[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Is Grossman wrong? (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 8/29/2013 5:59:35 PM EDT
|
First let me get this out:
I have never fired my weapon on duty. Or off-duty (other than training, of course) for that matter. I only ask pose this question because there are, as a percentage of the dept, a high number of officers who have been in OICs. I have, at one point or another, spoken with each of them about the experience, training considerations going forward, and the psychological aftereffects. I have also read "On Killing." For those who haven't read it, Lt. Col. Grossman posits that killings another human being takes an emormous toll on people, even in cases where it is justified and necessary to protect other life. What I just cannot reconcile is the percentage of likely PTSD cases that Lt. Col. Grossman claims will occur within any given sample of the population, and the actual number of psychological casualties as a percentage of the dept that actually occur. In fact, out of 18 cops, only two exhibited or claimed any negative psychological aftereffects, even years after the incident. So the question is, to put it succinctly, what gives? The guys that have "been there" don't seem to line up with the research that Lt. Col. Grossman claims to have collected. Has anyone else taken note of this? Or is it just something in the water where I work? |
|
well, on one hand- all of Grossman's findings are all research based. there is a possibility of error, or variation at the very least with all research.
on the other hand- without knowing who you are speaking of- are you talking to guys that have really been there, or guys that like to pretend to have been there? ive seen quite a few guys wearing badges that are as full of shit as the people in the back seats of our vehicles! 
by and large- i have gotten a whole lot out of grossman's work. |
|
The more prepared you are mentally for taking another person's life, the less it will bother you, typically.
MOST cops are poorly prepared for the outcome of a shooting. Virtually everyone involved in a deadly incident will experience some PTSD. How badly and how long it affects them will depend on how well they were mentally prepared for it, how well they were taken care of after the shooting by the department, and how they are treated by the general public in the fallout of the shooting. I know of several cops who were involved in shootings...they are a mess. But, they were not mentally prepared for it and their departments didn't stand up for them. Frankly, they are pretty weak minded. I also know several cops who were involved in shootings and they are fine. I was directly involved in a incident that got two people killed (not a shooting though). I watched one of the two die in front of me. I have never been seriously bothered by it. I don't talk about it with any happiness but my actions were appropriate and sadly, two people made a bad decision that resulted in the loss of their lives. "The body cannot go where the mind has not been." |
|
A lot of people put way too much faith in Grossman's assertions.
It would appear, then, that Lieutenant Colonel Grossman’s appeals to biology and psychology are flawed, and that the bulwark of his historical evidence – S.L.A. Marshall’s assertion that soldiers do not fire their weapons – can be verifiably disproven. The theory of an innate, biological resistance to killing has little support in either evolutionary biology or in what we know about psychology, and, discounting Marshall’s claims, there is little basis in military history for such a theory either. http://www.journal.dnd.ca/vo9/no2/16-engen-eng.asp |
|
I used to put a lot of stock in Grossman. The more I dug, however, the more I began to sway the other direction. When the John Giduck debacle surfaced, it concreted my suspicions.
I find the "Sheepdog" mantra old, tired, and corny as hell. I feel the fact that he has been giving the same line for line seminar for years, by rote, to be indicative of flawed research. The only benefit that I can glean from Grossman's enterprise is that it does have some motivational effect on those who have no motivation. "Mindset for Dummies," if you will. For those who are already switched on, its junk. |
|
Quoted:
A lot of people put way too much faith in Grossman's assertions. http://www.journal.dnd.ca/vo9/no2/16-engen-eng.asp Quoted:
A lot of people put way too much faith in Grossman's assertions. It would appear, then, that Lieutenant Colonel Grossman’s appeals to biology and psychology are flawed, and that the bulwark of his historical evidence – S.L.A. Marshall’s assertion that soldiers do not fire their weapons – can be verifiably disproven. The theory of an innate, biological resistance to killing has little support in either evolutionary biology or in what we know about psychology, and, discounting Marshall’s claims, there is little basis in military history for such a theory either. http://www.journal.dnd.ca/vo9/no2/16-engen-eng.asp Quotes from your same link: "There is much that we do not know, and plenty that we should be doing more to learn about. Grossman is clearly leading the way in posing these questions. Much of his work on the processes of killing and the relevance of physical distance to killing is extremely insightful. There is material in On Combat about fear, heart rate, and combat effectiveness that might be groundbreaking, and it should be studied carefully by historians trying to understand human behaviour in war." "I will be the first to acknowledge that Grossman has made positive contributions to the discipline. On Combat, in particular, contains wonderful insights on the physiology of combat that bear further study and incorporation within the discipline. "More research on the processes of human killing is needed, and although On Killing and On Combat form an excellent starting point, there are too many problems with their interpretation for them to be considered the final word on the subject." Grossman has done some extremely insightful research on the psychology of combat. He has a lot of theories on various things but, like any complex subject, we probably know less than we think we do. Every valid research over the years has had some faulty results as the concepts are being explored. When Thomas Edison was experimenting with the light bulb, he had a lot of failures. That doesn't mean that his research was invalid. People DO have an aversion to killing another human being. Watch the Dinkheller video. His aversion to killing someone is very evident...and sadly, it cost him his life. So, Grossman is absolutely right that we have to train our people to kill another human. It's essential because we may well be called upon to do just that. When the time comes, we need to take aggressive action in a timely manner and our training needs to prepare us for that. As a trainer, I am appalled at the crap that is portrayed as training our police for deadly force encounters in many departments. A few departments are doing training well but MOST are doing a terrible job of preparing their officers mentally and physically for combat. Most of the criticism that I've seen of Grossman revolves around his use of SLA Marshall's writing. So, if you ignore that part of his writing what do you have? You still have fascinating and valid research into the psychology of combat. |
|
I consider On Combat to be a valuable resource and has some good info about psychology/physiology.
On the other hand, On Killing is worthless and has too much historical and theoretical BS based on little more than war stories. Just my take. The sensory effects like auditory exclusion, increased ocular acuity, etc are definitely real. I also like the info about the sympathetic/parasympathetic nervous system. Grossman states something along the lines of, "everyone soils themselves in combat and if they say they didn't, they're lying." That's retarded. ETA: Check out Sharpening the Warriors Edge by Bruce K Siddle if you want more info about the psychology of combat and training for combat. |
|
Quoted:
I consider On Combat to be a valuable resource and has some good info about psychology/physiology. On the other hand, On Killing is worthless and has too much historical and theoretical BS based on little more than war stories. Just my take. The sensory effects like auditory exclusion, increased ocular acuity, etc are definitely real. I also like the info about the sympathetic/parasympathetic nervous system. Grossman states something along the lines of, "everyone soils themselves in combat and if they say they didn't, they're lying." That's retarded. ETA: Check out Sharpening the Warriors Edge by Bruce K Siddle if you want more info about the psychology of combat and training for combat. Tell me where that quote is. He DOES mention that it's not uncommon for people to lose control of their bowel movements and urinary tract during times of extreme stress and that IS correct. I have never read in his books that EVERYONE does. I know people who have had that happen to them in a military battle. It has never happened to me but I know that it's possible....that why when I'm at work I try to keep my system "empty" just in case.
I have also seen living people lose control of their bowels in extremely stressful things such as serious car accidents. So yes, it can happen. I have read a lot of Grossman's books and I've never seen him state that EVERYONE WILL lose control of their bowels. I also don't fully agree with Grossman over everything that he has written. I don't want to put words in his mouth but I suspect that since he has refined his theories since he wrote On Killing and he probably doesn't fully espouse all of his earlier theories. But, since it's now immortalized in print, he can be criticized by every "expert" out there. He brings up some very valid points and has a good perspective on a lot of things that are important to us as police officers. I have noticed that a lot of "tough" cops hate discussing psychology and I suspect that the reason is, learning about our minds forces us to be faced with our own immortality and our own weaknesses....and in many cops' minds, they are superman and anyone that suggests different is someone to be avoided. |
|
Quoted:
Tell me where that quote is. He DOES mention that it's not uncommon for people to lose control of their bowel movements and urinary tract during times of extreme stress and that IS correct. I have never read in his books that EVERYONE does. I know people who have had that happen to them in a military battle. It has never happened to me but I know that it's possible....that why when I'm at work I try to keep my system "empty" just in case.
I have also seen living people lose control of their bowels in extremely stressful things such as serious car accidents. So yes, it can happen. I have read a lot of Grossman's books and I've never seen him state that EVERYONE WILL lose control of their bowels. I also don't fully agree with Grossman over everything that he has written. I don't want to put words in his mouth but I suspect that since he has refined his theories since he wrote On Killing and he probably doesn't fully espouse all of his earlier theories. But, since it's now immortalized in print, he can be criticized by every "expert" out there. He brings up some very valid points and has a good perspective on a lot of things that are important to us as police officers. I have noticed that a lot of "tough" cops hate discussing psychology and I suspect that the reason is, learning about our minds forces us to be faced with our own immortality and our own weaknesses....and in many cops' minds, they are superman and anyone that suggests different is someone to be avoided. Quoted:
Quoted:
I consider On Combat to be a valuable resource and has some good info about psychology/physiology. On the other hand, On Killing is worthless and has too much historical and theoretical BS based on little more than war stories. Just my take. The sensory effects like auditory exclusion, increased ocular acuity, etc are definitely real. I also like the info about the sympathetic/parasympathetic nervous system. Grossman states something along the lines of, "everyone soils themselves in combat and if they say they didn't, they're lying." That's retarded. ETA: Check out Sharpening the Warriors Edge by Bruce K Siddle if you want more info about the psychology of combat and training for combat. Tell me where that quote is. He DOES mention that it's not uncommon for people to lose control of their bowel movements and urinary tract during times of extreme stress and that IS correct. I have never read in his books that EVERYONE does. I know people who have had that happen to them in a military battle. It has never happened to me but I know that it's possible....that why when I'm at work I try to keep my system "empty" just in case.
I have also seen living people lose control of their bowels in extremely stressful things such as serious car accidents. So yes, it can happen. I have read a lot of Grossman's books and I've never seen him state that EVERYONE WILL lose control of their bowels. I also don't fully agree with Grossman over everything that he has written. I don't want to put words in his mouth but I suspect that since he has refined his theories since he wrote On Killing and he probably doesn't fully espouse all of his earlier theories. But, since it's now immortalized in print, he can be criticized by every "expert" out there. He brings up some very valid points and has a good perspective on a lot of things that are important to us as police officers. I have noticed that a lot of "tough" cops hate discussing psychology and I suspect that the reason is, learning about our minds forces us to be faced with our own immortality and our own weaknesses....and in many cops' minds, they are superman and anyone that suggests different is someone to be avoided. I just remember reading something like that, can't remember the exact page. Gave the book away. |
|
I wouldn't go so far as to say that Grossman is wrong, just that it is a broad topic with a lot of variables. Grossman asks a lot of the right questions. Your answers may not be the same as his conclusions.
Either way, his books are are good place to start and question what you read, thus finding your own conclusions that get you where your mind needs to be in a stressful situation. Think of it like Bobby Bouchet's "Tacklin Fuel"...Gatorade is Better! Find your "Tacklin Fuel" in your mind. There are a lot of great books out on the psychology of combat. Deep Survival is a good read as well. |
| The fact that he continues to utilize information from John Giduck's book is enough to make me question the remainder of his "research.' That he continues to sell his books at his seminars, and support him in other endeavors is enough to make me question his integrity. |
|
Quoted:
If you are going to criticize someone, at least get your facts straight before criticizing. Quoted:
Quoted:
I just remember reading something like that, can't remember the exact page. Gave the book away. If you are going to criticize someone, at least get your facts straight before criticizing. Ok. Challenge accepted. Although it is the least important part of my post, and more something I just found amusing - I will find it for you. |
|
Quoted:
Tell me where that quote is. He DOES mention that it's not uncommon for people to lose control of their bowel movements and urinary tract during times of extreme stress and that IS correct. I have never read in his books that EVERYONE does. I know people who have had that happen to them in a military battle. It has never happened to me but I know that it's possible....that why when I'm at work I try to keep my system "empty" just in case.
I have also seen living people lose control of their bowels in extremely stressful things such as serious car accidents. So yes, it can happen. I have read a lot of Grossman's books and I've never seen him state that EVERYONE WILL lose control of their bowels. I also don't fully agree with Grossman over everything that he has written. I don't want to put words in his mouth but I suspect that since he has refined his theories since he wrote On Killing and he probably doesn't fully espouse all of his earlier theories. But, since it's now immortalized in print, he can be criticized by every "expert" out there. He brings up some very valid points and has a good perspective on a lot of things that are important to us as police officers. I have noticed that a lot of "tough" cops hate discussing psychology and I suspect that the reason is, learning about our minds forces us to be faced with our own immortality and our own weaknesses....and in many cops' minds, they are superman and anyone that suggests different is someone to be avoided. Quoted:
Quoted:
I consider On Combat to be a valuable resource and has some good info about psychology/physiology. On the other hand, On Killing is worthless and has too much historical and theoretical BS based on little more than war stories. Just my take. The sensory effects like auditory exclusion, increased ocular acuity, etc are definitely real. I also like the info about the sympathetic/parasympathetic nervous system. Grossman states something along the lines of, "everyone soils themselves in combat and if they say they didn't, they're lying." That's retarded. ETA: Check out Sharpening the Warriors Edge by Bruce K Siddle if you want more info about the psychology of combat and training for combat. Tell me where that quote is. He DOES mention that it's not uncommon for people to lose control of their bowel movements and urinary tract during times of extreme stress and that IS correct. I have never read in his books that EVERYONE does. I know people who have had that happen to them in a military battle. It has never happened to me but I know that it's possible....that why when I'm at work I try to keep my system "empty" just in case.
I have also seen living people lose control of their bowels in extremely stressful things such as serious car accidents. So yes, it can happen. I have read a lot of Grossman's books and I've never seen him state that EVERYONE WILL lose control of their bowels. I also don't fully agree with Grossman over everything that he has written. I don't want to put words in his mouth but I suspect that since he has refined his theories since he wrote On Killing and he probably doesn't fully espouse all of his earlier theories. But, since it's now immortalized in print, he can be criticized by every "expert" out there. He brings up some very valid points and has a good perspective on a lot of things that are important to us as police officers. I have noticed that a lot of "tough" cops hate discussing psychology and I suspect that the reason is, learning about our minds forces us to be faced with our own immortality and our own weaknesses....and in many cops' minds, they are superman and anyone that suggests different is someone to be avoided. I think Ayoob did some research articles on the tendency to piss yourself and it boiled down to how many cc's of urine were in your bladder at the time of the incident. If you were over that quantity threshold quantity according to Ayoob, your body was going to be more likely to trigger an evacuation drill. As for shitting yourself, if you're 3/4 of the way through your shift and pinching back a loaf because you haven't found a place to drop the gunbelt and take a dump, I wouldn't be surprised when the response to stress is to crap yourself....... |
|
I slept like a log the day after my OIS. I had made my peace about deadly force years earlier, and had trained enough to be completely confident in my abilities, both of which in retrospect were immensely helpful. The time to sort that stuff out is not during a gunfight.
That noted, I generally do agree with Grossman. |
|
Quoted:
I slept like a log the day after my OIS. I had made my peace about deadly force years earlier, and had trained enough to be completely confident in my abilities, both of which in retrospect were immensely helpful. The time to sort that stuff out is not during a gunfight. That noted, I generally do agree with Grossman. Well said. Sadly, this is not common for MOST cops. 
|
|
Quoted:
In fact, out of 18 cops, only two exhibited or claimed any negative psychological aftereffects, even years after the incident. So the question is, to put it succinctly, what gives? The guys that have "been there" don't seem to line up with the research that Lt. Col. Grossman claims to have collected. Has anyone else taken note of this? Or is it just something in the water where I work? The guys that won't admit the problems are ones you will see make the mistakes and their career is ended. Research is not absolute. There are people that will not fit the general mold. |
|
Quoted:
I read that the reason why some people urinate or deficate during extreme stress is because the body starts re-routing blood to more important areas such as your brain/eyes/heart same reason palms become clammy. I read that unicorns are real, and its okay to kiss other guys. None, and I repeat none, of the guys I know that have been involved in shootings have soiled themselves. |
|
Quoted:
I read that unicorns are real, and its okay to kiss other guys. None, and I repeat none, of the guys I know that have been involved in shootings have soiled themselves. Quoted:
Quoted:
I read that the reason why some people urinate or deficate during extreme stress is because the body starts re-routing blood to more important areas such as your brain/eyes/heart same reason palms become clammy. I read that unicorns are real, and its okay to kiss other guys. None, and I repeat none, of the guys I know that have been involved in shootings have soiled themselves. Just because you have never seen it, doesn't mean that it hasn't happened anywhere. Did you personally inspect the shorts of each of the "guys" that you know that were involved in a law enforcement shooting? Of course not. Would they have admitted it to you if they did? I don't know the people you know but MOST of the cops that I know probably would not admit it if it actually happened to them. We are a macho bunch. Admitting to each other that we were scared.....well that's rarely done. We don't like to admit any weaknesses....and while shitting yourself under extreme stress is certainly not a weakness, most cops will see it that way and won't be admitting it. Grossman's books are geared toward both military and law enforcement...so his theories will not apply equally to everyone. I read a book awhile back about a unit that was part of the second battle for Fallujah. I can't remember the name of the book or I would post it. In that book, the author mentioned that most of the guys in the platoon had shit themselves after several days of heavy conflict. I suspect that shitting oneself is a lot more common in military engagements than in law enforcement engagements due to the severity and extreme nature of heavy military combat. It's one thing to go into a relatively short duration fight with one or two suspects (the average LE shooting lasts in the vicinity of 2.5 seconds). It's a whole different and more severely humanly taxing environment to go into a battle where the enemy is using high explosives and heavy weapons and everyone is shooting at you for days on end. |
|
Quoted:
I read that unicorns are real, and its okay to kiss other guys. None, and I repeat none, of the guys I know that have been involved in shootings have soiled themselves. Quoted:
Quoted:
I read that the reason why some people urinate or deficate during extreme stress is because the body starts re-routing blood to more important areas such as your brain/eyes/heart same reason palms become clammy. I read that unicorns are real, and its okay to kiss other guys. None, and I repeat none, of the guys I know that have been involved in shootings have soiled themselves. Some people do shit/piss themselves when the bullets are flying |
|
Quoted:
Some people do shit/piss themselves when the bullets are flying Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I read that the reason why some people urinate or deficate during extreme stress is because the body starts re-routing blood to more important areas such as your brain/eyes/heart same reason palms become clammy. I read that unicorns are real, and its okay to kiss other guys. None, and I repeat none, of the guys I know that have been involved in shootings have soiled themselves. Some people do shit/piss themselves when the bullets are flying I have absolutely no doubt that it happens. I have seen it enough in other traumatic injuries to discount the possibility. I do not, however, believe it is anywhere near as common as Grossman would have us believe, just as I nearly completely discount his theories that there is an inate portion of a man's psyche that makes it nearly impossible to kill, and that video games cause violence. |
|
Let's get real.
How many guys are going to actually admit to their buddies/team-mates that they peed themselves during a fight? Just about zero. If they did lose a little urine, and nobody noticed, I guarantee they kept that little fact to themselves. It's been described, and it does happen... but you're NEVER going to get a good study on that. Honest reporting is virtually impossible when dealing an occurrence that's widely viewed, in a macho "warrior" subculture, as a shameful sign of cowardice, fear, or weakness. Would you admit to your buddies that you'd pissed your pants like a scared puppy? That's what I thought. As for the PTSD issue, denial isn't just a river in Egypt. You can pack traumatic experiences away, push them into the back of your mind, bury them a mile deep... and they can STILL come back at inopportune times... sometimes YEARS later. You may not realize you have a problem until that happens... but don't kid yourself into thinking it's only a defect of the weak-minded, and that some of those things don't leave their marks on your psyche. Mental preparation can blunt the worst of it... and then there are guys who simply aren't bothered by the taking of other peoples' lives (I've met a few)... but don't think it can't happen to you. |
|
Quoted:
Let's get real. How many guys are going to actually admit to their buddies/team-mates that they peed themselves during a fight? Just about zero. If they did lose a little urine, and nobody noticed, I guarantee they kept that little fact to themselves. It's been described, and it does happen... but you're NEVER going to get a good study on that. Honest reporting is virtually impossible when dealing an occurrence that's widely viewed, in a macho "warrior" subculture, as a shameful sign of cowardice, fear, or weakness. Would you admit to your buddies that you'd pissed your pants like a scared puppy? That's what I thought. As for the PTSD issue, denial isn't just a river in Egypt. You can pack traumatic experiences away, push them into the back of your mind, bury them a mile deep... and they can STILL come back at inopportune times... sometimes YEARS later. You may not realize you have a problem until that happens... but don't kid yourself into thinking it's only a defect of the weak-minded, and that some of those things don't leave their marks on your psyche. Mental preparation can blunt the worst of it... and then there are guys who simply aren't bothered by the taking of other peoples' lives (I've met a few)... but don't think it can't happen to you. I think the big wet spot would be pretty noticeable.
|
|
Quoted:
I think the big wet spot would be pretty noticeable.
Maybe... but how about when you've been out in the heat, or exerting yourself all day, full-armor, and your clothing is already soaked from sweating like a frickin' goat? I'm not even sure the odor would give it away... everybody smells bad under those circumstances... and in the ME? Half of everything there smells funky. You might not be able to hide losing a full bladder, but losing a little pee? It would be virtually unnoticeable under those circumstances. |
|
Quoted:
Maybe... but how about when you've been out in the heat, or exerting yourself all day, full-armor, and your clothing is already soaked from sweating like a frickin' goat? I'm not even sure the odor would give it away... everybody smells bad under those circumstances... and in the ME? Half of everything there smells funky. You might not be able to hide losing a full bladder, but losing a little pee? It would be virtually unnoticeable under those circumstances. A little pee maybe not. If it's that small of an amount I'd say it doesn't matter anyway. I have a relevant story. For some of a firefight I was on a roof with a SAW and a CLP bottle leaked out onto my crotch. So it look like I pissed myself.  Yes I got some shit for it but it was CLP DAMMIT.
|
|
Quoted:
I have absolutely no doubt that it happens. I have seen it enough in other traumatic injuries to discount the possibility. I do not, however, believe it is anywhere near as common as Grossman would have us believe, just as I nearly completely discount his theories that there is an inate portion of a man's psyche that makes it nearly impossible to kill, and that video games cause violence. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I read that the reason why some people urinate or deficate during extreme stress is because the body starts re-routing blood to more important areas such as your brain/eyes/heart same reason palms become clammy. I read that unicorns are real, and its okay to kiss other guys. None, and I repeat none, of the guys I know that have been involved in shootings have soiled themselves. Some people do shit/piss themselves when the bullets are flying I have absolutely no doubt that it happens. I have seen it enough in other traumatic injuries to discount the possibility. I do not, however, believe it is anywhere near as common as Grossman would have us believe, just as I nearly completely discount his theories that there is an inate portion of a man's psyche that makes it nearly impossible to kill, and that video games cause violence. First you imply that it never happens...then you state that you are certain that it does happen. Which is it? I don't think that he has written that it's impossible for humans to kill another human. He simply believes that it's not something that we, as humans do with ease. Given the right circumstances, almost anyone can make the decision to kill. It's just not a natural behavior so many people wait too long to make the decision to use deadly force due to the natural resistance to killing another human being...and that has resulted in many good people dying due to them being too hesitant to kill. The Dinkheller video is just one example of that. When we train people, we aren't necessarily teaching them to kill. We are teaching them to be able to make the decision to use deadly force QUICKER than they might naturally do so. We, as humans, definitely do not NATURALLY have a desire to kill others...unless you are a murderous sociopath. Also, violent video games are definitely a contributing factor to the huge rise in child mass murderers. The only factor...of course not. But, as Grossman has stated numerous times, when you have a child with no direction and parental supervision and nothing to live for nor any goals in life, add violent video games and you have a potential problem on your hands. A loaded gun in your house within easy access to your small children is no a guarantee that your children will shoot themselves or others with it. However, their odds of shooting themselves or others accidentally goes up considerably when the weapon is left in easy access and without supervision. Lack of parenting is probably our #1 problem in America today IMO and when you add the violent video games, you drastically increase your odds of a child mass murderer(s). It certainly is a contributing factor. How much?...that's certainly worthy of discussion. You remind me of the type of person who reads a book, disagrees with something that the author writes, and then discounts everything that the writer says. Or, someone who goes to training and then when the instructor says something that you disagree with, you then spend the rest of the training course arguing with the instructor instead of soaking up the good stuff that the instructor has to offer. Grossman has a lot of useful information to offer even if you don't agree with everything. He offers a lot of insightful thoughts into the mental and psychological and physiological effects of combat. However, he's been studying an incredibly complex topic of study and without a doubt, further research will change some of his research. He may not be the end all/be all but his research HAS been groundbreaking. More study and research by very smart people is still needed in this area for many years to come. I am certain that he doesn't have the exact same theories today that he had when he started his research. Further research builds on earlier research and will usually either confirm or deny earlier research. Discounting everything because of a few disagreements, is very narrow minded. Your own posts (and a few others) indicate that you read his work with a closed mind....because you are ascribing statements to him that he never made or twisting his writing into something that it is not. We should go into all training with an open mind. If we didn't have an open mind to new ideas and concepts, we'd probably still be carrying revolvers and failing to use modern day officer safety tactics...and we'd probably lose FAR more than the 120 officers who died in the line of duty in the US in 2012 or the 66 who have died so far this year. |
|
Quoted:
A little pee maybe not. If it's that small of an amount I'd say it doesn't matter anyway. I have a relevant story. For some of a firefight I was on a roof with a SAW and a CLP bottle leaked out onto my crotch. So it look like I pissed myself. Yes I got some shit for it but it was CLP DAMMIT. Quoted:
Quoted:
Maybe... but how about when you've been out in the heat, or exerting yourself all day, full-armor, and your clothing is already soaked from sweating like a frickin' goat? I'm not even sure the odor would give it away... everybody smells bad under those circumstances... and in the ME? Half of everything there smells funky. You might not be able to hide losing a full bladder, but losing a little pee? It would be virtually unnoticeable under those circumstances. A little pee maybe not. If it's that small of an amount I'd say it doesn't matter anyway. I have a relevant story. For some of a firefight I was on a roof with a SAW and a CLP bottle leaked out onto my crotch. So it look like I pissed myself. Yes I got some shit for it but it was CLP DAMMIT. Part of the issue as well in military combat is that in a protracted battle, your bodily digestion still continues. However, sometimes you don't have the opportunity to relieve yourself on your normal "schedule". So, your digestive system is overloaded already, add some extreme stress, and you have a recipe for involuntary evacuation of your bowels. Rarely does LE have that problem in our working environment. |
|
Quoted:
First you imply that it never happens...then you state that you are certain that it does happen. Which is it? I don't think that he has written that it's impossible for humans to kill another human. He simply believes that it's not something that we, as humans do with ease. Given the right circumstances, almost anyone can make the decision to kill. It's just not a natural behavior so many people wait too long to make the decision to use deadly force due to the natural resistance to killing another human being...and that has resulted in many good people dying due to them being too hesitant to kill. The Dinkheller video is just one example of that. When we train people, we aren't necessarily teaching them to kill. We are teaching them to be able to make the decision to use deadly force QUICKER than they might naturally do so. We, as humans, definitely do not NATURALLY have a desire to kill others...unless you are a murderous sociopath. Also, violent video games are definitely a contributing factor to the huge rise in child mass murderers. The only factor...of course not. But, as Grossman has stated numerous times, when you have a child with no direction and parental supervision and nothing to live for nor any goals in life, add violent video games and you have a potential problem on your hands. A loaded gun in your house within easy access to your small children is no a guarantee that your children will shoot themselves or others with it. However, their odds of shooting themselves or others accidentally goes up considerably when the weapon is left in easy access and without supervision. Lack of parenting is probably our #1 problem in America today IMO and when you add the violent video games, you drastically increase your odds of a child mass murderer(s). It certainly is a contributing factor. How much?...that's certainly worthy of discussion. You remind me of the type of person who reads a book, disagrees with something that the author writes, and then discounts everything that the writer says. Or, someone who goes to training and then when the instructor says something that you disagree with, you then spend the rest of the training course arguing with the instructor instead of soaking up the good stuff that the instructor has to offer. Grossman has a lot of useful information to offer even if you don't agree with everything. He offers a lot of insightful thoughts into the mental and psychological and physiological effects of combat. However, he's been studying an incredibly complex topic of study and without a doubt, further research will change some of his research. He may not be the end all/be all but his research HAS been groundbreaking. More study and research by very smart people is still needed in this area for many years to come. I am certain that he doesn't have the exact same theories today that he had when he started his research. Further research builds on earlier research and will usually either confirm or deny earlier research. Discounting everything because of a few disagreements, is very narrow minded. Your own posts (and a few others) indicate that you read his work with a closed mind....because you are ascribing statements to him that he never made or twisting his writing into something that it is not. We should go into all training with an open mind. If we didn't have an open mind to new ideas and concepts, we'd probably still be carrying revolvers and failing to use modern day officer safety tactics...and we'd probably lose FAR more than the 120 officers who died in the line of duty in the US in 2012 or the 66 who have died so far this year. I never implied anything. I made a statement that, of the more than a handful of cops I know who have had to use their weapons in the line of duty, none have had this issue. As for Grossman himself, I was what you might consider a follower. I have seen him three times, including once in a seminar I helped organize. I bought his shtick hook, line, and sinker for a number of years. The more experience I gained, the more certain things began not to sit right. He has been repeating the same things for years. The Bulletproof Mind seminar on tape I listened to in 2004 is, nearly word for word, the same one I sat in on earlier this year. He has thrown some current events stuff in, but nothing has really changed. He continues to utilize research that has been found to be flawed, incorrect, and even just plain made up. When the John Giduck story broke, I eagerly awaited Grossman to distance himself from him, but instead, he continues to use Giducks fictional tales in his seminar, and hawk his book on his sales tables. I think Grossman is a good guy, and I think he means well. I also think, however, that its time for him to fade away, or at the minimum, revamp his entire platform. The Sheepdog mantra is silly, and always has been. I do not need some guy who has never seen combat, never worked a murder, never had to fight some guy who would just as soon kill you than look at you to tell me how important I am. |
|
Quoted:
I never implied anything. I made a statement that, of the more than a handful of cops I know who have had to use their weapons in the line of duty, none have had this issue. As for Grossman himself, I was what you might consider a follower. I have seen him three times, including once in a seminar I helped organize. I bought his shtick hook, line, and sinker for a number of years. The more experience I gained, the more certain things began not to sit right. He has been repeating the same things for years. The Bulletproof Mind seminar on tape I listened to in 2004 is, nearly word for word, the same one I sat in on earlier this year. He has thrown some current events stuff in, but nothing has really changed. He continues to utilize research that has been found to be flawed, incorrect, and even just plain made up. When the John Giduck story broke, I eagerly awaited Grossman to distance himself from him, but instead, he continues to use Giducks fictional tales in his seminar, and hawk his book on his sales tables. I think Grossman is a good guy, and I think he means well. I also think, however, that its time for him to fade away, or at the minimum, revamp his entire platform. The Sheepdog mantra is silly, and always has been. I do not need some guy who has never seen combat, never worked a murder, never had to fight some guy who would just as soon kill you than look at you to tell me how important I am. Quoted:
Quoted:
First you imply that it never happens...then you state that you are certain that it does happen. Which is it? I don't think that he has written that it's impossible for humans to kill another human. He simply believes that it's not something that we, as humans do with ease. Given the right circumstances, almost anyone can make the decision to kill. It's just not a natural behavior so many people wait too long to make the decision to use deadly force due to the natural resistance to killing another human being...and that has resulted in many good people dying due to them being too hesitant to kill. The Dinkheller video is just one example of that. When we train people, we aren't necessarily teaching them to kill. We are teaching them to be able to make the decision to use deadly force QUICKER than they might naturally do so. We, as humans, definitely do not NATURALLY have a desire to kill others...unless you are a murderous sociopath. Also, violent video games are definitely a contributing factor to the huge rise in child mass murderers. The only factor...of course not. But, as Grossman has stated numerous times, when you have a child with no direction and parental supervision and nothing to live for nor any goals in life, add violent video games and you have a potential problem on your hands. A loaded gun in your house within easy access to your small children is no a guarantee that your children will shoot themselves or others with it. However, their odds of shooting themselves or others accidentally goes up considerably when the weapon is left in easy access and without supervision. Lack of parenting is probably our #1 problem in America today IMO and when you add the violent video games, you drastically increase your odds of a child mass murderer(s). It certainly is a contributing factor. How much?...that's certainly worthy of discussion. You remind me of the type of person who reads a book, disagrees with something that the author writes, and then discounts everything that the writer says. Or, someone who goes to training and then when the instructor says something that you disagree with, you then spend the rest of the training course arguing with the instructor instead of soaking up the good stuff that the instructor has to offer. Grossman has a lot of useful information to offer even if you don't agree with everything. He offers a lot of insightful thoughts into the mental and psychological and physiological effects of combat. However, he's been studying an incredibly complex topic of study and without a doubt, further research will change some of his research. He may not be the end all/be all but his research HAS been groundbreaking. More study and research by very smart people is still needed in this area for many years to come. I am certain that he doesn't have the exact same theories today that he had when he started his research. Further research builds on earlier research and will usually either confirm or deny earlier research. Discounting everything because of a few disagreements, is very narrow minded. Your own posts (and a few others) indicate that you read his work with a closed mind....because you are ascribing statements to him that he never made or twisting his writing into something that it is not. We should go into all training with an open mind. If we didn't have an open mind to new ideas and concepts, we'd probably still be carrying revolvers and failing to use modern day officer safety tactics...and we'd probably lose FAR more than the 120 officers who died in the line of duty in the US in 2012 or the 66 who have died so far this year. I never implied anything. I made a statement that, of the more than a handful of cops I know who have had to use their weapons in the line of duty, none have had this issue. As for Grossman himself, I was what you might consider a follower. I have seen him three times, including once in a seminar I helped organize. I bought his shtick hook, line, and sinker for a number of years. The more experience I gained, the more certain things began not to sit right. He has been repeating the same things for years. The Bulletproof Mind seminar on tape I listened to in 2004 is, nearly word for word, the same one I sat in on earlier this year. He has thrown some current events stuff in, but nothing has really changed. He continues to utilize research that has been found to be flawed, incorrect, and even just plain made up. When the John Giduck story broke, I eagerly awaited Grossman to distance himself from him, but instead, he continues to use Giducks fictional tales in his seminar, and hawk his book on his sales tables. I think Grossman is a good guy, and I think he means well. I also think, however, that its time for him to fade away, or at the minimum, revamp his entire platform. The Sheepdog mantra is silly, and always has been. I do not need some guy who has never seen combat, never worked a murder, never had to fight some guy who would just as soon kill you than look at you to tell me how important I am. You did imply something. Read this statement of YOURS again..... I read that unicorns are real, and its okay to kiss other guys. None, and I repeat none, of the guys I know that have been involved in shootings have soiled themselves. Your silly reference to unicorns implies that you don't believe that it ever happens...do I need to break down YOUR post any farther than that? Words have meaning. You don't like the Sheepdog analogy. Ok....no problem there. But, out of curiosity, what do you feel is your place or duty or responsibility working in law enforcement? Do you have any? Or is it just a job? Does a firearms instructor need to be a combat vet to be a capable instructor? |
|
OK, yes, I made an implication....that just because you read something, it doesn't mean its true. Is there some element of truth in that theory? Its possible, even probable that such issues do occur. It is not, however, as widespread as he would would have us believe. i base my beliefs on what I have personally witnessed, having been on scene with several shootings, and never having seen the shooter soil themselves, whether is be cop or other. I did once see a shooter who had pissed himself, but I tend to believe it was due more to the muzzle strike to the back of the head then the shooting. Maybe not.
As for the "Sheepdog" shtick, yes, I find it corny. It is nothing more than mental masturbation for those who lack the proper mindset to do this job. I know what I am, I know what I do, and what is expected of me, I don't need some sort of catchphrase, motto, or mission statement to direct my actions. I typically see this mantra embraced by those who in no way fit the supposed profile, and feel some need to be one of the cool guys. As for my duties and responsibilities, they are to enforce state and local laws, protect the lives and property of the citizenry who employ me, and most often, to serve as referee for every bullshit problem society faces, but lacks the courage, sense, or wherewithal to solve themselves. I am not a knight, I am not a paladin, and I am not a Sheepdog. I am a cop, plain and simple. I do my tour, I go home, and the exact same problems that existed before I went to work will exist when I come back tomorrow. When I retire, the world will be in no better or worse shape than it as when I started. As for you inference that I discredit Grossman due to his lack of real world experience, to some extent, I do. I do not fault the man for his lack of LE and combat experience, but I do hold reserve in the fact that he makes some attempt to tell me how I should feel when I do my job. He has absolutely no idea what I do for a living, what my job entails, or what emotions it will envoke other that what his "research" has told him. While research is a vital tool, without real world application, it is nothing but a tiny part of the giant puzzle. I take far more issue with his continued support and usage of John Giduck. Any man who will use research that has been proven to be completely false, propagated by a man who has been proven to be a fraud and a bona fide piece of shit, draws his own credibility into question. In the end, I think Grossman has good intentions. I also think his research, in its base form, has some merit when taken at its face. I also believe that research has morphed into something wholly different, a cult of sorts, that I find ridiculous. |
|
ZERO issues with mine. Should have been put down sooner.
However, I train realistically and expect the same from others. After close to two decades in LE I have yet to attend training that maximized mind set to aggression. While enlightened instructors gave lip service to such, never did it further. Pussyfooting around the basic issue of killing another is standard protocol and this is at least disturbing to me. Most officers I know as well as the many I observe have a very trusting nature. This may be due to limited experience with violence or the fact many have never had fighting experience. Simply put, they are woefully ignorant to how mean a person can be. When faced with such, it is a surprise that they are about to get a beat down or worse. When properly trained personnel engage in a deadly UOF situation, it should not come as a surprise. Shoot suspect(s) to the ground and reload. Carry on. |
|
Quoted:
OK, yes, I made an implication....that just because you read something, it doesn't mean its true. Is there some element of truth in that theory? Its possible, even probable that such issues do occur. It is not, however, as widespread as he would would have us believe. i base my beliefs on what I have personally witnessed, having been on scene with several shootings, and never having seen the shooter soil themselves, whether is be cop or other. I did once see a shooter who had pissed himself, but I tend to believe it was due more to the muzzle strike to the back of the head then the shooting. Maybe not. As for the "Sheepdog" shtick, yes, I find it corny. It is nothing more than mental masturbation for those who lack the proper mindset to do this job. I know what I am, I know what I do, and what is expected of me, I don't need some sort of catchphrase, motto, or mission statement to direct my actions. I typically see this mantra embraced by those who in no way fit the supposed profile, and feel some need to be one of the cool guys. As for my duties and responsibilities, they are to enforce state and local laws, protect the lives and property of the citizenry who employ me, and most often, to serve as referee for every bullshit problem society faces, but lacks the courage, sense, or wherewithal to solve themselves. I am not a knight, I am not a paladin, and I am not a Sheepdog. I am a cop, plain and simple. I do my tour, I go home, and the exact same problems that existed before I went to work will exist when I come back tomorrow. When I retire, the world will be in no better or worse shape than it as when I started. As for you inference that I discredit Grossman due to his lack of real world experience, to some extent, I do. I do not fault the man for his lack of LE and combat experience, but I do hold reserve in the fact that he makes some attempt to tell me how I should feel when I do my job. He has absolutely no idea what I do for a living, what my job entails, or what emotions it will envoke other that what his "research" has told him. While research is a vital tool, without real world application, it is nothing but a tiny part of the giant puzzle. I take far more issue with his continued support and usage of John Giduck. Any man who will use research that has been proven to be completely false, propagated by a man who has been proven to be a fraud and a bona fide piece of shit, draws his own credibility into question. In the end, I think Grossman has good intentions. I also think his research, in its base form, has some merit when taken at its face. I also believe that research has morphed into something wholly different, a cult of sorts, that I find ridiculous. Ok fair enough. I disagree with a lot of what you said...or at least see things quite differently.....but, I respect the fact that you are at least willing to modify your earlier statements. I think your outlook on your job is sad but that's your issue to deal with. I'll leave my comments at that. |
|
Quoted:
ZERO issues with mine. Should have been put down sooner. However, I train realistically and expect the same from others. After close to two decades in LE I have yet to attend training that maximized mind set to aggression. While enlightened instructors gave lip service to such, never did it further. Pussyfooting around the basic issue of killing another is standard protocol and this is at least disturbing to me. Most officers I know as well as the many I observe have a very trusting nature. This may be due to limited experience with violence or the fact many have never had fighting experience. Simply put, they are woefully ignorant to how mean a person can be. When faced with such, it is a surprise that they are about to get a beat down or worse. When properly trained personnel engage in a deadly UOF situation, it should not come as a surprise. Shoot suspect(s) to the ground and reload. Carry on. And, I suspect that your preparation is a lot of, if not all of the reason why you didn't have any issues with the incident that you mention. It's very sad but a lot of cops are in this job for all the wrong reasons and don't prepare enough, if at all, to mentally and physically survive a deadly force incident. |
|
Quoted:
If you are going to criticize someone, at least get your facts straight before criticizing. Quoted:
Quoted:
I just remember reading something like that, can't remember the exact page. Gave the book away. If you are going to criticize someone, at least get your facts straight before criticizing. That line is in one of the books, although it is said by a combat vet, not Grossman. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
Quoted:
iirc something like 80% of LEO's quit within five years of an OIS. I'm given to understand that much of that is based on what kind of support they receive from their dept/DA/Brass post-ois though. Still not entirely unsurprising. We had a county guy from a neighboring dept get into an OIS at a domestic. It has definitely had an effect on him. And he was approaching 20 years on before it happened. |
|
Quoted:
iirc something like 80% of LEO's quit within five years of an OIS. I would say that's probably old research. I know a fair number of guys that have been in OIS incidents and don't know of one that has left the field. I remember hearing the numbers you mention early in my career though. |
|
Quoted:
I don't think that's what we're seeing here. Quoted:
Quoted:
You won't get an honest answer. There's a very protective religious cult that surrounds Grossman and blindly attacks any discussion challenging his research, assertions or writing. I don't think that's what we're seeing here. Some people try to have a logical discussion of his theories. The problem is, there are two sides that will not listen to reason....the side that accepts everything that he says as Gospel truth and the other side that discounts everything he says based on their disagreement of a few opinions/theories of his. I might have missed it but I don't think that anyone in this thread has shown the worship of him but we HAVE seen some of the vocal dislike of him. As a side note, from reading this and other various forums, I have found that some well known instructors (in a variety of subjects) will say or do something controversial and will get beat up over it. Then, since people love to pile on, the various open mouth breathers will all pile on the anti XYZ controversial person and if you wade through the (usually) lengthy thread, the thread will eventually forget all about the original reason for the thread and the topic will take on a life of its own. Before long, no one really knows why they are beating up the person, but they know that it's cool to beat up the person so the pack mentality runs wild and the thread starts getting stupid and before long, no one knows the actual facts to the disagreement. |
|
Quoted:
That line is in one of the books, although it is said by a combat vet, not Grossman. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I just remember reading something like that, can't remember the exact page. Gave the book away. If you are going to criticize someone, at least get your facts straight before criticizing. That line is in one of the books, although it is said by a combat vet, not Grossman. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Rather than spread bad rumor about the information about people losing control of their bowels, I looked it up. Read pages 68-69 of On Killing. I'm not going to re-type what he wrote for those who are too lazy to look it up for themselves but there are the pages and book if you wish to disagree with what he wrote on that particular issue. The people in this very thread that mentioned lack of bladder/bowel control misquoted what he wrote....not very uncommon for someone who disagrees with something to misquote the person who they dislike in order to justify their dislike. I have no issues if someone wants to disagree with Grossman but at least get your facts straight. We can have a rational discussion/disagreement with each other about what he writes about but let's at least get our facts straight. |