Page 1 of 1

"Closing Down" A Threat

Posted: Sun Dec 14, 2014 10:44 am
by Ryan
Closing down a threat. You've entered, you're going towards the threat. Jam. Reload. Whatever. Transition. You continue to move towards threat. Is this behaviorally accurate at all? Anyone else been taught similar or have any comments?

"Let's see. If someone has a knife and we have plenty of warning appropriate tactics are to move away from danger and engage the threat. That makes sense.

But, if we are doing CQB and enter a room and spontaneously face a person with a gun, we are supposed to advance on them (move towards the danger) and shoot? Why would anyone require a behaviorally non-compliant tactic under conditions of greater threat and stress with less time to think?

Does anyone see a behavioral problem with what is taught in many CQB circles? Don't move into the unknown unless you are okay with stopping when you see a spontaneous threat. Systems of CQB that depend on people flowing through a door and not stopping to engage threats are behaviorally flawed from the start. Unless you have made a deliberate decision (threat is no longer spontaneous) to charge towards an immediate threat, the chance of you doing it is nearly zero.

The initial defensive response is instinctively wired into all of us. It occurs first because it sits in a "lower" part of the brain, is genetically wired, requires less information for execution, and is not as precise as higher brain actions. It is not practical to try and train it out of us."

Re: "Closing Down" A Threat

Posted: Mon Jan 05, 2015 6:06 am
by tacticalguy
Good topic, Ryan. Let's see where this takes us.

Re: "Closing Down" A Threat

Posted: Mon Jan 19, 2015 10:29 pm
by ClearRight
Depends on the operator's ability to switch his/hers agression on when needed, and "shoot his way to his corner", so to speak. Seen a fair few guys during exercises getting "target lock" and just move towards the target. Same as during fighting, people tend to get in clinches.

Re: "Closing Down" A Threat

Posted: Fri Feb 20, 2015 3:02 am
by tacticalguy
I'm in the habit of carrying several reliable weapon platforms at any one time, firearms and edged weapons. If I enter a structure/room/hallway, etc, I have TWO working firearms, one in hand and the other that I can quickly transition to, at need, besides a rear draw 12" Kukri and two very accurate throwing knives that I'm quite handy with. I prefer the M4 or the venerable MP-5 as my primary and my Sig 226 as the secondary. If my primary jams or misfires, I step offline but, continuing towards the objective, as I transition to my secondary. That's the way I was trained. I'll keep transitioning until I've either made it to my objective or am no longer capable of doing so. Backing up or stopping isn't really feasible in a dynamic situation, imho.