“Fast is fine, but accuracy is everything. You must learn to be slow in a hurry.” – Wyatt Earp
This legendary quote from Earp is often rephrased as “Fast is fine, but accuracy is final.” While spoken well over a century ago, this philosophy is nothing new nor is it antiquated. Anyone who has been in a gunfight knows it doesn’t matter how many rounds you get off, but how many rounds effectively engage the target, e.g. achieving the desired result of stopping the threat.
One’s training plan should be to realistically train for a potentially violent self-defense encounter. Some years ago, an acquaintance routinely posted videos of him standing seven yards from a dummy target. He documented his progressively faster draw times to engage the target from appendix carry. Eventually, he proudly posted a one-second par time from draw to one shot on center mass. I commend his speed and, more importantly, accuracy. Unfortunately, I witnessed this impressive feat unravel as soon as I attended an impromptu range day with him. The speed was present, but shots were easily missed at 20 yards. When he had to shoot multiple targets or introduce movement while shooting, it was even more disastrous. The speed remained, but the effective hits on target? Not so much.
The moral of this story is to consider the core basis of defensive shooting: to make effective hits on the threat therein stopping its violent — and lethal — intrusion upon one’s docile existence. If hits aren’t made, the problem will most certainly still exist. Thus, what considerations should be made when developing your training and skill-building regimen for defensive firearms carry?
Legal and Ethical Factors
A 124-grain 9mm exits the muzzle of a pistol at approximately 1,100 fps. If not directed in the right location, that bullet will travel with a potential lawsuit, criminal charges, or, in its most tragic form — an innocent human life. Lethal force encounters are what many in the insurance industry would characterize as a “high risk, low frequency” event. The occurrence is rare (as few to none of us will ever have to employ lethal force in our lifetimes) while the liability and risk are high. For those of us who carry a firearm for defensive purposes, we are exercising a Constitutional right. However, that right doesn’t absolve us from the responsibility associated with exercising it. Training and philosophy should be adjusted accordingly.
In my experience in law enforcement, an exceptionally small percentage of self-defense shootings (both in and out of uniform) end without a missed shot by the involved defenders. When adrenaline, movement, sensory disruption, recoil, and numerous other factors take effect; there is no guarantee every shot will hit its mark. Nevertheless, the goal is to train, at a minimum, to reduce the risk and assuage the conscience that accurate shots will be made during a lethal force confrontation. Your training regimen should have the legal and moral considerations in mind at all times.
Understanding Background
The Four Rules of Gun Safety are effectively the commandments of safe gun handling. They are not to be violated. Unfortunately, the real world isn’t conducive to such rules. Rule number four of safe gun handling: Know your target and what is beyond. In a defensive encounter, there are no guarantees of knowing what is beyond the threat. While a sand berm or Kevlar bunker would be a nice backdrop, bad actors don’t afford us that luxury if they intend to harm an innocent individual. Thus, training should be structured to include some form of decision-making by the trainee.
Previously, I’ve discussed integrating decision-making into shooting drills. It’s not necessarily how fast a shooter can get on target as much as it’s how fast they can make an intelligent decision to engage a threat. Before continuing further, I will acknowledge the caveat that not all circumstances provide us with the luxury of time to make such a decision. Some shootings occur so quickly that we are forced to act without further preparation. The threat must be handled posthaste. This discussion revolves around challenging our brains by introducing an additional element to the “draw and shoot” mindset of addressing a lethal threat. The introduced element is training the brain and senses to “assess” during such encounters.
Many days are spent with shooters drawing and shooting at a target presented before them. In a formal training environment, the range commands of “fire” or “threat” may initiate the engagement. Rarely do such expeditions include consideration for critical thinking under stress. Drills that force the shooter to think beyond putting holes in paper are excluded, unfortunately — and to everyone’s detriment.
There are a variety of drills to conduct that force the shooter to think of when, where, and how they should engage a threat. For instance, a single target with different numbers, shapes, or colors can help the shooter look for, assess, and identify the “threat”. This drill should be conducted with an observer calling out the threat while the shooter has their back turned or their eyes directed away from the target. Upon the identification of the target, the shooter acquires the target paper and looks for the threat as called by the observer. The shooter engages and assesses for another potential call by the observer of an additional threat. This drill requires target discrimination, accuracy, and speed on behalf of the shooter.
An additional drill, if equipped with the ability to do so, is to use targets placed in random order and location. The more target stands, the merrier. I’ve found this drill to be a fun and creative range session with my coworkers. This normally involves having the shooter remain at the firing line with their back turned to the targets. With a cold range, observers go down range and re-arrange the target locations. Admittedly, we have been a little ridiculous with target arrangement. Nevertheless, upon everyone’s return to the firing line, we will make the range live and give the shooter the fire command. The shooter will turn and be faced with a previously unknown number of threats at unknown orientations and distances.
Ultimately, an additional element is added — innocent “targets” amongst threats. With the addition of “no shoot” targets (representing places we don’t want high-velocity projectiles to go), the shooter may have to move laterally on the firing line or change their elevation to safely make a shot. Thus, the shooter now has to consider where, when, and at what angle they engage threats down range. If shots go onto an unintended target, that is obviously an undesired result. The goal is to force the shooter’s thought process to consider real-world environments while neutralizing the threat as fast as possible.
Discretion
Discretion is an oft-ignored component of firearms training. Shooters undoubtedly train for ways to expand their accuracy and speed through drills designed to challenge and develop these skillsets. While those skills are important, the ability to exhibit cool discretion under stress cannot be ignored. Arguably, the mark of a skilled defensive shooter is not in the shots they make, but in their ability to withhold a shot because they process the risk-reward of doing so. In Part 2 of this series, I will delve into how the action-reaction gap (OODA Loop) can be manipulated in our favor, address where and when speed should be implemented in target engagement, and how to identify your “failure” point in training through speed.
