Dental Hygiene Level Effort

Leave a comment

One of the most frustrating things I’ve encountered when trying to help shooters (military, law enforcement, and civilian/private gun owners alike) is that it wouldn’t take much effort to make a marked improvement.

My advice to LE students at the academy I instructed for was a simple dry practice routine:
Five careful “shots”
Five presentations from the duty holster

Do this in the locker/ready room at the start and end of each shift. The officers were gearing up/down and checking equipment anyway, so adding this only takes a minute or two. However, even for those skipping half the sessions would end up with well over a thousand quality “shots” and presentation reps before the end of their rookie year taking no real amount of time and costing nothing.

Everybody that bothered to do it reported their next qualification went notably better with a much improved score. Amazingly enough…

I refer to this as the dental hygiene level of effort. Dedicate about the same amount of time it takes to brush and floss your teeth every day to learning a new skill can yield long-term results.

The big problem was how few bothered to do so.

Advertisements

Ken Cooper

Leave a comment

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/mar/30/health/he-aerobics30

http://cooperaerobics.com/Health-Tips/Fitness-Files/Circuit-Training-The-Best-of-Both-Worlds.aspx
https://www.cooperinstitute.org/2017/04/10/strength-training-for-fitnessgram

http://www.cbass.com/CooperBook.htm
http://www.cbass.com/COOPER.HTM
http://www.cbass.com/Aerobics40anniversary.htm
http://www.cbass.com/ClarenceBassCooperClinic15.htm
https://cooperaerobics.wordpress.com/tag/dr-kenneth-h-cooper/

A study published in October in the journal Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise provides evidence for the first time that even a little weight training might reduce the risk of heart attack or stroke. People appear to gain this benefit whether or not they also engage in frequent aerobic exercise.

The study drew from an invaluable cache of health data gathered at the Cooper Clinic in Dallas, where thousands of men and women have been undergoing annual checkups, which include filling out detailed questionnaires about their exercise habits and medical history. More than 12,500 records were anonymized for men and women, most of them middle-aged, who had visited the clinic at least twice between 1987 and 2006. The subjects were categorized according to their reported resistance exercise routines, ranging from those who never lifted to those who completed one, two, three or more weekly sessions (or whether they lifted for more or less than an hour each week). Another category was aerobic exercise and whether subjects met the standard recommendation of 150 minutes per week of brisk workouts. This exercise data was then crosschecked against heart attacks, strokes and deaths during the 11 years or so after each participant’s last clinic visit.

The findings were dramatic: The risk of experiencing these events was roughly 50 percent lower for those who lifted weights occasionally, compared with those who never did — even when they were not doing the recommended endurance exercise. People who lifted twice a week, for about an hour or so in total, had the greatest declines in risk. (Interestingly, the subjects who reported weight training four or more times per week did not show any significant health benefits compared with those who never lifted, although the researchers believe this finding is probably a statistical anomaly.)

“The good news,” says Duck-chul Lee, an associate professor of kinesiology at Iowa State University and co-author of the study, “is that we found substantial heart benefits associated with a very small amount of resistance exercise.” As an associational study, the results show only that people who occasionally lift weights happen to have healthier hearts — not that resistance training directly reduces heart-related health risks. The data, though, does reveal associations between weight lifting and a lower body mass index, Lee says, which might be connected to fewer heart problems. He and his colleagues do not know the specifics of what exercises people were doing — lat pull-downs? dead lifts? squats? — or how many repetitions they did or at what level of resistance. Lee says he is in the early stages of a major study to examine some of those factors. But he doesn’t suggest waiting for those results.

https://firearmusernetwork.com/2016/01/05/strength-training-for-the-elderly-a-life-saver/

http://www.texasmonthly.com/articles/walk-dont-run/

Sightless Shooting

Leave a comment

Point shooters are a foolish lot… Good shooters are already good at point shooting. The reverse is rarely true.

Wanted to push the limits and see how well I could shoot a gun with absolutely no sights. Surprisingly it wasn’t as hard as you would think. Just really had to focus on trigger control. The times I missed were due to me trying to speed up my trigger pull.

The first drill is at 15yards with a plate 7yards to the side.

The second is at 10 yards.

The third is at 25 yards.

Give it a try and see if you can beat my times.

Gear Review Requests

2 Comments

https://www.facebook.com/notes/raven-concealment-systems/so-you-want-to-be-a-gear-review-blogger-eh/604668529582182/

http://soldiersystems.net/2013/12/30/ask-ssd-should-i-send-gear-to-this-blogger/#comments

Soldier Systems Daily posted an outstanding article today aimed at gear companies who get approached by bloggers wanting free gear. Since they get 20-30 requests for free gear from bloggers each week, use their list of advice for anyone that wants to review gear:

1) Gear blogs are neat, but the old “10 pictures and 5 paragraphs” format that a lot of guys still do is largely being supplanted by videos. Consumers still read text and image blogs, but video reviews result in a much higher conversion rate to sales. Since that conversion rate is what we manufacturers are looking for, you’re more likely to get product from us if you do video. Videos are also much more likely to get shared by the manufacturer via their social media program (like Facebook, Twitter, and e-mail newsletters) because that’s what consumers are most likely to click on. Hell, if I really wanted people to see this, I should have shot this note as a video rather than typing it!

2) Don’t hit me up out of the blue with your hand out for free stuff. Buy product from companies and do reviews first. A blogger who e-mails me cold and asks for something will likely get nothing, while a guy who sends me links to four other reviews he has already done on products of mine is likely to get a big box of goodies. On the other end of that, when you get free gear for reviews, it is a major faux pas to sell that gear online when you’re done with it. If you were given something and no longer need it, the proper course of action is to give it to someone who needs it, or donate it to a charity auction or raffle that supports a worthy gun/gear related cause. I’m not sending you free product so you can stock your own personal for-profit tactical gear store. Pay it forward.

3) Actually know what your viewership/readership is. Be able to articulate the particulars of your audience to me. BE HONEST about these stats; I’m going to check you out before I send anything. If you don’t know this stuff, you’re unlikely to get support from RCS.

4) I’m not necessarily looking for the guy who has a billion subscribers to his YouTube channel. What I want is someone who makes videos that don’t suck. Keep them SHORT. Almost everyone (including some of my friends who are big-time video bloggers) make videos that are waaaaaaay too long, which means people skim them, at best. When someone sends me a link to a 10+ minute “review” video, I won’t even skim it. Never make a video longer than four minutes; 90-180 seconds is optimal. If you can’t buffer it on your smart phone and watch it in the time it takes to roll through a McDonalds drive through, most people won’t bother trying to watch it. One of the best examples of a video done right is this one that Stephen Pineau made about the VG2.

5) Make sure you read the product instructions and relay correct product specs and information in your blog. It also doesn’t hurt to approach the company whose gear you are reviewing and ask them to check for any technical errors. Bloggers that screw up these little details are far less likely to get product support from manufacturers on future blogs or videos.

6) Cultivate a relationship with companies; don’t just chase after the latest new gadget. The guys who I send samples of our new products before they hit the shelves are the ones who have a proven track record and who stay in touch with us on a regular basis. They do follow up blogs on gear from us they have already reviewed. If the only time I hear from you is when I launch a new product, you’re probably not going to get what you’re seeking.

7) I like helping new bloggers get traction, because more successful bloggers means more exposure for RCS. But the surest way to get shut out is to do a bunch of posturing about what a big deal your YouTube channel or blog is. Be honest about being small; don’t try to use smoke and mirrors to dazzle me.

8) Seriously, keep your wife/girlfriend OUT of your videos. If your content is so anemic that you have to put Daisy Dukes on your girl and have her fumble awkwardly with a pistol on camera, you’re in the wrong line of work. It’s a gimmick, like having a a stripper working your trade show booth. Frankly, it distracts people from the product, and it makes you look unprofessional. When you look unprofessional, you don’t get product support.

9) Be knowledgeable. You don’t have to have a background in military or law enforcement work, but you DO need to know about the product you’re reviewing, as well as comparable and/or competing products. The best product reviews are the ones that not only tell the features of the product, but also help the consumer understand how the product works in conjuction with other firearms or gear that they also use.

10) This industry is a small one, and the companies talk to each other. If you conduct yourself professionally and create quality review content, you’ll find that doors open very easily to you. Free gear will flow like water. However, if you get a reputation as being a guy who shakes everyone down for free gear and then doesn’t deliver, or you get caught selling things you were sent as demo items, you’ll find yourself black listed pretty quickly.

Classification and Divisions

2 Comments

Attendance fall off at organized shooting events is the biggest problem facing advancing gun owner skill and improving the perception of gun ownership by the general public. Ignorant gun owners scoff about not caring what their non-gun owning neighbors think while ignoring the fact that pro-gun initiatives would be much easier if those neighbors had a reason to hold a positive opinion on it.

As it stands today, only 2% of the card-carrying NRA membership has never attended a NRA Sanctioned or Approved event. Back in the early 1960s, this was over 30%. Worse, the raw number has declined from a high of about 130,000 participants to around 95,000 today.

Part of that attendance fall off is shooters deciding to take up a different discipline. Camp Perry attendance peaked in the early 1960s and that was when rifle shooters could only choose between High Power or Smallbore and Pistol was Bullseye (or perhaps PPC if you were a cop.) I know some shooters in traditional disciplines don’t like the new options but I’d rather have gun owners participating in something that appeals to them than not at all.

Equipment isn’t the biggest factor concerning score but it is a factor. I’d address this by expanding the Classification system and equipment Divisions. Five or six skill groups for all shooters isn’t broad enough. High school sports have more than this and that doesn’t take Little League/Pop Warner/Pee Wee leagues, Junior Varsity, and other local leagues into account. College, semi-pro, and pro are entirely different groups with their own strata.

A competitive shooter “disadvantaged” by equipment but consistently capable of shooting a given score is at no real disadvantage when assessed in a peer group of people consistently shooting similar scores regardless of the reason why.

Add to this recognition of different equipment. As an example, USPSA has about six recognized divisions (it might be more by the time I finish this email) and it makes for a diverse group of options where almost any handgun can find a competitive role.

To keep some sanity and avoiding a “trophies for everyone!” issue, I’d only recognize a given division or classification if there is at least a minimum number of participants (say, about 6 or more for local matches) so there is a sort of mini match inside the match that is competitive for each group.

FWIW, but experience indicates the NRA doesn’t seem terribly interested in furthering their shooting sports by increasing participation. Their own membership base is a 98% no-show

Competitive Shooter Wins Fight

Leave a comment

Not an isolated incident. I’m convinced the only reason we don’t see more reports like this is it requires a low percentage event to meet with a low (but top) percentage of the gun owning public.

https://citizentv.co.ke/news/inayat-kassam-meet-the-52-year-old-hero-who-saved-lives-at-westgate-and-14-riverside-227173/

Inayat Kassam: Meet the 52-year-old hero who saved lives at Westgate and 14 Riverside
In a previous exclusive interview with Citizen TV, Mr. Kassam said he was at a shooting competition when his phone rang and when he answered, “the caller said, ‘Shots fired. We’re scared.’”

Mr. Kassam got into his car with fellow licensed firearm user – Peter Bonde – and off they sped towards Westgate Mall where they exchanged fire with criminals, fought side-by-side with Kenyan law enforcement, and led hundred of Kenyans trapped inside the mall to safety.

See also:
https://firearmusernetwork.com/ipsc-shooter-wins-fight/

Chuck Pressburg

2 Comments

SGM(R) Chuck Pressburg of Presscheck Consulting discusses training.

The subject of bullseye-style shooting vs. combat shooting (not the sport, the actual disciplines) are on another instructor’s FB page and since I took the time to address the shooter’s question on a response to a sub-thread that wouldn’t be seen by many, I thought I should repost my thoughts here.

If you can’t execute near-perfect under perfect conditions, everything starts to deteriorate rapidly from there…

Combat shooting is a complex math game where you are stacking tolerances of maximum spreads of human, weapon, and ammo in real time against the acceptable impact zone, what’s in front and beyond it and usually while both you and the impact zone as well as potential itermediate barriers are all in movement.

An acceptable “firing solution” occurs when you believe that you can place the bullet close enough to where you want it to land and make the decision to ignite the primer.

Fundamentals don’t change, How much emphasis we put on any single fundamental changes rapidly as we attempt to get a proper firing solution.

For shooting students exhibiting significant inability to exercise any fundamentals, an isolation of flaws and focus on improving them individually should take place. In the DOD we used the “crawl, walk, run” method of teaching and training.

Basic trigger press drills and sight diagnostics are FOUNDATIONAL in nature, but are crawl-level events. The only time they should be brought up with a “grown” professional is when their shooting foundation was built out of sand and they shoot like dog crap.

So shooting is hitting what you want and “bullseye-style” shooting (shooting bulls at distance) is the perfect execution of these fundamentals.

Combat shooting is like being a Doolittle Raider on the deck of the USS Hornet and someone is ordering you to strip critical items off your plane to be light enough to take off.

“What you do mean I have to dump my tail guns” (perfect sight picture)?! I NEED THOSE”!

“Look son, you’re gonna dump that weight (accept flash sight pictures at closer distances) if you want to make it off this flight deck”! (Shoot fast)

So combat shooting isn’t a different technique as much as it is the process of sacrifing perfection in real time in order to achieve an acceptable outcome sooner. Here’s the secret that nobody will tell you: 99.9% of people choose poorly and sacrifice too many of those fundamentals when fear of death is upon them.

Gripping the ever-living crap out of your blaster and hammering your trigger as fast as you humanly can, WILL work (I do it all the time), HOWEVER it will only work for certain firing solutions, and if you don’t read the cues that you need to ratchet things back and apply more of your fundamentals, then you are spraying. That cue will NORMALLY come from your dot or front sight post. It is nearly impossible for your dot to stay on target and your bullet to miss…that angry bee moved within (or completely out of) the glass before the gun went bang. Did you see it? Did you try to fix it, or did you run with it?

In my handgun classes I call my shots even if they land INSIDE the black from 25 yards in front of my students and its not magic, its EASY. I just ask myself a simple question, where was my sight/dot when the gun went bang?

Older Entries Newer Entries

%d bloggers like this: