I think I've had it wrong all these years

[stephen426]

I went to the range tonight and there was this guy just unloading his gun as quick as he could into the target. He was shooting at 7 yards and kept most if his shots in a standard B27 target. His groupings looked more like a shotgun blast. Meanwhile, I was taking my time and shooting pretty little groups under controlled fire.

I was suprised the range officers didn't say anything since few, if any, indoor ranges allow rapid fire. It got me thinking though... Who cares about pretty little groups in a real gun fight if you can't do it quickly. In my opinion, it is much more importants to gets shots on your target and get them on quickly. I wish I had the time to get into IPSC but I also have to work a lot. I believe that rapid fire requires rapid target reacquisition. Of course rapid target acquisition is highly important since the first shot may end the gun fight.

For that reason, I think point shooting from the low ready position (basically bringing the gun up quickly from low ready) and rapid target reacquisition should have much more importance when practicing at the range. I'm not suggesting spray and pray by any means, but rather getting so used to your primary defensive gun that you don't rely on your sights.
What do you guys think?

[mkg]

That's why I've been thinking about IDPA.

Reaction time, target acquisition , trigger control.

Mike

[Teuthis]

I think you have a good point. But I also consider the best drill is to do the point shooting, but start slowly. Practice putting your shots into a small group, speeding up only when you can do so effectively. Shooting is similar learning how to play a musical instrument. Start each lesson slowly and build your speed as your brain learns the fingering. Start your firing slowly, learning to make tight groups, and then move up a notch to faster shots. They will be wider, but with practice you will tighten them at the faster speed. Eventually you will be making effective groups at fast shooting speeds.

Wide groups in practice equal misses in actual self defense; even at close range. If you drill effectively you will learn to shoot those smaller groups rapid fire. That is important if you must ever engage in actual combat. That is how I learned, and how I still drill.

[Sportdog]

Quote from CCW instructor: "Spread that lead around Boy!!!!":D

[heyduke]

Most "real handgun" fights last no more than 3 rounds.

Think about that...

[stephen426]

Most "real handgun" fights last no more than 3 rounds.

Think about that...

Think about slower carefully aimed shots and the ability to do that with a bad guy spray lead in your direction. Even lucky hits count against you and will certainly hamper your ability to shoot back. Of course being able to draw and shoot quickly and accurately is probably the best combination. The problem is most ranges don't allow holstered weapon, much less firing while drawing from a holster. I guess they have seen too many idiots shooting themselves in the legs.

The other point is becoming so familiar with your primary carry gun, that it becomes and extension of your hand. Even without sights, you should be able to hit your target at 21 feet and group relatively well. I think I will practice more with my sights taped up.

[Dwight55]

If you have never seen the video from the dash cam of the Ohio State trooper who shot it out with a bg at about 12 to 15 feet, . . . google around on high speed videos, . . . somebody probably out there has it, . . . it is worth the watch.

The bg comes around his suv passenger side and draws a handgun on the trooper and they begin to exchange rounds, . . . I forget the number of rounds, but it was like 15 from each, . . . maybe somewhat fewer, I don't remember.

Point is, . . . several seconds of spray and pray, . . . no hits. If either of them had taken time for a good aimed head shot, . . . the video would have been much different.

I have always been a proponent of "shoot what you aim at" and "aim at what you shoot". Especially in today, . . . where YOU are responsible for where EVERY LAST ROUND lands that you fire.

May God bless,
Dwight

[Deaf Smith]

He was shooting at 7 yards and kept most if his shots in a standard B27 target.

B27 is the size of an obese gorilla. MOST of his shots? You mean he missed?

Considering the handgun is a very weak stopper we all know shot placement is the key to stopping someone. That means good solid COM, perferabley near the sternium unless you can deliver a CNS shot.I won't even get into the potiential of erriant shots killing someone else nor winchestering your gun one just one attacker leaves you vunerable to his friends.

Me think one needs to shoot one heck of alot better than 'most' of the shots on a B27.

Since you can shoot small groups, how about this. Go a little fiaster until the groups spread to about 8 inches. Then try to keep all the shots at 7 yards in that 8 inches as you get faster and faster.

You will have to speed up, then slow down, then speed up, slow down... till you can shoot very fast and keep all the shots COM, not 'most' on a B27.

[garryc]

One of my biggest problems with an indoor range is that the ones I've been to will not allow you to holster a loaded gun, especially in concealment. That draw from concealment is vital to your ability to use the gun in self defence.

Now that you've shot for years you should practice drawing from concealment and firing. Your basic tac-tac drill. Do it until it's smooth. Practice that draw at home with an empty weapon daily.

Then learn to draw and fire on the move, seeking C+C and such. Another thing you can't do on an indoor range.

[Caeser2001]

Practice that draw at home with an empty weapon daily.

+1 and reloads.

[stephen426]

Dwight,

I fully understand and agree that one is responsible for each and every round he fires. There is a difference between a spray and pray and being able to fire rapidly. While you may be taking your well aimed shot, a bad guy may be unloading his gun at you. Like I said, even off center hits will greatly hinder your ability to fight back. Besides, he could get luck and critically wound you with one of his shots.

The guy basically kept all of his shots on the target with maybe a few close misses.

I think I am just going to have to make time for IPSC or PPC. Shooting controlled fire while stationary at stationary targets has little to do with real world gun fights. I'm thinking paintball or even Airsoft might even be a better form of practice since you have to worry about getting hit as well. In paintball and airsoft, standing still to take a well aimed shot is usually suicide unless you are a sniper. Of course you can't go around spraying bullets like most guys spray paintballs/airsoft (unless you are in combat).

[Deaf Smith]

The guy basically kept all of his shots on the target with maybe a close misses.

Stephen,

A B-27 is HUGE. Way bigger than most men. At 7 yards, standing still, that's not good at all, fast or slow. I would not recommend imitating his 'style'.

Tell you what, time how long it takes him to fire all those shots. Then look at how many are COM hits. Now instead just fire a controled pair of COM shots. Time them. I bet you do it faster than the spary-n-pray style and with better hits.

[heyduke]

Either I'm old school or just plain poor.

Only thing I use now is an 8"x11" sheet of white paper with a quarter outlined in the center (25 yards) or a penny (at 7 yards):D

[JoeFromSidney]

I carry a Kimber 1911. I have two airsoft 1911 replicas: one spring-operated (need to rack the slide for each shot); one gas operated (fill the "magazine" with "green gas" before each session) which repeats and operates just like the real 1911. Each fires 6-mm plastic pellets. The guns are the size and shape of the real thing, but of course are lighter.

I set up a silhouette target in my basement and practice drawing and firing. Once I'm satisfied with my draw, I'll try it with my carry gun and live ammo at my gun club. I'm not sure I'm ready for that yet. Anyway, I think using the airsoft replica gun helps to work out the kinks in drawing and firing.

I've tried firing "from the hip" and "from the gut." I don't do well at it. I have found that I can bring my gun up to eye level quickly and get good hits.

Spring-operated replicas run about $30. Gas operated replicas run over $100. You might want to try one of the spring-operated ones to see if it helps.

[David Armstrong]

Spray and pray is not a good shooting technique. Learning target focused shooting (point shooting, instinctive shooting, etc.), on the other hand, is an excellent way to survive the usual CCW incident.

[stephen426]

Spray and pray is not a good shooting technique. Learning target focused shooting (point shooting, instinctive shooting, etc.), on the other hand, is an excellent way to survive the usual CCW incident.

I edited my posts to show that I never advocated spray and pray. I think we agree on the point shooting technique though. I believe most would agree that you react in the manner you practice when the poop hits the fan. If you are attacked and you try to get the perfect sight picture before firing, you may end up dead. If you can draw and get your gun on target faster than the bad guy, your odds go up significantly.

I think I need to get back to my airsoft practice where I would start with the gun at low ready and try to acquire the target and fire as quickly as possible. I was hitting a 8" x 8" sticky target from across the room without relying on the sights. I was actually at the point where most of my shots were grouping within 3 inches. The problem is the airsoft I have is a Sig P226 replica and I carry a Glock 26. Time to get a new Airsoft I guess.

The idea behind being able to empty the gun as quickly as possible is you are relying more on the muscle memory of the "reset" than on sight picture. Basically, you can reset to where your point of aim is without relying on the sights, despite the recoil. I'm sure that is a matter of being very used to a gun. Like I said, few ranges allow you to rapid fire so many may not have even experienced it.

I guess my main point of this thread is to get people to think about their practice time at the range and see how it would translate to a real life gun fight. In my opinion, pretty groups under controlled fire is meaningless unless you can draw and fire quickly and accurately.

[MrNiceGuy]

i shoot in a "league" at my local pistol range for this very reason

it really helps to become familiar with your weapon.
stuff like having 7 seconds to rack one in the chamber and fire 6 rounds at a ~6" target, 50' away.
very good practice

[David Armstrong]

I believe most would agree that you react in the manner you practice when the poop hits the fan.
That seems to depend in large part on just how much you have practiced.
I edited my posts to show that I never advocated spray and pray.
Fair enough, my comment was more of a general point than at you specifically.
I guess my main point of this thread is to get people to think about their practice time at the range and see how it would translate to a real life gun fight.
It's a good point, one that lots of folks never do get. My old training group's motto was "HOPE THAT YOUR TRAINING WILL BE A REFLECTION OF REAL LIFE INSTEAD OF HOPING THAT REAL LIFE WILL BE A REFLECTION OF YOUR TRAINING."

[Tennessee Gentleman]

I just listened to a Michael Bane Podcast and he now believes the "shoot until they are on the ground" as opposed to shoot to stop as he taught before. The bottomline is eliminate the threat. BTW, I knew you weren't advocating "spray and pray" and the example you gave was not such.

[stephen426]

I just saw a thread about sighted versus non-sighted shooting. I think this is what I had in mind when I started this thread. Here is the link (http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=315482).

[Sigma 40 Blaster]

There's a great deal of difference between a precise sight picture, a flash sight picture, point shooting, and spray and pray.

I have been shooting IDPA for about a year now and my outlook on all four of those things has greatly changed. I am far from a pro shooter and don't present IDPA as tactical training or anything other than a good test of a variety of shooting and gun handling skills.

When I buy a new gun (or new ammo with an old gun) I will begin with precise sight pictures so I can get an idea of POI. I have never bought a gun that required any sight tweaking.

After I have an idea of how the gun "aims" I work from the holster, my goal is to obtain a good hit as fast as possible. I have a 3-6 inch target I consider a good hit depending on distance. 7 yards and closer I do well with a flash sight picture, basically just enough to see that the front sight is centered and the top is even with the rear sights. This is not a precise alignment...just a quick check to make sure I'm on target.

As the distance increases that "flash" sight picture gets a little bit longer because I know a deviation in my sight picture will affect my shot more @ 15 yards than at 7. At 20 yards or better I'm almost back to a "precise" sight picture but I'm still not striving for "one ragged hole".

I regard point shooting as a good tool for rapid fire at 3-5 yards with a completely clear backstop. I don't do this from the hip but with my gun indexed at my pectoral muscle, slightly canted to the side so the slide doesn't hit me during recoil.

I think being able to get good hits as fast as possible is the primary objective for competitive or defensive purposes. I can think of scenarios where precise aiming, flash aiming, and point shooting could all mean the difference between life and death (your own or someone other than the bad guy(s)). Understand the difference in the three techniques and what situations they would be applicable and get good at all three.

Working from the holster is very important during practice (or just at home doing dry work if you can't do it at the range) because in real life you do not have time to pick your gun off of a bench, slip a fresh mag in, rack the slide, loosen your shoulders up, get into your stance, and aim for an X. If a typical SD situation is only 3-5 seconds long and it takes you 3 seconds to clear leather and get off a good shot you're in trouble. Distance and movement (either you or the BG) are very important variables in that equation that dictate the type of shot you will take.

[stephen426]

Sigma 40 Blaster...

Thanks for your insight. That is pretty much what I was talking about. You summed up my mumble jumble thoughts nicely.

My problem was that I fell into the trap of competitiveness with a friend of mine. We would work on shooting pretty little groups rather than getting lead on the target quickly and accurately.

Thanks for the input and ideas so far. Please keep them coming.

[vox rationis]

I like shooting tight groups too, but for defensive fire, fire as fast as you can, while still keeping your shots in the A and B (and maybe the C) zones (using something like an IPSC target for reference)...there's no use in remaking the same hole over and over ;)

http://www.gpsl.org/images/ipsctarg.gif

[fiddletown]

There's a difference between target accuracy and self defense accuracy, and there's a difference between acceptable self defense accuracy and poking a whole lot of holes all over a big silhouette target.

In classes I took recently with both Louis Awerbuck and Massad Ayoob, they each stressed the need to be appropriately accurate. For one thing, the things you need to put the holes in to maximize the likelihood that you will stop the fight are grouped in a relatively small area. For another thing, your performance will deteriorate significantly under stress, so to stand a good chance of getting the hits you need when you need them, you need to do better at the range.

So you don't need everything in one ragged hole, but you also don't want holes all over the paper. You want pretty much all your shots in the A zone, and you want them there quickly. The good news is that you can learn to do it. That's what training and practice are all about.

BTW, it's a good idea to end each practice with some precision shooting. That's how you program and confirm good trigger control.

[Deaf Smith]

Spray and pray is not a good shooting technique. Learning target focused shooting (point shooting, instinctive shooting, etc.), on the other hand, is an excellent way to survive the usual CCW incident.

And so is learning a good sighted fire method.

But missing a B-27 target at 7 yards and thinking that's point shooting and the way to go isn't a good way to 'survive the usual CCW incident", although I'd remind people that the 'usual CCW incident' dosn't even involve firing the weapon.

And pray tell, david, what if it's not quite the 'usual CCW incident'. Not like you can pick what incident you encounter.

So you don't need everything in one ragged hole, but you also don't want holes all over the paper. You want pretty much all your shots in the A zone, and you want them there quickly. The good news is that you can learn to do it. That's what training and practice are all about.

Absolutly fiddletown, absolutly.


If you have time to fire a whole magazine you have time to aim. Learn to use a form of sighted fire first. Master it and a form of hip/retention. Then if you want to learn point/instinctive/target focused fireing methods, great.

Don't accept 'shotgun like groups' on a static target at 7 yards. Especially if you are forced to enguage a partialy exposed attacker, armored one, or one with a hostage.

[stephen426]

Hey! I get shotgun like groups at 7 yards... :eek: Maybe slugs fired out of a shotgun or buck shot fired out of a long barreled shotgun with a tight choke! ;)

[fiddletown]

...Learn to use a form of sighted fire first....
+1

With the proper training and practice, it's amazing how fast one can acquire a flash sight picture and hit accurately. Learning those techniques and developing proficiency in the use of those techniques also gives you the flexibility to deal with targets at pretty much any distance. Yes, most gun fights are close range affairs. But what do you do if you've focused all your training on engaging targets 5 to 7 yard away; and the one time you really need to use your gun, it's the one in a hundred case in which you must engage an armed threat 10 to 12 yards away and partially behind cover?

The idea behind the flash sight picture is to focus on the front sight quickly and align the sights only as precisely as warranted under the circumstances. At distances on the order of 5 to 7 yards, when the target is the center of mass, a rough alignment will be sufficient to assure good hits (as long as you have good trigger control). As distances increase or the target shrinks, the alignment needs to be more precise. But with training and practice you can develop a good sense of how good is good enough.

And again, some precision shooting is important to maintain trigger control. Whether you use the sights or point shooting techniques to direct the muzzle of the gun in line with the particular part of the target you want to hit, if you don't have trigger control, your muzzle will not be in line with the part of the target you want to hit when the bullet leaves the barrel of your gun -- and you will miss. Most folks when shooting fast will start jerking the trigger. It takes a lot of good, focused practice to program in trigger control so that you will be able to sustain it at speed.

There is no target too close or too large to miss.

[T. O'Heir]

"...you don't rely on your sights..." Rubbish. Aimed fire is always better. Both legally and morally. If you don't use the sights and one bullet hits something or somebody, you're liable.
Stephen, while IDPA and IPSC are nothing but shooting games, it sounds like you need to make the time for recreation. Shooting either because it's fun and not worrying about placing will do that.

[fbrown333@suddenlink]

I use a plastic bullets from SPEER, They only use the primer to fire the projectile.It is a flat nose with a hollow base. I bet it hurts like hell if you were to get hit, any way I use these to allow me to draw and fire train in my basement with out the neighbors going ballistic and calling the cops. I just hang a blanket up with a target on it. The loose blanket allows it to stop the projectile (for reuse) with no damage to it.They won't cycle the action but other that that they work well for practice. Lets you find out what techniques work and what doesn't (catching on clothing) that type of thing.

[stephen426]

T. O'Heir,

Maybe I was using the wrong terminology in my initial posts. Nobody is talking about just firing wildly with total disregard for where your rounds land. I think most would agree that point shooting is indeed a form of aiming as is body indexing. The point is going for perfect sight picture and failing to work on speed will probably get you killed in a gun fight.

You can call IPSC and IDPA games, but I believe that people that play those games have a much better chance of survival compared to a bullseye shooter in an actual gun fight. First of all, there is a strong focus on speed and getting lead on your target. Second, they do focus on accuracy since the A zone is awarded more points. Besides, there are scenarios where targets or poppers are set further away. Finally, they practice shooting on the move. People that only shoot at stationary targets while standing still have a very hard time hitting anything while moving. The surprising thing for me was that I picked it up pretty quickly the one time I went. I also had some great coaching and was shooting some very nice guns. The more tricked out the gun though, the more it becomes a game.

Paint ball and airsoft are also games, but I believe people who play increase their odds in a gun fight. After all, not getting hit is as important as hitting your target. Of course you can't sling lead indiscriminately as you would paint balls!:eek: Regardless, I believe there is still skills that can be learned.

As the economy gets worse, crime usually increases. In my opinion, better to have the skill and not need them.

[Tuttle8]

stephen426,

I have to disagree with your thoughts on doing it wrong all these years. For one thing, I wouldn't use that person you saw as a litmus test on your methods of learning.

I also think there are many, many ways of developing defensive techniques, not one or two. I would say that all you need to do is expand on different techniques.

For that reason, I think point shooting from the low ready position (basically bringing the gun up quickly from low ready) and rapid target reacquisition should have much more importance when practicing at the range. I'm not suggesting spray and pray by any means, but rather getting so used to your primary defensive gun that you don't rely on your sights.
What do you guys think?

I would say that point shooting techniques should be learned to become proficient. There are times when this may be needed. However, I believe that sighted fire techniques are extremely important as well.

I can't tell you what's best for you. For me, Randy Cain's methods worked. He teaches sighted fire. I'd be glad to expand further why by PM if you wish so that this thread doesn't veer to another point vs. sight grudge match.

[Threefeathers]

fiddletown, how are you this morning. I finally got a chance to take my sife to Rocky Point which is sort of the Mexican version of Monterey.
Like you I've been rethinking shooting since LFI and from personal experience I realize that sometimes a quick get the gun out and fire from point blank range is necessary. I remember a talk from an ole IRA member when I was in college about shooting a Black and Tan officer, his statement, "There ain't no poor shoot from 2 foot range." rings true.

Yet, from 7 yards there certainly are poor shots. (take an inexpereinced shooterplace them at 7 meters from a IDPA targer and have them raise and fire 6 rounds as fast as they can. I do this often to folks I teach and have never had all 6 shots hit the target.
Doing it as Mas taught is is superior.
On another site the fellow who teaches point shooting in Flagstaff put a nice comment about our LFI class and I replied to him that I'd like to take his class sometime. As Mas said, we learn daily.
That said, I'm going to drill on a quick rock back if at point blank and continue up for a Stresspoint sight as I can.
One of the most combat experienced NCO's I had as a Plt Sgt in the Army, 'Slick' Harrelson drilled one thing in me that I believe has saved my life, "Keep your eye on the front sight, dammit." It is ingrained in me and I'm still here.

[fiddletown]

As Clint Smith wrote in the January/February, 2008, American Handgunner:

"It's alway argued that in a fight shooters will not look at their sights. I strongly agree -- if no one has ever taught them otherwise. To say that people don't, or won't, look at their sights is wrong. People have, they will in the future, and they'll hit the...target too. The correct alignment of the sights is a learnable skill. Is a textbook perfect sight picture available in every fight? Of course not....In fairness, the sights are only part of the issue -- the jerked on trigger doesn't improve anything."

Even when one has been taught to look at the sights, how much has he actually practiced quickly seeing the adequate sight picture and acting reflexively, without conscious thought, on the rough sight picture? As another trainer, Bennie Cooley, once told me, "It's not that I shoot quicker than you do. It's that I see quicker."

I often wonder if the reason there are so many misses in fights has less to do with the particular technique that shooter has been taught, but the fact that he hasn't trained sufficiently for the technique to become truly reflexive.

[vox rationis]

OK how about we put it this way:

With slow, aimed, off hand fire, you should be able to put 5 rounds into 1 inch, or less, at 7 yards. If your shots are outside of this parameter, then slow down.

With controlled rapid fire you should be able to make a "shot gun" type pattern into the A zone at 7 yards (or more). If your shots are significantly tighter than this parameter, speed up; if they are outside of this parameter, slow down.

[stephen426]

Son Of Vlad Tepes,

The main goal is to get to the point where you are able to get lead on your target faster than your target can get lead on you. Even if the first hit is not in the A zone, it should hinder your advesary's ability to fight back. Your follow up shots can finish the fight. If you can't hit your target before he hits you, you might not be able shoot back.

[fiddletown]

...With slow, aimed, off hand fire, you should be able to put 5 rounds into 1 inch, or less, at 7 yards. If your shots are outside of this parameter, then slow down.

With controlled rapid fire you should be able to make a "shot gun" type pattern into the A zone at 7 yards (or more). If your shots are significantly tighter than this parameter, speed up; if they are outside of this parameter, slow down.
I agree. I would suggest, however, one amendment. One should be able to do this at any distance out to at least 15 yards. The point is to learn the proper speed and degree of precision of sight picture appropriate to the distance and problem.

The main goal is to get to the point where you are able to get lead on your target faster than your target can get lead on you. Even if the first hit is not in the A zone, it should hinder your advesary's ability to fight back....
I disagree. A peripheral hit on your assailant probably won't hinder his ability to fight, especially if he's intoxicated, high on drugs or under the influence of an adrenalin dump (which is almost a certainty). Bad hits will most likely not slow the BG down at all; he probably won't even notice them. Only good hits are likely to slow and stop the attack.

I’ve been taught that there were four ways in which shooting an assailant would stop the fight:

[1] psychological -- "I'm shot, it hurts, I don't want to get shot any more."

[2] massive blood loss depriving the muscles and brain of oxygen and thus significantly impairing their ability to function

[3] breaking major skeletal support structures

[4] damaging the central nervous system.

Of those, damage to the central nervous system is the quickest, surest and most likely to be fatal. And hoping the guy will stop because it hurts, is the least sure and most likely to be hazardous to your own health. People, both good and bad, have fought long and hard with serious, and often ultimately fatal wounds. And someone who has massive amounts of adrenalin in his system, like a bad guy under the stress of committing a violent crime might, may not feel much pain from even a serious wound.

Since adrenalin or drugs can blunt the effects of pain, and people have continued to fight when severely wounded, effectively stopping the fight usually requires causing sufficient damage to render the attacker physiologically incapable of continuing the fight, such as from massive blood loss depriving the muscles and brain of oxygen, major damage to important skeletal support structures or damage to the central nervous system.

We are generally taught, and practice, shooting for the center of mass of our attacker, i. e., his chest. It presents a bigger, and generally less mobile, target than the head. And the idea is that within that area of the body there are a lot of major organs that will bleed a lot when damaged. So the center of mass is the usual target of choice because it’s the one we’re most likely to be able to hit. And we thus rely on blood loss depriving the attacker’s muscles of oxygen to stop the fight. The rub is that the effects of blood loss and oxygen deprivation can take some time – during which our attacker will most likely continue to try to hurt us.

We indeed may not have either the time or bullets to waste on peripheral hits that will most likely have no effect on the assailant.

[David Armstrong]

But missing a B-27 target at 7 yards and thinking that's point shooting and the way to go isn't a good way to 'survive the usual CCW incident",
I would have thought it rather obvious that missing the target is not good point shooting, and that missing is not a good way to survive the usual CCW incident. Thus the "Spray and pray is not a good shooting technique. "
And so is learning a good sighted fire method.
No disagreement, and I don't think anyone has ever said otherwise. Everything in its place and everything at its time.
And pray tell, david, what if it's not quite the 'usual CCW incident'. Not like you can pick what incident you encounter.
I would think it pretty obvious that if it is not the usual CCW incident you might need something beyond the usual effective response. And while one can't pick what incident they encounter, they can have some control over the incidents they are likely to encounter.

[David Armstrong]

"...you don't rely on your sights..." Rubbish. Aimed fire is always better. Both legally and morally.
Yes. However, aimed fired (using the sights) is not always possible. Thus the importance of being able to utilize threat focused shooting.
If you don't use the sights and one bullet hits something or somebody, you're liable.
Whether you use the sights or not really doesn't effect the liability issue much. If you use the sights and hit something you shouldn't, you're not any more or less liable than if you used the threat focused shooting. If you don't use the sights and you hit your target, you aren't any more or less liable than if you used the sights.

[David Armstrong]

Only good hits are likely to slow and stop the attack.
While good hits are more likely to insure that the attack will be slowed or stopped, any hits are likely to slow and stop the attack. Most attacks stop without any actual physical requirement---in other words, the BG stops not because he has to, but because he wants to.

[Deaf Smith]

Yes. However, aimed fired (using the sights) is not always possible. Thus the importance of being able to utilize threat focused shooting.

No, this is why one trains to bring the weapon up to the same position every time. In doing so the sights ARE in rough alighment. If you still can't see them it won't matter as they are in alingment. This is from the FM of the "MT". The 'flash sight picture" is mearly to confirm the sights, not to adjust.

Even if you used point shooting/threat focused/whatever you would still have to align the weapon with whereever you wanted the bullet to go. The key is indexing. One can easly learn that with a good presentation and sighted fire.

any hits are likely to slow and stop the attack

Bull. Show us the stats that show 'any hits' are likely to slow or stop. I bet you have zero on that david.

[fiddletown]

...any hits are likely to slow and stop the attack...
I doubt it. I don't doubt that there have been times when peripheral hits have stopped an attack. But I'm not prepared to accept the proposition that they would be likely to stop the attack, at least without some solid evidence. Do you have any? And if a peripheral hit doesn't stop the guy who's attacking you, you have just wasted some time and ammunition that may have been better applied to getting a better first hit.

There's also the question of training approach. Am I going to train to get good hits fast, or am I going to train to get bad hits fast? If I train to get good hits fast, well maybe my first shot under stress will be a poor hit -- and if so, so be it. But if I'm training to get bad hits fast, there's a real good chance that my first shot (or two or three) under stress will be misses -- and that won't help at all.

[Brit]

stephen426,

To find out what to train for, try to gather case history for shootings that have happened, real incidents. Up to 100 miles radius of your home location.

There are more of the drug dealer shooting drug dealer shootings than BG being shot by GG! The starter normally wins!

Reason? they start with gun in hand, lots of times they are more effective weapons, long guns are used by drive by artists as well, a 7.62X39 from twenty feet is an effective way of ending a territorial argument.

Definitely shoot IDPA, use your carry gear, gun/holster/mag pouch, and same cover type garment. Have gun and gear fail on a stage, not behind some building at O-dark thirty. Sights on a pistol tell you where the shot went, not where it is going, it verifies, scopes are a call the shot device.
From the holster, Punch gun forward, shot breaks as hands/arms stop forward punch, eyes behind the gun, sights kick from where the shot broke, "verification" and quick.

[stephen426]

The thing that caught my attention about the other guy's shooting was his unloading into the target. Inall honesty, he kind of looked like a hoodlum and I was thinking that I certainly wouldn't want to be on the business end of the barrell. I could certainly shoot much better groups than him, but how well would I be able to shoot if I was hit by 10 out of 12 round fired in about 4 seconds? Don't forget I mentioned his shots looked like a shotgun pattern which included good hits as well as bad hits. You can claim that "bad hits" won't stop a fight, but I can't see how someone could take 10 hits to the torso and still be able to fight back effectively. The first person to score a critical hit should win the fight, but I'm certain my ability to fight back would be diminished. Further more, if I took the time to get a perfect sight picture, I would probably be dead. Even if all 10 hits were non-critical, the blood loss would be very significant and the ability to control the bleeding from 10 places (possibly more if there are exit wounds) is slim to none.

In all honesty, I don't expect everyone to understand this "lightbulb moment" since they didn't see it first hand. I have been shooting for almost 15 years and I would say I am a decent shot. On the other hand, if I was facing that guy next to me, my failure to practice quick sight acquisition and rapid firing would probably end up with me loosing the fight. Try to find a range that allows rapid fire and see how well you can control your weapon. It might be harder than you think.

[fiddletown]

...but I can't see how someone could take 10 hits to the torso and still be able to fight back effectively....
Read accounts of actual gun fights. Read the Ayoob Files, the book and read his articles about actual gun fights in American Handgunner magazine. Read the account of the Miami FBI shoot out in which a mortally wounded BG was able to continue to fight and kill a number of FBI agents until he was finally stopped by a critically wounded agent. People can fight long and hard with serious, let alone peripheral, wounds.

...if I took the time to get a perfect sight picture,...
Reread some of my and others posts. No one is talking about a perfect sight picture. One of the keys to good, fast shooting is the flash sight picture -- only as good as warranted by conditions. (Another key is trigger control.)

...if I was facing that guy next to me, my failure to practice quick sight acquisition and rapid firing would probably end up with me loosing the fight....
Yes you probably would. But the answer to that problem is NOT practicing bad, fast shooting. The answer is learning and practicing good, fast shooting.

...Try to find a range that allows rapid fire and see how well you can control your weapon. It might be harder than you think....
It may be harder than one thinks, but it is possible. I've learned shoot quickly and accurately -- by competing in USPSA (Limited Division), training at Gunsite and other schools and practicing regularly.

[big_bang]

I practice emptying my 340PD with Speer .357 short-barrel loads into a 10" circle at 25 feet. I strive for one shot per second.

[David Armstrong]

No, this is why one trains to bring the weapon up to the same position every time. In doing so the sights ARE in rough alighment.
But deaf, once you get off the range and into real fights you'll find that you CAN'T always bring the weapon to the same position every time, along with assorted other issues we've been over dozens of times. Of course, as we've also seen, target-focus allows one to achieve that goal with less training, which is also a good thing.
Bull. Show us the stats that show 'any hits' are likely to slow or stop. I bet you have zero on that david.
Once again, deaf, your inability to understand basic issues in actual gunfights is showing. Most gunfights are over without any shots. Where shots are fired the usual response is for the fight to stop without any CNS hits. Perhaps you are Superman and being shot doesn't effect you at all, but for most folks it seems to have a detrimental effect to varying degrees..

[David Armstrong]

But I'm not prepared to accept the proposition that they would be likely to stop the attack, at least without some solid evidence. Do you have any?
Sure. Just look at the data concerning gunshots. You'll find that few of them are CNS hits, yet you will see great success at stopping the fight. The overwhelming number of "stops" in CCW gunfights appear to be psychological rather than physical (I want to as opposed to I have to).
Am I going to train to get good hits fast, or am I going to train to get bad hits fast?
I would hope one would not ever train to get bad hits. However, what one chooses to consider a bad hit is certainly open to definition.

[fiddletown]

...The overwhelming number of "stops" in CCW gunfights appear to be psychological rather than physical (I want to as opposed to I have to).
So far you have stated this as fact several times in several ways. But you have not produced one shred of evidence to support this contention. I guess we'll just need to assume that you have no such evidence and that your statement is merely your unsubstantiated opinion.

In any case, if some such encounters thus end happily, some must not and require more definitive hits to settle.

[garryc]

Sure. Just look at the data concerning gunshots. You'll find that few of them are CNS hits, yet you will see great success at stopping the fight. The overwhelming number of "stops" in CCW gunfights appear to be psychological rather than physical (I want to as opposed to I have to).

He's right. Put it this way, I shoot a deer with a rifle and take out both lungs, he runs until the oxygen in his muscles runs out. I do the same to a human and he falls down. What's the difference? The difference is that the human knows he's been shot and the deer doesn't. The deer knows something happened, but can't comprehend it. So take a limb hit, the deer just goes "Ouch" the human "Oh my God, I've been shot!!"

Take a perp that's doped up. He might have an altered sense of reality. He keeps going because he doesn't fully comprehend what happened to him.

[stephen426]

Quote:
Originally Posted by stephen426
...but I can't see how someone could take 10 hits to the torso and still be able to fight back effectively....

Read accounts of actual gun fights. Read the Ayoob Files, the book and read his articles about actual gun fights in American Handgunner magazine. Read the account of the Miami FBI shoot out in which a mortally wounded BG was able to continue to fight and kill a number of FBI agents until he was finally stopped by a critically wounded agent. People can fight long and hard with serious, let alone peripheral, wounds.


Quote:
Originally Posted by stephen426
...if I took the time to get a perfect sight picture,...

Reread some of my and others posts. No one is talking about a perfect sight picture. One of the keys to good, fast shooting is the flash sight picture -- only as good as warranted by conditions. (Another key is trigger control.)


Quote:
Originally Posted by stephen426
...if I was facing that guy next to me, my failure to practice quick sight acquisition and rapid firing would probably end up with me loosing the fight....

Yes you probably would. But the answer to that problem is NOT practicing bad, fast shooting. The answer is learning and practicing good, fast shooting.


Quote:
Originally Posted by stephen426
...Try to find a range that allows rapid fire and see how well you can control your weapon. It might be harder than you think....

It may be harder than one thinks, but it is possible. I've learned shoot quickly and accurately -- by competing in USPSA (Limited Division), training at Gunsite and other schools and practicing regularly.

Fiddletown,

I think we are basically agreeing with each other here. Who the heck would want to make bad hits? I want to practice making good hits fast. I guess the whoe idea behind the thread is to convince poeple to move on from the typical "shoot for pretty little groups with slow aimed fire" mentality and to practice drawing quickly and getting lead on their target quickly. Without this practice, I feel most would be ill prepared for an actual gun fight. I know none of us ever intend on getting into a gun fight,, but then again don't we carry and practice just in case it might happen? Might as well practice skills that will greatly improve your ability to survive an attack.

[Ruthless4christ]

Most "real handgun" fights last no more than 3 rounds.

that is not always the case. In the USA it is most often but not always, in most other parts of the world, it is a horse of quite a differant color,)see my thread
http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=289522

although people might be thinking, yeah but that kind of thing does not happen here...well thats why we have guns right? to be prepared for the unusual.

down ehre there are weekly, gunfights that last up and over ten minutes, and involve sometimes dozens of people against eachother, or one against dozens. i say the more lead you can pump out the better.

[fiddletown]

...the whoe idea behind the thread is to convince poeple to move on from the typical "shoot for pretty little groups with slow aimed fire" mentality and to practice drawing quickly and getting lead on their target quickly.
I'll go along with that as long as we can agree that we still want to stay in the A zone (or in an 8.5 x 11 piece of paper). And we must learn to make those hits quickly. If you can't shoot fast and also keep all your shots on an 8.5 x 11 sheet of paper, you need to train until you can do so both quickly and consistently. A shot timer can be helpful. One of the standards is to draw and get two A zone hits in 1.5 seconds. Faster, with the same accuracy, is better and doable.

Another standard is a 10 to 11 second El Presidente* (with all A zone hits). This is not a tactically correct exercise but is primarily a way to test quickness of draw, shooting, target transition and reloading.
_____________
*Three standard IPSC targets are set up 1 meter (or yard) apart 10 meters (or yards) from the shooting position. The shooter starts facing up range (back to targets) with his hands held above his shoulders. His gun is loaded and in his holster (in condition 1 if it's a 1911 or BHP). On the audible start signal, the shooter turns and engages each target with two rounds, reloads, and engages each target again with two rounds.

[David Armstrong]

So far you have stated this as fact several times in several ways. But you have not produced one shred of evidence to support this contention.
If you need evidence to support a statement of common knowledge in DGU incidents, I'd suggest your understanding is lacking something pretty big. Do you really think that most gunfights are stopped because of CNS hits?
I guess we'll just need to assume that you have no such evidence and that your statement is merely your unsubstantiated opinion.
One can make all sorts of assumptions. I guess we can assume you are not familiar with the basics of DGU incidents and that when you say "Bad hits will most likely not slow the BG down at all; he probably won't even notice them. Only good hits are likely to slow and stop the attack" it is merely your unsubstantiated opinion and you do not have one shred of evidence to support it.

[fiddletown]

...If you need evidence to support a statement of common knowledge in DGU incidents, I'd suggest your understanding is lacking something pretty big. ..
Interesting approach to disputation from someone who claims to be a Ph. D. and a teacher. I guess you'd accept that sort of a response from one of your students when you've asked him for evidence. And if my understanding is lacking, kindly educate me with evidence, as befits a teacher, rather than simple bombast.

I base my opinions that bad hits probably won't necessarily stop an attack on my readings of, among others, Jim Carrillo, Dave Grossman, David Klinger and Massad Ayoob, classes at Gunsite and elsewhere with various instructor including Louis Awerbuck, Massad Ayoob and Jeff Cooper, and other reports of DGU published in books such as The Best Defense and Guns Save Lives and the "Armed Citizen" column in American Rifleman. Information from these sources lead me to the inference that while sometimes mere display of a gun or mere discharge of a gun or weak hits with a gun may sometimes break off a fight, one can't count on it. There are certainly enough credible reports of criminal assailants pressing an attack even after suffering serious wounds, and ultimately requiring multiple, solid hits to be put down, that I am motivated to train and practice to make multiple, good hits quickly.

...Do you really think that most gunfights are stopped because of CNS hits?...
Of course not, and I don't necessarily discount the psychological effects of being shot. But am I willing to count on the effectiveness of the psychological effect? No, I'm not. Do I think others should? Well that's up to them, but I'd recommend against it. The fact that in a certain number of DGUs, the effect of simply being shot is enough is no guarantee that it will work out that way in your encounter. There are too many other variables. Among other things, we know that physiologically the adrenalin dump that accompanies high stress can significantly dull the sensation of pain and give one great strength.

So I would not to want to rely upon, nor train for, delivering quick, peripheral hits and thus counting on the psychological effect. I'd want to train having the greatest physiological effect as quickly as possible. The CNS offers too small and mobile a target, so I'm left with attempting to cause as much disruption as quickly as possible to blood flow.

[David Armstrong]

Interesting approach to disputation from someone who claims to be a Ph. D. and a teacher.
No approach, no disputation. I've made a statement, you've made a statement. You want me to offer proof for my statement you can offer some sort of proof for yours first. BTW, I make few claims that are not easily provable as facts.
guess you'd accept that sort of a response from one of your students when you've asked him for evidence.
I would not ask my student for evidence of what is common knowledge.
I base my opinions that bad hits probably won't necessarily stop an attack ...
Should you make the statement in that form I might join with you, but that was not the statement originally given and which I addressed, which was "Only good hits are likely to slow and stop the attack." That is very different from "bad hits probably won't necessarily stop an attack". Bad hits won't necessarily stop the attacker, but they are likely to stop or slow.
So I would not to want to rely upon, nor train for, delivering quick, peripheral hits and thus counting on the psychological effect.
Don't see where anybody has suggested that is something anyone should do.

[Deaf Smith]

But deaf, once you get off the range and into real fights you'll find that you CAN'T always bring the weapon to the same position every time, along with assorted other issues we've been over dozens of times. Of course, as we've also seen, target-focus allows one to achieve that goal with less training, which is also a good thing.

And any idiot who has studied 'point shooting/target focused' knows you have to bring the weapon to the same place everytime. Guess you never understood Lucky McDaniel or Applegate or Fairbrain or any of those people, do you david.

Once again, deaf, your inability to understand basic issues in actual gunfights is showing. Most gunfights are over without any shots. Where shots are fired the usual response is for the fight to stop without any CNS hits. Perhaps you are Superman and being shot doesn't effect you at all, but for most folks it seems to have a detrimental effect to varying degrees..

You said "ANY HITS" david. Guess you don't have stats do you? Never heard of people taking 10, 15, 20 or more hits and still keep going have you? You have not one drop of research to back you up, right? That Phd and hedge talk you give shows.

[ZeSpectre]

I'll go along with that as long as we can agree that we still want to stay in the A zone (or in an 8.5 x 11 piece of paper). And we must learn to make those hits quickly. If you can't shoot fast and also keep all your shots on an 8.5 x 11 sheet of paper, you need to train until you can do so both quickly and consistently. A shot timer can be helpful. One of the standards is to draw and get two A zone hits in 1.5 seconds. Faster, with the same accuracy, is better and doable.

Fiddletown and I may argue here and there, but this time I'm in agreement with him.

Here's what I consider an acceptable-to-great slow fire target.
(21 ft on 8.5x11 Sheet of paper)
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b66/zespectre/1911_080917_A.jpg




Here's what I consider an acceptable self-defense/rapid fire target.
(50ft on 8.5x11 Sheet of paper)
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b66/zespectre/1911_080917_B.jpg

[fiddletown]

David, thanks for continuing to be evasive. I can now write you off.

[Tuttle8]

I posted this to hopefully get this thread back on track and remind myself what the subject matter is:
I'm not suggesting spray and pray by any means, but rather getting so used to your primary defensive gun that you don't rely on your sights.
What do you guys think?

But deaf, once you get off the range and into real fights you'll find that you CAN'T always bring the weapon to the same position every time, along with assorted other issues we've been over dozens of times. Of course, as we've also seen, target-focus allows one to achieve that goal with less training, which is also a good thing.

In reality, one won't necessarily be able to have the same stance. But whether you're taking cover or only using one arm, don't you still lift the gun up to your sightline? I don't see where that necessarily changes often.

ZeSpectre,

I have a hard time agreeing with you on your version of acceptable self-defense/rapid fire target. Generally speaking, faster fire does induce larger patterns. But I believe that if I can't keep my shots in the vicinity of center mass or soft cavities, I have no business firing my gun at that rate. Some of those shots could very well glance off or easily pass through.

I'm sure if my life is in imminent danger of ending I wouldn't give a rats behind at the moment and will desperately do whatever it takes to stop the assailant. However, if I live through the confrontation I must be accountable for every shot fired...especially collatoral damage.

I'm arguing with myself here and I know rule #4 of Cooper's gun safety....

[stephen426]

Guys... (you know who you are)

Cut the petty arguements please. :rolleyes: If someone does not agree with your position, you're not going to convince them... Especially by insulting them. No one has to offer proof to anyone and no one has to believe what anyone else is posting. If the posts makes sense to you... Great! If you disagree, state why and then move on. Are you egos so fragile that you have to be right all the time are have you taken on the "responsibility" to ensure there is no false information passed along on the Internet? I have seen plenty of good threads that could have benefitted many people get closed down for petty argueing such as this. If you feel compelled to make personal attacks or "lead someone out of their ignorance", please do it through pm's.

Rant off.

[Threefeathers]

fiddletown, if only people realized how nice you are. As Mas told us, we always grow when we listen and try to put different techniques to our best use. That said, as a wrestling coach I guarantee there are certain muscle movements that will automatically come into play when the action gets hot and expereinced athletes and locked in combat. Being a pistolero is no different.

[ZeSpectre]

ZeSpectre,

I have a hard time agreeing with you on your version of acceptable self-defense/rapid fire target. Generally speaking, faster fire does induce larger patterns. But I believe that if I can't keep my shots in the vicinity of center mass or soft cavities, I have no business firing my gun at that rate. Some of those shots could very well glance off or easily pass through.

I'm sure if my life is in imminent danger of ending I wouldn't give a rats behind at the moment and will desperately do whatever it takes to stop the assailant. However, if I live through the confrontation I must be accountable for every shot fired...especially collateral damage.

I'm arguing with myself here and I know rule #4 of Cooper's gun safety....

Just curious, did you happen to pay attention to the distances? The rapid fire target was at 50 feet (16 yards).

If you can do better than a roughly 5 inch group, rapid fire (about 3 seconds total), through a magazine change, at 50 feet then you are a far better marksman than I'll ever be :D.

[stephen426]

Just curious, did you happen to pay attention to the distances? The rapid fire target was at 50 feet (16 yards).

If you can do better than a roughly 5 inch group, rapid fire (about 3 seconds total), through a magazine change, at 50 feet then you are a far better marksman than I'll ever be .

I also think he failed to notice that your target was printed on a 8.5" x 11" piece of paper!!! Good shooting Z!

[David Armstrong]

And any idiot who has studied 'point shooting/target focused' knows you have to bring the weapon to the same place everytime. Guess you never understood Lucky McDaniel or Applegate or Fairbrain or any of those people, do you david.
Apparently you haven't studied point shooting, deaf, because some of the point shooting disciplines will point out that you cannot always bring the gun to the same point. You might not be able to bring the gun to the same place every time. The repeatable index is only part of the discipline.
You said "ANY HITS" david. Guess you don't have stats do you?
Yes, deaf, I said any hits are likely to slow or stop the attack. And again, if you aren't aware of that or don't understand it you need to get off the range and start looking at the real world shootings.
Never heard of people taking 10, 15, 20 or more hits and still keep going have you?
Yes, I have. Unlike you I realize they are the rare exceptions to the rule, not the more common.
You have not one drop of research to back you up, right?
Actually, most of the research backs me up. You might want to try looking at if you are going to comment on it.

[David Armstrong]

In reality, one won't necessarily be able to have the same stance. But whether you're taking cover or only using one arm, don't you still lift the gun up to your sightline?
Not necessarily. You might be shooting from a restricted position, you might not be able to lift the gun that high, etc.

[Capt Charlie]

Guys... (you know who you are)

Cut the petty arguements please. If someone does not agree with your position, you're not going to convince them... Especially by insulting them. No one has to offer proof to anyone and no one has to believe what anyone else is posting. If the posts makes sense to you... Great! If you disagree, state why and then move on. Are you egos so fragile that you have to be right all the time are have you taken on the "responsibility" to ensure there is no false information passed along on the Internet? I have seen plenty of good threads that could have benefitted many people get closed down for petty argueing such as this. If you feel compelled to make personal attacks or "lead someone out of their ignorance", please do it through pm's.

Rant off.


I wuz gonna say that. Really, I was! Thanks for saving me the time, trouble, and typing, Stephen. ;)

[Deaf Smith]

The repeatable index is only part of the discipline.

So you now admit the repeatable index IS part of point shooting. The index goes for any of the positions in point shooting. 1/4, 1/2, 3/4. All of them david. So is the body index. Have to have it or it don't work. David this isn't some Clint Eastwood spaghetti western stuff, you do know that?

So yes, target-focus has to have a repeatable index to work, just like sighted fire. I really don't think you know much about it but what's posted here and other boards david.

[stephen426]

Deaf Smith,

What do you feel about firing from the hip? This is used when you are really close to your attacker. Basically you step back with your right foot (if you are right handed) and push the attacker away with your left hand. You simultaneously draw your weapon with your right and line up the gun with your body. This allows you to keep your attacker from grabbing your gun, If you brought up the gun as you normally do, the attacker would be able to wither grab or push the gun away. While it is great to have lots of practice, it doesn't hurt to have flexability in your tactics either.

[fiddletown]

What do you feel about firing from the hip? This is used when you are really close to your attacker....

It's not actually shooting from the hip, at least as I was taught by Louis Awerbuck.

Three points:

[1] The weak hand that is used to fend off the attacker should be brought immediately afterwards back in close to your body, preferably against the chest. One reason is to keep the hand from being in front of the muzzle when you start firing. The other is to have the weak hand ready and in position to assume its part of the two handed grip when you are able (see point 3).

[2] The gun is drawn straight upward from your strong side hip holster and the muzzle is then rotated to point at the target. The gun here is along side and slightly in front of the chest just slightly below the level of the pectoral muscle. the muzzle may be pointed in slightly since it's held somewhat at the side of your chest and you want the muzzle pointed at the center of your attacker. The gun is also titled slightly outward to assure that the slide (assuming you're using a semi-auto) has room to cycle without hanging up on your body or clothing.

[3] You begin shooting from this "retention" position, and as you fire, you begin moving backwards, or diagonally backwards, depending on the character of your environment. As you are moving backwards and creating distance, you can begin extending your strong arm and assuming a two handed grip on the gun.

We performed this drill in a class on close quarter combat taught by Louis Awerbuck, and it was very fast to both get the gun into play and to get good hits.

It looks sort of like this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmKR6evZRQQ

From the movie Collateral, I'm told by a colleague I trust that Tom Cruise was trained by someone formerly in the SAS.

[stephen426]

Thats a great clip. The first 2 shots looked like they were from the hip/retention position then the remainder from the extended position. Even though the first shots were not critical hits, it dropped the assailant and allowed the shooter to engage the other assailant.

I may be mistaken, but I believe that quite a few gun fights start with the good guy behind the reactionary curve. Say a guy pops out of a dark alley and sticks a gun in your face. I know most would say to comply, but if the mugger starts talking in a manner that leads you to believe he is going to kill you, you have to act. If he checks you for weapons and finds you are carrying, he might also shoot you or take your gun. This is where the quick draw and quick firing would be very useful.

[peetzakilla]

You might want to leave out the last shot in that movie clip in a SD situation...;)

[ZeSpectre]

You might want to leave out the last shot in that clip in an SD situation...

Well Mrs. Smith, we might have believed the self defense claim if you hadn't reloaded...twice.

[fiddletown]

...Even though the first shots were not critical hits, it dropped the assailant...
Anyway, we know that the reason BG1 dropped the way he did is because that's what the director told him to do. Be that as it may, the clip shows good technique and gun handling.

Notice how Tom Cruise re-holsters: smoothly sweeping his coat back, one handed, without looking, and maintaining muzzle and trigger discipline. He obviously had some good instruction.

[David Armstrong]

So you now admit the repeatable index IS part of point shooting.
Ummm, I've always said that. I also say it is not the only part of point shooting.
So yes, target-focus has to have a repeatable index to work, just like sighted fire.
Sigh. No, deaf, it doesn't.
I really don't think you know much about it but what's posted here and other boards david.
Given that you have regularly admitted that you have never had any training in point shooting, and regularly make statements that recognized point shooting instructors show to be completely wrong, I really don't think you know enough about it to know how much somebody else knows.

[Deaf Smith]

Deaf Smith,

What do you feel about firing from the hip? This is used when you are really close to your attacker. Basically you step back with your right foot (if you are right handed) and push the attacker away with your left hand. You simultaneously draw your weapon with your right and line up the gun with your body. This allows you to keep your attacker from grabbing your gun, If you brought up the gun as you normally do, the attacker would be able to wither grab or push the gun away. While it is great to have lots of practice, it doesn't hurt to have flexability in your tactics either.

stephen,

First there are several 'versions' of point shooting. From Fairbrain/Applegate to Lucky McDanials, even Cirillo with his Silhouette Point had his own verion where you used the back of the slide to index on. All except the extreme close quarter methods bring the weapon into ones peripheral vision (speed rock, SouthNarcs position 1 of the four point draw, 1/4 hip of Applegate.)

They all require indexing of ones body to get hits. In fact, Applegate himself wrote that the 1/4 hip was not good for targets much higher or lower than the shooter (and that shows why peripheral vision plays a part in point shooting, even if you are not 'looking' for the weapon.) One can demonstrate this by blocking out the weapon from view as it is brought forward. You will see shooters, except the most experienced, do poorly. It's even truer if you put a garbage bag over the target so you cannot see the bullets strike and correct on the hits. Then you sort of have to guess if the rounds are striking or not (and with cloths, it is hard to see strikes on the street.)

Hip/Retention is a must. You can use any of the methods above (speed rock, SouthNarcs position 1 of the four point draw, 1/4 hip of Applegate, and others.) The Speed rock, were you lean backwards is to create distance, not do make any contact with the shooter. SouthNarcs method is to expect a grappling move and to take the impact and still be stable as well as protect the weapon. Applegates 1/4 is just to protect the weapon, not take any impact from a grappling person.

All other forms of point shooting have the weapon in peripheral vision. Like it or not you will see it (in fact McDanial emphasized it.)

My view is one learns a form of sighted fire and retention/hip shooting first. It can cover all bases. The retention/hip can go from 0 to 3 or so yards while the sighted fire can go from 1 to however far you can shoot! Yes an overlap. And yes, sighted fire can be used when one cannot 'see' the sights. One just brings the weapon to the same places (index you might say) and the shoots will be pretty good. Not as good as if you could see the sights but good hits.

Once you have mastered this, if you want to learn point shooting, great, but it's not a 'must' except for those with eyesight problems or totaly zero interest in firearms training (and we know how that will work out!!!)

I find point shooting is not as accurate as sighted fire. Those that say 'big deal' don't see you may have a partialy covered attacker, or one with a hostage, or one with armor all requiring a much better shot that just any 'COM' hit. And we all know pistol ammo is not very powerful, thus shot placement (as many posters here have posted) is number 1!!!!

[Tuttle8]

Just curious, did you happen to pay attention to the distances? The rapid fire target was at 50 feet (16 yards).

No, because your chicken scratches aren't very readable from my 5 year old monitor.

I also think he failed to notice that your target was printed on a 8.5" x 11" piece of paper!!! Good shooting Z!

No I didn't, stephen. I read what was in bold and my eyes must have moved right past the finer print of the target size. I assumed that the sihlouette target was of actual size. No excuses. I just didn't catch all that was disclaimed. Sorry about that.

Fiddletown,

Your statements regarding what Louis Awerbuck is what I completely agree on. I've tried to explain where I was coming from on my way of pistol presentation in another thread. I was trying to understand why one would want move the gun to the center of your chest while firing the gun (in a nutshell). I was taught and prefer Randy Cain's teaching which he was a disciple of Awerbuck and others.

[stephen426]

I'm going to the range again tomorrow. I'm going to bring some black electrical tape and tape the sights on my Glock. I'm going to concentrate more on my grip and how the guns feels in my hand rather than relying on the sights. I hope it works out! I will probably also work on firing faster while trying to keep adecent groupings. I will give you guys an update tomorrow.

[easyG]

I used to go to the range and shoot for as much accuracy as possible.
I would perfect my stance, makes sure that my grip was just right, get that perfect sight picture, control my breathing, etc....
And I was very accurate and my targets all looked real nice.

But lately I have changed the way I practice.
Now I mostly practive shooting with one hand, with about half my range time using my left hand (I'm right handed), and I practice rapid fire mainly just aiming with the front sight.
My targets don't look near as nice as they did before, but I think the "training" is more realistic.

[stephen426]

I finally made it out to the range. I taped the sights on my Glock 26 and practiced point shooting without using the sights at 7 yards. My groups were not pretty at all and it the target looks like it got hit by a few rounds of buck shot to the chest. Most of my shots still hit upper COM, but I did have a few misses as well (almost all high and to the left). I believe those were a result of double tapping before getting back on target.

I also practiced firing string of 5 rounds as quickly as I could bring the gun back on target. While I didn't unload the gun as quickly as I could pull the trigger, I fired much faster than I normally practice and I focused on pulling the trigger as soon as the gun came back on target. This was mostly with my Glock 26 and my Kahr MK9 since those are what I carry. I did some drills from the low ready position and punching the gun out towards the target.

When I moved to my Les Baer, accuracy improved dramatically. While I know the Baer is much more accurate overall, I attibute most of that improvement to the longer sight radius and the overall pointability of the gun.

My observation from all of this "new" practice...
- Flash sight picture is MUCH more accurate than unsighted fire. Even if you are only looking over the top of the gun, accuracy improves dramatically. Having a consistent grip/stance/position leads to much better accuracy with unsighted fire and help line up your shot faster even with sighted fire. Practicing "rapid fire" is useful since it forces you to become more familiar with the gun's recoil characteristics (snappiness, recoil impulse, twist, etc...). With slow fire, there is too much time for resetting. Consequently, I feel more rapid fire drills will greatly improve my double tap ability since I will become more faimiliar with the gun's "reset position" (not sure of the term for when the gun goes back to the point of aim after the recoil cycle).

It was an eye opening experience and a bit humbling as well. It was hard not printing pretty little groups, but that will come in time. in the meanwhile, I've got some practicing to do!

[fiddletown]

stephen426,

It sounds like you had a worthwhile trip to the range. I also agree that rapid fire practice is very important. You want to learn to manage the recoil. I also suggest varying the number of shots in the shot string, making each string 2 to 5 or 6 shots with some speed reloads thrown in to keep the gun in action if you run dry during a string.

You might also want to invest in a shot timer so that you can see how fast you're shooting and get a better idea of the balance between speed and accuracy. As Jeff Cooper used to say, "Shoot as quickly as you can, but no quicker."

Well done.

[stephen426]

It sounds like you had a worthwhile trip to the range. I also agree that rapid fire practice is very important. You want to learn to manage the recoil. I also suggest varying the number of shots in the shot string, making each string 2 to 5 or 6 shots with some speed reloads thrown in to keep the gun in action if you run dry during a string.

You might also want to invest in a shot timer so that you can see how fast you're shooting and get a better idea of the balance between speed and accuracy. As Jeff Cooper used to say, "Shoot as quickly as you can, but no quicker."

Well done.

Thanks for the advice. I was actually looking at getting a shot timer. I still hope to find time to join IPSC/IDPA/ PPC type shooting competitions. I'm not sure what the differences are, but I want to use my carry guns. When you get into the tricked out race guns, it becomes more sport rather than practical self defense. Some skills will still carry over, but who the heck walks around with speed holsters and half a dozen mags. Besides, I imagine a fully tricked out race gun would be a bit hard to conceal. :eek:

[fiddletown]

Competition can be a good extension of training and practice. It's not a place to learn self defense and tactics. Especially IPSC (USPSA in the U. S.) and IDPA are excellent ways to learn and practice skills like safe gun handling, moving safely with a loaded weapon, shooting from unconventional postures, target acquisition, shooting fast and accurately, reloading, etc., all under the stress of competition.

To get an idea of the differences, you may want to do a little searching on the Internet. Both USPSA and IDPA have websites, and either of them will probably offer more of the kind of shooting you may be looking for. PPC, as I understand it, places more emphasis on accuracy and less on time pressure. And in PPC, the course of fire is standardized, so USPSA and IDPA provide more variation. And you would be able to use your carry gun in either USPSA or IDPA.