Part I of this review gave an overall view of the Jacks and Saps class. Some of the deeper lessons from the class are worthy of further discussion.
Multidisciplinary training (unarmed combat, impact tools, and firearms) doesn’t just mean learning to use different tools and techniques, it also means understanding the overlap of the different disciplines’ concepts. By understanding the overlap, we can reinforce the concepts and lessons of one discipline and apply it to others. Key Concepts in the Jacks and Saps class were Timing, Timing Errors, and Timing Windows. These have parallels in firearms training and practice, as well.
Timing refers to knowing when and where the tool can best be employed. The Distance to opponent is an important factor in our Decisions about when and whether to deploy any given weapon, whether it be a firearm, an impact tool, or personal weapon (hands and feet). John Boyd examined this relationship in great detail in the Aerial Attack Study. Updated version of Boyd’s Aerial Attack Study At a given range, the pilot of a fighter aircraft would execute previously determined decisions about where to position himself and which weapon was appropriate to use at that distance.
Timing Errors are faulty decision choices based on the distance to the aggressor and positioning. One of the major issues mentioned in the class and then seen in the final evolution was going for In Fight Weapon Access (IFWA) too soon. When using an impact tool, the defender needs to be in a Dominant Position before attempting to draw the Jack or Sap. Going for it too soon allows either the aggressor to foul the draw or prevents the defender from effectively employing the tool.
With firearms, this same relationship applies, only in reverse. Deploying a firearm too late doesn’t maximize the firearm’s principal advantage; its standoff capability. The firearm’s ability to inflict damage at a distance should be at the forefront of our minds in those circumstances where we are legally justified in employing Deadly Force.
Begin to attrit [wear down] the enemy at the maximum effective range of your weapons.
–a maxim of Infantry training
What this means to us is that we have a Timing Window that is most advantageous for us to deploy any particular weapon or tool that we have access to at that moment. The Timing Window has time, position, distance, and personal capability components. For example, an old gunfighter saying was “a deliberate back shot is much better than a quick front shot.” In the case of an impact tool, this means we need to have patience to gain the Dominant Position before accessing the weapon. In the case of a firearm, distance gives us our Dominant Position. We need to employ our weapon as soon as we are capable rather than hesitating, which would allow the aggressor can minimize our standoff position. The relationship between time and distance is the underlying wisdom of The Tueller Principle. https://www.armedcitizensnetwork.org/the-tueller-drill-revisited Distance and position for effective deployment can and will determine our success in a personal protection incident.
Proxemics tells us that, in North America, 12 feet is the distance beyond which we will subconsciously feel any person, aggressor included, has the ‘right’ to be. That’s why 12 feet is the boundary between Public Space (where people just are) and Social Space (where we begin to actually interact with others around us.) This fundamental spatial relationship is the reason the Draw and Challenge Dry Practice in Concealed Carry Skills and Drills http://concealedcarryskillsanddrills.com and the Michigan Safety Training Assessment in Indoor Range Practice Sessions https://store.payloadz.com/details/2501143-ebooks-education-indoor-range-practice-sessions.html are done at 12 feet, to reinforce our understanding of the spatial concept as it relates to using a firearm for personal protection.
A very interesting concept in Jacks and Saps was the discussion of the Disadvantages of running. Once again, this is a spatial concept. If the defender has sufficient distance from the aggressor, running may be a viable option. However, running is not necessarily a universal solution for defense.
- If the defender is too close to the aggressor, there simply may not be enough time to gain distance.
- Depending on the physical condition of the defender, they may be fatigued if caught, thus reducing their ability to resist.
- The defender is ‘giving up their back’ by running. In other words, they have positioned the aggressor in the Dominant Position.
The downside of running can sometimes be seen in the Summaries of Officers Feloniously Killed in the FBI’s Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted Report. https://ucr.fbi.gov/leoka/2017/resource-pages/felonious-summaries It is not uncommon for Officers to be shot in the back while trying to take cover when the engagement occurs at close range. Although ‘Get Off the X’ is a mantra within the training community, sometimes it’s necessary to ‘Stand and Deliver’ accurate gunfire as a response to an attack.
Multidisciplinary training can expand our thinking about all phases of our readiness for personal protection and how they interact and reinforce each other. I’m looking forward to the next step in my training, Chuck Haggard’s OC Instructor Certification Course at The Complete Combatant. http://www.thecompletecombatant.com/we-are-hosting.html
If you would like to purchase Concealed Carry Skills and Drills, the link to the downloadable ebook is here. http://concealedcarryskillsanddrills.com
If you would like to purchase Indoor Range Practice Sessions, the link to the downloadable ebook is here. https://store.payloadz.com/details/2501143-ebooks-education-indoor-range-practice-sessions.html
FTC notice: I introduced Larry Lindenman to The Complete Combatant so I did not pay to attend the class. However, I receive no promotional consideration for my reviews.