The One Huge Advantage of Position SUL

[Dave Williams]

There has been a lot of debate her on THR reference Position SUL. For those of you who don't know what Position SUL is, there are two articles here that describe the position in detail:

http://tftt.com/articles/

Also, here are some THR threads reference Position SUL:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=94382&highlight=SUL

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=40575&highlight=SUL

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=39784&highlight=SUL

I just returned from the 15th National Tactical Invitational(NTI):

www.tacticalteddy.com

During a hectic Force on Force scenario (an armed invasion of a restaurant), an unknown armed man, carrying a pistol in Position SUL, began to move around the restaurant and approach the good guys in the scenario(patrons of the restaurant, some armed). The intent of putting this man in the scenario was complex, but one of the reasons was to see if he'd get shot by the good guys.

Long story short, he was not shot one time by any of the good guys.

I believe that the reason had a lot to do with Position SUL. I believe if the gun had been in a conventional ready position, with the muzzle pointed generally out in front of his body, like Low Ready, or Chest Ready, or High Ready, he'd have been shot early and often, because he'd have been pointing a gun in the direction of the good guys as he approached them.

Keep in mind that in the live fire shoot house stages of the NTI, armed and unarmed good guys (Tactical Ted humanoid targets) are routinely shot, everyone from old ladies sitting on toilets, to cops, to your own son hiding behind a shower curtain.

I think it was significant that no one shot a mobile, obviously armed, unidentified man, during a high stress encounter that obviously involved at least one armed bad guy.

So I believe that out in public, if involved in an armed encounter, if not actively shooting but you still need a gun in your hand, the armed citizen's best chance of not being shot by responding Police who don't know his/her ID is to be in Position SUL.

Thoughts?

Dave Williams

 

[ShackleMeNot]

Interesting point.

I like Sul. I use Sul. It definitely fills a niche.

 

[ShackleMeNot]

I guess Sul isn't worth discussing here...

 

[El Tejon]

Yack, yack, yack--better now, SMN?

So, how do we arrive at the conclusion tacticool tactisul is the determinative factor? Were scenarios done with 3d party good guy in low ready?

Why is not indicative of the caliber of the participants? Everyone at NTI is the fraction of the one percent of gun owners, those dedicated to using their firearms as weapons, not recreational devices, right?

Does it not stand to reason that NTI participants know Rule #4? Does it not stand to reason that NTI participants know the consequences of shooting a non-target?

Why is it not software of the "operators" (I'd like to make a call) rather than the deadly cool technique?

Just my $.02, don't really know, wasn't there. Did anyone debrief the participants and ask them why?

 

[fjolnirsson]

Hmmm. From the pictures, SUL looks very unnatural, uncomfortable to hold for long periods, and awkward to transition from. A brief attempt with my red gun comfirms the visual for me. However, I'm willing to try anything that I can use. I'll give this a try at the range, see what I think. I'll get back to you in a few days, I hope. Right now, I certainly feel more comfortable with the close retention position I was taught in academy. I didn't see it in the pictures. When drawing from a hip holster, the gun is pulled straight up, close to the body, and rotated 90% to point forward. The weak hand lies flat against the chest.

 

[Preacherman]

The main reason I don't like SUL is its lack of a strong two-handed grip on the weapon in case the need for weapon retention arises. It's too easy to rip the gun out of the weak SUL grip before the gun-holder can transition to a more secure grip. Sure, SUL advocates will say that it's harder to get to the gun in the first place in that position: but I've seen it done at LFI in training, and under the right circumstances, I daresay it could happen in the real world.

I'd rather go for a strong low-ready hold, both hands on the gun, both arms extended, and the weapon pointing at the floor. Just as non-threatening to an expert, but much more easily retained if necessary.

 

[mike benedict]

SUL is easy to use and you can easily transition to a shooting position.
It is simple to teach
easy to use
and it works when you have to move around other people.

Mike

 

[Jeff White]

I think El T has a point. Without knowing why the man in position SUL wasn't engaged, (something that we could only find out from the AAR) we can only speculate as to why he wasn't shot.

There are other ways of discretely keeping a pistol in your hand while moving through a crowded room besides SUL. How do you think he might have fared if he'd had his pistol at his side against his thigh? Would anyone have shot him then?

Jeff

 

[Dave Williams]

Sul

-ShackleMeNot, thanks for the jump start.

-El T, at the NTI, Rule 4 violations are common, which of course includes non-hostiles being shot.

-fjolnirsson, the technique you describe has it's place, but it is not for the scenario that I'm describing, namely:

"So I believe that out in public, if involved in an armed encounter, if not actively shooting but you still need a gun in your hand, the armed citizen's best chance of not being shot by responding Police who don't know his/her ID is to be in Position SUL."

-Preacherman, it may be that the technique you describe would end up with the same results.

-mike benedict, Nice summary of SUL...........I would add that it is non-threatening to the good guys.

-Furious Styles, for me SUL flows very nicely into an off hand fend maneuver.

-Jeff White, I was thinking about your point, and I believe that SUL let's the other parties involved KNOW that there is a weapon involved, and that it is pointed in a safe direction, Rules 2,3,4 observed. Which is more than the concealed behind the leg position does(I've used that position many times, it has it's place).

Dave Williams

 

[JohnKSa]

True or False:

Most LEOs know this position and immediately recognize anyone using it as a good guy without question.

True or False:

This position is a good general purpose position and would be recommended for its safety, ease of use and other benefits even if the "LEO ID factor" turns out to be bogus and the user never expects to operate in a team situation.

True or False:

It's SIGNIFICANTLY faster to transition from this position to an effective shooting position than it is to transition from a "hand gripping holstered pistol" position to an effective shooting position.

True or False:

A person using this position is less threatening to an LEO than a person with their hand gripping a holstered pistol.

 

[FPrice]

Now, I am not very tactical, nor am I any sort of "operator". However, in what (little) I have read about Position SUL, it seems that this is a slightly relaxed mode of carry for trained operators which can allow quick transition to a presentation stance.

It does not appear (unless there is something I have not read) to be a method of identifying "non-threatening" shooters or "good guys" to responding LEOs or entry teams.

Perhaps it is just a tool for a very specific set of circumstances? Not a "multi-tool"?

 

[buzz_knox]

Now, I am not very tactical, nor am I any sort of "operator". However, in what (little) I have read about Position SUL, it seems that this is a slightly relaxed mode of carry for trained operators which can allow quick transition to a presentation stance.

It's a technique developed to replace the way in which a South American tac team positioned their weapons during stacking: sticking the muzzles into the neck of the operator in front of them while prepping to move (both to let the operator know they were there and because they couldn't decide which way the muzzles should go during stacking). The instructors who saw what they were doing were naturally horrified, and came up with Position SUL.

No, this isn't a joke.

 

[FPrice]

buzz...

It's a technique developed to replace the way in which a South American tac team positioned their weapons during stacking: sticking the muzzles into the neck of the operator in front of them while prepping to move

Is that anything like the pic of the policeman who was sitting on the muzzle of his shotgun?

 

[buzz_knox]

No, he was just being stupid. This team was doing something stupid in an effort to solve a (real or perceived) problem.

 

[Rob Pincus]

I teach SUL to Executive Protection students for the very reason you figured out Mr. Williams. The idea being that if the gun has to come out (particularly in a crowd situation) we want it to be as low profile as possible.. it also reduces the likelihood of a picture on the cover of the National Enquirer of a bodyguard with a gun pointed at a 13 year old fan.

 

[pax]

JohnKSa ~

F
T
T
F

As to your first question, btw, the issue wasn't whether a person would be instantly identified as a "good guy" based upon the technique they were using. The issue was whether or not someone with a gun out at the ready would accidentally sweep the good guys -- or even be perceived to have done so -- thus drawing (understandable) fire from people who are supposed to be on the same side but don't know it yet.

Jeff ~

With the gun behind my leg, I cannot see the muzzle and I do not know whether it is pointing at anything it should not. With the gun in SUL, I can do both those things. It's also less likely to get tangled in clothing or banged against a nearby object on its way up, if firing is called for.

pax

 

[buzz_knox]

On the other hand, I'd say the answers are

F - no officer is going to consider a ready position to be indicative of good guy status.

F - I don't think it offers any benefit to a normal low ready position except in the very limited area of entrances (where telegraphing one's muzzle might be an issue), and detracts from the ability to retain the weapon. Pulling the weapon lower and back in the low ready position solves these issues.

T but not worth the disadvantages.

F - gun out is always more threatening than one in the holster.

 

[El Tejon]

Alrighty then, for purposes of this thread, let's assume arguendo that position tactisul is a needed, vital part of gun handling.

How is it that tactisul prevented the misidentification issues that Mr. Williams speculated it might?

Aside from the fact that sul is practical, prevents high blood pressure and bad breath and is kind to little kids and kittens, how did it prevent the wrong person from being shot? The operators ("I'd like the area code for Smithville, please") didn't see a gun? The deadly operators knew he was a kindred spirit and well met? The deadly operators thought that tactisul is tacticool and would never shoot a fellow suler?

 

[pax]

Tejon, this isn't rocket science.

If you point your gun at someone who is armed, they might shoot you. Even if you & they are both good guys.

To avoid getting shot by a good guy who doesn't know you, you should avoid pointing your gun at such people.

If you approach someone with your gun in the low ready, or even worse turn and look at someone while your gun is held in the center ready, it's a pretty fair bet that your muzzle will cover some cherished part of that person's body, or be perceived to have done so. Which is, if the person is armed, a good prescription for getting kilted.

If you have to have your gun out, but it isn't yet time to shoot, it may be a good idea to hold it in such a fashion that you are unlikely to sweep the bystanders. Especially you should avoid holding it in, for instance, a ready position which causes your muzzle to sweep everyone & everywhere your eyes & body turn, because in that case you are likely to do something suicidally stupid when the nice officers arrive to find out what's going on.

Of course, once uniformed officers have arrived, you're going to holster your gun or put it down. Just as soon as you've looked and seen that it's them. Of course, having been to Gun Skul, you won't suffer the effects of tunnel vision, so of course you won't reflexively turn your body toward the unexpected noise of their arrival...with your gun held however you've been holding it during the entire encounter.

pax

 

[Trisha]

Hmmm. Why was the unknown SUL not engaged? Imagining myself in the scenario described, the SUL unknown does not - on a moment by moment evaluation - present an immediate threat as he moves, even if the carry position is completely unfamiliar. CQB/high stress focuses and distills one's training into reflex: the visible weapon is not presented as a threat.

SUL could fill a niche for urban folks.

The more realistically and intensively one trains, the more incremental potential for surviving all stages and aspects of a surprise lethal force situation - and that really tasks the definition of diversity!

Trisha

 

[buzz_knox]

Imagining myself in the scenario described, the SUL unknown does not - on a moment by moment evaluation - present an immediate threat as he moves, even if the carry position is completely unfamiliar. CQB/high stress focuses and distills one's training into reflex: the visible weapon is not presented as a threat.

A visible weapon isn't a threat? If training has indicated anything, it's that a weapon can be brought into action extremely quickly regardless of its initial starting point.

The target wasn't engaged because those participating screwed up. Don't expect bad guys or cops not to see a weapon in position SUL to be anything besides what it is: a drawn weapon and clear threat.

 

[Trisha]

Absolutely, Buzz - I would expect LEOs and goblins to automatically engage anyone with a visible weapon. A visible weapon is automatically a threat, but the decision to engage as a civilian good girl requires a lot more than that, and such was what I attempted to communicate in my previous post.

The force on force situation described would be extremely complex. My experience has been such that I would not automatically draw from concealment and engage someone in civilian clothes if they were not facing/focused on me (though it would and has always seen the christmas tree light up). I would have been involved in literally dozens of shootings to date had I automatically engaged anyone observed in public wearing civilian clothes openly carrying (not holstered) a pistol within 50 yards.

My CQB rules are satisfied and I engage when the unknown civilian presents a weapon and is focused on me, or someone blatently defenseless.

I hope this clarifies.

 

[El Tejon]

pax, and we know this how? No side by side in various low ready positions were run. Why not speculate about the color of the shirt of the non-target? Or, as buzz sez, the deadly operators missed it completely?

 

[FPrice]

So I believe that out in public, if involved in an armed encounter, if not actively shooting but you still need a gun in your hand, the armed citizen's best chance of not being shot by responding Police who don't know his/her ID is to be in Position SUL.

Having a gun out when the police respond is probably a heartbeat and 5-10 pounds of pressure away from getting shot.

In the vast majority of instances, the police are probably not going to know who is whom when they respond and they will most likely treat any gun-toting person as a potential threat. And the more gun-unfriendly the area, the more likely this is to happen. (Mental note: This could be a very good reason to get to know your local police, and better yet, let them get to know YOU and your sterling character if you ever envision having to be in this situation.)

IIRC this was a concern during planning for the US Iranian Embassy hostage rescue planning. Delta knew that there were several people in the group who, if a rescue commenced, would most likely seize the opportunity to try to over-power guards, grab weapons, and eliminate said guards. Delta also knew that if their operators encountered these people they would most likely be shot since the Delta people could not afford the luxury of trying to identify targets by face. I believe that one of the precautions given to people who might have to face being hostages is that, in case of a dynamic rescue effort, stay down and as out of the way as possible and do NOT try to grab a bad guy's weapon.

Position SUL is a relaxed yet guarded ready position for members of a team to use at the appropriate time - NOT a univeral good-guy ID.

 

[centac]

Actually I believe it dates to Princess Gate, and probably long before that. A plainclothes London Metropolitan Police Constable had managed to keep his revolver concealed from the Iranians for the duration. The SAS were concerned that one of their shooters might dump the guy if the Bobby rose to the guns.

I believe that SOP for the SAS is to tap anyone displaying a weapon, knowing full well that this may lead to mistakes in ID that are likely unavoidable in the circumstances. They also cuff/tape everyone until IDs are verified.

I havent found a pressing need to have a gun muzzle pointed anywhere near my groin, but thats just me.