Recently a professional instructor wrote an article about “Malfunctions Sticks”. Read the original article here: soldiersystems.net/2015/12/24/malfunction-sticks-not-work. For those that don’t know, a malfunction stick is simply an item designed to cause a malfunction, usually held near the ejection port of a semi-auto rifle. The designs I’ve seen usually consist of a long skinny handle with a business card size piece of material at the far end. While a shooter is firing the weapon, some other person or instructor can place the malfunction stick over the ejection port, interfering with the weapon’s ability to properly cycle and thereby causing a malfunction.
Semi-autos do four things during their cycle of operation; fire, extract, eject, and feed. If the weapon fails to feed or fire the action required correcting this is what is commonly called “Immediate Action”. In the Army I was taught the acronym S.P.O.R.T.S. Simplified this usually consists of a tap/rack or tap/tug/rack. The tap ensures the magazine is seated (this may have caused the fail to feed) and the rack of the charging handle then extracts and ejects the misfired or otherwise malfunctioning round from the chamber if needed before inserting a new round from the magazine. Usually the stimulus for the shooter to execute this immediate action is a bolt forward trigger press (hammer drop or “click instead of bang”).
This can be introduced in training building block style, with dry work to begin just to get the mechanics down (running a charging handle with the support hand for instance) and then progressing to dummy rounds mixed in with live rounds to surprise the shooter and start to develop more of an ingrained response.
None of the above should be earth-shattering to anyone with some basic training either in the military, competitive world, municipal law enforcement, federal law enforcement, or Billy Bob’s Gun Shop and Basement Range. I’ve received and/or conducted training in four of these areas and seen this explained and taught around the world.
Multitudes of carbine instructors often teach these Fail to Fire or Fail to Feed malfunctions (known in some circles as Type 1 malfunctions) Additionally taught by many instructors are malfunctions related to a weapon Failing to Extract or Failing to Eject (known in many circles as Type 2). The correction for these malfunctions is often called “Remedial Action” and is slightly more complicated than tap/rack. There are a bunch of great instructors out there teaching a variety of ways to clear these types of malfunctions so I’ll save the ink. It usually involves things like maybe locking the bolt or slide to the rear, stripping the magazine, digitally clearing brass, having the barrel skyward, racking the charging handle once or three times, etc. While shooting, the stimulus for remedial action is often twofold. First the shooter experiences a “dead trigger”, meaning not a hammer drop (no click instead of bang). A dead trigger is an indication the bolt is out of battery (not forward and locked). There is a distinct auditory, and more importantly tactile, difference between a “dead trigger” and a hammer drop. The bolt out of battery usually means one of two things; an empty weapon (probable) or a Type 2 malfunction (possible).
Training students in Type 2 malfunctions is more involved that Type 1’s. They are labor intensive to setup for a shooter. They’ve often been set up by the instructor or student coach and involve closing the bolt on a partially ejected piece of brass (stovepipe), double-feed, or fail to extract while the student doesn’t look. This is time intensive and is good for talking a student through the mechanics of clearing out these malfunctions but it is hard to give a student a lot of reps and have it start from a more true-to-life stimulus while they are thinking about something other than the Type 2 they are about to clear.
Enter the “Malfunction Stick”. While the student is shooting a course of fire that you’ve given them, you can randomly cause a Type 2. The writer who published the article disparaging this method said the randomness was an annoyance in one breath, but then talked about how the shooter expects the malfunction. I think randomness in training is a vehicle for checking the level of ingrained retention that a student has in a particular skill. And while the presence of the stick in the shooter’s peripheral vision indicates they may have a stoppage, it by no means guarantees it or lets them wholly concentrate on it as they are busy with a course of fire or exercise. This is of course after a student has been progressed to this point.
As an aside, I encourage a quick check of the ejection port (tactile or visual) as the last step of an engagement. This is especially true for right handed shooters who can’t see the ejection port with the weapon shouldered. And maybe I use the sticks wrong or made them out of the wrong material but I never find it to cause malfunctions reliably. That’s cool because while the shooter may pick up on the presence of the stick, as I stated above they just shoot the course of fire as designed. Their stimulus to fix their gun is that dead trigger or the check of the ejection port, just like a naturally occurring Type 2 malfunction being realized. I’ve noticed the malfunctions sticks cause a variety of different malfunctions. Type 2’s not cleared in a logical order often make for much worse malfunctions. This happens in spite of the malfunctions “looking” different. I’ve also seen a shooter struggle clearing the first one and by the sixth or seventh, do so flawlessly and much more quickly.
The article also mentions that the stick conditions shooters to accept things in close proximity to their weapon. I don’t know how to respond to this exactly. Yes, it accepts one to accept malfunction sticks close to their weapon, you know, so they can work on malfunctions. Does this mean if I’m in a back alley in Peshawar, getting ready to engage a threat, I won’t respond to the kid on the bicycle grabbing at the side of my rifle? Sometimes I think the idea of a “training scar” is the new training scar. “What if we are conditioning people to do X? “ “What if not having them do Y every time they draw their gun, they won’t do it when it counts?” Someone will bring up Newhall and cops putting empty casings in their pocket (which evidently didn’t happen at Newhall) every time this esoteric topic comes up. I’m not being dismissive of the idea of a training scar or saying conditioning someone is not real. I buy into all that neural pathway stuff, I really do. But sometimes it really is just about the hard skill. Blasphemy, I know. For example, if I’m working on the mechanics of a concealed draw, decreasing the shooters time to an accurate string of shots from the holster, do I need them to also displace every time? If I don’t, will they not displace when it’s for real? Or is there a better way to train displacement then having them take a step to the left or right Arthur Murray style? Later we can incorporate, or “drill” these skills together as the basic skills are more ingrained. I can have a student draw while I charge him with an edged weapon or draw my own concealed handgun. The conditioning is not being shot, or not having me tackle them as I sewing machine a training shiv into their abdomen. I’ve recently been reading and listening to some in the industry talk about the idea that there some things we shouldn’t or can’t train live fire. I couldn’t agree more. But hey, it’s more comfortable to shoot retention against cardboard and point out how good your group is than instill these skills when I’m teeing off on your head so people don’t often want to go there.
The article states “The purpose of training is to create environments as close as possible to real world conditions”. While I agree with the intended sentiment, I disagree with that statement from a logic standpoint. That’s a useful means for good training, not the purpose. I’d more like to point out it said this right after a sentence talking about how important simplicity is. While I agree that mimicking the real environment one is likely to face is best when possible for training exercises, sometimes it’s about initial installation of hard skills, attitudes, and knowledge. Years ago I received some long weeks of pretty top notch driving instruction on closed circuits, unimproved surfaces, and actual race tracks. But it wasn’t good training because there were no minarets? It wasn’t effective training because I was only focusing on driver inputs and vehicle performance issues one at a time and not all the other dangers I was likely to face in the future while driving?
When you shoot a piece of steel, it makes a particular sound. That’s why they are such an efficient training aid at distance. I get used to hearing it and it means accurate fire is being delivered. People don’t make that sound. Does that mean we shouldn’t shoot steel? Are students having to block out a certain stimuli in their environment while training that don’t really occur in a defensive engagement. The author of the article says “Unlike the simulators (referring to arty simulators), the malfunction stick is a deliberate interruption to training that is not patterned after any real world context, and is more representative of an instructor’s lack of experience.” My experience shows Type 2 malfunctions can occur while firing a semi-automatic rifle, however infrequently. The stick is causing an interruption to training? At that point in time the malfunction the stick causes is the training and it is patterned after the real world where they can happen on their own. That’s how I see it. Or am I missing something?
In reading the comments of the article (I know, I know) I see references to fundamentals, operational experience, combat firearms training, who is qualified to teach this stuff and who isn’t, etc.. Not really in the lane of this article’s title but it has relevance to the subject matter. Let’s pump the brakes a little shall we and reach into the glovebox for some perspective? Grab any kid off the street in Mogadishu circa 1993 or one of many kids on the south side of Chicago today. They have as much “gunfight” or “operational” experience as many seasoned veterans. Look to any police agency for an officer who’s won a defensive engagement or multiple. Does that mean they are proficient with a weapon system or better yet, sharing that proficiency? I’m sure all these groups of people have much they could teach people interested in the idea of surviving lethal engagements and possibly they are indeed a whiz with a gun. That doesn’t necessarily mean that’s where I’m getting my “combat firearms” training from. Today, we can gain information and training from seasoned and experienced people from the top ranks of the military, law enforcement, civilian world, and competitive world (and who are specifically skilled in sharing it) and we should. We can review countless videos of actual lethal engagements between humans, we can speak to survivors for anecdotal evidence, we can look at statistics, and we can use our brains and bodies after gaining sufficient experience to sort through the instruction we receive. Again, when I’m teaching a shooter to “run the gun”, I’m usually doing just that. Once that is firmly established we start adding layers to the onion while emphasizing adherence to those basic fundamental skills. That difference is often muddled and makes for what I consider less than optimal instruction sometimes.
I have never used the stick to lock a bolt back. For the most part I don’t push on the rifle in any noticeable way. I hold the stick in proximity to the ejection port to interfere with the cycle of operations. This can, and does, occur on its own while shooting.
Sometimes as instructors I think we complicate things. What is the skill or skills you are working on with any particular drill or exercise? Good, goal based training is key. To address some of the critics of the stick or other skills training that is out there, I agree, it is a priority of training thing. Would I have people clearing Type 2’s four hours into their first day on the rifle? No I would not. Would I use a Malfunction Stick to cause Type 2’s for an experienced shooter to experience and practice clearing these types of stoppages, reinforcing gun handling under pressure, as well as conditioning them to check their ejection port? Yes I would.
This debate or argument reminds me of a recent discussion about how “tactical” reloads are stupid. That article was put out online and it got a lot of supportive comments. First of all, the tone of someone’s opinion says a lot to me. I’ve never been much for drama and absolutes. From a priority of training perspective I guess I can see the point about tactical reloads. But how is the ability to efficiently plus up a gun while retaining a partial magazine before it goes dry a useless or stupid skill? I could understand someone saying that it’s not that important to train based on limited training time and chance of employment, but “useless” or “stupid”? Not so much. If I guy wants to spend an evening writing an article about it it’s a free country. Internet dissemination doesn’t make it gospel.
An overarching theme behind much of this is the idea of “training” vs. “instruction”. This idea is not original to me so I can’t claim it. When I hit the mat or gym three times a week, working on improving or sustaining skills, I consider that training. When I go to a weekend class and learn new ideas, skills, or techniques that is usually a heavy dose of instruction mixed in with some training. One doesn’t go to a weekend judo seminar and leave saying “Hey, now I’m proficient in judo.” But through years of toil, hard work, instruction, and application, I would say one is now “trained”. Give someone an hour class on a flashbang and I wouldn’t consider them trained. They’ve definitely received instruction. I would expect that first deployment of an NFDD to have about a fifty-fifty chance of going smoothly. Once they’ve gone through deployment procedures hundreds of times in training, had multiple chances of operation deployments, etc., I’d say they are “trained”. That’s my take on it anyway. Semantics matter and I’ve always liked the saying “Professionalism Through Language”. This malfunction stick is an item that can be used for instruction and later, training.
Type 2 malfunctions (or whatever you want to call them) happen. Training how to clear them and get your gun up and running is not wasted time. I feel the stick is a decent way to do just that. I think sometimes we can get a little too far into the weeds on the possible unintended consequences of particular instruction techniques. I hold this opinion having been trained in the use of force and having provided that training in a variety of ways and having then applied it myself and seen it applied. Of course this is my opinion. If an instructor doesn’t want to train people in that particular issue or with that technique, that’s cool, I’ve moved on. The title of the article that spurred me to write this is “Malfunction Sticks Do Not Work”.
Malfunction sticks are supposed to cause malfunctions. They do that.
This essay turned treatise started as some quick thoughts on the use of a particular instructional technique and I’m sure its length now violates all sorts of internet attention span studies. While my article’s title mentions Malfunction Sticks specifically, this topic and the original article’s treatment of it made me think more about the current state of the firearms instruction field as well as training methodology. As with most things in life, this is my opinion on this subject today given the experience and information I have at this point. It is subject to change.
Here’s to the fighting the good fight.
Robert (Bob) Welch
Bob Welch is a police officer in the Midwest and a full-time training officer at his agency in addition to being a perpetual student. He is an Iraq Veteran (U.S. Army Reserves) and a former Special Agent with the U.S. Department of State, Diplomatic Security Service. While at D.S.S., Bob was assigned to the Office of Mobile Security Deployments (M.S.D). Bob is not near as good of a shooter as he should be for the tax dollars invested but is still working on it. Bob can be contacted at foundationtactical@gmail.com.
I would also be interested if the author is one of the instructors at Hiel Hitler Tactical in Nebraska? I guess I should still be more swayed by several guys who have trained the best and brightest, and their real world opinions on this matter.
More just interested in what the authors dog in this fight is? Isn’t 88 Tac run by “cops in the Midwest”
Alright man. I don’t get it. What the deal with heil hitler tactical?
The 8th letter in the alphabet is “H”. So two 8s together would be HH. Certain Arian / Neo-Nazi groups use jerseys with #88 to represent Heil Hitler. I learned this from season one of Homeland. And after I got my Patrick Kane #88 Chicago Blackhawks jersey.
DB,
It really dumbfounds me as to why people like you can’t do your due diligence about an organization/ company prior to jumping to conclusions and making such slanderous accusations. “Heil Hitler Tactical?” Really, bro?
“88” comes from “Signal 88,” which is Nebraska police code for “situation secure,” or “all is safe.” The Nebraska State Patrol, Omaha Police Department, Douglas County Sheriff’s Office, etc. all use this same code. We are a LE based training organization, thus the connection to the number. I suppose you’ll make the claim that all of these agencies are comprised of skinheads now?
The 35+ red-blooded American warriors we have on staff, who have and continue to defend your freedom and protect the communities around you, certainly don’t appreciate being labeled as skinheads – especially the instructors we have on staff who are African American, Hispanic and Asian. Additionally, I hardly believe the LE agencies and military groups throughout, and outside, the U.S. would be contracting our services if we were attached, in any way whatsoever, to a hate group.
The next time you visit your local library to access the “World Wide Web” (that’s the internet, Professor), you may want to account for enough time to do some research on a company prior to shoving your new 5.11 boot in your ignorant mouth.
Fee free to peruse – which means, “read (something) typically in a careful, thorough way” our website at http://www.88tactical.com to learn more about us. That is, if you can read
88 tactical has got to be the dumbest name for a company owned by cops ever. How disgraceful. Everyone in law enforcement knows the number 88 is associated with white supremacists. It’s because of closet racists like you that we have to deal with groups like BLM.
The internet works both ways. Outside of the Nebraska bubble 88 means something else. You can blame the AB for ruining that for you…..that’s the Aryan Brotherhood per the Internet. I don’t think anybody thinks you’re a bunch of Indiana Nazis but fot a training company whose market is LE it wasn’t the best choice for a name.
Correction Nebraska nazis
Mike, I appreciate that, however you’re talking about 1% or less of the population that even thinks the way you are about our name. I founded Signal 88 Security, a LE based security company, back in 2003 and only heard a handful of people voicing their concerns about what they thought the number 88 meant to them. 120 franchises later and nearly $75 million in revenue each year tells me the vast majority of people didn’t have a concern – because they shouldn’t. 88 Tactical has been contracted out by well over 100 local, county, state and federal LE agencies, as well as special operations groups both domestic and foreign, so we’re not too concerned about the impression it’s giving such a small number of people. Unfortunately there are those individuals out there like DB and Police Lives Matter who are intent on trolling because they’ve either never been able to get into LE or the military, or they did and their career involved sitting at an elementary school or serving up slop in a cafeteria. Not everyone can be a warrior and work for 88 Tactical Group though.
Any LE agency that would send their personnel to a place named 88 anything is insane. It’s a lawsuit waiting to happen. Officer shoots a minority perp and the family sues.
Where was he trained?
Oh, some training center with an Aryan Brotherhood name.
We’re going to Sizzler!
Bet you his department email is full of ethnic jokes.
Congratulations, you’re doing precisely what it is that BLM members do – label people as racists when they have no clue who they’re even dealing with. You should be proud of yourself for the absolute slander you’re spewing.
Maybe you should remove “Police Lives Matter” as your tag name since it’s very apparent to us that you wouldn’t be accepted within our police brotherhood.
Why would any self respecting cop name his company after an AB code? You are definitely suspicious.
Two points: 1. The BLM has nothing to do with this discussion. 2. If you think that police lives matter, remember that there are a lot of cops that employed by the BLM. I am guessing that their lives do not matter to you.
Cops in black lives matter?
BLM = Bureau of Land Management?
Black Lives Matter
I’m fairly certain
Shea,
Thank you for teaching me what a Signal 88 was.. Not that some of us haven’t actually thought about this askjeeves.com thing where this magic box spits out answers when you type them in. But I digress.
So if you are such hard charging L/E types, what was some of the things they taught you in drug task force, or the gang unit? Maybe that the number 13 stands for M, is used by MS13, and other “groups” That 88 is used by Neo Nazi’s, and pictures of goats are used by various entities throughout the middle east as symbols of their group? C’mon dude, don’t give me your closet racist answer of “all secure” how about “Code 4 Tactical” instead….. guess that wouldn’t fly with your High risk SERE courses you teach… I am sure there are a lot of requirements for that in Middle Murica Law Enforcement.
Speaking of Middle Murica Law Enforcement….. This whole sticky stabby malfuckup stick that has seem to found its way up your ass from the first article written on here…. Did this opinion piss you off that bad before you hired a former L/E “trainer” that uses it almost exclusively as he does “lumens, and pube-lube”
Now on to this 35+ red blooded Americans who you have on your staff…. I am not taking away from their feats of heroism, bravery, and valor, but how can you get pissed off at me “labeling them” when your the dipshit that came up with the name “88 Tactical” That’s like getting pissed off at your boyfriend for calling you gay after you let him touch your dick…. No ones fault but your own…
Enjoy your malfunction stick Sgt Shea.
DB (I figured out your codename… it’s Douche Bag),
When you grow a sack larger than the most dominant squirrel in the shared backyard of your trailer court, please feel free to toss out your real name and the company/ agency/ branch that you work/ed for. Odds are you are a wannabe that never succeeded in anything you’ve ever done. I get it, winning 3rd place in a competition with 2 other competitors feels good, but it isn’t quite good enough, so you get mad. Let it out, sugar. Let it all out.
“Code 4 Tactical” must’ve been a previous company of yours… “No Further Assistance Needed Tactical.” Great name choice, Corky.
Oh, and feel free to come out to our facilities anytime… we’d love to teach you something.
always love the stupidity of some who if they don’t like your opinion that you’re going to “show them something”. always good for a laugh.
Way to go. First you name your company after WP code and now you’re threatening people. You are everything wrong with this profession.
Have you ever heard perception is reality? Outside of Nebraska 88 is definitely an AB thing . You can try to pass it off as whatever you want but that’s how it looks.
Fantastic. A guy comes on ranting about due diligence who named his company after a white power slogan. That’s one of the dumbest things I’ve ever seen on the interweb.
Let me interject here. The explanation of the name 88 was given, period. It does not refer to any deplorable racist code, but rather to a local code for situation secure. There will always be alternate meanings to numbers or acronyms across cultures. What 88 tactical will keep focusing on is providing the best training possible for LE/Mil and civilians in order to better prepare our community to respond and increase survivability rates across our nation. Period. Rants and trolling aside, we should, collectively, be building a safer environment for our families and children – and that is the aim of the 88 Tactical group. Anyone’s views of name choices or training tools should be respected, and not necessarily agreed upon – but what matters is that we are all striving to empower America as a whole.
I must say I’m really glad SSD posted this rebuttal to that article (bringing balance to the discussion). I rather read mindset, training articles from instructors with stories that inform their experience and offer tips then hear them complain or whine about what an instructor is doing or not doing.
You can get on out of here with all that logic and reasoning… Rabble, rabble, rabble…
Seriously though, good stuff. Like I said in the comments on the original article, I think the stick has a time and a place. But, like many popular training techniques/flavors of the day, people seize upon it as “the way” and overuse it to the exclusion of other things. That isn’t how ANY technique should be used if you actually care about imparting knowledge to a student.
Geez. Sorry I came out supporting your initial write up. Are you guys stupid? I have been around the community for many years now and have never seen a more Football Bat approach to a criticism. Clown shoes for all of you guys in size 12. Your initial article was well written and reasoned. You have lost all credibility with your follow on comments. Sorry but it is what it is.
It’s the best when company founders or reps come out and make themsleves look like assholes.
Bob Welch/Foundation Tactical don’t appear to affiliated with 88 Tactical. Please don’t let the above comments reflect badly on the author who had nothing to do with the mess above.
So basically it is a time saver for the instructor and that it doesn’t always cause malfunctions. So why not just take the time to set up mags with dummies, brass etc? The student isn’t going to remember if and when they will happen especially when they don’t see a instructor hovering over them with a stick.
Concur. Additionally, as an instructor, if I’m diddling around trying to induce a half with a stick I’m taking my attention off the student him-or herself, and whatever else is going on down the line.
Damn, the comments on here got off track quick. How bout we take a page from Tyler Grey and just say “it depends.”
Some good points. I think the who tactical firearms training realm is oversaturated, resulting in folks becoming very nitpicky and/or over thinking things. To think under stress, one must be competent and confident in their base skills. We do focus on the smaller stuff way too often, and ignore the larger benefits of doing the basics right. Learning to recognize and correct malfunctions is a vital, perishable skill that needs reinforced by more than just random and unexpected malfunctions. I think that learning to recognize the telltale signs of a malfunction is helped when the shooter is expecting them. They are less likely to miss an observation. This can help improve subconscious recognition, IMO. Maybe malfunction sticks are good, maybe not, but they sure seem to bring out impressive positional arguments.
To each his own I guess. When I first heard of the stick my thought was and is WTF? Been in the Army 22 years. Call me a dinosaur but I see you poking a stick in my face while I’m engaging I’m going to have to maintain some control to not slap your shit. What’s next? Shooting AK rounds in the dirt around me?
Boring
One Nebraska cop who contracted overseas and thinks that makes him somebody..
Even admitting he isn’t an impressive shooter. WTF?
I have no opinion on this stick business…
That being said, the disparaging comments about the guy’s background are a little unfounded, wouldn’t you say? Didn’t you read his bio at the end? I see nothing about “contracting overseas.”
He’s an OIF veteran and he was a DSS agent with the MSD in addition to being a cop/instructor now. I’m friends with a few DSS agents as well as their instructors at the their post-FLETC facility. Other than the Peace Corps kids that snuck into BSAT, these guys are pretty good too go.
Jesus, does this have a cliff notes version ?
Lulz
Cliff Notes Version:
-Its not the tool, its is how you use it.
-The concept of a training scar taken to its logical conclusion is silly. Not all training needs to simulate all the aspects of a no kidding gun fight. Some stuff can be worked separately.
-Walk, Crawl, Run is still a thing.
-Think about what you are trying to train, learn, or work on and tailor your practice and drills to best accomplish that goal.
I have never used a “Malfunction stick” mostly because I never thought of it. In the future I will. At some point, you have to find a time and cost effective method of teaching people to handle the situations they might come across. This magic stick sounds like it might be one such thing.
Like the author I think a lot of people confuse the teaching and training of tasks to people with teaching them how to operate overall. I had a boss who demanded we spray paint a gun silhouette on bullseye targets when we shot NRA bulls for score because “you’re just building bad habits shooting at targets that are unarmed.”
I’m sorry, but ideas like that and the original “stick” article are just stupid. I might just be partial to author of this articles ideas though because like hime I am nowhere near as good of a shot a I should be after the 30+ years and countless millions the Army, Special Forces, and other government entities have invested in teaching me.
Good points Kurt, the only thing I don’t like is the shooter knows when they will have a malfunction, and it’s nothing that can’t be done with dummy rounds or brass. Not so much for a type 2.
To the author, thanks for the rebuttal. I still could see how this is being used by inexperienced instructors in a way that is in no way beneficial to students. Like any tool, to include a firearm, wielding it is one thing, wielding it properly to create a positive outcome is completely different.
Without tons of thought I can only conceive of one time and place for this tool. Possibly using it as the walk phase for crawl-walk-run malfunction or transition drills. Crawl being dry fire rehearsals, ball and dummy (which teaches multiple things); walk being the stick; and run being dummy rounds in fully jammed mags and the occasional actual failure.
Personally I’m not a fan of someone holding a stick next to my weapon, especially doing so when I do more (comparatively) complex drills like tgts in width where it may physically interfere with my shooting or force an unsafe act. I’m sure an instructor worth his reputation would have foresight to avoid this.
My overall take is this, whether a technique fails or succeeds, at least there are people still willing to try to do things better, “you miss all the shots you don’t take”.
I still stand by my comments on the original thread, up until now I have never heard of nor seen this or a need for this; that said, I’m glad someone who implements it came back with a well written rebuttal.
Very good and in depth article that mirrored many of my concerns with the original article. Many many many instructors refuse to investigate new ttps, methodologies, or instructional equipment until there is no other choice. Then it’s too late and they are way behind the curve. If guys would simply investigate before they run their suck I think there would be a dramatic shift in opinion vs fact and this would put us back on the path to what actually matters.
As far as the comments go, SSD you guys should consider shutting them off. As much as I appreciate (and advocate) Mr. Degan’s blunt and honest replies, the trolls are getting ridiculous on here and they are detracting from the content. Maybe there is a way to make commenters register so that you can boot the trolls? I appreciate debate and dialogue like any professional, but 90% of comments tend to just be Bull shit. Either way keep up the good work.
Mr Degan and the 88 Tactical crew… Huge thumbs up. Assholes that get spun up on some bullshit like this AB bullshit have no idea and they ain’t worth your time… but serious props for getting on out there and calling them out.
Vic,
Thanks so much for your support. Having read your comment gives us hope. It’s just gotten to the point where it’s become too much lately and SSD is losing good people. It’s just too bad it’s gotten so ridiculous.
Stay safe, brother.
SSD is losing good people?
Good sir, you have been on here running your mouth trying to pass off your latent racist bullshit and your talking about SSD losing people?
I find it hard to believe this is the first time you have had to deal with this, I wonder if you made such a public spectacle of yourself in those settings as well…
So, is Vic part of the 88 crew? Seems like a lot of boot licking going on.
Nope, I’ve actually never heard of 88 Tactical till now. I don’t get out much and I’m just a nobody doing nothing that matters,l. that said, it is refreshing seeing some one just tell it like it is with these knuckle heads.
Some might call it unprofessional, but Fuck it. Some of these booger eaters need to get called out. It is interesting how everyone wants to talk about a name instead of the actual article or anything related to progressive training.
You can call it boot licking, or whatever. I really don’t give a fuck. If you got beef with my words then eat a dick. If you have something constructive to add… I dunno like maybe a way to keep comments on topic or something relevant to the article, then by all means fire away.
I can see why you like 88’s style of communication.
Comments are comments good bad or otherwise. Implying that SSD is to blame is as ridiculous as are some of the comments above. This also includes yours as a company representative. Instead of taking the high road you immediately went full potato. Perhaps add one more position at 88 tactical. A PR position with somebody who can defend a message without loosing their cool. Which is exactly what you did.
Author, good article. Get away from these guys now before they ruin your reputation.
It seems that you have been called out on your choice of name since 2012.
You might want to just have a prepared statement at the ready addressing this. So why blow your cork if this isn’t a new topic? Do you still build doomsday bunkers?
https://m.facebook.com/88.tactical/posts/312491828805071
http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/1299325_Doomsday_Preppers___88_tactical_.html
I would like to be able to see the future to find out how many instructors are using that stick to induce malfunctions. I am sure that if the stick is really a valid and useful way it is going to be used for almost any instructor. Time will say it.