Scan and assess - What's right, wrong, just opinion, and clearly silly?

[benenglish]

In another thread, some video of a training class was shown that was, to me, rather odd.

After a string of fire, the students were pulling the pistol to the chest. They'd then look left, look right, turn left 90 degrees, repeat, repeat, repeat, look left, look right, and slowly reholster. After a pause, they'd unholster, look left, look right, and then slowly reach down to recover their dumped magazines, all the while looking around like a starved feral cat protecting a kill.

Sig_Fiend suggested I start a new thread on the topic instead of reviving that old one. I had commented on it after seeing an insightful question from txinvestigator about the utility of all that dancing around.

In the example above, the students were being taught to muzzle sweep their heads or their classmates during the 360-degree turn and then to disturb evidence at a crime scene by recovering a magazine that I'm sure the police would rather find in situ for their investigation. All that took place over a time span sufficient for even a lard-ass like me to get completely out of the area to safety. Yes, I realize the guy teaching that class gets paid to teach, has real-world experience, and I'm just a clueless noob - but it simply struck me as ridiculous.

Since I'm new at all this, I thought I'd solicit thoughts, opinions, and examples. I'm aware of the general concept that we should be aware of what's around us and alert to possible additional threats even after the first shots die down. However, what's the right way to "scan and assess"? What actions are unnecessary or just wrong? How do we balance the need for awareness with the need to just move away from the already-identified problem?

 

[Leper]

I noticed that also. I just thought they were making sure everyone was done firing.

 

[Jakashh]

Link to video?

 

[TundraWookiee]

In my opinion the biggest purpose of scanning and assessing is breaking that tunnel vision. Ideally I think you would want to train yourself to scan and assess while moving to cover but obviously this is outside of the scope of most basic or entry level tactical courses. Multiple threat assessment/engagement, drawing/holstering, tactical reloads with retention, and movement are already key parts to such a scenario and a bit overwhelming at first to many students until they have trained enough to do this confidently. I see this stationary scan and assess as a stepping stone to develop the basic behaviour for later.

The part that confuses me about what you posted is why they would turn 90 degrees instead of keeping themselves squared to the threat and why you would unholster to recover a mag. I have mixed opinions on the recovery of the mag in general.

Brought to you courtesy of Tapatalk

 

[Younggun]

I would walk off the class the first time I was told to sweep another student, I'd run if another student was told to sweep me.

I guess I missed the video but from what you describe it sounds like a bunch of crap the instructor made up to look cool. I understand pulling the gun in close and have seen it in several training videos and the reasoning. I also understand being aware of your surroundings.

I don't understand why you would reholster, then upholster to pick up a mag, the reholster again. Why would you even put the gun away if you don't feel safe enough to pick the mag up off the ground.

I also agree leaving the mag on the ground would be better in a self defense situation.

 

[2slow]

i glanced at the thread title and thought i read scanning asses LOL

 

[Charlie]

Sure wished we had a popcorn eatin' smiley!

 

[Acera]

Have you guys priced hi-cap magazines these days?? Hell I will be picking up the bad guys magazines if I can

 

[benenglish]

Link to video?

Good idea but I purposely left it off because it would lead to a discussion of the particular (controversial) instructor and his personality rather than the root questions. I'll PM you a link.

 

[Shorts]

OP link to vid?

i glanced at the thread title and thought i read scanning asses LOL

So did I. And I wouldn't make it so obvious by turning my head a full 90*. That gets you caught by the spousal unit.

 

[txinvestigator]

I recall the thread and video. I see no need for all of that. I do see the need to get out of tunnel vision. "Is he down, are there more", is a good mantra to learn. But muzzleing someone is never acceptable. In the video their method is unnecessary.

 

[M. Sage]

In another thread, some video of a training class was shown that was, to me, rather odd.

After a string of fire, the students were pulling the pistol to the chest. They'd then look left, look right, turn left 90 degrees, repeat, repeat, repeat, look left, look right, and slowly reholster. After a pause, they'd unholster, look left, look right, and then slowly reach down to recover their dumped magazines, all the while looking around like a starved feral cat protecting a kill.

Sig_Fiend suggested I start a new thread on the topic instead of reviving that old one. I had commented on it after seeing an insightful question from txinvestigator about the utility of all that dancing around.

In the example above, the students were being taught to muzzle sweep their heads or their classmates during the 360-degree turn and then to disturb evidence at a crime scene by recovering a magazine that I'm sure the police would rather find in situ for their investigation. All that took place over a time span sufficient for even a lard-ass like me to get completely out of the area to safety. Yes, I realize the guy teaching that class gets paid to teach, has real-world experience, and I'm just a clueless noob - but it simply struck me as ridiculous.

Since I'm new at all this, I thought I'd solicit thoughts, opinions, and examples. I'm aware of the general concept that we should be aware of what's around us and alert to possible additional threats even after the first shots die down. However, what's the right way to "scan and assess"? What actions are unnecessary or just wrong? How do we balance the need for awareness with the need to just move away from the already-identified problem?

I don't see what's very good in the process you described. As you pointed out, that time might be better spent getting the hell out of Dodge, or at the very least, finding a more defensible position.

Some friends and I were hanging out a while back, and one brought up the scan and assess. The idea we came up with wasn't to stand there looking all around like some dumbass, but to take a look around, start moving to cover (particularly cover that's got a wall behind you, preferably a corner), drop your mag and reload.

Yes, drop your mag. If you need that 2-3 rounds that are still in it, you are probably in deeper trouble than that 2-3 rounds are going to be able to effect. IMO, once bullets have flown, job number one is making sure your gun is ready to go. If you're worried about more people showing up, why take the extra time to retain that magazine? Just get the damn gun full and ready to run as fast as you can. We're talking pit stop, not gas station.

Why a corner? Guns work in one direction - forward. If you want a defensible position, you want people coming at you from your front, not your sides, not behind.

I'll pick up my magazines later. From the police if they have 'em and are done with using them as evidence, or from the ground after everything is over. Either way, the magazine isn't going anywhere, and isn't important.

 

[benenglish]

I would walk off the class the first time I was told to sweep another student, I'd run if another student was told to sweep me.

I poorly phrased my summary. I'm sure the instructor didn't *explicitly* instruct the shooters to sweep each other or their own heads. However, that's what was happening, uncorrected. Thus, that was what was actually being *taught*.

I guess I missed the video but from what you describe it sounds like a bunch of crap the instructor made up to look cool.

Which was more or less the implied conclusion reached by those posting to that previous thread. However, my intent in starting *this* thread was to ask specifically about the whole "scan and assess" thing, divorced from discussion of personalities, styles, and history.

I don't understand why you would reholster, then upholster to pick up a mag, the reholster again. Why would you even put the gun away if you don't feel safe enough to pick the mag up off the ground.

I'm mystified, too, thus the new thread.

 

[M. Sage]

To add to my thoughts on magazines: They're disposable items. They're a consumable, I see them like tires on a car. They will eventually wear out (if you use them enough), and aren't a permanent component to the system. Discard and replace as the situation dictates.

 

[benenglish]

I see this stationary scan and assess as a stepping stone to develop the basic behaviour for later.

That's reasonable. But if it's a building block for more advanced skills, why teach it to beginners at all? At that stage, the beginner in that class is being taught to remain within a few feet of where they were when they fired their weapon. It seems to me that if there are any more bad guys around, they already know who shot their friend and every millisecond the good guy stays at or near their initial position puts them at a worse and worse disadvantage.

In my opinion the biggest purpose of scanning and assessing is breaking that tunnel vision. Ideally I think you would want to train yourself to scan and assess while moving to cover but obviously this is outside of the scope of most basic or entry level tactical courses. Multiple threat assessment/engagement, drawing/holstering, tactical reloads with retention, and movement are already key parts to such a scenario and a bit overwhelming at first to many students until they have trained enough to do this confidently. I see this stationary scan and assess as a stepping stone to develop the basic behaviour for later.

In an advanced class (or in the military, where holding a particular position may be required for a thousand different reasons), semi-elaborate scanning and assessing might be reasonable. For beginners, though, I always thought the proper action after the (we hope) last shot is to get away from where you're standing until you're far enough that you feel safe or are at least behind something solid. In my uninformed opinion, that breaks tunnel vision and is simpler for someone who isn't training for a protracted gun battle. But I don't know anything, so I'm asking.

The part that confuses me about what you posted is why they would turn 90 degrees instead of keeping themselves squared to the threat and why you would unholster to recover a mag.

Actually, they weren't turning 90 degrees to the threat; they were turning 360 degrees. Some students were turning 90 degrees 4 times. Some were doing 2 180s. I can understand the need to identify all potential threats in house-to-house fighting where hostiles may be anywhere. In a civilian training class, though, I was also confused by the notion of completely turning your back to the person you just shot.

I have mixed opinions on the recovery of the mag in general.

Why mixed? In a civilian self-defense setting, why would anyone ever try to recover an empty magazine? I'm not trying to be argumentative; I actually expect that someone might be able to envision a circumstance that my brain hasn't thought up.

 

[benenglish]

...I wouldn't make it so obvious by turning my head a full 90*. That gets you caught by the spousal unit.

The proper response to a competent spousal unit is "I'm married, not blind". Then pay them some special attention.

If that doesn't work, there was a previous breakdown in the spousal unit selection process.

 

[TundraWookiee]

That's reasonable. But if it's a building block for more advanced skills, why teach it to beginners at all? At that stage, the beginner in that class is being taught to remain within a few feet of where they were when they fired their weapon. It seems to me that if there are any more bad guys around, they already know who shot their friend and every millisecond the good guy stays at or near their initial position puts them at a worse and worse disadvantage.

All of this is just me spitballing and I'm not entirely convinced of one view or another but I would say that its better to at least introduce that idea of breaking tunnel vision to beginners and introduce the concept in case they never progress further in their training. I also feel there are some limitations on how far most instructors would feel comfortable taking a "scan and assess while move to cover" on a hot range. Obviously its great to suggest that they do that at a later point in their training but is there a safe way to practice this in a (relatively) beginner classroom setting?


In an advanced class (or in the military, where holding a particular position may be required for a thousand different reasons), semi-elaborate scanning and assessing might be reasonable. For beginners, though, I always thought the proper action after the (we hope) last shot is to get away from where you're standing until you're far enough that you feel safe or are at least behind something solid. In my uninformed opinion, that breaks tunnel vision and is simpler for someone who isn't training for a protracted gun battle. But I don't know anything, so I'm asking.

Actually, they weren't turning 90 degrees to the threat; they were turning 360 degrees. Some students were turning 90 degrees 4 times. Some were doing 2 180s. I can understand the need to identify all potential threats in house-to-house fighting where hostiles may be anywhere. In a civilian training class, though, I was also confused by the notion of completely turning your back to the person you just shot.

That sounds absolutely idiotic. Even if I was moving to cover I would still not turn my back to a known threat whether it had been neutralized or not.

Why mixed? In a civilian self-defense setting, why would anyone ever try to recover an empty magazine? I'm not trying to be argumentative; I actually expect that someone might be able to envision a circumstance that my brain hasn't thought up.

Its just always been my belief that I don't want to give up a known for an unknown. Lets say I have two magazines in total on my person, 1 in the gun and a spare on my belt. I empty or drop my first mag and load the second. Not knowing how things are going to play out I may want to recover that mag in the event that I do need any remaining rounds in it. Or, if its indeed empty, what is to say that I won't have some sort of malfunction in my spare mag. Its highly unlikely of course that that would occur and even more unlikely that I would have the time to load the rounds into the empty mag but it is guaranteed that I cannot do that if I left the spent or dropped mag lying on the ground.

I realize that leaving the mag where it lies may aid the authorities in their investigation later, but feel like my focus would be on making it through the encounter first. I personally practice retaining my mag when I reload (both tactical reloads and otherwise) so unless I fumble it my mag won't be hitting the ground anyway.

 

[benenglish]

I also feel there are some limitations on how far most instructors would feel comfortable taking a "scan and assess while move to cover" on a hot range. Obviously its great to suggest that they do that at a later point in their training but is there a safe way to practice this in a (relatively) beginner classroom setting?

Perhaps not. But I know I'd be willing to pay extra for class sizes small enough that any problematic drills can be done one student at a time, with care, followed by feedback from everybody. But maybe that's just me.

 

[M. Sage]

All of this is just me spitballing and I'm not entirely convinced of one view or another but I would say that its better to at least introduce that idea of breaking tunnel vision to beginners and introduce the concept in case they never progress further in their training. I also feel there are some limitations on how far most instructors would feel comfortable taking a "scan and assess while move to cover" on a hot range. Obviously its great to suggest that they do that at a later point in their training but is there a safe way to practice this in a (relatively) beginner classroom setting?


In an advanced class (or in the military, where holding a particular position may be required for a thousand different reasons), semi-elaborate scanning and assessing might be reasonable. For beginners, though, I always thought the proper action after the (we hope) last shot is to get away from where you're standing until you're far enough that you feel safe or are at least behind something solid. In my uninformed opinion, that breaks tunnel vision and is simpler for someone who isn't training for a protracted gun battle. But I don't know anything, so I'm asking.


That sounds absolutely idiotic. Even if I was moving to cover I would still not turn my back to a known threat whether it had been neutralized or not.


Its just always been my belief that I don't want to give up a known for an unknown. Lets say I have two magazines in total on my person, 1 in the gun and a spare on my belt. I empty or drop my first mag and load the second. Not knowing how things are going to play out I may want to recover that mag in the event that I do need any remaining rounds in it. Or, if its indeed empty, what is to say that I won't have some sort of malfunction in my spare mag. Its highly unlikely of course that that would occur and even more unlikely that I would have the time to load the rounds into the empty mag but it is guaranteed that I cannot do that if I left the spent or dropped mag lying on the ground.

I realize that leaving the mag where it lies may aid the authorities in their investigation later, but feel like my focus would be on making it through the encounter first. I personally practice retaining my mag when I reload (both tactical reloads and otherwise) so unless I fumble it my mag won't be hitting the ground anyway.

One phrase I've heard that stuck with me was, "time is life". That applies in a situation where shots have been or are being fired.

IMO, you're training for failure by retaining all magazines. What about a situation where the shooting hasn't stopped yet and you have to reload? Is your life worth the magazine? Because that's what it might cost.

Drop the stupid magazine. It'll be there later.

BTW, I've seen what blood does to steel. If you bleed out all over that magazine you took time to retain, it'll be ruined anyhow.

 

[TundraWookiee]

One phrase I've heard that stuck with me was, "time is life". That applies in a situation where shots have been or are being fired.

IMO, you're training for failure by retaining all magazines. What about a situation where the shooting hasn't stopped yet and you have to reload? Is your life worth the magazine? Because that's what it might cost.

Drop the stupid magazine. It'll be there later.

BTW, I've seen what blood does to steel. If you bleed out all over that magazine you took time to retain, it'll be ruined anyhow.

I retain the old mag between my ring and pinky finger while loading the new mag. The only real loss of anytime is shoving the old mag back in my belt and with training this is maybe 2 tenths of a second at most that you are only lacking a support hand. You have an otherwise operating weapon.

I don't retain my mags because I'm worried about ruining them or replacing them, I do it because I don't want to throw away an option. Like I said, in hypotheticals I can't really say what would or wouldn't transpire I just know that I would rather have the mag and not need it than need it and not have it. Pretty much the same reason I carry a knife or a gun. Kinda reminds me of how Hollywood always shows some guy throw away his gun when it jams or malfunctions....I'd be hanging onto it in the event I get an option to look it over or reassess.

Glock mags are polymer....

Brought to you courtesy of Tapatalk