The "one" way is only relevant if you care about winning. I do in fact take a lot of penalties at times when I dont like the way a stage was set up rule wise. With that being said I can honestly say that a few things I disagreed with in the begining, I have come around too later. Reload with retention being one of them. A tac reload on the other hand, I have more trouble warming up to. I can only see it really for a pistol that has a mag safety.

This is true. I forgot about IDPA matches. However, aren't the targets still stationary?

 

No - there are moving targets. Swingers, pop and drops, clamshells, turn and drops....

No - there are moving targets. Swingers, pop and drops, clamshells, turn and drops....

 

Nice.

No - there are moving targets. Swingers, pop and drops, clamshells, turn and drops....

Yes, but after the walk through when they show you how it all works(and by watching shooters before you) you know how fast/slow these targets move at. I think what Devs wants is a free moving target. Sort of like a clay or rabbit.

The "one" way is only relevant if you care about winning. I do in fact take a lot of penalties at times when I dont like the way a stage was set up rule wise. With that being said I can honestly say that a few things I disagreed with in the begining, I have come around too later. Reload with retention being one of them. A tac reload on the other hand, I have more trouble warming up to. I can only see it really for a pistol that has a mag safety.

I don't have to win, but I don't like to lose at anything. So I will play within the rules, finding ways that I can LEGALLY cheat or game a stage. I enjoy finding holes that were not filled in.

In the very begining of IDPA, IIRC you were not allowed to see the stage or the competitors before you. Great in theory, Im guessing it was really hard in practice. There are also competitions called Polite Society matches. I have never attended one. I hear its hyper critical and demanding. Sort of like IDPA on steroids and far closer to what IDPA was in the beginning.

Heres what a polite society cof looks like!!!

 

I don't have to win, but I don't like to lose at anything. So I will play within the rules, finding ways that I can LEGALLY cheat or game a stage. I enjoy finding holes that were not filled in.

 

Well said.

 

There is a saying. If you ain't cheating just a little, then you must not want it bad enough.

That's where a full auto pistol with 20 rounds would come in handy. Lol

 

Riight so you'd get one shot COM, and the rest off around venus somewheres as the uncontrollable muzzle climb pulled you up and away. Even Experienced MG shooters have trouble keeping busts small with "Machine Pistols", their cyclic rate is too high.

Ron, been there done that. I gave up because the Game mindset doesnt work well. It just kept getting me in trouble or screwing me up. The "someone might be shooting back at me" mindset works a lot better! My scores improved a lot when I did this. That is not to say there isnt something I tactically totally disagree with here and there. I choose those times wisely. Id rather lose a match or a stage and win in a real engagement. I know a few others that do the same.

Riight so you'd get one shot COM, and the rest off around venus somewheres as the uncontrollable muzzle climb pulled you up and away. Even Experienced MG shooters have trouble keeping busts small with "Machine Pistols", their cyclic rate is too high.

I figure you don't have to really hit shít. Once the perps hear the rat-a-tat hope they'll get scared and start ducking or running. Enough for you to get away.

Paintball is a good poor-mans substitute, as is airsoft.

I have a pretty big background in paintball, used to play it quite a bit. Although I agree with you for the most part that paintball is a good experience....I don't think it could really apply much to defensive shooting. There are too many differences. In paintball, you KNOW the other team is trying trying to shoot you....the adrenaline is spread out among 15 minutes, not 15 seconds. Distances are much farther also, I cant think of too many times that I shot someone within 25 feet let along 5 feet. Paintball however is GREAT at teaching someone how to gain an advantage through angles, cover fire, and firing while moving though.

 

Heres what a polite society cof looks like!!!

 

That looks AWESOME. Sign me up.

There are several things to consider before you decide how to train for multiple targets.

 

Always take cover first before you do anything if possible.

 

Maneuver can help you more than shooting sometimes.

 

First, how well someone shoots at the range is not a good indication of how well they will shoot in combat. NYPD stats show this consistently. Jeff Cooper touchs on this in his Mental Preparation lecture. Gunfighting is maybe 95% mental and 5% firearms handling skills.

 

I wouldn't waste a lot of time trying to figure out "who is the biggest threat". You want to keep your training simple rather than trying to determine exactly what each of your opponents is armed with. If you do go for the biggest threat it can be BG2, BG1, BG3 or BG3, BG1, BG2, etc. If you train one way it will be easier to perform if you have to do it for real. To me as long as they all have the ability to do me serious harm or kill me they are all equal threats.

 

Using the KISS system I would shoot left to right (I'm right handed) if they are roughly in a line formation or front to back if they're in a column formation. One shot each and then start all over again until they are all down. Point shoot, flash sight picture, or sighting is all dependent on the distances you know you can hit with using what technique.

 

Whatever you do keep it simple.

I haven't heard one word about retreating and taking cover.

 

Everyone has their own situational senario. I live in a bilevel. I know where my threats would occur.

 

I know where my retreat and take cover points are. In my situation the threats would have to funnel into

 

the safe area. This would cause the threats to be "fish in a barrel".

 

This is more complicated based on the location of your loved ones relative to the threats.

 

Being that it is only my wife and I and a few dogs, my senario is a little simpler.

 

I'm making the GROSS assumption that this is an in home senario, being that NJ is a non CCW state and all the distances that have been discussed are relatively short.

 

^This. Not a knock on IDPA or competition shooting but there is a definite difference between it and "gunfighting". I've taken a few combat courses. Trying to break into the private security operator field. In those courses its about complete situational awareness, not just targets. You need to be aware of level of threat, cover, when to do an additional assess, so on...

 

In these courses there's often guys who are high shooters and then hard shooters.

 

High shooters = accuracy but they often compromise use of cover

 

Hard shooters = may not be as accurate but they are breathing and their targets are not

 

I've always tried to find a balance. You can't pull the trigger if you're dead.

 

In the case of MULTIPLE threats:

 

1) Assess the threat

 

2) *COVER* period

 

3) Engage threats in closest proximity first. Simple as that. Greater distance = greater chance they'll miss

 

4) Work from there

' How would you really engage multiple targets? '

 

Let me put it this way. It would look like The Fourth of July.

 

That's how I "really" would do it.

 

*pets loaded MAX-11* (M16 and Betas locked up right now)

It sucks simunitions are expensive to utilize. They'll teach you the most about gunfighting, especially in terms of being hit. Paintball is a good poor-mans substitute, as is airsoft.

 

IDPA is the closest you might get to using your real guns in a real fight seeing as it allows you to run, gun, reload, run, gun, cover, etc. I'd like to try it. From the videos, it seems fun.

 

Simunition may not be that far out of out future here in NJ. I attended an Orientation class at Gun for Hire last Monday. No idea on the price or the final prerequisite courses needed but it should be available to the GP soon.

 

Harry

From my Modern Warfare 2 training, I would typically shoot at the closest enemies until dry, then switch to a pistol, and proceed to use my Commando perk to stab the last guy. Then find cover and reload.

 

Something tells me you are also on full auto and emptying a magazine into the 1st guy.

IDPA & USPSA are games. Neither prepares you for combat better than the other. Both teach you the basic skills of gun presentation, recoil control, transitions, shooting on the move. Both introduce a limited stress element of performing on a timer. That and some luck will slightly improve your chances in a confrontation over someone who just shoots at a bullseye target in a lane. The variability of potential situations makes it impossible to predict how many shots per target is the right approach. When confronted with multiple armed attackers you will need a lot of luck to survive no matter what your preferred game is. That is why the best number of rounds to fire per target is 0. It is best to not get into that situation. Second best is to escape. All other approaches come in tied for a distant third.

Engagement of the closest target while moving towards concealment then cover. Blading your body and making yourself small. Reload and scram during lulls.

IDPA & USPSA are games. Neither prepares you for combat better than the other. Both teach you the basic skills of gun presentation, recoil control, transitions, shooting on the move. Both introduce a limited stress element of performing on a timer. That and some luck will slightly improve your chances in a confrontation over someone who just shoots at a bullseye target in a lane. The variability of potential situations makes it impossible to predict how many shots per target is the right approach. When confronted with multiple armed attackers you will need a lot of luck to survive no matter what your preferred game is. That is why the best number of rounds to fire per target is 0. It is best to not get into that situation. Second best is to escape. All other approaches come in tied for a distant third.

 

I agree with you fully. IDPA & USPSA are games. However, they do help teach skills that could help save my life or the lives of others. That's why I do it - and I stay in the production class, because that's the gun that I will be using to defend myself if the time comes.

 

Plus it's fun

Engagement of the closest target while moving towards concealment then cover. Blading your body and making yourself small. Reload and scram during lulls.

 

 

How do you blade your body against multiple opponents?

People say that IDPA and USPA are games however all things being equal (including a little bit of luck) the guy who regularly shoots at those competitions are better prepared than someone who has not. Maybe it's only a 10 or 20 percent advantage but hey, every bit counts. Just my opinion anyway.

How do you blade your body against multiple opponents?

 

Odds are it's going to be bladed to somebody, which means that if their bullet has anything near decent penetration it will perforate multiple vital organs.

Im pretty skinny, I turn sideaways and good luck hitting me! ha

The whole "blading" thing is an interesting discussion. A lot of that argument comes from the perspective of those wearing body armor... and so it makes sense. To be in a bladed position with body armor would neglect the fact that the person would have their two strongest plates facing away from the possible danger (and with the sides where there are normally smaller plates and far less denser mass vulnerable).

Still, being squared up to the target, even without armor, would seem to make more sense as being hit on the sides, seems to me, could be more catastrophic.

Also, being squared up towards the threats (purposely plural in this context) would allow for a person to better drive their system towards engaging and stopping the threats. Of course this boils down to a person's shooting technique; but its a given that shooting from a bladed stance makes it more difficult to consistently and effectively/efficiently engage multiple threats... so, yea.

bbk, I've seen this argument taken even further than that. Instinctually, if you square yourself to your target, you're in more of a threat stance. If you're bladed, you're in a more submissive stance. Squared up to your opponent, and even approaching them (especially with gun in hand), will instill a type of primal fear IIRC.

Yea, that argument is more of the one about primal instincts in relations to how emotion(s) is tracked through our more "animalistic" tendencies. Trying to "bristle our hairs" to appear bigger can cause a type of intimidation. I'm skeptical though as I'm not a huge believer in certain biosocial conceptions of contemporary humans (like that one). Might work against bears, but humans who have a bit more processing power [in the brain] and knowledge about society and its tendencies? Cue the Indiana Jones scene...

 

ETA: Because I wanted to watch it again

My answer, I don't know, it depends on the situation. But here are some quidelines I'd follow:

1. Move quickly. Preferably in a direction that allows you to use one of your targets as a shield.

2. Shoot until they go down. No onesies or twosies for me.

3. Cover.

4. Kiss my a** goodbye as this will probably not end well.

How do you blade your body against multiple opponents?

 

With bullets

Multiple targets, I'm getting out of the way not moving towards them. You're moving quicker and easier low and bladed than you are squared up. You want to get hit in the chest? Then you square up. I'd rather take one in the arm or shoulder and hopefully stay mobile. When was the last time you saw a boxer, wrestler or anyone going at it standing square?