target discrimination training and skills

[yerasimos]

What are everyone's thoughts on training target discrimination skills? In particular, I am enquiring about what a non-sworn, private citizen, individual CHLer can do in self-structured practice to learn or improve these skills on a standard square range that allows for rapid fire. (Relevant dry fire ideas are also welcome, too.)

I have seen paper targets available with subtargets that are different colors, different shapes, individually numbered, etc. I was thinking that an individual could use dice and a range timer to randomnize the election of targets. For different colors, little squares of electrical tape could be applied to the dice as appropriate, or the dice could be marked for shapes using white electrical tape and a felt-tipped pen. An exercise could start by starting the range timer, and upon the sound of the tone, the shooter would roll the die/dice on a table in front of the shooter, then engage the appropriate target(s) indicated by the die/dice.

The preceding paragraph might help with building some basic skills. I have a few other ideas that I am mulling over, but some additional input would be welcome and help generate interesting discussion.

Also, how important do you consider target discrimination skills in the context of the individual whose only responsibility is to protect himself, immediate family and his property? Most of the training material I have been exposed to mention the need for target discrimination to at minimum Rule Four (always be aware of your target and what is behind/around it), but never address this issue by itself in depth.

It seems easy to say that someone would not be foolish enough to confuse their child for an intruder during an armed response to a home invasion; far away from a late night shooting at an urban gas station, it is facile to believe an individual trained in the bare basics would always be cool-headed enough to avoid shooting an attacker when there is a big gasoline truck or group of non-combatants directly downrange, and neatly sidestep for a safer background before firing.

Instead of simply hoping or passively expecting that the right decisions will be made in fractions of a second, what can be done to integrate such thinking into training, without leading the shooter to second-guess himself inappropriately or otherwise hamper his decisionmaking?

[Liberty]

Our duty isn't to normally insert ourselves into bad situations. and I don't believe it is a common siituation that we CHLers actually shoot the wrong person.

The most likely situation is in the case of police no-knock raids. and fake cops attempting to force their way inside.

Another situation might be those with teenagers or other family members who might have guest or be guests. sneaking in.

I don't have children, nor do illicit drugs. so anyone forcing their way in my casa will be met with force.

[Charles L. Cotton]

The multiple targets of various shapes would be a good drill and very similar to a scenario we run once or twice a year in our monthly IDPA matches. This scenario has about 10 targets each with a row of colored dots on the head. When the shooter isn't looking, the SO selects an index card with a specific color and places it in an IDPA box. The shooter starts facing up-range and when the buzzer sounds he/she flips open the lid of the IDPA box and sees the color the SO chose. The shooter then turns and engages only those colored targets. It can be done in the reverse where the color selected is a "friendly."

This scenario seems to be popular and it would be a good drill. After running it a few times, you may begin to learn the placement of the targets color-wise, so just move them around and start over.

Another threat identification drill is to use cut-outs of such common things as a gun, knife, wallet, cell phone, drill, etc. and use doubled-sided tape, Velcro dots, string, etc. to temporarily attach them to IDPA targets. This can be run just like the colored dots drill above, except that the non-shooting person randomly places the weapon and non-weapon props on the targets, rather than colored dots. I personally like this drill much better as it forces the shooter to do what we should be doing -- focusing on the presence or absence of a weapon.

As Liberty said, we have the luxury of not often having to inject ourselves into an ambiguous situation, but we can face that situation in our homes. It could be a stranger who is legitimately there, such as a friend of one of your kids, a repairman, or it could be a burglar. While far less likely, we can find ourselves in this situation outside our homes, as did the man involved in the Fort Worth grocery store shooting recently.

I admire your desire to train on this aspect of responsibly carrying a gun for self-defense.

Chas.

[fm2]

I like where you are going with this.

Having more no shoot targets than BG targets helps with scanning skills.
Having a no shoot, or an unknown behind a guy with a gun and moving to get a clear shot-line is a good drill.

Another threat identification drill is to use cut-outs of such common things as a gun, knife, wallet, cell phone, drill, etc. and use doubled-sided tape, Velcro dots, string, etc. to temporarily attach them to IDPA targets. I personally like this drill much better as it forces the shooter to do what we should be doing -- focusing on the presence or absence of a weapon.
Chas.

This is a great drill that I have used in the past.

[GlockenHammer]

Perhaps I am naive, but I've always imagined that if I were in a defensive shooting scenario, I'd be pretty sure if somebody was threatening me enough to warrant getting shot.

I like the game Charles describes above, but I wonder how well it translates into defensive shooting? Is the cognitive skill of matching colors similar enough to identifying whether or not someone needs to be shot?

I'm afraid I don't have a helpful suggestion for practicing defensive target discrimination skills at the range. My suggestion is to read forums like this and put your mind through as many different situations as you can so that when you are finally faced with your moment of truth, your mind will be practiced in looking for shoot/no-shoot clues. I know that I've read scenarios that have challenged me in how I would respond. After consideration at leisure, I've made decisions on how I would respond and hope that if faced with similar split-second decisions, I could sort through that information faster and come to the right decision in time.

Perhaps the best thing you could do would be to get some airsoft or simunitions and get some friends together to role play. Another option might be to seek out some of the video training systems that present you with shoot/no-shoot scenarios. These are less common, but excellent for your need.

I applaud your goals and I'll be watching here to see if other members might have some good ideas...

[jrosto]

I like the game Charles describes above, but I wonder how well it translates into defensive shooting? Is the cognitive skill of matching colors similar enough to identifying whether or not someone needs to be shot?

This type of drill assists with decision making. Just shooting at targets does not require any decision making skills on the part of the shooter. If you add a good shoot/bad shoot element to your drills it helps fine tune rule #4. You have to make a decision before pulling the trigger.

It may not be as effective as force on force, but it is a good place to start.

[Paladin]

Target discrimination is critical. Dangerous problems with target discrimination have been seen in both real shootings and in training.

This is a run down from the NTI:

The first [Problem] area is target/threat identification. The main area of concern that I have seen in this area is practitioners not taking the time to properly identify the target before shooting. I have seen this on both live fire stages and in Simunitions role-playing. There have even been several cases of judges being shot during Simunitions by role-players that had not identified their target. At NTI. XIII, there was a police target (no-shoot) that dropped around the corner after engaging a couple of bad guys in a predator drill (up close and personal). The target was shot by two-thirds of all participants and was even attacked by several with empty hands and knives. Of the people that shot the LEO target, many shot him more than once as the officer was yelling, “Police-drop the weapon�, etc. If this had been an actual LEO, he would have had to shoot the participant just to defend himself. Some thought must be given as to what would happen in real life if you are involved in a shooting and a police officer responds to the scene. There seems to be a lot of “see gun – shoot� responses! This is not always a good answer to the problem. As armed civilians, this is troubling since it means what we are training to shoot each other. The person with the gun may just be another armed civilian in the same problem you are. Sometimes more information needs to be gathered verbally, visually, or otherwise before the shot is taken. The most important thing to remember is that you are accountable for the bullet after it leaves the barrel. There are no re-plays.

http://www.texasshooting.com/TexasCHL_F ... php?t=3707

Paul Howe also talks about the issue:

DOES YOUR SHOOTING INSTRUCTOR OR SYSTEM HAVE A
DISCRIMINATION PROCESS OR USE ANY DRILLS TO DEVELOP THESE
SKILLS?

Through intense training, we have been taught and conditioned to shoot faster than we can think. This is dangerous practice. We must bring up our discrimination skills to the same level as our shooting skills. When looking at new instructor or shooting system, ask them what discrimination process they use or what drills they use to help the officers develop their discrimination process. If they do not have anything in this area, be cautious of the information they put out. Discrimination is
a critical safety valve for speed shooting. I can recall several instances where officers looked for the gun first, saw it and then went to center mass, pulled the trigger, all while their mind is saying “what is wrong
with this picture.� They generally get one round off, their brain catches up and they realize they are engaging a friendly officer. Some commanders will attribute this as an inherent danger of multi-breach point or window “Break and Rake� operations. Nothing could be further from the truth. The problem is a weak or non-existent discrimination process. I changed my discrimination process years ago from what I was originally taught in special operations. There they taught us to look at the hands first. This caused problems down the road when operators were shooting faster than they could think. They would look at a gun, go to center mass and launch rounds only to find the target was a good guy. Their mind was not moving fast enough to process the information, that the weapon their target was carrying was the same as theirs. They simply responded to how they were taught and this generally cost them their job. Now, my first step is to look at the whole person and then I collapse to the hands. How do we fix these issues? Continued exposure to advanced scenarios and the use of video. Video will not lie and is probably the most significant teaching tool I use. During the high-stress scenarios I put the officers through, many get the typical adrenaline dump and their mind can only absorb so much information. In effect, they can’t remember the finer details of what happened. Video will help them do this in a non-confrontational manner.

http://www.combatshootingandtactics.com ... oughts.pdf

[Paladin]

I am enquiring about what a non-sworn, private citizen, individual CHLer can do in self-structured practice to learn or improve these skills

I think the primary thing for an average CHLer to do is get a decent flashlight and learn to carry and use it. Lowlight shootings are very common... whether that's a late night home-defense/robbery or dealing with a dark corner somewhere. In lowlight, a flashlight will greatly aid your target identification and discrimination.

Fortunately civilians usually don't have as many variables and the police and military have to deal with as far as identifying who is who. When the BG's attack you, civilians figure that out quick.

[Wildscar]

I like the game Charles describes above, but I wonder how well it translates into defensive shooting? Is the cognitive skill of matching colors similar enough to identifying whether or not someone needs to be shot?.

Its actually a good idea. Imagine if you will that your walking down a Supermarket store aisle and you look up that the big mirrors that run down the back of the wall and see a man holding a gun or some such action. As you turn to look in the direction of the altercation, the weapon or what eve got your attention in the first place is no longer visible. would you then be able to figure out who had what from he reverse angle?

[fm2]

Excellent posts Paladin!

I assumed everyone that carried a gun, also carried a flashlight as part of their loadout.

People carry a quality light. The G2 or the more compact E2 are good choices. The new Fenix series looks promising as well.

[Paladin]

Threat ID Targets

Click on the link. There are nice examples of shoot/no-shoot targets here

http://www.kodakgallery.com/Slideshow.j ... nn_speed=1

Some surrendering, some with guns, some with knives, some with badges