Offensive display of negligence and incompetence.

Or is it?  I have nothing horrible to say about Tactical Response.  I can’t.  I have yet to enroll in one of their classes.   However, I’ve heard nothing but great things from my peers, so this really surprised me — or should it?

A friend forwarded this post from Todd’s pistol training blog:

It’s a real video.  See it here.

Perhaps the gentleman in the picture has casual experience with gunfire – that’s his choice to be in the line of fire.  However, the shooters on the line continue to fire.  Perhaps they have immediate control of their firearm; therefore, I won’t immediately discount the student’s judgment, but I am curious about the instructor’s thought process during this string of fire.

Tactical Response is known to go against the grain, so I won’t immediately regard this as negligence – though most of us know that it doesn’t give us that warm-fuzzy feeling inside.  I do admit that this certainly pushes the envelope.

Edit:

I decided to do a bit of investigating to uncover their reasoning.  I think I’m more intrigued by this answer than concerned:

Originally posted by Shay VanVlymen:
I left Tactical Response for quite a few reasons. I haven’t talked about it much in public so now let me be clear. Drills such as these and the constant focus on Mindset were the reason I stayed so long.

No other school cares more about its students’ abilities to fight.

I love how all the other schools’ instructors and students are coming out of the woodwork to condemn Jay being between targets. All I see an instructor who actually trusts the students he has taught. Where is their faith in the product they produce?

I think a suitable end to this post is this quote:

Everything I did in my life that was worthwhile, I caught hell for.
-Earl Warren