5 Clues that Training is Not Realistic

[Michael Brown]

Every year thousands of citizens spend millions of dollars in the firearms training industry. However are these dollars well spent?

On the face of things, I would say yes. I think there is rarely a place where money is not wasted than in training. However I think the vast majority of firearms training is not realistic and does little to prepare its students for violent confrontations.

Thus I submit this list of 5 clues that, if seen, indicates that training is not realistic.

1) Emphasis on shooting beyond 7 yards.

Very few law enforcement shootings occur past this distance. Even fewer in the non-LEO world. While it may be entertaining to shoot further and it may improve trigger control, it is not time well spent in a time-crunched world.

2) No Integrated Options.

If an instructor does not have a background in anything except firearms, this is a real strong clue that he doesn't really understand the nature of the problem. Self-defense minded instructors should have extensive H2H training and not just a two week defensive tactics course. Actually firing the weapon is only about 1% of the problem, however most people spend 99% of their time training this 1%.

A quality self-defense program should consider many different force options including H2H, OC, contact/edged weapons etc.

3) No Force on Force Training.

See above.

If the training amounts to shooting at paper or steel targets, regardless of how complex and skillful the demonstration, there is minimal benefit received after the student learns basic trigger control.

Most instructors tend to try to develop incremental improvements in the students ability to manipulate their firearm at more and more impressive levels. These increments are very rarely a deciding factor in confrontations. The speed at which you manipulate your firearm is not the limiting factor in defensive engagements. The main limiting factor is the speed of decision-making. If you only shoot, you don't test this aspect.

At a police training conference once, Rob Leatham (perhaps the greatest shooter in the history of competitive pistol shooting) gave a demonstration where he responded to three pop-up targets and instantly mowed them down with three shots in about 1 second from the draw.

While no one would dispute that such a demo takes tremendous skill and dedication, it was a young patrolman who asked the most relevent question about the demo: "What does that show? There's no way you could identify three threats that quickly."

If you're not training against a living, moving adversary there's no realism in the training.

4) Instructor's equipment looks like it belongs in competition (i.e. speed rigs, kydex OWB) or emphasis on competition.

If you see an instructor using this equipment, you can immediately tell he hasn't put in the flight time in FOF training. If he/she had, they would have found their kydex holster constantly losing the gun during H2H and grappling situations.

They probably would have also spent a small fortune in kydex to replace all their broken holsters.

There are some exceptions to this rule. For instance, Kelly McCann has a video series where he works out of a kydex OWB but he openly states that its only so the students can see what he's doing easily. When he was active operationally he always wore a leather IWB when in plainclothes.

Instructors whose resumes are largely based on their competition success generally do not make good self-defense trainers. Competition is a highly specialized skill and has little to do with real defensive engagements.

While I enjoy competition shooting, I recognize that its really little better than playing racquetball in terms of preparing you to face real problems. I participate purely for recreation and because I like most of the folks involved.

5) No Impact Reduction Suits (i.e. Bulletman Suit, High Gear, FIST)

If an instructor isn't using one, then there isn't any real contact. If there isn't any real contact, there isn't any realism.

If you don't reach an incredibly adrenalized state, you can't expect that your techniques will hold up under stress. Thus you can't count on them. The only way to bring injury potential down to an acceptable level and still reach this adrenalized state is to use a padded adversary.

No If's And's or But's.

While I am certain this post will find its detractors, its still true. If the firearms training you've had displays any or all of these clues, it wasn't worth much past the barest novice level.

Unfortunately the vast majority of firearms training does display most of these clues. Even the impressive high dollar schools with instructors with seemingly impressive resumes and really cool equipment.

Fortunately times are changing and good training that covers the real needs of self-defense is becoming more available.

Michael Brown

[bratch]

+1

Really wish I was closer to Tulsa and could get in on your group.


I've been pretty luck and most of my training has been the opposite of what you've posted. I also consider myself luck in getting to study under a very well respected knife instructor weekly for 3 months. To me his techniques were very realistic and reality based.

[Michael Brown]

Who are you training with?

Michael Brown

[bratch]

So far:

Givens
Suarez
Janich

I've been very happy with my experiences and am upset because Mike and Tom are going to be in Hinton and Amarillo on the same weekend so I'll have to pick. :mad:

The FOF segemnts of Suarez's class were eye opening to say the least. Its really hard to get people to understand unless they've done it.

[bratch]

I also have McCann/Grover's "Inside the Crucible" series and H2H DVDs but haven't gotten to use them a whole lot.

[Michael Brown]

All really good stuff.

Is Janich the knife instructor you've been studying with weekly?

If so, you are incredibly fortunate. If it isn't, who is it?

I'm going to Tom Givens' class in Hinton in January as well.

Michael Brown

[bratch]

Over the summer I worked in Denver and got to work with Mike almost every week. He lives north of Boulder and held a private class in Boulder. I wish I would have known about it last year when I was up there and I could have had 2 summers with him.

That alone was almost enough to get me to move to Denver :wink2: He's a great trainer and an even better person.

I think I'll be at Givens. I'm torn but the guys who are supposed to be coming with me want handgun training instead of knife. Tom's class last year was my first class and really good experience.

[10mm1911]

Okay, Mike, I've got to ask. What do you have against kydex? I can tell from your posts that you've experienced some siginificant problems, and I'm kinda baffled by that.

I've worn a kydex OWB all day, every day for about 10 years now. I wear it concealed, and it hides just fine. It's comfortable, concealable, and fast. What more do I want in a holster? My kydex holster, or some of them, at least, have been through 2 retention schools. Nothing broken, no guns falling out on the ground.

I would like to also point out that I wear quality kydex holsters, never to be confused with Israeli wonder plastic (Fobus). Fobus products have failed dramatically in every retention school I've attended.

[Michael Brown]

Okay, Mike, I've got to ask. What do you have against kydex? I can tell from your posts that you've experienced some siginificant problems, and I'm kinda baffled by that.

I've worn a kydex OWB all day, every day for about 10 years now. I wear it concealed, and it hides just fine. It's comfortable, concealable, and fast. What more do I want in a holster? My kydex holster, or some of them, at least, have been through 2 retention schools. Nothing broken, no guns falling out on the ground.

I would like to also point out that I wear quality kydex holsters, never to be confused with Israeli wonder plastic (Fobus). Fobus products have failed dramatically in every retention school I've attended.

Kydex will hide just fine. It conceals as well as any other holster and it is extremely fast, thus its prominent use in competition shooting where the only concern is quick acquisition from the holster.

However, its quick acquisition from the holster should give you some idea of how fast it also comes out if your adversary gets to it first. IWB kydex is much less of a problem. If it comes out quick for you, it comes out quick for anybody. It also means that it comes out easily in a struggle even when nobody has their hand on it. The laws of physics can't be re-written.

I'm not sure what schools you've attended where handgun retention was part of the curriculum, but I will offer that the vast majority of schools that I've seen don't train it realistically on the local and national level.

The most well-known retention system is the Lindell system. Jim Lindell was the first to recognize the problem of handgun disarmament. Handgun disarmament as trained in the Lindell system is always done standing from what I term the "Zombie Grab" where the attacker reaches right away with one or both hands.

The problem is attempted gun disarms simply don't occur this way. I say so because I have been involved in several both in uniform and plainclothes as a police officer and have studied hundreds more.

Gun disarms almost always occur from the clinch or a grounded position. This means that both parties have hit the ground and probably very hard. The only OWB kydex holster I've seen come remotely close to satisfying the requirements of retention after a fall is the Sidearmor holster that has its loops integral to the holster, not the current version that can be interchanged with a paddle.

We have seen Blade-Tech, Uncle Mike's, Comp-Tac, Fobus, Safariland and other makes of kydex all fail to the degree that I cannot in good conscience recommend them for self-defense.

In fact, I will take credit for Safariland re-designing their Raptor system after trying to sell it to the Tulsa Police Department. The rep hung the holster and belt from a pull-up bar and then hung from it to demonstrate its durability.

The rangemaster then called me from the audience and asked me to give it a realistic test. The rep put the belt on and I ripped the holster from its backing in about 15 seconds of aggressive disarming as he tried to defend it.

So much for "Level 4 Retention".......

If you haven't seen your kydex holster fail in ten years, my guess is you haven't been training very hard with it. That means hard wrestling where you are picked up and deposited hard on the ground and continued to fight from there. It means being punched in the face and disoriented prior to a clinched gun grab or takedown.

Nobody, that I know of, is doing this type of training in this immediate area on a wide-scale basis and only a handful are doing it anywhere. If you have trained with someone who is, consider yourself fortunate.

However if you had, and I am not trying to be condescending or arrogant, but you probably would already have seen the answer firsthand.

Some very well-known trainers teach what they refer to as handgun retention in a very static manner in the Lindell format that they claim is effective. In fact I attended a class where a nationally known instructor and gun mag writer was pummeled and disarmed trying to use the Lindell system against another 180 pound officer who had wrestled in high school.

If your system only works against the mildly aggressive, it isn't worth much. It has to work against a large, strong, determined, resisting opponent. If it won't work against a college defensive lineman, you can't rely on it.

I offer that example since my first incident where a suspect attempted to take my gun was a former Dallas Cowboys defensive end here in Tulsa.

If you test your kydex in this type of environment where an aggressive opponent with minimal restrictions attacks you with full-power strikes, takedowns, and grappling and it doesn't fail, you can consider it good to go.

Until then, you're just guessing.

Michael Brown

[okgr8outdrs]

Mr. Brown,

Not sure if this is taking this in the wrong direction or not, but in your opinion, do open-top, leather pancake style holsters provide adequate retention, or should I have opted for the thumb-break model? I currently use a Galco Concealable, but I have never wrestled with anyone over 40 pounds (my kids) while wearing it.

I have been thinking about personal defense training quite a bit lately, and wondered which order to attend your classes for maximum benefit.

[Michael Brown]

I think the Galco Concealable is one of the best choices. Its a good balance of accesibility and security.

If the gun is going to be concealed, I would recommend an open top leather holster or preferably a leather IWB.

My choices go in this order:

1) Leather IWB
2) Kydex IWB
3) Leather OWB open-top
4) Leather OWB thumb-break
5) Kydex OWB

As far as class order goes, all our classes are designed in no particular order.

However if you already have some basic combat marksmanship training, you will probably benefit most from the CQT course.

Michael Brown

[brennan]

Michael what do you use for concealed carry? And what do you think of the SideArmor IWB.

[blake711]

Michael what do you use for concealed carry? And what do you think of the SideArmor IWB.
I was also wondering what you use as cc as compared to your standard issue.

[Michael Brown]

I almost always carry the Milt Sparks Summer Special 2.

On occasion, church or something, where I prefer slacks that don't wear well with an IWB, I will wear a Galco Avenger since the angle of draw is pretty similar to the SS2.

If I'm going to the gym, I will wear a fanny pack if we're not doing weapons work, or if we are, I'll just wear what I normally carry.

I try to avoid pocket holsters at all costs.

At work we are all mandated to wear the Safariland 070 SS3. I have no complaints about it whatsoever as a duty holster. I'm not fond of its plainclothes counterpart the 0701. Its a great idea but the design doesn't work IMO.

I definitely have a preference for leather holsters for carry because of retention issues.

I think the Sidearmor IWB will work fine but I find kydex IWB uncomfortable. But that's purely a personal preference not a technical issue.

Michael Brown

[blake711]

Michael do you carry a g21 all the time? Also does tpd use Compensated guns?

[Michael Brown]

I don't own a G21.

We are issued the G22C and its what I carry all the time.

If I had my druthers, I'd use the standard non-compensated version but I don't get to make that decision.

The only time I will carry differently is if I go home to the People's Socialist Republic of Massachusetts where magazines over 10 rounds are illegal and I carry my G27.

Michael Brown

[J.P.]

That's such B.S.!
You mean even a police officer is limited to 10 rd mags?

The phrase "hell in a handbasket" comes to mind.

[RDS]

Does your training/trainer prepare you for that moment when some "animal" decides to take what it wants from you and/or yours? The original theme of this thread, as I took it, concerned realistic training.... survival training.

Really, we're all just a blink of an eye away from the stone-age. You know, "dog eat dog", "kill or be killed", "survival of the fittest", "fight or flight"..none of the constraints of civilization....

So how are you going to handle things when you're jacked up as you leave Starbucks, mocha-latte' in one hand, fumbling for keys with the other, and your cell phone tucked under your chin? ....or, you're slammed against the urinal wall while your hands are otherwise occupied?

The best case would be "no response necessary because you would have anticipated/avoided worst case and not pinned that big target on your back." Failing best case, now what do you do??

Just something to think about next time you're at the range....or Starbucks.....or taking a leak ............

[blake711]

RDS you make all good points.. As anyone with sense will agree. The best option is avoidance and do not put youself in a situation where you may be harmed. The second thing is sometimes bad things happen to good people. So you can never be to prepared. While I find carring at home a bit overkill lots of people do it. As for people like Michael training for these scenarios. I can think of no one better suited for this type of training than law enforcement. I have seen all to often the small budgets that go to training LEOs for physical confrontations. Instead its wasted on political crap/corectness training and such. Just like the officer that was killed a few weeks back that had a gun jam or something. Was it a training issue? Only one person knows but I promise you more training could have only helped in that situation.

[10mm1911]

Mike Brown wrote:

If you haven't seen your kydex holster fail in ten years, my guess is you haven't been training very hard with it. That means hard wrestling where you are picked up and deposited hard on the ground and continued to fight from there. It means being punched in the face and disoriented prior to a clinched gun grab or takedown.

Nobody, that I know of, is doing this type of training in this immediate area on a wide-scale basis and only a handful are doing it anywhere. If you have trained with someone who is, consider yourself fortunate.

However if you had, and I am not trying to be condescending or arrogant, but you probably would already have seen the answer firsthand.


I am a legal, civilian, concealed carrier. My best guess is that when I'm involved in a weapon retention bug tussle, chances are best that it will involve an already drawn handgun. I don't discount the possibility of a fight over a holstered handgun, I just see a fight over a handgun IN MY HANDS as the most probable. I spend the majority of my training time and efforts on what I think is most probable. Yep, we have trained and rassled pretty hard over dummy handguns, up to and including trading knees to the groin!

Now if I were in the habit of wearing a uniform, and a plainly visible handgun, I suspect I'd spent the bulk of my training time and efforts on protecting a pistol that's still IN THE HOLSTER. I suspect we're doing pretty similar things, just from very different perspectives.

[J.P.]

Mike Brown wrote:

If you haven't seen your kydex holster fail in ten years, my guess is you haven't been training very hard with it. That means hard wrestling where you are picked up and deposited hard on the ground and continued to fight from there. It means being punched in the face and disoriented prior to a clinched gun grab or takedown.

Nobody, that I know of, is doing this type of training in this immediate area on a wide-scale basis and only a handful are doing it anywhere. If you have trained with someone who is, consider yourself fortunate.

However if you had, and I am not trying to be condescending or arrogant, but you probably would already have seen the answer firsthand.


I am a legal, civilian, concealed carrier. My best guess is that when I'm involved in a weapon retention bug tussle, chances are best that it will involve an already drawn handgun. I don't discount the possibility of a fight over a holstered handgun, I just see a fight over a handgun IN MY HANDS as the most probable. I spend the majority of my training time and efforts on what I think is most probable. Yep, we have trained and rassled pretty hard over dummy handguns, up to and including trading knees to the groin!

Now if I were in the habit of wearing a uniform, and a plainly visible handgun, I suspect I'd spent the bulk of my training time and efforts on protecting a pistol that's still IN THE HOLSTER. I suspect we're doing pretty similar things, just from very different perspectives.

Trouble is,no matter how good you are,you might be on the ground before you can draw.
You have to always consider that possibility.

[Michael Brown]

Trouble is,no matter how good you are,you might be on the ground before you can draw.
You have to always consider that possibility.

Exactamundo! :wink2:

Michael Brown

[walpur6isknight]

i really need to stop buying guns and start investing in some training.

[Michael Brown]

Almost always a better plan.

Michael Brown

[J.P.]

10mm1911,
although you've made it clear that you will no longer be posting here...

You need not take offense to any advice or anecdotal information written by anyone on the internet.Especially with someone who actually has a lot of real world experience.
Mike would probably be the first person to tell you that he is not the greatest trainer of all time but would not be doing anyone a service by giving information contrary to his experience.Plain and simple.
Nobody is siding with or ganging up on anyone.
I disagree with Michael often about many things in life,politics,ballistics,even sometimes moderation of this forum.

Siding with good tactical advice is a good thing to do.
I'll take his training and expertise anyday of the week over somebody who has lesser qualifications.

The "I'm the execption" example which you gave, is foiled on a daily basis in the real world.That's all I was saying.



You are certainly welcome to disagree with and debate anyone's methods if you so choose as long as it is in a courteous manner.

In fact,if you *are* a trainer,your expertise would certainly be welcome here,as we could always use more great resources.
J.P.

[F16mickey]

O.K. Mike you have convinved me that I need more training, when is your next defensive handgun training course?

[Michael Brown]

We're trying to work out a deal with a new facility for 2006 so our pistol course schedule is on hold right now.

We will be offering the CQT course in February or March as the first class of the year. It really is our best course.

Michael Brown

[F16mickey]

The course sounds good to me. Let me know when you have firm dates. I will need to check and make sure I don't have drill that weekend.

[Hoov]

Bravo M.B! I see so many people take one class or worse yet, buy a video and think that they are 10-8 and GTG. I still like my Serpa because of it's retention, but there are always options. I tell people that rule number one in a gunfight is have a gun! Yet, so many people do not train. It is kind of like buying a car and not knowing how to drive. Of course, avoidance is always preferable. Keep up the good work M.B. Hoov

[Michael Brown]

Thank you for the kind words.

My dislike of the Serpa is not based on its retention capabilities, which I consider very good for a concealed holster.

My dislike for the Serpa is that I believe its unsafe because it requires you to use your trigger finger in a convulsive manner, similar to the way you pull the trigger. There have been several documented A.D.'s with the Serpa in a short period of time.

Its retention capabilities and the great feature of it locking in when its re-holstered are awesome. I just don't think it offsets the weakness.

But that's purely a personal decision and I've been known to be opinionated about these sort of things. :wink2:

Michael Brown

[chicane]

I understand your veiw of kydex being "easily broken" during a grapple-style encounter... But are you also saying that a adjustable tension kydex holster is easier to be dis-armed than a Milt Sparks?

I carry a Kytac IWB and I can adjust it much tighter than the VMII that I had before. I promise it is easier to get a glock 30 out of a VM2 than out of the Kytac.

Have you tried to break a C-tac or Kytac IWB holster? The ones with the flexiable leather connecting the holster to the clips? If so were you able to break them as easily as the fobus? In your opinion would they hold up to a linemen grabbing on them?

[J.P.]

I understand your veiw of kydex being "easily broken" during a grapple-style encounter... But are you also saying that a adjustable tension kydex holster is easier to be dis-armed than a Milt Sparks?

I carry a Kytac IWB and I can adjust it much tighter than the VMII that I had before. I promise it is easier to get a glock 30 out of a VM2 than out of the Kytac.

Have you tried to break a C-tac or Kytac IWB holster? The ones with the flexiable leather connecting the holster to the clips? If so were you able to break them as easily as the fobus? In your opinion would they hold up to a linemen grabbing on them?

Here's my take...

IWB Kydex is better than OWB Kydex because in the event of breakage you have the belt and waistband of the pants to help retain the gun.
I'm comfortable with most IWB Kydex designs,particularly CTAC.

It's not so much the actual designed retention capabilities but when you fall on a Kydex holster and it breaks,you can have ZERO retention at thAT POINT.
Additionally,when you grab and twist a gun in leather,it will not break.Some Kydex holsters can be broken by this method.

OWB Kydex is the big no-no,in my book....except for gun games, and I don't even use it for that anymore.

If it can be broken,mike will break it.
Hopefully he'll chime in and answer you question.

[chicane]

I wonder if our new Sponsor would donate a C-tac for this test? I think a C-tac would be really easy to crack if there is not a pistol in it. But with a pistol inside the holster, I really think it would hold up because the actual pistol is supporting the holster from crushing in.

If one did fail, I would have to guess it would be at the mounting points, Or the actual clips used to secure the holster.

[J.P.]

I wonder if our new Sponsor would donate a C-tac for this test? I think a C-tac would be really easy to crack if there is not a pistol in it. But with a pistol inside the holster, I really think it would hold up because the actual pistol is supporting the holster from crushing in.

If one did fail, I would have to guess it would be at the mounting points, Or the actual clips used to secure the holster.

You're forgetting about the gun-grab scenario.
The BG grabs the gun abd twists it.....holster cracks.

[IDtheTarget]

I must be backwards. I've got a leather IWB and Fobus kydex OWB. I prefer the kydex to the leather. I think it's because I have a pistol (glock) that doesn't have a safety, I prefer a holster that has a definite "click" when it is seated and that requires an intentional effort to draw it. I haven't personally handled a leather holster that had a detent retention system.

Maybe it's just me, but when I have a pistol whose only safety is "not pulling the trigger", I want to have utmost confidence that the trigger is always covered and can't accidentally become uncovered... :)

[Michael Brown]

?ux|hicane]I understand your veiw of kydex being "easily broken" during a grapple-style encounter... But are you also saying that a adjustable tension kydex holster is easier to be dis-armed than a Milt Sparks?

I carry a Kytac IWB and I can adjust it much tighter than the VMII that I had before. I promise it is easier to get a glock 30 out of a VM2 than out of the Kytac.

Have you tried to break a C-tac or Kytac IWB holster? The ones with the flexiable leather connecting the holster to the clips? If so were you able to break them as easily as the fobus? In your opinion would they hold up to a linemen grabbing on them?[/QUOTE]

I think kydex IWB is just fine. The CTAC is a great carry holster.

My dislike of kydex is generally relegated to the OWB variety which is chosen because the user has a pre-conceived notion that speed out of the holster is the primary virtue of a concealed carry pieice. This is where the gun games like IDPA/IPSC have done a tremendous disservice to those interested in self-protection. Timing, not time, is the primary consideration in close quarters.

Yes, we have broken a CTAC before but that does not change my opinion that it still does what is required of a good holster and if I wore a kydex holster, it would be my first choice.

Michael Brown

[Michael Brown]

I must be backwards. I've got a leather IWB and Fobus kydex OWB. I prefer the kydex to the leather. I think it's because I have a pistol (glock) that doesn't have a safety, I prefer a holster that has a definite "click" when it is seated and that requires an intentional effort to draw it. I haven't personally handled a leather holster that had a detent retention system.

Maybe it's just me, but when I have a pistol whose only safety is "not pulling the trigger", I want to have utmost confidence that the trigger is always covered and can't accidentally become uncovered... :)

I'm afraid I don't quite understand this "problem"........

Michael Brown

[Robbo]

I must be backwards. I've got a leather IWB and Fobus kydex OWB. I prefer the kydex to the leather. I think it's because I have a pistol (glock) that doesn't have a safety, I prefer a holster that has a definite "click" when it is seated and that requires an intentional effort to draw it. I haven't personally handled a leather holster that had a detent retention system.

Maybe it's just me, but when I have a pistol whose only safety is "not pulling the trigger", I want to have utmost confidence that the trigger is always covered and can't accidentally become uncovered... :)

I understand what you are saying, but I have found with a quality leather holster they are usually so tight (speaking from what I've found with Don Hume, Milt Sparks & Alessi holsters) I wouldn't be worried about the gun slipping up inadvertantly. I had to stretch mine when I got it (can be done by placing the firearm in a freezer bag, or sock then inserting into holster and leaving for a few days) just so I could get the gun in w/o it moving the slide. After that the holster still grips the gun very tightly.

Rob

[IDtheTarget]

I must be backwards. I've got a leather IWB and Fobus kydex OWB. I prefer the kydex to the leather. I think it's because I have a pistol (glock) that doesn't have a safety, I prefer a holster that has a definite "click" when it is seated and that requires an intentional effort to draw it. I haven't personally handled a leather holster that had a detent retention system.

Maybe it's just me, but when I have a pistol whose only safety is "not pulling the trigger", I want to have utmost confidence that the trigger is always covered and can't accidentally become uncovered...
I'm afraid I don't quite understand this "problem"........
Michael Brown

Sorry, I was being slightly sarcastic, with regards to the guys who were basically stating that kydex was a "very bad thing [tm]" in a "real world situation[tm]". I prefer kydex holsters and was pointing out why, in my own, unique confusing way. :)

[NikatKimber]

Yes, we have broken a CTAC before but that does not change my opinion that it still does what is required of a good holster and if I wore a kydex holster, it would be my first choice.

Michael Brown

Curious as to how you broke the CTAC? I have just aquired one, and I like it a lot more than I thought I would like kydex. and yes, the gun comes out like greased lightning which I can't say about any of my leather holsters... almost too fast, if held upside down the gun does NOT stay in.

[Michael Brown]

Curious as to how you broke the CTAC? I have just aquired one, and I like it a lot more than I thought I would like kydex. and yes, the gun comes out like greased lightning which I can't say about any of my leather holsters... almost too fast, if held upside down the gun does NOT stay in.

One of the rivets and clips broke during a struggle for the gun on the ground while it was still in the holster.

The CTAC I will adjust muzzle tension I believe, although I could be wrong. That should solve the problem of the gun coming out if held upside down.

IMO if the gun falls out when held upside down by the holster, it has an inadequate level of passive retention.

Michael Brown

[J.P.]

Yep,the CTAC has two retention screws.

[J.P.]

Mike,have you ever seen the snaps on a Milt Sparks holster break or be sheared off?

[NikatKimber]

thanks! i need to do that then *tighten it* it really worried me when I pulled the holster *with gun* off the couch and the gun came out when i held it upside down.

[NikatKimber]

so just one rivet and clip broke? then the other clip was still holding the holster in place too, right? while not great, I would think that would be acceptable, especially since the gun remained in the holster too.

[Michael Brown]

so just one rivet and clip broke? then the other clip was still holding the holster in place too, right? while not great, I would think that would be acceptable, especially since the gun remained in the holster too.

The single clip did not hold the gun in place. It came completely out of the pants.

The fact that it remained in the holster was a function of the individual's good training in weapon retention, not any function or fault of the holster.

When you're rolling around on the ground fighting to keep your gun, your skill is far more valuable than your holster-maker.

Michael Brown

[Michael Brown]

Mike,have you ever seen the snaps on a Milt Sparks holster break or be sheared off?

They've come un-snapped but I haven't see them break.

However they're far from unbreakable. They just have a lot more give.

Michael Brown

[NikatKimber]

The single clip did not hold the gun in place. It came completely out of the pants.

The fact that it remained in the holster was a function of the individual's good training in weapon retention, not any function or fault of the holster.

When you're rolling around on the ground fighting to keep your gun, your skill is far more valuable than your holster-maker.

Michael Brown

thanks for clarifying that. so is what you're saying: that the individuals training is more important than the holster type? ie, it is the individual keeping the gun from the opponent, rather than the holster doing it? some holsters types are easier to defend?
now if the gun was on the ground, didn't the holster fail? even though the individual passed *kept gun from attacker*???

thanks again for your comments! I appreciate them!

[IDtheTarget]

One of the rivets and clips broke during a struggle for the gun on the ground while it was still in the holster.

The CTAC I will adjust muzzle tension I believe, although I could be wrong. That should solve the problem of the gun coming out if held upside down.

IMO if the gun falls out when held upside down by the holster, it has an inadequate level of passive retention.

Michael Brown

Michael,

Do you mind sharing what you now use as a carry holster? I'm always interested in the opinion of somebody who "is there, is doing that". :)

[JamesBell]

I almost always carry the Milt Sparks Summer Special 2.

On occasion, church or something, where I prefer slacks that don't wear well with an IWB, I will wear a Galco Avenger since the angle of draw is pretty similar to the SS2.

If I'm going to the gym, I will wear a fanny pack if we're not doing weapons work, or if we are, I'll just wear what I normally carry.

I try to avoid pocket holsters at all costs.

At work we are all mandated to wear the Safariland 070 SS3. I have no complaints about it whatsoever as a duty holster. I'm not fond of its plainclothes counterpart the 0701. Its a great idea but the design doesn't work IMO.

I definitely have a preference for leather holsters for carry because of retention issues.

I think the Sidearmor IWB will work fine but I find kydex IWB uncomfortable. But that's purely a personal preference not a technical issue.

Michael Brown

ID, he did on the first page of the thread.

[Leadblooded]

However they're far from unbreakable.
Michael Brown
Nothing's unbreakable, I don't care how good it is, their will always be someone bigger, or badder, or better trained than you to prove it. This is why we train to retain. Holsters are just one aspect, you've got to get it into yourself that you will not be defeated and work towards that purpose.Even if it means, (and I know the chance is slim with all these shooters on board) that I am bare-knuckled and you are armed, I can see the chink in your armor.
I =being the goodguy
You =being the badguy

[IDtheTarget]

ID, he did on the first page of the thread.

Whups, you're right. I thought I'd read the whole thread, and I hadn't.

Thank you, Michael, you've obviously got light-year's more experience than I and I can see that I need to seriously re-think my holster and retention strategies.

[Michael Brown]

Whups, you're right. I thought I'd read the whole thread, and I hadn't.

Thank you, Michael, you've obviously got light-year's more experience than I and I can see that I need to seriously re-think my holster and retention strategies.

While I greatly appreciate the kudos, the big deal really isn't the experience as there are plenty of folks more experienced than me.

What tends to distinguish what my group does is that we do the work on a regular basis. I.E. we train at least twice a week on physical strategies and techniques against live, resisting opponents.

Most people (instructors included) usually work against cardboard or compliant or minimally resistant opponents.

That's the big difference. I just get to see and experience a lot firsthand because I'm willing to do the work.

Anyone, who is willing, can do what I do. Its just that there aren't too many people willing to sweat and bleed to do it and that's really what's required.

I heard a good theory from Tuhon Tom Kier of Sayoc Kali a couple weeks ago at a seminar: Take two identical twins and tell them they're going to fight each other six months from now.

Number 1 will get fifty of the best coaches/instructors in the world and they will train him in the best techniques in the world for that six months. They are going to teach him until he has the techniques down pat and he will know the proper way to throw punches, kicks, etc.

Number 2 will get fifty guys with headgear and boxing gloves and he will fight them five days a week for six months. They won't teach him a single technique but merely fight during all his sessions.

At the end of six months, number 2 will trash number 1.

While I believe a balance of the two is the best option, how much training that anyone has done involves the prospect of pain?

Certainly shooting cardboard doesn't do that and that's why so many seemingly trained people are really unprepared for conflict.

All realistic training programs have two things:

1) The prospect of failure

2) The prosepect of danger/pain

Nothing is a guarantee to combat success but training as close as possible to realistic conditions is the best bet you can make.

When you train realistically (i.e. against resistant opponents who try to hurt you) people invariably come to the same conclusions.

This is one of the reasons that two instructors, like myself and Southnarc as of a few years ago, can never train together and come up with incredibly similar programs and ideas.

When you actually do the work, the answers become self-evident. Like I said before, anyone can do what I do. All I do is try to apply an analytical mind and then actually sweat and bleed while doing the work.

Michael Brown

[okbirdman]

One of the most important lessons we learned in the Marine Corps is "that it

is better to sweat in peace than bleed in war", unfortunately I was a slow

learner twice. But I will agree that real life scenarios and true training are the

best education a person can have. Unfortunately to many people believe that

an 8 hour class and 50 rounds down range are going to save their life. In my

experience you will never be totally prepared for any type of confrontation,

but training and a clear mind will save your life. IMO true training is the only

way to maintain a clear head in combat. I believe this comes far above what

type of holster should I wear, I believe that you should wear what works best

for you provided it is a quality product, and don't have a diferent holster for every

day of the week. And always train in the exact equipment you are going to use

when your life depends on it. Now I am no expert, just someone with a few real life

experiences to draw from, and is always continuing his education and training

for personal gain.

[KurtM]

:laughup:Quickest way I know how to tell if your training isn't realistic, is when the instructor says "In the real world".:D

[notasniper]

Michael,
I use a Blackhawk CQC holster and it is Kydex and also has a retention device that grabs the front of thr trigger guard. It is an OWB holster and is perfectly suited to CC in the cooler months when I wear a jacket. I also had one of these holsters that has stood up to 2 deployments to Iraq in some brutal conditions. It never broke, loosened, and I never once lost a handgun. I am sure that your knowledge is unlimited in both the training and shooting arts. H2H weapon retention is something that we all need to be able to do. But you stated above the if your gear can not take a hit from an NFL linebacker then it is not up to the task. I am here to inform you that the flesh and bone that i am constructed of will most deffently not withstand such abuse. So the most vital component of my self defense is therfore bypassed before I get the chance to shoot. I understand the analogy quite well though. Your gear has to be tough. CHEERS, notasniper

[Michael Brown]

Michael,
I use a Blackhawk CQC holster and it is Kydex and also has a retention device that grabs the front of thr trigger guard. It is an OWB holster and is perfectly suited to CC in the cooler months when I wear a jacket. I also had one of these holsters that has stood up to 2 deployments to Iraq in some brutal conditions. It never broke, loosened, and I never once lost a handgun. I am sure that your knowledge is unlimited in both the training and shooting arts. H2H weapon retention is something that we all need to be able to do. But you stated above the if your gear can not take a hit from an NFL linebacker then it is not up to the task. I am here to inform you that the flesh and bone that i am constructed of will most deffently not withstand such abuse. So the most vital component of my self defense is therfore bypassed before I get the chance to shoot. I understand the analogy quite well though. Your gear has to be tough. CHEERS, notasniper

If it works for you, cool.

You're the only one who has to wear it and deal with it's strengths and weaknesses.

Michael Brown