Two gun shooting anyone? Benefits?

Original article is here: http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/bb/neuro/neuro02/web2/slee.html

While a very interesting read, especially when intact with the full references included, the posting of the article violates the "Fair Use" clause of Copyright, and this sites rules. Unless the article is public domain or under something like OpenDoc, GPL or similar licences?
 
The article was taken from the net, I believe thats public domain and credit of the author was given in the posting.

Brownie
 
Edmund BlackAdder said:
At the bottom of the source page, there is a little copyright symbol. Just because it's on the net, doesn't make it public domain.
Click to expand...
MartialTalk Rules said:
Copyrighted Material/Content Policy:
Don't Republish Copyrighted Information

Information copyrighted or owned by any individual or entity other than the member should not be posted on the discussion forums or software libraries without the consent of the owner. Exceptions to this standard are covered by the Federal law regarding fair use, 17 USCS 107, and related case law, which holds that only partial excerpts of copyrighted material may be reproduced, and only as necessary for criticism or comment.

If such an event occurs, the individual posting the information shall be held solely responsible. MartialTalk shall not be held responsible for member-posted information that may violate copyright law. In the event of a complaint by a copyright holder, we will investigate the issue and remove upon request their information.

If you believe that your copyright has been infringed, please contact MartialTalk.com at [email protected]. We will need to know details of the work, where it is on the site, and a statement that reproduction has not been authorized.

Posting Articles And News In The Forums
You cannot legally post entire articles or news in the forum without permission from the copyright holder. Even if you attribute the article correctly it's still copyright infringement.

Fair Use Provision
Under Fair Use provisions you can legally post a small abstract of an article - or perhaps the opening paragraph. So if you want to post an article you should do this and include a link, or just post the link. The exception to this rule is press releases; press releases are meant for distribution and can be copied and distributed as much as you want. If you are not sure if you can copy something then always err on the side of caution and simply post a link to the material.
Click to expand...

I think you are not in compliance.
 
Edmund;

I edited the post, to reflect part of the article as an excerpt with the accompanying link.

Happy?

Brownie
 
Moderator Note:

Please keep the conversation polite and respectful and familiarize yourself with the RTM button. It is the red bordered white triangle in the upper right hand corner of each post.

If you think a rule has been violated, please feel free to go to that post and use the RTM feature. NOTE: ANY USER CAN RTM A "BAD" (i.e. rule-breaking) POST.

G Ketchmark / shesulsa
MT Super Moderator
 
Welcome Mr. Brown!

While you might have some trouble with others because of your introduction, or lack thereof (and I suggest that you do make one in the appropriate forum, with some sort of bio) I recognize a student of Mitchell Werbell: one time OSS agent, "Wizard of Whispering Death," co-developer of the Ingram M-10-or, at least the developer of its infamous silencer, as what could become a valued resource in the firearms forum-Werbell's politics aside....
 
elder999,

My first post was in the introduction forum, under "Hola from Arizona".

Mitch owned the Military Armament Corp [ MAC ] out of Powder Springs, Ga.
which developed the Mac series of M-10, M11's and helped develop the Sionics Suppresor with Mr. Gordon Ingram.

I trained at Sionics, an acronym for [ Studies in Organized Negation of Insurgency and Counter-Subversion ] with some interesting people in 81 under Mitch and cadre some 10 years after leaving the Corps.

To say he was controversial is an understatement.

Thank you for the welcome sir.

Brownie
 
Wow.....long thread....haven't read it in it's entirety yet to really weigh in here, but I'll state a couple of ideas...

I could have more academic sources, btw; but I am limited to net sources because I am not giving you guys access to my academic library accounts ;)

1. Learning to shoot 2 guns simultaneously in minutes is believable for a number of reasons; you are using the mind/hands natural abilities to "point," and you are using your peripheral vision which is designed to detect shape and movement. In theory it should be actually easier to do this in the dark because you use your "rods" (outer eye; in charge of peripheral vision, depth perception, and shape/space detection, all things important for night vision) which is what allows you to see in the dark AND use your peripherals rather then your "cones" (the inner eye that is centrally focused and allows you to do detail work like reading, and detects colors, textures, etc.) which is primarily not used at night. See: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/vision/rodcone.html

Your "Rods" are what you should be using under stress in a fight to visually perceive what is going on around you. Unfortunately, because we are no longer "cave men," most people have poorly developed use of their rods as well as functioning under combat stress, which is why focus can be "tunneled" when operating with the SNS in a fight to using cones and focusing on the attackers weapon or hands to the exclusion of everything else, for instance. More research needs to be done on the biology of the visual process as it relates to the SNS.

The good news is that we can develop use of our peripherals through attribute focused exercises designed exclusively to develop the peripherals, or task specific things like operating at night or in the dark without artificial lighting, or doing physical activities that would require the use of our peripherals (like sparring or football for example). Once again, though, more emperical research needs to be done to determine the usuefullness of peripheral development and visual function through the SNS.

Then there is the natural ability to point accurately at a target that we all have, which is essentially a core aspect of how unsighted fire works. Focusing on the target rather then trying to split focus between weapon (sights) and target has been done since man has been chucking projectiles. Even sport clay shooting folks know the value of being target focused (see tip # 5): http://www.americaoutdoors.com/shooting/features/ten_tips.htm

That leaves the aspect of "two guns," meaning being able to split your mind body coordination between left/right brain function. This is not to suggest exclusivity or specificity in function (meaning that being right handed doesn't mean left-brain dominant or vice versa), but physical function is correlated to hemisphere activity. I am fairly ambidextrous and I shoot fine with both sides (but tend to do slightly better on my right probably because I am right eye dominant). But for the beginner, I am sure that they would have to learn to shoot 1 handed on both dominant and non-dominant sides before trying a 2 guns at one feat. I am sure that those of you who train equally on both sides should have no problems with assimilating this skill. Side note: If your having trouble with using your non-dominant side, and if your really bored, learn to juggle with your eyes closed (even if it is just with 1 or two balls). Sounds stupid, but some NLP Psychologists believe that this helps unify your right/left brain, coordinates your hand/eye in both dominant and non-dominant sides, and has therapeutic effects life reducing maladaptive responses such as panic and anxiety. But that is worth a separate discussion. I digress....you could just cut to the chase and shoot with your non-dominant hand more often... ;)

When you put it all together, this leaves the possibility of one learning "two handed shooting" fairly quickly. Because I like to mess around with different things, I have done this myself with my BB and airsoft guns. I can attest that it isn't as hard as it sounds when you can tap into your natural ability to use your peripherals, naturally point at your target, and split your activity between your right/left side.

2. I question the value of this as a usable method in a defensive situation, however. Such a skill could be useful in an extremely task specific situation, but I can't see how this would be common as it pertains to most defensive shootings. Particularly problematic is that when one is operating with the SNS, one has a difficult time splitting focus physically speaking and between both brain hemispheres. This is why the "pull push" modified weaver often fails under stress, among other things. People are also threat focused under stress; there is the propensity of focusing on the NEAREST/MOST DANGEROUS THREAT until that threat is no longer present. This idea of splitting focus between two hands and multiple threats simultaneously would most likely fail in an actual gun fight. Then there is the issue of thread ID, but lets assume that we have identified our threats previously, for arguments sake.

All and all, this seems like a skill that would work in practice, particularly on stationary targets, but would fall apart in an actual fight. The best way to test this would be to run airsoft or simunition scenarios; so far in the scenario's I have seen/experienced, the person tends to focus on the threat nearest/most threatening until that threat is no longer present, every time, and doesn't split focus. Current data supports that splitting focus isn't going to happened when operating with the SNS. I will admit that in these scenarios participants haven't necessarily been trained to use peripherals, and haven't been trying to use more then one weapon simultaneously; so my statement is just a hypothesis and more research would have to be done to verify the idea. But I certainly wouldn't be teaching this method in a defensive shooting course until it could be verified as reliable. On biopsychology and SNS: http://allpsych.com/psychology101/brain.html; On SNS response: http://www.gsgi.org/combat_stress.htm

3. So, yes I do have doubts to the validity of such a method once combat stress enters the picture. But does that mean that it wouldn't be a valuable skill to learn?

I will say that I am happy that I have picked up two guns and shot targets simultaneously to learn these skills. If anything, these have been both therapeutic and attribute building exercises. Plus, it's a lot of fun! I say do it if it is enjoyable and if it floats your boat. :)


SOOOO....

That's my take on this discussion. Hopefully there is something valuable there. I'll finish reading the thread, then I will probably crawl into my hole for another week or so (been real busy). So no offense if I don't respond to people right away. I will state that when given the opportunity, hopefully over the next year or two, I would like to put the issue of peripheral development and combat stress to more empirical university studies. Time will tell...

:)

Paul Janulis
 
I knew I'd post one more time before I logged off....

1. Not an entirely bad op ed on Proprioception; although I am not in full agreement with her inferences regarding unconcious and consious mind, it was a decent overview of the idea. The notion is in part why humans have a natural propensity to "point."

2. I am thinking that ya'll should lay off Mr. Brown regarding the "self-promotion" issue. He is providing content here that hasn't been here for a long time. Yes it is evident that he is promoting his programs, but he is not doing so in a shameless way that I can see. I am seeing a hell of a lot of text provided here by him so far, so I don't think it is fair to be blaming him for violating ad policies and such when he is providing a discussion about these ideas as far as I can tell.

I go sleepy now; good night.

:burp:
 
One more reply, then I am stopping I swear. (If I start quoting and replying specifically to myself, please call to have me committed again... ;) )

Just wanted to clarify (and because of some of the negativity on this thread that I don't want to propigate, I feel I need too) that just because I question the utility of the said method, and said I wouldn't include it in a defensive shooting program meaning a CPL class or basic gunfighting or advanced gunfighting class geared towards self-defense, that doesn't mean that there isn't value in going to learn something like that.

Firearms schools (frontsite, gunsite, blackwater, etc.) offer plenty of courses that you probably won't need; how many private citizens need to know how to repel from buildings, use group room clearing tactics, or shoot from up in trees? Yet people take these courses because they help them in other aspects of life, and there a hella good time.

It's no different then learning traditional stick fighting, or fencing for example, at least in my opinion. If I teach and advocate one, then I have to be O.K. with the other.

I feel that I have a professional duty to express the utility of a skill/training method when giving my opinion on the subject because lets face it, the gal getting her CPL to defend against a potential attack from a stalker doesn't need to be repeling from buildings or shooting with 2 guns at the same time.

But utility and value aren't the same thing; if someone wants to learn such skills because they are valuable to them, then I say go to a good instructor and have fun!

Paul
 
Hi Paul,

I think your posts on the subject are correct in their thought process in several ways. This particular technique gets people to develop/train their peripheral vision skills.

Peripheral vision and it's benefits is often times overlooked by too many in different situations. Developing and enhancing the peripheral vision is simply another exercise that may become important to people at various times.

I've also seen students who don't necessarily hone or work on their off hand skills with a firearm quickly be able to hit threats COM one handed solely based on their being given the key to this technique. How many actually practice off hand shooting enough, let alone one handed off hand reactive practice? Their proficiency with the "other" hand is increased a lot in short periods of time.

Just to be clear, the ITFTS courses do not cover this particular technique until the very end of the two day schedule, and only then to those who want to try it. The thing is, not one student has declined to try it or been unsuccesful in this once instructed how to do so.

There's simply too much material to cover in two days that is critical to SD first. Most two day courses cover anywhere from 12-18 techniques. The double handgun is thrown in at the end to expose the students to an ability they never thought they could possess. It opens doors for them to further explore other possibilities and keep an open mind.

The other benefit of enhanced peripheral training thats become obvious to us is while using one gun. The two gun gets students to see how to use something, it does not have to mean they need two guns in their hands after that.

Stay sharp out there

Brownie
 
Combat stress and the physiological reactions that come with it will make all that "parlor trick" 2 hand gunfighting stuff useless IMHO. Spend your extra time doing the basics unless you want to join the circus.
 
Blotan Hunka;

Thank you for your opinion. Basics? If you don't have them ingrained presently, your advice is certainly sound.

Basics--handhold, trigger control, sight alignment, breathing

"Basics" doesn't cover threat focused skills, nor shooting while moving or at moving threats. All skills that go beyond the "basics", yet are still more than useful and extremely important to the ccw carrier who may find themselves involved in a SD situation requiring the use of a firearm on the streets.

Basics is what you get with a typical NRA course, or a "handgun 101" course. People training with us usually are well past having to practice the "basics", and are looking for the more advanced training offered by quite a few out there in one form or another.

If I might ask, what length of time have you been studying the effects of Combat stress and the physiological reactions? How much time have you spent researching this subject personally and more importantly, perhaps, what experiences, if any, do you have in combat stress?

But again, thanks for your opinion.

Brownie
 
Anything that pushes your skill level or skill sets can be a good thing. Of course you shouldn't ignore the basics, you should always be at least maintaining them, if not trying to raise your proficiency at them. But to only concentrate on the basics of shooting would be like a TKD stylist only practicing Chon Ji.

Jeff
 
To paraphrase Louis Awerbuck, there's no such thing as an advanced gunfight, as they're all pretty basic: shoot him first and hit him properly so he doesn't shoot back. Good shooting always comes back to the basics.
 
If you think you have "mastered" the basics -and I would add in weapon manipulation, malfunction clearing, reloading, drawing and holstering as "basics"- then do them faster, do them one handed, do them under pressure. Dont waste your time doing "matrix" stunts. IMO the tactical industry is all about reinventing the wheel -or digging up some forgotten techniques that are so old they are new again- to keep on selling those seminars. But im a duffer so what do I know? :)
 
"The most important lesson I learned from those proficient gunfighters was the the winner of a gunplay usually was the man who took his time. The second was that, if I hoped to live long on the frontier, I would shun flashy trick-shooting -- grandstand play -- as I would poison."
Click to expand...

"When I say that I learned to take my time in a gunfight, I do not wish to be misunderstood, for the time to be taken was only that split fraction of a second that means the difference between deadly accuracy with a sixgun and a miss. It is hard to make this clear to a man who has never been in a gunfight. Perhaps I can best describe such time taking as going into action with the greatest speed of which a man's muscles are capable, but mentally unflustered by an urge to hurry or the need for complicated nervous and muscular actions which trick-shooting involves. Mentally deliberate, but muscularly faster than thought, is what I mean."
Click to expand...

"That two-gun business is another matter that can stand some truth before the last of the old-time gunfighters has gone on. They wore two guns, most of six-gun toters did, and when the time came for action went after them with both hands. But they didn't shoot them that way."
Click to expand...

"Primarily, two guns made the threat of something in reserve; they were useful as a display of force when a lone man stacked up against a crowd. Some men could shoot equally well with either hand, and in a gunplay might alternate their fire; others exhausted the loads from the gun on the right, or the left, as the case might be, then shifted the reserve weapon to the natural shooting hand if that was necessary and possible. Such a move -- the border shift -- could be made faster than the eye could follow a top-notch gun-thrower, but if the man was as good as that, the shift would seldom be required."
Click to expand...

"Whenever you see a picture of some two-gun man in action with both weapons held closely against his hips and both spitting smoke together, you can put it down that you are looking at the picture of a fool, or a fake. I remeber quite a few of these so-called two-gun men who tried to operate everything at once, but like the fanners, they didn't last long in proficient company."
Click to expand...


Exerpts from "Wyatt Earp: Frontier Marshall" by Stuart N. Lake
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Oh sweet seduction, thy name is...Glock

Previous Thread

The Quest

Next Thread

Similar threads

A
The Incredible Wrist- The Fine Tuner in Shooting?
Replies
0
Views
1K
AzQkr
A
A
Close Quarters Survival Seminar--Feb. in Arizona
Replies
1
Views
1K
AzQkr
A
Lisa
Shooting on the move; using your instincts
Replies
3
Views
949
Lisa
Lisa
Runs With Fire
Shooting stance
2
Replies
27
Views
6K
Gerry Seymour
Gerry Seymour
T
Point Shooting
2 3 4
Replies
66
Views
9K
AzQkr
A

Latest Discussions

Back
Top