April 20, 2011
Various internet domains
I have recently read a thread in a forum that has sparked my interest, and this typed opinion.
Most gun owners will not seek training beyond that required to obtain their firearm of choice. In short, training becomes that which must be completed in order to reach a desired goal. For some of us, we seek training to reach a goal beyond mere possession of a firearm, as we realize that mere possession of a handgun does not a shooter make.
This gives rise to various disciplines and itís disciples. Let me say up front that I believe all disciplines are no more than theory until that user puts them to real life usage in combat. Resisting a mugger is combat, and may very well cost one their life, or the muggerís life. I am of the theory, ďBetter 100 dead muggers than one dead innocent.
Each tactic and method will have a time for usage. There is no ďOne size fits allĒ in the modern world. There are systems, platforms, and tactics that are more likely to allow one to persevere and be victorious than others, but nothing replaces what one does in a real encounter, and we wonít know what that is until we have that encounter.
Studies and laboratory results give a good indicator, but are by no means the definitive answer. The best we can do is say, ďIf such and such happens, so and so may react like so.Ē This makes me ask, ďWhat if someone reacts like we didnít expect? What do we do now?Ē Iíve reacted as expected, and reacted not as expected on various occasions. One never knows for sure, as I said before.
This prompts the observation that proponents of various methodology can, if they are not careful, become too mired in a technique that gives rise to dogma and when things donít go as planned they donít know how to react. Iím not saying that one should attempt to obtain the equivelant of a Black Belt in every discipline, but it strikes me as common sense that one should have a modicum of understanding of various disciplines. We will naturally gravitate to things that we are good at, thatís understandable. The thing is, how good are we at understanding and using techniques and methods not to our liking?
I will admit up front, I hate hand to hand combat. Getting hit, or stuck with a shank, scares me more than getting shot. I donít say that because I think Iím bullet proof. I know I have a glass jaw, and have been knocked unconscious enough times to confirm it, and have seen the lethality of a simple homemade prison weapon. If Iím unconscious I canít maintain control of things like keys, weapons, or my own destination. Thus I find it not something to like.
So now we arrive at the core of my typing. Each discipline has itís proponents, but is one really better than the other? I would say that each discipline has itís time for usage. On the other side of that coin is that the more options one has, the longer it takes to make a decision. Gee, thatís quite a conundrum isnít it?