Pistol retention gone WRONG or how Sul isn't safe

[tacticalguy]

http://www.vikingtactics.com/images/med ... ention.pdf

[jimothy_183]

Very interesting article that challenges the status quo with compelling arguments and recommendations.

Nice find sir!

[tacticalguy]

Very interesting article that challenges the status quo with compelling arguments and recommendations.

Nice find sir!

Thanks! I guess I'm late to the discussion on this. Apparently, every tactical instructor worth his salt is teaching this and many, many LE agencies out there are preaching this to their tactical units, including the FBI. I haven't liked it since I first saw it many years ago. There is a lot of discussion about this on a few other tactical sites that I'm a member of. For those that don't know, this technique is supposed to minimize the danger of muzzling your team and maintaining muzzle awareness. The problem I have with the technique, is based on weapon retention. In sul, you have your weapon extended out from your body and over in a "broken" wrist position. Now, granted that this is the position that you will mainly see from the tactical team that is "stacked" at a door prior to entry, excluding the first assaulter. However, they're also teaching that this is the fall back position when you're searching for a potential target among a crowd. As I said, I'm not a fan of this technique and the above article eloquently explains why much better than I could.

[jimothy_183]

Well I think the short answer to this problem is that both sul and the other position advocated in the article are valid positions with their own time and place of use. As James Yeager said you need to point your weapon somewhere as you move around and you should let the situation dictate your tactics, or in this particular case the position.

I think the real problem is that people tend to look for some sort of magic, fix all solution that they can default to every time, and as far as I can see this is done out of intellectual and/or physical laziness. Unfortunately with something like weapon positions there is no such thing as a fix all solution as you will invariably have to constantly adapt to a changing environment in combat.



Also there are other positions.

[tacticalguy]

Well I think the short answer to this problem is that both sul and the other position advocated in the article are valid positions with their own time and place of use. As James Yeager said you need to point your weapon somewhere as you move around and you should let the situation dictate your tactics, or in this particular case the position.

I think the real problem is that people tend to look for some sort of magic, fix all solution that they can default to every time, and as far as I can see this is done out of intellectual and/or physical laziness. Unfortunately with something like weapon positions there is no such thing as a fix all solution as you will invariably have to constantly adapt to a changing environment in combat.

I KNOW that you're right. Again, this goes back to an earlier discussion that we had about what makes a shooter. These guys aren't able to make it past doctrine. They need to to stay within a rigid "form" to do the job correctly. IMHO, that's not safe. If you really can't think on your own, I don't feel that you should be doing that kind of job, personally.

[jimothy_183]

If you really can't think on your own, I don't feel that you should be doing that kind of job, personally.

Indeed, you want thinking humans not drones.

[tacticalguy]

If you really can't think on your own, I don't feel that you should be doing that kind of job, personally.

Indeed, you want thinking humans not drones.

The problem is that we don't have a widely accepted exam that can weed out the shooters from the wannabes. Even if you could, how would you justify removing someone from a team that has time on the team and hasn't done anything wrong? This isn't a fixable issue at the moment, I'm afraid.

[Ryan]

Hey I want a human-drone, a human-robot. Terminator anyone's ass.

[tacticalguy]

Hey I want a human-drone, a human-robot. Terminator anyone's ass.

Ooof course you do, Ryan.

[jimothy_183]

The problem is that we don't have a widely accepted exam that can weed out the shooters from the wannabes. Even if you could, how would you justify removing someone from a team that has time on the team and hasn't done anything wrong? This isn't a fixable issue at the moment, I'm afraid.

I think the other problem is that there would be mass manning issues as I would predict that a lot of people would be cut even if the problems you mentioned did not exist.

Hey I want a human-drone, a human-robot. Terminator anyone's ass.

I think what you really want is a Cyberdyne Systems Model 101 Series 800 Terminator.

[tire iron]

Good article by a great guy. Kyle is a humble, non-egotistical student of the art.

I use the SUL position when the situation calls for it. While "looking for work" it isn't possible to NOT sweep other unless the muzzle is pointed down. SUL accomplishes that. Once "work" is found - then go to low ready.

That is how I do it anyway - and how I teach others to do it too. I think it is a valid tool in the right circumstances.

cheers

tire iron