It’s tough to watch a good company inexplicably damage their brand. Until very recently, Troy Industries had an excellent reputation in the shooting sports community as a manufacturer of quality accessories for the M4/M16/AR-15 family of firearms. Unfortunately, the company’s bungled handling of two employee issues in recent weeks has damaged the company’s brand among a shooting public with long memories and little sympathy for those who abuse their trust. Troy Asymmetric, a training division of Troy Industries, first came under fire for hiring an anti-gun police chief. The company was then apparently less than honest about the terms of his departure, in what appeared to be an attempt to insulate Troy Industries from the hiring decisions at Troy Asymmetric. That breach of trust by caused some to look deeper into the instructor roster at Troy Asymmetric, where they discovered Dale Monroe. Monroe was a former FBI HRT sniper that played a small role in the debacle at Ruby Ridge as a spotter for infamous sniper Lon Horiuchi. The incident remains a sore spot for many who think Horiuchi got away with murder when he shot and killed Vicki Weaver while she was holding a baby in her arms. Instead of cutting their losses a second time and firing Monroe as well, company founder Steve Troy dug in and supported his employee. While it can be argued that Mr. Troy make a principled stand in support of Monroe, the customer base has not been sympathetic. A backlash against Troy seems to have started, though how widespread of a backlash there may be far from certain. Hammerhead Armament announced on its blog that they are now boycotting Troy’s products. Frankly, Troy isn’t going to notice when smaller retailers like Hammerhead Armament takes such a stand, not in terms of sales. Where they are going to notice the damage to their brand is if other retailers and some distributors begin joining the boycott along with customers already going out on some Internet shooting forums, and a small movement becomes an industry-wide shunning.
Categories
I thought Covid killed everyone
FBI Reports Most Murders in Decades, Police Point to George Floyd Fallout
by Casey Harper
The Federal Bureau of Investigation released crime data Monday showing a sharp spike in homicides in 2020.
While some crimes diminished in the unusual, COVID-shutdown year, homicides rose nearly 30% and aggravated assaults rose more than 12% in one year, the first time in four years that violent crime increased from the previous year.
There were about 21,500 murders reported in 2020, the highest figure in decades.
“In 2020, there were an estimated 1,277,696 violent crimes,” the FBI said. “When compared with the estimates from 2019, the estimated number of robbery offenses fell 9.3 percent and the estimated volume of rape (revised definition) offenses decreased 12.0 percent. The estimated number of aggravated assault offenses rose 12.1 percent, and the volume of murder and nonnegligent manslaughter offenses increased 29.4 percent.”
Violent crime rose more than 5% in 2020 while property crimes dropped nearly 8%, continuing an 18-year downward trend of property crimes.
“The 2020 statistics show the estimated rate of violent crime was 387.8 offenses per 100,000 inhabitants, and the estimated rate of property crime was 1,958.2 offenses per 100,000 inhabitants,” the FBI said. “Nationwide, there were an estimated 6,452,038 property crimes. The estimated numbers for two of the three property crimes showed declines when compared with the previous year’s estimates. Burglaries dropped 7.4 percent, larceny-thefts decreased 10.6 percent, while motor vehicle thefts rose 11.8 percent.”
U.S. residents lost an estimated $17.5 billion to property crimes last year, not including arson damage.
Police experts have tied the increase in violent crime to the reduction in police forces and rioting in the aftermath of the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis while in police custody.
“The sharp increase in murder that began with the riots and lawlessness of last summer come as no surprise,” said Jason Johnson, president of the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund. “Seeing this troubling number now officially recorded for history gives us a fresh opportunity to examine the root political and cultural causes for this historic rise in unnecessary loss of life. We can begin by acknowledging the fact that police and enforcement of the rule of law, with accountability for lawbreakers, are essential to protect our most vulnerable communities.”
“Black and Brown communities are the real victims of these policies. Their lives are being lost and continue to be put in jeopardy,” he added.
– – –
Casey Harper is a contributor to The Center Square and a Senior Reporter for the Washington, D.C. Bureau. He previously worked for The Daily Caller, The Hill, and Sinclair Broadcast Group. A graduate of Hillsdale College, Casey’s work has also appeared in Fox News, Fox Business, and USA Today.
Photo “George Floyd Riots” by Chad Davis. CC BY-SA 2.0.
———————————————————————————- Gee lets me see now. You stick folks into their homes for good knows how long. Maybe take away their jobs and business with no end in sight. Throw in some Family feuds, drugs or lack of and some booze. Plus have the Media keep pounding away with the same old song. We are all gonna die unless what ever happens. Throw in some Clowns in Power who can’t seem to get their shit together. So I don’t know but it seems a perfect storm to me for some violence. Grumpy
Georg Luger was an interesting man. Born into a rather privileged family on March 6, 1849, his father was a renowned surgeon, so Georg was schooled in Italy. He later studied business at studied at the Wiener Handelsakademie (Vienna Commercial Academy). In 1867 he enlisted into the Austria-Hungary 78th Infantry Regiment as a reserve officer cadet. It was here that he showed his superior marksmanship skills which garnered him an assignment to Austro-Hungarian Military Firearms School at Camp Bruckneudorf.
Soon he became an instructor there. Automatic firearms were in its infancy, but the idea fascinated Luger, and he took an active role in developing automatic loading firearms. After his military stint Luger floated around a bit surviving on jobs like an accountant at a jockey club. He met Austrian firearms engineer Ferdinand von Mannlicher during this time, and the two worked together on developing rifle magazines.
By 1891 Luger had found employment with Ludwig Loewe & Company, Berlin, Germany, eventually working his way into a design consultant. After Ludwig Loewe’s death, the company became Deutsche Waffen und Munitions Fabriken (DWM), and was the manufacturer of the Hugo Borchardt-designed C-93 pistol. Luger was tagged with demonstrating it to the U.S. Army.
Though rejected, Luger carefully recorded the criticisms the army had with the pistol and returned to DWM. Borchardt disallowed the criticisms, which included unwieldly overall handling because of its weight and nearly vertical grip, excessive recoil from the 7.65×25 mm Borchardt cartridge, as well as being too expensive to mass produce, and refused to make any design changes. The job was then given to Luger to integrate the improvements.
Luger shortened the cartridge to 21 mm, calling it the 7.65×21mm Parabellum—Parabellum meaning “prepare for war.” This allowed him to lighten and shrink the size of the toggle-link system of the C-93, shorten the stroke of the toggle, design a narrower angular grip that helped balance the pistol better in the hand and offer a more natural pointing of it. The result was the Luger Parabellum pistol of 1898.
A Model 1900 Parabellum pistol. These Swiss military service pistols were introduced in 1900 and chambered in 7.65×21mm Parabellum. The engraving of the Swiss cross “in splendor” (rather than as a coat of arms) indicates that this pistol was built before 1909. Photo from Hmaag.
Production began in 1900, and Switzerland immediately adopted the Pistole Parabellum in 7.65×21mm, a.k.a. 7.65 Parabellum and .30 Luger. The cartridge has been popular in Europe and the U.S., as well as Brazil. European police agencies used this cartridge well into the 1960s, however Germany led the move to upsize the power by increasing the bullet diameter to 9 mm, the weight of the standard bullet from 93 to 116 grains while retaining a nominal muzzle velocity of 1,200 fps from a 4.25″ barrel.
The case was shortened from a net 21.59mm to a net of 19.15mm by removing the bottleneck while retaining the taper of the parent case. The result was the 9x19mm Parabellum or 9mm Luger, developed in 1901. To say that the 9mm Luger has been a success would be a severe understatement. The cartridge is, without a doubt, the most popular pistol and submachine gun cartridge in the world since the end of World War I. It has a lot going for it. First, it is effective, especially in its military role.
Newer developments in propellant and bullet design have increased its effectiveness, greatly providing even more incentive to those needing a firearm for personal defense. Pistols made for the cartridge have not been overly burdensome, and more recent developments in sub-compact handgun design allow the full-size service pistol cartridge to be crammed into astonishingly micro-weight pistols that are easy to carry. The 9mm Luger is accurate enough for the target range and the roil is light enough to be controlled by most. The array of different firearms produced in this chambering is almost incomprehensible.
Not only has it been chambered into the beautifully engineered and produced Luger P-08 and Browning Hi-Power P35 pistols, it has been at the forefront of handgun design for more than a century. The first successful double-action, locked-breech, semi-automatic pistol, the Walther P-38, is chambered in 9mm Luger. Even revolvers, both double- and single-action, have been chambered or co-chambered in 9mm. In short, any gun enthusiast worth his or her salt that wants to shoot something prevalent and inexpensive should have something chambered in 9mm.
One of the many more recent sub-compact handguns to hit the market chambered for 9 mm, the SIG Sauer P365.
In the early days of World War II, Commonwealth countries developed and adopted a higher-pressure loading of the 9x19mm cartridge. Designated the 9 m/m ball MK 1z (Commonwealth nomenclature), it soon became the standard loading for modern firearms like the Browning Hi-Power and Sterling submachine guns. This load featured a 116-gr. bullet at a claimed 1,300 f.p.s. Canada put together a similar, but slightly softer load clocking in the mid-1,200s in 1955. It was adopted as the standard NATO load in 1962.
After the 1986 FBI Miami shootout between eight FBI agents and two murderous bank robbers, it was found that despite a 4-to-1 one advantage, the FBI lost two agents due in large part to the superior firepower of the criminals’ rifles versus the FBI’s .357 Mag. revolvers. A search began to find a better cartridge for revolvers as personal-defense weapons for agents and other law enforcement professionals.
Eleven years later, across the nation in North Hollywood, another pair of bank robbers stood off dozens of Los Angeles Police Department officers armed with 9mm pistols and .38 Spl. revolvers with a pair of Kalashnikovs. A dozen officers and members of the public were wounded during that 44-minute exchange. Along with other shootings, the incentive to build a firearm with a large magazine capacity and better stopping power led to the development of the so-called “Wonder-Nines.”
“Wonder Nine” is a term coined by writer Robert Shimek during this period. It referred to the “wonder” pistols of the day, chambered in 9mm Luger with double-column magazines holding at least 15 rounds. As much as anything, the popularity of the 9mm as a law-enforcement and personal-defense round in America is due to this evolution in firearms and cartridge design.
More recent bullet developments, along with some propellant improvements, have moved the 9mm ahead of such American stalwarts as the .45 ACP and .357 Mag. Mind you, the American cartridges are by no means obsolete, nor are they any less effective. In fact, some of these advances in bullet and propellant technology have rubbed off on those other cartridges. Regardless, the 102-year-old 9mm Luger is still on the throne as king of the pistol cartridges. I don’t see that changing in the near future.
Categories
Glock 18 Woods Walk
Why U.S. Gunmakers Could Soon Face New Competition
Samuel Colt’s venerable company is getting a new lease on life under European ownership.
Key Points
- Firearms demand is coming down from record levels but still experiencing significant growth.
- Czech gunmaker CZG’s acquisition of Colt gives it a major foothold in the U.S. firearms industry.
- CZG’s ownership of Colt and production of firearms at Colt factories will allow it to compete for U.S. military contracts under the Buy American Act.
Major names in the U.S. firearms industry, including Smith & Wesson Brands (NASDAQ:SWBI) and Sturm, Ruger & Company (NYSE:RGR) could soon have significant new competition. Czech gun manufacturer Česká zbrojovka Group (OTC:CZGZ.F), or CZG, is gearing up for a strong push into the U.S. after acquiring Colt.
CZG is now much better positioned to compete for law enforcement and military firearms contracts in the U.S., along with expanded civilian firearm sales. Aiming to double its revenue to $1 billion or more, it looks like competition will be ramping up for this industry.
IMAGE SOURCE: GETTY IMAGES.
The current firearms market
Firearms purchases seem to be slowing after 2020’s frenzy with sales growth for Smith & Wesson dipping to low double-digits in the fiscal 2022 first quarter after several periods of triple-digit growth. Earlier this month, firearms companies saw their stock prices rise after the Biden administration’s pick for ATF chief, David Chipman, failed to secure the support needed to cement his nomination. However, those small gains weren’t nearly enough to offset the steady decline shares have seen since June as investors respond to the news of an industry slowdown.
But sales are still growing despite the slowdown. Ammunition manufacturer Ammo reported solid second-quarter results in late August too. Both firearm and ammunition prices remain somewhat elevated due to continued strong demand intersecting with supply bottlenecks, though the price inflation has eased since 2020 and even early 2021.
CZG and Colt
While it has sold Czech-made firearms in the U.S. for years, including hunting rifles, semi-automatic pistols, and sporting rifles such as its civilian semi-auto version of the CZ Bren 2, CZG bought out Colt’s Manufacturing Company in early 2021. Colt, founded in the mid-19th century by the famous Samuel Colt, has had a long, checkered history, including many changes of ownership and multiple bankruptcies. It does, however, make several iconic firearms and has supplied the U.S. Army with multiple generations of the M-16 select-fire rifle platform, including the current M4 carbine. CZG launched its IPO last October, using the proceeds to buy out Colt in a deal that totaled $220 million in cash, plus approximately one million shares of CZG stock.
In an interview with firearms website TFB (TheFirearmsBlog), CZG’s president Lubomír Kovařík noted how the Colt acquisition provides a major expansion to the Czech company’s factory capacity. “CZG will gain an additional production capacity and expand its customer network in North America and other countries,” he said. He also pointed out how “[t]hrough Colt, CZG will become a supplier to Mil/LE customers and armed forces in the United States, including [the] U.S. Army.” He views the companies as synergistic with Colt having superior manufacturing and supply chain assets, while CZG brings top-notch research and development to the combined business.
Under U.S. law, only companies manufacturing guns in the U.S. can compete for American military contracts. Owning Colt will allow CZG to enter its firearms in the U.S. military procurement competitions. Colt lost a major contract with the American military in 2015, but half of its 2020 revenue still came from military and law enforcement sales, according to Reuters.
Czech analysts at Fio Banka predict CZG’s police and military sales in the U.S. will jump from 10% of U.S. sales to 50% thanks to the possibility of Colt contracts with the U.S. Army and other branches of the armed forces. CZG says the combined annual revenue of CZG and Colt total about $570 million, but it aims to expand this figure to more than $1 billion by 2025.
And the company is generating strong growth. Fiscal 2021 first-quarter revenue jumped 64% year over year, while EBITDA increased 117%. Net profits for the quarter beat analysts’ predictions by about 12% as well. To top it all off, CZG pays an annual dividend yielding about 1.6%, while its payout ratio sits at a very manageable 26%.
CZG’s plans to reach more than $1 billion in sales in just four years will still be a challenge for the company. Czech analyst Pavel Ryska from J&T Banka told Reuters he believes the target could be achieved if “the U.S. civilian demand remains robust and keeps rising, and second, CZG adds further production capacity either through its own [capital expenditures] or through additional acquisitions that are well executed.”
What this all means for American gumakers’ stocks
Neither Smith & Wesson nor Ruger have large-scale contracts with the U.S. Army or any other service branch. CZG’s takeover of Colt’s military supply role won’t affect either company’s business in this regard. Increased manufacturing capacity, however, plus the easier potential introduction of new CZG firearms made in the U.S. could win it additional law enforcement and civilian sales.
While CZG’s growth projections are dramatic, police and civilian sales are unlikely to significantly move the needle in opposition to Smith & Wesson or Ruger’s success, either. CZG is already competing with the two companies in these markets, meaning its effect on the competitive landscape is already priced in. Even with Colt’s catalog added to its own, nothing in CZG’s lineup is likely to revolutionize its civilian or police sales position.
Thus, the impact of CZG’s expansion on American firearms companies should be minimal. However, for those investing in the firearms sector of consumer durables stocks, CZG itself might be worth watching as a bullish choice if it ever applies for and attains listing on the NYSE or Nasdaq.
10 stocks we like better than Sturm, Ruger & Company, Inc.
When our award-winning analyst team has a stock tip, it can pay to listen. After all, the newsletter they have run for over a decade, Motley Fool Stock Advisor, has tripled the market.*
They just revealed what they believe are the ten best stocks for investors to buy right now… and Sturm, Ruger & Company, Inc. wasn’t one of them! That’s right — they think these 10 stocks are even better buys.
The only gripe that I have about CZ pistols. Is that compared to Sig’s, is that they are a pain in the ass to break down to clean after shooting. Other than that they are some great shooting irons!
In December of 2017, I had the pleasure of going through Matt Graham’s “Killhouse” course in Virginia. I was joined by two friends (Clark S. and Cy N.) that have done extensive training with me, and we had high expectations for this course for the months leading up to it. We arrived on a Thursday in preparation for the three day course that would run from Friday through Sunday.
Per the Graham Combat website, the course description is as follows:
The Graham Combat Killhouse is a comprehensive 3-day class designed to give you the fundamentals of defensive shooting, movement, and tactics within a structure.
We spend the bulk of our lives in and around buildings – rooms, hallways, stairs, interior spaces and exterior spaces – and we need to be able to defend ourselves effectively, regardless of the environment.
This 30 hour course combines flat-range firearms fundamentals, live-fire engagements, and force-on-force validation. You will spend Day One refining your combat shooting skills through intensive and focused instruction. Days Two and Three take place in the Killhouse, learning the fundamentals of engagements within spaces.
Additional time will be spent introducing, practicing, and then refining low-light and no-light principles within the same space. This course culminates with multiple force-on-force validations within the Killhouse – bring what you think you believe and put it to work.
Day 1: Weapon Manipulation
We met at the prescribed location a few minutes early and got checked in. We spent a few minutes meeting/greeting other participants who had come from all over the United States. There were representatives from Georgia, Massachusetts, Maryland, California, and several other locations present- and we enjoyed hearing about everyone’s journey into town.
We were joined by Matt, and he began with a safety and medical briefing and an outline of the of the course contents. He also went through an explanation of the locations and facilities that we would use for the different portions of the course, and then rolled right into the course content.
The first part of the course instruction began with Matt asking the rhetorical question of “Why are you here?” This wasn’t necessarily just for our attendance in the course, but “Why are you in whatever situation you find yourself in?” Said differently: “What is your objective for this current situation?” If I am with my family and bad things start to happen- my primary (and only) objective is to deliver my loved ones to safety. I am not there to stop an active shooter. I am not there to put out a hotel fire. I am there to protect my family by helping them escape the danger area. “WHY ARE YOU THERE” would set the tone of the course for every training scenario that we would face.
Transitioning from this key point, Matt would constantly reiterate to us that this course is NOT a course on “building clearing.” “You are NOT clearing anything,” he would remind repeatedly. This course is about YOU actively moving through a structure to perform a task or series of tasks. Some of those tasks include fighting, some include navigating with a person that you are protecting, etc. We are not clearing anything. It goes back to “Why Are You Here?”
Next Matt would segway into the topic of being able to find the danger at hand… If “it” isn’t in front of you (where you are looking), then it is somewhere else. Find it. Seek it out, as it is likely actively seeking you out. Matt emphasized checking behind you more than any instructor that I previously trained with. “Where are your vulnerabilities?” They are everywhere. If they aren’t in front of you, then they’re behind you. Identify them as soon as possible and begin to work through the problems: big to small, near to far.
During this classroom style discussion, Matt would emphasize the importance of making mistakes during training. He drove home the idea that everyone is going to make mistakes, but that victory favors the person making the fewest mistakes. Training allows us the opportunity to make (and eliminate) mistakes without paying the ultimate price. He urged us to not put any negative connotation on failure during training. Matt has a brutally direct sense of humor, which allows him to identify your mistakes and help you laugh through them while learning simultaneously. He constantly cracks jokes about himself and everyone else involved which keeps the mood light and everyone laughing. Honestly, if this whole “gun life” thing doesn’t work out for him, Matt could pursue a career in stand-up comedy. His stories and jokes are worth the price of admission.
After the classroom discussion was complete, we broke to get our gear together and hit the range. We started with handgun work. Specifically, Matt identified the grip as the most important fundamental of shooting a handgun. (This was refreshing to hear as I constantly stress the importance of gripping the firearm effectively to allow you to shoot accurately with any notable speed.) The first piece of instruction was to grip the handgun the way he wants us to. Luckily, his method was 99% identical to the way that I am used to gripping a handgun, with a minor alteration of the placement of my thumb on my shooting hand. From the grip, we moved into stance/posture and the presentation of the firearm. Matt believes in a “head up, gun up, roll out” method of presentation, and breaks down the process simply with various explanations and demonstrations. We worked on this dry for a few repetitions and then got into the live fire portions of the exercise. We began with what Matt calls “ladder drills” where we would present the firearm and fire one round. The next rep would produce two rounds. Then three… Then start over at one. Rinse and repeat as needed. We worked this drill with reloads as Matt would walk the line and make corrections where needed.
Matt then added in the importance of a safety scan. This process has multiple names to it: after action assessment, safety scan, threat assessment, scan and assess, etc. It’s all trying to accomplish the same goal but with some different ways of teaching it. Matt’s largest change to my current process was to reinforce the concept of not putting my eyes anywhere without my muzzle. “What good is it to see the threat if you can’t engage it?” Matt has an incredible ability to be able to lead you to the correct answers with a simple question… Sometimes that “leading” is humorous and allows you to laugh at yourself at the same time. We worked these drills repeatedly until it was time to break for lunch.
After lunch we returned and began working through a similar process with the carbines. He discussed the similarities between the carbine and the handgun- identifying crossover techniques between the two weapons. We zeroed our rifles and then got to work. After working through similar ladder drills as the handgun, we integrated in the utilization of cover into our manipulations. Matt talked about how to properly work around the cover. This was one of several “nuggets” that I took away from this class… I have a habit of “short stocking” the rifle in order to manipulate it around cover. This is a method of slightly dipping the muzzle and bringing the stock over your shoulder in order to draw it in close to your body so that you can maneuver around cover, obstructions, or within confined spaces. Matt would modify this into “retracting” the firearm instead of short-stocking it, which is a method where you bring the stock under the armpit and the muzzle is slightly elevated. This leaves the muzzle almost perfectly inline with your eyes and the potential threat areas. It offers increased abilities to strike with the muzzle of the firearm, fire from retention, etc. It’s something that I will continue to work on and make it my primary method of moving in confined spaces with a carbine.
The next “nugget” that I took away from this section was shooting at the target from cover. As many times as I’ve heard (and even taught) the phrase “shoot the target center mass as presented” Matt made the idea more applicable for me. In my mind, I’ve generally applied this phrase to shooting at a target where the target was behind cover. I would engage the center of whatever area was exposed. Working it from the other side of the equation, with ME behind cover, is the exact same process but a slightly different mindset. For instance, when shooting from behind cover at an exposed target, I generally would work to find the most appropriate area of the target to neutralize the threat (chest, head, etc.). That’s all well and good, until the target is shooting back at you. As I would work around my cover finding the chest or head, I would be forced to expose more of my body before I engaged. When there is incoming fire, this is obviously bad. Better to start shooting at the elbow and work your way up the arm and into the chest, allowing you to hide behind a wall of bullets as you work your way toward the center of the threat. This was a big “light bulb” for me during this training, and another valuable piece I will be working on continuously.
We then worked into shooting on the move, a technique which Matt simplifies for everyone. We would do “racetrack” drills which was similar to a “musical chairs” exercise where when there was a threat indicated, the appropriate parties would engage the threats in front of them while moving toward cover. It was a great way to combine the skill sets that we had worked up to this point.
As the sun went down, we began working on our low-light techniques with both handguns and rifles, both with weapon mounted lights and freehand techniques. There was an underlying assumption that each participant had previously worked in low-light environments, and everyone seemed to be comfortable and equipped to run their firearms in the dark. Working through this series of exercises would lead us to the end of Day 1.
Day 2: Introduction to CQB
Day 2 began at another location which was basically an apartment complex that was no longer in use. Matt secured this as a fantastic spot for us to work a multitude of different angles, problems, and environments. It worked out great as it provided large, open hallways with a multitude of doors (as would be found in a commercial dwelling) as well as bedrooms, residential hallways, kitchens, etc. (as would be found in residential dwellings). It was a perfect plethora of problems…
As should be obvious, navigating a structure while alone is very different than when you have a partner (or multiple partners) to help you. The most prevalent problem is that of “T” intersections which present themselves in intersecting hallways, opposing doors, or center-fed rooms. While partners can simultaneously dig the deep corners opposite of each other, an individual is forced to choose one direction or the other. The inherent problem is that you temporarily expose your back to one of the corners which you can’t see after immediately crossing the threshold- which is disheartening, to say the least.
Unlike many other courses that I’ve taken, Matt spent virtually no time talking about the common intersections (“T, L, or 4 way”) or much time about doors. Matt takes a very simple approach to this… “You’ve been opening doors for your entire life, let’s not make this more than it is.” Instead he talks about angles… He talks about the danger associated with lingering whether in rooms or connected places and then the need to properly identify your “room” which consists of EVERYTHING you can see or that can see you. He talks about constantly “checking your six” and seeking out threats. If it’s actively searching for you, then it’s important to find it as soon as you possibly can.
Through demonstrations, explanations, question/answers, and dozens of hilarious stories- Matt would address problems that each participant had. Day 2 was all dry fire, but a day where a great deal of the learning process occurred. I can run a gun accurately and efficiently. However, Matt’s method of dealing with problems which arise inside of buildings was slightly different than anything else that I’ve previously encountered. It was very similar to the methods taught by other instructors, but slightly quicker and with fewer interruptions in movement. It offered what I consider to be a happy medium between “limited penetration” and “dynamic entry” methodologies.
During the classroom discussion portions of Day 2, Matt would reiterate that EVERYTHING is our responsibility. Since we don’t have a team, we are responsible for being the breacher, assaulter, medic, and literally everything else. If there are 50 problems that arise, we are responsible for all 50 of them. Work through them: big to small, near to far… Matt would continuously remind us to not outrun our headlights and to avoid becoming our own worst problem. He quoted Sun Tzu in this endeavor as he stated “When your enemy is making mistakes, don’t interrupt him.”
Day 2 was a wealth of knowledge without a single round fired. It was entertaining, enlightening, and produced both answers to questions as well as new questions to accompany the new techniques. Day 3 would be when we put them all to the test…
Day 3: “This isn’t realistic. This is real. You’re standing in it.”
Day 3 began inside the shoothouse. The facility is amazing and offers multiple examples of problems in every form that you would encounter in a home or urban environment. To start off the day, Matt encouraged us to walk around for about 20 minutes and explore the compound. The beauty of the shoothouse is that there are really few ways to “game it” because the opposing forces are also living, thinking people. They are moving, adapting, and changing their methods just as you are. Therefore, Matt ominously told us that we could walk around, ask questions, or whatever we wanted to do.
Matt called us together and we went into one centralized area of the shoothouse for dry runs. From above us on the catwalk, he would observe, instruct, and correct us on our movements and techniques. He demonstrated the process of finding and guiding a loved one that we were separated from, and the most efficient ways of leading them to safety while minimizing the amount of restraint that they placed on our movements. We would partner up and practice dry run after dry run of any number of scenarios and problems as we navigated the house under the watchful eye of Matt. As we would each require correction, Matt would crack a joke and then ask us questions about our decisions until we arrived at the correct conclusion. It was a great way to offer up recommendations and instruction while keeping it light-hearted and fun. This series of instruction would consume the first half of Day 3.
After returning from lunch, the second half of the day would all be with simunitions. The first several runs were with a handgun, and the scenarios would include leading an unarmed partner to safety while engaging (or avoiding) any threats within the house. All of the manipulations from Day 1 would come into direct alignment with the techniques learned on Day 2 while under the stress of return fire. Through a multitude of laughs, bruises, and sweat- mistakes were made, lessons were learned, and negative stimulus was applied.
One of our next runs would include a carbine and would be in more of an open-air, longer range environment. We would have to escort a partner to safety while being engaged by multiple threats. Some of the threats were from elevated positions and virtually all were from longer ranges. This reinforced the need for us to not fall into “tunnel vision” as we worked through our problems. It was a difficult run, to say the least.
Next we would move back into the smaller structure (more “residential” in nature) and would work some more runs with our handguns. However, contrary to the previous runs, these would be done in the dark. The facility allows for low-light environments to be worked through while in the middle of the day. With it completely dark inside the shoothouse, each participant would go and work through our scenario to achieve whatever stated objective was provided. It was a great way to finish the work.
As an added bonus, myself and the two friends who traveled with me were asked to play the opposing force roles for the gentlemen who had been playing the opposing forces all day. We ran them through several low-light runs as they worked through the house, just as we had. It gave them the opportunity to shoot up the same guys that had been hitting them throughout the day. They were great sports about it, and their efforts were an invaluable contribution to each participant’s experience throughout the live-fire portion of the course.
THE GOOD, THE BAD, THE UGLY
Per my usual format, I will end this AAR with my take-aways from the course. I include a section of things that I took away as positives (The Good), things I would prefer to have been done differently (The Bad), and things that are important to consider when planning to attend this course (The Ugly). Note that these are always my interpretations of my experiences from the course, and are mainly here for the consideration of future students who are contemplating this course and for feedback for the instructors from the perspective of a student.
THE GOOD:
I originally scheduled this course more than a year ago. I was registered to take this course in March of 2017, but due to a family emergency I had to reschedule for Decemeber. I waited for more than a year to take this class, and it was one for which I had high expectations. Arguably unreasonably high expectations… I’ve watched Matt’s videos online and always admired his logical approach to problem solving and the demeanor with which he seems to teach. Add in the fact that two close friends and I have talked about this course for months on end, and you can begin to understand the level of excitement that we had going into this course. It delivered in every way. Matt truly hit a homerun with this one.
Facilities:
The facilities that Matt has arranged for this training are perfect. They are laid out in such a way that Matt can maximize the amount of time instructing and learning and minimize the down time. The shoothouse allows for low-light runs to happen during mid-day, and the house is inside so weather is not a factor. The live-fire happens in a very large action bay with plenty of room for shots out to 50 yards. There is a covered area for gear and equipment that also has lighting under it. All in all- this course is run out of fantastic facilities that strongly contribute in countless positive ways.
Instruction:
Matt Graham is not your average instructor. He’s in a league where few people ever get to play and his real-world experiences and years as an instructor both readily shine through. He has five simple rules for CQB:
- Nobody is coming to save you.
- Everything is your responsibility.
- Save who needs to be saved.
- Kill who needs to be killed.
- Always be working.
The largest “take-away nuggets” that I had from this course are as follows:
- Retracting the carbine when moving in confined spaces as opposed to short-stocking it
- Shooting your target as it is presented to you and working your way in to its center mass
- Avoiding “the flinch” when encountering a threat
To sum up this section, I will be registering for this course again in either March or October of 2018. I feel as though I could take this course a dozen times and learn something new each time. I’ll test this theory given enough time and money.
THE BAD:
The only way that I think this course could be improved for me would be with more runs in the house. I think there are a few ways to accomplish this… First, I completely understand the necessity of Day 1 for this course. Matt was making sure that we were all on the same page and that everyone was working from a minimum skill set for both manipulations and safety. I also understand that simunition rounds are pretty expensive, so the cost of the course is going to increase if the number of sim-rounds increases. With this course already being pretty expensive, it would likely be cost-prohibitive to increase the number of runs (and therefore number of required sim-rounds). However, if there was any way to do so, I think I would personally benefit from more runs in the house. Instead of having a half-day of runs, I’d like to see a full day- even if that meant the cost of the course went up by another $150. This could be done by either extending this course into a fourth day, or decreasing the first day of manipulations into a half day. This would also alleviate the cost of ammunition to the student so it might not be “more expensive” given the total costs associated with the training.
Understand that again- this is just my perspective. I performed at my best during manipulations and live fire- but I don’t travel to instructors of Matt’s caliber to practice what I’m good at. Instead, I’m seeking out instruction in what I’m not as strong at… I feel like the majority of the lessons that I was learning were from inside the house during the force-on-force, and therefore I would like to spend as much time there as possible.
As a disclaimer- other individuals in the class might have a completely different perspective. Some of the participants might have preferred to do the complete opposite of what I’m mentioning. This section of the AAR is designed to allow the instructor to get constructive criticism from a student’s perspective, and this is just my individual perspective. In order for me to achieve more runs in the house, I plan on taking this course again!
THE UGLY:
This section contains the aspects of the course that aren’t necessarily “bad things” but are rather just things to consider for students who are contemplating taking this course in the future. First and foremost- this is not a beginner’s class. It would be my personal advice that anyone who is contemplating this course to already be able to run their gun at a mostly sub-consious level. For me, courses of this caliber are more about problem-solving and thinking than they are about running the gun. You should already have very competent and safe gun handling skills and manipulations prior to arrival at this course. That will allow you to make the most of your time by consciously focusing on the problem-solving piece, and not worrying about how to clear a double-feed. If you’ve ever worked with simunitions before, you know that the guns run very dirty. You’re going to do malfunction correction. You’re going to do reloads under stress. If you’re having to mentally walk yourself through those tasks, then you might want to shore that up prior to enrolling in this course.
The next consideration for this section is the price. The tuition of this course is expensive (albeit completely worth it). If you’re not in the immediate area, then you will also have travel and lodging expenses in addition to the tuition and ammunition. The breakdown for my personal costs (not including food/drinks) were as follows:
- Tuition = $850
- Range Fee = $100
- Ammunition = $350
- Hotel (4 nights) = $450
- Flight / Gas = $250
- TOTAL: $2,000
The location for 2 of the 3 days is fairly remote and in a small town in Virginia. There weren’t any hotels there, so I would recommend that future participants consider AirBNB to find a local place to stay. It’s worth noting that this would also cut down on commute time (about 45 minutes each way) for 2 of the 3 days. Some of the participants in the course did this and I believe they actually came out about the same as our hotel costs- but with the additional convenience of having an entire house plus decreased commute times.
In short- buy once, cry once. This class is worth three other classes. Skip some others and save your money for this class. You won’t regret it.
CONCLUSION:
To finish out this AAR, I want to reiterate that the intentions of my reports are to share what we did and why we did it but to purposely omit how we did it. The tactics, techniques, and procedures associated with the new skill sets are not mine to give out. In conclusion- I highly recommend that anyone of the requisite skill level who is able to take this course to strongly consider it. If you don’t feel comfortable jumping into a force-on-force class, then I’m sure Matt’s other courses are just as good as this one.
We are going to try to schedule Matt at our facilities in 2018 which will hopefully allow for people in the southeast to train with him more conveniently/affordably. His instruction is among the highest in the industry and people serious about defending themselves or others with a firearm should jump at the opportunity to train with him. He’s truly a master of his craft.
Categories
Martini-Henry Rifle
