Thinking Man's Corner

Article by: William G.

I said what I said. Is/was your gunfight important? Yes, but what is it in the grand scheme, and to who? Most certainly we can learn from it. We can absolutely use some elements from it in training. However, it was unique, and only certain elements are valid for others. For true value, it needs a forensic dissection.

Was it a gunfight, or a shooting, or a gun battle? There is a difference to all of them. A shooting is where you are the only one that gets off rounds. A gunfight is where you exchange rounds. A gun battle is a prolonged, running, all out chaotic event. Depending on the actors involved, one may be more traumatic than another, or they could all be business as usual to different people.

At some point, most of us have probably heard “in my gunfight” from an instructor. That was, for sure, a pivotal event in their lives. But, what were they thinking at the time it happened, what was the lighting condition, what was the weather like, what was the distance, what was their surroundings comprised of, were they tired, when was the last time they went to the range, what gun did they use and is it one they typically carry (full size duty gun with a light, or a snub nose revolver they dropped in their pocket to go to the store), what events lead up to the action (was their a fight, was it an ambush, were they clearing a house)? The list of questions goes on and on.

The next thing we have to look at is did this event reinforce their training, or did it go against how they had trained? If they trained to use their sights, but don’t recall seeing them, are they now a proponent of indexed fire? If they had a malfunction on a gun that had never stuttered before, did they blame the gun, or was it possible they limp wristed it or their support hand interfered with the controls? If they had to make a long distance shot, do they now harp on a good portion of the training to be at distance? If there were multiple people, do they push for more training on multiple targets? The list goes on, and on, on this one too.

Over the years, we have been able to get great and valuable information from people such as Jim Cirillo, Scott Reitz, Evan Marshal, Bob Stasch, Aldridge, and many others. These men all had a larger than average number of gunfights. When someone gets into multiple gunfights, especially toward the end of the last century through now, they generally are pretty good at it, and are doing things within policy and the law. It may be a good idea to pay attention to what they say, because it has been working – repeatedly.

We now have bodycams, and other video footage. Watch what works. Watch what does not. THEN talk to the person for perspective. Take their words and match it up with the actions on the footage. Just reviewing bodycam footage means almost nothing without context. Taking your experiences and applying them to a video of someone else’s shooting/gunfight is just as bad as someone relaying their experience in their shooting/gunfight as what will happen to you. We have to take everything in whole, not perspective. Sort of like the whole 20/20 hindsight, from the view of a reasonable officer at the scene, etc.; things like that are in place for a reason.

I have a friend that started off in a violent metro area. He is now command staff in a large suburb of that area. He’s a cowboy, and that’s not an insult, it’s a badge of honor. (It is also a sly reference that doesn’t mean what you think.) He is very humble, and cares about what works. He watches the body cam footage, and then talks to the officer. He asks all sorts of questions that most wouldn’t think to ask. He makes sure his officers are mentally ok – after the gunfight, 24 hours later, a week later, a month later, and years later. He has a checklist in place of things to look for to see if anything is out of place. He reviews all this data, compares it to what training they are doing, and modifies the training as needed. Did the technique or tactic work, if so, why? Did it not work, if so, why not? Was it the technique/tactic valid in other situations, and not this? Did something they have not seen before occur? How do they implement it, or train against it, depending on what it was. Oh, and he has been in a handful of gunfights himself. Command staff that is street proven, constantly evaluates and challenges long standing beliefs to find out what works, and holistically cares about his officers and their families; yes that place exists, and it is not the kingdom, but it is close.

Jeff Cooper was in his share of gun play. Three of those events are written about for public consumption. Two of them involved a single action revolver. That was in WWII prior to him inventing the Modern Technique of the Pistol. Another was in SE Asia when he was performing clandestine operations, and involved a 1911 against a communist with a Sten gun. He learned and evolved. He talked to his students that had been in gunfights. He cared about what worked. He invented modern combat competitions to see what guns and techniques worked best. He used the American Pistol Institute (API, like in APIprodigy) as a laboratory. He took the case studies and reports of his students to evolve the art of close range interpersonal confrontations.

What do my friends have in common in the above references? They did not take a single or a few personal events and decry them as gospel. They studied them in their totality to get an idea of how they may e repeatable. They studied the facts and talked to others about their experiences, and develop doctrine based off the whole picture. That is what I am getting at when I say nobody cares about YOUR gunfight. Ask Y about OUR gunfights, and take what is moral, legal, ethical, viable, street survivable and winnable and then implement those lessons.

Also, if you do get a chance to talk to someone with this experience, the last thing to ask about is the gun or caliber. The mindset is the most important. Find out what they were thinking, and how they were feeling. How they were feeling is correlated to what they were thinking, which does influence the actions. What and when did they see what they saw to trip condition Red? The hardware matters, but not as much as the software.

Some events are an anomaly. Some people are an anomaly. The totality of the circumstances is a lot to take in, especially when viewed in the peace of a judge’s chambers.