Jack Weaver On the Weaver Stance

matthew temkin · May 25, 2009, 12:01 AM

http://kilogulf59.proboards.com/inde...ay&thread=1854

Deaf Smith · May 25, 2009, 06:45 PM

It's a good read. I've seen several articles about him.

Terry A · May 28, 2009, 10:32 PM

Thanks for posting the link, Matthew.

In my opinion, there's no better way to do a building / home search than with the "Weaver Stance". Tuck it in even closer when cornering, arms are in a decent position to afford you at least a modicum of protection to the your torso...it just feels right.

The movies shows guys searching places in the old isosceles triangle from the days of "Adam 12". Good way to lose your gun and the fight. Or how about the guys who go around corners and snap their gun out one handed like an old fashioned duel stance?

The weaver stance, in my opinion, works best for the job that needs to be done.

raimius · May 29, 2009, 03:34 PM

The Weaver stance definitely has its strong points, but also weaknesses.

It is easy to be stable and accurate. You present a reduced profile toward the target (and don't we all like being small targets when attacked?)

However, if you have body armor with strike plates, it places the plates 45 degrees off from the target--so you no longer have the best protection they afford! Also, some people find movement (especially lateral and diagonal) to be more difficult compared to an ISO stance.

Personally, I use an ISO stance with my off foot slightly forward. It seems to be the best for my situation.
Use what works for you and what the situation calls for!

Creature · May 29, 2009, 03:49 PM

Quote:

However, if you have body armor with strike plates, it places the plates 45 degrees off from the target--so you no longer have the best protection they afford! Also, some people find movement (especially lateral and diagonal) to be more difficult compared to an ISO stance.

A salty old "operator" once told me that the weaver position offers the BG a chance at taking out two lungs with a single lucky shot vs one lung with the facing position. I had to ponder that one for a while...

NRAhab · May 29, 2009, 06:42 PM

I find no end of irony in the fact that the Weaver stance was originally invented to win a game, and yet I have heard many people pooh-pooh the use of the modern (or combat) isosceles because it's used "to win games". Present company excluded, because none of that silliness has taken place in this thread. Yet.

Deaf Smith · May 29, 2009, 07:49 PM

Weither it's to win a game or not, if a method works it works.

Using two hands to shoot when ones life is on the line is not new, even in the '50s it was not new.

Weaver mearly codeified a way to shoot with two hands.

Funny thing is, the 'games' brought forth many inventions used by cops. From better sights to better safties to flaired magazine wells to action jobs.

Oldjarhead · May 30, 2009, 08:55 AM

The weaver is a fine shooting position. There is one drawback however. You must practice using it to the point it becomes second nature. Studies have shown that in gunfights, people go to their natural instincts, because of normal human reaction when your are in danger. The body becomes more rigid, you crouch and aim at the threat. How many police video camera shootings have you seen, where the combatants used the Weaver stance? I have yet to see one. I would say the average person or street cop will use some version of the isosceles, of point directly at the threat in a slight crouch. Have you ever been startled by a loud sound? Your instincts are to crouch immediately and look toward the sound. Sound familar? Like I said both the isosceles and weaver are good, but I have chosen what is more natural for me, the isoceles. If you can count on the Weaver as second nature reaction to a life threatening event, I say great, it will work fine. Just be willing to practice it alot, because it is not for most people, a natural shooting position, when reacting in a gunfight.

matthew temkin · May 30, 2009, 04:06 PM

The Weaver does belong in a shooter's bag of tricks.
Covering bad guys is one of it's applications.

May 25, 2009, 12:01 AM	#1
matthew temkin Junior member Join Date: June 7, 2002 Location: NYC Posts: 363	Jack Weaver On the Weaver Stance http://kilogulf59.proboards.com/inde...ay&thread=1854

May 25, 2009, 06:45 PM	#2
Deaf Smith Senior Member Join Date: October 31, 2000 Location: Texican! Posts: 4,453	It's a good read. I've seen several articles about him. __________________ “To you who call yourselves ‘men of peace,’ I say, you are not safe without men of action by your side” Thucydides

May 28, 2009, 10:32 PM	#3
Terry A Senior Member Join Date: December 27, 2008 Location: Washington, Pa Posts: 764	Thanks for posting the link, Matthew. In my opinion, there's no better way to do a building / home search than with the "Weaver Stance". Tuck it in even closer when cornering, arms are in a decent position to afford you at least a modicum of protection to the your torso...it just feels right. The movies shows guys searching places in the old isosceles triangle from the days of "Adam 12". Good way to lose your gun and the fight. Or how about the guys who go around corners and snap their gun out one handed like an old fashioned duel stance? The weaver stance, in my opinion, works best for the job that needs to be done. __________________ 2 Thes 3:16 "Now may the Lord of peace Himself continually grant you peace in every circumstance. The Lord be with you all! "

May 29, 2009, 06:42 PM	#6
NRAhab Senior Member Join Date: August 20, 2005 Location: Bellevue, WA Posts: 683	I find no end of irony in the fact that the Weaver stance was originally invented to win a game, and yet I have heard many people pooh-pooh the use of the modern (or combat) isosceles because it's used "to win games". Present company excluded, because none of that silliness has taken place in this thread. Yet. __________________ Join the community at GunUp!

May 29, 2009, 07:49 PM	#7
Deaf Smith Senior Member Join Date: October 31, 2000 Location: Texican! Posts: 4,453	Weither it's to win a game or not, if a method works it works. Using two hands to shoot when ones life is on the line is not new, even in the '50s it was not new. Weaver mearly codeified a way to shoot with two hands. Funny thing is, the 'games' brought forth many inventions used by cops. From better sights to better safties to flaired magazine wells to action jobs. __________________ “To you who call yourselves ‘men of peace,’ I say, you are not safe without men of action by your side” Thucydides

May 29, 2009, 03:34 PM	#4
raimius Senior Member Join Date: January 27, 2008 Posts: 2,199	The Weaver stance definitely has its strong points, but also weaknesses. It is easy to be stable and accurate. You present a reduced profile toward the target (and don't we all like being small targets when attacked?) However, if you have body armor with strike plates, it places the plates 45 degrees off from the target--so you no longer have the best protection they afford! Also, some people find movement (especially lateral and diagonal) to be more difficult compared to an ISO stance. Personally, I use an ISO stance with my off foot slightly forward. It seems to be the best for my situation. Use what works for you and what the situation calls for!

May 30, 2009, 08:55 AM	#8
Oldjarhead Senior Member Join Date: July 4, 2008 Posts: 508	Weaver vs. Isosceles The weaver is a fine shooting position. There is one drawback however. You must practice using it to the point it becomes second nature. Studies have shown that in gunfights, people go to their natural instincts, because of normal human reaction when your are in danger. The body becomes more rigid, you crouch and aim at the threat. How many police video camera shootings have you seen, where the combatants used the Weaver stance? I have yet to see one. I would say the average person or street cop will use some version of the isosceles, of point directly at the threat in a slight crouch. Have you ever been startled by a loud sound? Your instincts are to crouch immediately and look toward the sound. Sound familar? Like I said both the isosceles and weaver are good, but I have chosen what is more natural for me, the isoceles. If you can count on the Weaver as second nature reaction to a life threatening event, I say great, it will work fine. Just be willing to practice it alot, because it is not for most people, a natural shooting position, when reacting in a gunfight.

May 30, 2009, 04:06 PM	#9
matthew temkin Junior member Join Date: June 7, 2002 Location: NYC Posts: 363	The Weaver does belong in a shooter's bag of tricks. Covering bad guys is one of it's applications.