IS SCANNING REALLY AN AFTER ACTION DRILL?

[cedartop]

So while thinking of the Vegas ordeal and a question posed by bwframe I remembered this article by my former fellow SI Instructor Chris Upchurch. Chris is a prolific writer and has a way of getting people thinking. In this article he deals with the dreaded After Action Assessment and its place in the gunfight. Many people decry this as a Tactical "linedance" but I don't hear those people putting forth a good solution for the problem we are trying to solve, a problem it appears that our GG in the Vegas shooting was killed by. Read the article and post your thoughts maybe we can figure something out.

Is Scanning Really an After Action Drill? ? GUNFIGHTING 101

 

[jdhaines]

Geez, that's a tough one. I've never had all that great of a feeling about the way most scans are presented. I felt like I was doing it on the range but might not do it in real life. I'm not sure it was bad information, I just didn't feel like I ever really ingrained it.

A possible solution to this comes from something else I've been wrestling with since last October...Shoot/Move/Communicate. Two quick stories explain where I'm coming from:

• The first comes from a class I took last October - VCAST with Shivworks. It was 3 days dealing with shooting and fighting around cars. The part that is relevant is wrapped around watching two .mil guys (one Army SF, and one an NCO in the Marines) shoot/move/communicate in the form of problem solving, talking, shooting, and managing a complex scenario at night with multiple good and bad guys around cars. It was an absolute mess and everyone struggled more or less...but those two guys sailed through it. No doubt because of their time actually spent doing EXACTLY that in their jobs.
• The other is from reading a blog from an ex Army SF guy who talks a lot about small group tactics and how you need to be able to shoot move and communicate. I've gotten some feedback from some of these types of people with drills to help you work through stress and handle these problems.
• Honestly, going through the mindset labs classes I had my stress level amped up enough to have to work through stress, and saw an increase in capability by the end of the coursework. Back to the problem at hand...

All that said, I think the problem with effectively scanning is being able to slow the problems down and be outside of the raw fear / adrenal dump mode. I'm honestly thinking that if you are completely surprised by what is happening, you just shot someone, your mind is running a mile a minute on injuries/family safety/bystanders/good shots?/is he done/jail/legal fees/heart rate/catching your breath/cops coming/reholster/reload!/scan....the scanning is going to get lost. By that I mean that for most of us without the right background in training and stress management, we'll probably not scan and will be open to getting shot by that second person. I'm thinking more and more it's just a fact of life...sort of how some of us are going to lose that street brawl with an urban 'ute if it progresses to that point.

If we can work ourselves to the point where the situation doesn't overwhelm us, we're in a place where we've been before, and we still have thinking capacity left.......maybe moving and looking for more bad guys will just be something we do during our problem solving period after the incident takes place. It certainly should be. I just think it's unrealistic to expect someone to do MORE after they've just fallen into a pit of the most stress they've ever experienced in their lives. Getting them to the point of getting a gun out and actually fighting...let alone winning, is a hell of a WIN for most people.

I don't know if that's really an answer, but I think it's a huge problem with lots of pieces that will be extremely difficult to sort out. Getting someone to scan seems to be wrapped in it. Easy to teach and do when stress is low, but very difficult to do when the stress is through the roof.

Maybe the answer is to get people in classes to get through the shooting portion, then have them work on simply moving to cover and trying to take in information about what is going on. Deal with one problem at a time...I'm not sure.

 

[cedartop]

Good points Josh. Also as regards to something lie the recent Las Vegas incident, we need pre and mid fight scans as well. How is this accomplished? Some of this we cover in Managing Confrontations. If we are looking for what is out of place in a case like this one it may be that everyone is either frozen or fleeing. If you see someone besides yourself moving with a purpose, that may be a clue to observe. Another reason why getting to cover, if possible, can be more important than just stopping bullets from the immediate threat. It can also give you a point to do a scan from while in relative safety.

 

[ModernGunner]

Yessir, CT. While I've not seen any video footage of exactly how the GG was attacked, my gut feeling is that that he assessed too little before involving himself into the situation. Nor have I yet read or heard whether the GG had ANY sort of training, let alone combat training. So, it's hard to assess what went wrong, since so far, there's been scant details, AFAIK.

JMO, but this is one of the 'flaws' that I've noted and (to the chagrin of some) been 'vocal' about. Instructors who teach 'combat' training when that Instructor has never been involved in such a scenario. Hard to teach what one doesn't know, or about which the Instructior has only ever theorized.

Similarly, just from my own observations, too many Instructors and businesses that teach 'combat' spend too much time playing 'gotcha' games with their students. The student is there to learn, not for the Instructor to play a 'gotcha' on the student to 'teach the student a lesson'.

As repeatedly noted, it's not a 'game'. And doing such disservices to those seeking training can have deadly consequences.

One thing I would offer is, in addition to feedback from the students both before and after the training course, Instructors and training courses hire someone to come in, as a bystander, and review and critique the course. AFAIK, the typical methodology is to have the owner review what the Instructors are doing, or the Instructors critique one another, maybe with aid of critiques from the students.

However, that doesn't submit the training to a hard critique of what is excellent, what needs improvement, and what should be scrapped. Critiques or surveys from the students are beneficial, but it must be kept in mind that the student typically doesn't KNOW what he or she is supposed to know, hence what they should be taught.

It's not my intent to lambast ANY Instructor or training 'business', and I certainly believe ALL training is helpful and useful. But I do wonder why some prospective student would seek out training, particularly 'defensive combat' training, from anyone who hasn't "been there - done that".

Which MAY be what happened with the GG at the Walmart in Las Vegas. Unless someone in his family knows and is asked, we may never know.

 

[jdhaines]

We cover some of the pre-fight portion, but there is a huge monster of a problem that I think most of the industry still hasn't figured out. Shay has a good lock on another portion. Craig certainly hits some during his evos. Rogers school nailed down some pure shooting stress with his range of auto targets. How can regular people get to the point that .mil guys and at least a small subset of LEOs get to with regards to being able to function under stress. If the answer is simply go to a dangerous job day in and day out I'm going to be an unhappy camper. Stress from something like BJJ seems to get easier, but does that help with other types of stress?

I'm curious about whether research has shown that "stress is stress" or if you need to be exposed to the kind you are trying to get better at. I think I remember discussions showing that physical exertion does not equal adrenal stress and we can see that by seeing that people who are in better shape don't handle complex adrenal problems any better...but could I get in a boxing ring with a much bigger scarier guy...overcome that stress problem over time, and be better during a shooting?

I'll see if I can dig anything up, although someone with experience in psychology of stress would probably know off the top of their head. I can't remember anyone like that in this community but hopefully someone chimes in. I really feel like if we can solve the stress inoculation problem (or even make some solid headway) then scanning becomes one of many things that can fall in line.

 

[obijohn]

The foremost problem, in my mind, is that most of the time we would be acting alone. Add information overload to an adrenaline dump and our mostly christian upbringing, means that, again to me, we need to train and drill the basics past intuitive. If our marksmanship, our "choreography", our manual of arms are solid, then we will have the cognitive capacity to manage. Just my two cents. ACT teaches "after action" threat scans at the 101 and 201 levels. Constant scene management comes into play at the 301 level.

Of course if I always roll with my fire team....

 

[Expatriated]

What I am confused about in the article is the separation of shooting and scanning. He refers to it as after action. To me, it's not an after action activity. It's part of the action. Each drill I do on the range involves a scan. The drill isn't over until the students have determined things are safe. I am a HUGE proponent of scanning. And frankly, I am not having difficulty with getting students to scan.

What I see so many instructors doing is not holding the students to a high standard when it comes to scanning. A super quick head motion 20 degrees on either side of the target is, for some reason, sufficient for instructors. Not for me. I won't take that scan any more than I'll accept a round in the wrist of the target as a hit. No way.

My scans are required to be intentional and you HAVE to see what I'm wanting you to scan for. If you scan and are back in the holster and can't tell me how many fingers I had up...well, push-up time. If I ask you what color the car is in the back of the range, you better be able to answer. My students do a lot of push-ups in the beginning.

What we are trying to accomplish in our scanning is an actual REGISTERING of what's going on. Not just looking, but SEEING.

Do students forget this under stress? Sure. At first. With proper training, they ingrain it like they do anything else.

Of course, I don't consider a scan to be an "advanced" technique. To me, it's as important as finger off the trigger until you're on target and are ready to shoot. Meaning, that in my class, you'll be doing a 360 degree scan within an hour of arriving the first day.

Like any other thing involving stress--at first it seems like things are moving 100mph. Do it enough under stress and things seem to be slower, but really, it's cause you're able to process them faster. It's like the first time I shot skeet. I thought, "How in the heck can I ever hit that thing--there's no time." Eventually it got to be old hat and they seemed to slow down a lot. Obviously, they didn't slow down, I was able to keep up better.

I think we will mostly agree that shooting is predominantly a mental exercise. And it should be taught as such. However much you're using your gun in a defensive situation, you need to be using your brain 10 times more. Unfortunately most shooting instructors today teach the gun as the primary weapon. They're more concerned with holes in paper than weapon manipulation and situation management.

 

[Cameramonkey]

The Vegas incident was a red herring in relation to this article. He was ambushed by the very stereotypical "no go" target we all train with... the innocent looking woman, in this case pushing a shopping cart as reported by at least one news outlet. She employed pretty much perfect camo in this situation and managed to look like just another shopper.

Unless this hero had seen them enter the store together, I'm not sure how much pre-assessment he could have done that would have saved his life by preventing him being blindsided by her putting a bullet in his back. But I do appreciate the thought going into this, even though the incident isnt a perfect match for the article.

Very good food for thought. It now has me considering one other thing in my mental toolbox; Dont overly focus on the aggressor. Using Vegas as an example. If he only fired once into the air and hasnt targeted anyone yet, why blindly give him the bum's rush and engage up close? Assess the situation... the WHOLE situation before engaging the target. Keep that OODA loop processing, and evaluate the WHOLE playing field before exposing yourself as an equally armed opponent.

For example, in the Vegas incident he reportedly fired one shot in the air and yelled a statement. So you see him. Anyone near him that is calm and isnt freaked out? Could be another member of his/her party. The average person watching this isnt about to stand there calmly pushing a shopping cart; They are gonna GTF outta Dodge, duck and cover, etc.

 

[cedartop]

The Vegas incident was a red herring in relation to this article. He was ambushed by the very stereotypical "no go" target we all train with... the innocent looking woman, in this case pushing a shopping cart as reported by at least one news outlet. She employed pretty much perfect camo in this situation and managed to look like just another shopper.

Unless this hero had seen them enter the store together, I'm not sure how much pre-assessment he could have done that would have saved his life by preventing him being blindsided by her putting a bullet in his back. But I do appreciate the thought going into this, even though the incident isnt a perfect match for the article.

Very good food for thought. It now has me considering one other thing in my mental toolbox; Dont overly focus on the aggressor. Using Vegas as an example. If he only fired once into the air and hasnt targeted anyone yet, why blindly give him the bum's rush and engage up close? Assess the situation... the WHOLE situation before engaging the target. Keep that OODA loop processing, and evaluate the WHOLE playing field before exposing yourself as an equally armed opponent.

For example, in the Vegas incident he reportedly fired one shot in the air and yelled a statement. So you see him. Anyone near him that is calm and isnt freaked out? Could be another member of his/her party. The average person watching this isnt about to stand there calmly pushing a shopping cart; They are gonna GTF outta Dodge, duck and cover, etc.

Chris wrote the article well before the Las Vegas incident. He does however talk about how there should be more to scanning then just the post fight portion which is where I thought it related. Foe that reason I don't think it is a red herring and you seem to agree judging by your last sentence.

 

[cedartop]

Expatriated, I think most, well maybe not most, but I teach scanning much the same as you. (Minus the pushups, too many students who couldn't do one) What the point of the article is, I believe is there should be more to it than that as to the narrowing of the focus before the shooting, or stabbing, or whatever the needed violence is. I hate to call it situational awareness because that is overused and everyone can be got, but it does relate to that.

 

[churchmouse]

Not to derail the thread as the conversation is good but, the new deal is LEO offed the civilian. If that is the case the new scenario is how to deal with that "THREAT"
Not LEO bashing at all. They are entering a high stress environment with active shooters.

 

[cedartop]

Not to derail the thread as the conversation is good but, the new deal is LEO offed the civilian. If that is the case the new scenario is how to deal with that "THREAT"
Not LEO bashing at all. They are entering a high stress environment with active shooters.

The police killed the BG not the GG. Previously they had said the wife killed her partner then herself. Is that what you mean?

 

[Expatriated]

Expatriated, I think most, well maybe not most, but I teach scanning much the same as you. (Minus the pushups, too many students who couldn't do one) What the point of the article is, I believe is there should be more to it than that as to the narrowing of the focus before the shooting, or stabbing, or whatever the needed violence is. I hate to call it situational awareness because that is overused and everyone can be got, but it does relate to that.

I kind of got the feeling I wasn't getting the full point of the article

I think it goes to the lecture that I sometimes go into about the difference from being legally/morally/ethically justified in BEING ABLE to shoot someone vs. absolutely HAVING NO CHOICE but to shoot someone. That goes to evaluation before involvement. To evaluate, you have to analyze and process everything to make split second decisions. Easier said than done. And why LEO's get criticized so much for excessive or not-enough use of force. It's a tough thing to process instantly.

 

[Streck-Fu]

So while thinking of the Vegas ordeal and a question posed by bwframe I remembered this article by my former fellow SI Instructor Chris Upchurch. Chris is a prolific writer and has a way of getting people thinking. In this article he deals with the dreaded After Action Assessment and its place in the gunfight. Many people decry this as a Tactical "linedance" but I don't hear those people putting forth a good solution for the problem we are trying to solve, a problem it appears that our GG in the Vegas shooting was killed by. Read the article and post your thoughts maybe we can figure something out.

I took a class with Patrick MacNamara and he is not a fan of the 'scan'. He explains that it began as an administrative training method to get trainees to break the mental focus after shooting exercises like work in the shoot house. It was a way to get the students to return the trainees to situational awareness and identify where the other teammates are and reduce any accidents.

Somewhere in time, it evolved from a mental focus break to operational gospel.

That covers the after action portion of the scan.

One of the many problems of dealing a conflict is that, unlike the police or military units, we civilians will most likely be working alone (parent team in Florida not withstanding) and must handle both the the assessment (scan) and focus on the identified threats as the situation develops. We humans are terrible multi-taskers. We can do really only one thing at a time. Even when we think we are multi-tasking, we are breaking up those multiple tasks into individual moments of focus. Whether typing, talking on the phone, or driving, etc, we do one thing at a time even if momentarily switching back to the other activitiy.

Applying this to threat engagement....Being civilians, we almost always are reactive to conflict. Hopefully, we recognize it in advance to prep ourselves a little bit, but we are always reactive to the threat presentation. So you start with a focus on an identified threat, now you want to scan for additional threats. To do so, you have to break focus on the known threat, scan for unknown, return focus, scan, repeat.....

What you actually do here has to be driven by how immediate the threat is. If you are not directly threatened, great! You can assess and possibly move to a superior vantage. But what if someone else is directly threatened? How you now define your relationship with that person defines how you react. If it's a stranger, you may decide to seek that advantage or risk harm to them while try to keep your SA up by scanning again. If it is your wife or kids threatened, I bet you go full focus to engage the threat to them.

Any such focus means you are not scanning. Scanning means you are not focusing. And it sucks that we have to do it all, probably alone, until the Calvary arrives.

So what do we do?

The best possible answer to be situationaly aware enough to see the event develop, identify the threats, and quickly decide a course of action. Outside, that, do the best you can.

 

[cedartop]

I honestly don't remember Pat addressing the issue in the last class I did with him. Most of the other students were SWAT guys and they were scanning. If I do another class with him later this year I will be sure to ask. That being said then, are we just to ignore the whole issue and don't scan at all?

 

[iChokePeople]

.

 

[Streck-Fu]

I honestly don't remember Pat addressing the issue in the last class I did with him. Most of the other students were SWAT guys and they were scanning. If I do another class with him later this year I will be sure to ask. That being said then, are we just to ignore the whole issue and don't scan at all?

I edited my post to add content that should address this.

And he presented the post shooting scan as a habit forming issue with no practical application. Meaning, on a square range, shot twice, scan holster, repeat.

 

[rhino]

Changed my mind. Nothing to see here!

 

[churchmouse]

The police killed the BG not the GG. Previously they had said the wife killed her partner then herself. Is that what you mean?

No...read a link put up that the GG died from a LEO fired round. Can not verify if true but it was in the Vegas shooting thread. Been to busy to verify. Still, that throws another hitch in this scenario.

 

[cedartop]

I edited my post to add content that should address this.

And he presented the post shooting scan as a habit forming issue with no practical application. Meaning, on a square range, shot twice, scan holster, repeat.

Thanks for the edit. Focus is definitely variable to the immediateness of the situation. Am I looking for answers where there aren't any?