Open VS Concealed Carry, Hoss USMC and James Yeager

[video=youtube;HWKmfgtNlfQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWKmfgtNlfQ&feature=channel&list=UL[/video]

Seriously, what is the "tactical surprise" CC proponents always talk about? I don't care about tactics, I just want to go home at night.

Going home at night is the main concern for Yeager too. So he runs away from fights, even ones he needs to be in. He left his team to bleed to death so he could go hide in a ditch (google it).

After all the facts were in there was nothing he could have done to help anything, but he didn't know that when he went hiding. I don't know if I would have reacted any differently, but I wouldn't make some of the claims he does if I reacted similar.

Yeager, like many others, makes a living by signing off that folks sucessfully completed the course needed in order to get a permit. That means he has a vested interest in promoting CC.

As for the rest of his personal history, I have no knowledge or interst since I see no possibility of me wanting to take a course he offers.

stay safe.

09jisaac said:

Going home at night is the main concern for Yeager too. So he runs away from fights, even ones he needs to be in. He left his team to bleed to death so he could go hide in a ditch (google it).

After all the facts were in there was nothing he could have done to help anything, but he didn't know that when he went hiding. I don't know if I would have reacted any differently, but I wouldn't make some of the claims he does if I reacted similar.

Click to expand...

I just finished reading the After Action Report on the April 20[SUP]th[/SUP], 2005 incident to which you refer. Based upon what I read, your judgement of his behavior during this GPMG assault - with AP ammo - seems a bit severe. According to the AAR, Yeager was assigned as the driver of "a soft-skinned BMW Sedan", which is taken to mean a standard aluminum bodied vehicle with no armor. They were taken by surprise, with heavy, well-aimed automatic weapons fire - and aluminum provides zero protection against AP projectiles. Yeager attempted to suppress enemy fire from the rear of his vehicle, but could not locate exactly where it was coming from, so he fired into the general area, prior to diving for the nearest cover he could find. After somewhere in the amount of 200+ aggregate rounds of returned 5.56 fire into a white suburban by his team, with no effect, it was determined the enemy vehicle was armored. The entire incident lasted no more than 70 seconds, and the white suburban drove away. I don't see where he did anything wrong given the circumstances. His vehicle provided nothing more than concealment - he may as well have been behind a cardboard box. It's much easier to find fault when one isn't hampered by the fog of war, and heavy MG fire. Pax...

Ya know - I really don't care one way or another what happened over in the sandbox when it comes to chosing a training instructor. I care about what and how they train today - as in it is just within the realm of probability that if they did not perform well in the past they just might have learned from that experience/episode and are now on the good side.

Drill Instructors at Boot Camp yelled and scremed and tore recruits down so they could be rebuilt according to the plan specs. There should be no need to do that, or to intentionally place anybody within a danger zone, when conducting self defense training. If you want to get and maintain my attention (as opposed to making me stop my train of thought to consider what kind of jackass you might be) unleashing a string of profanity-laced threats at me is not the way to go about it. If there is a need for the student to eperience and deal with the adenaline-fueled panic of being in a firefight force-on-force with simunitions or airsoft can come as close as needed without risking putting an additional opening in anybody.

As for the "tactical advantage" offered by CC - if it were possible to collect data showing that one way or the other actually makes a difference I would be willing to consider the issue. In the meantime I take the personal preference thing one step farther than many (most?) folks - cops, officers in tin-pot armies and I all wear a pistol openly as a sign of authority. The cop wears his where folks can see it to remind them he can enforce the law with everything up to and including deadly force. Tin-pot army officers wear pistols where they can be seen as a symbol of their authority to tell other people what to do.* I wear mine openly to declare my authority to defend myself against assaults by those who would otherwise want to harm me. It's all advertising.

stay safe.

* I never could figure out tin-pot army officers - they go around yelling and kicking a bunch of folks who each have a rifle and cartridges. Takes guts or a lack of thinking - not sure which.

Gill, Did you even read what I wrote?

09jisaac said:

After all the facts were in there was nothing he could have done to help anything, but he didn't know that when he went hiding..

Click to expand...

After all was the information was in Yeager couln't have saved the man bleeding out in his car, and he couldn't have successfully assaulted the armored SUV, but he didn't know any of that when he took to finding a place to hide.

The only things he knew when he knew before he went running was that his co-worker had a servere wound in a car that offered know protection, the car wouln't move itself and he and his people were getting fired at by a machinegun.

We've heard it all before, OC makes you a target, CC is better, blah blah blah. Yeager has some good info to pull from his vids, but like anything else, don't take everything he says to heart. Don't take everything anybody says to heart right off the bat. After all, it's an opinion....and you know the old saying....opinions are like a**holes, everybody has one. Take what's useful to you and discard the rest. And I have to agree with the vested interest part....a man selling CC courses isn't going to promote something that cuts into his bottom line. Figure out the money aspect, and that usually leads you right to the truth of the matter....in almost any situation.

09jisaac said:

Gill, Did you even read what I wrote?



After all was the information was in Yeager couln't have saved the man bleeding out in his car, and he couldn't have successfully assaulted the armored SUV, but he didn't know any of that when he took to finding a place to hide.

The only things he knew when he knew before he went running was that his co-worker had a servere wound in a car that offered know protection, the car wouln't move itself and he and his people were getting fired at by a machinegun.

Click to expand...

Objectively, it's called COVER, not "a place to hide". Could one reasonably expect him to stay with the aluminum foil car, rather than seek cover and possible safety? It's not his fault that nobody else took cover. It wasn't a Hollywood film, and John Wayne was nowhere to be found - not all men are meant to be "heroes". Dead folks can't protect anybody, and cover helps to keep one alive to fight another day. I'm not saying his actions were perfect, but he made the best choice he could for him to survive that encounter... and he was not faulted by his superiors. Remember, the entire thing - including the Suburban's departure - was over in no more than 67 seconds. Pax...