The Firing Line Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old June 17, 2018, 06:52 AM   #1
OhioGuy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 11, 2016
Posts: 676
Importance of sights in self defense

"Nobody uses sights in a gunfight."

"You won't have time to see your sights; looking at them could get you killed."

"If he's far enough away that you need sights, then it'll never hold up in court."

These are things I've either read or been told over the last few months when discussions about "the best sights" have come up.

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.

Of course not everyone feels that way. What do you guys think? If you have done anything at all to improve your sights, from painting the front orange to running an RMR, what led you to that decision?

ps: What often comes up too are figures about the hit/miss rates of police in gunfights, and these are usually dismissed as irrelevant to CCW because we aren't kicking in doors, and we won't likely be robbed from 15 yards away.
OhioGuy is offline  
Old June 17, 2018, 07:38 AM   #2
AK103K
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 1, 2001
Posts: 9,729
I think you need to be well practiced in all, or at least, as many aspects as possible, not just one. Being a great small group shooter at bullseye targets is great, if thats the kind of shooting youre expecting to do. Not all that great for much else.

You need to have the experience and skills of shooting in a number of different ways ingrained, so your brain can make that instant decision, without thought, as to whats needed in the moment and make it work. It takes a lot of varied practice to get there though, and you have to put the time and effort in. You dont get there by thinking about it.

If youre a believer in the "Rule of threes", more power to you. Murphy has always taken a liking to me for some reason, so I tend to plan for the worst.


As far as hit or miss ratios, every fight is its own critter. It is what it is, and will be. If your versatile and varied in your skills, you have a much better chance of doing better than the average.

Cops arent any better, and Ive personally seen cases of much worse, than your average "gun guy" when it comes to shooting. They arent somehow "better", just because they have a badge.

I posted this a few years back. The distance was "feet" (like 5'), and both the cop and the bad guy shot to slide lock (20 some odd rounds between them).

https://thefiringline.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=444797

Direct link to the article....
http://fmgpublications.ipaperus.com/...HMJ11/?page=32
AK103K is offline  
Old June 17, 2018, 08:23 AM   #3
Brit
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 29, 2005
Location: Orlando FL
Posts: 1,553
Interesting post-Ohio Guy!

I had my own "School" for over twenty years. My Diplomas were seen as sufficient proof by the Canadian, Ontario, Provincial Police, to issue Carry Permits. These had to be kept in force, once a year, via a Refresher Course.

Some feedback from past Students. A Brinks armoured car attendant, sprayed in the face with oven cleaner, and his money bag grabbed. Gave chase. Still could see OK, but stinging, and copious watering of eyes.

Ran around the corner of a small structure, was greeted with the sight of an individual partially concealed behind a telegraph pole, aiming a pistol at him.

He went prone after hearing a shot and felt what he thought was a piece of a pebble hitting his leg. He fired two rounds from his S&W Mod 65? .357 loaded with Semi-Wadcutter .38 Special 158g non-Hollow point rounds.

He told me he could see the sights clearly, consciously pressed the trigger smoothly. And could hear my Liverpool accent clearly, saying "Front Sight/Front Sight". And he could see the sights. One of his rounds missed? Still going. The other hit the stomach, causing lots of internal damage, Colonoscopy Bag? for life.

Due to this severe damage (I think) and his first offence, the Judge imposed an 8-year sentence, Canada Aye.

The shooter fired a .45 ACP 1911 at him, a reloaded 200g Semi-Wadcutter it hit the ground, broke in pieces, a piece entered his calf.

Faced by a 14-year-old Jamaican Boy on Holiday, in Toronto, at 4 am, (Buses did not start running yet.) as a joke? Company Universal ATM. He pointed his hand in the pocket of his Coat, stating "Stick em up!" The female Guard carrying the bag of whatever, Cheques/cash. In her left hand, dropped it, speed drew her Revolver, on which she had painted the front sight with white fridge paint, that she saw clearly, centred on his nose! And screamed "Don't FXXXXXX move" He peed his pants, literally. He was released to his Aunt, who he was staying with, March break?

Complicated Road Rage Incident? faced by a West Indian, who was holding a broken Pint Glass, by the handle, he had been drinking Rum out of, whilst a passenger in a vehicle, driven by his half Brother.

Mike XXX? Stated, "Don't move" Loudly (according to on-scene witnesses.
He said he placed the front sight, between the nipples (as taught, even though a shirt was worn) he saw the front sight clearly, again an S&W issued Revolver. Prior to Semi-Auto issuance. Non-compliance caused a single round to be fired. The 158g Semi-wadcutter round entered centre chest, damaged the heart, caused instant collapse and when clothes were cut off on the gurney, at the hospital. The bullet was found.

The explanation I was given, the skin was stretched quite a few inches, from coming from the inside out. Therefore slowing the bullet down.
Not allowing an exit.

A funny aside, they had this young man, sitting on an office chair, till the manager arrived, Revolver still holstered, not in cuffs waited to have the gun taken from the holster (And unloaded!) by the Manager!

Again, sights are seen, clearly, even though the range was just a couple of yards. That was my mantra, "Front Sight/Front Sight"

My carry Glock 19 4th Gen is outfitted with TruGlow night sights. 3 bright green dots.

Last edited by Brit; June 17, 2018 at 08:34 AM.
Brit is offline  
Old June 17, 2018, 09:22 AM   #4
TunnelRat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 8,887
I've done force on force and I've done multiple days of reflexive shooting classes where they tape your sights so they can't be used. There are absolutely times and situations where reflexive shooting can make a significant reduction in your shot times while not sacrificing much in terms of accuracy. When I do rule of 3 drills I do them entirely reflexively. For me personally I can shoot reflexively and still get accurate hits out to 7 yds. Passed that I want sights. It doesn't have to be an either/or type situation. You'll want both and you'll want to test yourself to know where you want to use both. I'd add that long distance accuracy isn't something to ignore either. While the rule of 3 is great, it's essentially an average. There are documented cases of people needing to make longer distance shots so having that ability is important.

In my force on force there were many times where frankly everything happened so fast and close that I didn't have time and the clarity of thought to use my sights. There was one time, however, where at 5-7 yds I and the attacker unloaded on each other with UTM pistols. He fell to the ground, pulling a bystander on top of him as he fell, and I assumed he was hit. The reality was neither of us had hit anything and he was playing possum. This was at a distance where I would laugh at making those shots but adrenaline in what I even knew wasn't a life threatening situation had played its part. As I approached his body I had finally remembered to acquire that front sight. He started lifting his arm and head to get back in the fight and the only part visible to me was his head. Sight alignment, trigger press, and one shot to the head and he was out. If I hadn't used my sights I'd have been "dead".

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
TunnelRat is offline  
Old June 17, 2018, 11:59 AM   #5
OhioGuy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 11, 2016
Posts: 676
All great answers, thanks!

One argument I hear (and increasingly believe) about lasers or especially red dots are that they put the sight and the target on the same focal plane. In using a red dot I've found I can be much quicker acquiring a sight picture. Even in what would be point shooting, I can still see that dot appear somewhere on the target.

Do you think (in principle) that "target focused" sighting systems are advantageous?
OhioGuy is offline  
Old June 17, 2018, 12:12 PM   #6
LineStretcher
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 14, 2018
Posts: 242
I run a RMR on my Kimber 1911 and a Hogue grip laser. I went that route because I'm 6'4" tall with a 36" reach. It takes me longer to get into a two hand shooting position and adjust to a target, front and rear sight picture than it does to either look over the RMR at the laser or look through the RMR. My laser is sighted in at 21ft and my RMR at 25 yards.

As side note, I have heard that some folks like taking that couple of extra seconds since it allows them time to think about actually taking the shot. My advice to them is don't pull that gun out of it's holster unless you've already made the decision to shoot, hesitation is a leading cause of death.
LineStretcher is offline  
Old June 17, 2018, 12:13 PM   #7
TunnelRat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 8,887
I think red dots on pistols will become more and more common. It's more battering on the electronics than it would be on a rifle or shotgun so my faith in them isn't as high as on a rifle, but many of them have cuts to still use the sights were they to fail. The amount of milling required isn't extreme so I imagine gun manufacturers could add the cuts as a baseline without much cost. The fact that the military had the M17 include moutning of a red dot is telling.

My only question for those that use them, as I don't currently but am strongly considering them, is so they add to the printing of the pistol at all? I imagine where you carry also matters in that regard.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
TunnelRat is offline  
Old June 17, 2018, 12:20 PM   #8
OhioGuy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 11, 2016
Posts: 676
Quote:
Originally Posted by TunnelRat View Post
I think red dots on pistols will become more and more common. It's more battering on the electronics than it would be on a rifle or shotgun so my faith in them isn't as high as on a rifle, but many of them have cuts to still use the sights were they to fail. The amount of milling required isn't extreme so I imagine gun manufacturers could add the cuts as a baseline without much cost. The fact that the military had the M17 include moutning of a red dot is telling.

My only question for those that use them, as I don't currently but am strongly considering them, is so they add to the printing of the pistol at all? I imagine where you carry also matters in that regard.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
I carry a P-07 with RMR in an AIWB holster at around 1:00 position. The holster is JM Custom Kydex with a wedge that tilts the grip into my gut, and claw that rotates the bottom of the grip against my side. As such the RMR sits directly at 1200 position and sticks out no further than the buldge made by the holster, under the loosest part of my shirt. So in my case no, it doesn't hurt concealment at all.
OhioGuy is offline  
Old June 17, 2018, 12:30 PM   #9
TunnelRat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 8,887
Yea I can see how that would be the case. I don't carry appendix and at the 2-3 o'clock positions I think it would make a difference, though how much is a question.

To the original question with regards to red dots, I don't think a red dot replaces reflexive shooting as reflexive shooting simply uses the fact that your natural point of aim is often very adequate at close distances and the pistol doesn't even need to come up to the eye. That said, I do think red dots have plenty of other advantages.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
TunnelRat is offline  
Old June 17, 2018, 01:02 PM   #10
MTT TL
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 21, 2009
Location: Quadling Country
Posts: 2,169
Quote:
"Nobody uses sights in a gunfight."
This is of course not true.

Quote:
"You won't have time to see your sights; looking at them could get you killed."
Depends. You might not have time if you had to react quickly enough. Then again you might, especially after the first shots miss.

Quote:
"If he's far enough away that you need sights, then it'll never hold up in court."
This statement makes the least sense. I can't even tell what the speaker is trying to say.


Quote:
"...the hit/miss rates of police in gunfights..." Is mostly caused by a near total lack of cops practicing or being the least bit interested in shooting and a lack of training.
This is also ignorant nonsense.

Quote:
What often comes up too are figures about the hit/miss rates of police in gunfights, and these are usually dismissed as irrelevant to CCW because we aren't kicking in doors, and we won't likely be robbed from 15 yards away.
There is a little truth there. If police are kicking in doors they will most likely be using rifles and shotguns and not a concealed carry type weapon. This quickly makes that comparison irrelevant. But how often do the police kick in a door and subsequently get in to a gunfight? Almost never compared to all other police shootings.

Also police shootings happen more often on the streets and many defensive shootings happen at home where the defender has huge advantages. Practically no police shootings happen at home although there are a few.

Robberies take place at different ranges and attacks take place at all ranges. Most likely in a defensive shooting it will be closer than 15 yards.

Quote:
One argument I hear (and increasingly believe) about lasers or especially red dots are that they put the sight and the target on the same focal plane. In using a red dot I've found I can be much quicker acquiring a sight picture. Even in what would be point shooting, I can still see that dot appear somewhere on the target.

Do you think (in principle) that "target focused" sighting systems are advantageous?
In regards to red dots the US military (and quite a few others) seem to think so. I've seen nothing that effectively counters that argument. Pistols of course are strictly back up and currently mostly are not equipped with a red dot, mostly for logistical reasons and their lack of usage in combat compared to rifles.

I know of no police agency that has equipped their standard carry pistols with red dot sights. These tend to be more fragile, or really expensive (and therefore beyond the reach of most departments) and less practical. The police are much more likely to be in a physical confrontation where the sight could get broken than ever use it in a shooting. Well made ones do work well.

With lasers this is different. Visible lasers on handguns at self defense ranges are much less useful than say an IR laser on a rifle in combat. This goes to the point of near uselessness in conditions when the laser is difficult to see.
__________________
Thus a man should endeavor to reach this high place of courage with all his heart, and, so trying, never be backward in war.
MTT TL is offline  
Old June 17, 2018, 01:11 PM   #11
Wyosmith
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 29, 2010
Location: Shoshoni Wyoming
Posts: 2,523
I made a living for several years either fighting, or teaching military men how to fight. This is something I know from experience and not book-reading.

I find it alarming how some folks "teach" students that sights don't matter in a fight.
It's the pinnacle of idiocy

It's also usually the words of someone that has not been in many (or any) gunfights.

AT NO TIME IS IT EVER MORE IMPORTANT THAN WHEN IN A GUNFIGHT TO USE YOUR SIGHTS CORRECTLY!!!! Missed paper or game animals doesn't usually result in your death or the death of a loved one.

Would any hunter of dangerous game think such an idiotic thought? Don't aim, you don't have time?

News flash for all the readers here.
YOU DON'T HAVE TIME NOT TO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Many fighters have not use sights, and that's the reason so many rounds are fired.

EVERY round you fire will hit....................something or someone.

You can't afford to miss in Civil fights or in Policing. Shoot as slowly as you need to, to can make a hit! Stay cool, DON'T Panic and concentrate on making a hit!

Last edited by Wyosmith; June 21, 2018 at 08:20 AM.
Wyosmith is offline  
Old June 17, 2018, 01:33 PM   #12
TunnelRat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 8,887
There's a good read out there by Bob Taubert who was an infantry officer in the Vietnam War and helped instruct the FBI HRT as an agent as well as being an adjunct instructor for many other units. It's called Rattenkrieg and covers many elements of CQB fighting.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
TunnelRat is offline  
Old June 17, 2018, 01:48 PM   #13
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 11,194
They put sights of firearms for a reason. IMHO, point shooting works ONLY if you have acquired years and thousands of rounds of muscle memory with the specific firearm.

Many years ago someone sent me a sample of a mid-priced 1911 airsoft pistol for review. After I had finished my review, I gave it to a friend, a fellow handgun instructor, in another state. Some time later I asked what he did with it. He said he kept it loaded and charged (green gas) on a cabinet in his workshop. Every once in awhile he would grab it at random and take a shot at a target he had set up in a corner of the shop. His purpose was to reinforce muscle memory for taking snap shots (as opposed to snapshots).

Since then I have adopted his approach. I keep an unloaded and "neutered" 1911 on my workbench in the basement. When I'm working down there, I'll often grab the non-firing gun and "point acquire" some object ten to fifteen feet away. Once I think I'm pointed at the target, I move my head to see how close the sights are to where they should be. They're usually pretty close -- but I've been shooting 1911s since 1967. If I try the same exercise with a different semi-auto, or a revolver, it doesn't work.

But ... if you're holding the gun at eye level and you put the front sight on center of mass, at self defense distances you can't miss by all that much even if you don't look for the rear sight.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old June 17, 2018, 01:49 PM   #14
SIGSHR
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 13, 2005
Posts: 4,135
Ed McGivern said the sights are used in rapid shooting, Jeff Cooper emphasized use of the sights, IIRC Jim Cirillo also. Charlie Askins. Bill Jordan emphasized their use over 7 yards or so, but I suspect few of us mortals can approach his mastery of hip shooting.
SIGSHR is offline  
Old June 17, 2018, 02:19 PM   #15
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 21,806
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK103K
I posted this a few years back. The distance was "feet" (like 5'), and both the cop and the bad guy shot to slide lock (20 some odd rounds between them).
Interesting that officer Lang comments that he felt most of his misses came early in the fight before he started using his sights.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old June 17, 2018, 02:52 PM   #16
AK103K
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 1, 2001
Posts: 9,729
Quote:
Bill Jordan emphasized their use over 7 yards or so, but I suspect few of us mortals can approach his mastery of hip shooting.
I suspect if you put the time in, in practice, some mortals might.

"Unsighted" shooting isnt just 'hip" shooting, and covers everything from clearing the holster, to shooting over the top of the gun. Its not all "unsighted", as your brain does get input/indexes from sources other than the sights, and even the sights themselves, even if youre not consciously looking at them.

Quote:
Interesting that officer Lang comments that he felt most of his misses came early in the fight before he started using his sights.
Id be curious how much time he ever put in, in shooting without the sights. Theres no doubt, youll do much better using the sights, but there are times you may need to shoot without them, and at those distances, and actually, at distances a lot farther than many seem to think possible, you can shoot quite well without using the sights. But you dont get good there, unless youve practiced.

I still think you need to be as well versed in unsighted shooting, as you do in sighted shooting. If you arent, your are leaving a gap in your skills that I think is important. Just like shooting while youre moving, which often makes sighted shooting, "a challenge". Even then, you are "aiming", even if you arent looking "at the sights". If youve been working on things like this in practice, your brain has things covered there.
AK103K is offline  
Old June 17, 2018, 03:05 PM   #17
TunnelRat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 8,887
Quote:
Originally Posted by SIGSHR View Post
Ed McGivern said the sights are used in rapid shooting, Jeff Cooper emphasized use of the sights, IIRC Jim Cirillo also. Charlie Askins. Bill Jordan emphasized their use over 7 yards or so, but I suspect few of us mortals can approach his mastery of hip shooting.
Practicing reflexive shooting isn't the same as saying to not use sights. For many people, with practice you'll find that at certain ranges the difference in accuracy isn't much. There will likely still be a difference, but there is also a difference in time. Finding the magical point at which you should or shouldn't use sights isn't easy, and I'd argue there isn't some hard and fast rule that works in all occasions. It will depend on the situation. I can shoot rapidly with sights, that isn't the issue. The difference is in the time taken to acquire a sight picture. How much extra speed is worth it? Again, I don't have a universal answer.

In courses I've done on reflexive shooting most people are amazed how well they can do reflexively. It's something many people never try. The instructors always emphasize that this is not some endorsement of never using sights.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

Last edited by TunnelRat; June 17, 2018 at 04:37 PM.
TunnelRat is offline  
Old June 17, 2018, 03:16 PM   #18
fastbolt
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 9, 2002
Location: northern CA for a little while longer
Posts: 1,799
Listening to people who have been in sudden, unexpected dynamic shooting incidents, it appears that not everyone may remember seeing their sights, but that doesn't mean they didn't use/see them. (Some people clearly remember seeing their sights, too.)

Yes, I've heard a handful of guys say they were able to effectively index/point shoot at close range in order to prevail in their incidents. No surprise. That's a skill that can be taught to most folks, at the appropriate distances, and refined.

However, I've also listened to a greater number of guys who have been in shooting incidents and heard them express how they were unable to get solid and effective hits on their attackers until they were able to get a sight picture and/or align their sights.

One guy succinctly stated that after he'd been seriously wounded during the incident (by attacker's gunfire), and was loading his last spare magazine (which meant he'd already fired and missed with 23 rounds in his 4006 .40 duty weapon), he realized that if he wanted to have a chance to survive that incident, he really needed to "stop shooting instinctively and start aiming".

He said his next shot, which was aimed, hit seriously wounded the attacker, causing him to stop shooting and crawl to cover. Both the cop and the attacker remained behind cover, both seriously wounded, until cover units arrived. (FWIW, the investigation reconstruction showed that the distances involved during the indent were as close as 5ft and as far as 100ft when shots were being exchanged.)

I've also heard Mas comment that he'd heard much the same thing over the years, meaning that cops who were successful in prevailing in shooting incidents seemed to involve a high percentage of people who reported aiming their shots and getting hits.

Some of the best "modern shooters" in LE have reported being able to clearly see their front sights (and even the individual serrations of their front ramps) during shooting incidents.

Now, I've also been in instructor classes where they used electrical tape to cover the front and rear sights of student instructor pistols. There's a teaching purpose to this practice.

The last time this was done it involved shooting a course-of-fire that covered distances of 15-50yds, and the targets were scored. Many of those student instructors in the last class (it was a recert class, for current instructors) were able to obtain the same, or close to the same, scores as they'd done in the same course of fire using their regular uncovered sights.

Well, there's something to be said for consistency of grip, weapon alignment and silhouette/profile picture of the slide against the target (even with the sights covered) ... and sometimes firearms instructors can put in more dedicated trigger time and attention to skills development than casual owners/shooters.
__________________
Retired LE - firearms instructor & armorer
fastbolt is offline  
Old June 17, 2018, 03:24 PM   #19
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 21,806
Quote:
Id be curious how much time he ever put in, in shooting without the sights.
He mentioned that they did a lot of shooting from "disadvantaged" positions but does not say anything about practicing point/instinctive shooting.

Lang was reported as asserting that:

"...most of his misses came in the early moments of the shootout, when he was point shooting below eye level, and that once he started getting his front sight on his opponent, he started to get the hits that decided the fight in his favor."

He remembers thinking "front sight!" at one or two points in the fight.

I do think that point shooting is a useful skill to have in the toolbox to use when it is not possible, or unreasonable to use the sights--sort of a contingency option to bring out when it's needed. Unfortunately, from what I see at the range, it looks like very few people practice enough to maintain a useful point-shooting skill level. In fact, it's not that common to find ranges that will allow people to practice point-shooting with live fire.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old June 17, 2018, 03:33 PM   #20
TunnelRat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 8,887
I wanted to add that some comments in here reflect a thinking that yes it can be done, but only by very high level shooters. At some point the question becomes what is a high level shooter? Is it only combat and LE veterans? Only the legends of old? I'm not saying this to beat my own chest, it's an honest question. I in no way would advocate unsighted fire for a new shooter or someone that barely practices. But there is a lot of space between Bill Jordan and new shooter.

I was listening to a Podcast with Ken Hackathorn yesterday on InRange TV where he was discussing the creation of IPSC, IDPA, and combative type shooting in general and how it changed over time. https://youtu.be/Q9B9FxNVXN8. One interesting point was Hackathorn mentions how he sees a number of young guys today at levels that are very good, and the number of shooters that good surprises him. It's a function of people putting in the time and money to get that good and while competition has its limits, Hackathorn seemed to think it was raising the overall bar.

This isn't me saying I think Bill Jordan or Jeff Cooper are overrated. This is me saying there are quite a few great shooters out there. While it may be that they represent a small percentage of all shooters, I think the number on the whole is higher than people think. It's then not easy to have advice that is appropriate for all shooters, as that advice will and I think should change by experience level. Should someone not try certain techniques until they reach legendary status? There's always the danger of being overconfident and then getting bit by it, but not allowing experimentation because of the lowest common denominator isn't the answer either.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

Last edited by TunnelRat; June 17, 2018 at 04:35 PM.
TunnelRat is offline  
Old June 17, 2018, 03:52 PM   #21
AK103K
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 1, 2001
Posts: 9,729
Quote:
I've also heard Mas comment that he'd heard much the same thing over the years, meaning that cops who were successful in prevailing in shooting incidents seemed to involve a high percentage of people who reported aiming their shots and getting hits.
I think there is some misunderstanding here as to what "unsighted" shooting is, and what "aiming" is. Youre still aiming, just that the focus may not be heavy on the sights, and/or in a traditional manner.

You can get good hits, using different aiming methods, even some that many dont consider "aiming", even though your brain recognizes that you in fact are. Your brain sees "everything" when you shoot, not just the sights. It registers those other indexes as well, and can use them to make things work, whether you realize it or not. Like anything else though, there is a learning curve. You have to show your brain what works.

I think its a normal response to danger, to focus on the target, especially at closer distances. If youve practiced shooting with that focus on the target, youre still aiming, whether or not consciously, and will still get good hits.


Quote:
I do think that point shooting is a useful skill to have in the toolbox to use when it is not possible, or unreasonable to use the sights--sort of a contingency option to bring out when it's needed. Unfortunately, from what I see at the range, it looks like very few people practice enough to maintain a useful point-shooting skill level. In fact, it's not that common to find ranges that will allow people to practice point-shooting with live fire.
I agree.

Even if youre lucky enough to shoot somewhere where you can actually practice anything but slow fire bullseye shooting, you really dont see many doing much beyond that. Be it point/unsighted shooting, drawing from the holster as they normally carry their gun, moving while shooting, etc.

As with anything, if you hope to get good, and then maintain that, you need to practice.
AK103K is offline  
Old June 17, 2018, 04:21 PM   #22
mete
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 14, 2004
Location: NY State
Posts: 6,545
There was an incident about 1980 in Nyack NY That opened the eyes of many people - to reality . No longer were matches just for fun. We always heard shooters say " front sight, front sight " as a reminder . Sometimes in combat matches Cirillo was laughed at since he played them as he would on the street I wonder if the laughers knew Cirillo's record on the street.
There was a study of officers who had been in shootings . The ones who shot
best clearly remembered seeing the front sight !
The draw and shoot from the hip also was mostly myth . Yes it's a little faster but using the sights DOUBLED the hit probability !!
__________________
And Watson , bring your revolver !
mete is offline  
Old June 17, 2018, 04:34 PM   #23
TunnelRat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 8,887
Shooting reflexively is not the same as shooting from the hip. Your options also aren't "only use sights" or "never use sights". There's a balance that needs to exist in this conversation.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

Last edited by TunnelRat; June 17, 2018 at 04:51 PM.
TunnelRat is offline  
Old June 17, 2018, 05:07 PM   #24
Sharkbite
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 4, 2013
Location: Western slope of Colorado
Posts: 2,957
Quote:
Shooting reflexively is not the same as shooting from the hip. Your options also aren't "only use sights" or "never use sights". There's a balance that needs to exist in this conversation.
For the WIN!!!!

I tell my students “see what you need to see, for the shot at hand”.

As the shot gets harder (more precise) put more focus on the sights. A center chest shot at 7-10 FEET just look over the gun. A center chest shot at 5-7 YARDS, look thru the sights. A head shot at 7-10 YARDS...FOCUS ON THE FRONT SIGHT

Trigger control is more important then sights at realistic defensive ranges.
Sharkbite is offline  
Old June 17, 2018, 05:19 PM   #25
TunnelRat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 8,887
For me I see reflexive shooting as an option if I'm in a close engagement and my pistol isn't already out. I need to get into the fight quickly and depending on the range to and actions of the person I'm shooting at I may well shoot reflexively. Now that doesn't mean that if the fight continues due to my shots not having the effect I want or missing that I'm going to continue shooting reflexively simply because I started that way and I'm too stubborn to change. Fights evolve and I should evolve with them. There are also forms of reflexive shooting that Sharkbite touched on above. Whether from my side from retention, one handed, or at a full extension where I might look over or through my sights depending on how close up to my eyes I move the pistol. You could spend a week going over the nuances.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
TunnelRat is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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 05:38 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.12735 seconds with 8 queries