Competition vs Combat vs Self-Defense: Conclusion

 First, to clarify, I have said for years that the definition of Self-Defense is "a legal determination made after the fact by a criminal justice authority" (Tim Larkin, When Violence is the Answer).  I absolutely still believe that; what I am referring to in these last few columns is the distance at which self-defense shootings occur.  If a situation is determined to be self-defense after the fact by a criminal justice authority, it is typically going to happen within a certain distance, because there has to be some element of imminent danger to be determined as Self-Defense.  Sorry if that confused anybody.

So, having said that, allow me to go back to confusing people by misusing my own terms again.  What makes good self-defense shooting?  In the past few weeks, I have written about how the fundamentals of marksmanship either apply or don't to self-defense shootings in close proximity.  Breath control is useless.  Slow and steady trigger squeezes are unimportant if you have a proper tight grip on the gun.  Aiming is not optional outside of gun-grappling range because of the risk to bystanders,  Stances are irrelevant because in a six-foot fight, your stance will never be what you practice.  That covers four of the NRA's five shooting fundamentals.

The one I didn't cover is Follow-Through, because it confuses the more important aspect of successful defensive pistol shooting: speed!  The purpose of engaging with a handgun when your life is threatened is to "stop the threat."  What does that actually look like?  Well, what I teach students is that the goal is to put the enemy into shock, INSTANTLY!  That is the critical aspect of winning a self-defense encounter of any type; cause Damage to the attacker as fast as you can.  Now, if you shoot somebody in the chest with one 9mm bullet, he will eventually go into shock, he may even die.  What most people don't understand is that "eventually" means he is still functionally able to hurt you before he goes into shock.  That is why it is so critical to shoot fast into the ribcage and put him into shock, instantly.  That means putting two to five shots into his ribcage in under two seconds.  Which can only be achieved if you GRIP the gun correctly and pull the trigger as fast as possible without moving the point of bullet impact outside of the attacker's ribcage ("accurate enough" shooting). Second point, the precision of the shooting in a ribcage with a handgun is not nearly as important as the volume in achieving the objective of putting the enemy into shock, instantly.  Hitting somebody three times in the lungs or liver or spleen in one second will actually have greater medical effect on the enemy than hitting him once in the heart in that same one second.  Both of these scenarios are survivable, despite what Hollywood says, but the three less-accurate shots in one second will cause greater shock and systemic shutdown, ending the fight more quickly.  That's the main objective in self-defense shootings: end it QUICKLY.

And that is the fundamental difference between combat distances and self-defense distances in shooting.  In combat, you shoot to wound, despite what hostage rescuers preach, because the laws of land warfare are very specific about this point.  The reason soldiers can't modify ammunition to make it more lethal is because the Geneva and Hague Conventions legally make warfare about putting the enemy out of the fight with a single shot wound.  At self-defense distances, I have to shoot until the attacker is incapable of harming me.  Now, whether he lives or dies is up to doctors, our goal is to end the engagement as fast as we can, and the best way to do that is to put him into shock instantly, which requires multiple shots delivered as fast as possible into the ribcage.  Which is why I argue that pistol fighting is a lot more like fist or knife fighting than rifle combat.  It is much more grisly and violent, and the outcomes are usually more gruesome, because the closer you get to an enemy trying to kill you, the fewer options you have.  You have to end such fights as quickly as possible, to minimize your exposure to getting hurt instead.  In a tank battle, miles apart, things can happen more slowly than in a knife fight in a phone booth.  The closer you are, the faster things need to happen to minimize risk.  That is why Follow Through is not worth talking about for Self-Defense distances, because while it might technically happen, it will happen in a fraction of a second between shots if you correctly manage the recoil of the handgun with your grip, trigger pull and aiming.  Proper recoil management is proper Follow-Through, it's just allowing you to shoot much more quickly than traditional understandings of Follow-Through as preached by bullseye shooting at paper ranges.

Be the Gunslinger!

In conclusion: the goal is to end a self-defense encounter as quickly as possible without risk to yourself.  How do you do that?  By incapacitating the enemy as quickly as possible, which medically means I want to put him into shock, INSTANTLY!  What's the best way to do that with a handgun?  Putting two to five rounds into his ribcage in under two seconds.  The faster you can put him into shock, the less risk you are exposing yourself to in a self-defense situation.  Speed is the most important aspect of self-defense shooting and it is achieved by proper grip, trigger pull and combat accurate aiming (ribcage).  Precision is for competition or hostage rescues (combat).  Calmness is for snipers, not self-defenders.  Slow and deliberate decision making is for generals, not gunslingers.  Be the gunslinger. 

Hope you liked these tips on effectively defending yourself with a handgun at close range.  If so, please share this blog with other people you may know who want to learn.  If you totally disagree and think I'm an idiot, please also share and comment.  If you want to learn how to do it for real, give me a call.

Thanks,

Soule

www.easy6training.com

facebook.com/easy6training