General Category > Gun Fighting

How To Shoot More Effectively In CQB + A New CQB Study

(1/3) > >>

How To Shoot More Effectively In CQB + A New CQB Study

Below are links to a new article.  I would post it here, but it is 2 big.

+ + + + +

Canuk started a separate thread on the recent Force Science Research study and posted the info from the Force Science Research Newsletter.

I 2 get the Newsletter and made a digest of the study which you may find easier to understand and read. A link to it is below.

A key finding of the study is that "those who win lethal assualts do so, in part, because they achieve target acquisition with their firearm in a way that is directly opposite of how most officers are trained."

The info goes on to explain that basically officers are trained to use their sights in the process of acquiring the target and shooting, while experienced police operators basically use Point Shooting which allows them to shoot more quickly and more accurately.

Below is a link to a digest that I made of Part 1 of the series. The full information will be added to the Force Science Research web site in the future.

You can request to be included in the e-mailings of the newsletter at

Here's the link to the digest:

As to Hock's note re moving and shooting, check out this video:

If you want to see some short videos of WW II fighter aircraft that i made at our local airport:

I think the other thing with really need to take away from that study was to pay attention to the threat ques/body language displayed by the bandit

Thanks for info!  

I'll add that in my humble experience...and reality checks...

-The Target practice: stationary, moving target, and shooter moving.

-The Force practice: airsoft, paintball, sims in 1-1, 2-1, 3-2 drills, etc.

My observations:

-Sighting in just dissolves into the practice somewhere, and sights are not significant in CQB, nor are the exact details on grip, etc.  Moving to cover, flanking, charging in, cover fire, etc are critical to surviving.

-Using the best firearm for the distance, ammo capacity, and ability to quickly reload

-Shooting more effectively means shooting the target before target shoots at you or hits you.  This is a matter of rolling the dice and circumstance.

-You will get shot eventually if you are in enough street gunfights, so body armor, and emergency first aid and equipment nearby is critical to know and have.

-And, men were men back when they just carried a wheel gun (revolver).  Proper respect to guys like Hock who did so by choice.

This is my response to a web ring of many of the famous and infamous gun instructors of the USA. One subject came up was...was there a clinical expert overseeing this Force Science study?....If not, is that acceptable?


I am a proponent of having, at very least, a clinical psychologist involved with all performance testing. We are often left in the sad shape of training that we find ourselves in today, from a lot of basement, "stop-watch" tests run by high-school drop-outs, or other "experts" unaware of what can affect and distort performance. We are all still suffering from and shrouded under the "ancient", disproven aspects of things like "Hick's Law," "Startle Reflex" and "Heart-Rate Performance Charts," etc. I know having a handy "psych" seems to be impossible all the time, but the lack of professionals present at tests should be mentioned when announcing all serious tests. Lots of near-by colleges!? The results of tests might be valid and interesting, but the involvement of professionals elevates the test results. (Bill Lewinski surely uses these pros, but most donít)

This subject/debate is really about the transition from paper target shooting to interactive situational shooting. Simply training with simulated ammo in shoot-outs situations with actors solves a lot of these shooting problems. Almost makes them moot. The eye trains itself after interactive situational training. It creates a real world savvy that full-time, paper target shooters will never get. NEVER!

All shootings are highly situational and the training should be so. I believe in this: after a beginner qualifies on the range, then each subsequent firearms training hour should be split 15/45. 15 minutes of live fire familiarization, then 45 minutes of "sims" ammo shooting at moving, thinking people who are shooting back. You will never learn how to really gunfight unless someone is shooting back at you. Period. Deep in our hearts we all know this to be true. And I do know this destroys the current shooting industry and 90% of all shooting businesses and training programs. But it is the utter, simple truth. (And its way cheaper!)

Where and how to look becomes a savvy for a vet? Then replicate that with simulated ammo and actors in situational training. Show the shooter how the common thug draws and shoots, on up to how a distracting "pro" draws and shoots. You won't need $150,000-plus worth of medical gear and film screens. Just shoot at each with sims. Its ugly. But it is the truth truth. And like in football. The same play doesn't always work.




[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version