Topic: Civilian combat group question

[Solsys]

A couple of years a go I read about tactics used by french air crews for survival (after bailout / forced landing). A crew of two would have their sidearms and one shotgun (double-barrel), one crew member would have the handgun at the ready while the other has the shotgun ready, and they progress together.

Alas, it has been a while since I read that article, and I can't remember any details. Does anybody here have iinfo on that kind of configuration ?

On a broader perspective, I wondered if such pairs could be used in an urban combat situation. It would be like : three pairs of shotgun+handgun, one pair consisting of a scoped hunting rifle+spotter (marksman/sniper role), group leader with a pistol-caliber carbine.

I'm just looking for simple tactics & configuration with commonly available civilian weapons, to counter a small gang for instance. Any ideas & suggestions welcome.

[azredhawk44]

I think the weapons deployment are going to be far less important than the actual tactics used by such a group.

Unorganized lay folks up against non-military gangs are going to be best served by examining their mindset as a primary tactic.  They are already behind the curve when it comes to certain ethical lines they would have to cross in a conflict.

-Are you willing to cover a human being with the front sight of your gun?
-Can you pull the trigger?
-If it comes to grappling contact, are you willing and able to stab a man to death?
-Can you immediately re-engage the rest of your enemies after winning a hand to hand conflict?

Plain old normal folks tend to want to control a situation rather than dominate it.  That's the first tactical failure they are up against.  Conscience is a hindrance.

As far as weapons assignments...

I would never have a group of people act in an offensive role, armed only with handguns.  Each "squad" or pair of people would have at least 1 long gun.  If I were so destitute in firearms that I could only arm some of my people with handguns, they would be tasked with close proximity defense of my long-gunners as they acted in an offensive manner.  Shots under 25 yards, only.

Group leader with PCC?  Hmm.  I think deliberately putting a specific gun in your "hero's" hands is starting to get into role-play territory.

Once you get into role-play territory, then you have to examine your own strengths and weaknesses as a shooter and a leader and tactician.

I'm fairly confident in saying I'm one of the best (if not the best) rifle shooters in my neighborhood at this moment and if "sniping" work is called for, no one is better equipped to accomplish that, than me.

When it comes to group tactics on how to repel an advancing force... I'm sure there's a Vietnam or other veteran sergeant somewhere in my neighborhood that can lead in that regard.  'Cuz I'm not a trained small squad tactician.

[Solsys]

Thanks for the insights, especially regarding the mindset. that is very well seen. 

As for the weapon-specific annotation, it was more of a general idea (it could have been a semi SMG or a lever-action, that is not really the point as you said).

On a broader perspective I'm trying to find ways to make do with what will be available around me, thus the weapon choices. It's something like anticipating an unfavorable situation regarding both weapons and mindset, and how to compensate somewhat with tactics. One has to find an edge (and also one has to not oversee/forget something).

[Fenix]

-Are you willing to cover a human being with the front sight of your gun?
-Can you pull the trigger?
-If it comes to grappling contact, are you willing and able to stab a man to death?
-Can you immediately re-engage the rest of your enemies after winning a hand to hand conflict?

Yes, Yes, Yes and Yes. Been stabbed too, it hurts and I don't recommend it very highly at all. Got nice scar from it though.

[Mikeyboy]

My dad explained to me once some basic concepts he learned in the Marines. The goal is to created an upside down triangle. Your guys want to be the V part and line on top of  the V that make it an upside down Triangle is your enemy. You basically want to put your enemy in a cross fire, so your shooting at them at multiple angles, getting around their cover without coming in at too sharp of an angle so your not shooting your own men. The Machine gunners would give covering fire, keeping the Bad guys heads down while the riflemen would keep moving (cover, shoot, move, cover, shoot, move) to try to outflank the bad guy.

Then my dad would laughed and said, that is the theory. In Vietnam it usually did not work out that way.

I guess the short answer would be one member of the pair would try to pin the Bad guy down, while the other tries to move to a better firing position to shoot at the BG, and then take turns.

[eldarbeast]

  I recall reading a book (I think) By David Hackworth, and in it he said the difference between generations (WW II and Viet-Nam) was the reply of the soldiers when asked "Could you shoot an enemy soldier?"

  The Nam era person would start out with, " Well, I guess it would depend on...", and the WW II era person would reply, "I'd paint that sucker red in  a heartbeat!"...

  The difference is between 'being civil' and 'civilized'...

eldarbeast

[Beprepared]

While it is written for Star Trek I read this and it shows some of the basic squad tactics taught in Marine Corps boot camp (circa 1990, there may be updates).

http://database.obsidianfleet.net/wiki/index.php/Marine_Combat_Tactics

If you are up for a little more reading, a bit more indepth... there is the US Army Manual on Infantry Rifle Platoon and Squad.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/3-21-9/chap3.htm

[Mr. Grey]

Lets not compare apples to oranges.  2 french airmen in unfriendly neighborhoods is a far cry from you chasing gang bangers off the front porch.

In one case you are working your way through hostile territory to get back home.  In the other you are already there.  I am not a marine but we have a few scattered in this forum so if I get it wrong I'm sure they will correct me. 

Marine corp rule of combat number 1.  (or at least in my opinion it should be) an inferior force can withstand a superior force if they fight from a fortified position.   In ridding your neighborhood of crack heads you should be fighting from home.  It should already be fortified.  This is your place of advantage.  Use it.  Further more the following story should shed some light on the subject.

An elderly couple went for a walk in the woods of Alaska.  They were enjoying a short day hike.  They came upon a large grizzly who stood up on its hind legs to sniff the air and grunt and growl.  The old man dropped his pack kicked off his hiking boots and started to put on his tennis shoes.  His wife said "you can't out run it you know"  to which he responded, "I don't have to.  All I have to do is out run you".   

AS soon as you demonstrate that you are capable of shooting back and with effect (as opposed to spray and pray)  and you demonstrate that you have some power in your stable (deer rifle, 12 gauge etc.) you will find that you don't have to beat them.  You only have to be a tougher nut to crack than the neighbors.  Most crack heads (unless high in which case all bets are off as judgment goes out the door) will bail as soon as they do not have the advantage.  These people are bullies and nothing more.  they will never engage in mortal combat hand to hand  with a man 6 foot by 6 foot.  They will look for small and week.  If you are not, they won't be back.  No point in getting hurt when some one else is willing to do it for you.  That was a direct and sarcastic reference to the politically correct.  I really should try to tone that down.  Sorry about that.  I think the term used in this and other forums would be sheep or sheeple.  There are a lot of them.  They stand on the side walk with signs that proclaim war is not the answer.  I have always wondered what the question was that war was not the answer too but never bothered to ask.  Further more I don't know of any who have offered the correct answer but seem only to be quick to point out that war was not it.  Sorry again I really should control the ranting as well.  The point is, if some one else is easier pick'ns, why bother risking getting hurt messing with you?

This is why in so many cases, the presence of a gun is all that is required to ward off evil.  Its like magic some times.  Not always but ever so very often it is.  If at all possible Never Never Never put your self at risk.  One stray bullet, one lucky hit (even bad people get lucky once in a while and wind up hurting good people) and its all a moot point.

If you must venture out from home sweet castle, moving in 2 fire teams is a time tested method.  some one uses fire to pin them down on the right while some one moves on the left.  then the left pins and the team on the right moves.  As mentioned above thats the way it is supposed to work but in combat it can become a crap shoot in a heart beat.   There for stay home let them have the ones with Obama bumper stickers.  Oh dang I do need to cut down on that. 

[entropy]

This is why in so many cases, the presence of a gun is all that is required to ward off evil.  Its like magic some times.

Never, EVER, count on this. Those who do often die. If you cannot answer these two questions, "

-Are you willing to cover a human being with the front sight of your gun?
-Can you pull the trigger?

with a resounding "YES!" , you are a liability with a gun.

As Mr. Grey points out, offensively engaging gangs in a civil unrest/SHTF/TEOTWAWKI situation is best left to the professionals. Defensive engagement is best augmented by passive systems (barricades, firing lanes, position, etc.) as force multipliers. Becoming a 'hard target' is your best defense against all but the most determined and/ or professional attackers.

-Are you willing to cover a human being with the front sight of your gun?
-Can you pull the trigger?
-If it comes to grappling contact, are you willing and able to stab a man to death?
-Can you immediately re-engage the rest of your enemies after winning a hand to hand conflict?

Yes, to all four.
I'd add "Are you willing to take damage in your own/ others' defense?"

[mtbkski]

Another thing to think about.

Are you willing or able to keep fighting after someone in your party (especially a family member like your wife or child) takes a hit or worse yet is killed outright by those attacking you.

I really think this will be the hardest thing to overcome if engaged in a fight during a SHTF situation.  Seeing your kid rolling around with blood pouring out of them, as fire continues to come in on you and you have to keep fighting instead of rendering them medical assistance.