when would it be appropriate to point a loaded weapon at some one and then stab them in the throat with it
The use of a real weapon during some of the impact drills bothers me.
Playing devil's advocate I can think of two reasons to choose to hit someone with a loaded, functioning pistol:
1. You need to conserve ammo and can deal with a close threat through firearm combatives.
2. You don't want to have the noise of a gun shot so you choose a strike instead.
Admittedly, I had to stretch to come up with those two.
Wouldn't your reaction to a punch with a firearm in your hand make you ball up your fist? Wouldn't that be even more likely in a stressful situation?
If you hit someone with the pistol that would take the pistol out of battery. If for some reason you had to shoot them while pistol was on them you wouldn't be able to.
I fight and wrestle with psych patients at least on a weekly basis. All of this simulation crap goes out the window when someone is doing the windmill fist attack. My priority is always to:
1. Stop the attack.
2. Restrain the attacker.
At this point I wouldn't need to hit them with my firearm or flashlight, I have them restrained.
Sorry, but I don't get the point you are trying to make.
I sometimes come across these videos and I think they make a good tool for evaluating what it being taught out there. I know what and why I teach what I teach, but I certainly can't defend what other schools do. I do like having the chance to have open discussions on some of the more "unconventional" tactics and techniques that are presented.
yeah and a gun falls out at the end.Did anyone notice that they never engage the retention straps on their holsters?
Did anyone notice that they never engage the retention straps on their holsters?
I did see at the end when the main trainer tossled with the bigger guy, the bigger guy's handgun came flying out onto the ground and then they were rolling around on top of it.
The use of a real weapon during some of the impact drills bothers me. Namely the one where he shoves the muzzle into the guy's neck. Sure he may have unloaded it, but I don't know that, and a blue gun could've just as easily been substituted for everyone's verification.
I would also be curious to hear the reasoning behind subduing an attacker and then shooting somewhere else. It seems like the most immediate threat is the guy with his hands on you, not the guy in pistol range. A live attacker isn't going to just sit there and let you take shots at his buddy. If you have the time and ability to access your firearm, you have the time and ability to put some rounds into the guy holding onto you.
The downrange photographer stunt does have training merit, but I think it can be conducted in other ways that induce similar stress and still necessitate focus. Putting live bodies down there leaves zero room for error (and there's always error in a training environment-- that's why we do it).
But hey, it looks cool on video and in games, and from the opening and closing it looks like they are into video games.