Last week, we began breaking the “two shots per target” habit with Rich Verdi’s Non-Standard Response Drill. Now we’ll expand on that concept to simulate a more realistic shooting situation.
First, let’s remember why we were doing Verdi’s Non-Standard Response Drill in the first place. There is no guarantee that two trigger presses will result in two good hits. Neither is there any guarantee that, in a fight, two good hits will result in stopping the threat. We want to learn to keep shooting until the threat is gone, and that might take one shot, two, or ten.
While there are many reactive targets, most of them will fall if you shoot them in the right place just once. That’s unrealistic. So instead, we need a way to control when a target is a threat and when it has been neutralized. The easiest way to do this is with a shooting partner.
Set up a silhouette, USPSA, or IDPA target at whatever distance you want to practice. Be sure the target has both a torso and a head zone. Start from your normal carry condition whether that’s concealed or in duty gear.
The start signal will be your shooting partner. He can simply call out “Go!” or blow a whistle or tap you on the shoulder. Just work it out in advance. When the start signal is given, engage the target until your shooting partner gives you the signal to stop. Your shooting should be as fast and accurate as you can get good hits. Don’t slow down or speed up to unrealistic levels. Remember, you’re trying to neutralize an active threat.
When does your partner give you the stop signal? Before telling you to start, your partner needs to decide how many hits it will take to “stop” your threat. Maybe it will be one or two center hits, maybe it will be six … only count center “A-zone” hits, not shots which miss the zone. Maybe on some runs, a head shot will be required. The partner does not tell the shooter how many shots are required. He just stands behind you and watches your target as you shoot. When you get the required hits, he calls out “Down!” or blows the whistle or taps you on the shoulder again.
Your partner’s job is to vary the required response from run to run. So you might get by with 2-3 hits half a dozen times in a row, then suddenly no matter how many times you shoot the threat it won’t “stop” … because your partner is waiting for a good head shot.
If you have access to a turning target system, the start & stop signals can be the target facing and disappearing. Some turning systems let you show both the front and back of a target … put a “hostage” or “non-threat” on the back and have that appear sometimes instead of the shoot target. Obviously, firing a round at the hostage target would be a mistake and reason for remediation.
If you want to add another level of complication to the drill, you can set up your magazines as outlined in the Surprise Reload Drill. As you’re engaging the threat, your pistol will run dry at random times. Deal with this in a realistic way … move to cover or at least move while reloading, don’t just stand there.
The goal of the Reactive Response Drill is not to launch dozens of rounds downrange each time. Your partner should keep you on your toes, changing the number and location of required hits to break any habits. What you are learning to do is shoot until the target is neutralized, without any expectations of what the “standard” response should be.
Training with firearms is an inherently dangerous activity. Be sure to follow all safety protocols when using firearms or practicing these drills. These drills are provided for information purposes only. Use at your own risk.
Oooh, I LIKE this one.
I conduct most of my departmental training with each officer individually, and this will be great. I routinely require a lot of surprise reloads and a dummy round per mag will make it even better.
Thanks very much for the idea.
Todd,
In my opinion, one of the downsides to using verbal cues as a start and stop as described above is that the decision to use deadly force is generally focused more on visual cues (i.e. what’s in the hands and what those hands are doing, distance from threat, etc.), hence why I prefer turning targets. Obviously, quite a number of people don’t have access to a turning target system so this would probably be the next best thing, particularly since as you stated, this drill is designed to focus on NSR vice use of force.
Todd.
I really like the idea of a second party deciding the event. So many times as a sole shooter you have to “play” in your mind the scenario and act accordingly. With a partner driving the event you can actually REACT as appose to ACT out a situation. Thanks for the SA.
would having your partner load your mags with various rounds not achieve the same thing? he hands them to you and you shoot until empty each time. Trying to hear a whistle or a verbal command, while firing is going to be challenging to say the least. the tap on the shoulder would work of course, but then might not people get the mindset of “waiting for the stop signal?”
gonna have to dig out our old turning target system and see if I can get it working again.
rob — No, that would not be a good alternative. You’d simply be habituating yourself to (1) shoot to slidelock every time and (2) stop fighting when you got to slidelock every time. Neither of those is guaranteed to be the right solution. Any start and stop signals other than the appearance of a threat and cessation of the threat will be artificial. The purpose of this drill is learning to let the target dictate when you stop rather than firing a pre-determined number of rounds.
makes sense.