Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ranburr
But, if you use the Good technique, it really doesn't matter if you have night sights or not. I use night sights on my own guns. But, if you have a light and know how to use it, I have never seen a difference in shooting speed or accuracy between pistols with or without night sights.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ranburr
In basic terms put the light next to your head, eye level in the weak hand. When you work the light you essentially flash through the front sight into your target. Thus, you get a good sight picture with or without night sights.
|
The Harries technique, while not illuminating the sights DOES allow the weak hand to provide some level of useful support for the gun. So while you lose the benefit of a light shining on your sights (compared to the Good technique) you gain the benefit of a better supported shooting hand.
In other words, the Good technique will cost you support to your shooting (and therefore speed and accuracy) compared to the Harries technique but will give you the ability to see non-illuminated sights.
Your assessment that you "have never seen a difference in shooting speed or accuracy between pistols with or without night sights." may be correct, but it ignores the fact that your flashlight technique costs you shooting speed and accuracy by making your flashlight hand completely unavailable to help support the handgun.
Night sights and a technique like the Harries technique lets you see your sights and still allows your flashlight hand to provide some level of useful support for the handgun.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Skyguy
Long ago I discovered that night sights are next to useless and that one is much better off using ambient light and point shooting.
|
How far away can you be and still consistently score hits on the torso and head of a human sized target by point shooting with a handgun?
How long did it take you to attain that level of skill?