Packing your training trunk.
Monday, June 08, 2009 Filed in:
Techniques &
Training, Self defense
There is a concept that, in order to properly teach the use of a
firearm for self-defense, one must have been in a shootout. The
term most often used to describe that state is "seeing the
elephant." (I'm not sure how the phrase got corrupted to mean
shooting at someone, but I am sure that I find it quite
annoying.)
The assertion, of course, is that only those who have drawn blood
with their weapon are in a position to talk about it, and anyone
else isn't worthy of attention. This harkens back to the days of
the warrior caste, when knights were the privileged class and could
own mere peasants who weren't supposed to voice their opinions. The
same dynamic is in play today, especially amongst a certain cadre
of defensive shooting instructors.
I'll admit that I've gone through an evolution with regards to
this. There was a time when I thought that only experience counted,
but over the years I've come to realize that experience is just
another data point, and one point may or may not be adequate to
promote a conclusion.
Rory Miller, whose book "Meditations On Violence"
I've already gushed
over,
deals with this up front. As he correctly observes, all fights are
idiosyncratic - one will not necessarily be like another. While
there are some characteristics that are true of a large number of
incidents, there are many more that vary from encounter to
encounter. As he puts it, no one person can have been in enough
fights to generate enough data to make generalizations. Experience
is important, he believes, but not to the exclusion of everything
else.
This was brought home to me in a recent ABC News story out of Tampa. A woman was carjacked, and
successfully ended the encounter with her own gun - but not in the
way you might think. She punched the assailant in the forehead with
the muzzle, which caused him to jump out of her car.
She did everything wrong (starting with her beliefs about the use
of deadly force), and yet she came out on top. Would you want to
emulate her in any way? I would hope that you answer "no"! Imagine
this, though: she could start teaching other people how to defend
themselves with a gun, claiming authority based on experience. How
silly would that be?
If you didn't know the nature of her experience, and/or had no
other reference with which to evaluate it, it wouldn't seem silly
at all. It's only when you can put her performance up against the
experiences of a large number of others can you gain the
perspective necessary to draw conclusions. It's what we call
'research', and is just as important as optical observation of the genus
Loxodonta.
-=[
Grant ]=-
Tags: attacks