About a dozen or so years ago, I read an article in one of the gun rags by Clint Smith.  It was titled “The 300”.  In his usual kind and generous manner, Clint stated in the article that in the period of the upcoming year, there would be 300 new training schools that would pop up.  He stated how much that would be a good thing.  And he was right as usual.

But there has been a downside to it.  One that I am sure has been around to some extent ever since the first weapons and tactics school opened to teach proper use of the rock and stick.  That is the schools that teach some really questionable stuff.  In recent years, we’ve seen everything from serious safety violations (instructors shooting themselves, instructors shooting students, instructors having students stand by targets while other students shoot at the targets in the name of “realism”, etc) to really whacky techniques and tactics.

One such technique that I have been hearing about is a student or instructor standing next to a target frame while another student shoots at the target.  I find that to be absolutely insane for just about any type of live fire training, let alone an open class with students with mixed skill levels.

I think a lot of the really insane, unsafe stuff that gets put out there in the name of “realism” is due to the desire to satisfy the “tactical tourist”.  There are seemingly folks out there, much like fantasy football camps, who take a class to be “Tier One” for a couple of days. That is all well and fine, I have no problem how people spend their own money.  The important part is that they go, have fun, and be safe.  But, when you start seeing the “commando mind with a potato peelers ass” type safety violations, enough is enough.  You’ll hear those that defend this type of behavior quote “Big Boy Rules” as if somehow that negates the unsafe behavior that goes on.  They’ll boast that anyone who has a problem with what they do as “panty wetting” and other crap bravado to camouflage how silly what they are doing is.

In 2016, there are far more schools out there from good, solid sources than 300.  It is easy to do a little research and pick one that teaches a solid product, without all of the safety shenanigans.

I thought seating a jury would be an extraordinary task and would take longer than the actual trial. It played out pretty much that way. I thought none of the defendants would testify. I was wrong about that. The shotgun-wielding defendant’s testimony wasn’t bad, but he needed to hit a grand slam on demand. He didn’t, on his own, and the video evidence didn’t allow for it. (I have said this to several clients – “If you don’t testify, you will likely be convicted. If you testify and are not perfect, you will be convicted.”). I was fairly sure none of the defendants would leave the courtroom exonerated at the conclusion of the trial. That also happened. They were summarily remanded to custody by the judge. As convicted murderers.

I watched the entire trial daily. The State of Georgia’s “evidence” didn’t see overwhelming to me, and its legal arguments on several counts struck me as rather novel and overbearing. As I predicted however, there was little to support the factual or legal basis to assert “citizen’s arrest.” And with that, there went their weak defense. The lead prosecutor was often unintelligible and condescending. Sure, there are several appeal worthy issues. On Georgia law, the jury instructions, and overarching Constitutional principles. Even with some counts reversed, or a new trial, the defendants’ fates are pretty much sealed.  As is sadly, that of Ahmaud Arbery. No matter what he was doing on their street that sunny Sunday. Of note: There remains a federal indictment the defendants must face in 2022.

Takeaways: Knowing the MAY beforehand, not after a defensive use of force or in the middle of a trial, is critical. Whether you are a gun-toting citizen, police, prosecutor, defense attorney, or judge. Never push the envelope, and never forget the SHOULD. The McMichael family will likely never again see two of their loved ones alive and outside prison walls. A simple-minded guy making a video (who had good reason to think he would be a state’s witness) left the courtroom in shock, to a holding cell. Likely to spend decades in prison. Because he gave ill-advised interviews to law enforcement. Also of note: If you think use of force “expert” testimony will be admitted and exonerate your use of deadly force, there is significant precedent in many states that says otherwise.

Kudos to the defense attorneys. Their devotion to their clients and the noble process was the only feel-good thing of the entire case.

With permission to use granted, Claude Werner, a/k/a The Tactical Professor, decided, when referring to my CAN-MAY-SHOULD-MUST paradigm (for the use of deadly force), to re-sequence it. His version:

CAN-MAY-MUST-SHOULD

From the professor: “This author re-sequenced them from Mr. Harris’ original sequence to Can-May-Must-Should because Can, May, and Must are essentially binary Yes/No decisions that would be decided the same way by similar persons in the same set of circumstances. Should, however, has numerous ambiguous inputs based on individual moral and sociological precepts. If the Can and May criteria are met but the Must (i.e., I do this to survive) is not, then the Should decision could be legitimately decided differently by persons in the same set of circumstances. For instance, in the case of defense of a third party, some persons might choose to intervene and others might not. Both decisions could be reasonable based on the personal beliefs of the individual who is making the decision.”

I got nothing. I like it. It hadn’t occurred to me when I first thought up my paradigm that my favored seriatim analysis was not the only appropriate presentation. From studying the professor’s body of work it occurred to me long ago that my CAN and SHOULD are the two elements over which the force user has nearly complete control, unlike the MAY and the MUST elements, which are dictated by someone else.

Hat tip: Claude Werner. Lesson learned: Never mess with an “OODA” expert.

https://bo283.isrefer.com/go/WS2016M/modernserviceweapons/

Avid readers of this page know that we are big fans of the SIRT pistol for skills development and maintenance. Thanks to our friends at Next Level Training, SIRT pistols are discounted and you get some extra goodies in time for the holidays. The M&P version of the SIRT is typically not discounted, so this is a solid offer. Check it out by clicking the link above.

I often caution citizens not to expect their domestic pets to be effective guard dogs.  Folks usually don’t like heavring it, but that’s been my experience after a few decades in law enforcement.  Dogs are great alarm systems if properly programed, but are rarely capable of a full-blown attack against a dedicated assailant.  I can’t tell you how many times I’ve gained permission to enter a fenced-in yard to search for a suspect only to be told by the homeowner that no one could survive their killer canine’s zone of terror.  One gentlemen even told me, “if he’s back there, you’re on a recovery mission [rather than a rescue mission].”  Several of those times, not only did we find the suspect in Cujo’s Corner but one time (I kid you negative), the felon was actually hiding in the dog house.  Still, police work is consistent with anomalies. Continue reading →

This particular Glock has sights mechanically centered in the slide, but many Glocks do shoot slightly left. This is my target from a while back after shooting the FBI Bullseye Course, which is shot at 15 and 25 yards.

I’d like to start by apologizing for the slow rate of articles as of late. Many real life events are conspiring to keep some of our authors and me from the keyboard.

This latest topic was born from a recent email I received from a couple readers asking about whether or not Glocks shoot left, and if it is something about which he should be concerned. While I would not describe myself as a Glock guru, though it is currently my preferred sidearm for work and play, I have seen a few of them on the range over the years, and have spoken with some knowledgeable individuals. Here is my take on the issue, for whatever it is worth.

Continue reading →

1980’s television taught us so much.  The Bren Ten was controllable for controlled “triple taps”.  A Ruger Mini-14, when fired with the stock folded, was guaranteed to only hit the dirt beside a moving car, and if it did hit the car, it was only a tire.  The car would then flip over 96 times, and then it would show both of the occupants getting out and merely dusting themselves off.  A Smith and Wesson Model 29 (and oddly enough the SPAS-12, and HK P9) would blow the hood open on a car as it traveled towards you.  That bad guys could be armed with the same weaponry as the good guys, but always lacked in marksmanship skills.  And those that are serious carry a M1911 in their waistband with no holster. Continue reading →

Going to SHOT Show?  What is that?  SHOT stands for Shooting, Hunting, and Outdoor Trade show that now has become synonymous   with “that cool, tactical (tacti-cool) show”.  In all seriousness, it’s where all the gun and gear companies come together with buyers (?) to show off their new products for the upcoming year.  It’s Mecca for the shooting industry no matter which side (competition or tactical) you are on. Continue reading →