|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
September 21, 2009, 03:19 PM | #1 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 16, 2008
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 11,061
|
BlackwaterUSA Chimes in on Point vs Sight shooting
Quote:
I dont beleive there is the delay in getting on the sights, I do believe you revert to your training or habits in stressful situations. Good habits are as hard to break as bad habits. I just couldnt say it as well as Mr Scolly.
__________________
Kraig Stuart CPT USAR Ret USAMU Sniper School Distinguished Rifle Badge 1071 |
|
September 21, 2009, 04:00 PM | #2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 8, 2009
Location: Boca Raton, FL
Posts: 1,902
|
I agree. Sight shooting is paramount for taking out a threat and minimizing unwanted damage.
The Agency I worked for was very unique in that if we, as Agents, were to be engaged in a firefight, it was going to be in close quarters, usually with lots of innocent people in the vicinity. Accuracy and time were the qualifying factors when it came to training. All training and qualifying range sessions were timed with X number of points for specific hits and -X number of points for other than specific hits or bullets left in the magazines during the time allowed. If you were to qualify, you had to be fast and you had to be accurate. If you train yourself to be accurate, the speed will follow. I couldn't think of a worse outcome than think you neutralized a threat only to find you took out a family member in the commotion and confusion.
__________________
45Gunner May the Schwartz Be With You. NRA Instructor NRA Life Member |
September 21, 2009, 05:58 PM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 15, 2008
Location: Northern California
Posts: 375
|
I think there is allot more to be said about point shooting than most people understand! Applegate, Fairbain and Jordan put the point shooting method as the primary concern in gunfights. And these are pepole who have been in actual life and death encounters.
This is from a N.Y.P.D. study of 6,000 incidents. In 70% of the cases reviewed, officers reported that they used instinctive or point shooting. It was used for a variety of reasons: the close proximity of their adversary, rapid escalation of the incident, poor lighting, or the need for the swiftest possible reaction. No sight alignment was employed. It is an acknowledged fact that very few gunfight survivors ever remember seeing their sights at all during a life-threatening encounter. In other words, regardless of the amount of practice using the sights at the target range, the vast majority of shootout survivors are unable to see their sights when faced with life-threatening stress. One study found that when faced with stress, '93% of officers focused on the threat, not the weapon, and 88% of the officers resorted to binocular vision.’
__________________
Land of the Free Because of the Brave! |
September 21, 2009, 06:34 PM | #4 |
Member
Join Date: August 31, 2009
Posts: 74
|
To expand on what trigger finger said, we should be practicing point shooting, NOT sight shooting because in intense situations, we don't use the sights so why should we rely on something we haven't practiced?
|
September 21, 2009, 06:45 PM | #5 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 20, 2005
Location: Bellevue, WA
Posts: 683
|
Quote:
__________________
Join the community at GunUp! |
|
September 21, 2009, 07:58 PM | #6 | |
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
As Clint Smith wrote in theJanuary/February 2008 American Handgunner:
"It's alway argued that in a fight shooters will not look at their sights. I strongly agree -- if no one has ever taught them otherwise. To say that people don't, or won't, look at their sights is wrong. People have, they will in the future, and they'll hit the...target too. The correct alignment of the sights is a learnable skill. Is a textbook perfect sight picture available in every fight? Of course not....In fairness, the sights are only part of the issue -- the jerked on trigger doesn't improve anything." Even when one has been taught to look at the sights, how much has he actually practiced quickly seeing the adequate sight picture and acting reflexively, without conscious thought, on the rough sight picture? As another trainer, Bennie Cooley, once told me, "It's not that I shoot quicker than you do. It's that I see quicker." With the proper training and practice, it's amazing how fast one can acquire a flash sight picture and hit accurately. Learning those techniques and developing proficiency in the use of those techniques also gives you the flexibility to deal with targets at pretty much any distance. What would you do if you had to engage an armed threat 10 to 12 yards away and partially behind cover? The idea behind the flash sight picture is to focus on the front sight quickly and align the sights only as precisely as warranted under the circumstances. At distances on the order of 5 to 7 yards, when the target is the center of mass, a rough alignment will be sufficient to assure good hits (as long as you have good trigger control). As distances increase or the target shrinks, the alignment needs to be more precise. Quote:
Under stress, one reverts to one's level of training. So, as Clint Smith (and other instructors like Joseph Scolly quoted in the first post, Louis Awerbuck, Massad Ayoob, Jeff Cooper and yet others) if you have trained to use your sights, you will use them. And if you have trained ot use them quickly, you will use them quickly. |
|
September 21, 2009, 08:12 PM | #7 |
Member In Memoriam
Join Date: March 17, 1999
Posts: 24,383
|
I am not sure I would be so analytical in a gun fight, but I think it is a matter of circumstances, mainly distance. The idea of point shooting at 50 yards is scary if any bystanders are in the vicinity. But using the sights and taking aim, no matter how rapidly, at five feet is silly. (It can also be dangerous legally; point and shoot looks like self-defense but taking careful aim may look like deliberate murder.
Note, though, that point shooting is not "shooting from the hip". Point shooting involves holding the gun in front of you, where you can see it and see where it is pointing. You are essentially using the line of the gun as a sighting device. With practice, it can be accurate enough up to about 7-10 yards, and most misses will be high or low, not to the side, because it is harder to judge whether the gun is pointing up or down than where it is pointing in a horizonal plane. Jim |
September 21, 2009, 08:16 PM | #8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 15, 2008
Location: Northern California
Posts: 375
|
Quote
"That's called a false correlation. Just because some gunfight survivors don't recall seeing the sights doesn't mean they didn't use the sights. It just means that in the trauma of the gunfight, their brain decided that it wasn't important to catalog the mental image of the sight picture as a memory. Gunfight survivors don't remember a lot of things about their gunfights, including stuff like reloading, the number of shots fired, moving, etc. To suggest that because they don't remember seeing their sights means that they didn't use them betrays a significant lack of understanding of the mechanics of stress incidents." But on using the sights isn't that all we have to go by. The fact that they don't remember using there sights is not an indicator that they did. This is the only factor we can use, their memory, however flawed or not it is.
__________________
Land of the Free Because of the Brave! |
September 21, 2009, 08:51 PM | #9 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 31, 2000
Location: Texican!
Posts: 4,453
|
Paul Howe, who teaches in Nacogdoches, also feels if you do both, point shooting and sighted fire you will tend to default to the one that takes least effort, I.E. point shooting.
I hope some of you take a course from Tom Givens, of Rangemaster in Memphis. He has had over 50 students in gunfights and all have prevailed. He gave an excellent power point presentation on ten of the shootings (the 10 were not cherry picked. He simply had the most data from the students that he could sit down and debrief.) His power point presentation also showed how 'flash sight picture' works (it's a non-traditional use of the sights) and why it works so well. His course will teach you how to get very fast, very consitant GOOD hits.
__________________
“To you who call yourselves ‘men of peace,’ I say, you are not safe without men of action by your side” Thucydides |
September 21, 2009, 09:37 PM | #10 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 21, 2009
Location: Georgia
Posts: 1,424
|
Quote:
If you do practice using your front sight what then? I know I miss a lot more point shooting than when I use my sights, and the time difference is only a couple of hundredths of a second difference more when I take the time to focus on the front sight which more than makes up for the misses.
__________________
NRA Life Member - Orange Gunsite Member - NRA Certified Pistol Instructor "When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society,
they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it." Frederic Bastiat |
|
September 21, 2009, 10:03 PM | #11 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 5, 2008
Location: Renton, WA
Posts: 462
|
This is an interesting thread question
I have to put my $0.02
I've seen this question pop up from time to time and the same argument arises (see above). Both sides will chip in and stand their ground. One of the biggest things newer shooters need to understand is that there are lots of "views" on this topic. Please remember all the experts and "names" of experts are thrown around and also those with lots of experience will stand their ground. The bottom line that comes up is practice what you are taught or trained. Either one can be done to a degree of success if one is trained and practiced until it becomes muscle memory. Each has it's limitations: Point and shoot is limited to very close quarters shooting (within 3-10 feet in general). Sight shooting is obviously better for farther distances (greater than 15 feet). Again these are just distances from my point of view. There may be some that practice at closer and farther distances under each school of thought. Where do I stand? For me I am on the sighted shooting as you can increase the speed after lots of practice - which only increases your accuracy and speed while point shooting is limited to very close shooting and what I fear is more spray and pray type of shooting (just hoping by shooting a lot you can hit something you are trying to hit). Sorry no offense. I know there are some that can do it justice but I see quite more that cannot (just go to a shooting range). They are trying to aim and can't shoot. Another point that many do not ask is how do the Grand Masters in IDPA and USPSA - now that is a good level of stress in those competitions, do it? All the teachings from the winners of these shooting events are sight shooting. Their accuracy is hands down "X" and their speed is un questioned. I just don't see any point shooters at this level of competition. Of course, these guys are shooting 50,000+ rounds a year so their muscle memory is right on. So, their ability is in the extreme range of the spectrum. Again, this is just my 2 cents.
__________________
"Shoot Safetly, Shoot Often and Share Your Sport." Jim Scoutten, Shooting USA Check out my new website: www.shootonthemove.org |
September 21, 2009, 11:34 PM | #12 | ||||
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
Quote:
Personally, I think you get a greater "return on investment" putting the effort into practicing the flash sight picture. If offers the greatest versatility. Quote:
"Fast is fine, but accuracy is final." (Wyatt Earp) Quote:
Consider the standard IPSC exercise called "El Presidente." Three standard IPSC targets are set up 1 meter (or yard) apart 10 meters (or yards) from the shooting position. The shooter starts facing up range (back to targets) with his hands held above his shoulders. His gun is loaded and in his holster (in condition 1 if it's a 1911 or BHP). On the audible start signal, the shooter turns, draws and engages each target with two rounds, reloads, and engages each target again with two rounds. I've seen good shooters complete this exercise with 12 center hits, in the Limited Division (no comps or optics), in 4 to 6 seconds; and I guarantee you that they were using their sights. |
||||
September 22, 2009, 12:01 AM | #13 | |
Junior member
Join Date: August 5, 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,982
|
Quote:
|
|
September 22, 2009, 01:22 AM | #14 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 25, 2008
Location: California
Posts: 1,951
|
In my shooting ny triggerguard was touching my side when I fired, there is no way I could see the sights. However I had trained this way and knew I could do ii I fired one shot. D.O.A.
__________________
http://www.armsmaster.net-a.googlepages.com http://s239.photobucket.com/albums/f...aster270/Guns/ Retired LE, M.P., Sr. M.P. Investigator F.B.I. Trained Rangemaster/Firearms Instructor & Armorer, Presently Forensic Document Examiner for D.H.S. |
September 22, 2009, 07:43 AM | #15 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 31, 2000
Location: Texican!
Posts: 4,453
|
Quote:
__________________
“To you who call yourselves ‘men of peace,’ I say, you are not safe without men of action by your side” Thucydides |
|
September 22, 2009, 08:38 AM | #16 |
Junior member
Join Date: June 7, 2002
Location: NYC
Posts: 363
|
It is unfair to claim that point shooting is not accurate due to the NYPD SOP-9 stats.
After all, the NYC police are not taught how to point shoot. What the stats do prove is that a lot of these officers are not using the aimed fire skills that they have been trained to use. Not surprising, since the typical NYPD gunfight distance is 0-7 feet. If you guys think that you can always use your sights in a super close range, low light situation, then more power to you. However, once you get some quality point shooting instruction, then you will see just how fast AND accurate this method can be--and with minimal training/hours/ammunition. One last thing..if officers who claim not to see their sights are mistaken (as some here have suggested) then can the reverse also be true? Or is a miss assumed to be be via point shooting and vice versa? Once again, here is a point shooting home study course that I wrote awhile back for those so interested. I also shot a point shooting video with Paladin Press last June which should be coming out in a few months: http://kilogulf59.proboards.com/inde...lay&thread=114 Last edited by matthew temkin; September 22, 2009 at 08:43 AM. |
September 22, 2009, 08:45 AM | #17 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 12, 2004
Location: Viera, Florida
Posts: 1,340
|
I've used the sights in training and competition for about 40 years. Still there have been IDPA stages where targets were so close that using the sights wasn't necessary. There was no concious decision made; I point-shot without thinking about it and always got good hits.
On the Steel Challenge stages, the sights are needed by most of us for all stages except Smoke and Hope. On that stage, the 1st 4 targets are big and close and using the sights is a waste of time. If you've trained using the sights and have a good index, you can just hose 'em. At least you can do it in practice! A shooter who's had lots of training and experience using the sights doesn't really have to train for those super big and close targets. Anything beyond that, though, and real training is necessary, training that, IMHO, would be better spent on fast sighted fire. |
September 22, 2009, 08:47 AM | #18 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 31, 2000
Location: Texican!
Posts: 4,453
|
Quote:
The use of the 'flash sight picture' is only part. Again, as Cooper said, "the body aims, the sights confirm".
__________________
“To you who call yourselves ‘men of peace,’ I say, you are not safe without men of action by your side” Thucydides |
|
September 22, 2009, 08:53 AM | #19 |
Junior member
Join Date: June 7, 2002
Location: NYC
Posts: 363
|
To me retention shooting is a form of point shooting.
(W.E. Fairbairn called it 1/4 hip way back in 1942) And what you quoted by Jeff Cooper is EXACTLY the same as Applegate's point shoulder method. After all, if you CANNOT see the sights then some type of alternative must be used. Glad to see that we agree on everything except the exact semantics. Once again, for those so inclined to make up their own minds on this so called debate: http://kilogulf59.proboards.com/inde...lay&thread=114 |
September 22, 2009, 08:59 AM | #20 | |
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
Consider that the majority of shooters I see at the range can't put two rounds within 2 feet of each other, on a B-27 silhouette, slow fire, with sights, at 7 yards. Their problem is, of course, primarily trigger control. But good trigger control, consistently, under stress and at speed takes considerable practice to develop. I'll stick with the way I've been trained: flash sight picture (and shooting from retention at contact distances). |
|
September 22, 2009, 09:48 AM | #21 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 25, 2009
Location: Stuttgart, AR
Posts: 1,569
|
Young Point Shooting
While I am a firm believer in using sights in all possible situations, I can remember the years I was a "point" shooter. I owned the most accurate BB gun in our neighborhood (dad always believed in buying high quality firearms), but at some point the sights got knocked off; therefore, I guess I was point shooting from there on.
Was I able to hit? You bettcha! Why could I put the BB on target? In those days, my primary expenditure of my limited funds was the purchase of ammo (funny how some things haven’t changed in the last 40 years). Even though my rifle didn’t have sights, I could hit distance targets because I shot thousands of rounds and the repetition made shooting almost automatic. |
September 22, 2009, 10:18 AM | #22 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 8, 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,786
|
Interesting discussion with valid points on both sides.
The only contribution I will make is to offer a way to practice drawing and quick sight acquisition on a daily basis. In the interest of safety, make sure that you have a mirror in a location that makes this safe (like on an outside wall), and to keep the finger out of the trigger guard, but when you are ready to take your pistol off your belt when you get home, why not practice your draw and put the sights in the middle of the chest of that ugly sucker in the mirror? You have to pull the pistol anyway, so it takes like one extra second to make it a practice session. FWIW. |
September 22, 2009, 10:49 AM | #23 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 31, 2000
Location: Texican!
Posts: 4,453
|
Matt,
Semantics are alot of the issue. The main emphasis is on wither to ignore the sights in training or not. Cooper, Givens, and Howe, find that practice with the sights is the best way to get the skills and not the other way around. Tallgator, Instead get a 'Red' gun that matches your carry gun, drill a hole in the barrel and empoxy some lead bullets, In the grip, drill a few holes and do the same. That makes the plastic red gun weigh like your carry gun. Use that Red gun to do all your quick draw in the house. That way, no chance of an accidental discharge.
__________________
“To you who call yourselves ‘men of peace,’ I say, you are not safe without men of action by your side” Thucydides |
September 22, 2009, 11:06 AM | #24 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2008
Location: gulf of mexico
Posts: 2,716
|
i practice heavily for point shooting on my kel tec p32. i start to fire as soon as the gun reaches my hip, and continue to fire as i extend my arm towards the target.
i practice this way because it is a "short range" gun, and all likelihood the "target" will be verry close, and every fraction of a second i can get im gonna use.
__________________
There is only one tactical principle which is not subject to change. It is to use the means at hand to inflict the maximum amount of wound, death, and destruction on the enemy in the minimum amount of time." |
September 22, 2009, 11:38 AM | #25 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 16, 2004
Posts: 516
|
Ketchup, Mayo, or Mustard?
Full time corrective lenses or 'readers'? What McGivern, Brice, or Bill Jordan could do has about as much relevance as Ford/Chevy Nascar choices vs. your daily driver. salty edit. Mr McClure nailed it. Learn to work with what you got. sd. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|