Interesting Podcast on Sighted vs. Unsighted Fire

Bartholomew Roberts · October 1, 2014, 03:03 PM

http://ballisticradio.com/2014/09/30...ber-28th-2014/

An interesting discussion with a firearms instructor for a law enforcement department with a better than 80% hit rate in actual shootings discussing his views on sighted vs. unsighted fire.

SPOILER: He says uses your sights if you aren't in a retention situation.

2damnold4this · October 1, 2014, 05:32 PM

I'm looking forward to the podcast when I get home. Thanks for posting.

Jim243 · October 4, 2014, 04:29 PM

Good Show!

Jim

mete · October 4, 2014, 10:27 PM

The information I had which goes back some years was that sighted is a bit slower but DOUBLES the hit probability !! I don't remember who did the study.

valleyforge.1777 · October 7, 2014, 08:41 PM

Didnt listen to that podcast, although I do regularly download John's podcasts and listen often. Anyone being "absolute" is probably being too rigid and generally wrong.

If you take real-to-life training, like Craig Douglas's ECQC (which the radio show host/interviewer John Johnston has taken, by the way) you learn when to shoot using the thumb-pectoral index, and when to use the various levels of retention and various levels of presentation, and you realize there is a close distance from the target at which you simply are too close to bring the sights up to your optical plane and yes, you are going to need to shoot with pointing (indexing is a better term). And, as you move back away from the target, you advance the gun out and at a distance where the bad guy can not grab your gun you can use the sights. But having a discussion about point shooting that ignores those facts is not useful. In my life (not a cop, not military, just a regular guy), if I get mugged, the bad guy will have used stealth or some ruse to get in close to me, and I am going to have to use empty hands skills initially, then when timing is right I can do in-fight weapons access and get the gun out, and probably will be too close to bring the sights up to my optical plane. That's just the facts of reality, John's esteemed guest notwithstanding.

October 1, 2014, 03:03 PM	#1
Bartholomew Roberts member Join Date: June 12, 2000 Location: Texas and Oklahoma area Posts: 8,462	Interesting Podcast on Sighted vs. Unsighted Fire http://ballisticradio.com/2014/09/30...ber-28th-2014/ An interesting discussion with a firearms instructor for a law enforcement department with a better than 80% hit rate in actual shootings discussing his views on sighted vs. unsighted fire. SPOILER: He says uses your sights if you aren't in a retention situation.

October 4, 2014, 04:29 PM	#3
Jim243 Senior Member Join Date: January 5, 2009 Location: Just off Route 66 Posts: 5,067	Good Show! Jim __________________ Si vis pacem, para bellum

October 4, 2014, 10:27 PM	#4
mete Senior Member Join Date: June 14, 2004 Location: NY State Posts: 6,575	The information I had which goes back some years was that sighted is a bit slower but DOUBLES the hit probability !! I don't remember who did the study. __________________ And Watson , bring your revolver !

October 1, 2014, 05:32 PM	#2
2damnold4this Senior Member Join Date: August 12, 2009 Location: Athens, Georgia Posts: 2,526	I'm looking forward to the podcast when I get home. Thanks for posting.

October 7, 2014, 08:41 PM	#5
valleyforge.1777 Senior Member Join Date: June 2, 2011 Posts: 177	Didnt listen to that podcast, although I do regularly download John's podcasts and listen often. Anyone being "absolute" is probably being too rigid and generally wrong. If you take real-to-life training, like Craig Douglas's ECQC (which the radio show host/interviewer John Johnston has taken, by the way) you learn when to shoot using the thumb-pectoral index, and when to use the various levels of retention and various levels of presentation, and you realize there is a close distance from the target at which you simply are too close to bring the sights up to your optical plane and yes, you are going to need to shoot with pointing (indexing is a better term). And, as you move back away from the target, you advance the gun out and at a distance where the bad guy can not grab your gun you can use the sights. But having a discussion about point shooting that ignores those facts is not useful. In my life (not a cop, not military, just a regular guy), if I get mugged, the bad guy will have used stealth or some ruse to get in close to me, and I am going to have to use empty hands skills initially, then when timing is right I can do in-fight weapons access and get the gun out, and probably will be too close to bring the sights up to my optical plane. That's just the facts of reality, John's esteemed guest notwithstanding.