Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns "Shooting To Live" on pdf !

The classic 1942 tome by Fairbairn and Sykes, with a forward by Rex Applegate...

http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache:vejEZCq8PBEJ:www.gutterfighting.org/files/shooting_to_live.pdf+shooting+to+live&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us



A must read for anyone even remotely interested in the defensive use of handguns.

Enjoy

Birdwatcher

The more things change....

....this written in '42, based upon experience gained in the '20's and 30's (from Chapter VII) ...



...and at the close of that chapter, after describing failure to stops with both Webley .445 revolvers firing soft lead bullets and Colt .45 Automatics firing hardball...





Birdwatcher

Thought I'd reply to my own thread...

Note a couple of familiar truisms...



The significance being that these two Brits were the first guys to put such down on paper, the same truths subsequently repeated many time over by our own post-war generation of experts.

Note that Fairbiarn and Sykes had their raw recruits practice on a full-size combat silhouette at a distance of only two yards so as to best duplicate the conditions of most "affrays", teaching instinctive point shooting from the hip and also a sort of "pistol alignment by silhouette" on the target much as later taught by the famed (and recently deceased) NYPD Detective Jim Cirillo, who likewise was instructing based upon his own experience in shootouts with armed criminals.

Fairbairn and Syles taught the use of the sights with a two-handed hold at longer distances (25 yards) and recommended high-visibility sights such as there were back then (silver front posts), in all cases recommending rapid-fire until the target went down.

Most surprising to me is their use of dynamic courses of fire involving running and rapid-fire at pop-up targets, as well as the practice of forced-entry techniques, this all developed back in the 1920's in Shanghai, at a time when everybody else was training mostly by shooting one-handed at targets.

Sykes (formerly Schwalbe) had previously been a professional hunter in India and in Shanghai formed a police sniping squad, complete with scoped rifles, he and Fairbairn being popularly credited with developing the world's first SWAT teams, except I expect they could be a lot freer in that time and place at firing upon suspects than would be tolerated today.

Birdwatcher

Hoo boy! Note even the provenance of the term "Pratical Pistol"...

(...'scuse me, while I had heard much about this work, this is the first time I have had access to it).

Anyhow, here is "Gunsite" meets "Thunder Ranch", courtesy of the Shanghai Municipal Police, circa 1935...



Eric Anthony Sykes died of a heart attack in 1945.

Towards the end of the war Fairbairn and Sykes reportedly had a falling out, specifically about Sykes being intrumental in preventing Fairbairn from accompanying British Commandos on actual raids (although pushing 60 by that time, Fairbairn was certainly physically capable).

A correct decision, IMHO, Fairbairn being far too valuable to risk. Instead he was sent to Washington to help with the establishment of our own OSS. After that he was stationed in Canada at the top secret "Camp X", where he became an inspiration for a young Canadian Naval Officer and future popular spy fiction author named Ian Fleming.

Post-war, William Ewart Fairbairn was again assigned to the East on "Her Magesty's Secret Service" to deal with upheavals in Ceylon (Sri Lanka), likely much of what he did is still classified.

Sheesh! A pity ol' Fairbairn and Sykes never made it to the present, IMAGINE the endless reams of print in gun rags and books they could have written...

Birdwatcher

The sad part, really, being that the existence of these guys and the extent of their innovations comes as a surprise to many if not most American handgun enthusiasts.

Chalk that up I guess to the self-promotion of our well known gun gurus...

"Lives Less Ordinary" indeed...

http://www.fighttimes.com/magazine/magazine.asp?article=57



I expect Fairbairn would have been about 50 at the time.

I really must get a copy of the recent biography of this extraordinary man...
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Legend-W-E-Fairbairn-Gentleman-Warrior/dp/0954949404

Birdwatcher, Fascinating read.Fairbairn & Sykes lived in a time & learned-taught skills...and did jobs few of us ever will encounter.

Makes the average CCW citizen think about how truly skilled or ready he is..and that requirement varies tremendously depending on who we are and where we live-work-travel.

Another great topic would be what skills-tools can one learn & have which are non lethal to protect self and family..

Things and head smarts one can take with him into the Federal building, into a school zone..the airport..across state lines..into foreign countries....:) Jim

Birdy I can't thank you enough, you've turned me onto more good reading material about real folks, something I really enjoy. Thanks again. Randy

1ak... here's a pretty good link on E.A. Sykes (click on top link for PDF version), a guy as mysterious and enigmatic today as is Fairbairn.
http://72.14.209.104/search?q=cache:5OA4m5T9UQAJ:www.manfamily.org/PDFs/EA%2520Schwabe%2520Essay.pdf+eric+anthony+sykes&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us



On the same topic, some years back there was a British website that offered free in pdf format Syke's and Fairbairn's knife-fighting manual, complete with illustrations of where to cut an opponent to best inflict debilitating wounds. IIRC the pdf file was later taken down, according to the website at the request of Fairbairn's surviving family members.

It seems reasonable to conclude that this preference for anonymity was also characteristic of Fairbairn himself, and which may account for why it was a full 45 years after his death before a biography appeared.

One thing is for sure, with their at that time rare first-hand knowledge of Asian martial arts combined with an expertise in the use of firearms that was well ahead of their times, both Sykes and certainly Fairbairn were likely man for man, among the most lethally capable warriors the world has ever produced.

The British Empire has produced no shortage of "Gentlemen" skilled in brutality over the years, of the sort entering such units as the Black and Tans in Ireland during some of the same years that Sykes and Fairbairn were in Shaghai. I had been wondering if Fairbairn and Sykes were cut from the same cloth.

The evidence I hae read thus far indicates to the contrary, that both Fairbairn and Sykes were moral men, in short, numbered among the good guys

Birdwatcher

Jim... well aquiring skills with a firearm certainly requires a lower standard of physical fitness (as Cooper was wont to complain about some of the guys showing up for his classes ) than is become proficient at martial arts.

Anyhow, back to the topic of firearms, Sykes and Fairbairn have this to say about auto pistol design...



..and of stopping power, with respect to "light and fast" versus "slow and heavy"....



Sounds to me like they were describing a Glock, in .40 S&W, which has emerged as pretty much our pre-eminent Law Enforcement pistol/cartridge combo.

Birdwatcher

Depends on what you consider High velocity...and what you mean by a reasonably large caliber....

Not everyone's ears hear the same things...mine hear .45 ACP not 40 Short & Weak

Hard to say I guess exactly what Sykes and Fairbairn would have said today. They do eliminate the .22 and .25 as legitimate choices right off, but consider the .32 and .380 Autos as apparently legit.

I do know that Fairbairn armed the smaller-statured Chinese members of the SMP with Colt .380 autos rather than with 1911s.

His own preferred weapon was the 1911 (and I sure would like to find the text of his 1925 book on the use of that fiream), but in "Shooting to Live" him and Sykes do write favorably of a cut-down Colt revolver in .44 Special.

They also allude in "Shooting to Live" to not being allowed "by the rules of the game" to use expanding hollowpoint ammo.

What they meant by "very high velocity" depended on their frame of reference I guess. The standard velocities of British revolver rounds were exceedingly weak, even the vaunted Webley .445 lumbering along at around 650 fps, and his .45 ACP 1911 with 230 grain ball probably had an mv of somewhat less than 850 fps.

OTOH the .30 Mauser/7.62 Tokarev round they mentioned as being a paragon of high velocity used a 90 grain bullet travelling at a mv of 1,400 fps (and was later dropped by the Germans who created it when they expanded the neck of that bottleneck case to give us the familiar 9mm cartridge we still use today).

It might be that today's hotter/lighter/faster .45 acp bullet options (ie 185 grains at about 1,000 fps) would have also fit their criterion as a "middle ground" option, I dunno.

One theme that does stand out though is how very early these guys adressed the familiar questions we still debate today.

Judging by his writing in the "Stopping Power" chapter of "Shooting to Live", Fairbairn likely never would have said of his 1911 that "they all fall to hardball" and apparently did not share either Cooper's or Clint Smith's degree of faith in the efficacy of that round (but lets face it, by the time "Shooting to Live" was published he had accumulated far more first-hand practical experience than both of those guys combined).

Interesting that in "Shooting to Live" they specify that one must respond within a "third of a second" to a threat in a typical "affray", a requirement which seems to exceed possibility if one includes normal human reaction times.

Elsewhere (maybe in his 1925 book) Fairbairn had written that a typical altercation involving deadly force would occur by surpise, in the dark, within ten feet, and that the outcome would be decided within the first two seconds.

I have long kept those maxims in mind when conducting my own practice at the range.

Birdwatcher

Having been mentored by Jeff and taken classes from...each of them had/has plenty of experience on which to base their teachings.

Both Clint, who at one time was Ops Mgr for Jeff at Gunsite are struck from nearly the same mold...and both would agree that if you are totally surprised, they gotcha...no matter what gun or weapon you pack...don;t know about reaction time in a confrontation but the average today is about .22 to .25 for personal reaction to the buzzer. Fairbain echoes the FBI stats for gunfights...they take place in dim to no light, 2.1 shots are fired, at 7 to 10 feet and one person us usually hurt/dies. Nothing new there either.

What was fast in 1925 might really be moderate today..like a 230850 not a 1801000...

Since you keep the old maxims in mind when practicing, tell us how they influence your drills...

Well I figure the reference to some of our own Icons in anything less than reverent terms would get a rise .... but what I said is true...

..and Fairbiarn's "nothing new" WAS new when he put it into print.. the fact that the FBI et. al. reached the same conclusions when reinventing the wheel merely reinforcing the validity of Fairbairn's prior conclusions.

With respect to drills... Simple, I spend far more time up-close than most (seven yards or less), firing from a crouch. In fact if I'm popping off 100 rounds (typical), all of 'em might be shot at close range, both eyes open of course.

I don't practice nearly enough, maybe once a month, so when I do I concentrate on up-close where I am most likely to need it.

I'll usually include a few strings one-handed, both strong and weak hands, the emphasis throughout on speed from a low ready (in center mass is precise enough).

Where I differ from Fairbairn is I rarely if ever shoot from the hip and most times shoot two handed, aiming "by outline" as both Fairbairn and Cirillo describe. Usually double taps.

Fifteen yards and more, I'll pick up the front sight. If boredom gets to be a factor I'll make aimed head shots double action at 25 yards, and attempt the same double or single-action at 50. But really, anywhere in the torso double or single action at 50 is acceptable.

Mostly I'm on j-frames now, of those mostly a 3" Mod 60, almost always with .38 plusP. Revolvers being simple enough to operate that my wife can easily use 'em, a critical consideration IMHO.

Even my Airweight though wears the larger "Uncle Mike's Combat Grip" like S&W puts on their .357 j-frames. I go up about an inch in width and length with the "Combat Grip" relative to the "Boot Grip" type grips, but a grip is of absolutely no use to me if I cannot grab it consistently every time in panic drills, and the "Combat Grip" fits me really well.

Panic drills? Grasping unloaded from concealment (as described on another thread) bringing to firing position and dry-firing. I prefer not to dry fire anywhere but down a range.

I dunno who is worse prepared, me or JOG, but then he cheats and uses a Hi-Power...

Did I mention the dog? ...

Birdwatcher

I can understand and applaud your drills....but why do you crouch? What part of a second are you willing to give up while doing it and what does it buy you? Remember 7-10FEET, crouching won't make them miss at that range and it makes drawing more difficult and distorts your NPOA....Remember it was Cooper that got the FBI to stand up straight and to put BOTH hands on the pistol instead of placing a forearm and clenched fist over their thorax and shooting with the strong hand..

BTW...there are no such things as double taps...they should actually be a controlled pair, both shot using the sights and unless hip shooting, it is just as fast and more accurate...

also BTW, you did know Jim Cirillo was killed last week in a car crash, didn't you...? Too bad,he was one of the really good guys...old school certainly and would share some of his incredible stories if prompted with the right liquid refreshment...was fortunate to hear a few of those...

Crouch is relative I guess, more like a slightly bent-kneed stoop, I do so because Fairbairn observed those under stress when TSHTF (including himself) regularly did the same. Since I'm prob'ly gonna cringe anyway, might as well cringe in practice too.

I dunno how much time I lose cringing in practice as opposed to the time I would lose cringing in the actual event. And of course, I much prefer an "actual event" never happen, if only on account of the legal expenses if I'm still drawing breath afterwards (I also read Ayoob ).

With respect to double taps; a useful compromise between unrealistic single shot drills and the multiple shots likely to be unleashed in an actual situation.

It is easy to shoot wide even at 7 yards when striving for speed (as many actual police shootings attest), two shots practices aiming consistently between shots... and JUST two shots makes 100 rounds last longer, as well as imposing a sort of ingrained fire-disclipline that could be critical when armed with a 5 shot j-frame (even with autos I practiced with only five rounds in the mag for that very reason).

Sometimes I'll load four and one empty and then spin the cylinder before rapid-firing, stopping when I click on the empty, this being a useful way of checking for consistency of hold between rounds.

I had heard on these forums of the recent passing of Jim Cirillo, and mourn his passing, as I do the Good Colonel. I used to buy "Guns and Ammo" just to read Cooper's column, and I fear his like will become increasingly rare in these modern times.

Congrats on getting to meet and train with all of those guys

Birdwatcher

Just before he died, two street thugs tried to mug Col. Rex Applegate. Applegate was in his 80�s and walked with the aid of a cane. The two would-be street thugs got the liven snot kicked out of them by an 80+ year old man walking with a cane�I just love to hear stories like that.

There is some merit to the crouch, but not for crouch sake. The idea is that a moving target is always harder to hit (regardless of the range) than a stationary target. Anytime you draw a weapon in defense, you�d better be moving. I tend to move left or right, but a crouch is better than nothing. You survive a gunfight by coming away with the same amount of holes you started with. Always move, and hopefully you�re moving toward cover. Never stand there like a B29 and duke it out�that usually ends in both participants getting new holes.

As the years pass more and more of those who did not care for political correctness are leaving us...I fear those of us who say what we mean and mean what we say are now in the distinct minority...mores the pity..but that is for another forum...

As for training with Cooper, and Cirillo...yes those two were unique, but no more unique than some of the others who are still with us and from whom we can still learn..Shooting pistols over the years has been the vehicle that allowed me to meet some of the sports greatest, and I have been humbled and in awe many many times watching them show their profiency with arms of all kinds...and with few exceptions they have proven to be some of the finest people I have met..stalwart, forthright, and sincere...

There are some on the other side of the coin, but they don't need discussing...

Keep after it and always give it your best..

Tightloop

Wwe have had a number of very talented 'teachers' to help us learn the basics well and then work to perfect what works best for us..and our needs..
Few of us will have the same needs that Fairbairn & Sykes had policing in Shanghai..

This article below covers briefly some of the techniques taught and used over the years, including Bill Jordan, whose book 'No Second Place Winner' was one of the first I read when training years ago.Jim

http://www.spw-duf.info/point.html