Discussion in 'General Self Defense' started by Bill Mattocks, Jun 19, 2017.
Yeah just shooting isn't hard to teach but when you start putting the tactics in with it is where it gets complicated and takes a lot of training.
Recognizing inward/outward opening doors, open door vs closed door, cutting the pie, etc... all while reading the layout of a structure as you move thru it and knowing the correct tactics to clear it is what takes time.
Add in tactical reloads, transition between rifle and pistol and clearing malfunctions under high stress also takes time.
I just re-read the post in question and it still does not seem to be specific to only that attack in Britain but, instead, your use of the word "similar" and repeated comparisons to the U.S. seem to imply a much more generic and general application.
Bollocks, you haven't read what I said have you, I never said there was a preference for suicide bombs read it again.
Nowhere did I say there was a preference, I said I would 'suggest' so you are wrong. it was a suggestion which you could have agreed with or disagreed with however it was not a statement so no I'm not wrong. You are on your high horse misunderstanding what I right just for an argument.
Yes. But still less time and direct instruction than is typically required to gain a green belt.
You should know by now that I never imply I say what I think, to imply leaves it open for people to make their own interpretation and they are invariably wrong as yours is.
Apparently you didn't read it either. You specifically wrote, and I quote, "I would suggest however that in the USA knowing that all police are armed as well as many civilians, the situation would be changed. There wouldn't be any attacks with knives or guns but a straightforward suicide bomb."
I was being nice. What you wrote was "there wouldn't be any."
You're kidding me, right? I don't see how any reasonable reading of that could possible be interpreted that way.
Which is why I quoted you post: "I would suggest however that in the USA knowing that all police are armed as well as many civilians, the situation would be changed. There wouldn't be any attacks with knives or guns but a straightforward suicide bomb."
Whatever. We've had these discussions before, like the last time you wilfully insisted I was handing out belts without grading the students. I'm not continuing with this as I have better things to do.
If you want to be an expert in all things policing in the UK fine, if you want to be the expert in all things fine. Just stop skewing what I write to fit what you want to write. You have deliberately misunderstood just the same as you usually do, only this time it's not carrying on over various threads and various arguments. It finishes here. I'm not taking this in the way you mean it to be taken, personally, so wind your neck in and carry on pontificating about someone else's words. I'm off to have my dinner.
Disagree it takes a lot of training to be able to operate smoothly in high pressure circumstances.
You can show guys exactly how to clear a building and then put them under stress with simmunitions firing back at them and it is nothing how you showed them.
Takes a lot of training to get on the same page to where you can work thru a building and clear it properly.
Well that escalated quickly.
Which, first, wasn't what I wrote and, second, irrelevant to this.
Nice straw man you got there.
Define "a lot."
Yes, it requires training and practice. How much is the current question.
How did we move from making reliable head shots at combat pistol distances under stress to team building clearing?
It happened when I wrote that 8 minutes is a horrifyingly long time for the victims and Tez seemed to believe that I was challenging all of Britain to a duel.
100s of hours
I was pointing out that the training involved to be part of a specialized unit that responds to active shooters is probably more than just green belt level. It's more than just being able to shoot a target.
Why don't we all have a Fresca?
Working as part of a unit requires a lot more training and effort, I agree. But accurate shooting of a dynamic target under stress doesn't require hundreds of hours. OTOH, being part of a team that does that as one unit, I agree, does.
Being able to shoot someone may well be as easy as you say, but knowing when and who to shoot in a chaotic situation is another issue. Is it true that US police officers are issued a gun as soon as they graduate from the academy? (as little as 20 weeks training?) When you consider that in the UK, in order to even apply for an armed officer position you have to have been a regular PC for 2 years, it's quite a large difference.
Yes if you pass the standards required to carry them.
But we have a culture where we are comfortable with guns and are experienced with them than ya'll are.
Prior to becoming a LEO, I had been handling firearms since I was 10 years old.
8 minutes is a horrifyingly long time if you are armed as well though.
Holding off terrorists on your own with a pistol is a big ask.123
Separate names with a comma.