The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post - Playing around with point fire as opposed to aimed fire, and thoughts on CCW training

sigxder · January 24, 2012, 01:40 AM

All the early teachers of point shooting be it Mr.'s Sykes, Fairbairn, Applegate, and later Bill Jordan never taught that it was point shooting vs. sighted shooting. I do not understand why this myth is still perpetuated. The point shooting method was developed by the British/Chinese police force in Shanghi because they were not doing well with the target style method of training that was being taught at the time. The reason being as today most handgun fights were close up affairs.
If one tried to take their time raising the pistol to the classic dueling stance, one eye closed, look for the rght sight picture and so on you were basically dead. The classic technique of shooting simply didn't work n these sort distance, compressed time frame situations. They developed a system for the up close, down and dirty street fights they were in. At close range the balance between speed of firing vs. accuracy changed dramatically. At close range it was found an exact sight picture took too much time and was not needed. Accurate enough and fast enough was the key. It is aimed fire by the way. Aimed by body indexing.
Some encounters were so close you came out of the holster shooting. Others you could get to the 3/4's position. Further out arm fully extended. And with enough distance get behind cover, use two hands, and a good sight picture. In Shooting to Live, Kill Or Be Killed, and the other texts on point shooting all show two handed shooting behind cover when possible. It was just that usually with a handgun it wasn't practical because of the distance. All agreed you should be taught both. The problem is many in the Modern School as it is called try to debunk point shootng as some sort of Pray and spray.
Nothing could be farther from the truth. You are aiming up very close by body indexing. A little further out by pointing te gun as you would your finger. Somewhere you may look over the sights or use the guns outline for aiming. Back far enough and use as muc sight picture as you have time for. This is the question for most civilians. At what ranges are you most likely to use a handgun? Feet not yards.
So if self defense with a handgun is your goal much time should be spent practicing at the distances you will use your weapon. Clos up you will point shoot. you just don't have time for anything else. And it is a method dveloped and proven in combat. It has already been validated for many decades. It is still a system that must be practiced. You can't spend 10 minutes at a range point shooting and think you have mastered it. But it is smple to learn compared to other systems.
One of the goals of point shooting was to train OSS personnel who would be dropped behind enemy lines a fast, effective way to learn to shoot a pistol. That and/or a dagger being the only weapon you're likely to have. Learning codes, languages, and so on encompassed most of your training. You were their to gather information and get it back to where it could be used. If you had to resort to a weapon your cover was blown. But f it was you needd to be able to use your pistol well.
Anyone involved in Martial Arts is vry awar of Bruc Lee's ideas of zones of slf defense. At longer ranges kicking works the best. Closer and hand techniques, knee's and elbows. Nose to nose and grappling comes into play. The lesson has ben learned and that's why Mixed Martial Arts involves it all. If you only believe that kickng is effective, or say grappling you are very mistaken. Point shooting is grappling, knees and elbows. Modern Technique is kicking when you can stay back out of the other guys range. But you better be well versed in all of it if you want to stand a chance of winning.

January 24, 2012, 01:40 AM	#35
sigxder Senior Member Join Date: August 20, 2009 Posts: 390	All the early teachers of point shooting be it Mr.'s Sykes, Fairbairn, Applegate, and later Bill Jordan never taught that it was point shooting vs. sighted shooting. I do not understand why this myth is still perpetuated. The point shooting method was developed by the British/Chinese police force in Shanghi because they were not doing well with the target style method of training that was being taught at the time. The reason being as today most handgun fights were close up affairs. If one tried to take their time raising the pistol to the classic dueling stance, one eye closed, look for the rght sight picture and so on you were basically dead. The classic technique of shooting simply didn't work n these sort distance, compressed time frame situations. They developed a system for the up close, down and dirty street fights they were in. At close range the balance between speed of firing vs. accuracy changed dramatically. At close range it was found an exact sight picture took too much time and was not needed. Accurate enough and fast enough was the key. It is aimed fire by the way. Aimed by body indexing. Some encounters were so close you came out of the holster shooting. Others you could get to the 3/4's position. Further out arm fully extended. And with enough distance get behind cover, use two hands, and a good sight picture. In Shooting to Live, Kill Or Be Killed, and the other texts on point shooting all show two handed shooting behind cover when possible. It was just that usually with a handgun it wasn't practical because of the distance. All agreed you should be taught both. The problem is many in the Modern School as it is called try to debunk point shootng as some sort of Pray and spray. Nothing could be farther from the truth. You are aiming up very close by body indexing. A little further out by pointing te gun as you would your finger. Somewhere you may look over the sights or use the guns outline for aiming. Back far enough and use as muc sight picture as you have time for. This is the question for most civilians. At what ranges are you most likely to use a handgun? Feet not yards. So if self defense with a handgun is your goal much time should be spent practicing at the distances you will use your weapon. Clos up you will point shoot. you just don't have time for anything else. And it is a method dveloped and proven in combat. It has already been validated for many decades. It is still a system that must be practiced. You can't spend 10 minutes at a range point shooting and think you have mastered it. But it is smple to learn compared to other systems. One of the goals of point shooting was to train OSS personnel who would be dropped behind enemy lines a fast, effective way to learn to shoot a pistol. That and/or a dagger being the only weapon you're likely to have. Learning codes, languages, and so on encompassed most of your training. You were their to gather information and get it back to where it could be used. If you had to resort to a weapon your cover was blown. But f it was you needd to be able to use your pistol well. Anyone involved in Martial Arts is vry awar of Bruc Lee's ideas of zones of slf defense. At longer ranges kicking works the best. Closer and hand techniques, knee's and elbows. Nose to nose and grappling comes into play. The lesson has ben learned and that's why Mixed Martial Arts involves it all. If you only believe that kickng is effective, or say grappling you are very mistaken. Point shooting is grappling, knees and elbows. Modern Technique is kicking when you can stay back out of the other guys range. But you better be well versed in all of it if you want to stand a chance of winning.