FOOD FOR THOUGHT

SORRY THAT I HAVE BEEN A LITTLE LACKS ON POSTING.  I HAVE BEEN A LITTLE BUSY GETTING READY FOR THE UP COMING TRAINING SEASON.

FOUND THIS ARTICLE ON FACEBOOK, POSTED BY DAVE SPAULDING.  HOPE YOU FIND IT INTERESTING AND INFORMATIVE.  

From THE TACTICAL WIRE...a good piece from Tiger McKee talking about action/reaction in conflict. The Boy Scouts have it right...BE PREPARED!

Skill Set: Action Beats Reaction? 

by Tiger McKee



The general rule is that "action beats reaction." And this is true, to a certain extent. A simple example: two people have to snap their fingers. Participant "B" can't react until he sees/hears "A" snap his fingers. In this example "A" always wins. Action beats reaction. But fighting is more complicated than this. It is possible for the threat to act, initiating an attack, and your reaction win the confrontation.

This occurs frequently in military actions. A patrol is ambushed. Their reaction defeats the threat. The same is true for individual or personal confrontations. When attacked your reaction must be immediate, efficient and effective.

There are always exceptions, but generally speaking your reaction to an attack should be immediate. It's dark and you're walking through the parking lot to the car. (Since it's dark you already have a flashlight in hand. Remember, a big part of being able to react immediately is about being prepared.) A man charges you. You shine the bright light in his eyes, cut it off and move laterally. He can't see where you are. The threat acted first. Your immediate reaction disrupted his action, providing you time to do whatever else is necessary to stop the attack efficiently.

When faced with serious bodily harm/death the solution to your problem is to stop the threat as quickly as possible, efficiently ending the confrontation, and not get injured in the process. Continuing with example above: you've disoriented the threat, moved, and bought some time. During the time required for the threat to recover - now he's in the reactive mode - you draw your pistol and issue verbal commands. "Stop! Leave me alone!" The attacker recovers some vision, notices you're in an aggressive stance with a weapon, and runs. The time from when he attacked to you winning was only a few seconds. Your efficient response, a reaction, defeated the threat's intended action.

The response to a threat must be effective, stopping the attack. In fighting the term "effective," what it will take to win, is very subjective. Winning could require anything from moving and communicating to being forced to engage the threat(s) with accurate fire. An effective response will "normally" include moving, communicating, using cover - if it's available, and it usually is - maybe shooting, and most definitely thinking. The thinking part or your reaction is mandatory to formulate an effective response. Your initial reaction may be preprogrammed, like moving, but then you have to think about the best, most effective way to solve the problem. You must stop the attack in the shortest amount of time possible. Participating in an extended confrontation is normally not a good idea.

There are two ways to stop an attack. You force the threat(s) to change their mind; you're not an easy victim and the risk vs. reward isn't great enough. Or, you inflict the damage necessary that physically the threat(s) can't continue the fight. Regardless of what's required, your response to violence should be immediate, efficient and effective. Reaction can beat action.

Tiger McKee is director of Shootrite Firearms Academy, located in northern Alabama. He is the author of "The Book of Two Guns," writes for several firearms/tactical publications, and is featured on GunTalk's DVD, "Fighting With The 1911 - http://shootrite.org/dvd/dvd.html Website:www.shootrite.org