Do You Ever Comply?

[RetiredUSNChief]

Here's the deal: in that training scenario, the "carjacker" was an instructor who was trained and prepared to shoot at you if you decide to floor it and get out of there. His reactions and muscle memory were already set up in his head. He is also probably an accomplished marksman. If he were a bad guy, he would be what you would call a "trained killer."

In real life, however, you almost certainly won't be dealing with a trained killer. You may be dealing with someone who is prepared to kill, but not someone who has practiced this exact scenario over and over again and is also an accomplished marksman to boot.

Were this to happen in real life, the best scenario is to floor it while ducking down. There's a solid chance you'll nail the guy with your mirror, and even you don't, he's going to be shaken by nearly getting run over. I'm guessing you'll survive 95% of the time in this situation.

My own experience:

I have considered such a situation before, and I watch for it. One time, I was stopped at a light. I was in "pole position" (which is where carjackers always strike, since jumping in a car you can't immediately drive away is stupid). This particular light had the stop bar a good 10 feet back from the crosswalk. There was also a median that ended at the stop bar. As I'm sitting there, I see a pedestrian suddenly deviate from the crosswalk and start heading towards my driver side door, which was locked.

I am left-handed, but ambidextrous when it comes to pistols. I carry a Polish P-64 on my left hip in a cavalry draw (handle forward) position. The moment I saw him start heading my way, my left hand went to the handle. In a split second I could have that gun out and in my right hand, aimed at him. I also was prepared to floor it and get the hell out of there. He could not see what I was doing, as I kept it concealed and I also drive a tall vehicle (FJ Cruiser).

Fortunately, for both of us, he, for whatever reason, had just decided to stop at the median instead of finishing crossing (I don't know why; he had plenty of time and getting to the median took about as long as to the other side, and he definitely wasn't a panhandler). I don't know what he heck he was thinking, but I don't think he would have expected what would have transpired had he had ill intentions.

Well, of course he's a trained instructor. They probably don't have very many actual carjackers out there doing this training for a living.

But to say that the "best scenario" is what you describe belies the conditions of the actual circumstances one may find themselves in. You cannot, for example, "floor it while ducking down" if there's nowhere for you to go when you floor it.

And this particular car jacking scenario isn't even the most likely one, necessarily. A quite popular way of conducting car jackings is a minor car accident which prompts the parties to get out of their vehicles, like a miner rear-ending. You got a car too close to you in front and one on your bumper, you ain't flooring it and getting away.

And many carjackers DO practice, even if they may not be "trained killers".


The purpose of any given interactive training is to develop and exercise a particular skill set, in this case involving situational awareness, evaluation, and action based upon the specific circumstances.


And congratulations on heading off your own potentially deadly encounter.

 

[WardenWolf]

Again, no halfway intelligent carjacker is going to jack a car that's not at the front of the stack or with nowhere to go. Because they need to get away themselves. And if they have somewhere to go, then so do you.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

Again, no halfway intelligent carjacker is going to jack a car that's not at the front of the stack or with nowhere to go. Because they need to get away themselves. And if they have somewhere to go, then so do you.

Again...not necessarily so.

First of all, we're making assumptions here which support a narrow range of actions. Change any of those assumptions, and that narrow range is not necessarily viable any longer. For example:

- Car jackers in Puerto Rico, have been known to work in tandem with two or more vehicles. One in front, which blocks one avenue of escape, and one behind to engage with minor bumper kiss.

- And then you have the car jackers that aren't particularly intelligent at all and hijack vehicles which aren't at the head of the line.

- There are some car jackers who target specific vehicles based on value and work the traffic patterns to get the vehicles they want even if they're not at the head of the pack.

- Some car jackers won't care because you're in the middle of nowhere and shooting you first is the easiest way to get the job done with nobody else around.


The whole point is that the specific circumstances have to be evaluated and acted upon for what they actually are...not what our preconceived notions may be. The moment we lock our actions down to a single act or a narrow range of actions based on preconceived notions we have failed ourselves. It is our responsibility to train ourselves in the basics and allow the flexibility required to adapt that training to the real-life circumstances we may actually encounter.

There's an old saying: "no battle plan ever survives contact with the enemy". That doesn't mean "don't have a plan", nor does it mean that the enemy will prevail because the plan failed. It means we have to be adept at modifying our plan based on real-time feedback.

 

[Kleanbore]

Post #53

...is worth careful reflection.

The scenario notwithstanding, I am more concerned about an attack that takes place in a parking lot or at curbside, say wham someone pops into the passenger seat after you have dropped someone off.

 

[strambo]

The whole point is that the specific circumstances have to be evaluated and acted upon for what they actually are...not what our preconceived notions may be. The moment we lock our actions down to a single act or a narrow range of actions based on preconceived notions we have failed ourselves. It is our responsibility to train ourselves in the basics and allow the flexibility required to adapt that training to the real-life circumstances we may actually encounter.

There's an old saying: "no battle plan ever survives contact with the enemy". That doesn't mean "don't have a plan", nor does it mean that the enemy will prevail because the plan failed. It means we have to be adept at modifying our plan based on real-time feedback.

Yes! Training should be simple building blocks not complete strategies for a given scenario. This allows your subconscious to select the "block" that fits in the moment vs. you only knowing to do one of a few pre-rehearsed techniques.

The simplest building block would be a single strike to a single target. If you train to strike weak areas of the body from all angles you'll be way better off then if you simply memorized a half dozen 3-5 strike fighting "techniques" and then try to adapt one of those in an instant to what you face. What if you get knocked to the ground from behind? Does one of your techniques start there? I have practiced injuring/striking from face down probably hundreds of times, can be as simple as rolling your body over their ankle.

Shooting is the same, practice moving off line and putting rapid bursts of fire on target from different positions, angles and distances. Practice drawing and not immediately shooting. Practice scanning. Practice surgical head/heart shots from various distance. Practice from cover. From prone, from the back, 1 handed....

Don't just practice to always draw, side step, and double tap as a rote response.

For anti-carjacking, you need to be able to shoot, fight H2H and to evasively drive. One or all of those skills may be needed or none (comply).