the AR mall ninjas. I agree. I am not a huge friend of the AR, but you can’t beat the AR for modifications, rail systems for lights, and compactness for CQB. Luckily they came out with the 6.8, which seems to be very promising. They also have modified the uppers of the AR to be piston operated like the AK, or HK G36. A piston operated 6.8 would be my preferred weapon at this point.

I personally think the AK can be used as well with the new rails and modifications but Suarez is the only major player these days that deals with large caliber rifles and non AR carbines. Like I said his training is sometimes unorthodox, but the rest of stuff has been given good reviews by most students. The down range thing is for returning students who know each other etc.

I like the HK91 friend has one, but it really is pretty long for CQB, and I hate it only has two stock positions.

knowledgehungry

January 14th, 2007, 01:42 AM

InfernoMDM, it certainly appears that you are being argumentative for the sake of being argumentative. You obviously have a good background in weapons and tactics, but there is no point in trying to prove it by arguing with an administrator here(especially NBK).

I agree that you CAN develop skill while shooting on the run and that it is good to practice such if you MUST shoot on the run. The point that you are failing to get and ignoring so you can argue is that shooting on the run is inherently less accurate and makes you more vulnerable than shooting from cover, and while it is good to be prepared to shoot on the run the best method of gunfighting is to shoot from a stable position with time to aim.

I don't know if it is too late to save yourself from a banning but if I were you I would stop trying to argue for the sake of arguing and drop this.

nbk2000

January 14th, 2007, 02:38 AM

Gee, it's been so long since I've only been referred to as an ass, and not an asshole, I must be getting soft in my dottage.

The reason why many people don’t teach what you perceive as the best idea for combat, is because only a handful of professionals can shoot well at distance, and provide one shot kills with out a scoped weapon. There are a handful of individuals that are as skilled as you claim to be under combat and that’s why the masses are now taught what I was discussing.

They can't really be called professionals if they can't do what generations of shooters did before the invention of rifle scopes, now can they?

This goes back to the 'out of date' philosophy of mastering your tools and your trade, not flitting about like a butterfly in search of the newest flower (or gimmick/rail widget/tacti-k3wL tactic).

You say the advice of the gunfighters is obsolete?

Well then, lets change the weapons from guns to swords, for comparision of relevance.

Is the advice of Medieval knights and Italian renaissance fencing masters who lived and died by their skills to be dismissed as 'out of date' because some modern idiots who call themselves masters are waving around swords in gymnasiums?

No.

The advice to take the time to make the shot is counterpointed by the fact that in the time it takes you to miss with your first shot and bring the sight back on me to take a second, I'll have already nailed you with my first AIMED shot. A quarter seconds worth of patience pays dividends. ;)

As for stealing that’s why I started participating, and posting threads about things I know and may interest the people on here. If you call that stealing, please divulge all of your worldly knowledge as well.

How oddly similiar to what I've been doing here for the last seven years. :rolleyes:

Please by all means debate me if you are wrong, ... I will atempt to keep my calm.

Debate you if I'm wrong?

Wouldn't that automatically mean that you are right? :mad:

And if you are convinced you are right, than nothing, no proof, would be able to sway your beliefs...much like a religious heretic who has blind obedience to his incorrect faith.

But when finally you surrender to us, it must be of your own free will.

I do not destroy the heretic because he resists us: so long as he resists us I never destroy him.

We convert him, we capture his inner mind, we reshape him. We burn all evil and all illusion out of him; we bring him over to our side, not in appearance, but genuinely, heart and soul.

We make him one of ourselves before I kill him.

InfernoMDM

January 14th, 2007, 04:13 AM

They can't really be called professionals if they can't do what generations of shooters did before the invention of rifle scopes, now can they?

No.

The advice to take the time to make the shot is counterpointed by the fact that in the time it takes you to miss with your first shot and bring the sight back on me to take a second, I'll have already nailed you with my first AIMED shot. A quarter seconds worth of patience pays dividends. ;)

How oddly similiar to what I've been doing here for the last seven years. :rolleyes:

Debate you if I'm wrong?

Sorry I really fucked up on that one statement. It was supposed to be "Debate me if you think I am wrong"

Hickock was a great shot. He also had his target sitting at 75 yards not moving. How would he have reacted if he was being shot at say 25 yards repeatedly by a moving target? Would he have been able to stand still and aim? Maybe but the question is can you, or others?

The "mall ninja" you were blasting earlier use to have pistol competitions in excess of 125 yards with other top shooters. Can you? Are you that skilled? They can do what other generations did, but the tactics have changed greatly in the last 20 years, obviously beyond your realm of thinking.

However the style of fighting is different today on both sides.

Lastly if I can make 3 shots to your center mass in the time it takes you to sight in, where do you stand? Can you really risk taking the time to get into a proper shooting stance and aim in on a target in a build, or out on a road at 10, 20, 30 feet?

Do you think your bullet every time will hit its target just right that you will get that one Central Nervous Hit? There are cops that have shot people 10-12 times in the head at point blank ranges and the guy survived for many reasons. One guy actually snotted out the 45 ACP round that logged in his sinus cavity. Will you take that shot and then stand there to see if your target is dead, or are you sure by the great being in the sky not to miss? Thats why others take multiple shots.

If you can more power to you, but you know in the end 95% of shooters cant because they don't train every day.

PS If you are a cop why can't you talk about what you did? I have never heard of that before from any LE.

Docca

January 14th, 2007, 09:34 AM

InfernoMDM

January 14th, 2007, 03:22 PM

Oh for god's sake, just ban the moron!

This is the k3wlist topic / discussion in the last six months.

BTW, who told you SS109 was tungsten cored? I'm sure they were k3wl. I'll let you figure that one out for yourselves, remember, Google is your friend.

Just quit regurgitating k3wlness, PLEASE...

Your right the SS109/M855 have steel tips with lead cores.

The M995 have a tungsten core.

The military was going to switch to the tungsten core for environmental reasons.

I see your knowledge is based on google, so you must be a expert as well right?

Docca

January 14th, 2007, 06:43 PM

InfernoMDM

January 14th, 2007, 07:11 PM

One shouldn't need Google than to know that buckshot beats pistols, but no one here has been able to get that into your thick skull.

Honestly, it's like three pages of watching a cat play with a wounded mouse.

And regarding the LA bank robbers - I'm sure they would have greatly enjoyed this little conversation, had they survived. If they hadn't been so wrapped up in k3wlish little projects like converting AKs to full auto and wrapping themselves in body armor... They're a good example of how the spray + pray / mall ninja mentality works in the real world.

You honestly have no idea of even semi modern tactics do you? Neither NBK or myself have brought up a spray and pray concept.

Also as for buckshot the advantage of buckshot over a standard pistols is the quantity of projectiles hitting your target giving you a better chance of the guy bleeding out, or maybe even hitting the CNS. I don’t know if each pellet is identical in its grains, but the diameter of 00 buckshot is that of a 32 ACP. Even if you get 2 pellets in the body chances are you wont have a one shot one kill from a CNS hit, and bleeding out wont be fast. I love shotguns, but I don’t think the exotic choke is necessary.

Which makes me wonder with all the slanderous comments of me trying to be cool, why none of you pointed fingers at the choke.

Just FYI but, I believe the wound studies say for a good probability of destroying a major organ you need 11-13” penetration in to ballistics gel. That is supposed to represent going through heavy clothes and bone. However that is a different topic entirely.

Docca

January 14th, 2007, 09:31 PM

Neither NBK or myself have brought up a spray and pray concept.

Which makes me wonder with all the slanderous comments of me trying to be cool, why none of you pointed fingers at the choke.

NBK brought up the L.A. bank robbers and the stunning success rate of their tactic (spray + pray).

Regarding the choke = Fair is fair, I have to agree with you there. As long as I'm at it, you've made some other good observations (a few). I guess that's why you're still here, because I really only made it to the third page looking to see:

A- if anyone here knew what SS109 cores were made out of (apparently not).

B- if you had gotten banned yet (obviously not).;)

nbk2000

January 14th, 2007, 10:53 PM

I've seen both tungsten carbide, and steel, being mentioned as penetrator cores for the SS109 round, depending on who's making it and when.

InfernoMDM

January 14th, 2007, 11:28 PM

I've seen both tungsten carbide, and steel, being mentioned as penetrator cores for the SS109 round, depending on who's making it and when.

Thats what I thought as well, but I couldn't find that info when I did a quick search at work.

Docca

January 15th, 2007, 01:21 AM

Thats what I thought as well...

You're both missing my point.

First, anyone else who didn't know wasn't the one giving a dissertation on the external ballistics properties of the SS109 projectile. That would be InfernoMDM.

Second, I don't really care if there ever was a tungsten core equipped SS109 - It's obvious that the commonly available projectile doesn't contain any tungsten. Even if it does (pay attention MDM) I'm not going to spend the next three pages trying to convince the staff and anyone else who happens along that my understanding of the subject matter is inherently superior.

Now, just to show I'm not playing favorites:

The duckbill choke IMHO is just as much a gadget as the red dot sight on the AK, maybe worse since it's going to prevent you from using slugs in that weapon (if you value your weapon or your undamaged body parts). That said (pay attention MDM) if you think a gadget is the answer to some of your problems, more power to you.

InfernoMDM

January 15th, 2007, 03:27 AM

Docca - It's very difficult to sit down and listen to people make the mistakes that I once did. I at one time thought very much like NBK2000 does. It had to be big bullets, and precise controlled shots at 100 yards using iron sites. I started competing in small bore rifle competitions my freshman year of high school. I read everything on the net I could, from the older members of competition teams, and sites like www.thehighroad.org. I came to the same conclusions NBK has said.

Finally just before and after Iraq I went to classes, and talked to people who had seen much more combat then I probably ever will. The things I took as truth, I was told were not as effective as once believed. NBK even blurted out the Matell toy line that I loved to use so much. Granted I think the diameter of the round is still very important. However after getting an AR working with them I learned the advantages, and disadvantages I see why its so popular over battle rifles. I went to training events and learned from people that had been there and done that.

You know in the end the reason I fight so hard is because I think people should be informed of both opinions not just one. I don't like people writing off things because they just think its wrong. Many people did, or repeated exactly what NBK said out of hand. They did this in a community that I am willing to bet doesn't research the topic much at all. As a example, even though I think Yeager is a dick he still knows a lot and has seen a good bit of Law Enforcement and combat, so I try to take what I can from him. I think the same should be done with the forum members here.

Self Defense isn't a science, and it isn't a art. You can create a chemical that will do the same thing every time in a lab, but in Self Defense situations, that are very similar, you can have different outcomes.

If you can shoot a man at 75 yards with a revolver once and kill him do so. The average shooter with the basic training can't. Even more advanced shooters have a hard time with what NBK is talking about. For instance a officer shot a guy on drugs 5 times in the chest and the guy didn't die. However that guy shot twice, missing once and another went in his armpit and killed him. No matter how good you are sometimes its all about ballistics, and very small differences that choose life or death.

For a place of knowledge and facts, most here ignored all the links I pointed out where people far more knowledgeable then myself state nearly the same thing I was. When relevant and logical information was presented by me I was ignored. When short clips of training were shown, they were picked apart as if they were a whole class. Hell even you did it initially.

I am not looking for your respect, or for you to change your minds, just to open some eyes to other possibilities. The key to survival isn't a rigid plan or solid unwavering rules, such as run to cover. Its flexibility. Am I near cover? can I hit my target? Will I get pinned down if I move to certain cover?

Thats why shooting on the move is taught. If you can shoot and hit your target on the move you open up more options then you would just moving to cover very quickly.

Does that make sense?

Gunjack

January 15th, 2007, 04:25 PM

I'll try to add some info here concerning penetration.

I have been witness to a test:
a bolt-action rifle in caliber .300Winchester Magnum shooting a steel block (ST37 steel) at a distance of 50 meters with Remington hunting ammo(Core-Locked?)

The hole was 46 mm deep.

defiant

January 20th, 2007, 12:00 AM

Inferno wrote:

The key to survival isn't a rigid plan or solid unwavering rules, such as run to cover. Its flexibility. Am I near cover? can I hit my target? Will I get pinned down if I move to certain cover?

That's sound advice - so why'd you disagree when NBK and I said the same thing a couple of pages back.:p

Gunjack:

How thick was that steel block?

nbk2000

January 20th, 2007, 02:02 AM

If you have a bolt-action, if you have a revolver, if you have any semi-automatic with limited ammo...the whole 'Shoot on the Move' theory falls apart.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

To me, a professional is someone who can get the job despite the lack of HS/LD tools.

And professionals practice their trade daily, or close to it.

I practice stalking and sniping on animals everyday with a break action pellet rifle (Gamo), as you only get one shot before they split, which emphasizes the need for accuracy.

A couple of days ago, I shot a hummingbird out of the air in mid-flight. I'd shoot more of them if there were any around here to be shot.

I guess having two grandfathers, both of whom were gun nuts, expert hunters, with one a soldier/career cop, kind of gave me a different outlook on the value of making your shots count and not making a target of yourself by running around in the open.

As for the idea of a "bug-out bag":
http://www.alpharubicon.com/prepinfo/backpackfever.htm

Jacks Complete

January 20th, 2007, 08:46 PM

Wow, epic.

I know that those who have been on site and read my posts are aware that I generally know what I'm talking about, otherwise I don't write it.

Everyone on this thread is right, for a given definition of right. The one who walks away at the end is the winner. That's all that comes out as important at the end of the day.

A SAK is better than a scapel, unless you want to cut someone open and remove a tumour. If you train well and can keep your wits about you, you will do well. Don't expect pros to go to bits if you start shooting at them. The firearms cops around here are trained well and dumb enough to start with that they will revert to that training. How much training like that do you do? Will you have three mates who are well trained behind you if the door caves in? Who won't bottle it and run? Or even if they were there, would they shake so bad they shoot you in the back of the head by accident?

Yes, you can move and shoot at the same time. It will upset your accuracy. Practise to reduce this effect. You will improve. Practise getting jumped by a battle squad lying in ambush. Learn what adrenal shock feels like, and what to do. Realise your limits.

You cannot run and shoot at the same time. Running involves using your arms, and so stops your effective use of a gun. You can't jog and shoot effectively, since by definition you will be jogging your gun too. You can walk and even walk fast while firing effectively (depending on firearm, training, terrain underfoot (don't fall down!) and your physical condition, plus other things like lighting, wind, where your glasses are, and more) once you get the hang of it.

I personally know a man who can take his pistol and shoot a target of a man in the head at 25 yards from behind his back. It took a lot of practise, and a lot of rounds, even for this man who has shot for at least 15 years (half his life) both as a keen amateur and, later, for a time, as a professional.

You can do it. But you have to train at it. And there are limits. But the more you train, the more you can push the limits.

I much prefer the stalking role. However, CQB is a different ball game entirely. There is a place for both. Train for both.

As regards the duckbill choke, in a CQB scenario, I'd pick a short barrelled auto shotgun with that choke and heavy shot over most things. At classic CQB ranges, indoor, you are looking at 20 yards absolute max. My house, you are looking at 7m tops, most likely under 4! Heck, a sawn-off would be great. A flamethrower would probably be better.

Of course, I'd be up against at least 2 cops with pistols or MP5 carbines, first response, wearing level 2 vests or better, plus helmets. First sign of trouble, it would be essentially a full on SWAT team. Hard to win then, even if armed.