What's Good Enough - Carbine Skills

[USMC0331]

Dude in the video claimed that "Army guys" spend 4-5 seconds of rapid fire and hit jack shit, whereas he spends a second or two actually aiming and getting hits.

Though I'm pretty sure there are a lot of "Army guys" who would take issue with that broad classification. 1KM was an "Army guy," airborne, I believe.

Am I the only one that takes a second to check out a sources background?
http://www.wayofthegun.us/about/

[USMC0331]

I agree on the house going to secondary.  After the first entrance you could tell that it was going to be very tight.

Specifically I saw...

        Tactics
            3.05 can see target while slicing pie but pops out for full exposure to shoot it
            7.27 gun grab waiting to happen
            7.29 turns back on unsecured lane
            16.35 chamber checks but does not top off before going over hill
            17.35 surprised by target, either first run or lost concentration. Why the rush? Move and pause, which he does well in other areas of clip
            17.54 good retreat to cover/concealment for mag change, way too slow though
            18.35 good use of charging handle sight method in brushy area, expecting up close targets
       
        Unfamiliarity / bad technique
                1.13 right hand loading as a right handed person, take master grip away.
                1.22 slow reload with no emerg spot setup
                1.22 very slow transition
                1.25 thumbs hammer, adds time instead of dbl action, breaks shooting grip
                1.35 poor recoil management
                1.40 again mag on wrong side, gun in weak hand without firing grip to reload
                1.53 sling hanging on water bag
                4.34 reload w/retention has gun empty for 5 seconds!
                6.05 gun not in shoulder, poor recoil management
                7.12 folds stock for QCB, suffers many FTF for it as well as recoil management
                10.10 long time to secure secondary
                12.45 E-reload slow from flapped pouch. Should have one setup or speed and be bumping mags
                17.54 fatigue showing, rides bolt home
       
        Safety
            16.30 slings rifle w/safety off. Never uses safety on COF, even with long pauses between threats
       
        Bad gear
            11.10 shell stuck in chamber, stops and switches uppers. GI cleaning rods would have had him back up in 5minutes tops

[rah45]

Dude in the video claimed that "Army guys" spend 4-5 seconds of rapid fire and hit jack shit, whereas he spends a second or two actually aiming and getting hits.

Though I'm pretty sure there are a lot of "Army guys" who would take issue with that broad classification. 1KM was an "Army guy," airborne, I believe.

Am I the only one that takes a second to check out a sources background?
http://www.wayofthegun.us/about/

His experience on the matter is inconsequential, which is why I did not bother with his background. If Chesty Puller had said it, the statement still would have been unfair and untrue. There are plenty of guys in every branch of the military, including the Marine Corps where "every Marine is a rifleman," who do not know how to properly operate and maintain their weapon, much less hit targets adequately (and my sources for that info are two infantry guys, former Army and Marine Corps). My point is that making such broad generalizations does a disservice to those Army guys who actually take the trouble and do practice and do get it right. If he had said that "Army basic firearms training teaches this crap instead of what they should," I wouldn't have said anything.

It's no different than saying, "All conservatives/liberals/libertarians think ******* about ********, now and forever." Painting issues with such a broad brush doesn't help anyone - it only severely ridicules those whose minds you wish to change (and they won't listen because it's not constructive criticism), and it ignores those people who put effort into doing "it" the right way.

[USMC0331]

The way I see it is...  being Army and knowing that many Army guys can't shoot, he has a right to give them shit which is what he was doing.

No different than an LEO saying most cops can't shoot.

Both are true statements and his background gives him a pass because he knows first hand, so it's very relevant.

If someone won't put in the work then nothing they hear is going to matter.  You have people that test things and think for themselves and those that don't.... period.

[rah45]

The way I see it is...  being Army and knowing that many Army guys can't shoot, he has a right to give them shit which is what he was doing.

No different than an LEO saying most cops can't shoot.

Both are true statements and his background gives him a pass because he knows first hand, so it's very relevant.

If someone won't put in the work then nothing they hear is going to matter.  You have people that test things and think for themselves and those that don't.... period.

Had he made that distinction, it would not have mattered. "Most" and "many" is very different from "all," and without saying "most" or "many," "all" is implied.

His background is impressive, but him voluntarily taking on the role of instructor and, therefore, a role model of sorts, forgoes his "pass," as you call it. Someone attempting to educate others as that man is doing has a certain responsibility to correct others with respect and grace. Broad negative categorizations do neither, instead causing divides among those who might otherwise come together to learn. Furthermore, it sets a bad example to anyone else who might consider serving as an instructor. Because of his experience, because of his assumed position as educator, guide, instructor, his words carry power. With this kind of power, just like when handling firearms, you must exercise appropriate caution and behave responsibly. This applies to him, or any other instructor/teacher in any educational setting.

"What's Good Enough - Carbine Skills" - You started this thread so that we can post our ideas, experiences, questions, concerns, etc., all with the intention of helping one another improve our skills. How we speak to one another, whether on a forum, via YouTube videos or at the range doing personal training, does affect how much we learn. A comment designed to demean another is never necessary in an educational setting. There is always a neutral way to identify the problem, address it, and work to solve it.

Effective, positive communication to others regarding topics such as these is just as important as the actual skills you are trying to teach. If you talk to someone else, directly or indirectly, in the same manner he did, you will have only a negative effect on that person. You will also likely lose respect from others who see you do it. In your students' eyes, if you said that about him, why wouldn't you say it about them? No one wants to be made a scapegoat - everyone wishes to have a patient, understanding instructor. Whenever you find yourself in that position, as a teacher, you willingly take that responsibility, and everything that happens with your student as a result of your choice of mannerism and language is on your head. You are correct in that hard work on the student's part is key to learning, and this is the student's responsibility. However, you can make or break a student's will with just one positive or negative word. One word can be all it takes, one sentence spoken a certain way. As a student, they work to learn. As a teacher, you must earn and maintain their respect - and that means giving as well as getting it. If they do not respect you, they will not learn much, if anything, from you.

[USMC0331]

Wow rah, that's a well laid out explanation and I thank you for it.  That said... "If you talk to someone else, directly or indirectly, in the same manner he did, you will have only a negative effect on that person."   I think you take things a bit to seriously.  If he did that in front of me I would have the same response I did while watching it... a good nature'd laugh.

If a person can not laugh at themselves when they perform sub-par or fail, they will not get back up and carry on IME. 

Very few cops shoot competition with civies because their egos won't allow them to fail in front of them or they want to believe they have skilz so much that they will not put them to the test until it is no longer voluntary, i.e. a shootout. 

Many on the forums (this one included I'm sure) tend to fall into the same trap.  My intent of the post is to make people think about what their skill levels really are in comparison to a likely opponent and possibly encourage them to get out and test them like those guys in the video.  To have people ask themselves... "Am I in the Arena?"

It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.

[rah45]

I think this thread was a great idea. I know that I need it, because I don't get a lot of opportunity to go practice like I would like to do.

You make a good point about ego, and you're correct in saying that people (such as certain LEOs, for instance) can use their ego as a shield because they're afraid of criticism. Instead of just laughing it off and moving on to someone more receptive, I challenge anyone who serves as an instructor to accept getting that person to let down their guard, put aside their ego and trust you with their emotional vulnerability, so that you can truly help them prepare. Plenty of egotistical, hard-headed guys in the military who probably wouldn't be alive if some NCO hadn't cared enough to punch through that outer wall and used that opportunity to teach them life-saving lessons.

Some people are hopeless - they just won't let that ego fall away in order to learn. However, there are those who just need a teacher to make that little extra effort to get inside their mental and emotional wall, make that connection between teacher and pupil, and use that connection to, in this case, hopefully save a life down the road. Teachers cannot always tell which is which, and it's your call whether to make that extra effort, but I ask you not to dismiss someone just because they're a little more hard-headed. They might just need you to peek under that outer shell. That egotistical asshat at the range might just be the most trustworthy friend you could ever meet, if you can get under his defenses and give him a chance.

[USMC0331]

excellent points, and I want to add that I hear you about matching your behavior to the student.  I have a friend that is interested in prepping (Morman that has the food part cold) and got started in IDPA/3gun last year as well as shooting with me on more SHTF type scenarios. 

Great guy, but not having been .mil, LEO, smoke jumper, etc. I sometimes need to remind myself not to be as brash as I can be sometimes.  If he ain't hearing the message because of the messenger, it's no point now is it? 

Like being a good Christian proclaiming the Gospel.  I can reach many with it that "sensitive" people can't because I'm up front and no BS about it, but either topic though can fall on deaf ears if I get too confrontational or develop the attitude that they need to "suck it up" which is a .mil thing that some don't get.

You have served me a good reminder to think about the audience.  Is the end goal to cultivate potential preppers or enlist those that are hardcore only?  On the other hand... Sometimes being the NCO kicking one in the arse is the proper role model.

[USMC0331]

http://mountainguerrilla.wordpress.com/2013/09/23/the-realities-of-applied-combat-marksmanship-or-why-basic-marksmanship-training-is-just-not-enough/

[JohnyMac]

A bit off-topic however I have been following the discussion between DVC and Rah45 so here goes.

I have been a successful coach of people for over the past 35+ years because in part, I am a coach not a manager. You manage cows you coach people.

The other part of being successful is to know your people. Some folks only need a "feather approach" when coaching for optimal performance while others need a "2x4 applied to the head approach." 

It's all about art & science. The style you use to deliver the facts make all the difference.