Bringing a knife to a gunfight- Tueller Drill (21 foot rule)

[Regular Guy]

EDITED: Why am I arguing with a small arms repair tech? Hey man, I'm sorry you think I'm a stupid boot (I'm a Sergeant, and I left active duty last year), and I'm sure you're well trained. Enjoy your day, have a good one.

Yeah, I've trained with TDW, no worries, he can rock. I've trained with a few others on this forum, they all can hold their own.
I'd like to chime in on OC sprays. Even if your totally immune to pepper spray, which is unpossible, you still have to deal with a liquid coming at your face. You either have to put up a hand to block it, shut your eyes because liquid is being sprayed at them, deal with temporary blindness or turn you head to the side. There is no way not to react to anything coming at your face, watch folks who get sprayed in the face with just water, almost everyone reacts. That alone makes spray vaild. Even if it gives you one second of advantage that's one second I'll take in a fight that may last seconds.
Even if you're tough enough to take a hit of spray to the face and still fight, as TDW mentioned, you're not going to fight at 100%. Most folks that spray each other and train know they're going to get sprayed. Try it when you're not ready, it will have a different effect because you're not expecting it. No matter what, it will effect you in some way. I'm not saying that spray is the end all, be all but it does, IMO, have a place in the self defense spectrum.
My one caveat is there must be a secondary level to the use of spray. Some thing that can deliver defensive strikes. I futhermore think the spray must be held with the support side hand. This will leave the strong side free to address the secondary level of defense.

[TDW586]

Also, in case I did not make it clear, I am not advocating the use of OC spray as a response to an active, committed attack with a knife. OC is properly regarded as a less-lethal item, and should not be used as a primary defense against an attack with a lethal weapon, as it would hold the same disadvantages of deployment as a firearm and is less likely to be decisively incapacitating. However, with good situational awareness you may be able to see an attack developing and use less-lethal options to prevent it.

[Regular Guy]

Also, in case I did not make it clear, I am not advocating the use of OC spray as a response to an active, committed attack with a knife. OC is properly regarded as a less-lethal item, and should not be used as a primary defense against an attack with a lethal weapon, as it would hold the same disadvantages of deployment as a firearm and is less likely to be decisively incapacitating. However, with good situational awareness you may be able to see an attack developing and use less-lethal options to prevent it.

It's kind of goofy that even needs to be mentioned. I think the folks reading this have to realize spray is a quazi-preventative measure, at best. Spray is not a fighting tool. Once the fight gets physical common sense would dictate any liquid that is lawful for us is no longer valid. Clarification, I'm not saying you're wrong for saying it.

A perfect use of spray would have been the fellow who threatened me in the Publix parking lot. Not an active physical threat but he was making threats to harm my person.

[Murph]

Also, in case I did not make it clear, I am not advocating the use of OC spray as a response to an active, committed attack with a knife.

It's kind of goofy that even needs to be mentioned.

After seeing some of the things posted in this thread, there are a lot of misguided ideas out there. But I totally agree, it's pretty sad when you have to disclaimer everything.

This is one of those not sure to laugh or cry kind of moments.

[400 Grains]

Also, in case I did not make it clear, I am not advocating the use of OC spray as a response to an active, committed attack with a knife. OC is properly regarded as a less-lethal item, and should not be used as a primary defense against an attack with a lethal weapon, as it would hold the same disadvantages of deployment as a firearm and is less likely to be decisively incapacitating. However, with good situational awareness you may be able to see an attack developing and use less-lethal options to prevent it.

It's kind of goofy that even needs to be mentioned. I think the folks reading this have to realize spray is a quazi-preventative measure, at best. Spray is not a fighting tool. Once the fight gets physical common sense would dictate any liquid that is lawful for us is no longer valid. Clarification, I'm not saying you're wrong for saying it.

A perfect use of spray would have been the fellow who threatened me in the Publix parking lot. Not an active physical threat but he was making threats to harm my person.

That's about it. Though you had better be able to convince the cops, and maybe a jury, that you felt immediately threatened beyond "bare fear". Cops have a little more leeway in using it, as they're not expected to walk away from someone trying to start a fight. While pepper spray may be sold at the drug store, it's misuse, (or perceived misuse), is still a felony in many places, subject to prison time, and all the other ugly things a felony conviction brings. Some of the recent filmed applications of it to OWS protestors, have likely increased the chances of criminal charges being brought if you can't justify why you used it.

OC is world's ahead of the CN and CS sprays we were issued before, but it doesn't affect everyone, and it's not instantaneous, (except on me....). It's a "seriously, back the fuck away" tool, not a fight stopper after it's already started. Great for college kids refusing to get out of your face when you're closing down their illegal drinking party at 2 AM, but lousy for the jacked ex-con that's already decided to twist your head off.

Would I spray someone threatening me with a knife?

Hell no.

[OldSchool45b]

OK, my second message was out of line, I apologize for that. My first one was not meant to be condescending though. But here is a little background on me.

22yrs Military experience
4 deployments with the SF
I have trained thousands of US and foreign soldiers on everything from basic and advanced marksmaship, IED recognition and counter measures, Urban warfare, Convoy operations, SUT, foreign weapons, DDM and sniper (for the UTANG).
I am a repeated graduate of the Special Forces Basic Combat Course, Support and also an instructor.
I have trained probably a thousand civilians on pistol, rifle, shotgun, precision rifle, defensive pistol, TTTC.
I wrote a POI for DHS in 2005 outlining the use of thermal imagers at ports of entry to detect contraband stored in vehicle panels, then adapted that POI to detect IED and UXO at dusk for the military (primarily used by people clearing ranges of UXO prior to use, this has been used a Dugway proving grounds to clear areas that were ranges decades ago but have been re-purposed)
Licensed SOT and NFA MFG for 15yrs
I currently work for one of the leading firearms lawyers in the western US who has written one of the best books on the self defense laws in all 50 states.
With Mitch (Vilos, the lawyer) we have written one of the most comprehensive defensive pistol course for use in Utah and states that have similar laws.
I also consult for him as a expert witness and paralegal on matters of NFA law and defensive shooting.

So I have a bit of experience both in down range operations and dealing with lethal force training state side as well. My comments about finding and getting training are not based on just wide eyed speculation, but from teaching these classes and helping people defending themselves in court post incident. TIFFIW, but I see this stuff come through the office weekly, and training and using "reasonable man" judgement based on your training is everything when you are justifying your actions or building a defense. Quality training with an instructor that knows the laws in your area will teach you your left and right range limits and help you better prepare, mentally and physically for a potential deadly force encounter. If this is something you view as important to your survival all the speculation and debate online will not get you a fraction of what a quality class will give you. Get Mitch's book and learn the laws in your state, get a quality instruction and document it.

[AKFTW]

I have never been sprayed with OC spray, but the point I was trying to make was that as a civilian, I just don't see the niche for it in most encounters, and definitely not in the context of an impending knife fight. If you are not in fear of your life enough to go to guns, but you have the opportunity to use OC spray, why not just GTFO or otherwise de-escalate the encounter? Any time when you could use OC spray (except against hostile/wild dogs, where I see it having utility), you could be putting obstacles between you and your potential knife attacker, and any other time it's either excessive (and hard to defend in court), or too little too late. I just don't see a time or place for it in most context for the CCW civilian.

[tarafore]

Okay, let me see if I can sum up the general consensus:

by "Pepper Spray" I mean "pepper spray in hand ready to go, while I'm walking to the parking lot, which is discreet and won't cause a panic the way walking out with gun in hand would," NOT "pepper spray in my pocket where I can't get to it."

Pepper Spray is useful for:
The "Hostile Interview" phase, before the attack is committed (aka, the 'threats and intimidation' phase).
Physically weak individuals in areas where they can't have guns (it's better than a 80-year old's punch)
Vicious animals

Pepper Spray is not useful for:
Committed attackers - it might take them out, but it might not, and that's a big might.
Really close range, because it will get on you if they're that close, and you'll end up 'maced' too

So carrying it, out-and-ready, might be okay, so long as you're willing and able to drop it and go bare-hand if a committed attack happens, but don't expect it to work against a meth-head, fanatic, etc. On the other hand, if it slows your response to a committed attack, it might actually be a negative.

BUT it has to be in the off-hand, so as to not slow down your draw (your good hand should be going for your gun, if there's a committed attack going on or imminent).

Is this roughly right?

Would this change with something like Kimber's high-powered, long-range pepper spray gun, or is that just a more expensive delivery system for the same stuff?

I'm not even going to ask about Tasers, because they're the same size as a gun, can be mistaken for a gun at a distance, and thus aren't good candidates for carrying out and ready in the first place. Clearly, if you have time to draw something, draw a gun.

[Tetra Grammaton Cleric]

Reading thru this, i'm wondering if this might be an argument for carrying pepper spray in the weak hand. It can be discretely carried ready to spray, and give more range (and, theoretically, effectiveness) than a punch. This would be in addition to, not instead of, a handgun.

Is this useful, or am I way off-base?
(I'm no expert)

I think it's an arguement for carrying a knife on the weak side 9o'clock or 11o'clock. A fast deploying specialized short fighting knife to augment the pistol, like the little TDI or the Bloodshark.

Isn't the idea "Don't bring a knife to a gunfight and don't bring a gun to a stabbing" ?

A defensive knife draw is faster than a pistol draw isn't it?


@6:01

If a threat is within what you define to be an applicable "Tueller Drill" range for the situation go for the knife (bring a knife to a stabbing). No?
If the threat is outside that range but a threat nonetheless then "Choot 'em".

So yeah, I think a fast, specialized knife on the weak side is a solution.

That W.E Fairbairn quote says a lot.


(Also no expert)
-

[400 Grains]

I've got to disagree, it absolutely is going to help in certain situations. Have you ever been sprayed? The way you dismiss OC as mildly irritating makes me think you haven't.

OC is extremely useful if you've got someone threatening you, knife or not. Even as a civilian, if someone approaches you in a way that makes you fear an attack, you attempt to move away and/or tell them to back away and they continue advancing, as long as you can articulate why you feared an attack you can legally justify using OC preemptively, before the attack starts.

I'm not saying you can spray anyone who speaks to you, common sense applies and you've got to be familiar with the law and capable of articulating why you felt threatened.

If you can OC someone in the hostile interview pre-attack phase, you've given yourself a significant advantage if they do press the attack.

Sent from my SGH-T839 using Tapatalk

Missed this post. You have it exactly right.

[TDW586]

TGC, I'm not a fan of the knife to a knife fight. If your goal is "if they try to kill you, you kill em' right back" it's a great solution. If your goal is to survive, deploying a knife against a knife attack is sub optimal. You're still going to get stabbed, you'll just be able to stab them too.

Sent from my SGH-T839 using Tapatalk

[UndeadInfidel]

As someone who's been OC qual'd, I'd say fuckabuncha that. You can still function to an extent, but you're not just going to power through it like Rambo, especially against a trained police officer.

[Raindog]

TGC, I'm not a fan of the knife to a knife fight. If your goal is "if they try to kill you, you kill em' right back" it's a great solution. If your goal is to survive, deploying a knife against a knife attack is sub optimal. You're still going to get stabbed, you'll just be able to stab them too.

x1000 I'm not sure if I've ever heard it stated better.

[Tetra Grammaton Cleric]

Thanks TDW, I hear what you are saying.

I'm just putting it out there I guess - I've been paying particular attention of late to Videos/AAR's of the SouthNarc, Grey Group, TDI kind of thing and just trying to put it together.

So yeah, just to be clear though (that fucking disclaimer thing again lol):

I think I'm more talking about using the knife in the weak hand (when the guy is inside what you have determjned to be the TD range for the situation) to...

"fight your way to your pistol".

"defend/retain your pistol".

or...

"block/grapple an incoming knifehand with your strong hand then counterstriking with your knife in your weak hand to de-fang the snake".

or...

"that Kyle Defoor stab him/steer him thing".

^that sort of thing.

-

[TDW586]

I honestly don't have enough training time with that aspect of bladed weapons to say. I respect the hell out of both Kyle Defoor and Southnarc and his ECQC system, so I'm not going to say it's a bad idea. I just don't have any experience with it.

Sent from my SGH-T839 using Tapatalk

[Tetra Grammaton Cleric]

I honestly don't have enough training time with that aspect of bladed weapons to say. I respect the hell out of both Kyle Defoor and Southnarc and his ECQC system, so I'm not going to say it's a bad idea. I just don't have any experience with it.

Sent from my SGH-T839 using Tapatalk

Me either. I am definitely intrigued by it though.

-

[ninjakid]

hi im new here i found it interested..i agree to u Raindog

[Visionz]

I posted this on another forum, but I figured it is good food for thought:


The cliche of "bringing a knife to a gunfight is one I hear a lot", but it has had me thinking lately that a knife is much more dangerous than people give credit too.

A few things to consider:

It is usually stated that around 90% of all gunfights occur within 21 feet, about half of which occur within 5 feet.

Even if the heart stops beating you have about 5-10 seconds left of consciousness and the brain has four minutes worth of oxygen.

So given the Tueller Drill where one tries to cover 21 feet as quickly as possible (the creator demonstrated that it could be done in 1.5 seconds), even if you get a fatal shot at a vital organ besides the CNC, that in no way means the threat is neutralized. You could shoot them in the heart and they could still have enough time and momentum to plunge a knife into your chest.

You may have 5-10 seconds left of consciousness....but consciousness doesn't carry your body twenty one feet. Your muscles and blood pumping through them do.
I am no expert, but I think if you suffer a direct shot to the heart.
You will have 5-10 seconds on the ground to think "this sucks, I should have brought a gun"

[Phantomgrift]

People can run all the hypothetical scenarios they can think, but ultimately, no one will ever know unless their actually in a situation requiring lethal use of force.
If nothing else, in addition to the key theme of training that has cropped up over the last couple pages, the other vital aspect is simple familiarization with whatever it is you carry.
Due to the nature of my job with traveling and all, I'm a bigger knife user than I am a firearm user. Even then, I have certain EDC knives that I'll use over others, simply because I'm more comfortable with them for whatever the task at hand is.

The original post idea of a drill from twenty feet away? Who knows.
I have no personal experience with it, but a quick browse of police reports and survival accounts place assaults and lethal encounters at much closer ranges.
Outside of traversing some random dark alley at night or encountering a random dangerous hobo while camping out in the woods, I can't very well picture myself in any situation that requires me trying to cover twenty feet of open ground with either a knife or gun.

[Tetra Grammaton Cleric]

I can't very well picture myself in any situation that requires me trying to cover twenty feet of open ground with either a knife or gun.

Since this thread has been bumped I might as well point out the fact that it is your (potential) assailant not you that is going to be covering the 20' not you [it varies according to the situation but let's say 20' for the sake of this post].



-

[squinty]

People can run all the hypothetical scenarios they can think, but ultimately, no one will ever know unless their actually in a situation requiring lethal use of force.
If nothing else, in addition to the key theme of training that has cropped up over the last couple pages, the other vital aspect is simple familiarization with whatever it is you carry.
Due to the nature of my job with traveling and all, I'm a bigger knife user than I am a firearm user. Even then, I have certain EDC knives that I'll use over others, simply because I'm more comfortable with them for whatever the task at hand is.

The original post idea of a drill from twenty feet away? Who knows.
I have no personal experience with it, but a quick browse of police reports and survival accounts place assaults and lethal encounters at much closer ranges.
Outside of traversing some random dark alley at night or encountering a random dangerous hobo while camping out in the woods, I can't very well picture myself in any situation that requires me trying to cover twenty feet of open ground with either a knife or gun.

Like the Cleric said, you missed the point of the drill. It's not a drill to practice stabbing someone 20 feet away. It's a drill to try and dfend yourself from a rush attack from 20 feet away. The Tueller studies were done to answer the question, "how close does a knife wielding suspect need to be before I consider him a threat?" They were conducted after some incidents where police shot suspects who were armed with knives but not yet within arms reach of the officer who did the shooting, and some people thought the use of force was excessive because the suspects were out of arm's reach - ie "not close enough" to be a threat. So how close is close enough? Opinions varied.

In the drill, the defender gets attacked, from varying distances, by a knife wielding attacker. It was discovered that within 21 feet, a holstered gun didn't do much good because most attackers could cross 21 feet in time to beat the draw. So, for police, it was decided that approximately seven yards was the closest a knife wielder should be allowed to get without the officer at least drawing his sidearm or other weapon.

The fact that most self defense scenarios happen at ranges much closer than 21 feet makes the Tueller lesson even more important to the armed defender. If the average trained person can't outdraw someone in time to stop an attack from so far away as 21 feet, how much harder is it going to be to draw defensively against an attack from 5 feet, or 3?

If your weapon isn't already out - and it's not likely to be esp. for a civilian defender - you will generally lose the race to draw it. You'll be cut before you clear the holster and shoot, perhaps fatally. So you have to learn some degree of hand to hand defense against knives, and have some strategy to create distance, just to buy the second or two it takes to bring the gun. Without those skills the firearm can be rendered moot.

I would assume that any lessons are transferable, ie what applies to "holstered gun" should apply as well to "sheathed knife" or "tactical folder clipped in pocket."

[Visionz]

I think the op of this thread was implying that the knife carrying attacker is just as much of a threat after being shot at 20ft, because the brain remains conscious for 5-10 seconds, and it only takes 1.5 to traverse 20ft.
That is where I disagree.
He is a threat at 20ft while gun is holstered and prior to being shot.
But, after a direct shot to the heart as mentioned in the original context, at 20ft he is not.
How fast can a deer run?
Faster than a human right?
Have you ever shot one directly in the heart?
How far did it get when it's natural instincts kicked in and it tried to escape?
The study cited dealt with the threat of 20ft while pistol was holstered, not after pistol was drawn and fired.

[Murph]

I think the op of this thread was implying that the knife carrying attacker is just as much of a threat after being shot at 20ft, because the brain remains conscious for 5-10 seconds, and it only takes 1.5 to traverse 20ft.
...
He is a threat at 20ft while gun is holstered and prior to being shot.
But, after a direct shot to the heart as mentioned in the original context, at 20ft he is not.
..
The study cited dealt with the threat of 20ft while pistol was holstered, not after pistol was drawn and fired.

The drill is attacker (with the knife) starts running from 21 feet, THEN defender (with the pistol) starts drawing. It's just a drill to show that you're not as safe as you think given X amount of distance.

It sounds like you're saying that if the defender had their gun drawn and shot the attacker in the heart, that the attacker couldn't run 21ft. Is that what you're saying?

[Visionz]

I think the op of this thread was implying that the knife carrying attacker is just as much of a threat after being shot at 20ft, because the brain remains conscious for 5-10 seconds, and it only takes 1.5 to traverse 20ft.
...
He is a threat at 20ft while gun is holstered and prior to being shot.
But, after a direct shot to the heart as mentioned in the original context, at 20ft he is not.
..
The study cited dealt with the threat of 20ft while pistol was holstered, not after pistol was drawn and fired.

The drill is attacker (with the knife) starts running from 21 feet, THEN defender (with the pistol) starts drawing. It's just a drill to show that you're not as safe as you think given X amount of distance.

It sounds like you're saying that if the defender had their gun drawn and shot the attacker in the heart, that the attacker couldn't run 21ft. Is that what you're saying?

Yes, the original poster of this thread said this..

Even if the heart stops beating you have about 5-10 seconds left of consciousness and the brain has four minutes worth of oxygen.

So given the Tueller Drill where one tries to cover 21 feet as quickly as possible (the creator demonstrated that it could be done in 1.5 seconds), even if you get a fatal shot at a vital organ besides the CNC, that in no way means the threat is neutralized. You could shoot them in the heart and they could still have enough time and momentum to plunge a knife into your chest.

Which basically sounded to me like he was implying that just because your still alive and conscious 5-10 seconds after being shot in the heart, you also have the ability to traverse 20ft, which I strongly disagree with.