To improve is to change; to be perfect is to change often - Winston Churchill
Terrorist and criminal strategies, tactics and techniques change constantly in the never ending game of tactical cat and mouse. We implement security procedures, they devise ways round them and the circle keeps on turning. Because of this our learning curve is more of a vertical line and as such the speed with which we need to implement new S.O.Ps (Standard Operating Procedures) has to be done as fast as possible.
We can though to some degree pre-empt what any new enemy Modus Operandi may be by training on our new S,O,Ps ourselves. Putting ourselves in the place of the enemy to give us a possible view of where and how future attacks might happen.
It is at this point where we need to be reactive in our training, so that when the time comes the tactics and techniques used are actually the correct response required.
Many people are afraid of change and as the title suggests, if you do not keep up with current enemy strategies, tactics and techniques and implement procedures accordingly, if you do not change you may very well end up dead.That is not to say change must be for the sake of changing.
I want to take a look at one technique in particular; this is the use of body cover for the IBG (Individual Bodyguard). Here we will see how dogma can make techniques stagnate and become not only ineffectual but also more dangerous than the job already is in these instances.
Before I go any further may I just thank Richard Aitch author of - Close Protection, A closer observation of the protection equation. For supplying and allowing me to use the following photograph from his book.
I first came across this technique back in the 1980s and then again in the mid 90s being taught on close protection courses and it is still around today.
When you look at the photo below please, for now disregard the cross and the wording that is written on the photo. Before we can say that any technique is right or wrong it has to be dissected, trained on, revised, dissected again, trained on again, revised further and so on until it can either be useful or is binned.
Terrorist and criminal strategies, tactics and techniques change constantly in the never ending game of tactical cat and mouse. We implement security procedures, they devise ways round them and the circle keeps on turning. Because of this our learning curve is more of a vertical line and as such the speed with which we need to implement new S.O.Ps (Standard Operating Procedures) has to be done as fast as possible.
We can though to some degree pre-empt what any new enemy Modus Operandi may be by training on our new S,O,Ps ourselves. Putting ourselves in the place of the enemy to give us a possible view of where and how future attacks might happen.
It is at this point where we need to be reactive in our training, so that when the time comes the tactics and techniques used are actually the correct response required.
Many people are afraid of change and as the title suggests, if you do not keep up with current enemy strategies, tactics and techniques and implement procedures accordingly, if you do not change you may very well end up dead.That is not to say change must be for the sake of changing.
I want to take a look at one technique in particular; this is the use of body cover for the IBG (Individual Bodyguard). Here we will see how dogma can make techniques stagnate and become not only ineffectual but also more dangerous than the job already is in these instances.
Before I go any further may I just thank Richard Aitch author of - Close Protection, A closer observation of the protection equation. For supplying and allowing me to use the following photograph from his book.
I first came across this technique back in the 1980s and then again in the mid 90s being taught on close protection courses and it is still around today.
When you look at the photo below please, for now disregard the cross and the wording that is written on the photo. Before we can say that any technique is right or wrong it has to be dissected, trained on, revised, dissected again, trained on again, revised further and so on until it can either be useful or is binned.
So lets start dissecting.
Firstly what sort of attack are we looking at here? A close or medium range gun attack, and by how many people 1,2,3 or more?
Here we come to our first problem, that of ranges.
Every combat system depending on the training and knowledge of the instructor has its own set of ranges. See my book for a full description of how I break ranges down and how I see these as the correct ranges.
Let me just say here that close range with regards to firearms is from 0-5ft and medium range is from 5-15ft. These though are also broken down further with regards to individual weapons, firearms and others.
If you look at the majority of assassinations by firearms, they have been conducted at ranges of 5ft and under. From the point of view of the IBG we have to take into consideration the position of the principal. 0-5ft from me to an attacker is different from the attacker being 5ft away from the principal. Why? well because the IBG will be standing 1-2ft behind the principal. We also need to take into account the angle of attack, the angle may shorten or lengthen the range accordingly. The attacker also needs to be taken into consideration, is the attackers weapon already presented or is he in the act of drawing the weapon.
This matters. How fast can you draw your weapon? Now add to that your response time=seeing what you are looking at, add to that the time it takes you to move, present and fire. In all honesty can you really perform all of that faster or just as fast as someone who already has a weapon pointed at the principal or is already in the act of drawing their weapon. One thing that is always forgotten is that you will also be taking direct incoming fire once the shooting starts.
One thing I want to ask here, you do wear a ballistic vest don't you? If you carry a side arm and you are not wearing a vest then that is your ego which is going to get you killed, rounds are definitely going through you into the principal without a vest. Good luck to the principal there.
The time from Jack Ruby stepping out of the crowd to firing his weapon at Lee Harvey Oswald = 1 second
There are lots of examples, I will let you research others so I don't have to list many points where one will suffice.
If we look at the photo, regardless of whether we return fire we are presenting either a static target or at best a very slow shuffling target moving backwards, left or to the right. The IBG is square on to the attacker and even with modern ballistic vests it is no garuantee that rounds will not hit the target or hit and go through you into the target, as I said above, doing all of the above while taking rounds into your vest is a big ask of anyone. If like in the photo you tell the principal to get down then you are not giving body cover as only your legs will cover some of the principal and they are not protected.
In the photo and other photos I have seen the arm is extended, I have seen a few photos of and also practiced shooting from the hip (bad phraseology, but you get my drift), standing, kneeling and squatting down. None offer an easy escape, getting off the X. If thinking about the 0-5ft range from the attacker to the principal and we shoot with the arm extended while standing in front of the principal we are shooting at point blank range. This then puts the weapon in the attackers personal space where we are getting into the realms of physical CQC.
When we look at techniques we need to understand where they are going to be used and by whom. In what environment are you going to be armed with a side arm and be working as an IBG? PSD, Executive Protection, Diplomatic Protection, Royalty Protection?
Now in what situation would this technique be used. Well where do you work? If you are like me most of my work takes place in built up sprawling urban environments, lots of people, busy roads, well you know the areas.
Lots of cover, lots of escape routes that can be utilised. So why stand still or move slowly into cover, don't forget on a busy street you may know what you are doing, your principal if you are very lucky may know what he is doing but every other civilian around you will either be frozen to the spot, running around like headless chickens or falling over in the rush to escape, this will happen behind and to either side of you. In this situation you are relying on your principal to let you know where to move to, you are not going to be able to concentrate any fire on an enemy and move the principal at the same time while looking at where to go and how to get there. It looks nice shooting on an open range directly in front you, on a busy street, in different light, pedestrians, angles of attack, not so easy.
For those of you who have practiced this technique have you practiced all or any of the fails from this body cover position? Weapon fails to fire, you are shot in your shooting arm, you are shot in the arm holding the principal, you are shot in the leg, your principal is shot and so and so forth. What are your responses to these situations?
Although we are there to protect the principal we are also there to be a threat to any enemy who attempts to attack the principal. This is where the biggest fail of this technique arises. while we are giving body cover and returning fire we are a threat to the enemy, so far so good. The only problem with this is that so long as we are in front of the principal, the principal is still in the line of fire, is still the target.
This has just been a short critique of a technique which as the photo says is wrong and dangerous, to both the principal and the IBG. In the next blog post we will look at some alternatives to this technique that offer a better chance of winning and staying alive through this attack scenario.
Stay Dangerous
Rock
Firstly what sort of attack are we looking at here? A close or medium range gun attack, and by how many people 1,2,3 or more?
Here we come to our first problem, that of ranges.
Every combat system depending on the training and knowledge of the instructor has its own set of ranges. See my book for a full description of how I break ranges down and how I see these as the correct ranges.
Let me just say here that close range with regards to firearms is from 0-5ft and medium range is from 5-15ft. These though are also broken down further with regards to individual weapons, firearms and others.
If you look at the majority of assassinations by firearms, they have been conducted at ranges of 5ft and under. From the point of view of the IBG we have to take into consideration the position of the principal. 0-5ft from me to an attacker is different from the attacker being 5ft away from the principal. Why? well because the IBG will be standing 1-2ft behind the principal. We also need to take into account the angle of attack, the angle may shorten or lengthen the range accordingly. The attacker also needs to be taken into consideration, is the attackers weapon already presented or is he in the act of drawing the weapon.
This matters. How fast can you draw your weapon? Now add to that your response time=seeing what you are looking at, add to that the time it takes you to move, present and fire. In all honesty can you really perform all of that faster or just as fast as someone who already has a weapon pointed at the principal or is already in the act of drawing their weapon. One thing that is always forgotten is that you will also be taking direct incoming fire once the shooting starts.
One thing I want to ask here, you do wear a ballistic vest don't you? If you carry a side arm and you are not wearing a vest then that is your ego which is going to get you killed, rounds are definitely going through you into the principal without a vest. Good luck to the principal there.
The time from Jack Ruby stepping out of the crowd to firing his weapon at Lee Harvey Oswald = 1 second
There are lots of examples, I will let you research others so I don't have to list many points where one will suffice.
If we look at the photo, regardless of whether we return fire we are presenting either a static target or at best a very slow shuffling target moving backwards, left or to the right. The IBG is square on to the attacker and even with modern ballistic vests it is no garuantee that rounds will not hit the target or hit and go through you into the target, as I said above, doing all of the above while taking rounds into your vest is a big ask of anyone. If like in the photo you tell the principal to get down then you are not giving body cover as only your legs will cover some of the principal and they are not protected.
In the photo and other photos I have seen the arm is extended, I have seen a few photos of and also practiced shooting from the hip (bad phraseology, but you get my drift), standing, kneeling and squatting down. None offer an easy escape, getting off the X. If thinking about the 0-5ft range from the attacker to the principal and we shoot with the arm extended while standing in front of the principal we are shooting at point blank range. This then puts the weapon in the attackers personal space where we are getting into the realms of physical CQC.
When we look at techniques we need to understand where they are going to be used and by whom. In what environment are you going to be armed with a side arm and be working as an IBG? PSD, Executive Protection, Diplomatic Protection, Royalty Protection?
Now in what situation would this technique be used. Well where do you work? If you are like me most of my work takes place in built up sprawling urban environments, lots of people, busy roads, well you know the areas.
Lots of cover, lots of escape routes that can be utilised. So why stand still or move slowly into cover, don't forget on a busy street you may know what you are doing, your principal if you are very lucky may know what he is doing but every other civilian around you will either be frozen to the spot, running around like headless chickens or falling over in the rush to escape, this will happen behind and to either side of you. In this situation you are relying on your principal to let you know where to move to, you are not going to be able to concentrate any fire on an enemy and move the principal at the same time while looking at where to go and how to get there. It looks nice shooting on an open range directly in front you, on a busy street, in different light, pedestrians, angles of attack, not so easy.
For those of you who have practiced this technique have you practiced all or any of the fails from this body cover position? Weapon fails to fire, you are shot in your shooting arm, you are shot in the arm holding the principal, you are shot in the leg, your principal is shot and so and so forth. What are your responses to these situations?
Although we are there to protect the principal we are also there to be a threat to any enemy who attempts to attack the principal. This is where the biggest fail of this technique arises. while we are giving body cover and returning fire we are a threat to the enemy, so far so good. The only problem with this is that so long as we are in front of the principal, the principal is still in the line of fire, is still the target.
This has just been a short critique of a technique which as the photo says is wrong and dangerous, to both the principal and the IBG. In the next blog post we will look at some alternatives to this technique that offer a better chance of winning and staying alive through this attack scenario.
Stay Dangerous
Rock
RSS Feed
