Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 26

Thread: Want to shoot as well as a SWAT cop?...

  1. #1
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,350

    Post imported post

    So I'm sitting here reading through threads on the forum, and the google ad bar up top has something interesting. It's an add for Front Sight training, and it asks the question "Want to get as good with your guns asa SWAT Cop or Navy SEAL?". I don't usually speak to my computer, but I couldn't help but quickly shout "NO!". That'd be as scary as forgetting how to shave! I can't imagine what it'd be like to be so bad at shooting that I couldn't hit 3 man-sized targets in a small room with an AR-15. I hope Front Sight doesn't really suck the talent out of you like that..





  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Mag-bayonettes!, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,407

    Post imported post

    SWAT friends I've shot with were all marksmen (well at least competent shooters), and I dunno about SEALS, but aren't they hardcore as well? Maybe you were directing it towards Frontsite? The $200 coupon dealie guys?

    Speaking of ads, and sorry to say it because I like this site and would love to occasionally click an ad, but I use Opera so I don't see ads anywhere on any site. There are free plugins for Mozilla as well, and this guy has a list which takes care of any major ad network:
    http://www.fanboy.co.nz/adblock/

    Pages load about 2x quicker, and there's never a "You've won a free iPod nano!" blaring from my speakers.
    -Unrequited

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    PLUS ONE

    It's merely more marketeeering to separate the sheeple-dogs from their money and the rest of the sheeple.

    Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth. NRA *******

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Lynnwood, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,487

    Post imported post

    I wish I had a police-like wizardry over my handgun. My targets would last a lot longer.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Johnny Law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Puget Sound, ,
    Posts
    462

    Post imported post

    expvideo wrote:
    I wish I had a police-like wizardry over my handgun. My targets would last a lot longer.
    A little generalized cop-bashing? I take a lot of pride in my shooting abilities and am qualified as master. Besides general pistol and rifle quals there is night fire (complete darkness) ipsc style drills, cqb, extreme cqb, "fun house", running man, fats,and general combat training during every visit to the range. Also we have active shooter training inside a large complicated multi-story building. Many of the courses of fire do not allow even a single miss.

    Our Officers are all trained to SWAT standards by the SWAT team, and arecompetent in shield use, forming "hasty"teams on the spot, and performing entries.

    Please don't generalize that cops can't shoot well, as I can assure you that the vast majority are highly skilled.
    If you have to fight, do not fear death. We will all die one day, so fight skillfully and bravely! And if it is to be that you die, then at least go to God proudly. Meet him as the proud warrior that you are, and not as a sniveling coward. Nobody lives forever.

  6. #6
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Olympia, WA, ,
    Posts
    3,201

    Post imported post

    Johnny Law wrote:
    A little generalized cop-bashing? I take a lot of pride in my shooting abilities and am qualified as master. Besides general pistol and rifle quals there is night fire (complete darkness) ipsc style drills, cqb, extreme cqb, "fun house", running man, fats,and general combat training during every visit to the range. Also we have active shooter training inside a large complicated multi-story building. Many of the courses of fire do not allow even a single miss.

    Our Officers are all trained to SWAT standards by the SWAT team, and arecompetent in shield use, forming "hasty"teams on the spot, and performing entries.

    Please don't generalize that cops can't shoot well, as I can assure you that the vast majority are highly skilled.
    It's only the cops who miss that get lots of coverage. Although I am reminded of a case in San Diego where several officers shot a guy 30-40 times. Seems one fired, another fired, then another, and like the Energizer Bunny they just kept going and going....

    I would imagine most cops are fairly well trained when time, budget and personal interest allows. I met a cop in Texas who hated having to wear a gun. I can just imagine how well he shot. I met a cop in Colorado who was a gun collector and hunter. I can just imagine how well he shot.

  7. #7
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Just a "wannabe" in Mtn. Top, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    1,441

    Post imported post

    Johnny Law wrote:
    Please don't generalize that cops can't shoot well, as I can assure you that the vast majority are highly skilled.
    Cops can often shoot very well. Problem is where the rubber meets the road. Most cops are woefully undertrained in force on force training. Not their fault, the dpt's don't have the budget, etc etc.

    Cops miss on the street because target skills mean squat when you are confronted with the stresses of life or death encounter.


  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Lynnwood, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,487

    Post imported post

    Johnny Law wrote:
    expvideo wrote:
    I wish I had a police-like wizardry over my handgun. My targets would last a lot longer.
    A little generalized cop-bashing? I take a lot of pride in my shooting abilities and am qualified as master. Besides general pistol and rifle quals there is night fire (complete darkness) ipsc style drills, cqb, extreme cqb, "fun house", running man, fats,and general combat training during every visit to the range. Also we have active shooter training inside a large complicated multi-story building. Many of the courses of fire do not allow even a single miss.

    Our Officers are all trained to SWAT standards by the SWAT team, and arecompetent in shield use, forming "hasty"teams on the spot, and performing entries.

    Please don't generalize that cops can't shoot well, as I can assure you that the vast majority are highly skilled.
    I'm sorry if I offended you. I meant that in a light hearted way, and I wasn't intending for anyone to take it seriously. It was only meant to be humorous, not to cop bash. And as you say not to generalize that cops can't shoot well, which is not true, I was poking fun at the advertizement for generalizing that all cops can shoot well, which is also not true.


  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Manassas, ,
    Posts
    24

    Post imported post

    Johnny Law wrote:
    Please don't generalize that cops can't shoot well, as I can assure you that the vast majority are highly skilled.

    Au Contraire... In my experience as a multi-sport handgun competitor/Range Safety Officer, the folks that have the absolute worstfirearms' handling, safety and marksmanshipskill sets are local/state police officers. I shoot with folks from several federal jurisdictions (ATF/Marshal's) and they have better skill sets. These practices that I offer my observations on, arecompletely different than competition skill sets, and is NOT a judgement on their tactical skills.

    The worst part is that they come once and never come back...

  10. #10
    Regular Member Marco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Greene County
    Posts
    3,844

    Post imported post

    Having been to "FS" numerous times I can attest to their training being top notch.
    I don't agree with everything they teach.

    In1999 the LVMPD (Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Dept.)hosted a Ironman shooting event and Sub-gun match on their range. Over a 100 competitors attended and not one (actively employed) LEO finished in the top 10 of any of the matches. The sub-gun match was a total bust for the LEO's, non sworn personnel cleaned up, most of us were prior military.
    (I'm searching for the score sheet, hopefully I'll be able to find it.)

    I guess all those monthly sub-gun matches held in LV paid off for the non-sworn personnel. The guy who won the sub gun match runs the monthly sub-gun matches in LV, he is also a retired Rochester NY SWAT officer.

    Good training and dedication (quality trigger time)to your craft will make you a better shooter on and off the range.



    If you think like a Statist, act like one, or back some, you've given up on freedom and have gone over to the dark side.
    The easiest ex. but probably the most difficult to grasp for gun owners is that fool permission slip so many of you have, especially if you show it off with pride. You should recognize it as an embarrassment, an infringement, a travesty and an affront to a free person.


    ~Alan Korwin

  11. #11
    State Researcher Kevin Jensen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Santaquin, Utah, USA
    Posts
    2,313

    Post imported post

    Johnny Law wrote:
    Please don't generalize that cops can't shoot well, as I can assure you that the vast majority are highly skilled.
    How often do police actually go out and practice with their service pistol? Is it as often as I get to practice with my M16? We get to go to the range and qualify once per year. Once a year I get to shoot 49 rounds. I get 9 rounds to zero my weapon, and 40 to qualify. Others get to fire hundreds of rounds. Is it because they shoot as poorly as the police? I submit that it is. Then again, maybe they are smarter than me. If they don't qualify the first time, they get to keep shooting while I just watch.

    Why should people assume that police are experts with firearms, simply because they carry one? Their title is "law enforcement", but the real crooks (lawyers) have been to law school and are well versed in the law. I am shocked at how often I read an article about a cop had to use his weapon, fired probably 15 rounds and maybe 2 managed to find their intended target! Where do the other rounds go?

    Please know that I am not "cop bashing". I am just tired of society assuming that only police should have guns. Everyone should have guns. I am tired of society assuming that the police could shoot a fly off of the tip of a pencil at 50 yards. Some cops can, but most never will. I am tired of society sitting back quietly and assuming that a cops opinion carries legal weight. Opinions are great, but don't enforce them.

    Know the law.

    Respect the law.

    Shoot often!
    "An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life." Robert A. Heinlein

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    Johnny Law wrote:
    A little generalized cop-bashing? I take a lot of pride in my shooting abilities and am qualified as master.
    Argument from authority, just like LEO229. We're 'cops', you're not - the ad hominem attack. Perhaps 'passive-aggressive' but attack none the less.

    Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth. NRA *******

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Lynnwood, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,487

    Post imported post

    Doug Huffman wrote:
    Johnny Law wrote:
    A little generalized cop-bashing? I take a lot of pride in my shooting abilities and am qualified as master.
    Argument from authority, just like LEO229. We're 'cops', you're not - the ad hominem attack. Perhaps 'passive-aggressive' but attack none the less.

    Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth. NRA *******
    You're really stretching that one. I'll admit that I don't always agree with Johnny Law, but I did say something that was generalized cop-bashing, just like he said. He said that he is pretty handy with a gun even though he is a cop, to disprove my statement which hinted that all cops were bad shots. He didn't insinuate anything with the statement you quoted, and he didn't mean anything other than to disprove my statement. There was no attack, and you are just being confrontational.

    And you need to get a dictionary to go with your thesaurus, because what Johnny Law said was the exact opposite of ad hominem.
    An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the man", "argument against the man") consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim.
    My claim was not factual, and his argument did provide evidence that mystatement was in fact flawed. Thus, your use of the term "ad hominem" shows again that you are just a condescending jerk with a thesaurus and a superiority complex. Sorry that's not in Latin, but at least I linked it so you can see what it means.

  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    'Argument from authority' and 'ad hominem personal attack' are contrapositives (maybe 'opposites' will do if you don't do contrapositive). One implies the other.

    I have posted the vulgar citation many times and it still is not understood - by you. There are none so blind as those that will not see. There are none so ignorant as those that will not learn.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    , Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    450

    Post imported post

    I would be surprised if the average gun owner was more proficient with firearms than the average LEO... However, I think it would be fair to generalize that the top 10% of 'civilian' shooters would give the top 10% of LEOs a run for their money. The top 100 civilian shooters (the professional/competitive types, most likely)would assuredly give the top 100 LEOs a spanking.

    I don't have the ego to assume that I am in the top 10% of 'civilian' marksmen (I might be, but that would be masturbatoryspeculation obviously).

    Military special ops folks are deadly... likely to have more trigger-time and proficiency than 99% of civilian shooters (LEO or private citizen). At least, they have proven to be competent in actual application.

    The obvious question is what kind of shooting a person wishes to be good at... because being able to hit a bullseye at 100yd with a pistol, slow-fire, doesn't necessarily mean that they have the reflexes or point-shooting ability of a combat/competition-hardened professional. I'd be surprised if the average Navy SEAL gives a rats-ass whether or not they can knock over a steel plate with a 1911 at 100yd while standing still... but many people judge 'proficiency' on skills which make little difference in real life.

    I've never been to Front-Sight... and I've heard good and bad. Seems to me though, that whatever the caliber of their instruction may be, the objective is for the students to leave afterwards better prepared to control their own survival... and they certainly do that. But advertising high-level professional skills as if they are simply for sale, requiring no individual aptitude, is just hokey.



  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Superstition Mountain, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    424

    Post imported post

    Don't SEALS fire something like 1,000+ rounds a day? Since they're also quite competitive with each other, I'd wager that they don't like to miss.

    With that kind of practice, it would be difficult not to be a good shot.

  17. #17
    Regular Member Johnny Law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Puget Sound, ,
    Posts
    462

    Post imported post

    mzbk2l wrote:
    Don't SEALS fire something like 1,000+ rounds a day? Since they're also quite competitive with each other, I'd wager that they don't like to miss.

    With that kind of practice, it would be difficult not to be a good shot.
    Becoming proficient with firearms is all about practice, no matter who you are. There are cops who only carry a gun because they are required to, and really don't care to know anything more about firearms. These are the minority however, as most are "gun people" and are interested in firearms and shooting.

    There is a big difference between punching paper and being in a gunfight, but I can say that when confronted with a shooting in the real world, you will go into "auto mode" and will do what you were trained to do (provided you have trained for such an event). Firing under extreme stress is a world away from what you do at the range.

    One of the reasons that Police sometimes fire a seemingly large # of rounds into a suspect is usually because there are several Officers present. A experienced officer will sometimes fire first, and then less experienced officers will sometimes fire "sympathy shots" because at least one Officer has already decided to shoot. It becomes a hail of gunfire, but it really dosen't matter how many rounds were fired if the suspect was shootable in the first place. This is not to say that just because multiple Officers fired, it was not justified.

    It's easy to armchair qb a shooting after the fact, but unless you've experienced being shot at and having to fight for your life, you really don't know how you're going to react. The more training you have in real world combat scenarios, the better your chances for survival.
    If you have to fight, do not fear death. We will all die one day, so fight skillfully and bravely! And if it is to be that you die, then at least go to God proudly. Meet him as the proud warrior that you are, and not as a sniveling coward. Nobody lives forever.

  18. #18
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Olympia, WA, ,
    Posts
    3,201

    Post imported post

    Johnny Law wrote:
    Becoming proficient with firearms is all about practice, no matter who you are. There are cops who only carry a gun because they are required to, and really don't care to know anything more about firearms. These are the minority however, as most are "gun people" and are interested in firearms and shooting.

    There is a big difference between punching paper and being in a gunfight, but I can say that when confronted with a shooting in the real world, you will go into "auto mode" and will do what you were trained to do (provided you have trained for such an event). Firing under extreme stress is a world away from what you do at the range.

    One of the reasons that Police sometimes fire a seemingly large # of rounds into a suspect is usually because there are several Officers present. A experienced officer will sometimes fire first, and then less experienced officers will sometimes fire "sympathy shots" because at least one Officer has already decided to shoot. It becomes a hail of gunfire, but it really dosen't matter how many rounds were fired if the suspect was shootable in the first place. This is not to say that just because multiple Officers fired, it was not justified.

    It's easy to armchair qb a shooting after the fact, but unless you've experienced being shot at and having to fight for your life, you really don't know how you're going to react. The more training you have in real world combat scenarios, the better your chances for survival.
    JL, I have to agree with everything you said except one thing. When you defend multipile officers shooting a single "shootable" individual. Your argument is very similiar to the one the SDPD used in justifying such a shoot, although they had some more technical sounding terms in there. Several officers firing one or two shots make sense. But there has been at least one if not more cases of several officers EMPTYING THEIR MAGS. That is going way too far if you ask me, and becomes excessive force. Why keep shooting if the guy is down? If I did that I would be in jail so fast it wouldn't be funny. Why is it then okay if several cops make multiple shots or empty their mags?

  19. #19
    Regular Member Johnny Law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Puget Sound, ,
    Posts
    462

    Post imported post

    sv_libertarian wrote:
    JL, I have to agree with everything you said except one thing. When you defend multipile officers shooting a single "shootable" individual. Your argument is very similiar to the one the SDPD used in justifying such a shoot, although they had some more technical sounding terms in there. Several officers firing one or two shots make sense. But there has been at least one if not more cases of several officers EMPTYING THEIR MAGS. That is going way too far if you ask me, and becomes excessive force. Why keep shooting if the guy is down? If I did that I would be in jail so fast it wouldn't be funny. Why is it then okay if several cops make multiple shots or empty their mags?
    The dynamics of a mutiple person vs. single person shooting are quite different. When a single shooter is firing he his only concerned withHIS bullets, and incompasitating the bg. The same is true when you have multiple shooters, as each person is not waiting for the other to "finish the job". Each person (in this case Officer) is working independently, and multiple rounds are fired in just a short moment. Each Officer is focused on the bg, and isn't paying much attention to who else is shooting at the same time. It is an extremelystressful moment, and your survival instinct kicks in.

    I am a firm believer in the old adage; anything worth shooting once, is worth shooting multiple times. Especially where pistols are concerned. I have seen several 1 shot stops (resulting in death)with a .223, but that is usually not the case with a handgun.

    You have to keep in mind that Police do not "shoot to maim, kneecap, or shoot the gun out of bg's hands. That is for entertainment purposesfor movies. If you have grounds to be shooting at someone, it is lethal force, and it is a very real possibility that they will die. Theupper torsoand head are the only targets Police aim for.

    Anyone not witnessing the shooting cannot say when the bg went down, or how many shots were allegedly fired after that fact. I do not agree with continuing to fire after the threat is eliminated, but just because someone is on the ground does not mean that they are no longer a threat.

    Bullets have different effects on different people, and some are able to absorb them and keep fighting, better than others. I'm sure there are times when it goes a little too far, but your perspective is quite different when faced with a bg who is trying to do you harm/kill you.
    If you have to fight, do not fear death. We will all die one day, so fight skillfully and bravely! And if it is to be that you die, then at least go to God proudly. Meet him as the proud warrior that you are, and not as a sniveling coward. Nobody lives forever.

  20. #20
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Olympia, WA, ,
    Posts
    3,201

    Post imported post

    Johnny Law wrote:
    sv_libertarian wrote:
    JL, I have to agree with everything you said except one thing. When you defend multipile officers shooting a single "shootable" individual. Your argument is very similiar to the one the SDPD used in justifying such a shoot, although they had some more technical sounding terms in there. Several officers firing one or two shots make sense. But there has been at least one if not more cases of several officers EMPTYING THEIR MAGS. That is going way too far if you ask me, and becomes excessive force. Why keep shooting if the guy is down? If I did that I would be in jail so fast it wouldn't be funny. Why is it then okay if several cops make multiple shots or empty their mags?
    The dynamics of a mutiple person vs. single person shooting are quite different. When a single shooter is firing he his only concerned withHIS bullets, and incompasitating the bg. The same is true when you have multiple shooters, as each person is not waiting for the other to "finish the job". Each person (in this case Officer) is working independently, and multiple rounds are fired in just a short moment. Each Officer is focused on the bg, and isn't paying much attention to who else is shooting at the same time. It is an extremelystressful moment, and your survival instinct kicks in.

    I'm sure you're right.

    I am a firm believer in the old adage; anything worth shooting once, is worth shooting multiple times. Especially where pistols are concerned. I have seen several 1 shot stops (resulting in death)with a .223, but that is usually not the case with a handgun.

    I'm unsure, but in this state, I imagine I could get away with a "double tap" but would hesitate to keep shooting for fear of "excessive force" charges. Not that I am likely to get any DA or local cop to have THAT conversation with me. I'm going to try though.

    You have to keep in mind that Police do not "shoot to maim, kneecap, or shoot the gun out of bg's hands. That is for entertainment purposesfor movies. If you have grounds to be shooting at someone, it is lethal force, and it is a very real possibility that they will die. Theupper torsoand head are the only targets Police aim for.

    Is there any other target?:P

    Anyone not witnessing the shooting cannot say when the bg went down, or how many shots were allegedly fired after that fact. I do not agree with continuing to fire after the threat is eliminated, but just because someone is on the ground does not mean that they are no longer a threat.

    Bullets have different effects on different people, and some are able to absorb them and keep fighting, better than others. I'm sure there are times when it goes a little too far, but your perspective is quite different when faced with a bg who is trying to do you harm/kill you.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Lynnwood, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,487

    Post imported post

    I don't know how the rest of you practice, but I empty the mag as fast as I accurately can. This isn't because I have enough money to waste ammo, or because I have no value for proper breath control and so on. This is because if I ever have to use my gun, it won't be one of those one-shot-per-second deals that a lot of the people at the range practice. I also don't generally spend as much time practicing torso shots. Pardon me if that's not PC, but I've been shot in the torso*, and I maintained consciousness for nearly a minute, so I'm not really expecting that to work too well.



    *no. I'm not going into details. If you want to talk about it, we can talk in person, because it was a traumatic and life changing event, and it's hard enough talking about it without having to deal with internet sceptics telling me that I'm lieing.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    142

    Post imported post

    I've been to Front Sight twice now, will be back there inMarch,and learned a lot. Assuming youare shooting a decent round, e.g., 9 mm or larger, we were taught to put two quick controlled shots in the torso, followed by a head shot or shotsin the event the assailant is still standing. The concerns expressed with emptying the mag into the perp are (1) being charged with excessive force (Q. why exactly was the tenth, and eleventhrounds necessary to protect your life?) (2) facing another assailant (not good with an empty gun) and (3) being responsible for every round fired (i.e., collateral damage can get the bejesus sued out of you). But yeah, you have to keep firing until the guy is down. And by the way some of those guys I trained with at FS shot pretty damn good, most being ex military or current military contractors.



  23. #23
    Regular Member Superlite27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    God's Country, Missouri
    Posts
    1,279

    Post imported post

    mzbk2l wrote:
    Don't SEALS fire something like 1,000+ rounds a day? Since they're also quite competitive with each other, I'd wager that they don't like to miss.

    With that kind of practice, it would be difficult not to be a good shot.
    I imagine you're right, but you are letting the smoke and mirrors of quantity mislead you from quality.

    I can practice the wrong way to do something thousands of times and say, "I'm an expert! Look at all the training I've had!"

    Round count isn't a be-all end-all. 1000+ rounds mean nothing if they all miss.

    I'm a firm believer that quality outshines quantity.

    I'm not going to argue about the quality of SEAL training, though. I believe they have both quality and quantity covered real well.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    , Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    275

    Post imported post

    ianto94 wrote:
    I've been to Front Sight twice now, will be back there inMarch,and learned a lot. Assuming youare shooting a decent round, e.g., 9 mm or larger, we were taught to put two quick controlled shots in the torso, followed by a head shot or shotsin the event the assailant is still standing. The concerns expressed with emptying the mag into the perp are (1) being charged with excessive force (Q. why exactly was the tenth, and eleventhrounds necessary to protect your life?) (2) facing another assailant (not good with an empty gun) and (3) being responsible for every round fired (i.e., collateral damage can get the bejesus sued out of you). But yeah, you have to keep firing until the guy is down. And by the way some of those guys I trained with at FS shot pretty damn good, most being ex military or current military contractors.

    1) - I've been trained that the ONLY concern I should have while I'm shooting the bad guy is saving my ******* ass.

    1) Shoot to stop the threat
    2) When in doubt, empty the ******* magazine
    3) Reload
    4) repeat steps 1 thru 4 as needed

    2) - That's why if you carry a gun you should carry 1 (or 2) extra magazines. Bad guys sometimes travel in groups.

    3) - So long as you use your sights, every round will magically go where it needs to go.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    142

    Post imported post

    Saving my ass is why I would be carrying and same for two extra magazines. But I don't want to end up in jail or sued either (of course that's better than dead, but still a real bummer).

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •