What do you think about point shooting?

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Originally Posted by spacecoast

in the extra second it takes you to find your sights you are risking taking a debilitating hit.

Do you routinely use a shot timer when you shoot? I find it difficult to believe that it takes the average person an extra second to find their sights.

For that matter, can anyone who practices point shooting quantify just exactly how much faster they are? Looking at this video of point shooting advocate Matthew Temkin, it appears to take him about a second to draw and fire his first shot at a target 3 yards away using point shooting (and I'm not counting reaction time). See the video at 2:39-2:40 and subsequent videos.

It has been awhile since I've gotten in some quality training; but I'm confident it won't take me 2 seconds to put good hits on target at 3 yards.

[Eagle0711]

While I agree with Mr. Vickers and Howe; I see two problems with holding a gun at eye level when the enemy is at arms length. The first is the weapon may be taken away, and second the gun, hand, and arm can block your view.
I can hit at a distance of 12' using point shooting using the chest as the target. With many BGs using vests I would if at all possible use the sights, and likely go for the bridge of nose.

" If you can't shoot faster than the other guy; Shoot straighter".- Chic Gaylord

[spacecoast]

Do you routinely use a shot timer when you shoot? I find it difficult to believe that it takes the average person an extra second to find their sights.

I don't. It's significantly faster to use point shooting... why else would it be a strong emphasis at self defense handgun classes? The point is, you might as well practice it and use it because it's almost guaranteed that under time pressure you are NOT going to make effective use of your sights, or if you force yourself to use your sights you are going to be significantly slower than if you didn't. Point shooting is based on pointing your finger. Notice that when you (or most people, at least) point quickly at something that the hand is not oriented up/down, but rather 30-45 degrees to the horizontal because it's the most natural and comfortable position. That is how we were taught to point shoot. The bullets don't care how many degrees the gun is rotated. I guarantee that most people rotate the gun up/down to use their sights, which by definition takes extra time/effort if it's not the most natural pointing position. It also takes extra time to get the gun up to eye level. Point shooting does not rely on eye-level shooting.

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Originally Posted by spacecoast

I don't. It's significantly faster to use point shooting.

Exactly how can you determine that it is significantly faster to use point shooting if you aren't using a shot timer? Are you telling me you can subjectively tell the difference between tenths of a second, let alone hundredths of a second?

And if the point of point shooting is speed, then who is teaching you to point shoot but not using a shot timer to demonstrate improvement?

[spacecoast]

At the class I attended we did use a shot timer. We tested how long it took to get 6 shots on a COM target before and after a class which taught a number of SD techniques, including significant time spent on point shooting. Almost without exception the time to perform that task was halved or better, starting times ranged from 4 (best case) up to 11 seconds, including the time required to get the gun out of the holster from a hands-on-ears starting position. I attribute at least half of the speed increase (which was 2-5 seconds in most cases) to getting somewhat accustomed to point shooting and practicing with at least 50 rounds.

Point shooting IS significantly faster if done correctly and practiced.

[pax]

Deleted some unacceptable rudeness.

Remember, guys: disagree with each other all you want, as long as you remain reasonable polite. Snarl at each other like rabid dogs, and a moderator will come along to dump icy cold water on the furball.

pax

[KellyTTE]

What people too often fail to realize is that the whole school of point/reflexive/unsighted/whatevertheycallitthisweek fire was mostly developed before the advent of modern sport training science. Those writers resorted to those methods of shooting under stress because because they didn't have a reliable, consistent, quantifiable (shoothouses, video playback, shot timers, reactionary targets, etc) methods of training. Couple this with modern stress inoculation and deadly force psychology and we have the ability now to train to a point of respond versus react.

When you look at it, Paul Howe, Kyle Lamb, Larry Vickers and Pat McNamara (an very distinguished SF small arms NCOIC) all pretty much have dismissed point shooting as anything other than a retention/low/no light method. What always amuses me is the number of point/reflexive/unsighted/whatevertheycallitthisweek firing instructors that like to use the term 'its another tool for you' as a way of defusing criticism against their methodology.

Whole lotta guys died in due to volleyed fire and bayonet charges back in the day, doesn't mean that we should return to that method of fighting.

[VHinch]

Originally Posted by spacecoast

why else would it be a strong emphasis at self defense handgun classes?

Whose class do you keep referring to? Offhand I can't think of a single top tier instructor that "strongly emphasizes" point shooting. Just because somebody out there teaches it doesn't necessarily make it a credible argument. I could teach you to scratch your ass with your elbow but that wouldn't make it the best technique for doing so. 4 of the most credible instructors available to civilians have been mentioned in this thread as to their views on point shooting, all of which are based on real experience and you could add Clint Smith, Chuck Taylor, Louis Awerbuck, and Magpul Dynamics to that list as well and that's just the guys I can think of right off the top of my head.

Originally Posted by spacecoast

you might as well practice it and use it because it's almost guaranteed that under time pressure you are NOT going to make effective use of your sights

I'm going to preface my comments here by saying that I'm asking in the spirit of intelligent conversation/debate and not to be adversarial with the disclaimer that it's often hard to portray tone via written word, but what is this comment based on? Actual real world experience, or something you read, were taught, whatever? There are several instructors out there, Larry Vickers and Paul Howe in particular (I single these guys out from the others because I've actually heard it from them firsthand) who can and will dispute this from actual extensive experience in multiple engagements. I can tell you from my personal experience that the most vivid image I can recall from the one fight I got tangled up in is the sight picture. All the other details are somewhat get blurred from the speed of the engagement, time that's passed, etc., but I can recall acquiring the sight picture of each shot like it happened this morning.

Originally Posted by spacecoast

I don't. It's significantly faster to use point shooting.

The other thing that all of the instructors noted above teach is some variation of "Fast is fine, accuracy is final." You simply can't miss fast enough to win a fight.

I'm not saying point shooting doesn't have some place. When you have to fire from a retention position it's all you're going to have. It's useful to a slightly lesser degree in low light environments. For those scenarios, it is certainly worth spending some training time on. Due to the limited scope of those scenarios however, it's a secondary skill set and therefore shouldn't be a primary focus in training.

Originally Posted by KellyTTE

What always amuses me is the number of point/reflexive/unsighted/whatevertheycallitthisweek firing instructors that like to use the term 'its another tool for you' as a way of defusing criticism against their methodology.

Well said. It's always interesting to question the resume of those guys as well, as the result is usually equally amusing.

[Nnobby45]

In a SD situation, it's highly unlikely that you will have a choice but to point shoot...........

Best way to get started with practice is to take a SD shooting class, they will (or should) show you close-range point shooting techniques, including shooting from the retention position.

I don't recall in either of John Farnum's classes him ever teaching anything about point shooting.

Nor in any other classes by different instructors, except for near contact distance where gun couldn't even be raised to eye level.

However, I believe it is useful at close range and should be practiced as secondary to the more effective "use the dang sight" method.

My definition of point shooting still brings the gun to eye level with focus on target and sights seen peripherally--but still a reference. I don't shoot by "instinct" (which some define as point shooting) except, as stated, at near contact distance.

I recall that Jim Cirillo was involved in a number of gun fights and that his practice was to concentrate on the front sight. In one instance he could clearly see the serrations. Yes, he also developed the geometric point shooting technique---after he retired from real gunfighting (six gunfights in all, I believe).

moderator will come along to dump icy cold water on the furball

Ahha. That cat reference again.

[Nnobby45]

Seems to be a lot of misconception regarding the amount of "extra" time it takes to use one's sights.

I never noticed Jerry Miculek, or Brian Enos slow down a lot by getting on their sights.

Yes, I know, we aren't professionals like they are. But we can learn to very quickly bring the gun up and insert the sights in our line of vision that's looking at the target.

This is so easily demonstrated in the comfort of your own living room with simple dry fire practice, that it's amazing such a notion would be kicked around as long as it has.

TIP: Your eyes don't find you sights. You SIGHTS FIND YOUR EYES.

Works like this. Focus on target. Raise gun in the manner you'd bring the gun on target and insert gun sights into your line of sight.
Switch focus to front sight. SIGHT PICTURE. My eyes are 65 years old and I can still do that.

Practice on the range from low ready, until you're really gettin it, then mix in some draws.

Sometimes it sounds as if some folks techniques are a shortcut to avoid practice.

[Brit]

Let us set a test, on timer. We will not use a cover (IE Concealed) the reason being, you can miss a draw, due to being concealed, less chance of that, with gun free of cover, and outside of belt.

One IPSC target, 3 yds directly in front, one at 45 degrees to the right, 5 yds away. Third target, 45 degree angle to left, 7 yds away.

Standard type of carry guns, Glocks/Sig's/S&Ws all 9mm.

Keep a level playing field. Exercise, draw and fire two on each, center right left, done twice, center left, right last time.

12 rounds in all. One point shooter point shoots, the other shooter does not.

If you are versed in the punch draw, times will be as close to identical, normally better hits with eyes level with eyes.

[jimbob86]

I don't.

[spacecoast]

I could teach you to scratch your ass with your elbow

Now THAT would be a cool trick. Does it require point shooting or do you use sights?

You simply can't miss fast enough to win a fight.

Who's talking about missing? If you point shoot correctly and practice you won't miss.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I have no life. I'm online on a Friday night.

But, then I get to read about joints and tushy contact.

Closed.