|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
June 17, 2018, 06:40 PM | #26 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 4, 2013
Location: Western slope of Colorado
Posts: 3,679
|
Quote:
This is not something to try to figure out on your own. Avail yourself of the professional trainers experience and expertise. |
|
June 17, 2018, 07:24 PM | #27 |
Member
Join Date: June 15, 2018
Posts: 93
|
A gunfight? If someone runs up to you threatening you with a weapon you won't use your sights, you will point and shoot. If you have time to line up your sights you have time to avoid the gunfight. Gun sights are for target practice which allows you to engage your muscle memory. That's what is needed in an immediate defensive situation.
A gun which would be used for a "bump in the night" situation should have a laser sight. |
June 17, 2018, 07:32 PM | #28 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 12,212
|
Quote:
To me it doesn't make sense to say using sights in target practice is for muscle memory to shoot reflexively. To use the sights as you mention you have to bring them up to your eyes. If you're doing that in an actual engagement then you might as well use the sights. If you want to shoot reflexively well then practice that specifically. Also practice using those sights too as the engagement distance isn't a given. Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk Last edited by TunnelRat; June 17, 2018 at 07:39 PM. |
|
June 17, 2018, 08:25 PM | #29 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 4, 2013
Location: Western slope of Colorado
Posts: 3,679
|
Quote:
A study of actual shootings, shows the fallacy of that statement. The issue is TRAINING. Those that have trained extensively in dynamic pistol use and then been forced to use those skill show an overwhelming tendency towards sighted fire The challenge is always balancing the need for sights with the speed of a close range encounter. Training at speed up close using a gross body index AND using sights for more precision shooting needs to balanced. |
|
June 17, 2018, 08:35 PM | #30 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 22, 2017
Posts: 1,011
|
Sights are useless - until they're not.
There is no universal answer to the question. How far is the target? How quickly is it closing the distance to you? Has the target already drawn a weapon? How many targets are there? The answer to these questions - and maybe a hundred more unique to the particular scenario you are in - will determine whether aimed fire is even practical. If you are awakened in the middle of the night by an armed intruder in a 12 foot wide bedroom, whether you are even going to be able to see well enough to acquire a sight picture, let alone aim, is problematic. And it is clearly a different scenario from three thugs coming onto your farm to menace you in broad daylight. |
June 17, 2018, 08:51 PM | #31 | |
member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
|
Quote:
|
|
June 17, 2018, 09:13 PM | #32 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 4, 1999
Location: Rebel South USA
Posts: 2,074
|
Quote:
__________________
Life is a web woven by necessity and chance... Last edited by FireForged; June 17, 2018 at 09:18 PM. |
|
June 17, 2018, 09:56 PM | #33 | |
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Greg Morrison on the flash sight picture (Morrison, Gregory, The Modern Technique of the Pistol, Gunsite Press, 1991, pp 87 - 88, emphasis added):
The Modern Technique wasn't just "plucked from thin air." It evolved from competitions held in in Big Bear Lake, California by the Southwest Combat Pistol League. The competitions were based on courses of fire which attempted to represent real life situations and thus test methods of effectively using a pistol for self defense. Leaders in the competitions included Jeff Cooper, Jack Weaver, Ray Chapman, Elden Carl, Thell Reed, John Plähn, Bruce Nelson (designer of the "Summer Special" holster) and Michael Harries (who developed the the Harries Technique of using a flashlight with a gun). While Thell Reed was noted for point shooting "fast draw" exhibitions, he was thoroughly grounded in the Modern Technique as well. He did a lot of gun coaching for the movies. Here he's training actor Michael Rooker with a 1911. Note that he tell Rooker (at about 0.13), "Focus on the front sight...."
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper |
|
June 18, 2018, 12:39 AM | #34 |
Member
Join Date: June 10, 2018
Posts: 67
|
Using a laser/light combo is a huge must for a nightstand gun as said already. Trying to hold a light and gun limits your extra hand and shooting at what you can't see is a terrible idea.
|
June 18, 2018, 04:37 AM | #35 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 29, 2005
Location: Orlando FL
Posts: 1,934
|
IIRC, Jim Cirillo, I met at an IALEFI annual conference. He had set up a short course of fire, his targets had features, weapons on them (not real weapons)
but illustrated ones. Bad guy with a knife, handgun, a man in coveralls gripping a large spanner (Wrench) he asked me if I wanted to shoot it, his course of fire. (I was on the Board and doing safety checks) it was lunchtime. Borrowed safety glasses, ear muffs, and off I went. He said I was the only person to shoot the mechanic? Two rounds centre chest. I saw the wrench as a weapon! Not right, not wrong, just perception. I had used hand-held weapons in fights and had them used against me. Been stabbed twice also. A big wrench looked dangerous to me. |
June 18, 2018, 05:38 AM | #36 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 21, 2009
Location: Quadling Country
Posts: 2,780
|
Quote:
__________________
Thus a man should endeavor to reach this high place of courage with all his heart, and, so trying, never be backward in war. |
|
June 18, 2018, 07:31 AM | #37 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 22, 2007
Posts: 348
|
|
June 18, 2018, 08:29 AM | #38 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 21, 2009
Location: Quadling Country
Posts: 2,780
|
Quote:
__________________
Thus a man should endeavor to reach this high place of courage with all his heart, and, so trying, never be backward in war. |
|
June 18, 2018, 09:03 AM | #39 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: May 22, 2007
Posts: 348
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
June 18, 2018, 09:15 AM | #40 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 12,212
|
If you're using a weapon mounted light to search you need to use the spill of the beam, not the beam directly. With weapon mounted lights putting out close to 1000 lumens now the spill can illuminate a lot. That said if you do want to have a handheld to minimize that risk there's nothing wrong with having both. Use the handheld as your primary search light and use the weapon mounted if you actually end up in a fight. There is something to be said for having a hand free and for being able to use two hands while shooting.
We should be careful of thread drift though. Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk |
June 18, 2018, 09:37 AM | #41 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 15, 2010
Posts: 1,850
|
I agree a weapon mounted light can be used to effectively illuminate a potential attacker without pointing the weapon directly at that person. I also know that I am more comfortable with a handheld light. Either way a little training and a lot practice is needed for any low light situation.
I know there some who can achieve amazing accuracy without the use of sights. I also know some very well trained and skilled defensive handgun shooters who always use the front sight to verify alignment unless at hand to hand distance. Even on my second generation LCP, I use a brightly colored front sight to verify alignment. My answer is emphatically yes! Sights are necessary on a defensive handgun.
__________________
"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Benjamin Franklin |
June 18, 2018, 10:47 AM | #42 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 9, 2002
Location: northern CA for a little while longer
Posts: 1,931
|
Quote:
Here's an informal experiment we once tried, on our range, which helped give us some small bit of insight into the potential value of such things. Many years ago the former head instructor and I tried an experiment with the rest of the range instructor staff. We were wondering about the importance of peripheral vision and being able to visually index/align the handgun when it was held anywhere from just forward of the hip. The distance decided upon for the experiment was approx 3-4yds. To start, we had each shooter stand and fire several rounds from the holster on a silhouette, 1-handed. Any grip technique with the gun held below chest level, and forward of their hip/holster, was fine for our test. Use what they thought was practical, but also gave them the most confidence to get solid hits at that close distance. As you might expect for some seasoned instructors, they did pretty well. Nicely clustered and contained hits. Here's the important part, though. When questioned, all of the instructors said they'd been able to roughly see their guns in the lower edge of their peripheral vision, but none of them thought it had particularly aided them in getting their accurate hits. Then, we added something to obstruct their peripheral vision. We used a large cardboard target backboard, held horizontal (flat) to the ground, positioned about chest height, in front of the shooters. It blocked their vision looking straight down, and for almost the whole way to the targets, but didn't obstruct seeing the whole target. We repeated the test, allowing them to stand positioned to the threat target before we added the cardboard. Then we signaled each of them to shoot. (And they were all watching as each individual shooter did this, too.) The first string resulted in some larger clusters of hits, and the presence of the obstruction bothered most of them, even though it didn't physically hinder their draw, presentation or firing. They admitted they were surprised that the presence of the obstruction (of the cardboard) prevented them from seeing their guns in the lower field of their vision. In other words, they didn't feel as comfortable when they couldn't see the outline of their pistol slides above their hands. We tried it one more time, and this time we changed how we let them "prepare" to face the threat target. We had them stand facing off at an angle from the target, and then positioned the cardboard in front of them, and then we allowed them to turn and face the target. Then we signaled them to draw and shoot. That next string showed some even looser clusters of his, including some surprising misses. After some discussion it was generally agreed that if they had to turn and face a threat, and then couldn't "see" their drawn guns in the edge of their vision, it was surprisingly harder to orient their guns on the targets and get solid hits. They were all pretty surprised that when it came to shooting at threat targets out past "arm's reach", that they were apparently "visually indexing" their guns while orienting on the targets. More than they'd thought, at the beginning of the informal experiment, at any rate. I've sometimes wondered how such an experiment might go if repeated nowadays, with some of the younger instructors who have installed some of the larger, brightly colored painted front sights or the brightly colored plastic tubes on their front sights. I wonder how much they're unconsciously relying on being able to pick up and "see" those things on their slides, when shooting from low positions where they don't think that they're "aiming", or "aligning" their guns in their peripheral vision on a threat. Naturally, it's very difficult to induce the sort of "tunnel vision" sensory deficit that can occur in serious stress, outside the static/square range, so there's still the question of how much of their gun any particular person might actually see in a dynamic life threatening situation. Dunno. In the meantime, though, I'll continue to add some dab of bright color to the front sights of some of my stubby revolvers and the LCP's, though. Can't hurt, might help.
__________________
Retired LE - firearms instructor & armorer |
|
June 18, 2018, 11:05 AM | #43 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 11, 2016
Posts: 1,089
|
Good discussion! How about this summary?
Well this has turned into a pretty solid discussion! I especially appreciate the feedback from personal experience, as well as the research that people are familiar with. The "right" answer seems to fall between the extremes of overgeneralizing, whether "sights don't matter, you'll never see 'em in a gunfight" or "always take time to focus on the front sight and nothing else!"
Would anyone take issue with the following generalizations about the use of sights in rapid self defense scenarios? 0. Practice situational awareness, don't be stupid, and avoid the problem to begin with. Like Mr. Miyagi said, "Best way to not get hit, is don't be there!" 1. Within a relatively close distance, maybe 0-15' where margins for error are much greater, speed rules and the best defensive tactic is to either point-shoot or use some other unsighted technique to get hits on target as quickly as possible. 2. Within a midrange, maybe 15'-45' (greatly depending upon the shooter's eyesight, level of skill, etc.) a sight picture is required, but a "flash" sight picture may be good enough to land hits for the sake of speed. 3. Beyond that distance, careful sight alignment and aiming are necessary. 4. Optical sighting systems, including red dots or lasers, *can* present an advantage at all distances by placing the visual cue on the same plane as the target itself. 5. In all cases, trigger control is key -- no amount of aiming or technological wizardry will compensate for sloppy trigger slapping. 6. In all cases, regular training must include these scenarios. Any shooters hoping to defend themselves must be well-practiced in rapid point shooting, mid-range shooting and longer range precision shooting. Is that a fair summary? |
June 18, 2018, 11:07 AM | #44 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 11, 2016
Posts: 1,089
|
Quote:
Certainly not fashionable, but it did seem to be tactically well thought-out |
|
June 18, 2018, 11:18 AM | #45 | |||||
Senior Member
Join Date: August 11, 2016
Posts: 1,089
|
Quote:
My commentary on the rationale behind these people's statements, as best I can theorize: Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
He'd also once commented separately that if someone is aiming a gun at you from a distance, the worst thing you can do is remain stationary while you line up your sights. "Get the hell out of there" was the recommended solution, and I'd presume that sight alignment at a full sprint isn't going to happen. So I think there was some rationale behind these otherwise naive sounding statements. Quote:
|
|||||
June 18, 2018, 11:21 AM | #46 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague Cnty, TX
Posts: 12,717
|
I have seen videos where people involved in real life self defense shootings have no recollection of using their sights, yet it is obvious that they are using their sights, bringing the sights up to eye level before firing.
Most of what I see when people are instinctively or reflexively shooting is indexing their guns. They are still very much using visual clues to orient the gun properly. Quote:
Quote:
Self defense is more determined by whether or not the person has intent, opportunity, and ability to cause harm to you or somebody else more so than by some arbitrary distance from you. The "law" of "3 shots, 3 seconds, 3 yards" is often cited. So the usual conclusion given is that sights don't matter, night sights are a waste of money, and lasers or red dots are just gimmicky party tricks. Quote:
__________________
"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 My Hunting Videos https://www.youtube.com/user/HornHillRange |
|||
June 18, 2018, 12:01 PM | #47 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 21, 2009
Location: Quadling Country
Posts: 2,780
|
Quote:
__________________
Thus a man should endeavor to reach this high place of courage with all his heart, and, so trying, never be backward in war. |
|
June 18, 2018, 12:03 PM | #48 | |
member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
|
Quote:
At close ranges, if you are facing someone who is willing to fight, you need better than A-zone accuracy or you are likely to be shot also. Look at the FBI shootout, the very first hit on Platt was fatal. Platt murdered the man who fired it and his partner despite this. At 15 feet, someone has the rest of their life to kill you. |
|
June 18, 2018, 12:26 PM | #49 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 21, 2009
Location: Quadling Country
Posts: 2,780
|
At 0-2' (contact distance) sights won't matter at all because you won't be able to use your sights and hit probability is very high.
From 2-4' you could use your sights but probably not a great idea since your attacker could grab your weapon or knock it away with your arms extended. Hit ratio drops tremendously, likely for these reasons. Where is the old time/distance reaction zone chart?
__________________
Thus a man should endeavor to reach this high place of courage with all his heart, and, so trying, never be backward in war. |
June 18, 2018, 12:35 PM | #50 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 12,212
|
Quote:
__________________
Know the status of your weapon Keep your muzzle oriented so that no one will be hurt if the firearm discharges Keep your finger off the trigger until you have an adequate sight picture Maintain situational awareness |
|
|
|