Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 234567
Results 61 to 70 of 70
  1. #61
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Beyond The Wall
    Posts
    44,906
    Mine in bold

    Quote Originally Posted by mike135 View Post
    In LE scenarios, much of what is done is focused on reducing risk.

    Who told you that? That may be the"official theme" but not who it really works. There is also "educated tactical risk" and "reckless, careless, and stupid". We lived in the former and never ventured into the latter. Had the focus been to always avoid risk, I would never have been in a single gunfight. Life is risk...and certain jobs are risk. You manage that with Tactics...not avoidance.

    It affects how officers interact with individuals, it affects how they move through structures, how they move in teams, etc. So for me, the most critical question to answer in regards to CQB scenarios is not just finding the best tactics to reduce risk, but also finding that proper balance between risk and effectiveness.

    See above. Mission is not, "stay safe under all situations and go home". Mission is going ina kill the bad guy without allowing him to kill you.

    It's a question that has already been addressed in part--if you hear gunshots, you will proceed differently than if you don't. If you're a civilian, you will proceed differently depending on whether your family is present or not. In regards to risk, I think all of us would probably say that we would take greater personal risks to protect and defend our family in that situation than if we are alone and only protecting strangers as we hunt the shooters.

    Maybe...maybe not. I am willing to die to keep family safe...but that is not my objective. A corollary to that is I am willing to go to extreme violence much sooner with much less hesitation or analysis for family safety than for general public safety. But I will still go hunt the bad guy because that is who I am. But this is a salient point...I am there to kill the terrorist, not to save anyone. And thus the thinking is a vastly different one.
    Gabriel Suarez

    Turning Lambs into Lions Since 1995

    Suarez International USA Headquarters

  2. #62
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Beyond The Wall
    Posts
    44,906
    Quote Originally Posted by mike135 View Post
    Nobody said anything about shooting blindly. I said that if I've located the shooter and I have a rifle and I've practiced at those ranges, I'm going to shoot back at him even if I'm not 100% confident I'll hit him with my first shot. I talked about putting rounds into the broken window where I see him shooting from even if I don't have 100% target acquisition. That's not shooting blindly, that's returning fire in a situation that has essentially become a military engagement and not a law enforcement scenario.
    That however, is not a "best practice" by professional standards. That may be applicable in a CQB context in a room to room, hallway fight (ie. shooting through the wall), but not in a counter sniper context.
    Gabriel Suarez

    Turning Lambs into Lions Since 1995

    Suarez International USA Headquarters

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Western WA
    Posts
    5,579
    Saving anyone that isn't GFT is a happy by-product, not the goal.
    Brent Yamamoto
    Suarez International Tier 1 Staff Instructor

    Ready, willing, able. Bring it.

    Instagram: karate_at_1200fps

    Upcoming classes:

    Pistol Groundfighting, Kansas
    Pistol Groundfighting, Washington

  4. #64
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Beyond The Wall
    Posts
    44,906
    Mine again

    Quote Originally Posted by mike135 View Post
    My point was that if everybody is limited to defined policies and procedures, there are going to be situations that were never anticipated--what do you do then?

    That is where a man's maturity and self-directed action will fit in. You point to policies and ROE, but you yourself are limited by the laws of where you live. And things must go pretty bad for you to willfully violate them. Same thing here. I violated plenty of ploicy in my time because the policy was stupid. And after my actions they were rewritten. The mission and objective are what they are...the mission and objective is not to "obey policy all the time no mater what". Did anyone suggest that?

    Are you going to sit back and let 40 more people die because your policies don't allow for you to do anything else, or are you going to recognize the extreme exigent circumstances and figure out what you can do that might have a chance of affecting the situation? Sometimes bad stuff happens and you have to choose the best of the undesirable options.

    I dunno...it depends. It really does. On many things. What the situation really is as opposed to what I would like it to be...is only one example. Often you don't quite know what you have at the outset. Policies were written so the dumb kids wouldn't make dumb mistakes. Same for laws I suppose. In a nutshell.

    We often talk about how important it is to keep your brain switched on and working throughout any situation--that's all I'm talking about. And the most tools I have at my disposal (such as a rifle with a magnified optic in this situation) the better.

    OK
    Gabriel Suarez

    Turning Lambs into Lions Since 1995

    Suarez International USA Headquarters

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Southeast Florida
    Posts
    1,761
    I don't want to prolong this conversation, but just want to make a clarification. There are several different perspectives that are getting mixed up, and in my mind they need to be kept separate and defined or the conversation gets very muddy.

    1. The private individual who is just carrying concealed (or maybe has something more stashed somewhere just in case, but that doesn't really change the mission)

    2. The individual officer and the decisions he makes regarding his own actions

    3. The department policies and procedures, and the training that follows them

    So Gabe, much of what I was talking about earlier in this conversation focused on #3. None of it was about #1. And the recent element of the Las Vegas incident was focused on what #2 does in the context of #3.

    I know you focus here on #1 and #2, and I have no argument with anything said in that regard.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Beyond The Wall
    Posts
    44,906
    Mine

    Quote Originally Posted by mike135 View Post
    I don't want to prolong this conversation, but just want to make a clarification. There are several different perspectives that are getting mixed up, and in my mind they need to be kept separate and defined or the conversation gets very muddy.

    1. The private individual who is just carrying concealed (or maybe has something more stashed somewhere just in case, but that doesn't really change the mission)

    His mission is, IF HE HAS SUFFICIENT AND ACTIONABLE INTELL...AND HE IS WITHIN TACTICAL REACH OF THE TERRORIST - to attack and kill the shooter. Period. His tactics will minimize his exposure to both the shooter and to responding LE. If he elects to handle this with anything other than his pistol he is a fool.

    2. The individual officer and the decisions he makes regarding his own actions

    His mission is to find, fix, and f...kill the terrorist. While on the way he must understand that many private citizens are as dumb as dirt and will get in the way physically, and even be uncooperative from fear and from a lack of understanding of what is actually happening. He cannot allow them to stop or slow his mission. As well...he must understand that there are at the same time likely Off Duty LE and CCW folk going after the shooter, as well as OTHER TERRORISTS that may want to go unchallenged and shoot him in the back.

    3. The department policies and procedures, and the training that follows them

    Sometimes yes...sometimes no.

    So Gabe, much of what I was talking about earlier in this conversation focused on #3. None of it was about #1. And the recent element of the Las Vegas incident was focused on what #2 does in the context of #3.

    I know you focus here on #1 and #2, and I have no argument with anything said in that regard.

    Understood.
    Gabriel Suarez

    Turning Lambs into Lions Since 1995

    Suarez International USA Headquarters

  7. #67
    We do have a term for breaking rules and policies in dealing with the new and unknown - exigent circumstances. Most, if not all, agencies have a policy saying in exigent circumstancing, using the "totality of the circumstances" present to the LEO, should existing policies/procedures be ineffective or unreasonable, the LEO may just "fucking figure it out" and be backed by the agency - we'll call this intent under the color of law.

    Rules and policies are guidelines bendable to the exigent circumstances of the totality....and that gentlemen, is the gray area most of us play and excel within.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona
    Posts
    9,501
    Bumping this one as it's beginning to dovetail in the Lessons of Kenya thread. http://www.warriortalk.com/showthrea...OF-KENYA/page9

    I also have cleaned some of the comments up to increase signal to noise ratio.
    Last edited by Greg Nichols; 01-23-2019 at 09:59 AM.
    Greg "Hyena" Nichols
    Instagram: tacfit_az
    Facebook: SI Instructor Greg Nichols

    #thinkinginviolence
    #tactisexual

    Always entertaining, mildly offensive
    IANative: Indeed, when you grab Brent (or he grabs you), it feels like liquid unobtanium wrapped in rawhide... whereas Greg is just solid muscle wrapped in hate, seasoned w/ snuff and a little lead.

    http://www.warriortalk.com/showthrea...he-Obscenities

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona
    Posts
    9,501
    Quote Originally Posted by Papa View Post
    This is probably as good a place as any to remind that if you are not solo--if you're with family or friends who are not warriors and have not worked with you tactically, get out.

    YES, if I'm with someone who is my responsibility, I'm either finding a space I can control and has an exit and bunkering in or I'm escorting my people out of the structure. It depends on what is the safest course. I am not going to turtle up in a room with only one door because movement is life and I don't want to get cornered buy a superior force. In an event like this I'm 100% willing to die for MINE, and 100% willing to KILL for yours. Don't get the two confused.

    And expect to have to fight your way out, while maintaining a low enough profile to avoid being shot by responding LE. See Gabe's comments above and elsewhere on keeping your firearm out of sight and yet instantly accessible.

    As said before, observe the masses and do the opposite, find an egress that isn't being used by everyone else, if you have to break a window or use a fire exit or employee hallway/exit

    When you enter a business or a mall, better consider exits as well as angles.

    And think about what might be waiting for you outside.

    This is why I don't follow the masses, I don't want to get caught in a kill box or picked off by someone from a window. Think, move, shoot. In that order.

    And again, if you're protecting those with you, any thoughts about hunkering down inside the structure, say under a circular clothing rack, and engaging threats as they come to you?

    See above. Additional note, in a structure/urban warfare, the ambush and displace always works. Just make sure you have a way out, never enter somewhere you don't have a plan to leave.

    (We've found folks hiding there after a running gun battle that flowed through a local department store.)

    As a general rule I prefer moving to hiding. A body in motion and all that
    Sorry Papa, I completely missed this one the first time around. Mine in Bold
    Last edited by Greg Nichols; 01-23-2019 at 12:03 PM.
    Greg "Hyena" Nichols
    Instagram: tacfit_az
    Facebook: SI Instructor Greg Nichols

    #thinkinginviolence
    #tactisexual

    Always entertaining, mildly offensive
    IANative: Indeed, when you grab Brent (or he grabs you), it feels like liquid unobtanium wrapped in rawhide... whereas Greg is just solid muscle wrapped in hate, seasoned w/ snuff and a little lead.

    http://www.warriortalk.com/showthrea...he-Obscenities

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    3,291
    No worries, you're tracking, and you nailed it.
    Warrior for the working day.

    Es una cosa muy seria. --Robert Capa

    "...I ride the range in a Ford V8...Yippy Yi Yo Ki Yay." --Johnny Mercer

    "Can I move?...I'm better when I move."

    1, 0, 12. And a wakeup.

Posting Permissions

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