- An online friend of many years - who himself has an extensive background in military special operations - mentioned a
concept that he'd been taught by a well respected instructor: Make sure that the first threat is completely out of
action - even if it means emptying an entire magazine - before turning your attention to the next threat.
- This ran counter to what I have been advocating and teaching - to place a round into each threat, then return to place
more rounds in any threat that remains active. I guessed correctly who the instructor had been - someone who'd be high
on my training agenda if I were planning on placing myself in harm's way, armed with an AR-type rifle or carbine.
I commented that I'd been surprised to see a video clip of one of that instructor's close-quarters drills in which he
had the student stand in one place, rapidly dumping several rounds into a single target. I'd have been training the
student to "get off the X," then shoot and scoot - shifting location as rapidly as possible, while still scoring hits.
- My friend replied that the instructor's background was training some of the heaviest hitters in the US military and that
those guys often do entry work in which each has a designated lane of fire. For them, moving laterally would likely place
them in a teammate's line of fire and that they can normally rely on a teammate to address threats in another lane of
fire. I certainly grasped why the drill I had viewed made sense, in that context.
- Realtors say that the three most important criteria are location, location and location. When you evaluate prospective
or past training, look at both techniques and tactics in context, context and context. Something that makes great sense
in the context of a highly trained team operation may not be a wise choice when you are operating on your own. By the
same token, something that makes sense for a sole operator may not be a wise choice when you operate in tandem with a