![\"Force](\"https:\/\/www.luckygunner.com\/lounge\/media\/force-on-force.jpg\")
<\/a>This training scenario was part of a course titled \u201cEstablishing a Dominance Paradigm,\u201d which, if I\u2019m being honest, is not a course title that would typically pique my interest. It sounds a little too abstract and buzzword-y. I remember wondering what it could possibly offer me, someone who has, at least in a military fashion, \u201cbeen there, done that, and got the T-shirt.\u201d In fact, I only attended the course because Lounge editor Chris<\/a> wasn\u2019t able to make it and the training facility happened to be quite close to home. It\u2019s not every day that you get to evaluate something without having any sort of personal stake in it; there was no real monetary investment in attending and I had no relationship with the instructors, positive or negative. If anything, I was initially very skeptical, waiting to be faced with frustrating no-win scenarios and \u201cgotcha!\u201d-style instructor debriefs. In hindsight, I really couldn\u2019t have been more wrong.<\/p> EDP is taught by a veritable super-group of instructors: Tom Givens of Rangemaster Firearms Training Services<\/a>, William Aprill of Aprill Risk Consulting, and Craig Douglas of ShivWorks<\/a>. While all of them have spent several years as law enforcement officers, they each have a primary specialty that they focus their teaching on: firearms instruction, criminal behavior, and force-on-force training, respectively. The 3-day course was an incredibly enlightening and eye-opening experience covering the entire spectrum of factors that play into lethal-force situations on the street. We covered topics like\u00a0how criminals develop and select their targets, how they act face-to-face, and how to put shots exactly on target under authentic severe stress. It is the best single course I can imagine someone taking in order to become a more aware, more prepared, and more competent armed citizen. And, it has led me to question a lot about how we as shooting enthusiasts often approach defensive training, particularly with respect to concealed carry.<\/p> \u201c…it definitely highlighted to me one of the huge shortcomings inherent to gun-range defensive training: real defensive situations involve so much more than just pulling the trigger.\u201d<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote> While walking back to the main classroom after getting unceremoniously shot in the head, I could only think to myself, \u201cI really thought I would do better than that.\u201d I\u2019m sure many of the other students thought the same thing, but it definitely highlighted to me one of the huge shortcomings inherent to gun-range defensive training: real defensive situations involve so much more than just pulling the trigger. As I debriefed with the instructors and watched the video playback of my encounter projected on the screen in front of the entire class, I was actually very pleased with my shooting ability, it\u2019s just that everything besides my shooting ability had already gotten me killed.<\/p> Going back, I was able to see how and where I went wrong as\u00a0I involved myself with the assailant and how just about every one of my actions actively contributed to the thug drawing the gun. I found that I inadvertently gave control of the situation to my aggressor by simply matching his aggression instead of exceeding it to control the situation, or as the best students decided to do, retreating to\u00a0prepare an ambush. Even though my reaction to the gun was immediate, my response was divided and ultimately unsuccessful. So while it stung a bit (or a lot) that I had failed my scenario despite my background, it forced me to wonder if I really had any right to expect better.<\/p> One of the lesser discussed elements of concealed carry is that it really does offer a unique set of circumstances when compared to the actions of military and police. As a Marine in Afghanistan, I may have faced greater threats than street thugs, but I had factors in my favor as well; namely backup, free access to my rifle, and body armor. As an average person on the street we may not assume the same odds of encountering a deadly situation as do military and police, but we do find ourselves much less prepared to deal with one should it arise. The only advantage an armed citizen has when targeted by a criminal is the enemy\u2019s lack of threat anticipation, and if all we ever do is put holes in paper on the range, are we really working on maximizing that advantage?<\/p> \u201cIf we\u2019re being honest though, we hold our equipment to a much higher standard than we hold ourselves.\u201d<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote> I\u2019ve always found it a little amusing what the gun community at large typically focuses on when it comes to self-defense. We champion our preferred ammo for its ballistics-gel performance, and largely we accept nothing less than absolute reliability of our carry gun, be it after 1,000 rounds without a cleaning or sometimes even caked in sand and mud. If we\u2019re being honest though, we hold our equipment to a much higher standard than we hold ourselves. The problem is that no matter what brand of gun you carry, it isn\u2019t going to get you safely out of a bind on its own. Unfortunately, it isn\u2019t often that you come across the opportunity to put the time and effort into developing the software to go along with the hardware. Perhaps that\u2019s due to the relative obscurity of broad-spectrum training like EDP in the face of whiz-bang shooting courses promising to make you laser accurate and lightning fast in a weekend. In fact, the turnout for my class was just 10 students, and for many of those, this was not their first course with the instructors present.<\/p> On the one hand it\u2019s understandable; good courses are in short supply (this particular course is only offered once a year) and they require a substantial commitment in terms of time and money. On the other hand, you have to face the fact that the majority of\u00a0people who have undertaken the responsibility of carrying the power of life and death with them in their daily lives don’t actually prepare for the full scope of the situation they want to be ready to face. That means having to deal with a real person and the real issues that arise when things don\u2019t go exactly how you want them to.<\/p> Imagine it this way–an aspiring boxer wouldn\u2019t prepare for a fight solely by punching a speed-bag. His rhythm and cardiovascular endurance can certainly help, but he hasn\u2019t learned how to react to punches or how to maneuver intelligently around the ring. If his opponent is used to fighting or at least sparring, he\u2019ll beat him handily even if his technique is substandard. After failing pretty miserably\u00a0initially, I made significant\u00a0progress through a variety of\u00a0scenarios over just a few days of EDP. I can\u2019t help but think that the gun community as a whole could use a lot more “sparring”; more force-on-force with real people and well-simulated weapons instead of the usual arrangement of real weapons and very poorly simulated people. It\u2019s not even necessarily gun owner training apathy as it is a lack of options. Shooting courses have a much broader appeal, and while they\u2019re far from worthless, their prevalence compared to courses like EDP tends to build the idea that shooting proficiency is all you need to succeed.<\/p> <\/p> One of the things I appreciated most about Tom Givens\u2019 teaching approach is his conviction toward concealed carrying. It isn\u2019t morbid, but it isn\u2019t sugar-coated either. Your gun is on your person not for some vague concept like\u00a0\u201cprotection\u201d or \u201cdefense,\u201d but you are armed because you may have to shoot someone today, in an hour, or in five minutes. While that may seem somewhat dramatic to more casual carriers out there, it\u2019s hard not to agree with him. \u201cIt\u2019s not the odds, it\u2019s the stakes,\u201d he told us, and that was not just poignant on the issue of carrying a gun but also with regard to the full-spectrum training we were engaged in.<\/p> Certainly many people in America each year find that they\u2019re able to defend themselves without having done elaborate force-on-force training scenarios with role-players and Simunition guns. The odds certainly seem in favor of merely having a gun and knowing how to use it as enough to win the fight. But as armed citizens, we can’t\u00a0just be concerned with the odds. We must also be\u00a0concerned with the stakes involved. Given that, it might be worthwhile to put ourselves in a position to get an honest evaluation of our response to stress, aggression, and force. It\u2019s personal, it\u2019s frustrating, and it\u2019s sometimes embarrassing. However, quality force-on-force training will help you know what to do if the day comes that a criminal decides to bring violence into your world.<\/p> <\/a><\/a>