The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Tactics and Training

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old August 9, 2008, 06:05 PM   #26
nate45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 15, 2007
Location: Illinois
Posts: 3,746
There's just no way

It has been proven over and over again that sighted fire is superior to unsighted fire.

I can see he value of point shooting with your first shot at very close range (3 yards or less), but if all possible then acquiring the sights will lead to more precise shot placement.

Is not the main thing we all stress shot placement? If you want your shots to be well directed at the sternum and brain, use your sights.
__________________
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."- Thomas Jefferson
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
(>_<)
nate45 is offline  
Old August 9, 2008, 07:45 PM   #27
Erik
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 24, 1999
Location: America
Posts: 3,479
"I have the highest respect for all the newer warriors and instructors out there, but no matter what is taught..."

What is typically taught is sighted fire and point shooting, with an emphasis on the sighted fire. Typically taught as in I cannot think of anyone teaching otherwise; even the most ardent sighted fire proponents teach some point shooting solution to managing close-in threats, after all.
__________________
Meriam Webster's: Main Entry: ci·vil·ian Pronunciation: \sə-ˈvil-yən also -ˈvi-yən\, Function: noun, Date: 14th century, 1: a specialist in Roman or modern civil law, 2 a: one not on active duty in the armed services or not on a police or firefighting force b: outsider 1, — civilian adjective
Erik is offline  
Old August 9, 2008, 09:33 PM   #28
matthew temkin
Junior member
 
Join Date: June 7, 2002
Location: NYC
Posts: 369
I just think a gunfight is the wrong time to discover that your training is incomplete.
I never said that point shooting is superior to aimed fire--why does everything have to be either or?
Leadbutt is correct that Bill Jordan was a big fan of point shooting for situations
when aimed fire is nearly impossible.
matthew temkin is offline  
Old August 10, 2008, 05:39 AM   #29
Stone Cold
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2008
Location: Wilmington, Ohio
Posts: 177
Since most confrontations occur at 7 yards or under, I'd say instinctive shooting (I believe that's what Bill Jordan called it) is a wise practice routine. Annie Oakley rarely used the rear sight of her levergun and hit some pretty small targets with amazing regularity. I practice drawing my weapon to a ready position and to full extension and firing the first shot towards where I'm looking. Under 10 yards, It's not hard for me to nail the center of mass. One hole drills are good for developing that instinctive alignment.
Stone Cold is offline  
Old August 10, 2008, 06:44 AM   #30
threegun
Junior member
 
Join Date: March 1, 2006
Location: Tampa,Fl
Posts: 4,000
What I took from this case is a lack of situational awareness and the importance of getting the first good hit on a bad guy.

Quote:
I didn't even know that the slug hit me squarely in the middle of my chest. But my subconscious did, because it instantly sent gallons of adrenaline into my system, turning me into a stumbling zombie.
Stumbling zombies don't point shoot or use sights very well. Getting good hits fast is very important as it could cause your attacker to miss were he otherwise would have hit.

Quote:
It has been proven over and over again that sighted fire is superior to unsighted fire.
Question....If you can get really good hits point shooting very fast or very good hits sighted but not as fast.....what do you do?

A point shooter will likely get his bullet out first and possible turn the sight fire guy into a "stumbling zombie".


Quote:
There is NO way a person living a normal life can keep his distance from everyone he sees. It's simply not possible. YES, SA is clearly important, but it can not be the scapegoat for every situation that goes bad. I think too much is blamed on SA and people count on their SA too much to keep them out of trouble. It's critical to maintain SA, but even if your SA is perfect it can't save you from every situation.
Six guys walking out of a McDonald's as you walk in vs.......
Quote:
The scene is in South Africa in 1996, where a family man is parking his car at home when he is attacked by six gun toting thugs.
.........six guys in or around a car in front of your home. This guy was not using his BG radar. Had he done so he might not have been shot. There are times when SA won't give you valuable time to react however if I see six guys bailing out of a car parked in front of my home I can promise you that I won't have to worry about accessing my gun and preparing for trouble.
threegun is offline  
Old August 10, 2008, 06:46 AM   #31
matthew temkin
Junior member
 
Join Date: June 7, 2002
Location: NYC
Posts: 369
Stone Cold..I could not agree more.
Threegun..some very good point indeed.
But, if one is shot first which method--point or aimed fire-- would give him a better chance of hitting his mark?
For those interested, here is a link to a point shooting home study course that I wrote a few years back.
http://kilogulf59.proboards80.com/in...lay&thread=114
matthew temkin is offline  
Old August 10, 2008, 09:22 AM   #32
threegun
Junior member
 
Join Date: March 1, 2006
Location: Tampa,Fl
Posts: 4,000
Matthew, Don't know as I've never been shot. I do practice both just in case.

I base which to use on distance and position in the reactionary curve. If I'm ahead, no need to rush. If behind and within my ability to hit.........I'm point shootin.
threegun is offline  
Old August 10, 2008, 11:13 AM   #33
nate45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 15, 2007
Location: Illinois
Posts: 3,746
Quote:
Question....If you can get really good hits point shooting very fast or very good hits sighted but not as fast.....what do you do?

A point shooter will likely get his bullet out first and possible turn the sight fire guy into a "stumbling zombie".
If you can really get better hits faster with point shooting, why don't top level IDPA and ISPC shooters use this method to trounce their slow sighted fire opponents?

I've shot both ways and know from experience which method is superior and has been proven to be superior.

Since 1986 I have used a range timer to measure just how fast I can draw and fire, draw and fire quality hits. Prior to that time I used point shooting, I could draw and fire all six rounds of full power .357 from my Model 66 in 3 to 3.5 seconds and some of them were in the A-zone some of them weren't. In fact I had no idea how slow I was till I started using a timer.

Now I typically do Mozambique Drill's in 1.5 seconds or less and can draw and fire an entire magazine from my 1911 in less than 2.5 seconds, I have done it in less than 2.
I always use the sights, my hits are in the A-zone.


I drew and fired the above 8 rounds from 5 yards in 2.31 seconds.

In regard to the OP in my mind the main question still is, can any of us put our training into practice, after being shot and attacked by six assailants.

Firstly I hope I never have to find out, and secondly with all the speculation and armchair quarterbacking aside, I don't think any of us will truly know until it happens.
__________________
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."- Thomas Jefferson
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
(>_<)

Last edited by nate45; August 10, 2008 at 12:37 PM. Reason: spelling
nate45 is offline  
Old August 10, 2008, 12:03 PM   #34
matthew temkin
Junior member
 
Join Date: June 7, 2002
Location: NYC
Posts: 369
Nate45..from what I have read many competitors do use target focused/point shooting techniques on some of the closer close range courses of fire.
Brian Enos is a classic example of hard/soft focus techniques.
Which just reproves that there is a place for both.
Then again, what a professional shooter can accomplish compared to the typical Joe may not be a fair comparison
And quite a few writers who have been shot at also sing the praises of both shooting methods
matthew temkin is offline  
Old August 10, 2008, 12:44 PM   #35
threegun
Junior member
 
Join Date: March 1, 2006
Location: Tampa,Fl
Posts: 4,000
Quote:
If you can really get better hits faster with point shooting, why don't top level IDPA and ISPC shooters use this method to trounce their slow sighted fire opponents?
I didn't say better hits faster. Let me clarify. You can get good COM hits faster by point shooting. Your first shot is faster point shooting and your splits should be faster because you don't have the micro second delays involved with using the front sight. Its not for every situation and sighted fire should be used when ever possible. For me PS will only be used when I'm behind in the reactionary curve or when shooting from a retention position.

Also when talking about fighting with the gun there is a line of thought that suggests speeding up until your groups open up a bit. Your all A zone hits while beautiful and fast could be A & B zones hits even faster while still being effective.

Personally I don't use the sights on the real close action shooting targets.
threegun is offline  
Old August 10, 2008, 12:52 PM   #36
nate45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 15, 2007
Location: Illinois
Posts: 3,746
I have read the works on point shooting before that you site in the article you wrote Point Shooting Lesson Plan By Matthew Temkin before, I read No Second Place Winner in the 70's, I taught myself to draw and point shoot before I learned the Modern technique, there is a place for point shooting I fully agree. I just don't see how it would have helped the subject in the OP from the description of events.
__________________
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."- Thomas Jefferson
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
(>_<)
nate45 is offline  
Old August 10, 2008, 01:04 PM   #37
nate45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 15, 2007
Location: Illinois
Posts: 3,746
Quote:
Also when talking about fighting with the gun there is a line of thought that suggests speeding up until your groups open up a bit. Your all A zone hits while beautiful and fast could be A & B zones hits even faster while still being effective.
In a competition I would whole heartedly agree with you and I know for a fact that the top competitors give up A-zone hits in exchange for speed.

In a real life or death situation, given the relatively puny nature of handgun rounds and what it actually takes to incapacitate someone. My opinion is that the more well directed the shots are at the sternum and brain the better your odds are of success.
__________________
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."- Thomas Jefferson
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
(>_<)
nate45 is offline  
Old August 10, 2008, 01:20 PM   #38
SAWBONES
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 17, 1999
Location: The third dimension
Posts: 662
Oh no. Not another thread degenerating into a "point shooting vs. sighted shooting" argument.

Both are necessary. It's not either-or but both-and.

Quote:
It has been proven over and over again that sighted fire is superior to unsighted fire.
Bunko.
The point (obvious pun) is to get adequately-accurate and adequately-fast hits on target, on a life-threatening adversary, at relatively close range. Point shooting does this faster, in hands that know how to accomplish it, faster than sighted shooting.
At longer distances, sighted shooting excels point shooting for accuracy, no doubt about it, but that isn't the condition under discussion here.
__________________
"Humani nihil alienum"
SAWBONES is offline  
Old August 10, 2008, 01:29 PM   #39
nate45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 15, 2007
Location: Illinois
Posts: 3,746
Quote:
At longer distances, sighted shooting excels point shooting for accuracy, no doubt about it, but that isn't the condition under discussion here.
What is the condition under discussion? If you can ascertain the time and distances involved in the shooting from reading the OP, please enlighten me, then we can determine whether point shooting may or may not have helped.
__________________
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."- Thomas Jefferson
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
(>_<)
nate45 is offline  
Old August 10, 2008, 01:33 PM   #40
Slopemeno
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 19, 2007
Posts: 2,341
(opening can of worms..) uh, exactly what IS the delay with using sights? How much time exactly?
Slopemeno is offline  
Old August 10, 2008, 01:36 PM   #41
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 18,216
Quote:
six guys in or around a car in front of your home.
The article doesn't say that. It says he was parking his car when he was attacked by 6 men.
Quote:
six guys bailing out of a car parked in front of my home
It says nothing about a car being visible nor does it say the men were visible when he drove up.

It's highly unlikely that even the most brain-dead thug would think that a good way to take a person in a motor vehicle by surprise would be for a half-dozen men loiter in front of a residence in full view. The point is that given what the article actually SAYS, there's no way to blame this on SA just like there's no way to say that sighted shooting was the cause of the misses or that point shooting would have saved the day.

What I was getting at with my comment about SA is that it's commonly used as a convenient "out" or as a "scapegoat". I hear people recommending ill-advised courses of action and when the problem is pointed out they blithely respond that their excellent SA will prevent their poor tactics from biting them in the nether declivities. I hear people immediately assuming that SA was the problem in scenarios even when there was no evidence to suggest that it was.

The fact is that NO one manages to ALWAYS have perfect SA, and even those who have excellent SA are not immune from having bad things happen to them. SA is very, VERY important, but it's not always the problem when something goes wrong and it's not always going to save you from trouble.
__________________
Did you know that there is a TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old August 10, 2008, 01:38 PM   #42
nate45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 15, 2007
Location: Illinois
Posts: 3,746
Quote:
(opening can of worms..) uh, exactly what IS the delay with using sights? How much time exactly?
It's a fraction of a second and in my opinion worth expending in order to use the sights.
__________________
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."- Thomas Jefferson
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
(>_<)
nate45 is offline  
Old August 10, 2008, 01:42 PM   #43
Playboypenguin
Junior member
 
Join Date: February 27, 2006
Location: Great Pacific Northwest
Posts: 11,515
I love gun mag stories. It is almost as good as the letters section of Penthouse. They give some guys erections for very different reasons but they are almost always made up.

My favorite was one I read recently about two campers being rousted from their sleeping bags by two "hippies" clad in flowered shirts and bell bottoms wielding knives and bats. Luckily both men had headed the advice to always sleep with your firearms inside your sleeping bag.

Although, I am a big supporter of both point shooting and being able to shoot with both hands. At least of my practice time is done point shooting.

Last edited by Playboypenguin; August 10, 2008 at 03:56 PM.
Playboypenguin is offline  
Old August 10, 2008, 03:51 PM   #44
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague County, Texas
Posts: 10,344
Quote:
But, if one is shot first which method--point or aimed fire-- would give him a better chance of hitting his mark?
LOL, you can't honestly being asking this question and expect a realistically useful answer or that there is a universal truth, do you? That would be very naive.

Don't you think that would depend on where a person was shot, maybe?

FYI, from the description YOU provided in the OP, it sounds like the story teller was using point shooting...

Quote:
It was almost impossible for me to correctly aim and shoot. I have been trained to shoot with both hands, but I recall that I fired one handed during this incident.....
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher."
-- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old August 10, 2008, 06:07 PM   #45
Deaf Smith
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 31, 2000
Location: Texican!
Posts: 3,215
Quote:
"Without warning he (the BG standing in front of his car) fired a shot at me. I felt no sign of impact to my body: I didn't even know that the slug hit me squarely in the middle of my chest. But my subconscious did, because it instantly sent gallons of adrenaline into my system, turning me into a stumbling zombie. I pulled my own revolver and tried to take cover behind a concrete pillar of the carport and fired off my first round in the direction of the attacker...
...The main attacker was still taking cover at the back of the car, less than two meters from me, and he kept firing at me.
He was constantly changing his position, never standing still.
It was almost impossible for me to correctly aim and shoot. I have been trained to shoot with both hands, but I recall that I fired one handed during this incident.....
..Then, without warning, the attackers turned tail and fled. As quickly as it started, so ended the first phase of my struggle for survival."
So at 2 meters he fired (six feet), not sure if he hit the guy or missed (no mention of blood or any kind of wound) and one thinks one handed fire was in some way superior to two handed fire (or point shooting for that matter.) The other guy just bugged out.

I don't see how this validates anything. Misses with one hand are about as good as misses with two hands.

On the other hand, I'd read Paul Howe's work on the subject. Might see other thoughts on this.

Say brownie, how much experience did the writer of the article have? Hmmm he had a wheel gun in the age of automatics. Kind of wonder about him. Please enlighten us.
__________________
"The government has confiscated all of our rights and is selling them back to us in the form of permits."
Deaf Smith is offline  
Old August 10, 2008, 06:51 PM   #46
threegun
Junior member
 
Join Date: March 1, 2006
Location: Tampa,Fl
Posts: 4,000
Quote:
The article doesn't say that. It says he was parking his car when he was attacked by 6 men.
That section of the post was responding to the victims lack of situational awareness. The article said the bad guy was standing in front of his car.

Quote:
"Without warning he (the BG standing in front of his car) fired a shot at me.
Quote:
The point is that given what the article actually SAYS,
It says bad guy standing in front of HIS car. If all six guys were out of the vehicle the victim had poor SA. If the lone exposed bad guy was standing in front of his car filled with other bad guys his SA failed. I did speculate in my post but that doesn't change the poor SA by the victim.
threegun is offline  
Old August 11, 2008, 12:15 PM   #47
kraigwy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2008
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 9,367
Ok I'm sold, I'm gonna file off all the sights on my pistol.


LOL not likely, they put those sights on pistols for something.
__________________
Kraig Stuart
CPT USAR Ret
USAMU Sniper School Oct '78
Distinguished Rifle Badge 1071
kraigwy is offline  
Old August 11, 2008, 03:02 PM   #48
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 18,216
I took that to mean the victim's car, but I believe you are correct.

Nonetheless, the article doesn't say that the men or the vehicle were present or visible when the man pulled up. In fact, it sounds like they pulled up behind him based on the description of the article. If you take the statement to mean that the BG was in front of the BG's car then the next statement which seems to say that the BG was at the back of the victim's car supports that idea.

It's still building a lot on a little. It's too bad that the OP didn't post the entire text of the article, or at least the entire text of the pertinent section of the article.
__________________
Did you know that there is a TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old August 11, 2008, 03:43 PM   #49
bds32
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 5, 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 481
One of the things that I took out of the brief information given about the confrontation and from the other training experiences in my LE career is this: When someone is shooting at you at very close range, you don't have the ability to make a conscious choice. That part of your brain is out of operation at that moment. The good guy in this case went one handed instead of two. This was not a choice but simply a reaction. The same will happen with the use of the sights. His mammilian (mid-brain) had taken over and he was powerless to make any sort of decision while being shot. Once time and distance are established and gunfire is no longer striking you or very near you, I think you can make some choices.

I train to use the sights most of the time but I believe with 100% certainty that if I have to shoot someone who is shooting at me or is pulling a gun for that purpose, at distances of around 10-15 yards or less, I will not see the sights. I know this because it's happened to me on numerous occassions while conducting Force on Force Simmunitions training. Despite the bazillions of rounds of sighted fire I've shot, my experience is that I focus exclusively on the target trying to shoot me and not on sights. A SWAT commander and trainer named Randy Watt confirmed that this is likely to happen to alot of officers in an experiment he conducted a couple of years ago. In that experiment, sighted fire shooters outshot point shooters on static targets(no surprise). When participants were put in a position where someone started shooting them with Simunitions while they engaged a target (with live guns and ammo), the sighted fire shooters still outshot the point shooters even though not a single sighted fire advocate could remember seeing his sights while being shot at. Why? When you train to use your sights, you are training your body to put the gun in the right place. When being shot at, the gun is still lining up just like it has many many times, whether you see the sights or not. It makes perfect sense to me.
bds32 is offline  
Old August 11, 2008, 04:07 PM   #50
nate45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 15, 2007
Location: Illinois
Posts: 3,746
bds32

Quote:
When someone is shooting at you at very close range, you don't have the ability to make a conscious choice. That part of your brain is out of operation at that moment.
Exactly, the adrenal gland would go into overtime and there's nothing any of us could do about it. I still contend that not a single one of us knows for sure exactly what we would do or be capable of doing in a similar situation.

Just the fact (if it is a fact) that he drew his weapon and returned fire, is fairly impressive in and of itself.
__________________
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."- Thomas Jefferson
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
(>_<)
nate45 is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.14530 seconds with 7 queries