Well said.  That is a logical explanation of one man's estimate of the situation.  As opposed to some who feel the need to denigrate anyone who thinks (and trains) differently from them.  

I have absolutely no quarrel with anything you have said.  Indeed, the "bell curve" analogy is very fitting.  And you are probably right, in that the vast majority of folks will see the wisdom in preparing and training within it's parameters.   However, the one caveat that I would like to add, if I may, is that some "outliers", while low in probability of occurrence, have extreme consequences.  By that I mean, even though the likelihood of occurrence may be much lower  than "common" street crime, the consequences for not being prepared are literally life-threatening.  So in my estimation, the cost of not being ready is so high, that it warrants more attention, than just it's probability of occurrence would warrant alone.  And I acknowledge that perhaps this isn't a "mainstream" view of the situation.  However, I would encourage folks to at least consider looking at this COI, and make their own decisions, rather than being overly influenced by many "mainstream" trainers, who would scoff at the very idea of training for this.  That is just my opinion, for your consideration.

If you do decide to seek out training to prepare you for an outlier event, what do you do.  One COA is to check out Max Velocity Tactical.  This is what I have done, and I have been very pleased with the results.  The training met and exceeded all my expectations.  But as TonyF said, there are issues.  How do you know the training is valid.  How do you then train up your own group or team.  How do you sustain the training.  All valid points.  So let me begin by explaining why I think the training is valid, or actually works.  The way the whole curriculum is structured, you learn to fight or shoot with other people, in an approx. 120 deg  range in the woods, and an approx. 170 deg range for urban environments.  It closely simulates real encounters by making you scan and locate threats, deploy a team so you can all engage them, and safely engage targets without hitting anyone else.  These are skill sets not commonly found in square range training.  They can be applied in either rural, or urban settings.  I went there and learned to do all these things.

Next, how to you get your own group trained up.  This is a huge problem.  One solution, is very similar to "farm aid" or "mutual assistance groups".  I have found guys that have trained at MVT within my area, and am presently organizing with them , for follow-on training, and eventually mutual aid or support.  Not the perfect solution, but a workable one.  We are planning additional training at this point to establish specific SOP's and so forth.  So while it would be nice to have a closer family group up and running, that's just not possible at the present time.  But it's a start.

Then, how do you sustain training.  I am a BIG proponent of sustainment training.  Too often guys take this "P90X" approach to their training, where they blitz it one year and then let it slip.  Ideally, we would all get back together for "alumni training weekends" at MVT, to reinforce and update our training, at least on an annual basis.  The "Rifleman Challenge" is run every spring and fall.  These are excellent opportunities to train and compete.  But eventually, you need to have some kind of in-house training cell to support your group.  If the situation is such that you can no longer safely travel back and forth.  Here is where guys are gonna have to step up, and become good instructors, as well as masters of the material.

So while there are significant problems with obtaining and sustaining this kind of training, it can be done.  It just depends on your level of commitment and desire to do so.  

I don't have a crystal ball either; I don't know what the future holds.  But I think each person needs to take a hard look at the situation and plan for it as they see fit.  I only take exception to those that would jam their opinions down other people's throats, for whatever reason.  Or heap scorn and ridicule on those who have a different viewpoint from them.                  

Good thread.

A couple of things jump out at me. There are perhaps two aspects to this:

1) There is the reality of a personal threat assessment, as you describe, the implied task from which is to seek training to counter that assessed threat.

2) There is a somewhat less helpful tendency (and I know, I have run into it) to heap scorn on those who seek SUT/tactical training, and many mainstream trainers (no names)  who refuse to teach even simple things such as buddy pair bounding. It's square range or nothing in some cases. That's how my Texas classes started - the regular annual mainstream trainer had refused to teach SUT, which the loose group down there wanted to progress to, so I was asked to provide it. But I'm not going to harp on that, I want to get at the first point.

So going back to the first point, it is clear that any training should correctly follow a progression. So by the time you have got to SUT, you should have already become competent at the more basic individual skills. The more advanced SUT/team skills will 'put more tools in your box.' Thus, even if you don't find yourself fighting Red Dawn, those skills, will flow back down to the more likely scenarios. For example if you had a home invasion, whether you are working by yourself or with a partner (wife? Son?) those buddy team skills, that bounding fire and movement, that CQB tactical clearance high threat entry etc, will all flow down and give you a better chance of surviving/winning.

In terms of training the rest of your group/family and skill fade, this is something that we run into. Some students think they can come to a CTT class (3 days) and they are now good to go, forever. They also think they can train their family i.e send one and that will take care of 'train the trainer.' It just doesn't work out like that - but we understand the limitations . We get the most results from those who return for repeat/more advanced classes. We also get better results if the whole group/team is brought to training. But for many, that is a time/financial thing, so I get it. We are not being paid by .gov to do this training! The exception here are combat vets who come to brush up on skills, and they are not learning from scratch on the training progression, so their skill fade is less pronounced.

In terms of our threat assessments, I personally think we live in very uncertain times, No one knows what any 'collapse' may look like, and it's pretty much guaranteed that it won't look like what you think it will! However, any intelligent observer of current affairs and world events can see what a fragile society we live in. Even if your personal 'SHTF' only lasts 30 minutes while you fight off a raging gang, the training was worth it if the alternative is rape and death for your family.

I have traveled extensively both in and out of the military and as a paramilitary contractor. I have seen how the world can be. I think it is gross normalcy bias and a mistake to think that nothing like that can happen here. We live in a 'society' with a very thin layer of civility over barbarism and many places are very third world in nature.

I think Max makes a good point about these skill sets being able to move up or down the scenario ladder.  As TonyF pointed out, you don't want to neglect training for the most likely events, while you train for less likely  ones.  But, there are some basic skill sets that "scale" or move up and down the threat matrix, as needed.  Just the concept of being able to fight, in conjunction with another person is huge, in any application.  This could be at any public place or event.  An active shooter incident, for instance.  What I learned in the Civilian Close Combat course is directly applicable to a violent home invasion, whether as "common" street crime, or the consequence of rioting/ civil unrest.  So any attack on your person will be met with the same response, regardless of whether it's done by itself, or in conjunction with a widespread breakdown of law and order.  

I think the mis-conception might be that we're all training up these tactical teams to patrol the perimeter of our "retreat" out in the woods, after we've "bugged out" from the city.  While it may come to that, there is much ground in between the current sit, and that scenario.  There are many natural, and un-natural disasters that may occur, where leaving your home might not be necessary.  Or only be a temporary measure.  I live in an area where hurricanes roll through every few years.  We also had the threat of our own little "mini-Ferguson" event, when a local cop was accused of wrongfully shooting an un-armed black man.  These types of events can temporarily overcome the EMS capability of your area, and you must be prepared to fend for yourself.  Or at least, that's my view of it.  Many, if not most, will be totally unprepared.  

So absolutely, what I learned to be used in a WROL situation can be applied to either a short, or long term event.  Or, even a single act of random violence.  I don't want to give the impression that we're planning to hole up in a cabin somewhere and wait out the "zombie apocalypse".  That's simply not a viable COA for most folks.  But, what does make sense to me is to seek out advanced training that teaches you how to work as a team, in your own terrain and situation.

Good discussion guys.

How many mechanics have JUST a single sized wrench in their toolbox and nothing else?

Quite the contrary, a decent mechanic is going to have MANY tools. Heck I've seen tools I didn't even know what TH they were when helping others tear apart backhoes, fix bulldozers, etc.

Some tools are specialized. The hammer will do a lot of things, but when you need a wrench, you need a WRENCH.

I've enjoyed training over many subjects over about 3 decades now. Some things at the time I thought "this isn't really applicable to my situation", only later to find that it actually was.

I've driven 14 hours one way to classes that taught how to make wine, cheese and soap. I've flown across country for specialized classes. My AK's rarely rarely fail on me, but I've taken 4 AK Armorer's classes, ditto for my Glocks. Hell at some point I intend to take an AR armorer's class, and I gave up on AR's 20 years ago. I've taken classes where I've hit targets at 1,100 yards, I've taken classes wherein we started drills with a training knife at your throat and had to work from that distance. I've learned to fight on the ground, standing up, with or against gun and knife, shotgun classes, pistols, "carbine" classes, long distance rifle, Hand to hand in many disciplines, medical from "put a bandaid on and call 911" classes to casting and setting bones, internal suturing, etc, outdoor survival, edible plants, carpentry classes, blacksmithing classes, beekeeping classes.

Hey, it's fun to learn new things, it makes life interesting.

As to the practicality question- do you like to shoot more than 100 yards? Why? It was cool as all get out to make consistent hits at 800 yards, but where is the real practicality? Who knows, it might be there someday. For now, it's something I like to do when I can and it challenges me.

TonyF,

I have not read the entire thread (yet), but wanted to quickly post my thoughts based on reading your opening post, before they escape me...  First, good on ya for doing 2-person tactics courses and for encouraging spouses to attend!  (I wish I could get my wife to do something like that!)

Need for SUT training -
Where do I start?...  If I truly thought my world was going to melt down soon, I would sell everything I own that wasn't survival-related, and move to the Rocky Mountains and start digging a bunker.  By the same token, if I thought I was going to get mugged in the Walmart parking lot, I would not go to Walmart!  Any kind of "combat" training is insurance for something a sane person hopes never happens, whether it's a martial arts class, a CHL license class, or Max's Combat Patrol class.  You buy insurance on your house, but hope it never catches fire.  You carry a spare tire, but hope you never get a flat.  etc...  The side benefit of doing firearms related training, is that it's FUN, and it can be a way to challenge yourself.  The degree of challenge depends on your skill level and your comfort zone.  Ex: The first square range handgun course I took back in 1986 took me as far out of my comfort zone as Max's Combat Team Tactics course did 29 years later.  

I don't have a crystal ball, so I don't know what this country is going to look like in 10 years (or in 6 months), but I feel in my bones that we are on a precipice looking down at something BAD.  I hope I'm wrong, but it has happened on a national/international scale in many countries throughout history.  It happened to THIS country 150 years ago.  It is happening right now in most countries between North Africa and Afghanistan.  It is happening to some extent, in Mexico, about 15 miles from where I sit as I type this.  It has happened on a smaller local scale much more often in many more places.  I think any sane person would say that it WILL happen in Europe soon, as a result of the current "migration" (cough-invasion)...  To think that "it can't happen here" and "civilians have no need for SUT training" is truly and simply normalcy bias based on the tiny snapshot of history in the one little corner of the world that you have personal experience in.

Your bell curve is a good idea, as long as the situation you/we are in right now does not change.  Without getting into details about economics, demographics, politics, war, etc, I don't see how anybody can open their eyes, ears, and brain, and think our world is going to stay "status quo" for the next couple of decades.  It just CAN'T.  It is already changing.  I don't know how it will end up, but it is already changing.

Benefit of SUT training -
Another point is that all this small unit tactics stuff DOES carry over to individual "civilized world" self defense scenarios.  Situational awareness that you mentioned is one example.  Stress inoculation is another.  Being able to move, keep your gun in the fight, look around and see what's going on and where people are, mentally shift gears quickly from one problem to another and deal with it under stress when you're tired and uncomfortable...  A typical square range class does not help you with all of that, even though that is the only kind of training that a lot of folks seem to think is appropriate for civilians in our current environment.

Edited to add:  Oh yeah - If I am the only person in my area that has this kind of training, I personally benefit as above.  AND, I am passing it down to my children.  AND if the time comes when there is a more immediate likelihood of needing to operate as a team, I have enough faith (hopefully not misplaced) in my fellow man to think that I will have some eager students and can put together a workable team on short notice.  Do I think I can do it with the skill of a "Max Velocity"?  Hell no.  But I CAN pass along a lot more than they know right now.

So just to put my $.02 in here. Take all of the reasons against doing this type of training and put them in a box for a minute. I know of no other location where a civilian can go and shoot at reactive targets while moving. Surely, even if folks believe that the cooperative/team based aspect of Max's training is unnecessary for civilians, everyone can agree that getting a chance to shoot these types of targets holds some value; this is an order of magnitude closer to having to engage a live target. I would argue that the benefit from the use of Max's infrastructure more than makes up for the cost of the class. The teamwork component of what he is doing creates a deeper knowledge of the other folks in the class beyond shooting drills with them. I saw with my own eyes that this type of training builds camaraderie amongst the students. I may not need a fire team buddy to fight the zombie apocalypse, but I made friends at the class that I attended that have already helped put together an emergency communications standard that may well be useful if this hurricane does indeed strike us this weekend.  As a final thought, even if you don't think Max's style of training is necessary it will certainly be an eye opener on your fitness level. It seems to me that a lot of folks have this idea that they would perform well in a without rule of law scenario, even if they believe such a thing will never happen. The hills of West Virginia will disabuse you of this notion very quickly if you aren't in shape. In the event of some sort of disruption of normal life you may not have to bound your way to the grocery store with a buddy team, but are you fit enough to walk there and then back home with a load of groceries in the event you cant get fuel for your vehicle? I believe that Max's training is indeed important for civilians to have, but even if you disagree with me I hope I have outlined some of the other reasons his facility is an amazing resource.

I will be attending Max's patrolling class for the first time in February here in Texas.

I have almost two decades of courses from instructors whose names are well known in the training community. I know how to competently shoot most any weapon you want to hand me. I am an attorney by trade, for some 20 years now. I have a good and reliable income stream with plenty of disposable cash- lots of ammo and guns to shoot it with. I live less than 5 miles from a range with pistol pits etc....I shoot 2-3 x a week. At this stage of my life and training experience, I don't want to sound like a know it all ass but, there are only so many ways to do certain things. I'm about done with "Up" and most square range training. I have plenty of problem solving tools in my kit at this point for most likely scenarios.....

Tony, you raise valid questions about the purpose of this training and it's effectiveness for most people. I can't speak for all the attendees but I CAN speak for some of them. Why? Because I have known some of them for over a decade. I know their kids and they know mine- we have shot together, camped together, shared meals together..... Every year we gather at a particular shoot for a weekend of fellowship. Several of us maintain that relationship more regularly-through other training classes, family visits etc.... I know by name and deed fully half the guys that will attend Maxs' Texas class. I consider them friends and would trust them with my money or my wife.

As far as maintaining training....My "shooting range" is a 1,700 acre ranch....By Texas standards, that's not much but it is my little piece of the world- and I have some pretty nice "range facilities" there. I can shoot, day or night in any direction ......I can pretty much train anytime I want in any manner I want...Now as far as training buddies etc....My dad is 72. Three weeks ago he completed a 5 mile run with rifle, pistol, ammo and assorted gear- the temperature when he began his run? 105.....During his run he fired at targets out to 250 yards with his carbine. Took him about an hour and a half...best times were just over an hour.....Damn Texas A&M Corp of Cadets shooting team kids....jack rabbits with guns.....

Now, to be fair, he didn't place all that well against some of the 100 other competitors....but for a guy of his age etc....I don't want him shooting at me anytime soon. My 10 year old competed in the 6 mile version a few years ago, it rained the whole time and turned the talcum powder dirt into terrible mud.... He finished the course all by himself. I have a picture of the three of us together that is one of my most treasured possessions- my 10 year old kid, my 70 year old dad and myself- kitted out, covered in mud and tired as hell... having got off the Goddamn couch and done something, together. It's what we do....

I don't kid myself. Marsoc isn't going to be calling me anytime soon. But that's not my goal......My goal is to make myself and those around me more dangerous to the enemies of this country- and they are real and many..... If you haven't noticed- THEY ARE WINNING......I don't care what metric you want to use, things are NOT getting better for this nation- not here, not abroad and we ignore that at our peril- because I damn sure am not convinced those "leading" us know what the fuck they are doing! Further, I think that anyone who believes that we simply need to put our guy in charge and everything will be hunky dory is seriously deluded. I see a dark future for this country quite honestly, at best we end up like Brazil or South Africa, at worst...who knows? The only thing I can control is the 400 yards from the end of my rifle, and I will to the best of my ability.

Following Maxs' class I will be taking THIS course-

http://www.combatshootingandtactics.com/flyers/civilian_courses_15/urban_defense.pdf

If you, or anyone else knows of a more competent or vetted instructor, I'd damn sure like to meet them.....I don't think he engages in Ballistic Masturbation......

Tony,
You started a good thread on Prioritization of Training needs and good points to discuss. Sadly this has already turned into a sales pitch by the MVT crew with the common "you don't know his COI" and the assumption that no one else is teaching tactics. I think this topic would be better served in the instructors only forum and only by those who can post their verifiable credentials (real names, dd214, certs, etc...).  This would weed out the people who don't have any experience other than taking a class or two and promote actual discussion, not random insults (like the following sentence). Perhaps this is why MVT isn't on any forum that requires those things...

Good points, Will.  I too think that anyone can see something is terribly wrong with the current state of affairs, but as always, opinions vary.

You know I remember reading on another website about a guy describing  the events leading up to his country disintegrating in the Balkans.  Right up to the very end, the news commentators were telling the people everything will be OK, don't worry about it, just go about your daily lives.  Right up until the shelling started.   I think you're seeing a lot of that here as well.  

But, as always, some will see it and prepare, others won't.  Same as it ever was.

Tony: A couple of further thoughts on this:

1) We try and involve women/wives as much as possible in the training without any allowances. Of course, we can't make them show up and if they are not into this, then they simply aren't into it. It is *one* of the reasons (other than having a training progression) that we have classes such as Combat Rifle Skills, that are basic carbine classes on the square range, in order to offer something less intimidating to the womenfolk, and those who don't feel they are ready to go into the woods.

(Question: you mention the training you conduct as an instructor  I am new here - what school is that? PA based? Perhaps not so far from my school in WV?)

2) I totally agree about the 'HSLD' training. I see this very much as a 'fanboy' activity. I don't see this so much as tactical training, but live fire dress-up. This is, to me, simply a live fire version of airsoft ("mil-sim') where the student is more concerned about image and looking cool perhaps running some faux CQB drills. That isn't what I would term as SUT, which is of course very serious and designed for team self-defense in uncertain times. A little harsh? Perhaps, but that sort of HSLD thing does little for those of use who are serious about tactical training.

All the posts here are directly responding to TonyF's original post.

Why are you so obsessively determined to shut this kind of discussion down?

You still don't read very well, do you?

I would like to chime in here if I may.  Since the other post was locked and this ongoing scrum popped up here.

Part1

I am not a vet or LEO.  I am a civilian.  I do have experience in taking tactical firearms courses.  I have 800+ hours under my belt.  I have taken 100 hrs under Clint Smith.  I have taken every course offered to civilians from Paul Howe, including Rifle Instructor.  I have taken 8 different courses with Tactical Response.  I have taken all of MVT courses offered.  I have also taken individual courses from Progressive Force Concepts, from James Williams, and from Kent Morrison at BSG services.  I believe I can tell if a course is crap or is unsafe.  

I can categorically say that MVT courses are worth taking and are NOT unsafe.  I would recommend MVT.

But then I would recommend all of the schools I have trained at. You see, I take people at face value.  I approach training schools the same way.  I do not listen to anyone, including training instructors, that criticize a school based on watching a video.  Videos are misleading.  Why?  Because there is no scale, there is no context and does not reflect curriculum being taught.  Videos are for marketing purposes only.  Tactical trainers are notorious for bashing other schools and instructors.  Which I think is chickenshit.  If you have not taken the course, then you have no opinion whatsoever.  I don't give a shit what SF unit you served with.

Part 2
Clint and Heidi are a class act.  It has been since 2004 since I have trained with them.  When they moved to Oregon, the travel was a bit much for me.  I recommend their school.  

Paul Howe is a great person and is about as friendly as you can imagine.  And when trainers start measuring dicks, they can't match Paul's.  I highly recommend his school.  

Everybody bashes Yeager.  But let me tell you something, he would give you his last dollar if you were in a bind.  He has offered me a bedroom in his house to save me money.  And I am not a long lost buddy.  His heart is gold and he says whatever the hell he wants, and could give a shit what anyone thinks.  (Refer back to taking people at face value).  If you don't know him or have never taken a class, then STFU.  I would recommend his school.

Max is a no nonsense trainer that has a unique curriculum in civilian tactical training.  It is excellent in basic fundamentals in SUT.  If you are a vet and are curious/dubious then take a course and then and only then, can you critique the course using your mil experience.  I believe that everyone would be interested in any vet that takes an MVT course due to past experience.  But don't watch a frickin video and tell me it's unsafe.  Better to just stay in your lane and STFU.

Craschtx: You know that's a pretty fair eval of all those peeps you trained with.  Good point about not being able to fairly judge a school by it's vids.  You pretty much need to be there.

Especially about Yeager.  You know he says whatever he wants and that can really piss you off sometimes, but yeah, you're right, the guy would do anything for ya.  When I first moved to NC, he made sure his alum hooked up with me and got me comp'd to several classes to get me up to speed.  Then he probably had a say at getting me a gig at Lightfighter, back when they had the brick and mortar store at Bragg.  Right before him and Brad broke up.  

Back to the OP, I appreciate the point of clarification from TonyF, concerning peoples choices in training, and their priorities.  Like anything else, there's a wide spread of opinion involved.  I have my own thoughts, but unlike others, I can live with other points of view.

As a frame of reference; do you find the act of placing a photographer between targets during live fire drills a safe and acceptable practice?






There are in fact times when a person can watch a video and tell that something is unsafe. I haven't seen in the few MV videos I've watched, but it's certainly present in some videos found online

Wow.  

Number one, didn't know about that.

Number two, I take it you are no longer associated with the TR gang?  I mean, I'm not either, but we haven't talked since those days.

Dude; we haven't had anything to do with them in about 9 years.  We had cut ties with Camden long before the Willis association began and the photo BS started up.  Outgrowing them was easily one of the best things that ever happened to us as a company and me as a person striving to get better with a firearm

@ Diz

So what would it take to verify with you, in your almighty wisdom, that I am who I say?  Especially when your boss, Max hides behind his pen name?  This is why I suggested that this be moved to the instructor forum where people like you, who thinks that everyone who disagrees is a troll, are not allowed.

And I state again, MVT is not any competition with me. Where I teach, all students show up with a security clearance and govt funding. I don't even teach civilians so I have no dog in this fight other than calling a spade a spade.

@NCPatrol When The photographer was down range when I was there it was not done in an unsafe manner.  It was at very short range and The students were in lanes.  However I personally did not think it was necessary and would not recommend.

Thanks for the info and understanding your ideas of safe and unsafe actions.  I certainly don't agree with them (at least in this case)

@NCPatrol  Fair enough.  Have a good one.

While i have never taken a MVT class and unsure if it fits for me it is good to see some movement in this fourm, and some new perspectives.

When i got into the whole gun culture scene the reason was self defense for my family and myself. Over the years it has evolved into a great hobby and i have met some good friends shooting. But i still try to hold true to why i started, sure i will game some stuff in a 3 gun match, but i will also show up to a ipsc match and shoot my glock 26.


Zombies and roving hordes of gang bangers are low on my list, and i dont have alot of buddy's who would even take a square range class let alone a SUT class.

But i still like to be the best i can be cause hell you never know right?


So my question is where should i go next? Keep taking the same type courses from different instructors while learning different techniques? Move into something like a MVT SUT course even though it would just be me?


I know i could use some medical training and would like some force on force but they both seem real hard to come by in this area, except for Defensive Concepts hand gun retention class which is on my list.


I am no high speed guy just someone looking to always be improving. I still regularly dry fire, and shoot in some kind of match once a month. Here are the few classes i have taken thus far


Defensive Concepts handgun course


Kyle Defoor handgun course


NCFI handgun course and carbine course

TonyF:  Again, very reasonable, balanced thoughts.  I am learning a different perspective here of why more people aren't "prepping" for something I think is a "given".  I appreciate that.  

NC Patrol AR:  Interesting about Yeager.  As with anything, there are two sides to that coin.  Lots of folks, including those you mentioned from Southern Pines, think he's nothing but an ass-clown, but in the interest of fairness, you have to take into account what Will and others have said as well.  

Badfish25:  Adding more is good, but I also find just sustaining skill sets takes a lot of work.  It couldn't hurt to re-visit some of the classes you took and make sure you are up to speed, and maybe even improve a bit.  I also think med training is absolutely a good idea.

The training progression TonyF mentions looks pretty solid.  The decision to add SUT is up to the individual to decide.  As a coldwar jarhead, it was a real eye-opener for me.  A lot of the T,T,P's I had learned have been improved and expanded beyond the scope of training that I initially received.  So it's been an interesting journey for me, to see what things from old school training are still valid, and what things from the new school are superior, to replace "older tools in the tool box".  So from a strictly technical outlook, it has been a fascinating journey, just to learn new things and improve skill sets.

The question of transferability, and the actual creation and sustainment of a civilian self-defense group is still a valid concern.  It is a difficult and complex task.  Ideally most everyone in your group or circle would be on board and motivated to train.  But in reality, you are lucky to have a few friends in your AO with similar interests.  So initially, you would have to link up with these folks, your new "tribe" as it were, and hopefully be able to provide enough security for the situation at hand.  So having folks trained up and ready for an event is the optimum solution, but it will probably be the case that most will not be motivated until after the fact, and must learn "OJT" as it were.

Now the question is, can these skills be transferred, outside of good training facilities and instructors, at the "grass roots" level.  Especially in a compressed time-frame.  That's the tough one.  I go to qualified instructors for training, investing a lot of time and money, just like anyone else, into getting the best training available to me.  Trying to pass that on will be difficult.  It will be "watered down", according to the ability of the new instructor to pass on what he's learned.  I have a buddy who is a ten year veteran of  "the Great War" as he calls it.  His tales of trying to train ignorant 5th century goat-herders are amusing but very illustrative of the problem.   A lot has to do with the motivation of your target audience.  And what they perceive as in their best interest.   But you do the best you can, with what you have; that's the mission.

I'm glad I came over here.  It has given me a broader perspective of people and why they own weapons.  I may not always agree, but I understand more.  For me weapons and the training to use them are for real-world, self-defense applications.  But the interpretation of just what that entails may certainly vary.

I believe we are witnessing the decline of our democratic republic, right before our eyes.  It may go peacefully, it may not.  But go it will.  This is not the same country I was born into some 60 years ago.  It will not be the same country 5-10 years from now.  We are becoming a socialist, collectivist society.  This may possibly result in economic collapse, race riots/wars, or who knows.  This is my estimate of the situation and why I seek out SUT training.  I realize this may seem really radical to some.  The normalcy bias is so strong that you don't want to even think about it.  Those in the government will continue to tell you that you don't need this type of training.  "Nothing to see here folks, just keep moving along".   Those that pursue it are oftentimes ridiculed by the .gov types, and those aligned with them, to discourage others from taking that step.  So in the interest of balance, I would encourage each person to take a hard look at the current sit, and decide for themselves if this type of training might not be prudent, in their training progression.

In terms of statements that MVT believes that we offer the only tactical training out there, let's clarify that:

1) There are other quality trainers out there who teach these skills to civilians. One such is 'John Mosby' @ https://mountainguerrilla.wordpress.com/. He is a former SF guy, again a pseudonym, and many students of MVT have cross trained with him. He is Idaho based.

2) There needs to be a qualifier on 'tactical training': this is one of the main issues. Often training is called 'tactical' when its not. Isn't everything 'tactical' nowadays? This goes back to TonyF's comments on the HSLD craze that has been going on since the GWOT. To me, tactical training is small unit tactics (SUT) training. Progression before that such as 'carbine classes' are not tactical, but they are a vital part of the progression. Often, many 'tactical classes' simply are not, they are in fact 'ballistic masturbation' and tacticool fanboy stuff.

Couple of additional points:

- MVT is not only SUT. As I have mentioned several times, we run a  training progression from 'Combat Rifle Skills' on the square range, through to patrolling classes. Progression is important. I think the issue being debated here is not so much that "MVT just does SUT and has no progression" but really: where does the progression stop, and many will tell you short of SUT. That is based on your personal threat assessment.

- Getting a team together and getting them adequate trained is one of the big issues for those seeking to be effective as protectors of their family/group (Shepherds). It is a big issue all across the 'prepper' scene. Meeting, training, trusting, all that. It doesn't mean that tactical training in and of itself is not valid, it is just that people have to figure out a way of getting and maintaining their own tactical team.

- Pen names/pseudonyms: As you can see from 'John Mosby' above (he is former USSF) there are several of us that provide writing and training who choose to use pen names/pseudonyms. We tend to be formerly high speed and offering training to primarily the civilian market (notwithstanding military/LEO who come individually to our training). As has been seen in the various threads here, there are multiple poop-slinging trolls out there, and we do it to keep and air gap between that BS, and our family life. Don't tell us we lack validity because we do this. Our family trumps your BS. And be careful what claims you make to high-speedness: we know who you are, and we know your claims are over inflated. That is all.

I can certainly agree that training needs to follow a progression. I started at Gunsite and Thunder Ranch. From there I trained under Louis Awerbuck, Paul Howe, Tiger McKee, Bill Jeans. Mas Ayoob, Tom Givens, John Farnham, Ken Hackathorn, Pat Rogers, Kyle Lamb........For the last few years I have concentrated a little more on H2H skills-we have a Michael Janich certified trainer who teaches Tue and Thur. classes at a local dojo..It's $5 a session, attend as often or little as you want...That's great for us because the kids are busy as hell, sometimes we make both sessions for a couple of weeks....sometimes we don't make a single class for three weeks....but we always make it back......The last two years have been lots of tacmed....My wife has insisted--- and she was right.....Dark Angel, Patriot Nurse, Lone Star Medics.....

The money I have spent on training could easily pay for a college degree at some state schools........

I think circumstances of the shooter are important....sustainment training is an issue. Having said that, people had better be investing in other people NOW. If you don't have a serious training buddy etc...you should take some time to find one. Make it a priority- a training priority, a LIFE priority. People survive in groups. Proof of that? Mogadishu had MORE people living in it during the Battle of the Black Sea than BEFORE the troubles-it's a matter of record...We are going to need others around us we can depend on. People need to devote time and energy to finding reliable folks. Now.The first part of sustainment and long term survival is others.

Then, you have to find a place to practice. That's hard. Especially if you live in a large city as so many do. I'm fortunate in that while I live in a fairly good sized town-200k, it's very rural. You have to ask around-again, the more people you know, the more likely you are to find a place. Do you hunt? You should....if you hunt, a hunting lease off season, makes a great range..... The shoot I mentioned earlier, has been held for almost 15 years on several private ranches in West Texas.  While not ideal always, most of the American West has huge areas of public land. Watch a Nutnfancy video sometime.....the guy is running and gunning all over the place. There are competitions like the Bug Out Drill, Zombie Run and Gun, Pecos Run and Gun etc....while not SUT events obviously, they do offer a regular opportunity to strap on a rifle, put together a gear load out and run and shoot under field conditions......If you do those events....you WILL meet people that think the same and that will open further opportunities.....

There is quite a bit of interest these days in "tactics" classes...beyond manipulation drills- problem solving training under field conditions. To me it's a natural progression and a good thing. I watched an old LA County Sheriff's training video the other day from the 1930's---They shot cigarettes out of the mouths of guys btw....we've come a long way.....

http://www.recoilweb.com/a-glimpse-into-history-la-county-sheriffs-department-range-time-1938-25699.html

As has already been stated, you have to do a threat/skill needed assesment and then start looking for ways to address it. For most people it might look something like:

Handgun 1
Lowlight Handgun
Concealed carry tactics
Vehicle based shooting - handgun
Carbine 1
Lowlight Carbine
Basic medical care (can be as simple as first aid and CPR through the Red Cross)
Empty hand self defense (though I'm not a big fan of seminar based training only)
Home Defense
SUT
Etc etc


If I lived in the southwest with a lot of acreage  I may put a more carbine work up front based on my potential needs.


The biggest issue I see is that people want to go with the sexy stuff prior to developing a functional level of competency in fundamental skills

@ NCPatrolAR:

There is a lot of merit in the progression you describe. We go about it a different way, by specializing in certain areas:

1) Handgun: we don't currently run any handgun classes, but we expect that students will train elsewhere to become effective concealed carriers.
2) We also don't run H2H training, but hope that students will be able to seek effective training,

- both of those together, concealed handgun and  hand to hand, are integral to your day to day self-defense readiness.

Our progression is designed to take people up to the ability to conduct effective SUT, but also has application running up and down the scale of threat. Bottom line, the more trained you are, for more situations, the better off you will be. We go the extra mile to make our students truly dangerous to their enemies.  Gunfighters, not gun drivers. Simple.

So,to progress:

3) Basic Rifle Skills: this really nails down weapon manipulation up to individual react to contact and engagement drills. This is vital , because if you are unclear on weapons manipulation, when you get 'out in the wild' you will find yourself beating at your weapon, having lost your fine motor skills with no idea what you are doing. Think I'm joking?

4) Combat Team Tactics (CTT): this includes a day on the square ranges, a fast track version of Combat Rifle Skills, but then concentrates on buddy and team fire and movement skills, react to contact, including some real break contact drills that students take away from them. This is a tactical class out on real terrain using pop-up reactive target systems.

5) Combat Patrol is available only to alumni of CTT: this class operates at the team and squad level and teaches recce, raid, ambush, patrolling and patrol base. IT covers security patrolling and gives you the basic of what you need to protect your home base in a collapse situation.

6) Citizen Close Combat is also only available to alumni of CTT, because CTT teaches you the precursor of buddy/team movement: this is an urban / tactical clearance class and although it is advanced, it has immediate payback down towards the basics of home defense. This is  a perfect example of how the skills can flow up and down the threat matrix. SUT is not just for fighting blue helmeted UN invaders LOL.

If the training is available to you, why would you choose to limit your exposure, due to normalcy bias ' because it will never happen to me?'


I wrote the following as an excerpt to a blog post, original: 'Two Tactical Worlds.'

....hits the nail on the head. Much of the ‘tacticool’ style training is firmly rooted in Law Enforcement training, and much of the fan-boy stuff follows that route towards ‘SWAT-style’ CQB, and perhaps even goes as far as ‘SOF-Tier-1-style’ fan-boy training. That also has roots in ‘mil-sim-air-soft’ and is effectively the same thing: one is playing with air soft, the other slightly more serious with live rounds.

It is amusing that these types will talk about combat training, such as MVT, as ‘tactical band camp’ but really they themselves are just playing. Examples of this type of comment can be found in the ‘Normalcy Bias‘ post. It is the trainers of such students, who these students avidly follow, who will often state that they will not train civilians in basic tactics such as fire & movement “because civilians don’t need to know that.” How ironic. It is very prevalent – they will take your money for some sort of tacticool BS class, that can’t really be teaching you anything real, because they don’t believe you have a right to know the ‘real.’ Go figure….

MVT will teach what the others won’t teach you, because it’s “too dangerous” for civilians to know.  We go the extra mile to make our students truly dangerous to their enemies.  Gunfighters, not gun drivers. Simple.

Now, not all of this is BS. Some guys are doing serious close quarters and personal defense type training that has real application in self-defense situations in current times. Concealed handgun, hand to hand training and such are legitimate use of your training time. I have talked before about the need of such skills both now, and as the ‘gray collapse’ progresses. The problem appears to be when  these types don’t acknowledge the very real possibility of societal slide/collapse (watch the news?) and are stuck in a form of denial / normalcy bias. These are the types who sneer at those of us who are interested in being prepared for uncertain times, and thus wish to conduct real tactical training. I don’t know if it is possible to wake these types up. It seems impossible to wake up a lazy and apathetic nation, including many so-called ‘Patriots’ who refuse to even put down the cheeseburger, let alone do some PT, or combat training. Hard times are ahead kids!

Again, this is a very valid point, in that a lot of folks don't take the time to learn fundamentals before moving onto other stuff.  I want to avoid using "basic" and "advanced"  in this discussion because I believe most of being "advanced" is about having the "basics" down cold.

So yes, it is a blend of square range, and more open (or in some cases more enclosed) range training.  You need to take the time to learn the square range techniques, but then most folks never progress beyond that.

As we discussed a little earlier, I think there is much cross-over between the techniques, in training for a "normal", inside the bell curve type of violent assault, and a not so normal WROL type event.  When it gets right down to it, what's the difference between "normal" street crime. and "abnormal" events?  The techniques you learn to deal with them are much the same.  By having the additional training in expanded ranges, with team tactics, you have improved your chances of survival in any event.

The differences in preparing for "more likely" events, versus "outlier" events may be closer than we think.  The differences lie more in things like duration,  lack of EMS, and other essential services, etc.  The T,T,P's for actual self-defense may be much more portable than we thought.