From a different site and I felt it was important enough to repost it here:
http://www.shtfmilitia.com/viewtopic.php?p=11276#11276
Quote:
In the early eighties, a young police officer named Dennis Teuller wrote an article for Chuck Taylor's Magazine titled "How Close is Too Close?". In the ground breaking article, Officer Teuller compared the time frames in which an adequately trained officer could draw and fire an accurate shot, and the time frame in which an able-bodied man armed with a contact weapon could cross a seven yard distance. The time was remarkably similar - 1.5 seconds for each.
The distance of seven yards was chosen, incidentally, because this was the 'average' distance between combatants in an urban gunfight. Of special note is the word 'average'. The stats came from the FBI's Uniform Crime Report. In this report, over 85% of those confrontations under 7 yards were more like 5 to 10 feet - well within the 21 feet in Teuller's test. In any case, Teuller determined that, in the best case, the attacker would connect just as the first shot broke. Those of us who've been in combat know that a Tie in such a situation is no different from losing.
Teuller suggested maintaining a distance greater than 7 yards. To his credit, the study was intended for questionable individuals of potential threat and not for the every day contact of those labeled as 'low-key' or 'unknown risk'. Keeping your distance from a likely threat is a fine idea and God knows how many lives Teuller saved with his study.
The main problem is that while the concept of 'keeping your distance' is a tactically sound one, it is difficult to apply in every day, unknown risk situations. Who can, for example, simply talk to someone from 7 yards away?
Practicality demands getting a lot closer. Proximity creates its own problems, however. As you close in, your reaction time increases because everything can happen faster. Keeping in mind that 85% of these events occur at 5 to 10 feet, it is likely that if all one has to fall back to is to draw and shoot, the adversary will kill you before your hand ever touches your pistol.
Listen carefully: An artificially created mechanical target mover that charges you will not give you the visual and dynamic input necessary to train correctly for this situation.
Solutions? Increase your adversary's reaction time by changing his perception of things when things start to happen. In simple terms, you'd better move out of the way. Lateral or diagonal movement will increase your chances of evading his attack as you launch your own attack on him. The ability to integrate footwork from certain field sports and martial arts disciplines will make your survivability even better. But that is not all. As things get close, the integration of hand to hand combat and shooting becomes very important.
Body to body contact requires moving laterally while blocking, redirecting, or striking the adversary. While all this is going on, you would also be drawing your pistol and firing as it begins to extend forward toward the adversary. The only viable solution in this interval requires this integration of force.
As distance is increased from arm's length to a couple of steps beyond (10 to 15 feet) the need to actually touch your opponent with your hands may be limited, but it must remain as a viable option, in addition to moving laterally. Even at extended distances (anything beyond 7 yards) you should move, either aggressing the threat, moving to cover, or into a better defensive position. Very rarely will it be desirable to just stand still.
Getting back to the 5 to 10 foot interval, picture an 'X' on the floor in front of you. Your initial steps will be along the legs of that 'X'. Think of 10:00 and 4:00, and also 2:00 and 8:00.
To really get the feel of how this works, forget about using a timer to move within 1.5 seconds or anything like that. Time is only relevant to the speed of your opponent. Ideally, you would be able to use Simmunitions, but there may be liability issues. That stuff is also quite expensive. A good training alternative, if you can manage to stay serious about it, is to use your kid's water pistol.
Here is the set up. Draw out a large man-sized 'X' on the deck and stand on top of it. Get comfortable moving, with speed and balance, toward each direction of the leg of the 'X' (2:00 - 4:00 - 8:00 - 10:00). Next, place an adversary with a simulated contact weapon in front of you at an appropriate distance. I would suggest starting out at 10 feet and decreasing the distance as your speed and ability increases. Holster your water blaster and stand by.
The adversary initiates the action by attacking. Your job is to react, moving and evading, blocking or redirecting his attack as needed, while bringing out your little plastic water gun and, well, hosing him down with it.
Stop the action immediately and evaluate. Did you get hit? Did he? Were you able to move in time? This is what reactive CQB is all about. The Teuller Drill is an excellent beginning into the study of intervals and reaction time. But it is only a beginning, and a presentation of a concept. It is up to each operator to test himself at the more likely closer intervals well within Teuller's 21 feet. Start thinking, moving, integrating, and evolving. When you are presented with the once-in-a-lifetime moment of truth, you will realize that it was definitely time well-spent.
Gabriel Suarez
Suarez International USA
303 E. Gurley St., Ste. 461 - Prescott, AZ 86301 USA
(Office) 928-776-4492 - (Fax) 928-776-8218
|
MY RESPONSE:
S,
I like Gabe's articles and though I've never attended his school, his stat's are a little misleading.
THE ACTUAL AVERAGE distance between two protaganists in a gun fight is SEVEN FT. Not seven yards. The AVERAGE number of rounds fired is three.
THAT IS FROM THE Justice department stats.
And if you allow a criminal to get within 21 feet of you, then YOU aren't doing your job.
I've carried weapons on and off for more than thirty years. AT NO TIME did I allow a confrontation to occur at a distance of 21 feet, UNLESS I WAS ALREADY IN CONTROL OF THE SITUATION. That means my gun was already out (perhaps at my side) and I WAS ready to kill the individual in question. It's only occured four times. And in EACH INSTANCE, just showing the weapon resolved the situation immediately.
If it had not, there would have been a dead body on the floor and it would NOT have been mine. If you can't judge people (yes, even criminals) and KNOW what to expect, the you will be just another victim.
That's ONE AREA that NO firearms course that I have taken addresses. How to 'judge' your situation or the person in front of you BEFORE it becomes NECESSARY to use a weapon. If in doubt, 'HAVE IT OUT' has always been my rule. You don't have to 'flash it'. But that 2.5 second delay CAN get you killed.
That means you don't go down a dark alley unnecessarily. You don't walk next to bushes when you are at an area you don't know. Come on folks. Wake up.
It's all about recognition. If you can't recognize that you are in a bad situation, in my estimation, you're already behind the eight ball.
I've probably lived in Condition Yellow for more than 30 years. I sleep with multiple firearms next to my bed. Up to and including an AK pistol, which is the first weapon I grab when I search for 'unusual noises' that wake either myself, my wife or one of our five dogs up at night.
And I don't use a light. My night vision, while not the best, is pretty good. And I have one advantage at night over BG's. I KNOW the lay out of our house. They don't. And if they are stupid enough to enter a home with five LARGE dogs barking...
Well, lets just say that my guys need to eat meat just as much as anyone else does. Fortunately, that's never happened. YET.
And NO, I don't dial 911. Cops only obfuscate matters. And are NOT helpful, regardless of what anyone else thinks or says.
I should know, I've got several as friends and in my gunsmithing business (I'm retired now) they were almost two thirds of my business. They are all great guys. But the laws they are required to enforce are written AGAINST the legitimate gun owner. That would be you and me.
