Is gunfighting the great American martial art? —it sure has the same problems.

Firearms are certainly a valid option or component of personal protection.   Many people have a gun in conjunction with their martial arts; others have it instead of combatives training.  Obviously I have a preference on the and/or debate, and lately, I have personally been spending more of my training time in gunfighting as well.   The FAST Stress Shooting course we offer is one such important class for anyone who wants to do more than just shoot cans off the backyard fence post.  Recently I was having a conversation with one of our students who was new to firearms—which type to carry, basic training, equipment, etc.    In talking to a martial arts student, it was helpful to put the journey of gunfighting into martial arts terms, but I suspect many of our other students and their parents and friends who carry might also benefit from a more thorough analogy.

The case could easily be made that gunfighting is the great American martial art.   Harkening to the wild west, it has the history and lore that mirrors the samurai (see the cross over between Kirosawa and the Magnificent 7).   But the parallels go much further and are much more instructional.     I am not the first to suggest this.   In fact, I know of at least one group (with a highly acclaimed self defense author associated with them), that has started awarding belt rank in gun fighting.   I must admit, while I don’t really care about the belt, the idea of a structured curriculum with standards intrigues me, simply from a perspective of staying on task and systematic progression.   Sure, there are certainly qualifying scores and other time standards for certain drills in various agencies and groups.     But rarely do these add up to a complete system.  But I would like to think that both in martial arts and in gunfighting, I am more concerned about substance than titles and ranks.

And gunfighting has many of the same pitfalls and debates that afflict most other martial arts.   And sadly, it seems that most firearm enthusiasts are even less self-aware of these sometimes incongruent concepts than martial artists are.

The first relates back to the rank analogy and training progression.   Everyone needs to start with the basics like stance, technique, etc.   Some people don’t get much formal instruction at that, but have just gone out in the country and played around—shooting bottle or cans or what have you.   I liken these people to the “martial artists” who have supposedly trained themselves primarily from a book or YouTube, but gotten no hands on formal training, but he and his buddies have gone out to the garage and mixed it up a bit.  And I mean, his buddy sparred with a Navy SEAL once, so he must be doing something right.  (Don’t get me wrong, I use books and YouTube as supplemental resources too—but not my primary source).   But even most gun proponents who receive instruction stop at a white or yellow belt level—taking a gun safety or CCW class that teaches the basic familiarity of the weapon and basic technique and stops there.  And they might get very good at that white belt form—better than me—but being really good at taking your time in hitting that can on a fencepost in stance you will never use in real life doesn’t always translate well to real world scenarios.

Are you doing the green belt through black belt stuff?  Reloads, moving, different levels and positions?  If you have taken our stress shooting class, you know why practicing one handed and with your other hand is quite relevant.   These other skills are like being able to free spar instead of simply hitting a stationary target.  Like in martial arts, real world scenarios are not likely going to give you perfect conditions to use perfect technique….are you able to adapt and modify and still be foundationally sound? Like your martial arts, your gunfighting practice should be getting more challenging instead of simply improving on the minimal basics.

A related question that all martial arts students must ask is if your training is consistent with your overall goals and objectives.  Are you training for marksmanship or combat shooting? (I hope you know the difference.)   How a sniper and a SWAT team member use their rifle is quite different.  Got a handgun for home defense, but never actually practice going around corners or entering rooms?    Carry concealed, but never practice drawing the weapon and only practice on the range at full extension at unrealistically long distances?  And it wouldn’t be a real martial art if there wasn’t a healthy debate on the advantages and disadvantages of sport.   Gun competition or marksman techniques sometimes are contrary to more tactical considerations (I will spare you the details.)   But just like in other martial arts, while sometimes proficiency in sport helps combatives, sometimes certain habits make skills less transferable or dangerous.    Similarly, you should also realize the obvious limitations imposed by safety precautions and any training scars that these create.

Like most martial arts, there are a variety of schools or “styles” of gunfighting, and I am not talking pistol vs rifle vs shotgun or even caliber differences.   I recently learned there are as many ways or styles to tactically reload a shotgun as there are to chamber a down block or get out of a particular hold.   There are pros and cons to most, but you should understand the difference and make a decision as to which is best for your body and overall game plan, just like a black belt has a developed game plan that fits them.  Of course, a good teacher should be able to help you explore those options (while others are more dogmatic in their particular style.)

Finding a good teacher and differences of instruction is the next common pitfall.  As in any field, there is always going to be a difference in quality and ability of various instructors, but more specifically, is your instructor qualified in the particular field or area you hope to improve in?   Rumor has it that a competitor on the show Top Shot failed miserably getting off the line of attack during a FAST stress shooting class.   Experience counts for a lot, but isn’t always everything, and sometimes there are posers.  Are their teaching methods antiquated?  Safe, but not too artificial?   More interested in showing off themselves than helping you get better?   Are they dogmatic in their approach because they feel strongly or simply don’t know any other way?

These are questions martial artists need to ask about their training, curriculum, and teachers.  Any person would do well to ask similar questions if a firearm is going to be part of their overall personal protection strategy.   Gunfighting is certainly plagued with the same issues.   Obviously I am biased , but I am not an advocate or relying solely on a gun.  But whatever martial art you do—including gun-fu- don’t settle for being a yellow belt!

Cops Have a Hard Enough Time Without Having to Do Our Job Too

            This is not a criticism of law enforcement, many of which I call friends, teachers, and honored to call students; it is more a commentary on other people’s perception and expectations.

Recently, while promoting one of our Kids FAST classes, another person with no knowledge of the content of our course dismissed it because, according to them, they were thinking of more escape and evasion, preferably taught by law enforcement.   Aside from the fact that we actually do teach kids in the class to break tunnel vision and look for the opportunity to run to safety, I found the objection rather peculiar.   Primarily because cops really shouldn’t be doing much running away; in most cases they are mandated to do just the opposite and go towards the danger.   I am not sure what police academy would send their cadets through SERE training.  Given that, I personally have no interest in learning from a cop who is good at running and hiding.  In contrast, a military recon team member might have some interesting things to teach (but they wanted LEO instead).   And I say some, because even then it makes you wonder how much is relevant to a child (which camouflage or native foliage to work into your ghillie suit probably isn’t.) Secondarily, certain LEO’s may be great with children, but how many of them have experience formally teaching and developing child appropriate curriculums?

I must admit, I am probably hyper sensitive to this issue because of the bias I have often encountered in regard to professionalism in my field.   For example, let’s say I call up an elementary school in another town and offer to teach abduction prevention and personal protection strategies at an assembly.   Odds are, it would be met with much skepticism and questions.   What are you going to teach them?  We don’t need them karate chopping everything in the hallways afterwards.   We don’t want to encourage violence.   Maybe even that we don’t let businesses advertise in school.    In contrast, if a LEO would call and make the same offer, it would more likely be met with more enthusiasm and gratitude for taking the time for such an important community service.   And yet, in all likelihood I have done more research and had the experience of teaching many more children these types of strategies.

Let me be clear, this is not to bash on police officers anywhere.  I am honored to occasionally work with some of Morgan County’s finest, and I appreciate the difficult and often thankless job that they do.  And sadly, even routine parts of their jobs are becoming increasingly more dangerous. But the requirements of that job means that most simply don’t have the chance to become focused and expert in areas where I have spent the bulk of my time.  Now of course, there are a few who have specialized and taken it upon themselves to hone the craft.  Some of the people I consider true mentors are law enforcement who have taken positions in jails or prisons, which gives them more experience with “fighting” in a few months than most officers get in a career.

But most officers spend their day writing tickets, paperwork, investigating, doing many things other than training combatives.   I just read that the average law enforcement trains 14 hours a year in firearms.   I certainly hope I get more practice than that in this year! One of my gun fighting instructors—one of those specialized, dedicated men I mentioned above– would say that he would prefer to be in a gunfight with the regulars of these classes than with the overwhelming majority of officers.   I have taught seminars for law enforcement and soldiers where they struggled with concepts and techniques that I would be mad if our upper rank colored belts in Hapkido couldn’t do.

Again, this isn’t a criticism per se.   While the possibility of danger is ever present in their jobs, the majority of their work simply isn’t focused on what a major portion of mine is.   And I think more of the public should be more understanding of that as well.  Perhaps some people would be more realistic in the standards they hold police to in use of force incidents.  *That does not mean we should be condone negligent behavior, only not hold LEO’s to superhuman expectations in those situations.

As martial artists, we also have to be careful of falling into many of the same traps.   I am personally amazed at how many people want to learn the newest “top secret” navy SEAL knife fighting techniques.   I question when they, as civilians, will ever have the need to take out a sentry without them making a sound.   (Side note— it is interesting that many of these same people that insist on learning police or military style combatives fail to realize that they are scoffing at the very same martial arts styles that those combatives are rooted in.)    I have taken some very interesting classes in military style tactics, but great instructors realize their audience and are able to explain how it relates to us as normal people in everyday life.    And even more importantly, they realize the limitations of their audience and what they can or cannot do or even realistically achieve.

In the medical field there are general practitioners, specialists, surgeons, etc.  It is the same in the realm of personal protection/combatives/self-defense.   I would never attempt to teach anybody about how to do traffic stops, but then again, none of my students need to know how to do that either.  When it comes to our field, maybe it is time that civilians at least start out with people who specialize in civilian self-defense.  The LEO’s job is hard enough without have to be an expert in that as well.