Illinois Concealed Carry Weapons (CCW) License Class

$250 - Illinois Concealed Carry Weapon (CCW/CCL) License Training Class

VETERANS / MILITARY QUALIFY FOR THE 1-DAY (8 HOUR) CLASS - $100

Get your Illinois Conceal Carry License... Plus get 3 other CCW's licenses FREE! (Utah CCW, Arizona CCW & Florida CCW) - together safely and legally conceal carry a handgun in over 37 States...!!!

Price: $250 (NO other class fees), 

price includes;

1. Range fees ($25)

2. Illinois Livescan digital fingerprints ($70)

3. Utah & Arizona ink fingerprints ($25)

4. Passport photos ($15)

5. CCW application paperwork 

6. Assistance with CCW application paperwork 

Class Date: April 2-3rd (16 hours)

Location: VFW- Villa Park, Illinois 

331-642-8110 / www.IllinoisCC.com

Action always beats reaction in CCW

Concealed Carry Myths: Can You Shoot Fast Enough to Beat the Other Guy?

So, what exactly do concealed carry and tailgating have in common?

Remember Driver’s Educaiton? If your class was like mine, you learned about the dangers of tailgating. You know, following the car in front of you too closely.

If you do that, and the driver in front slams on their brakes, you might rear-end them. In fact, given the right conditions, there is a 100 percent chance you will rear-end the car in front of you, no matter how much you stomp on your brakes. While you may think you can stop fast enough to avoid a crash, you cannot, no matter how good your reflexes are.

There are a few variables at play that can make collision a certainty.

First, there’s your reaction time. How fast can your brain process a signal from your eyes that says, “Hey wake up! The guy in front of you just stepped on his brakes!” Your eyes have to see it, and then send a fax to your brain. Your brain has to think about this and retrieve from its memory banks the correct response. “Oh yeah, I need to tell right foot to move off the gas and step on the brake.” Then your brain has to send that message through your spine down to your leg. Your leg muscles have to wake up and start the process of moving to the other pedal.

Second, your brakes require distance. They’re designed to bleed off energy and turn your car’s forward motion into friction and heat, so your car will cover a certain amount of distance while this happens.

Check These Out

Last, the speed at which both cars are moving changes everything. The faster you’re both going, the farther away you have to be. When going fast, your car covers more distance while your brain figures out stuff and your brakes do that slowing down thing.

There’s a valuable concealed carry or self-defense lesson to be learned from the dangers of tailgating. It all boils down to the fact that action is always faster than reaction. This principle is the cornerstone of Colonel John Boyd’s OODA loop theory, originally developed for fighter plane dogfighting. OODA stands for Observe, Orient, Decide, and Act. It describes the process I laid out above with deciding to stop your car when the dude in front slams on the brakes.

In a self-defense scenarios, when your assailant acts, there’s a certain amount of time required for your brain to observe what’s going on—that’s the first “O.” The orient stage is more complex and varies with one’s prior experiences, beliefs, and genetics. In this stage, your brain is filtering what it sees to develop context. Based on your experience, does your brain assume you’re being attacked when someone makes a certain type of move? If you fight a lot, your orient stage will be quicker for a certain stimulus. If not, your brain has to sort out what that move really means. The next stage is decision. What will the brain tell the body to do? Last, of course, it the action itself.

All of this stuff takes time, and every time your attacker makes an action, you have to go through the entire process again. In a fluid and sudden aggression, you’re in trouble because you’re constantly reacting as your assailant is starting multiple actions. You most likely keep starting your OODA loop without every finishing any.

Boyd essentially said you need to turn the tables, and by implementing your own action, you get inside your opponent’s loop and cause them to do all this response process to your actions.

Okay, enough theoretical science. What does this really mean?

If you have a gun pointed at a bad guy, they can still shoot you before you can pull the trigger, even if their gun is not pointed at you.

Don’t believe me? Consider an action/reaction study completed by Dr. J. Pete Blair, an associate Criminal Justice professor at Texas State University. At a SWAT conference, he assembled two groups of people. Twenty-four SWAT officers, with an average of 10 years experience, were the police officers in the exercise. Blair recruited 22 Criminal Justice students with an average age of 22. Most had no experience with firearms.

Blair had the police enter a building, where they would encounter a “suspect” (student volunteer) who either had their gun held at their side pointed at the ground or aimed at their own head in a suicide position. The police were instructed to command the suspects to drop the gun and do whatever necessary to protect themselves. The suspects were instructed to raise their gun and shoot at the police officer at a time of their choosing after they were commanded to drop their gun. Of course, all the guns in involved were non-lethal marking guns that leave a welt and glob of paint.

Just to be clear, in each case the officer had their gun aimed at the suspect with their finger on the trigger. The suspect, not experienced with firearms, had it hanging toward the floor or pointed at their own head.

So what do you think happened? Were the experienced SWAT officers able to shoot the suspects when they saw them starting to move? No. In most cases, the officer and suspect ended up shooting each other at approximately the same time. And when I say approximately, I mean the shots were fired within one-tenth of a second of each other.

“The miniscule edge did go to the suspects, technically,” the study reads. “Examined case by case, they shot faster than officers or precisely simultaneously in more than 60% of the encounters. Even in situations where the officer was faster, there was less than a 0.2-second difference, suggesting that the suspect would still get a shot off in most of these encounters.”

The action was measured with frame-by-frame analysis of the encounters. The suspects were able to raise their gun and fire in an average of 0.38 seconds. The officers were able to fire back in an average of 0.39 seconds.

What? You mean if I aimed my gun at someone with a gun that’s not aimed at me, they can shoot me at will, and there’s not a darned thing I can do about it? That’s exactly what I mean. Yes, you’ll end up shooting them too, but you’ll still have a brand new body orifice. It all boils down to the absolute science of action and reaction times. The suspects started the action of raising their gun to shoot, while the officers had to react to, process, and then act on that stimulus. The overhead of this process allowed enough time for the suspect to get their shot off first, although just barely.

Now there’s something to think about. This is exactly why keen awareness, at all times, is so critically important. You’re already being the eight-ball if someone attacks you, because they chose to act, putting you in a position where you have to react.

http://www.outdoorhub.com/stories/2015/09/08/concealed-carry-myths-can-shoot-fast-enough-beat-guy/

$100 - Utah, Arizona & Florida CCW License class - for Illinois residents

$100 -  Utah, Florida & Arizona CCW License Class - for Illinois residents

Get three (3) non-resident Utah, Florida & Arizona CCW permits / licenses - together legally and safely conceal carry handgun(s) in over 34 States. 

Location: VFW Villa Park,  Illinois 

Date: April 2nd (9AM - 1PM)

Cost: $100.00 

331-642-8110 / www.IllinoisCC.com

Concealed Carry and the Right to Remain Silent – Part 2

By: Marty Hayes | September 22, 2015

Add to favorites     

 

 

Zoran Karapancev / Shutterstock.com

The author tackles 5th Amendment Rights wallet cards and several other factors to consider when giving a brief statement after a defensive shooting.

In my previous blog post, I wrote about why I recommend giving responding police officers a very brief statement after a self-defense shooting. This runs counter to common advice from attorneys, and in this series, we are discussing why the affirmative defense of self-defense makes it advisable to communicate a limited number of details to law enforcement after a self-defense incident.

In addition to telling responding police officers that you were attacked, it makes sense to point out any witnesses who saw the incident, or know of any evidence that is likely to be missed by the officers during their investigation. Witness statements are a double-edged sword, so we’ll look at the pros and cons of witness statements in Part 3 [Coming soon – Editors]. First, though, there is one more thing you need to mention briefly to responding police.

Ask for Medical Help

Were you injured during the assault against you? If it was a physical altercation, as is true of most disparity of force situations, there will likely be evidence of that attack on your body. If you are aware of any pain as a result of the attack, ask for medical aid. It is likely that when attacked, you experienced an Adrenalin dump. One of the effects of Adrenalin is that it masks pain. You may have been injured, but don’t really feel it. Those injuries, even if you don’t feel any pain, are evidence of an attack. A bruise on the noggin may in fact be a concussion. You need to get checked out at the hospital, so ask the responding officers to call an ambulance.

Also check out, Deadly Force: Understanding Your Right to Self Defense. This guide, by Massad Ayoob, will help you understand the legal and ethical issues concerning the use of lethal force by armed citizens.

Why tell police if you are hurt during the assault? Were you struck first? Is there a bruise on your neck where the assailant tried to strangle you? If you clam up, how do the police know about this exculpatory evidence? Having your lawyer tell the police three days after the event, “By the way, my client was assaulted,” isn’t going to do much good. It is best to turn the police detectives into your detectives, by letting them know of any injuries or other attacks to your person.

It is pretty tough for a prosecutor bent on putting you in prison to cross-examine medical records. You see, in the hierarchy of professionals, doctors trump lawyers, and so a doctor’s word is going to be believed before the ranting of a prosecutor who wants to see you convicted. If you just tell the cops you want your lawyer and fail to ask for medical aid, that evidence is lost.

You may be a rough, tough guy, “awe shucks, it’s just a flesh wound,” and it very well may be, but your injuries are also evidence of the attack. Are your clothes dirty, wet or muddy? It’s evidence that you were on the ground. Make sure the cops see, understand and document that fact. You see, no one knows what little piece of evidence will be the one that tips the scales of justice in your favor, so you cannot leave anything out. Guilty people don’t help the cops. Innocent people do.

“I Will Not Answer” Cards

A lot of organizations and many criminal defense attorneys give their clients a wallet card that is supposed to alleviate the problem of confessing to the elements of a crime, while preserving your rights against self-incrimination. These cards usually are printed with words to the effect of: “Officer, if I am handing you this card, I was just attacked and had to use justifiable force to defend myself. I am invoking my rights against self-incrimination, and wish to make no statements until my lawyer is present.”

Ahem…you have just handed the officer a damning piece of evidence that can be used against you in court. This card can be used to transform an intentional albeit self-defense shooting into a premeditated shooting. It can be used to turn a life sentence into the death penalty. Do you honestly think a jury would view this printed statement the same way they do the car insurance card in your wallet?

Even a rookie prosecutor trying his first case would likely be able to turn this against you, to say nothing of the picture an experienced prosecutor could paint around that detail. If you insist on presenting such a card to the responding officers, let’s profoundly hope the assailant lives, because the element of pre-meditation is not usually a factor in assault cases.

The argument for having this card in your wallet goes something like this: “Well, I am likely to be so upset and confused that I won’t be able to speak clearly, and might make a statement that could be used against me.” While that might be true, at least a misstatement due to stress could be explained in court by a competent expert. I don’t know of any competent legal expert who can explain why having this card in your wallet is a good idea.

To further address that concern, however, we should ponder what details you fear you may misstate. The fact that you were attacked? The fact that you felt your life was in danger? The fact that witnesses saw what happened? The fact that, having stated these few points, you now want your attorney, before giving a formal statement?

So what should you say? Some have recommended a one-size-fits all statement of, “Officer I was in fear for my life, so I shot. I want my lawyer present before I answer any further questions.” But as you know, one size does not fit all, and neither does one uniform statement to the police—or no statement at all—work effectively in all cases. Let me explain.

First, after an incident occurs, you have no idea when your attorney will arrive. Unless you happen to have an attorney who is a family member living nearby, or you somehow know the whereabouts of your attorney at all times and you know that he or she can show up at a moment’s notice, you may wait many hours, or even a day before your attorney is at your side. So, off you go to the jail in the back of the police car, to await the arrival of your attorney.

This time gap creates a huge problem when you have invoked your Miranda rights and told police you would not talk to them without an attorney present. Why? Because, as we discussed in my previous blog post, absent justification, shooting someone fulfills the elements of the crime of assault or murder, depending on what happened. With the elements of the crime satisfied, you will be arrested, and once arrested, you will be booked into jail. The eventual charges depend on whether the person lives or dies. Of course, the titles of the crimes vary from state to state, so for the purposes of this discussion, let’s limit the possibilities to aggravated assault or murder. For this example, let’s imagine you were out in public when you were forced to use deadly force in self-defense.

Now, put yourself in the role of the responding officers who received the “shots fired-man down” call. Arriving on the scene, the police know a crime has just been committed, because it is illegal to shoot someone without justification. They know it is their duty to arrest people committing crimes, and in fact, they get lots of “atta-boys” when they make good arrests, so they are likely going to arrest someone if they can. They have two potential candidates for arrest in this scenario: either the shooter (you), or the guy on the ground, who might have been committing a crime against you.

Once police make that arrest, they shift all their attention to proving that their arrest was a valid arrest. This means investigating the assault or murder of which you now stand accused, and not the underlying crime about which they have little or no knowledge. If this occurs, you are in for a long trip through the legal system.

“But wait!” you cry. “I’m innocent!” Yeah, I know you are innocent, you know you are innocent, and even God knows you are innocent, but at that critical juncture, no one has told the cops that you are innocent, and they had no information to make them believe you’re not just another guilty suspect. Why? Because, you—perhaps the only truly credible witness who is still alive—handed them a card indicating that you would not talk to them.

The one person who knew that a crime was being committed against you refused to talk to the cops! By immediately invoking your Miranda rights, you have just earned a trip to jail, and prosecution for assault or murder.

http://www.gundigest.com/concealed-carry-news/concealed-carry-right-remain-silent-part-2

Concealed Carry and the Right to Remain Silent – Part 1

Copyright: bikeriderlondon

When it comes to concealed carry, remaining completely silent following a defensive gun use may not be the wisest option.

It is common advice among lawyers and judges that when first confronted by the police after a self-defense shooting, you should say nothing. That’s because anything you say “can and will be used against you” in a court of law. That is true, of course. But the fact of the matter is, if you are tried for an alleged criminal act associated with your use of deadly force in self-defense, you are likely going to have to testify in court anyway.

I know, you don’t have a legal requirement to testify, and most if not all criminal defense attorneys would advise against a criminal defendant testifying. But here is the rub: The vast majority of criminal defendants are guilty of a crime, and if they testify, it simply gives the prosecution the opportunity to elicit more information about their criminal act.

In addition, if the attorney reasonably suspects that the defendant did in fact commit the crime, he must not put the defendant on the stand and solicit lies. It is called suborning perjury and that is a crime in itself. So, in the typical criminal case, the defendant remains silent (as is his right) and the prosecution must prove that he is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. It is the defense attorney’s job to poke holes in the prosecution’s case until the jury has too many doubts to convict. But the roles are reversed in a self-defense case. Let me explain.

Whenever one person shoots another, they have fulfilled the elements of the crime of either murder or assault, depending on whether the person lives or dies. When the police show up, they have “Criminal Law 101” which they learned in the police academy running through their heads. They look at the dead body with holes in it and they look at you holding a gun. They add up these factors and “murder” flashes up on the mental screen. I once asked a police academy instructor what they are teaching recruits about the armed citizen and self-defense law, and he said, “Nothing!”

At this time, there is only one way you may avoid going to jail. That way is to convince the police that there are extenuating circumstances that negate their conclusion of “murder.” But if they don’t know about those extenuating circumstances, you will be arrested. And once arrested, you will remain in jail until you can make bail, or a kind and friendly judge decides to release you. In many jurisdictions, you will be arrested anyway because you fulfilled the legal elements of the crime of murder or attempted murder, regardless of any mitigating circumstances.

The crime of murder encompasses the intentional killing of another human being. Only a defense to that crime will allow the shooter to walk free. If the cops have no information that you acted in legitimate self-defense, you are sure to be arrested.

And, if that isn’t bad enough, in court, when you are on trial for murder and your defense is that you acted in self-defense, you have to admit to the elements of the crime in order to invoke self-defense. In opening arguments, your attorney will tell the jury that you killed that man. All the prosecution has to prove is that you did not kill him in self-defense. If you don’t put on a legitimate case, the jury doesn’t have any choice but to convict you of murder. The burden has shifted to you to prove your act was a legitimate self-defense. How do you do this?

First, don’t act like a guilty man or woman. When the first words out of your mouth are, “I want my lawyer,” you have done a surprisingly good imitation of a street-wise criminal who has some experience in these situations. What is any self-respecting cop supposed to think? Dead body + gun + “I want my lawyer” = murder.

If, on the other hand, the officer hears, “My life was threatened, I had to shoot,” he forms a slightly different conclusion. In addition, if he first learned of the incident through a call you made to 9-1-1, in which you indicated that you were the victim of a robbery (or whatever crime caused you to believe your life was in danger) then he forms a different picture of the call before he even gets there.

If, instead, all he hears is: “Shooting occurred, suspect is still on the scene and armed,” called in by a witness, then you will be perceived immediately as a dangerous, nasty character needing to be dealt with aggressively.

You need to be the reporting party, if it is possible for you to do that safely. Win the race to the phone. Most criminal prosecutions start by playing a 9-1-1 dispatch tape, to set the mood for the jury. In your case, if you report the crime first, the jury gets to hear you telling dispatch, in your own words, that you were just attacked and had to defend yourself.

The 9-1-1 Call

Also check out, Deadly Force: Understanding Your Right to Self Defense. This guide, by Massad Ayoob, will help you understand the legal and ethical issues concerning the use of lethal force by armed citizens.

There is another flaw in the advice to never speak to the police. After you are in a self-defense situation, who is going to call the police? Sure, an onlooker who heard the shots or saw the action, may call 9-1-1, but you can’t count on that. No, to best protect yourself, you are going to have to be the one to call the police. Your call is necessary if you want any hope that the legal system will view your act of shooting or killing another person as justified. If you believe you cannot effectively tell the responding officer that you felt your life was in danger, how on earth can you expect to call 9-1-1 and effectively report the same situation?

I can see it now.

Dispatcher: “9-1-1, what is your emergency?”

You: “Ahh, I would rather not say, but I really need the police.”

Dispatcher: “Sir, we are rather busy here at the moment, unless you are reporting a crime in progress, or some other emergency, I am going to hang up.”

You: “Wait. Don’t hang up. Someone has been sho.. er, injured.”

Dispatcher: “What is the nature of the injury?”

You: “He has a hole in his chest, and he is bleeding a lot.”

Dispatcher: “Okay, sir, how did he get the hole in his chest?”

You: “I would rather not say. In fact, could you do me a favor and call my attorney for me?”

Laughable? Sure, but you get the idea. Here is the deal: Society, made up of the very same folks who will be on your jury, expects other members of society to tell the truth to the police, to be good witnesses to crimes in progress, and to help out other members of society when possible. Your actions will be judged against those expectations, and to the standard of a reasonable and prudent person, knowing what you knew, and standing in your shoes. If you don’t believe me, ask any attorney.

Do you think the members of the jury will find it a little odd that instead of telling the police that you shot the guy who was attacking you, you whip out your 5th Amendment Rights “sure to go to jail” wallet card and hand it to the first police officer who asks, “What happened here?” Do you think that the members of the jury would have done the same thing under the same circumstances, or do you think perhaps they might simply tell the police that they were attacked and that man on the ground attacked them?

http://www.gundigest.com/concealed-carry-news/concealed-carry-right-remain-silent-part-1

Do you correct negligent gun handling on others?

If You See Negligent Gun Handling, You Say Something. Right?

Negligence has no place when handling firearms. Zero. Period. No room for error, and no place for stupid people.

Let’s say you’re at the range and you see some negligence going on. Say the person in the lane next to you is flagging others left and right (for those unfamiliar with the term ‘flagging’, it simply means pointing the barrel of your firearm at someone, even if it was unintentional). Would you say something?

If you didn’t, would you feel bad if that person negligently shot someone one day?

A man in North Carolina was disassembling his firearm just this afternoon when it went off and struck his brother. We’ll assume the firearm didn’t go off on it’s own (and even if it did, the owner still didn’t clear it prior to dis-assembly). One simple action would have prevented this, and that’s a safety check of the firearm.

Ultimately, it’s up to each gun owner to show responsibility and common sense while handling their firearms. After all, if they need to be babysat… they shouldn’t have a firearm in the first place. Anyone crying 2nd Amendment infringement right now isn’t going to get far with me in an argument. Simply put; there are people out there –legal and law-abiding citizens– who don’t possess the brain power to own a gun. Period.

So unless they figure their negligence out on their own, it’s up to the people around them to point out their negligence when it happens. Right?

http://concealednation.org/2015/09/if-you-see-negligent-gun-handling-you-say-something-right/

Firearm training techniques

Idiotic Arguments: Stop trying to be right & start training technique options!

Preparation is an important part of being ready to fight, and training is part and parcel of preparation. Information is critical for preparation, and arguing over stupid shit doesn’t help! What shit, you ask? They can be many in the firearms training realm, but it’s generally those subjects that pop up every so often that serve no purpose other than to confuse people or sell magazines. Most are silly, but “experts” (ex= a has been, spurt= something you do in your undershorts) argue them continually, even if they inhibit preparation and training. For many, the need to be right overrides everything, and these people will argue forever, regardless of whether anything is being accomplished.  

What I’m going to do here is take a look at a couple of these idiotic topics in hopes that we can begin to understand that such bickering solves nothing other than make some internet troll feel good about his sad and useless life. In doing so, those who are looking for a path to preparation can move forward. Critical thought will get most people past these silly debates, but some will still want to argue in an effort to raise their profile. Remember, “common sense” is poorly titled in this day and age. Sense is not common in the age of the internet…

Handgun Stopping Power

 I wrote my master’s thesis on the topic of handgun stopping power, and it proved to be a mistake. I thought I could collect shooting data from across the country, and then come to a definitive conclusion. After all, part of a thesis is to defend a research conclusion. But how do you do that when nothing seems to come together? The agencies I contacted were good at supplying data, and I actively collect shooting data until my retirement from LE. However, for every good result I collected, I also get a failure, making it hard to come to a conclusion regardless of caliber. 

There are two types of incapacitation: physical and psychological. Psychological incapacitation is impossible to measure, as some people will stop with a round through the finger. Others will fight through multiple 5.56 rounds to the chest. Physical incapacitation is usually explained as violating vital organs or leaking as much blood as possible, which can certainly kill, but they don’t necessarily stop instantly. So where does this leave us?

In the laboratory we look at wound patterns in ballistic gelatin—an apples to apples comparison of potential wounding effectiveness. But gelatin isn’t human tissue. Humans aren’t a consistent, homogenous substance. Let’s disregard this and look at wound volume for each caliber. You’ll see that wound volume of the best .45 is 15–20% larger than the best 9 mm. Thus, it’s safe to say that a bigger bullet is a better bullet.

Now for the bad news… that 15–20% is not enough to make up for poor shot placement, so we still have to hit something important for our handgun round to be deemed effective. The heart and aorta are about the size of a 3 x 5 card as is the vital areas in the head. Both are protected by bone. Multiple hits to such a small target are difficult under the pandemonium of a gunfight. Thus, we must take into account the probability of a missed shot. The best hollow point round available will be useless if it impacts the wall next to our attacker. Hits are critical. If a miss happens, we must be able to get back on target quickly for a fast follow-up shot.  Try this drill…run into position quickly, plant and draw and fire multiple hits to a 3 x 5 card and then instantly move again.  Take no more than a few seconds to do this…how did you do? 

In truth, we should select the  largest caliber handgun that we can control under-rapid fire, given the level of training and practice time we have available under the weather conditions and environment we’re likely to face. Once you’ve determined this, practice until you’re confident in your skill. Cute, easy to carry guns will make this more difficult so choose wisely. 

Isosceles vs. Weaver

 What we are arguing here? The Weaver stance, as currently taught, is squarer to the target than in the past. Most realize that, in a fight, you’ll face your attacker, so the strongly bladed position is gone. Because we all know recoil is best controlled by leaning the upper body into the gun, all that’s being argued is whether the support arm should be bent. Doing so pulls the shooting arm back into the body like a rifle stock. The Isosceles, on the other hand, pushes the gun forward like stabbing with a spear. Both control the recoil and are good enough for fighting distances, so who cares? Many people, actually, but is it important? Some argue that, in actual combat, shooters will naturally straighten their arms, but I’ve seen plenty of dash-cam gunfights in which officers have a bent support arm. So what’s the big deal?  

The truth: You’ll do in a fight what you’ve trained yourself to accomplish, provided you’ve had more than minimal training. Past studies have shown that minimally trained police officers (40 hours in the basic academy and one to three qualifications a year with no practice in between) will square to the target, thrust their pistol forward and smash the trigger with their index finger hoping for a good hit. 

What about practiced shooters? I’ve trained thousands of basic police recruits and some shoot better with the Weaver, others the Isosceles. I let them discover what works best for them. The only thing I insist is that they lock their shooting arm. Why? It’s consistent with what they’ll do when shooting with one hand, which happens more often than many realize and certainly lets the air out of the argument regarding the support arm. We must prepare officers to fight, not just shoot, because they probably won’t have the optimal shooting platform.

When using the Isosceles the locked support wrist is really where recoil is controlled…this is why the support hand thumb is forward. When shooting a Weaver, the support hand thumb is usually up which is oh as this also locks the wrist. Look at your thumb and wrist on the gun when the arm is straight, then bend the elbow DOWN (not out) and note how the wrist stays locked while pointing the thumb up. Both control recoil it’s just the Weaver transfers the mechanics from the wrist to the elbow to apply pressure to the front strap. Both work…

Digital Dexterity

 It’s a proven fact that fingers don’t possess the same level of dexterity in combat as they do when not stressed, but how “dumb” do they become? This seems to depend on what a given instructor wants his doctrine to include. I attended a school where the instructor told us we needed to grasp the slide on our pistols and manually cycle it to load, as we wouldn’t have the digital dexterity to use the slide stop lever in a fight. I can understand the argument. However, during a carbine course I attended, this same instructor told the class to reload their AR-15s by inserting the magazine, rolling the thumb up and hitting the bolt-release lever. I saw this as a discrepancy and when I asked, I was told that, “The size of the slide release on a pistol varies, but the bolt release on an AR will always be the same.” I then inquired about the dexterity needed to press a trigger, hit the magazine release button and insert a magazine into a pistol. I was told, “Proper training will prepare you to accomplish these tasks without conscious thought.” Does this make sense to you? You can hit a magazine release button without conscious thought, but not a slide release lever?

I showed him that the slide release on my pistol was substantial. (The size of the lever is certainly a factor. For example, the stock slide lock lever on a Glock would be hard to manipulate.) He responded, “You can’t be assured that you will be using your gun. You might have to pick up a gun in the middle of a fight.” But isn’t it far more likely that I’ll start and finish my fight with the gun I have on me or in my hand? “You never know,” he said, which is true, but is it likely? Should we spend our valuable training time on possible or likely? Fantasy gunfighting is all the rage (gotta love that CALL OF DUTY!) and an argument can be made for even the most- silly conclusions. Once again, common sense is rare and critical thought should be applied to which techniques you are going to spend your valuable time anchoring.  To me, the most simple techniques…the ones that require the least movement…are the ones I will focus on. 

Efficiency Defined

 During a recent conversation with a well-known instructor, I was told “Just because something is faster doesn’t mean it’s more efficient.” Efficiency seems to be one of the new buzzwords in firearms training, but the meaning seems to change from school to school. The word efficient is defined in Webster’s Dictionary as the least amount of time, effort and energy expended to accomplish the desired goal. To me, this means if something is faster and still accomplishes the task, then it’s more efficient.  Truth be told, in pistol fighting, speed is usually a result of lack of unnecessary movement/motion so if something is faster there is a REAL GOOD chance it is more efficient. 

On this occasion, I was taking a pistol class and was clearing malfunctions by turning the pistol sideways into my left hand (inverting the ejection port down so gravity would help clear the chamber). This allows me to grasp the slide with the heel of my hand, thumb, index and middle fingers much like grasping a rope which I believe is stronger than the ring and pinky fingers. The instructor stopped me, told me I was doing it wrong and that I should reach up and over the slide and “power stroke” it to the rear, hitting myself in the chest to ensure complete slide retraction. I have no heartburn with this technique, if you like it, but I don’t find it to be efficient as the hands are too far apart in the end. I believe my method is stronger, faster and it works with pistols of any size.

When using small guns, if you work the slide in the hand-over method, your hand covers the ejection port (something that happens with full size pistols as well), creating a stoppage or you’ll have a minimal ring/pinky finger grip on the slide. Thus, turning the gun inboard works with guns of all sizes, making it more consistent and efficient due to its increased grip potential, lack of unnecessary motion and overall speed of task, though you have the right to believe what you want in this great country or ours! 

In Sum

Remember: It’s more important for a shooter to complete a given task with ease than it is for them to get all wrapped up in how it’s accomplished. Not all shooters have the same level of strength and skill, and we need to take that into account. In addition, many shooters want to save their lives and not just look cool while shooting. 

Doctrine, not dogma, should be the rule of thumb in the combative application of firearms. Train someone to prevail by giving them technique options and finding what works best for their physiology instead of trying to prove who’s right.  Training is a journey of discovery everyone must take and it is unlikely we will all arrive at the end point with the same skill sets or techniques.

http://handguncombatives.blogspot.com/2015/08/idiotic-arguments-stop-trying-to-be.html?m=1&utm_content=buffer33f8a&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer