Should a pistol be aimed or pointed?

[Black Wolf]

Originally Posted by WVsig

I could not disagree more. It is not how many rounds you send down range it is the quality of the rounds sent down range. Practice does not make perfect. Perfect practice makes perfect. You are much better shooting 100 rounds and making every round count then going to the range and sending 500 rounds down range without regard for fundamentals. This is especially true the early you are in the learning curve.

It would be my contention that a lot of the most important parts about shooting a pistol well can be learned and practiced without sending any rounds down range. Your grip, stance, draw and most importantly your trigger control all can be worked on and improved without shooting a round.

Live fire is very important and needs to be done but it should IMHO be done with more than " some basic fundamentals". Make every round count.

I understand your position, and respect it, but still disagree.

The thing is, tho - I can not say with 100% certainty because I actually have had considerable training. So... was it the quality training or the truck load of lead I chucked that got me dialed in? Truth is, I can't say without going back in time and do it each way.

However, I honestly feel that it was "doing it" that made me proficient, not being taught it. I guess I shouldn't assume everyone learns the same way.

I don't under estimate the value of dry practice. I actually do a lot of it. But it is like martial arts - bag work is important, kata is important, partner drills are important, but if you're learn to fight..... ya gotta fight.

[Black Wolf]

Originally Posted by Lohman446

To further the thought above about the quality of practice:



This was said by Michael Jordan. He was not talking about firearms but the lesson is correct still. I have heard it phrased "Practice does NOT make perfect, only perfect practice makes perfect"

but the proof is on the paper. If you're learning to shoot "the wrong way" but are quickly placing accurate shots, what's the problem?

[Lohman446]

but the proof is on the paper. If you're learning to shoot "the wrong way" but are quickly placing accurate shots, what's the problem?

Those are vague terms. If you can be more accurate and faster by practicing the right fundamentals (whatever those may be) wouldn't that be better?

I get that there is no certain "right way" that we are discussing and that presents an issue.

[Bartholomew Roberts]

I am not talking about just hitting a 20" x 40" target I am talking about A zone hits. I am not talking single hole groups like one can shoot slow firing but all in the area the size of a grapefruit. I imagine you knew that and I imagine you can do it.

Well, the initial location of the grapefruit varies on IDPA/IPSC targets; but I do fire a tighter group in rapid fire than slow fire usually. In force-on-force, the target starts moving as soon as it perceives you and that tends to scatter the hit locations in a surprising way, especially when they turn.

[Don Fischer]

For me, the thing about pointing and aiming is that pointing is much faster nd if the target is far enough away to give you time to aim, it's probably not a threat in the first place. I don't practice handgun shooting but maybe once a month. Pain in the butt looking for all the fired case's and seem's I never recover them all. Much rather fire my revolver's at longer range and have time to aim. Tried aiming at target's about 10 yds away and a snail can darn near cover that distance before you can get off an aimed shot. If you were in a war and under attack by the enemy, I'm pretty sure if you aim your shots, your gonna die at the hands of some guy that simply sprays the area. So I got away from aiming at all with a carry gun and I do point it, With my eyes I simply have a hard time even finding the post! When I do practice I don't attempt to ht a specific spot but rather an area, center mass! If shooting is warranted I doubt the target will be that far off. If the target is, you could probably walk away!

I,m pretty sure experienced pistol competitor's can do what the rest of us would call amazing things, most of us do not fall into that cataglory.

[WVsig]

Originally Posted by Black Wolf

I understand your position, and respect it, but still disagree.

The thing is, tho - I can not say with 100% certainty because I actually have had considerable training. So... was it the quality training or the truck load of lead I chucked that got me dialed in? Truth is, I can't say without going back in time and do it each way.

However, I honestly feel that it was "doing it" that made me proficient, not being taught it. I guess I shouldn't assume everyone learns the same way.

I don't under estimate the value of dry practice. I actually do a lot of it. But it is like martial arts - bag work is important, kata is important, partner drills are important, but if you're learn to fight..... ya gotta fight.

I am glad it worked for you and that you have gotten quality training that helped you get to where you are but the advice you are giving to new shooters is about as bad as it gets. If you do not have sound fundamentals you are not learning the skill of shooting a handgun well. You are building muscle memory which may or may not serve you down the line. This doesn't apply to just handguns as Lohman446 pointed out.

It applies to football, basketball, golf, driving etc... To use your analogy of martial arts after taking one class I should run out and challenge people to a fight. Even after you get I get my head handed to me because I lack any skill I should keep picking fights? If I pick enough fights eventually I will be good at martial arts. What is that teaching you? I am not saying that life fire is not necessary or is not essential to shooting a pistol well but it has to be done the right way or you are building bad habits which you will have to train out later or in the worst case scenario never correct.

Telling people to go blast away and you will eventually get it is poor advice.

[WVsig]

Originally Posted by Bartholomew Roberts

Well, the initial location of the grapefruit varies on IDPA/IPSC targets; but I do fire a tighter group in rapid fire than slow fire usually. In force-on-force, the target starts moving as soon as it perceives you and that tends to scatter the hit locations in a surprising way, especially when they turn.

Maybe I did not make that clear in my post but the videos I referenced demonstrating what I was talking about show people shooting A zone hits. I should have been more clear.

Yup shooting on the move hitting a moving target changes the dynamic but don't you think the principle stays the same? You are looking to shoot the gun as fast as you can by pointing it the thing you want to hit and "pulling" the trigger as fast as you can without having it move in your hand. Even a tiny bit of movement by you or the target makes the task harder but the principle of getting positive hits stays the same, doesn't it?

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by WVsig

...It is not how many rounds you send down range it is the quality of the rounds sent down range. Practice does not make perfect. Perfect practice makes perfect. You are much better shooting 100 rounds and making every round count then going to the range and sending 500 rounds down range without regard for fundamentals.....

I agree completely. Not only does only perfect practice make perfect, but also practice makes permanent. If one keeps doing it wrong over and over, he just becomes an expert at doing it wrong.

Originally Posted by Black Wolf

...If you're learning to shoot "the wrong way" but are quickly placing accurate shots, what's the problem?

The problem is that things really don't work that way. Folks can sometimes get to a certain level of proficiency using poor techniques. Sometime they just have enough natural talent to get by.

If that's what they want, they will probably be satisfied. But in my experience helping coach our club's youth trapshooting program, someone will reach a plateau and be unable to progress further because he's held back by poor technique. It's then a long and frustrating process to "overwrite" the bad habits and then re-program good habits.

[WVsig]

Originally Posted by Frank Ettin

I agree completely. Not only does only perfect practice make perfect, but also practice makes permanent. If one keeps doing it wrong over and over, he just becomes an expert at doing it wrong.



The problem is that things really don't work that way. Folks can sometimes get to a certain level of proficiency using poor techniques. Sometime they just have enough natural talent to get by.

If that's what they want, they will probably be satisfied. But in my experience helping coach our club's youth trapshooting program, someone will reach a plateau and be unable to progress further because he's held back by poor technique. It's then a long and frustrating process to "overwrite" the bad habits and then re-program good habits.

Yes! Yes! Yes! You see this all the time with QBs in Football. They have natural talent and athletic gifts. They practice from the time they could hold a football. The raw talent gets them through HS maybe even college but when the get to the Pro level they have to change their delivery because they have plateaued. They need to release the ball faster in the pro game because they will get sacked if they don't. They have to change their footwork because they need to deliver the ball with more velocity. They need to learn a 3 and 5 step drop just just throw from the spread. The guys who do not have to be re-training to hold the ball higher and shorten their motion are ahead of those who have to be re-trained. Same thing applies to shooting.

I have seen it in classes where the instructor has to take a decent shooter and break them back down to the basic fundamentals because their technique is holding them back. The poor technique is keeping them from moving to the next level.

I cannnot say it enough times. If I could go back and start over I would buy less guns and shoot less rounds but get more training. I would have spend more time and $$$ building a better shooting foundation from the beginning verse throwing rounds down range for years before getting professional instruction.

The reason I can tell the story of a shooter plateauing is because at one time that was me. No matter how many rounds I shot I was not getting better. It was not about the quantity of the rounds I was shooting it was about the quality. I took some classes and things improved. Now I try to take a few every year to build on the skills I have learned. I try to give this advice to all new shooters. Unfortunately too few of them listen.

[Black Wolf]

Originally Posted by WVsig

I am glad it worked for you and that you have gotten quality training that helped you get to where you are but the advice you are giving to new shooters is about as bad as it gets. If you do not have sound fundamentals you are not learning the skill of shooting a handgun well. You are building muscle memory which may or may not serve you down the line. This doesn't apply to just handguns as Lohman446 pointed out.

It applies to football, basketball, golf, driving etc... To use your analogy of martial arts after taking one class I should run out and challenge people to a fight. Even after you get I get my head handed to me because I lack any skill I should keep picking fights? If I pick enough fights eventually I will be good at martial arts. What is that teaching you? I am not saying that life fire is not necessary or is not essential to shooting a pistol well but it has to be done the right way or you are building bad habits which you will have to train out later or in the worst case scenario never correct.

Telling people to go blast away and you will eventually get it is poor advice.

I agree fundamentals are important. In fact, one of my favorite sayings is: "What makes the elite the elite is being better at the basics than anyone else".

But they are exactly that "basics" and they are polished by repetition. From my very first post, I said there were a few fundamentals that needed to be focused on. Let's be realistic, how many are there? front sight focus, press the trigger smoothly using just your finger not your whole hand, shoot from reset. Other than that, there isn't much. It is actually a pretty simple process (simple not easy).

(safety rules aside) I believe a total novice could take those THREE concepts and a case of ammo and make great progress in the absence of any other instruction.

Now, I am only talking about shooting. I am not talking about fighting with a pistol. That is a whole different beast and an much more complex set of variables. I'm just talking about becoming proficient at quickly placing accurate shots.

[WVsig]

Originally Posted by Black Wolf

I agree fundamentals are important. In fact, one of my favorite sayings is: "What makes the elite the elite is being better at the basics than anyone else".

But they are exactly that "basics" and they are polished by repetition. From my very first post, I said there were a few fundamentals that needed to be focused on. Let's be realistic, how many are there? front sight focus, press the trigger smoothly using just your finger not your whole hand, shoot from reset. Other than that, there isn't much. It is actually a pretty simple process (simple not easy).

(safety rules aside) I believe a total novice could take those THREE concepts and a case of ammo and make great progress in the absence of any other instruction.

Now, I am only talking about shooting. I am not talking about fighting with a pistol. That is a whole different beast and an much more complex set of variables. I'm just talking about becoming proficient at quickly placing accurate shots.

If it was that easy you would not see targets like this hanging at 7 yards everytime you go to the range. IMHO clearly YMMV

[Bartholomew Roberts]

WVSig, I will say that despite a conscious effort to use sights, people get shot in the gunhand freakishly often in force-on-force, which indicates to me that some kind of target focus shooting is happening.

[WVsig]

Originally Posted by Bartholomew Roberts

WVSig, I will say that despite a conscious effort to use sights, people get shot in the gunhand freakishly often in force-on-force, which indicates to me that some kind of target focus shooting is happening.

I would assume that is because people are focusing on the gun in the persons hand and shooting where they are looking.

[Don Fischer]

Originally Posted by WVsig

If it was that easy you would not see targets like this hanging at 7 yards everytime you go to the range. IMHO clearly YMMV

Nice target. Bad guy coming at you does not have those easy scoring rings!

[Ricklin]

Originally Posted by WVsig

I would assume that is because people are focusing on the gun in the persons hand and shooting where they are looking.

Perhaps they are liberals and trying to shoot the gun out of their hand? Isn't that what the boob tube teaches?

[WVsig]

Originally Posted by Don Fischer

Nice target. Bad guy coming at you does not have those easy scoring rings!

I personally do not consider that a good target especially if it was shot slow fire. If you are shooting slow fire at 7 yards you should be all in X-9 ring. If you are good should be able to put them all in the X-9 ring at speed. Not enough of those are hitting something in the central nervous system. I guess everything is relative. YMMV

[sigxder]

Simple really. Use as much of a sight picture as time and distance allows. Most civilian self defense situations are very close. Up close you will point shoot. A little further a "flash sight picture". Greater the distance the more of a refined sight picture you can get and need.
No matter what anyone says you need to practice both point shooting for up close. And differing sight pictures/grips as distance varies. From a Martial Arts perspective think of it this way. When someone is right on you you grapple. Maybe elbows, knees, and head a little further out. Then fists and feet. It would be stupid to try a spinning back kick if someone is in body contact distance.
It's like when MMA started. Kicking styles thought they would be able to keep the guys off with their feet. So they didn't need to grapple. soon got that straight. Graplers beat everyone.
Then they adjusted to the realities of the distances changing in a fight and integrated grappling, kicking, and punching. If someone is telling you that you should always and only take a two handed stance with this or that grip. And only use a sight picture like this and this only. Find someone else.
Fighting with a gun is not target shooting. Learn how to shoot from every possible stance and distance. Don't think a sidekick works for everything. Neither does one kind of shooting.

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by WVsig

...I would assume that is because people are focusing on the gun in the persons hand and shooting where they are looking...

A few weeks ago I attended a class in self defense law put on by Andrew Branca. He offers an option at the end of the day to participate in some simulator exercises.

There's a computer generated scenario. The student has a laser pistol (which looks like a Glock). If the gun is fired the computer records the hits and time. But the purpose of the exercise is to test decision making. Not every scenario involves a lethal threat, and shooting will not always be the best response.

On the other hand, some scenarios involve a very rapidly unfolding lethal threat. To survive one needs to very quickly evaluate the situation, identify the appropriateness of a lethal force response, and effectively respond with lethal force. The result of a failure to act decisively would be highly unsatisfactory for the defender.

That sets the stage.

I'm walking to my car in a parking lot. I'm suddenly confronted by a scruffy person loudly demanding my car keys. I observed a gun tucked into his waistband and immediately began deploying my gun (we weren't using holsters so held the gun in our hand at our side).

I observed the assailant begin to reach for his gun. I brought my gun immediately on target. I was very aware of the front sight and my gun indexed on his center of mass. I fired two shots (a "hammer" in Gunsite jargon, i. e., two shots on one sight picture) and the simulation stops.

My first shot hit his gun squarely. His gun was coming up but still a bit below his shoulders roughly at the upper center of his chest. My second shot was well centered at the base of his neck.

So I neutralized the threat. Also, apparently I keyed on the gun which was at the time roughly in the center of mass.

[cc-hangfire]

“Should a pistol be aimed or pointed?”

After thorough deliberation & checking the posts to date, the answer is:

YES

[Ricklin]

Originally Posted by cc-hangfire

“Should a pistol be aimed or pointed?”

After thorough deliberation & checking the posts to date, the answer is:

YES

The right answer.

[RAfiringline]

In the movies / tv, it should always be pointed with one hand.

In real life, it should be aimed using two hands, assuming the threat is at some distance.

If the threat is right on top of you, point and fire is fine.

[pete2]

Aimed or pointed? It depends on the distance to the targer. Practice a little bit and you'll understand.

[Pep in CA]

Aimed or pointed? It depends on the distance to the targer. [sic] Practice a little bit and you'll understand.

Yes, as the OP of this thread, I intend to do so. And it is nice to see this thread winding down toward simplicity instead of maximum complexity, and also some conflicting ideas melding. I say bravo to all that.

I want to acknowledge someone ... Rangerrich99 in post #67. His post almost went unnoticed but he is doing what I will be doing too. He is ahead of me at the moment, but his path seems to be the same as mine. Bravo.

[SonOfScubaDiver]

I can only speak for myself. Other than the tips given to me by the fine folks who work at the gun range, and a few YT videos, I had no training whatsoever before I started shooting. My first couple of times at the range weren't horrible, but I was definitely placing shots all over the target, kinda like the pic Don Fischer posted only with a hundred holes instead of a few. Once I learned how to line the sights up properly, my shooting improved. I had to aim, regardless of the distance.

Eventually, without even realizing it was happening, I transitioned to point shooting. I don't know if it's because I learned each gun well enough to know how to hold it so that the sights naturally lined up, or what, but I started paying less and less attention to the sights and more to the target. It became more of a hand to eye coordination type of thing. I started shooting faster and faster, and eventually stopped using both hands. Now, at SD distances, I can point any one of my guns and hit the coveted center zone with very little effort. I can't explain all the technicalities of how I got there, but I'm confident that I can hit center mass one handed.

It would be nice if I could say the same thing for anything more than 15 yards! LOL! Anything greater than 15 yards and I'm still taking the time to aim, making sure the sights are lined up, using both hands, etc. I'm good to 25 yards with my full sized guns, but not so much with my EDC guns, especially the LCR. I can still hit the target at 25 yards with them, but I have trouble placing the shots exactly where I want them.

So....I would say that point shooting is good to learn for SD distances, but anything more than that requires more deliberate aiming.

[deserted]

To the question, "Aimed or pointed?".
Yes.