Why learn to shoot on the move?

[C4IGrant]

Shooting is shooting.







Neither does most "tactical" training....

I guess it depends on WHOM you are taking your training from and at what level your at.


C4

[Failure2Stop]

While USPSA and IDPA are excellent venues to test marksmanship and manipulation skills, they are not in any way a simulation of a gunfight.

If you replaced the targets in an average USPSA/IDPA stage with people holding simunition equipped pistols, even keeping the targets stationary, the shoot would look very different. There aren't a lot of people that stop at close range in front of a lethal threat that don't wind up hurt in some way.

It doesn't take a whole lot of speed to decrease your probablity of getting hit, though faster is better. It is a training problem, not a tactics problem. Properly trained, you should be shooting about 80-95% of your standing ability when shooting while closing, backing away, and moving to the strong side. Moving to the weak side, with a rifle or carbine is much more difficult, and even with proper training you will probably be shooting at about 75%, but just below your other moving ability with a pistol. I say this from qualification results of hundreds of qualifications that include shooting on the move, that were properly trained and coached in the technique.

[Redhat]

Charles,

"Shooting is shooting"

Are you saying any of the shooting disciplines would translate well into combat?

Thanks

[Failure2Stop]

Shooting is shooting.

Not when the conversation is about fighting.
There are lots of organizations that prided themselves on their marksmanship abilities. Then A-Stan and Iraq kicked off, and they discovered that they were ill prepared to deal with close-range and moving threats.

Fighting might be shooting, but shooting is not fighting. There are a lot of people that spend their time learning how to shoot their guns and relatively few that bother to learn how to fight with their guns.

[Blinking Dog]

I did a class with Paul last week, and looking back wish I had talked to him about it. I'll email him for his view.

In the mean time, I think some have pointed this out, I doubt any of the instructors who don't advocate shooting on the move are teaching "just standing there." Paul didn't. Paul's class taught us the most accurate stance for the situation. At 7 yards that would probably be standing there, driving tacks in the BG [edit: assumption - 1 BG]. But farther back the stances would make you a smaller target. That is, kneeling or prone. He also taught us the proper ways to break cover to make shots, coming out quickly, making the shot, then back to cover.

[edit: Also, remember that Mog is the situation Paul probably remembers top of mind when he teaches. If you read BHD, and recall that situation, likely you'd sprint from cover to cover and not consider shooting on the move. You'd want to be moving on the move!]

As with everything, isn't it situational? If you're at 7 yards then that dictates one thing. But at 25 or 50, perhaps another. I think I'd rather sprint to cover, then engage from the if possible.

edit: summary of my view:
1. I don't know what's "best" but again surmise it is a healthy combination of shoot on move, while moving to cover
2. Healthy debate on the subject is good, but let's be intellectually honest. Surely no one would say just stand in the open and be a bullet magnet.
3. I sent an email to Paul to ask his view, will post a summary of his reply when/if I get one.

[Blake]

Shooting is shooting.







Neither does most "tactical" training....

I'm not trying to be offensive, but I couldn't disagree with both of these statements more. Before I started training and taking classes, the shooting that I was doing was doing nothing to help me survive a lethal encounter of any kind. I couldn't hit the broad side of a barn, and I was doing nothing other than making lead deposits to the environment.

I'm pretty sure there are many instructors out there that teach shooting from cover, not all but I'm comfortable using the word "many".

[Robb Jensen]

Fighting might be shooting, but shooting is not fighting. There are a lot of people that spend their time learning how to shoot their guns and relatively few that bother to learn how to fight with their guns.

That's signature line material brother!

[Redhat]

Failure 2 stop,

I say this from qualification results of hundreds of qualifications that include shooting on the move, that were properly trained and coached in the technique.

What quals would those be? Any way I could get a look at these courses of fire?

Thanks

[Failure2Stop]

PM inbound

[Redhat]

Copy

Thanks