Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Hock]

Many of us know that Grossman has become the "poster boy" for death expertise by many police agencies. But, this is really interesting counter-point reading...

http://www.theppsc.org/Grossman/Main-R.htm

If you know of, or have heard of Grossman-you simply, ABSOLUTELY need to read this.

Hock

[Nick Hughes]

Hock, without reading it I always thought his premise was BS.  Some of the guys and I did the numbers on his theory of how many guys are actually shooting at the enemy in a battle and when you read some of the history it means 2 guys killed 158 of the enemy while their mates fired over everyone's heads.

It's pure bollocks.

[spanky]

I read the whole thing WOW, Grossman is toast 

[tcavlee]

Why in the world is this guy still training people? It is stuff like this that give fuel to people with no clue of reality.

[Hock]

He became the poster boy of death with his book "On Killing."

The best parts of On Killing were some US Army stats, but some of those stats, such as the firing rates, are under dispute. Some come from "Slam" Johnson-whom Hackworth learned to despise while working right beside him on the very research used in the Grossman book.

I would like to ask him a few important questions too, that didn't get discussed in the debate.

He only trains people in lectures. No physical training. He is also a dinner speaker guest at many police expos and dinners. He is a charming guy.

Hock

[Hock]

On another thread I mentioned...

An Intimate History of Killing by Joanna Bourke from Britain.

Far, far more detailed and researched study, with a world wide perspective. It is so chock full of culture and information, it is dense and at times, heard to read through. (the notes, index and bibliography pages start at page 365 and run to
509- and all in small print)

I have been told that Grossman did not include Marine firing rates in the Pacific, which would skew his conclusions. Nor do his liberal conclusions cover say-teenage soldiers/killers in Sierra Leone and other world hot-spots.


Hock

[seanross]

The article cited is a total slam on Grossman.  He is only allowed to make out of context statements probably taken from other interviews.  Averi, since it is his article, gets to go on and on never allowing Grossman to counter.  I really couldn't get much of a picture of what Grossman is advocating other than Averi thinks he is an egotistical jerk.  This is not to say that I agree with either side in this debate, just that the article cited is a one-sided slam.

Some of what bled through about Grossman's position makes sense, though that doesn't necessarily mean it is correct.  Things like:  'more bullets in gun generally mean more bullets fired' and 'people exposed to violence are generally more likely to be violent' seem very reasonable and backed up by common experience.  Compare number of rounds fired in a typical paintball game vs. number of rounds fired with small clip air soft scenarios we do in the SFC seminars.  Compare the willingness of the average American citizen to do violence with the willingness of the average middle eastern Arab to commit violence.

[Chuck Burnett]

This Aveni dude has a forum on his website. One of the forum areas is "Grossman, quack or luminary?".
Aveni has started every thread.

It's good to have a hobby, I guess.

I've read "On Killing". Some of his ideas, like enabling factors, mesh with my beliefs. Some don't.
I try hard not to be like a college freshman, i.e. "the product of the last book I read".

I attended one of his seminars. Good, entertaining speaker, hooahs and all. Tailored, perhaps, for the audience of firearms instructors, it was pretty gung-ho, wolves and sheepdogs stuff with some interesting concepts re terrorism response, autogenic breathing, and optimal adrenal states for combatives.
Basically his "Bulletproof Mind" lecture.

Cliches and boilerplate material, perhaps. I've carried my handgun religiously every day since so it obviously struck a chord with me. (If he's really anti-gun I must have misunderstood the big words.)

I'm not going to take long warm showers with him or get a DG tattoo but I can think of a lot of other trainers and writers that could use some of the bashing he gets.

Hock, thanks for the word about "An Intimate History of Killing". Great stuff.

Chuck

[Hock]

"Ok, Ok," take a few deep breathes and start over"

And for those who haven't heard of Autogenic Breathing, it is bascially what your grandmother told you to do, except now it has a new-age name. Her grandmother told her to do it too. There is no telling how far this method goes back.

We were advised to do this when responding to a dangerous police call, oh, 30 years ago, and it still stands as a great method to calm down. It is hard to do and hard to remember sometimes. Hard to get some people to trust it, because it is so simple.

Hock

from a medical health page...

Autogenics (or self-regulating)
Autogenic training (AT) is a systematic program that will teach your body and mind to respond quickly and effectively to your mental command to relax and return to a balanced, normal state. If you've heard the expression "mind over matter", then you may already have a basic idea of what autogenic training is all about.

The Basic Technique
Autogenics is a progressive technique. You begin by concentrating on a mental suggestion such as, "My left arm feels heavy and warm." Then repeat the same command, focusing on your right arm, left leg, right leg, and so on. Try to practice this exercise for about ten minutes, twice a day, or whenever you feel stressed.

Step By Step
Sit comfortably, loosen any tight clothing, close your eyes, and try to clear your mind. You may wish to breathe deeply for a few moments and repeat a peaceful suggestion such as "I feel quiet", or something similar.

Mentally focus on your left arm and repeat to yourself, "My left arm feels warm and heavy", until it begins to feel warmer and heavier. Then try the same command, focusing on your right arm, left leg, right leg, and so on, until you feel completely relaxed.

Breathe deeply and stretch as you finish the exercise. Open your eyes, exhale slowly, and notice how you feel. As you become better and better at this technique, you'll be able to help your body relax anywhere, at any time.

Progression of Autogenics
Autogenics is a technique that requires practice, time, and commitment -- but the benefits you gain are well worth the investment. Start by practicing autogenics twice a day for about ten minutes each session. Within four to eight weeks, you may be able to produce this relaxation response with as little as five minutes of concentrated effort. And, as you progress, you'll find that it's easier and easier to help your body relax when you "put your mind to it."

[misshinryu]

As far as the breathing techniques is concerned, it works for me.
In 1990 I developed a severe case of acid reflux. Zantac and others were not working. Doctors and test showed it to be extreme, etc. Started to study hsing-I and the breathing excercise coupled with imaging helped me to gain control over the reflux.
I rarely have acid reflux today. If it feels like it is coming back, I resort to the breathing again.
 

[Hock]

From Death Stats page:
http://www.civilwarhome.com/casualties.htm

"At least 618,000 Americans died in the Civil War, and some experts say the toll reached 700,000. The number that is most often quoted is 620,000. At any rate, these casualties exceed the nation's loss in all its other wars...
Some of the great blood baths of the war came as Grant drove on Richmond in the spring of 1864- Confederate casualties are missing for this campaign, but were enormous. The Federal toll:

The Wilderness, May 5-7: 17,666
Spotsylvania, May 10 and 12: 10,920
Drewry's Bluff, May 12-16 4,160
Cold Harbor, June 1-3: 12,000
Petersburg, June 15-30 16,569
These total 61,315, with rolls of the missing incomplete.

Now Grossman often says...
"In more modern times, the average firing rate was incredibly low in Civil War battles. Patty Griffith demonstrates that the killing potential of the average Civil War regiment was anywhere from five hundred to a thousand men per minute. The actual killing rate was only one or two men per minute per regiment (The Battle Tactics of the American Civil War). At the Battle of Gettysburg, of the 27,000 muskets picked up from the dead and dying after the battle, 90 percent were loaded. This is an anomaly, because it took 95 percent of their time to load muskets and only 5 percent to fire.

But even more amazingly, of the thousands of loaded muskets, over half had multiple loads in the barrel--one with 23 loads in the barrel. In reality, the average man would load his musket and bring it to his shoulder, but he could not bring himself to kill. He would be brave, he would stand shoulder to shoulder, he would do what he was trained to do; but at the moment of truth, he could not bring himself to pull the trigger. So, he lowered the weapon and loaded it again. Of those who did fire, only a tiny percentage fired to hit. The vast majority fired over the enemy's head."

<But jeez, somebody was killing somebody at some point in the Civil War...huh? How do these facts all fit together?

<Is Gettysburg more unique? Typical of the whole war? A lot of is misfires and bad powder causing problems?  Early part of the war and poorly trained?

<In the end a whole lot of people died in the Civil War...

Hock

[Hock]

And more on the Civil War Stats...

Jared Diamond,

http://149.142.237.180/faculty/diamond.htm

author of Guns, Germs and Steel, and numerous other books, Pulitzer Prize winner, and someone I personally hold in thre greatest of esteem (his credentials dwarf Grossman's) makes a point in his award-winning best seller, the The Third Chimpanzee, he speaks in generalizations...

"Today we divide the world into "us" and "them"...."humans beings practice a dual standard of behavior:strong inhibitions of killing one of "us," but a green light in killing one of "them."

Perhaps the Civil War in its beginning, was perceived subliminally as an "Us" war at first, and revved up as the years went on. If so, is Gettyburg a good example of firing rates to be toted in the Grossman arguement as an example?

Grossman says...
"...of the 27,000 muskets picked up from the dead and dying after the battle, 90 percent were loaded. But even more amazingly, of the thousands of loaded muskets, over half had multiple loads in the barrel--one with 23 loads in the barrel."

ahhh, maybe that is why they died, and people who shot them got to pick up the rifles? Somebody shot somebody in the Civil War. Should this Grossman/Gettysburg observation deserve such weight and to be such a constant, main arguement of his?

(Hey, the basic premise-that humans-the human race- have a natural desire to facilitate each other and not kill at random...I believe this, taught to me by great minds well before Grossman...but I wonder about these Gettysburg stats...)

Hock

[Hock]

The Lone Ranger Versus the Leone Ranger:
The Weird and Misleading New Road Map Called "On Combat" by Dave Grossman

I have been reading, or I should say, examining with a magnifying glass, the new David Grossman book On Combat. I am scouring it line-by-line with lots of side notes and marked lines. I will say much more about it later, but in summary? It is quite mediocre. In it, he spends too much time rehashing his first book, On Killing, even offers an apology for it, saying,"

"The problem is that my data was mostly based on 18 to 20 year-olds. who had killed." (page 163)

    He mentions that he later met and thousands of people who did not experience the reactions he predicted in On Killing. What are we to do with this admission? But, also he spends pages defending some of the first book, also. Then there are several chapters rehashing his "kids playing violent video games" theme. Does it fit under this title? No. Nor do another parts of this book. The book title is misleading, some 40% abstractly relates to the title, or at least the reason cops and soldiers would buy it for. The title should have been, "On Davey."

    Yes, On Davey- with...with Loren Christensen? I know Loren Christensen and he is listed as co-author in this. I simply cannot tell where Loren begins/end and Grossman begins, because the entire project is like a Grossman, 1st person speech. Dave tells a few Loren cop stories. Dave has co-authored several books and I don't know why a second author even bothers? Why does this West Point and college professor need them?

    This book is chock of full of wasted space "Dave" anecdotes about mice in school rooms, and how he learned to sleep amongst people who snored in basic training barracks. Then there is this annoying need to have a literary quote EVERY little, sub-section of the book. It smacks of "see how smart I am? I can quote two lines from a French book written in 1847!" I will estimate there are hundreds of these little quotes. And 80% of them to not really contribute to the piece..

    "What goes on around you...compares little with what goes on inside you"
                                                                             Ralph Waldo Emerson

...leads of the subsection called The Gift of Aggression. As though, without that Emerson quote, I never would have understood the essay. There are hundreds of these space-wasters. Couple that with his self-aggrandizing lines like.. (and I satirize here to make a point)...

"In 2001, I was asked to present a paper to International Board of Braniacs in the 114th Munich Genius Conference, there I discussed the three Switches...."

    Most academic authors start their paragraph with the "The Three Switches are..." When scores and scores of these little "I am so I important" ditties appear in the book, it begins to wear on the reader. We have to hear about Today Show's, Katie Coric's, pretty, batting and distracting eyes before we get the message. (Yes, Dave. We know you've been on the Today Show. YES! Please present the point!) This book could be 220 pages instead of 400.

    I also grew weary also of the constant reference to warriors. Warriors, warriors. warriors. Everyone who wears a uniform is automatically a warrior. I just don't think so. I think that term is reserved for unique people. Just cause you wear a uniform doesn't mean you're a warrior. Then Dave talks about Peace Warriors. Warriors, warriors. warriors.

    The tactical breathing chapter begins on page 314 and runs to 332. The idea has been around for centuries, with the ever-so "vital" header quote? "The Devil is in the details." (?) In this long, convoluted desertion, you'll eventually find the important, simple "4 in, hold 4, let out 4" breathing instruction paragraph. This section eventually and somehow meanders into summary remarks like "..no suicides after Jonesboro school shooting" remarks? Windy. Windy, Windy.

    He mentions in the book that the world is swimming in violence, the USA is awash in violence with what should be killings, but are not, because of medical advances. Yet... we have this genetic binding not to hurt each other? Pick one, Davey! All this against the backdrop of fall, 2005 news reports that violent crime is down in the USA, AGAIN. Well, which is it?

    Most revealing to me, is when Grossman quotes a US Army Ranger in Panama who spotted enemy soldiers afar and did not shoot them. The soldier admitted that because the enemy was not actively engaged in attacking him, he would not shoot at them...

    I ask a deeper question here and at the heart of why I am always so uncomfortable with Grossman... is this all about the natural will not to kill? Or some of the issue, just as much a good-guy, all-American Lone Ranger Syndrome? Good-minded Americans taught not to attack, exactly like cops, unless being attacked .A socialization of what the good-guys do? How does this good-guy, psychology fit into the mind of a Sierra Leone "ranger", a 14-year old teen in Africa who has never played video games and hacks people's hands off for fun. And then shoots women and children at his free will, after he rapes them? There are armies of these wild teens ravaging central Africa and uncivilized parts of the world.

    Grossman's look into violence is not just problemed by interviewing only 18-20 year-old Americans. I think he misses the entire semi-civilized and uncivilized world in his research. Much of the social contract is...social! The society that surrounded you as you grew. That means Indonesia, Africa and Siberia, the communist era of Stalin. Hitler's SS, Polynesian cannibals, not just stories that US cops and soldiers emailed you. The big picture, is not just muzzle-loading rifle stats, and optimistic opinions, instead, the world history gives us the big, human psychology picture. Professors like Jared Diamond and Victor Davis Hanson are far, far better sources for all this information. (Grossman isn’t a social scientist. His Masters degree is in Educational Psychology, an education that qualifies him to be nothing more than a grade-school, guidance counselor).

    I believe that the social contract exists. I believe that for the human race to survive there must be some hard wiring to cooperate-at least on a tribal level. I believe in the confusion caused by blasting heart rates. I believe in repetition training to overcome stress and ambush- the chaos of combat. These are also some of the same basic premises of Grossman in the end! Yet, there is just something offbeat and funky about him, and off-target about how his arguments are built and conclusions are met. It just that Dave has a weird road map to me. He takes a very strange way to wind up at the same city you did, in a much faster, better way. You look at his map, scratch your head and say, "How the hell did you wind up, up here with us?

    If you are a Dave-junkie and have a poster of him on the wall? You'll love this book. If you are neutral on Dave, it will be a partial waste of time. The new, interesting combat points (and there are some) have to be mined out. There is a part on Post Traumatic Stress.Nothing new, and there are about 15 books on the market better than his rehash of those works.

    Grossman is a meandering vessel of information that can be found from better sources. Guess what? You should buy and read the book. The book is $25 to $30. Get it at least for the reference books Dave drops. He mentions about 8 books that you really should read like Training at the Speed of Life and Into the Kill Zone...much better books with more direct road maps. No snoring stories or French quotes...

    Oh, oh did I tell you Dave was on the Today Show?

Hock

[lakerssportsfan]

Thats an awsome post Hock!

Homerun hit out of the park!

[Hock]

As I sometimes get to do, I reread some books.

My review remains the same. This time I am further amazed just how much name-dropping of everyone and everything since the dawn of his first book, which is  redone here in parts.

I think it is must read, though. Both his books. Just remember my review and then dive in. Take notes of the sources and then read go read the sources, so you can form your own opinions.

Hock