GlockTalk Forum banner

1 - 20 of 31 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
195 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Last week seven of us met at Frontsight in Nevada for a two-day defensive handgun class. While I have participated in training of all sorts, e.g., handgun, shotgun, and rifle (certified NRA Rifle instructor) and consider myself more advanced than the beginner defensive handgun level I decided to do this with these guys because four of them were brand new shooters (one was 13 years old!) and I thought the camaraderie would be fun. It was! By the way I have given the 13 year old the nickname "Jackson the Nailer" since he performed so well. Also, like all training I have EVER done I learned something. I always learn something when I train and am thankful for what I got out of the Fronsight class.

They send you an evaluation request the next day asking for your comments about the class attended. The emails come from the organization like rain in a thunderstorm but I responded right away. I gave the class a 9.5 out of 10 in spite of the fact they teach old school technique regarding stance, presentation, and target.

They teach a bladed modified Weaver stance which no top notch trainer teaches that I am aware of any longer. Everybody has advanced to isosceles, or whatever it's called, with the feet squared to the target arms and gun in a triangle. Anyhow, they teach the bladed stance. Next, they teach a five step presentation where step two is straight up out of the holster and step three is rotate the gun to the target and four is push to target in a two-hand standard grip, five is fire. That too is old school and not taught by the top trainers. I won't go into what the newer and better presentation is at this time since there are likely folks on this website much more qualified than I.

Finally, they teach the two quick well placed shots to the thoracic center mass and one to the cranial occipital area. This too is "old school." Most of the top police trainers now teach pelvic girdle follow up shots if the thoracic shots fail to stop the threat, otherwise known as the "d*ck shot," LOL! This is also superior to the cranial occipital shot since virtually nobody can hit the head shot in a real gun fight – very, very advanced shooters can but most of us aren’t that good. Standing still, feet planted, target pegged five yards away not moving and single headshots can be done quite well; in a gunfight not so easy to say the least.

Here's why I gave the class a 9.5 even though they teach these old school techniques which, very importantly, they teach very, very well in my view! Good old training is better than no training. Period!

Add to that and they stress very effectively GUN SAFETY, something every new shooter should make second nature.

Personally, I wish every single law abiding and armed American would take a class such as the Defensive Handgun I, taught at Frontsight. Too many armed citizens don't train sufficiently and don't practice enough - Frontsight stresses BOTH plus they drill on safety. This to me is a desideratum. If the new shooter wishes to advance beyond simple beginner status I recommend they move on to instruction in the new and better techniques. But most will not so "old school" is better than "no school."

Cheers!
Fred
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,170 Posts
What a great review!
Too often I read reviews where the reviewer "knows better" and puts the training down.
It sounds like you had fun, and got some great practice in.
Thanks!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,645 Posts
While I unabashedly do not like frontsight, there is still a use for the weaver stance. Additionally I hate PG shots. And advanced shooters can make headshots. They aren't that uncommon. The purpose of shooting someone in self defense is to make them stop what they're doing. A PG shot only does this if it's a psychological stop or if they only had a knife or club. Since someone wearing body armor is probably not going to fall into either of those categories, the PG shot for self defense is stupid. It has limited applications in other areas, but it is down right dumb for most civilian applications, and it needs to die.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,645 Posts
LOL. Not every bad guy out there wear body armor.
This is correct. The traditional failure drill will also work well on those hopped up on PCP or just plain determined. The PG shot, with a pistol, will likely not.

The PG shot was developed as an alternative to a thoracic shot during scenarios where body armor was likely. Somehow, this got lost in translation to use it as an alternative to a failure drill. The original application of the PG shot was "hips and heads", not "chest and hips".

The misuse of the pelvic girdle shot is just one of those (many) things that annoys me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pAZ Ron

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,170 Posts
This is correct. The traditional failure drill will also work well on those hopped up on PCP or just plain determined. The PG shot, with a pistol, will likely not.

The PG shot was developed as an alternative to a thoracic shot during scenarios where body armor was likely. Somehow, this got lost in translation to use it as an alternative to a failure drill. The original application of the PG shot was "hips and heads", not "chest and hips".

The misuse of the pelvic girdle shot is just one of those (many) things that annoys me.
The OP sounds like he has plenty of training. It sounds like he could pick and choose what he wanted to take home from the class. And he is ok with going along with their program, even if it is not exactly what he expected. No doubt loads of people know better than Frontsight, especially on the net.
But, it also sounds like the OP and his friends had a great time, and the new shooters most gained a lot of trigger time, learned safety, and got a healthy introduction into shooting.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
195 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
I didn't realize that isosceles stance is an advanced modern technique.
Well, I guess only if you've previously been trained in Weaver or some other. I don't think I wrote "advanced modern technique" did I? LOL, it's not rocket science. But for police and military I understand it's primarily to ensure the max body armor coverage.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
195 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
This is correct. The traditional failure drill will also work well on those hopped up on PCP or just plain determined. The PG shot, with a pistol, will likely not.

The PG shot was developed as an alternative to a thoracic shot during scenarios where body armor was likely. Somehow, this got lost in translation to use it as an alternative to a failure drill. The original application of the PG shot was "hips and heads", not "chest and hips".

The misuse of the pelvic girdle shot is just one of those (many) things that annoys me.
It's my understanding talking to my son who is a SWAT team leader and police firearms instructor that the threat stopping sequence for both rifle and pistol is now multiple thoracic (3-5?) then multiple pelvic girdle shots till threat is stopped. They don't teach the head shot follow up now instead they go right to PG in the event of body armor or drugs, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Caver 60

·
Registered
Joined
·
195 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
The OP sounds like he has plenty of training. It sounds like he could pick and choose what he wanted to take home from the class. And he is ok with going along with their program, even if it is not exactly what he expected. No doubt loads of people know better than Frontsight, especially on the net.
But, it also sounds like the OP and his friends had a great time, and the new shooters most gained a lot of trigger time, learned safety, and got a healthy introduction into shooting.
Yes, but more trigger time for me would have been better. The class is very BEGINNER so there's just not enough time in two days to shoot as much as most of us would like. What they taught, in my view, was taught very well and the range master was an excellent presenter with plenty of humor and life experiences anecdotes to hold your attention even on a hot day.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
65,071 Posts
Well, I guess only if you've previously been trained in Weaver or some other. I don't think I wrote "advanced modern technique" did I? LOL, it's not rocket science. But for police and military I understand it's primarily to ensure the max body armor coverage.
You do know that the Isoceles stance was invented before the Weaver stance? By about 40-years or so.

My point was that the Weaver was the "modern" technique to supersede the Isoceles, and now the Isosceles is back.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
65,071 Posts
It's my understanding talking to my son who is a SWAT team leader and police firearms instructor that the threat stopping sequence for both rifle and pistol is now multiple thoracic (3-5?) then multiple pelvic girdle shots till threat is stopped. They don't teach the head shot follow up now instead they go right to PG in the event of body armor or drugs, etc.
SWAT and cops face different threats than Joe Blow.

That's why I always laugh whenever people trying to teach police and military tactics and techniques to Joe Civilians.

Focus on the intended audience's needs instead of making things all "tactical" and "combat".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
195 Posts
Discussion Starter #13 (Edited)
O
LOL. Not every bad guy out there wear body armor.
Of course not but if you're training for follow up shots in the event of body armor or drug desensitized threat the PG is, I think, superior to the CO since hitting the CO is very difficult. I'm told the PG, with its big blood vessels and bones supporting the girdle which is essential to being able to remain upright plus the excruciating pain of PG shots, it's a good choice to take the fight right out of the threat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Caver 60

·
Registered
Joined
·
195 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
You do know that the Isoceles stance was invented before the Weaver stance? By about 40-years or so.

My point was that the Weaver was the "modern" technique to supersede the Isoceles, and now the Isosceles is back.
Yes! What goes around apparently comes around, again, even in defensive handgun training...
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
65,071 Posts
O
Of course not but if you're training for follow up shots in the event of body armor or drug desensitized threat the PG is, I think, superior to the CO since hitting the CO is very difficult.
One size does not fit all.

A good training program would teach the students on how to think and evaluate threats and respond accordingly instead of doing rote programmed responses.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,739 Posts
I'm not being a contrarian; just trying to understand the theories in vogue.
What is the target in the pelvic girdle shot?

http://monderno.com/training/pelvic-shooting-best-worst-option/
Is this correct? A femur or a femoral artery? Basically looking for a potentially unarmored target in a kevlar age?
Pelvic functionality, for the sake of self-defense shooting is largely relegated to the hip bones as the center of the pelvic girdle contains organs and tissue not critical for life function.
the pelvic region is where the aorta feeds the common iliac arteries, which feed the femoral arteries in either leg. When it comes to causing massive trauma, a strike to an artery is one of the best ways to do it, though being small in nature with no visible outside markers to exact artery location, targeting any artery is not realistic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
195 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
SWAT and cops face different threats than Joe Blow.

That's why I always laugh whenever people trying to teach police and military tactics and techniques to Joe Civilians.

Focus on the intended audience's needs instead of making things all "tactical" and "combat".
Well, I agree. But some of us "Joe Civilians " can out shoot 90% of the cops out there. So if you're training why not train right? I'm not saying I'm all that and a bag of chips, I'm not and the older I get the more I'm not, but my boy the popo says most PD's just don't train enough and he'd rather have me backing him than many cops. So when I train, especially with him, he insists I do it right ... just sayin'
 
  • Like
Reactions: Caver 60

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,170 Posts
I'm going to venture a guess, that for most civilian defensive shooting situations, Weaver or Isoceles stance is going to be a non-issue. I doubt most encounters will last more than a few seconds, and will be at extremely close range. Given the time and distance, pulling the trigger might not be the best option.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
65,071 Posts
Well, I agree. But some of us "Joe Civilians " can out shoot 90% of the cops out there. So if you're training why not train right? I'm not saying I'm all that and a bag of chips, I'm not and the older I get the more I'm not, but my boy the popo says most PD's just don't train enough and he'd rather have me backing him than many cops. So when I train, especially with him, he insists I do it right ... just sayin'
How is training as a civilian to react to a police/SWAT situation "right"?

How many civilians you know walking around with a carbine/rifle strapped to the chest and a pistol strapped to the thigh?

How many civilians shootings you know of where multiple civilians team together and "stack" at a door and storm a premise?

Just because the Navy SEALs or the US Army Rangers or LAPD SWAT does certain things certain ways, it doesn't mean that Joe Blow should emulate.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
195 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
  • Like
Reactions: Caver 60
1 - 20 of 31 Posts
Top