Shooting while moving training.

[blues7]

My confusion. I guess I'm not sure what people mean when they say "move and shoot."

I understand the English, but I've seen the phrase used different ways.

If "move and shoot" means taking a step right or left to GOTX, drawing while stepping off the X, then shooting, that seems doable if needed for self defense.

If it means engaging in a running gun battle and firing your pistol while in motion, seems like a bad idea.

The way I was taught was "move, then shoot."

The former vs. the latter. There is little to no justification for getting into a running gun battle and such a scenario is outside most any self defense scenario.

Getting off the x to avoid presenting a static target to your attacker can be as simple as moving a step to the left or right or taking advantage of available cover or concealment.

 

[dougb1946]

Nothing funnier than civilians playing Rambo with loaded weapons taught by wanna be Rambo 'range officers".
You want to learn how to shoot on the move join the Marines or Army. It's Free!!!

Bird hunting with flushing dogs will give you an experience.

 

[Mister X]

My confusion. I guess I'm not sure what people mean when they say "move and shoot."

I understand the English, but I've seen the phrase used different ways.

If "move and shoot" means taking a step right or left to GOTX, drawing while stepping off the X, then shooting, that seems doable if needed for self defense.

If it means engaging in a running gun battle and firing your pistol while in motion, seems like a bad idea.

The way I was taught was "move, then shoot" and "shoot, then move."

It depends. Many gun centric folks envision having a certain amount of distance involved, but that usually isn't the case.

If I'm facing a gun at something like 3-5 yards, I'm going to move dynamically and any shooting I will be doing most likely be done while still in motion, at least initially.

Against a knife or any other contact weapon, I am usually going to want separation providing I'm alone. If they are pursuing which is often the case, I will once again very likely be firing while in movement.

There are no absolutes however as there are many variables to consider. The best way to hash these things out is through Force on Force training incorporating close-quarter scenarios with a full spectrum of possible modes of attack.

 

[Tinhack]

I think it's important to practice "move and shoot". It used to be taught in cop school as defensive maneuvers as well as an aggressive tactic. In the face of overwhelming odds, you have a duty to retreat and fight another battle. Or wait for backup. The movies and the 3-gun games only show aggressive move and shoot tactics. In real life, you need to deal with close combat defensive maneuvers that put space or cover between you and an attacker. That includes acquiring and discharging your firearm, when necessary. It was especially important training for traffic and felony stops.

How it might apply in civy life should be in a defensive posture such as when you may be caught in a store, restaurant or walking to/entering your car. Just because you carry a gun doesn't mean you should only practice aggressive tactics or shoot for a bull eye. The Marines or Army won't teach you that.

 

[Ziggy2525]

It depends. Many gun centric folks envision having a certain amount of distance involved, but that usually isn't the case.

If I'm facing a gun at something like 3-5 yards, I'm going to move dynamically and any shooting I will be doing most likely be done while still in motion, at least initially.

Against a knife or any other contact weapon, I am usually going to want separation providing I'm alone. If they are pursuing which is often the case, I will once again very likely be firing while in movement.

There are no absolutes however as there are many variables to consider. The best way to hash these things out is through Force on Force training incorporating close-quarter scenarios with a full spectrum of possible modes of attack.

I have done FoF with both simunitions and fake knives. That was where I leaned the "move, then shoot" and "shoot, then move" thing. At least in the scenarios we worked on, those seemed to work better than "shooting and moving" simultaneously. That's been 10 years ago. "Good tactics" may have changed since then. ETA - I've taken other tactical training courses since then, just not with simunitions.

 

[BradLH]

Quote from Delta Force veteran Sgt. Paul Howe

"Reference shooting on the move. It is a skill that all shooters aspire to learn and spend a great deal of time and effort trying to master. I have never had to use it in combat. When moving at a careful hurry, I stopped planted and made my shots. When the bullets were flying, I was sprinting from cover to cover, moving too fast to shoot. I did not find an in between. If I slowed down enough to make a solidhit when under fire, I was an easy target, so I elected not to."

http://www.combatshootingandtactics.com/published/training_for_the_real_fight.pdf

 

[Mister X]

I have done FoF with both simunitions and fake knives. That was where I leaned the "move, then shoot" and "shoot, then move" thing. At least in the scenarios we worked on, those seemed to work better than "shooting and moving" simultaneously. That's been 10 years ago. "Good tactics" may have changed since then. ETA - I've taken other tactical training courses since then, just not with simunitions.

At what distances were these drills conducted?

Not too many felons with serious intent announce they are going to shank you from across the street. When the attack with a contact weapon erupts at close-quarters, you basically only have two initial choices. Either close and engage utilizing integrated empty hand techniques or explode off the X and create/maintain separation. Unless you are a whole lot quicker than your assailant, you'll never get the distance to stop and fire from a stable shooting base.

 

[richardw]

To offer some clarification, the term "move and shoot" originated in the military many years ago. It refers to taking aggressive offensive action by moving toward the assailants while shooting. Shooting from cover and going from cover to cover is not moving and shooting. It is just changing cover and shooting from the new cover spot. Moving right or left a few feet or moving up or back a few feet is not moving and shooting. Moving and shooting in civilian life as being taught is advancing or movement from one cover to the next and firing. It simply prolongs a gunfight. It is a bad way to defend yourself in a civilian defensive scenario unless you are trying to withdraw from the hostile scene. That means getting away not advancing on your assailant(s). As I stated in a post above, If you have to defend yourself against a gun attack, the best way is to be still, take careful aim, and stop the attacker. If there is cover you should take it. If not, reduce your target size by taking a couple cover shots while going to kneeling position. If the fire is heavy do the same thing and go prone from kneeling. Continual standing and shooting in a gunfight offers too big a target. Your attacker is likely to do that, so reduce your target size, take aim, and hit that big target he offers.

I have watched numerous videos of civilian trainers teaching how to defend in a gunfight by moving and shooting and holding a continual Iscocolese position. If I could, I would sue them for perpetrating a fraud. It just makes them money and puts their students lives at risk.

Believe me, from experience I can say that if you are attcked with a gun, your best chance of surviving unhurt or dead is to incapacitate the aggressor, and attempt to withdraw as you do that.

If you want to be Rambo, then so be it, but I am axpert at only one thing. That is not getting shot. I was shot on tour 2 and tour 4 in Nam. Getting shot sucks. Generally Marines stand their ground, but I am not a civilian Rambo. So, if I get into a gunfight today, if I cannot stop the attacker with the first few shots, I am going to try to withdraw.

Some might think that a bit of cowardice, but for me it is common sense based upon experience. I don't need another Purple Heart.

 

[Muss Muggins]

Bird hunting with flushing dogs will give you an experience.

Only if you hunt birds that shoot back . . .

 

[Ziggy2525]

At what distances were these drills conducted?

Not too many felons with serious intent announce they are going to shank you from across the street. When the attack with a contact weapon erupts at close-quarters, you basically only have two initial choices. Either close and engage utilizing integrated empty hand techniques or explode off the X and create/maintain separation. Unless you are a whole lot quicker than your assailant, you'll never get the distance to stop and fire from a stable shooting base.

With a single knife wielding attacker, it was from 3 or 4 feet out to 20 feet. Exploding off the X isn't contrary to what I'm talking about.

What was taught in the class was you want a stable platform during the moments you're shooting. You don't want your feet dancing or running while you're shooting. You aren't taking up a full isosceles or weaver stance. You aren't pausing to sing the full course of "row row row your boat" before taking the next step.

You move perpendicular to the attacker, away from their weapon, drawing while moving. Even at 3 feet, the perpendicular move provided enough separation to allow drawing from strong side concealment. You pause your feet and turn your body towards the attacker just momentarily so you have a stable platform and then fire from retention. You move again perpendicular to the attacker, away from their weapon. You pause momentarily again so you have a stable platform and fire from retention.

My experience in the class was that people that didn't do the pause to get a stable platform (move and shoot) missed a lot and got stabbed (with a fake knife obviously). The people that paused when shooting (move, then shoot) hit the attacker almost every time before they could be stabbed (the class assumed multiple shots to the attacker before being stabbing stopped the threat).

That was my experience. YMMV.

 

[Mister X]

With a single knife wielding attacker, it was from 3 or 4 feet out to 20 feet. Exploding off the X isn't contrary to what I'm talking about.

What was taught in the class was you want a stable platform during the moments you're shooting. You don't want your feet dancing or running while you're shooting. You aren't taking up a full isosceles or weaver stance. You aren't pausing to sing the full course of "row row row your boat" before taking the next step.

You move perpendicular to the attacker, away from their weapon, drawing while moving. Even at 3 feet, the perpendicular move provided enough separation to allow drawing from strong side concealment. You pause your feet and turn your body towards the attacker just momentarily so you have a stable platform and then fire from retention. You move again perpendicular to the attacker, away from their weapon. You pause momentarily again so you have a stable platform and fire from retention.

My experience in the class was that people that didn't do the pause to get a stable platform (move and shoot) missed a lot and got stabbed (with a fake knife obviously). The people that paused when shooting (move, then shoot) hit the attacker almost every time before they could be stabbed (the class assumed multiple shots to the attacker before being stabbing stopped the threat).

That was my experience. YMMV.

Whose class was this?

 

[Muss Muggins]

Whose class was this?

Not yours, clearly . . .

 

[Mister X]

Not yours, clearly . . .

Definately not. I am curious who is teaching what he described.

 

[Muss Muggins]

Definately not. I am curious who is teaching what he described.

You'll never know . . .

 

[Mister X]

You'll never know . . .

Why is that?

 

[Muss Muggins]

Why is that?

He ain't gonna tell you publicly. Surprised?

(and really, why does it matter who?)

 

[Walkingwolf]

I run(move) to either get the Heck out of there, or get to cover. If I shoot the most important objective is stopping the threat, and bullet placement is prime. The faster I run, the less likely I get shot. I doubt most people can run at full steam, and place shots. So no Rambo training for me. I never will be tactikewl. Heck I don't even own a polo shirt, tactical vest, or 5.11 pants. I prefer tennis shoes to tactikewl boots.

 

[richardw]

Quote from Delta Force veteran Sgt. Paul Howe

"Reference shooting on the move. It is a skill that all shooters aspire to learn and spend a great deal of time and effort trying to master. I have never had to use it in combat. When moving at a careful hurry, I stopped planted and made my shots. When the bullets were flying, I was sprinting from cover to cover, moving too fast to shoot. I did not find an in between. If I slowed down enough to make a solidhit when under fire, I was an easy target, so I elected not to."

http://www.combatshootingandtactics.com/published/training_for_the_real_fight.pdf

So true. Amen!

 

[richardw]

With a single knife wielding attacker, it was from 3 or 4 feet out to 20 feet. Exploding off the X isn't contrary to what I'm talking about.

What was taught in the class was you want a stable platform during the moments you're shooting. You don't want your feet dancing or running while you're shooting. You aren't taking up a full isosceles or weaver stance. You aren't pausing to sing the full course of "row row row your boat" before taking the next step.

You move perpendicular to the attacker, away from their weapon, drawing while moving. Even at 3 feet, the perpendicular move provided enough separation to allow drawing from strong side concealment. You pause your feet and turn your body towards the attacker just momentarily so you have a stable platform and then fire from retention. You move again perpendicular to the attacker, away from their weapon. You pause momentarily again so you have a stable platform and fire from retention.

My experience in the class was that people that didn't do the pause to get a stable platform (move and shoot) missed a lot and got stabbed (with a fake knife obviously). The people that paused when shooting (move, then shoot) hit the attacker almost every time before they could be stabbed (the class assumed multiple shots to the attacker before being stabbing stopped the threat).

That was my experience. YMMV.

Forget it. If you follow it you might die.

I respect your effort to learn, yet I think you were ill advised. I have fought adversaries with guns and knives at close quarters, and I am able to write this post because my training kept me alive. It is past my bedtime so forgive typos. I am tired.

Stepping aside in a knife assault will get you stabbed! When you step aside you lose continuity of defense, a critical component of fighting. Then you have to regain it, that is to need to readjust into fighting mode. inam speaking about defensive composure. If you are unarmed, it is much better to stand your ground and concentrate on the attacker's knife hand position. If you have learned how, it is relatively easy to take the knife away. Not as easy as taking a handgun away, but easy enough. The secret is to stop the arm and disable the wrist. Since I could write a book on that topic, I'll just stop there.

If you are being attacked by a knife neither the Isosceles nor Weaver position are of any value, but Weaver is better because it offers cover of vital organs better than Isosceles.

Today there is a better option.

By luck I had the good fortune to meet Paul Castle around 2002. Paul, who died in 2011, was the creator of the the Center Axis Relock (C.A.R.) gunfighting system. He was a proven warrior in the British military and police. He designed the system from decades of experience. If you want to learn more about the C.A.R. System start here: http://www.sabretactical.com/CAR.pdf

The C.A.R. Gunfighting system really makes the Weaver and Isosceles stances obsolete for close quarter combat. If you really want to educate yourself in self defense, you must evaluate the system. While I value the many things I learned in the Corps, the C.A.R. system is better when it comes to civilian self defense.

I have no financial or otherwise economic interest in any entity offering training in the System. I write about it only because it is a life saver. Learn about the System and then re-evaluate your thoughts on this thread.

 

[rwsmith]

I'm not training for.......

I'm not training for a running gun battle. If I move anywhere it's backwards and maybe I should practice that. It will have to be simulated because the idea of running around while shooting would be impossible. If that is your goal, I don't think any training from unexpected positions could be BAD!

I like certain parts of most any system than is used in my self defense. I'll take what works for me.