Suarez says finger SHOULD be on trigger

[Davidk]

Suarez Suarez is now advocating "when approaching a specific danger point, or challenging or covering a human adversary at gun point (only a fool covers from low ready) the finger should be touching the trigger to reduce your reaction time, and thus increase your safety."

Wow, just wow

http://www.warriortalknews.com/2011/01/finger-off-the-trigger-sacred-cow-in-need-of-butchering.html

 

[BigMike]

A big ol' YMMV to that guy.

As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.

 

[whatluck]

No thanks. I don't like ketchup on my burgers.

 

[drgrant]

This is gonna be good.

Shameless rip from Calsdad's earlier post...



Admittedly from what I've seen of the stuff Gabe teaches, he knows what he's talking about. That said, another one of his things has always been to not take anyone as gospel, either.

To put things into context, it doesn't seem so bad if you read the preface of that statement quoted...

To reiterate. I am advocating the finger off the trigger as a default position. In other words, unless there is a better place for it, the finger will be indexed along side the frame of the firearm. This is where it would normally be when moving or generally covering a danger area.

-Mike

 

[KMaurer]

I haven't read all of his most recent update on the topic, but his original piece posed a false choice between having the gun in a low ready position with the finger off the trigger and having the gun pointed at the subject with the finger on the trigger. Moving from low ready to the target and confirming the point of aim would seem to explain 99.99% of the difference in performance he observes. I don't believe that moving the finger 3/4" from the frame to the trigger takes any appreciable time compared to the time it takes to make the decision to fire. If it did, serious gamers like Rob Leatham would put their fingers there early in their draw stroke; videos of their slow practice and high-speed ones of their actual competition shooting show that their fingers don't move to the trigger until their guns are pointed in on the target.

Ken

 

[Jose]

There are situations in which coming in second place is far worse than not winning a match.

Such is the context for Gabe's teachings and doctrine.

And if you think about it rationally, I AM ready to fire if I am pointing the gun at some douche than wants to kill or hurt me.

Whether I fire or not is a different question.

Again, Gabe's focus is 100% on fighting. What competitive shooters do or do not is of no importance just because of who they are or what they have won.

 

[TheWookie]

Is this the same Gabe Suarez run out of law enforcement. Could it be the same Gabe Suarez who worked for Santa Monica, CA PD who took a workers comp claim and was then videotaped rolling and jumping around in his training classes? Is this the same Gabe Suarez that was prosecuted for worker comp insurance fraud, convicted and thrown off the dept? Is it that same Gabriel Suarez? I wonder...

 

[Jose]

Suarez Suarez is now advocating "when approaching a specific danger point, or challenging or covering a human adversary at gun point (only a fool covers from low ready) the finger should be touching the trigger to reduce your reaction time, and thus increase your safety."

Wow, just wow

http://www.warriortalknews.com/2011/01/finger-off-the-trigger-sacred-cow-in-need-of-butchering.html

OK, don't teach it that way.

I happen to agree with him.

 

[Davidk]

I teach that the finger should never be on the trigger until you have decided to destroy whatever your gun is pointed at. No false experiments/reasoning will change that.

 

[supton]

If I may expand drgrant's snippet of the quote:

To reiterate. I am advocating the finger off the trigger as a default position. In other words, unless there is a better place for it, the finger will be indexed along side the frame of the firearm. This is where it would normally be when moving or generally covering a danger area. But when approaching a specific danger point, or challenging or covering a human adversary at gun point (only a fool covers from low ready) the finger should be touching the trigger to reduce your reaction time, and thus increase your safety.

[emphasis added.]

I dunno, this sounds rather specific to me. It's not "I think I heard something" but rather "whatever I'm pointing at ain't no friend of mine".

He ends on:

I suggest that students of the art look at these so-called theories for themselves and test them. Open your minds and your eyes.

I don't think he's telling people to do this, much less telling everyone to do this.

 

[Jose]

I teach that the finger should never be on the trigger until you have decided to destroy whatever your gun is pointed at. No false experiments/reasoning will change that.

OK. That doesn't make you any more right than him.

 

[Jose]

If I may expand drgrant's snippet of the quote:

[emphasis added.]

I dunno, this sounds rather specific to me. It's not "I think I heard something" but rather "whatever I'm pointing at ain't no friend of mine".

He ends on: I don't think he's telling people to do this, much less telling everyone to do this.

I wonder why Kenik left all that context out?

Hmmmmmmm............

 

[Jose]

Is this the same Gabe Suarez run out of law enforcement. Could it be the same Gabe Suarez who worked for Santa Monica, CA PD who took a workers comp claim and was then videotaped rolling and jumping around in his training classes? Is this the same Gabe Suarez that was prosecuted for worker comp insurance fraud, convicted and thrown off the dept? Is it that same Gabriel Suarez? I wonder...

Yep. So?

Everyone who's paid him for training know all that and don't really GAF since the training is top notch.

 

[TheWookie]

Yep. So?

So, in a day and age where tactical=tacticool, con men like this guy are making a lot of money off those who don't know any better. Gabriel Suarez is a fraud, a conman, and a felon who makes money off of mall ninjas and wannabees. If you want good training, go somewhere else.

 

[Cabin Fever]

So, in a day and age where tactical=tacticool, con men like this guy are making a lot of money off those who don't know any better. Gabriel Suarez is a fraud, a conman, and a felon who makes money off of mall ninjas and wannabees. If you want good training, go somewhere else.

Do you have any personal experience with good training that you would like to pass on? Or an opinion on the topic of finger placement? You haven't added much to the discussion.

 

[appraiser]

I'm no gunfighter, just a below average Joe, but I have carried my weapon out of the holster at my side with my finger extended.

If I had reason to raise the weapon to use the light, I kept the finger extended.

I had one occasion many years ago where I broke leather and pointed a gun at someone who I thought was a threat. I do believe my finger was on the trigger once I was on target. If I was in a position where I was faced with pulling the trigger, I'd rather have my finger placed on the trigger correctly than to jam it in the trigger guard and pull under fire.

The issue for me is when do you take away the last bit of safe handling of the firearm and go into yes I am really ready to fire but if someone says boo I might pull the trigger accidentally mode?

So it is safety vs better shot placement and time savings right?

 

[Davidk]

I wonder why Kenik left all that context out?

Hmmmmmmm............

There is NO context. He clearly stated without qualifications: "But when approaching a specific danger point, or challenging or covering a human adversary at gun point (only a fool covers from low ready) the finger should be touching the trigger to reduce your reaction time, and thus increase your safety."

I did give a link to the full article so readers may decide the "context" for themselves.

 

[FPrice]

I was going to quote the entire section as you did, but you beat me to it. Later on he also wrote this:

Now as a trainer of some experience I will be the first to say that it makes the training job very easy to require novice shooters to keep their fingers off the trigger and out of the trigger guard until they are well aligned on the target. But that is simply a vehicle to get them to a point in their development safely and I know that people do not fight like that outside of the learning environment.

I wonder if people are reading parts of his article or digesting the entire offering.

If I may expand drgrant's snippet of the quote:

[emphasis added.]

I dunno, this sounds rather specific to me. It's not "I think I heard something" but rather "whatever I'm pointing at ain't no friend of mine".

He ends on: I don't think he's telling people to do this, much less telling everyone to do this.

 

[Cabin Fever]

I teach that the finger should never be on the trigger until you have decided to destroy whatever your gun is pointed at. No false experiments/reasoning will change that.

The article presents decent evidence in favor of the "finger on" position:

"The article in question was written by Dr. Martin Fackler and Ernest J. Tobin. It was titled Officer Decision Time In Firing A Handgun, and appeared in the International Wound Ballistics Association magazine – Wound Ballistics Review. It is a scholarly study on how long it takes the average officer to decide to shoot. They determined that it takes approximately .677 seconds to react and fire a handgun that is already pointed at a threat with the finger out of the triggerguard. That is an additional time of .312 seconds over those whose fingers were already on the trigger. Fackler suggested, quite correctly from my perspective, that it was unsafe to require officer’s fingers to be outside the triggerguard until they had made the decision to shoot."

Might I ask what your main point of contention with this technique is? 1/3 of a second might be useful in certain situations.

 

[Jose]

So, in a day and age where tactical=tacticool, con men like this guy are making a lot of money off those who don't know any better. Gabriel Suarez is a fraud, a conman, and a felon who makes money off of mall ninjas and wannabees. If you want good training, go somewhere else.

Yeah, OK dude. Whatever you say.

 

[walkit]

If the finger is on the trigger, it's for firing. Otherwise, get it out of the guard, and lower the gun a bit. The problem with having the gun pointed, but not firing, is twofold. It virtually FORCES you into "tunnel vision", and then other enemies escape your notice. The guy you are aimed at, especially if you are at 10 ft or less, and more so if you are aimed at his head, can drop to one knee, ccw draw and fire (or draw from small of back, open wear) before you can realize what's happened, lower your pistol, and get a good hit. The other prob with finger on trigger, especially SA autos (safety disengaged) is that if the guy coughs, sneezes, faints, or a cat screeches, etc, you are going to shoot him, and it's unjustified. Remember, 80+ % of the time, you will not have to fire at all, and 1/2 of the remaining times, you will not have to HIT him to make him run off. Your shot demos that you have a REAL gun, it's functional, it's loaded, the safety is disengaged, hammer's cocked, and you WILL fire at him!. All those things ARE in doubt until you fire, you know. Many of these punks have been at gunpoint before, been in gunfights with other punks, etc. The main thing is to get the gun out and ready, in time for him to see it, and leave him a way to escape. If you corner him, you more than double the odds that you will have to spend $50,000 on legal fees, bond fees, lost work, etc, for the criminal case and the civil suit to follow. Just ask OJ if it's possible to be acquitted in the criminal case, and then lose everything you ever make to a civil suit for "wrongful death". Ask Bernie Goetz about having wounded robbers showing up in court, in a wheel chair, and testifying how you shot them TWICE, after they surrendered. It's not a joke. Gabe's getting further out into left field every year.

 

[Jose]

If the finger is on the trigger, it's for firing. Otherwise, get it out of the guard, and lower the gun a bit. The problem with having the gun pointed, but not firing, is twofold. It virtually FORCES you into "tunnel vision", and then other enemies escape your notice. The guy you are aimed at, especially if you are at 10 ft or less, and more so if you are aimed at his head, can drop to one knee, ccw draw and fire (or draw from small of back, open wear) before you can realize what's happened, lower your pistol, and get a good hit. The other prob with finger on trigger, especially SA autos (safety disengaged) is that if the guy coughs, sneezes, faints, or a cat screeches, etc, you are going to shoot him, and it's unjustified. Remember, 80+ % of the time, you will not have to fire at all, and 1/2 of the remaining times, you will not have to HIT him to make him run off. Your shot demos that you have a REAL gun, it's functional, it's loaded, the safety is disengaged, hammer's cocked, and you WILL fire at him!. All those things ARE in doubt until you fire, you know. Many of these punks have been at gunpoint before, been in gunfights with other punks, etc. The main thing is to get the gun out and ready, in time for him to see it, and leave him a way to escape. If you corner him, you more than double the odds that you will have to spend $50,000 on legal fees, bond fees, lost work, etc, for the criminal case and the civil suit to follow. Just ask OJ if it's possible to be acquitted in the criminal case, and then lose everything you ever make to a civil suit for "wrongful death". Ask Bernie Goetz about having wounded robbers showing up in court, in a wheel chair, and testifying how you shot them TWICE, after they surrendered. It's not a joke. Gabe's getting further out into left field every year.

 

[appraiser]

Might I ask what your main point of contention with this technique is? 1/3 of a second might be useful in certain situations.

to me it is more than the 1/3 second, it is having the finger properly placed on the trigger so that when you squeeze the shot it will go where it is intended to go and not go right or left if the finger is placed on the trigger in a hurry and pulled without proper placement

 

[Gonzo]

Ummm....I really don't see the problem with this. It's all how it's applied in context.

 

[Gonzo]

If the finger is on the trigger, it's for firing. Otherwise, get it out of the guard, and lower the gun a bit. The problem with having the gun pointed, but not firing, is twofold. It virtually FORCES you into "tunnel vision", and then other enemies escape your notice. The guy you are aimed at, especially if you are at 10 ft or less, and more so if you are aimed at his head, can drop to one knee, ccw draw and fire (or draw from small of back, open wear) before you can realize what's happened, lower your pistol, and get a good hit. The other prob with finger on trigger, especially SA autos (safety disengaged) is that if the guy coughs, sneezes, faints, or a cat screeches, etc, you are going to shoot him, and it's unjustified. Remember, 80+ % of the time, you will not have to fire at all, and 1/2 of the remaining times, you will not have to HIT him to make him run off. Your shot demos that you have a REAL gun, it's functional, it's loaded, the safety is disengaged, hammer's cocked, and you WILL fire at him!. All those things ARE in doubt until you fire, you know. Many of these punks have been at gunpoint before, been in gunfights with other punks, etc. The main thing is to get the gun out and ready, in time for him to see it, and leave him a way to escape. If you corner him, you more than double the odds that you will have to spend $50,000 on legal fees, bond fees, lost work, etc, for the criminal case and the civil suit to follow. Just ask OJ if it's possible to be acquitted in the criminal case, and then lose everything you ever make to a civil suit for "wrongful death". Ask Bernie Goetz about having wounded robbers showing up in court, in a wheel chair, and testifying how you shot them TWICE, after they surrendered. It's not a joke. Gabe's getting further out into left field every year.

So you're more worried about other people's perceptions of your actions than whether or not you are right or wrong? If you lack the conviction of spirit to stand by your actions regardless of the consequences, you probably shouldn't be offering advice on anything.

 

[wolf223]

Ummm....I really don't see the problem with this. It's all how it's applied in context.

this


if i'm getting shot at, or about to drop someone, i'd hope my finger is on the trigger.

-there was a thread NOT too long ago that mentioned "sympathetic response" or something to that effect about a dude using the CT lazer grips and accidentally shooting someone when he tried to turn the beam on.. maybe it was a police officer... but in that case.. hey? what could go wrong?

 

[supton]

If the finger is on the trigger, it's for firing. Otherwise, get it out of the guard, and lower the gun a bit. The problem with having the gun pointed, but not firing, is twofold. It virtually FORCES you into "tunnel vision", and then other enemies escape your notice.

Fair point about tunnel vision. But then you say:

The guy you are aimed at, especially if you are at 10 ft or less, and more so if you are aimed at his head, can drop to one knee, ccw draw and fire (or draw from small of back, open wear) before you can realize what's happened, lower your pistol, and get a good hit.

Which is to argue Gabe's point in a somewhat roundabout way--you have no idea what is going to happen, and going into some sort of "safe" mode might be the exact wrong thing to do.

The other prob with finger on trigger, especially SA autos (safety disengaged) is that if the guy coughs, sneezes, faints, or a cat screeches, etc, you are going to shoot him, and it's unjustified.

Actually, Gabe talks about this. Unfortunately, it's purely antedotal evidence. It seems valid to me, but then again what does that say about those who carry striker/DAO's with long-ish triggers?

Remember, 80+ % of the time, you will not have to fire at all, and 1/2 of the remaining times, you will not have to HIT him to make him run off. Your shot demos that you have a REAL gun, it's functional, it's loaded, the safety is disengaged, hammer's cocked, and you WILL fire at him!. All those things ARE in doubt until you fire, you know. Many of these punks have been at gunpoint before, been in gunfights with other punks, etc. The main thing is to get the gun out and ready, in time for him to see it, and leave him a way to escape. If you corner him<snip>

This I find to be an interesting tangent. Should you let someone have a free exit from you? On one hand, as you go on to point out, should anything happen you could face a costly legal battle. OTOH, are you letting someone back into "society" who will only be that much more likely to not let anyone else get the upper hand--and is that much more likely to be violent?

Legal battles are bad, but there's no stopping civil lawsuits unless if there is a strong Castle doctrine. They can always take you to court just for "brandishing" after all. That can be costly also. So I'm not sure this is a valid dismissal. Also, is it worth it to society (that is, your neighbors, or simply any other person) to take a risk in letting this dirtbag get away? Nobody wants to be involved in a "questionable" shoot. But what are the odds of who you are letting get away is now going to enter a priesthood?

, you more than double the odds that you will have to spend $50,000 on legal fees, bond fees, lost work, etc, for the criminal case and the civil suit to follow. Just ask OJ if it's possible to be acquitted in the criminal case, and then lose everything you ever make to a civil suit for "wrongful death". Ask Bernie Goetz about having wounded robbers showing up in court, in a wheel chair, and testifying how you shot them TWICE, after they surrendered. It's not a joke. Gabe's getting further out into left field every year.

They can show up in court, but don't they have to first explain why they were being pointed out in the first place? We can argue about what a sneeze might do, but hopefully one is being pointed at for a very good reason.

 

[stinx]

Gabe makes good points alot of times and other time not so much. I dont agree with his work ethic but will read something he writes and give it consideration YMMV. I do think he very knowledgable about the proper running of an AK47.

 

[FalArAk]

How do all these hypothetical situations being teached by someone who has never been in an actual life or death situation work,do you just read a bunch of books ?

 

[supton]

How do all these hypothetical situations being teached by someone who has never been in an actual life or death situation work,do you just read a bunch of books ?

I believe Suarez has been in something like four incidents. Certainly armchair types can read about a great deal of incidents and the even more numerous takes on said incidents.