handgun sights in a stress situation

[FireForged]

in close quarters... front site post only

[lcpiper]

By jason_iowa;
Military and Law enforcement are completely different applications and rarely defensive. You are sanctioned by the government. You are under much less scrutiny. You are not confined to fear for your life to use lethal force. Its apples and oranges.

I feel you are wrong. The decision making process, all that leads up to, and follows may be different, but the act of engagement is not greatly different in any material way.

[jason_iowa]

A civilian in a non stand your ground state can not use lethal force unless they are in fear for their life and have no means of escape.

Military and law enforcement have no such requirements. While this has gotten completely off topic its frightening to me that people are having trouble with that distinction. Part of carrying a weapon as a civilian is knowing at what point you can use lethal force in your particular state. You do not have the same rights to use lethal force as an LEO.

Again I would stress that people do some research on self defense shootings and the average distances then go to the range and look at a man sized target. 7 yards/21 feet is the distance someone with a knife or other hand weapon can close in the time you can draw and fire. It is VERY CLOSE. You push that to 10 yards/30 ft aka a first down in football which is still very close. You shoot a guy with a knife at that distance and you better have one hell of a good lawyer. You get beyond that and it becomes more and more unlikely that you could not escape a dangerous situation or defend it in court.

So in most close combat situations we're talking very short ranges if you can't draw, point, fire and hit vitals on a man sized target at 21ft with out sights you NEED more range time. It's a simple matter of training and muscle memory. Under stress you react based on how you train. Train enough and you can do it blindfolded <don't do this as a live fire exercise>. Get a SIRT PRO Training Pistol and try it yourself. Great training tool I have gotten a bunch em.

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by jason_iowa

...So in most close combat situations we're talking very short ranges if you can't draw, point, fire and hit vitals on a man sized target at 21ft with out sights you NEED more range time...

And with that much range time, you should be able to get a flash sight picture. With that kind of training, at distances of that sort, a flash sight picture should be no slower.

But at arms length, point shooting from retention would be the way to go.

[Derbel McDillet]

So in most close combat situations we're talking very short ranges if you can't draw, point, fire and hit vitals on a man sized target at 21ft with out sights you NEED more range time. It's a simple matter of training and muscle memory.

All fine and well on a square range but the circumstances of self-defense vary (movement, obstacles, stability of footing, etc.) and shooting method must adapt to the situation.

[Grizz12]

years ago, when I was able to practice to my hearts content in the desert, I would draw and shoot (double and triple tap) as slow as possible using the sights. Before I knew it I was getting pretty fast as my muscle memory was being created.

I would practice at home with unloaded weapons. I would pic a target, close my eyes and draw - when I opened my eyes the sights were perfectly lined up. This increased my speed and accuracy when at the range.

I tested myself to see if I was using the sights by putting electrical tape on the rear sight. I still hit everything.

Practice, practice, practice, practice, practice and you wont need to think about using them or not, it will come natural

[RBid]

Originally Posted by Frank Ettin

And with that much range time, you should be able to get a flash sight picture. With that kind of training, at distances of that sort, a flash sight picture should be no slower.



But at arms length, point shooting from retention would be the way to go.

Exactly this.

The difference in flash sight picture or unsighted shooting from extension isn't a time thing, it's just about what your eyes do.

[Sharkbite]

God save us from the Tuller drill!!!

The 21 foot "rule" isnt a rule at all... Its a guide line. The real world is not a square range and circs change. If i have my wife with me i may not be able to avoid shooting an edged weapon assailant if he were 35' away. What about if i have my 10 year old daughter. Should i wait till the assailant is closer then 21'

All Dennis Tuller did was show in a quantifiable manner that a knife wielding attacker does not have to be able to touch you to hurt you. It had NOTHING to do with max distance he was a threat.

Back on point (pun intended). The sights exist for a reason. Just like different size hammers and wrenches. If your encounter is so close and fast that you dont need sights then you better have the skill/training/muscle memory to get good hits without them.

If your encounter requires more precision then unsighted fire permits, then you better be able to get the sights aligned to the level needed FAST

As to the civilian vs LEO vs military topic i can tell you that the physical act of gunfighting is identical. The thought process varies a little, but once its time to get on the trigger it dosent matter what "uniform" you are wearing. BDU's or cargo pants and an LL bean shirt over your armor or jeans and a t-shirt.

Everybody thinks its easier in a war zone..... It aint. BTDT

As an example... In post Bremer Iraq under the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) a US cilvian contractor could be arrested, jailed, tried and sentenced to an IRAQI prison for any crimes commited in Iraq. If you think the thought of a US citizen spending even 1 day in an Iraqi jail didnt cross our minds before we dropped the hammer on some Haji... Boy are you mistaken. Now truth be told our OGA friends would have prob gotten us ut of the country if the need had arisen. But who wants to bet on that

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by Sharkbite

God save us from the Tuller drill!!!

The 21 foot "rule" isnt a rule at all... Its a guide line....

And it really isn't even a guideline.

Dennis Tueller developed the exercise to test at what distances an assailant with a contact weapon could be a credible threat. The Tueller data can be helpful to a defender who needs to establish that he was reasonable in concluding that someone making threatening gestures with a club had Ability, Opportunity and put him in Jeopardy even if the "assailant" was 20 feet away.

And regarding the duty to retreat (where it's the law): One would be required to retreat before using lethal force when he could do so safely. This of course could raise all sorts of questions about whether the defender indeed knew he had a safe way to escape or was reasonable in concluding that he did not. And the defender's decision, which he had to make in an instant under stress, might then be second guessed by members of a jury who have all the time in the world.

[mordis]

What about those of us with some types of revolvers whose sights are not removeable or easily modifiable? Case in point my M15 revolver. Its a classic so im not going to cut up the integral front sight just to dovetail a tritium/fiber optic sight on. The sight is black front and a adjustable uncolored blade on the back.

Sure in situations were there is enough light, ya I can see them just fine. At night or situations were the light is poor and the target is in front of a dark background and it drowns out the sights.. So im learning to shoot with a light in my hand but because of that light I don't have as good a grip on the handgun so I cant get shots off as fast as I normally can.

Unless someone has found a way to get a full hand grip and hold a light at the same time, please help a brother out.

[Sharkbite]

I started of with a mdl 64 as a duty gun. You think your mdl 15 has hard to see sights?!?!?!

Lots of ways to intergrate a flashlight with a handgun. None allow an uncomprimised grip (at least to some degree). Hence the intergrated lights on semi's

The good news is once a flashlight comes into play the sights get easy to see

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by mordis

What about those of us with some types of revolvers whose sights are not removeable or easily modifiable?...

It's a simple fact that if you choose to use a handgun with sights that are difficult to see you have voluntarily forgone any benefits you could realize with sights that are easy to see. You've created/accepted a disadvantage which you may want to train and practice to overcome as best you can.

Your choice -- your decision.

[Sarge]

People use what they can afford/are issued and they adapt to it. In the old days we dolloped white correction fluid on the front sights of our service revolvers for 'night work'. My compatriots so armed were in 12-13 shooting incidents over a five year period, where I knew the party(s) involved and spoke with them afterward. Most saw at least their front sight and those prevailed early in the affray.

Mine came in sufficient natural or artificial light to see the sights and I saw them both times. Not a perfect sight picture but 'perfect enough'.

[Deaf Smith]

...The flash sight-picture involves a glimpse of the sight-picture sufficient to confirm alignment....The target shooter’s gaze at the front sight has proven inappropriate for the bulk of pistolfighting. However, the practical shooter must start at this level and work up to the flash, which becomes reflexive as motor skills are refined. With practice, a consistent firing platform and firing stroke align the sights effortlessly. This index to the target eventually becomes an instantaneous confirmation of the sight-picture.

...Using the flash sight-picture programs the reflex of aligning the weapon’s sights with the target instantly....There is good reason for sights: one needs them to align the barrel with the target reliably....

That is the best description I have seen of flash sight picture. Add to that a solid repeatable index and you nave an excellent way to deliver VERY fast hits at all but grabbing distance.

Now in Jim Cirillo's books he did write of engaging three robbers at once with a S&W M10 .38 in NYC, hitting all three of them, and he not only saw the sights but remembers seeing the serrations on the front sight.

Now yes at close ranges point shooting can work just as closer ranges hip shooting can work. As I have posted many a time over the years, as a BASIC system a form of sighted fire and a form of retention\on/hip shooting is enough. If master those two will cover the spectrum of zero to maximum handgun range.

Once one becomes proficient with the two, if one wishes to add other techniques to their skill set then by all means do!

And the Tuller drill depends alot on many factors such as reaction time of BOTH parties ability of the attacker to close the distance, and how one carries their gun. An attacker with a knife who has short legs and is rather overweight will close the distance later than a tall athletic person with long legs. And the defender who practice once a year will present their weapon in far longer time than a IPSC grand master with his favorite rig!

Yes 21 feet is a guideline at best.

Deaf

[mordis]

So why then frank do we see people recommending M10 revolvers to newbs for there first gun so frequently if the platform is sub optimal for self defense. By your definition most every revolver out there is inadequate.

What are you trying to say with your comments? That getting a revolver was foolish? That since I have been on hard times financially I had to get rid of ally my guns but the one my family member passed on to me?

Please clarify but your post is implying something negative towards revolver ownership for self defense.

Shark bite, the sights are black on black, how is that not hard to see?!

[Sharkbite]

What i was saying is that once you intro a flashlight into the setting the sights tend to be silhouetted against the white light of the beam. It makes those sights easier then the black sights on a dark shirt for instance

I never disparaged your revolver. As i said my first duty gun (and the first gun i had to use for real) was a S&W mdl 64. It did the job just fine. Center chest sight picture and down he went. NOTHING wrong with a revolver.

[mordis]

I know you didn't shark, I was commenting to Frank. His post came off as condescending towards revolvers.

I love this gun, cut my shooting teeth on it.

I just don't want to get a bottom feeder just to have a well lit sight. I cant stand looking for the brass from those annoying things..

[Sharkbite]

Hahaha. Thats why you take your kids to the range. Little brass vacumes...

"You want cheeseburgers for lunch? Help pick up brass"

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by mordis

So why then frank do we see people recommending M10 revolvers to newbs for there first gun so frequently if the platform is sub optimal for self defense. By your definition most every revolver out there is inadequate...

I have no idea why some people do things.

And I have several revolvers with very visible sights.

Originally Posted by mordis

...What are you trying to say with your comments? That getting a revolver was foolish? That since I have been on hard times financially I had to get rid of ally my guns but the one my family member passed on to me?...

What I said in my post is what I said. My post speaks for itself.

If your gun has sights that are difficult to see -- whether it's a revolver or an old GI 1911 with those tiny sights -- and if you don't want to do anything to modify the sights, that's what you'll have to use -- a gun with sights that are difficult to see.

I would not choose a gun with sights that are difficult to see, and I would not recommend at gun with sights that are difficult to see. Sights that are difficult to see are in fact, based on the way I've been trained in the Modern Technique of the Pistol, a disadvantage in a self defense gun.

[Sarge]

What i was saying is that once you intro a flashlight into the setting the sights tend to be silhouetted against the white light of the beam.

They will also be silhouetted against your first muzzle flash.

[Jim243]

Well I don't have an oar in this water, but in reading the posts, I just keep shaking my head (or is it scratching it). I have watched too many u-tube videos of armed citizens point shooting it out with bad guys in gas stations, convenience stores and one even in a off track betting parlor where he fired off his 380 5 times and didn't hit a thing (thank God).

I shoot IDPA and some of the targets are 5 feet or less away, AND ALWAYs have the front sight on the target BEFORE the trigger is pulled, it only takes a half second to get your sights on target. But I am more concerned about hitting center of the target than shooting someone's kid standing in the background.

Here in Chicago we have a lot of point shooters, they are called gang-bangers. They love to point shoot, that is why so many 6 and 10 year old children sitting on their grandmothers porch never make it to their next birthday here.

You want to point shoot, hell go with it, I never will even if the assailant is only two feet away, my front sight will be in his face. (Period, end of story) I may break his nose first before the bullet goes into his brain.

Jim

[Double Naught Spy]

Wow, Jason, you have said a bunch of things that are flat out wrong, but this was my favorite because it shows your use of logic in argument construction.

Some people are of the opinion that sights are useful at defensive ranges. I am not of that opinion and like i have said in my close combat experience sights were not useful. If you don't care for that opinion that's fine. You are free to have your opinion as well. I'm of the opinion that lasers on a defensive weapon are a crutch for the ill-prepared and a liability.

First you say that sights are not useful for SD and then claim that they are a crutch for the ill-prepared and are a liability. So what you are saying is that for those people who need them, crutches are useless? Most people do not possess the apparent supreme skills of not ever needing sights that you have. Most people don't go to the range more than once a year, if at all. Most people are not prepared for an attack when it happens. So those people would need to use their sights and the sights would be useful to them for the purpose of hitting their target.

So how can you argue that sights are useless and then point out that sights are helpful to those who need them?

I do like the argument of categorizing something in an emotionally-charged negative manner to make your argument, in this case, calling sights a 'crutch' as if the person who must need them is crippled or feeble. After all, nobody would want to admit to needing a "crutch" if they are not crippled or feeble, right? However, a crutch is just a tool to help overcome a situational parameter. Needing to use your gun is a crutch to self defense. That means that you are in a situation where you have to rely on it to get the job done for you because you think you can't do it without it.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

As to the OP, asking individuals if they used their sights in a stressful situation is a mixed bag for getting accurate answers. Under such stress, people often do NOT remember a lot of what goes on, especially specific details. This is commonly associated with the adrenaline dump, target fixation issues that correspond with factors such as auditory exclusion and tunnel vision. Some details are remember above others and some not remembered at all.

In this video, for example, the officer who did the shooting retreats and falls down. He gave the statement that he had no memory of falling down (watch video and see page 3).
http://www.news-leader.com/article/2...nclick_check=1

So if folks claim that they didn't use their sights, it is going to be tough to determine (without video confirmation) whether they actually didn't use their sights or if it is simply not a memory that occurred from the situation. People people may not have. Others, as noted, certainly used them via flash sight picture or indexing which are both still sighting methods that are not simply muscle memory.

[mordis]

Frank im not blind. They work fine in just about every other situation. My issue Is only low light. I have been working on flashlight techniques but I just can not stand 1 handed shooting. No matter how much I practice 1 handed I just cant get the same rapidity of fire, with the same kind of accuracy that I can get 2 handed.

I have yet to meet or see anyone that can shoot as fast and as accurately 1 handed as they can 2.

Why on earth would I modify a classic gun? Can you give some examples from your collection of revolvers with very visible sights?

[Deaf Smith]

Some people are of the opinion that sights are useful at defensive ranges. I am not of that opinion and like i have said in my close combat experience sights were not useful.

Whoa...

Now I am sure you have had some situations where the sights, for YOU, were not adequate, but there is quite a base of experience where the sights were useful (example: Jim Cirillo did use his sights, on a S&W M10, and hit three robbers at close range.)

Why do people use inadequate sights? Go look at the sights of the original 1911 .45. Small thumbnail sights. Same for Colt .32s, Remington pocket autos, S&W hand ejector .32s and .38s, etc... all a carry over from the early 1900s.

Small fixed sights where the normal and I am sure encouraged alot of people to use point shooting as in anything but broad daylight and 20/20 vision they are very hard to see.

Yes even the latest M10 .38s and Colt Official Police had smaller sights (but I could see them ok myself.)

But now days you can get many a serious defensive gun with very good sights.

That is why Jeff Cooper pointed out you needed a good set of sights and a good trigger on you defensive pistol. Most else was just bells & whistles.

Revolvers with good sights? Any S&W adjustable sighted gun, like these below (both are mine.)



and two of these in this picture that also have adjustable sights that are excellent: And the third one, my old 640 Centennial, I had a red insert put in so I could see them better.



Deaf

[sigxder]

Depends on many variables. If time and distance allow use of sights yes I have used them. Upclose out of the holster and point shoot. Different tool for different applications.