Don’t Adopt a Defense Technique Just Because it Worked for Someone Else

There’s a common misconception in the firearms community that if a whole bunch of shooters or impressive instructors do things a particular way, it must be the most effective solution for everyone – including citizen defenders carrying firearms for protection.

There are lots of examples, from tactics applied by SWAT or special forces that are taught to citizens; grips and draw strokes that are utilized by competitive shooters, then transposed to special forces or law enforcement; movement and stances that work effectively in a competition or on an open battlefield, but that are meaningless for the defender guarding his home in an invasion.

This whole idea of doing something simply because it worked for someone else is called institutional inertia. Here’s a story to help illustrate what’s actually going on. 

A young married woman decides to cook a roast, and as she’s about to put it in the pot to braise it, she cuts the roast in half. When her husband asks why she cut the roast, the wife replies: “My mother always cooked it that way.” The husband continues: “Why did she do that?” and the wife, realizing she doesn’t know the answer, goes to her mother and asks. The mother answers: “Because that’s how my mother cooked it.” The young wife then asks the grandmother the same question, and gets the same answer: “Because that’s how my mother cooked it.” The wife finally approaches the elderly great-grandmother, who smiles at the young wife and replies: “I cut the roast because when I was young, the roast was too big for our small pot.”

Was there a good reason for the young wife to cut her roast in half? Not at all – this was solving a problem that no longer existed. But that didn’t stop her (and those before her) from assuming that this method was correct because that’s what the “expert” had done. 

In the firearms world, it’s often a given that a useful skill or technique can (and should) be universally applied. This could be out of respect for previous trainers and institutions, social popularity or conformity, or an assumption that success in one arena must obviously be good in all other arenas. Although this thinking is widespread, from law enforcement and military training to the citizen defender carrying for protection, it’s based on serious fallacious assumptions.

The Fallacy of the Appeal to Experiential Authority

Respect for previous trainers, generations, and institutions is definitely important, and we can certainly learn from those that preceded us, but the situation with the roast is a classic Fallacy of an Appeal to Experiential Authority: believing that because person X did Y, therefore Y is the right thing to do. The problem is that you will never have person X’s same experiences, and person X did may be incorrect in other situations. A simple example comes from the Brazilian Jiu Jitsu community, with the sudden emergence of BJJ into the Ultimate Fighting circuit. It’s a fallacy to say that because Royce Gracie used BJJ to defeat so many opponents in the octagon, BJJ is now the only martial art that matters. Real psychopathically violent aggressors would beg to disagree, as you can see from this (warning: very graphic) video. Is it valuable to know BJJ? Yes. Is BJJ the be-all end-all of physical confrontation? Certainly not.

Social Popularity and Conformity

One of the largest problems I see in the firearms training community is social popularity and conformity. We see a lot of slick videos, but we rarely get to see how many edits, tries, or takes were actually needed to accomplish the skill demonstrated in the snippet on your favorite social media short video. What is shown in the video might be really cool, and potentially effective, but you are totally blind to all the elements that went into the video and how realistic (or unrealistic) it actually is.

We also see a lot of defenders picking up the gear and techniques of social media influencers without parsing the positives and negatives. Take the appendix carry position, the current position du jour of the self-defense firearms world. I have literally heard instructors say that if you do not carry appendix, you don’t know what you’re doing and don’t have the ability to defend yourself. This, of course, is asinine. If appendix is the “best” defensive carry position, why doesn’t one single special operations team, SWAT, or law enforcement officer carry there? Could it be that they have a broader mission in which appendix doesn’t fit? And even for citizen defenders appendix may not be the best option. Here’s my friend Mike doing sub second strong-side concealed draws all day. The reverse of this situation is also common. I can’t tell you how many videos and seminars I’ve seen of defenders rocking battle belts with Level 2 or 3 holsters feeling like they’ve just expanded their concealed carry capability. You have not.

A Change of Environments

The last issue is taking tactics and skills to environments and situations completely different from where they were originally used with success. 

I saw a video of a well-respected and experienced firearms trainer and former special forces operator talking about preparing for a defensive encounter. In the video, he starts by setting his feet and posture to let his threat know that he’s ready to fight. With all due respect, that is a horrible instruction for a citizen defender. 

First, understand that you aren’t in a foreign conflict zone, where your ability to pose as a powerful force is necessary for your survival. We citizen defenders live in a highly litigious and prosecutorial country, where “posturing up” is a great way to convince a future jury that you were hoping to fight, or worse still, egging that fight on. 

Second, in videos of real violence, posturing up is almost instantly followed up by an attack. In many violent cultures, like gangs or other ‘honor based’ groups, if you posture up, they are obligated to fight you. Here’s another example. Keep in mind that every time you fight, you take on short-term and long-term risk. Short-term: injuries, maiming, and death. Long-term: freedom and fortune. Your long-term risks are very different from those of a special operations fighter whose government is paying him to be in potentially violent situations.

Let’s also talk about the posturing itself. If your Situational Awareness is on and working, as soon as you see the threat, you’re already taking action to avoid any conflict rather than trying to look aggressive. That means that most real violent encounters start as an ambush, like this, again graphic warning. Notice the defender’s “posture.” He feigned surrender. Notice also that he effectively neutralized his threat… and it didn’t require him to carry appendix.

Neglecting the change in environment is extremely common. Check out this video of a well respected firearms influencer, who certainly has a very good skillset. Here he is taking a course on rifles. Rifles are a very useful tool, especially for home defense scenarios. But notice the skill he is working here: it’s a technique for an open field conflict. I did this skill in the infantry when someone would yell “Contact front!” and you drop low, start shooting to force the enemy’s head down, then begin the counterattack. On the other hand, home defense looks like this and requires a completely different skill set. To protect yourself and your family you need a home defense plan, not Battle Drill #1. 

What is the point of this? To remind you to ask yourself “why.” 

Everytime you see a technique, ask yourself: why is this useful? Is it useful in many situations, or only a few? Would it be helpful for my own defense? Consider things like: your body type or shape, your fitness level, the legal requirements in the state you reside in or are traveling in, your defensive environment and threats, and your lifestyle. 

And lastly, don’t get caught up in slick videos or famous influencers if you’re actually looking to defend yourself. If you want a self-education on defense, start by watching videos of violence. You’ll start to see consistencies running through violent encounters, including pre-contact cues, threat carry methods, times from contact to violence, and the skills that seem to give you the best odds of success. 

The Force Science Institute, a group of scientists who have been studying violent encounters for thirty years, give this formula for surviving a lethal force scenario: 

• Build defensive skill sets to unconscious application (Automaticity of Skill) 

• Develop a blueprint of what violent encounters look like (Schema)

• From that blue-print learn to identify the signals that violence is about to begin and connect your defensive skills to that engagement signal (Heuristics)

This is how we teach at Defensive Mindset Training. 

Don’t get caught up in institutional inertia. Stay focused on preparing to be the defender that your family needs. For more training, along with the WHY behind each thing we teach, sign up for one of our Defensive Mindset Training classes in Minnesota or check out Defender University, our revolutionary online training program.