Why is reality based training critical? Well, because any skill set you want to be proficient in and to master requires training and practice. We were going to have Breach-Bang-COWAN! tell you, but he got roofied by a tranny stripper and wound up writing a guest column for Monderno. So we’ll just excerpt it here. Since he did a good job and it’s important stuff we’ll skip his punishment for writing elsewhere (well, except maybe for the gimp ball).
Training vs. Practice vs. the Missing Reality – You will be attacked by people 100 percen tmore often than by cardboard
Here’s the thing. Proper training teaches the student to conceptualize and create new techniques and tools to address real-world situations. It’s more than just memorization. For firearms, all training should be conducted with reality in mind.
When much firearms practice is done in a 3 foot stall against two dimensional targets in a straight line, when many courses instruct against the same two dimensional targets with little or no realistic movement and little or no attention is paid to the realities of close quarters shooting — well, realism suffers. You do not go to a range to learn how to go to a range, shoot on a range or move on a range, yet it seems much traditional training is geared towards developing training skills, not real life skills. Much training is built around two dimensional targets with little or passing reference to how skills do or are supposed to translate to real life.
You will be attacked by people 100% more often than cardboard. Your threat will behave as a person behaves, which is unpredictable. Because of this reality, training for use of force must include, as often as possible, the ability to validate skills against the most realistic threat you can get, which isn’t going to be paper. Another aspect to this is the human aspect; you simply cannot experience the same degree of stress against traditional targets as you will against a human threat.
This is where non-lethal training ammunition (NLTA) systems such as Simunitions FX (and others) justify themselves. NLTA provides the citizen with something they simply have not had meaningful access to before; the chance to, as realistically as possible, face a threat and make real-time judgments on using force, reacting to force and confronting the personal experiences associated with a violent encounter. No other method of training or practice can prepare the average citizen for a real use of force like NLTA training.
My personal and professional feeling is that realistic training shouldn’t be restricted to those who carry a weapon occupationally. Much training is taken from the military and LE and adapted to the citizen, whereas the amount of training that is organically developed for the citizen is much smaller by comparison. I’m not the first person to realize this, but it’s still a small minority. Because training at the citizen level is an individual issue (literally who you want to train with, or what your state requires for CCW) you have the option to pursue the most realistic training possible without waiting on an administrator or faceless officer in the Pentagon to decide it a good idea. I like to think that learning a better way to win a gun fight is always a good idea, seems that some desk attendants disagree.
Makes a lot of sense don’t it? We agree, even if COWAN! (we like calling him that) did write it elsewhere. Read the rest of the article in its entirety here, and watch the video that goes with it. Oh, and despite their questionable hygiene and strange taste in androgynous clothing, keep an eye on Monderno. They frequently publish great stuff.