Categories
All About Guns Some Red Hot Gospel there!

What Are Your Training Scars? By Kevin Creighton

The Newhall Incident was a formative moment in American law enforcement training. The incident happened in 1970 when four California Highway Patrol officers were shot and killed by a pair of violent felons after a traffic stop in Newhall, California.

lead image for training scars article showing a Springfield Armory 1911 DS Prodigy and first aid kit
According to the author, minimizing training scars isn’t literally about injuries. Rather, it’s about makingsure your training is applicable to the real world.

One of the persistent myths about this shooting is that one of the troopers was found with empty shell cases in his pocket because that was part of the training he received on the practice range. That myth turned out not to be true, but it highlights one of the pitfalls of defensive firearms training — namely, making what you learn on the range match as close as you can to what a defensive encounter might actually look like.

What we are talking about is training scars. This is not physical scars or signs of injury, but rather a habit or skill you learn in practice which can negatively impact your performance in the real world. We train on an indoor or outdoor range with a solid backstop and a clear, defined target in front of us. The real world, however, is messy and complicated, and bridging the gap between the two can be complicated. Let’s take a look at some of the more-common training scars out there and what we can do to correct them.

The Wrong Direction

The first is prioritizing the wrong things during a practice session. At the range, we tend to practice the things we’re good at in order to make them better. There is a limit on our time and ammo budget, however, and giving in to the ego boost of pushing our limits comes by sacrificing the time needed to improve our weaknesses.

students learning how to shoot handguns receive instruction at an indoor shooting range
Most indoor ranges do not allow you to practice fundamental skills like movement and drawing from a holster.

As my friend Michael Bane once said, train your weakness, race your strength. He originally said this in the context of practicing for triathlons, but it applies to defensive firearms training as well. If you don’t know what your weaknesses are, a diagnostic drill like the Dot Torture Drill will help you find them.

Another common training scar is never practicing under artificial stress. Concealed carry is the American martial art. Just like almost every other martial art out there, it arose because there is a gap between the security that the society can provide an individual and what those individuals need to actually stay safe.

An effective martial art will have an element of sparring and competition to it. It’s not enough to practice your punches, blocks and kicks in a gym or dojo; those techniques must be stress-tested and refined so they become automatic.

training priorities
The training priorities for the military and law enforcement can potentially be quite different than those of the legally armed citizen. Image: Leo Ritualo/DVIDS

Using a shot timer as your practice provides a measure of artificial stress which can inoculate you against real stress. Adding a shot timer to a relatively simple task like sending five rounds into a five-inch circle that’s five yards away can become a herculean task once you’re required to do it in five seconds or less.

A third training scar is using incorrect inputs to guide your training. Our mission as armed citizens is to avoid violent threats to our lives and the lives of our loved ones. However, if violence is unavoidable, it’s our mission to stop the threat as quickly as possible using an appropriate measure of force.

Sound Priorities

The missions of the military and law enforcement are different from this. The military’s job is to overwhelm an enemy force so it is incapable of effective resistance. Law enforcement, on the other hand, is tasked with pursuing alleged criminals until they are brought to justice. Each of these missions requires a different skill set — skills that can be very different than what is required to protect yourself and those around one.

military police shotgun training on outdoor range
U.S. Air National Guard Combat Arms Instructors from the 155th Security Forces Squadron qualify with shotguns in June 2026. Image: Tech Sgt. Kevin Leahy/DVIDS

For example, soldiers carry rifles and armed citizens use rifles as defensive firearms. However, aside from the basics of making the shot under stress, the use of that rifle can vary greatly from the military versus how the armed citizen uses a rifle. Taking a class which teaches military techniques like fire and movement can be fun, but it probably shouldn’t be at the top of our training priorities.

Finally, prioritizing the process over results will almost always result in training scars. If we need to use our defensive firearm, we need to get hits on target as quickly as possible while minimizing the risks to ourselves and others. Anything that gets in the way of that outcome needs to be eliminated in training before it shows up in the real world. This is why taking classes from a variety of trainers is so important.

The American martial art of concealed carry has not reached the point where our training techniques are rigidly codified. Karate has Shotokan, Wado-Ryu and a number of other styles that are under the umbrella of karate, but the styles and forms of concealed carry are wide open and borrow from each other. Take advantage of that fact and learn which techniques work best for you.

Training with a variety of trainers is one way to avoid acquiring training scars and optimize your practice for the real world. Another way is mixing up your training routine. Going to an indoor “bowling alley” range and punching a neat, ragged hole in a target seven yards away is a good way to build accuracy.

training to deal with a knife threat
Training with a single tool on a static range may not prepare you for a dangerous encounter like a sudden knife attack. Image: Sgt. Kyhlee Woodford/DVIDS

Next time, however, why not take a set of Bluetooth earbuds to the range, connect them to your phone, then slip them in under your protective earmuffs so you can hear the “beep” from the timer app on your phone? Use them to see if you can put one round into the target in two seconds from low ready, then push things and try to make two, three or even four shots in that same amount of time.

The explosion of online video and the constant presence of surveillance cameras means that there are now many opportunities to see what real-world violent encounters actually look like. These are an excellent reality check on your training in order to avoid creating a gap between what you know and what is useful for defending a life.

Head-to-Head

Another way to minimize training scars is pressure-test your training. The other martial arts figured out long ago that competition was one way to encourage real world results and created things like sparring matches and mixed martial arts competitions. This is also true in the defensive firearms world, where sports like the United States Practical Shooting Association (USPSA) and International Defensive Pistol Association (IDPA) allow you to use firearms that can be quite similar to what you might carry with you every day.

use shooting competition to pressure test your skills
Shooting practical pistol matches like USPSA and IDPA can help innoculate you against stress, but they are still not the “real world.”

There are those who say that shooting competitions can cause training scars, such as avoiding the use of cover and creating a “shoot two rounds and move on” mentality. To a certain extent, this is true. However, I have found that shooting a practical pistol match is the best way to learn how to handle an unexpected event when you are putting rounds downrange, and do so in a timely manner. The best stage plan in the world can fall apart with one missed shot, so learning how to adapt and overcome when something unplanned shows up is a skill that can be quickly learned at a practical pistol match.

Finally, you can test your abilities in a force-on-force training event using airsoft, paint marker rounds or other practice munitions. These can vary in quality, depending on the nature of the scenarios presented. Remember that we are not trying to boost our egos by going through the motions of a mock defensive encounter, nor should an instructor try to break down a student by presenting them with a “no-win” scenario. Rather, force on force should be used to see how closely what we know matches up with what we might face outside of the training range.

Conclusion

William Shakespeare wrote in King Henry V that “All things are ready, if our minds be so,” and ultimately, that is the key to avoiding a training scar. We should never be content with our current level of training. The real world can throw an almost infinite number of problems our way, and it is up to us to make sure the skills and methods we learn during training and practice can be quickly adapted to match the challenges we face in our daily lives.

Categories
Paint me surprised by this Some Red Hot Gospel there! The Green Machine The Horror! War

The Intentionally Vile Hershey’s Field Ration D Bar By Will Dabbs, MD

Don’t let the image fool you — D bars were positively ghastly.

Back when dinosaurs roamed the plains and I flew Army helicopters for Uncle Sam, I was afforded the opportunity to attend the U.S. Air Force Arctic Survival School. The colloquial name was “Cool School.” That sounded pretty awesome. As the big day approached, I actually looked forward to the experience. It seems I was an idiot.

Hard Reality

I discovered later that Cool School was informally called the Air Force Food Appreciation Course. Not only did the average temperature hover around 30 below zero, but there also wasn’t much to eat. The mission was to simulate what it might be like to be a stranded military aviator in the frozen Arctic wastes. We were given the contents of an ejection seat survival kit and a single MRE to last the duration of the course.

After a couple of days, that MRE was but a vague memory. I consumed absolutely everything in that tan plastic pouch. I also ate a boiled rabbit. That was about as awesome as it sounds.

The survival kit included these weird compressed food bars. I would liken them to finely-ground sawdust mixed with a little sugar and pressed into a rock-hard, brick-like cube. It took a little effort to gnaw off the edges. At the end of the exercise, I had licked the cocoa beverage powder and instant coffee clean from my MRE, but I still had two and a half of my three survival food bars intact. Those things were ghastly.

That was most likely by design. If they tasted like Toblerone, you’d be tempted to gobble them up right sharpish. As it was, the consistency and flavor meant you tended to make them last. It turns out there was a WWII-vintage precedent.

The thought of having to survive on a D bar kept troops on full alert.

An Army Marches on Its Stomach

We are all rightfully enamored with the guns, planes, tanks, and ships, but it is really the mundane stuff like food and warm clothing that really drive a combat unit’s success in the field.

U.S. Marine Corps General Robert H. Barrow once famously opined that, “Amateurs study tactics; professionals study logistics.” As such, in 1937, the United States Army approached the Hershey’s Chocolate Company with a most curious request.

Pearl Harbor caught the U.S. military acutely unawares, but there were still plenty of folks who could sense that war was coming. As a result, they began reaching out to American industry to modernize weapons and support gear in anticipation of fielding massive expeditionary armies overseas. As part of that, Uncle Sam needed a new government chocolate bar. However, they wanted it to taste, in the words of the Army Quartermaster, “Only a little better than a boiled potato.”

Before these old heroes could be this awesome, they had to be fed. Public domain.

Origin Story

Hershey’s chief chemist Sam Hinkle and Captain Paul Logan of the U.S. Army Quartermaster General’s office established four criteria for what would eventually become the Field Ration D bar. It had to be energy-dense and weigh no more than four ounces. It had to withstand high temperatures without melting. It also needed to taste bad.

The logic was sound. Like those nasty compressed survival bars in Cool School, if the emergency ration chocolate was tasty, troops would consume it recreationally. They needed to save this thing for actual emergencies. The solution was to make it taste awful.

For starters, the Hershey research team dramatically reduced the sugar. Then they increased the chocolate liquor to make it bitter. After that came oat flour to create a dense, dry texture with a killer aftertaste.

The original concoction was so thick it could not be poured into a mold. Every single bar had to be manually pressed in place. The factory workers at Hershey’s reportedly despised making them. However, the resulting compact bar offered 600 calories in a 4-ounce chunk. Troops claimed it was all but impossible to get into the thing without a knife.

Of course it came with instructions. Troops were supposed to eat the quarter-pound bar slowly over the course of half an hour or dissolve it in water to make a drink. Either way, getting a whole D bar down was a gut check.

Practicalities

The Army ordered the first 90,000-bar lot in 1937 for field testing. Troops predictably despised them, but that was the point. By 1941 Hershey’s was producing D rations at scale. By war’s end, Hersey’s had produced more than three billion of the horrible things.

Troops in theater nicknamed the D bar Germany’s secret weapon. This was partly because of their deleterious effect on the human gut. Additionally, hungry civilians who got the D bars in trade often thought them inedible.

In 1943, Hershey produced a specific version of the D ration for the Pacific Theater called the Tropical Chocolate Bar. This awful comestible was designed to withstand temperatures of up to 120 degrees Fahrenheit without melting. It intentionally tasted slightly better than the standard D ration, but troops nonetheless nicknamed the Tropical Chocolate Bar the “Dysentery Bar.”

Performance

D ration bars were standard issue in aircrew survival kits. In 1943, Army Air Corps Lieutenant Louis Zamperini, the Olympic distance runner featured in Laura Hillenbrand’s 2010 book Unbroken, survived 47 days adrift in a life raft in the Pacific Ocean after his B24 Liberator crashed. He survived in part thanks to the D bars he had on board.

Hershey eventually earned five Army-Navy Excellence in Production awards. Before WWII, chocolate was considered a luxury in post-Depression American society. When the 16 million GIs who deployed to fight WWII returned home, they were all addicted to the stuff.

This seismic shift in American culinary tastes drove the explosion of products like candy bars and Coca-Cola in the 1950s. That’s one of several reasons Americans are so blasted fat today.

I do love me some M&M’s. They resulted from WWII-era research into shelf stable chocolate.

Spin-Off Tech

Not all military chocolate was supposed to be nasty. The confections intended for standard rations needed to be as tasty as possible. This was the stuff American GIs handed out to starving kids in liberated war zones.

When Forest Mars needed a snack that could survive high temperatures in transit, he took little gobbets of chocolate and coated them in hard candy. The result was M&M’s. Mr. Mars secured an exclusive military contract, and M&M’s went to war before they were sold to the general public. GIs came home rabid for the things.

A surprising lot of the modern candy offerings tempting you at the Walmart checkout had their genesis during World War II. Environmental stability and the necessity for maximum caloric density often drove that train. In the case of the ghastly D bar, however, it was also engineered to be gross.

Categories
Interesting stuff Some Red Hot Gospel there!

Because that would be wrong!

Categories
Some Red Hot Gospel there! Some Scary thoughts

The boy crisis nobody talks about

Categories
Some Red Hot Gospel there!

What I call a safe place

Categories
A Victory! All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" COOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Good News for a change! Hard Nosed Folks Both Good & Bad Interesting stuff Manly Stuff One Hell of a Good Fight Some Red Hot Gospel there! Stand & Deliver

Like It or Not, Trump Is Delivering on the Second Amendment by Scott Witner

Gun owners have plenty of reasons to be skeptical of politicians who suddenly discover the Second Amendment during election season. We’ve been through this before.

Campaign promises are easy. Following through is where things tend to get complicated.

That makes the second Trump administration worth looking at as a whole rather than judging it by whichever gun story happens to be dominating the news this week. There have been missteps, unresolved issues, and a few decisions that deserve criticism. But taken together, what the administration has done on the Second Amendment since returning to office represents a substantial shift in how the federal government approaches gun rights.

And arguably the biggest change isn’t coming from the White House itself.

It’s coming from the Department of Justice.

DOJ Is Actually Litigating for the Second Amendment

For decades, gun owners became accustomed to seeing the Justice Department on the opposite side of Second Amendment cases.

That’s what makes the creation of a dedicated Second Amendment Section within DOJ’s Civil Rights Division so significant.

The section isn’t merely advisory. DOJ says its mission includes investigating alleged patterns of Second Amendment violations by law enforcement, pursuing litigation, filing statements of interest, intervening in cases, and using amicus briefs to advance a broad interpretation of the right to keep and bear arms.

The federal government isn’t simply declining to defend a particular gun-control law. In several cases, it is actively suing state and local governments over restrictions DOJ believes violate the Second Amendment.

That includes challenges involving Los Angeles County’s handling of concealed carry permits, gun permitting practices in the U.S. Virgin Islands, Washington, D.C.’s ban on commonly owned semi-automatic rifles, Denver’s so-called “assault weapons” ban, Colorado’s magazine restrictions, California’s handgun roster and GLOCK restrictions, Virginia’s recently enacted semi-automatic rifle ban, and Montgomery County, Maryland’s expansive “sensitive place” restrictions.

The Denver rifle-ban lawsuit and Colorado magazine-ban lawsuit are particularly notable because DOJ isn’t dancing around the central issue. The government is arguing that commonly owned semi-automatic rifles and standard-capacity magazines are constitutionally protected arms.

That’s the kind of position gun-rights organizations have been arguing in court for years.

It Started With Trump’s Second Amendment Executive Order

On February 7, 2025, President Trump signed an executive order titled Protecting Second Amendment Rights, directing the Attorney General to review federal regulations, guidance, policies, international agreements, and other government actions that potentially infringed on the right to keep and bear arms.

That review included Biden-era firearms regulations and enforcement policies.

What could easily have become another symbolic executive order instead produced tangible changes throughout DOJ and ATF.

Among them was the end of the Biden administration’s so-called “zero tolerance” policy toward Federal Firearms Licensees.

The Department of Veterans Affairs also stopped reporting veterans to NICS as prohibited persons solely because they required fiduciary assistance managing their benefits.

Then there was the creation of DOJ’s Second Amendment Section itself.

Those aren’t campaign promises. They’re changes in federal policy.

ATF Has Been Moving in a Very Different Direction

ATF hasn’t exactly enjoyed a warm relationship with America’s gun owners.

That makes the agency’s current regulatory direction particularly interesting.

In April, DOJ and ATF announced a package containing 34 final and proposed rulemaking actions following the administration’s review of federal firearms regulations.

Some of the proposals are fairly technical. Others could have meaningful consequences for gun owners and FFLs.

ATF has moved to clarify the definition of an “unlawful user of or addicted to” a controlled substance, revise rules governing certain non-over-the-counter firearm transactions, and reconsider other regulations affecting dealers and gun owners.

Instead of searching for increasingly creative ways to expand existing statutory language, the agency is now publicly describing its regulatory work in terms of reducing unnecessary burdens and aligning regulations with current law and court precedent.

That’s quite a change from where ATF was only a few years ago.

The National Firearms Act remains one of the more complicated pieces of the administration’s Second Amendment record.

Congress eliminated the $200 tax on suppressors and short-barreled rifles, removing one of the NFA’s most recognizable burdens. Registration, however, remained.

That created an obvious legal problem.

If the tax that historically justified the NFA’s registration scheme disappears, what exactly is the constitutional basis for continuing to require registration?

That question is now being fought in court.

The administration has also taken positions suggesting suppressors receive at least some Second Amendment protection, an important development for challenges to state laws that ban them outright.

More recently, the government’s handling of the consolidated Silencer Shop v. ATF and Jensen v. ATF litigation has raised even bigger questions about whether DOJ intends to continue defending portions of the NFA registration regime.

TTAG covered the latest development when DOJ allowed the stay to expire, putting Silencer Shop’s NFA injunction into effect.

As of August 2026, that story is still developing.

What happens next could be one of the most consequential Second Amendment developments of Trump’s second term.

The Government Is Showing Up in Other Gun Cases, Too

DOJ’s direct lawsuits aren’t the entire story.

The federal government has also increasingly appeared as an amicus in major Second Amendment litigation.

That includes challenges involving so-called “assault weapon” and magazine bans, ammunition background checks, handgun rosters, and restrictions on where lawful gun owners may carry firearms.

The administration filed briefs in Wolford v. Lopez, for example, challenging Hawaii’s restrictions on carrying firearms on private property open to the public.

It has also participated in litigation involving California’s ammunition background-check system and Massachusetts’ handgun roster.

That matters because the Solicitor General and Justice Department carry institutional weight that another amicus brief from a gun-rights organization simply doesn’t.

It also creates something that has historically been missing from Second Amendment litigation: an executive branch willing to tell courts that state and local governments have gone too far.

There Are Still Reasons to Be Critical

None of this means gun owners should stop paying attention.

The administration’s record isn’t spotless.

DOJ has continued defending some federal gun laws, including portions of the NFA and the Gun-Free School Zones Act. Some of that is expected; the Justice Department ordinarily defends federal statutes. But gun owners aren’t obligated to pretend those positions suddenly become good policy because they’re being defended by a Republican administration.

There have also been questionable litigation decisions.

The government’s position on the scope of relief available to members of organizations involved in Second Amendment lawsuits created legitimate concerns about associational standing.

DOJ’s handling of Benson was another unforced error, with U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro’s office urging the D.C. Court of Appeals to rehear a favorable Second Amendment decision en banc.

Then there are the pardons that haven’t happened.

Gun-rights advocates have repeatedly raised the cases of individuals such as Patrick Adamiak and Matthew Hoover. Trump has demonstrated no reluctance to use his pardon and commutation authority elsewhere, making the lack of action in some firearms cases increasingly difficult for supporters to ignore.

There have also been comments from Trump and administration officials following high-profile shootings that haven’t exactly inspired confidence among gun owners.

Look at the Whole Scorecard

The mistake is judging the administration’s Second Amendment record based on one lawsuit, one comment, one ATF rule, or one disappointing decision.

Look at the entire scorecard.

The administration ordered a government-wide review of federal firearms policy. DOJ created a section of its Civil Rights Division specifically dedicated to enforcing the Second Amendment. The Justice Department is suing governments over rifle bans, magazine restrictions, handgun rosters, carry permit practices, and sensitive-place laws. The federal government is filing briefs supporting gun-rights challenges nationwide. ATF has reversed enforcement policies and begun unwinding or reconsidering regulations. Congress eliminated the NFA tax on suppressors and SBRs.

There are still significant fights ahead, particularly over the remaining NFA registration requirements and the administration’s willingness to challenge other federal gun laws.

There are also legitimate criticisms that shouldn’t be dismissed simply because the overall trajectory is favorable.

Gun owners have spent decades fighting against the institutional power of the federal government. For perhaps the first time in the modern Second Amendment era, at least part of that institutional machinery is being pointed in the opposite direction.

Categories
Soldiering Some Red Hot Gospel there! The Green Machine

Army General Says Enlisted Leaders More Important Than Officers

Categories
Some Red Hot Gospel there! Well I thought it was funny!

He has risen! (“Hey can we get our money back from the Funeral House?”)

But for me I will hear this. “Hey does anybody out there have a mallet and a wooden stake, that we can borrow for a few minutes !?!”  Grumpy

Categories
Some Red Hot Gospel there!

Yep

Categories
Some Red Hot Gospel there!

I really do believe that I was born about 40 years too late!