“Front Sight or No Front Sight that is the question”

[DCJS Instructor]

“Front Sight or No Front Sight that is the question”

By Tom Perroni


I have worked as a Firearms Instructor since 1986. I think the most debated topic in the “Firearms Industry” is the use of the front sight or not using the front sight. No matter whom you take training from, or what book you read or what internet forum or chat room you’re in everyone has their own opinion as to weather or not they use the front sight when shooting.

The arguments on both sides are very compelling and they all have good points as to why one choice may be better than the other.

However this article is not going to try and sway you one way or the other, instead I will tell you that I think that both methods are important and have their place in training and real world application. The trick is to have a proper understanding of both training philosophy’s and use what is needed from both in a given situation.

So let’s define Front Sight Shooting as Sighted Firing or using the front sight to line up the firearm with the target to get the bullet to go where you want it to. The let’s define Non Front Sight Shooting as Point Shooting or Not using the sights to get the bullet to go where you want it to.(Pointing the firearm in the general direction of the target).

No matter what method you use Front Sight or No Front Sight continued training and practice is the key. I will also say that Combat Mindset is also critical I once had the opportunity to hear a very good firearms instructor say “If you had a person armed with a loaded handgun and No Combat Mindset and a person armed with a hammer and Combat Mindset, The person with the proper Combat would win the fight every time”.

I have also said at the moment of truth when your life is in danger you will not rise to the occasion you will default to the level of training you have mastered.

So how do we train with both methods? What I teach my students is not “Point Shooting” but more of indexed fire. At close distances 3-10 feet I teach my students the elbow up, elbow down, handgun canted method. Let’s take this step by step:

No matter what stance you use make sure you have a good shooting platform or base to shoot from we begin with the handgun in the holster. Then you hear the command “THREAT”……and then….

1.Non shooting hand comes to the abdomen shooting hand acquires a firm grip on the handgun we release any retention device.

2.The elbow is pulled straight up.

3.The elbow is pushed down and then indexed next to the rib cage the handgun is canted out about 5-10 degrees so the slide is not impeded. The front sight is indexed in the center of the chest of the target. We then begin firing. (One handed)

4.The handgun is moved to the center of the chest (Retention Position) where we acquire a two hand grip. We are still firing at the target.

5.Then we begin to press the gun forward towards the target while we are still firing at the target. Are elbows are partially bent.

6. Then we press the gun completely forward bringing the handgun to our dominant eye or using both eyes we focus on the front sight for the precision shot to the head (Cranial Ocular Cavity) hopefully this stops the threat and ends the fight.

7.We then compress back to the retention position finger off the trigger scanning left and right looking for threats and breaking tunnel vision.

8.Then we compress to Position SUL and scan 360 degrees.

9.Then we reload and holster a fully loaded firearm.

* Note* Once I am comfortable with the skill level of my students I teach them to move off the X. (In all directions) the above method has been called the “Zipper Method”

In this method we have used both non sighted fire and sighted fire and employed sound tactics to mitigate a threat. I am a BIG proponent of getting as much training as you can from as many instructors as you can so that you have many tools to put in your tactical tool box. So that when you need them you can pull them out and use them as the situation dictates.

Be very Leary of instructors who say never do this or don’t do that unless they can explain why! A good instructor should be willing to demonstrate any technique they are teaching and explain how any why the technique works.And if they tell you not to do something they should offer an alternative. I have a saying in my training school. What I teach is A way to do it not THE way to do it.

Stay Safe & Shoot Straight!

Remember that conflict is inevitable….but combat is an option!

[Teuthis]

I consider point shooting any firing in which you are having your aim follow your eyes without focusing on sights. Your index firing is basically a type of point shooting with a follow up, finishing drill. I like it. It is an aggressive tactic for close range confrontation. Skillful point shooting under pressure requires considerable drill, but I consider it as important as the Tripod and Weaver stance techniques.

[Shane Tuttle]

The handgun is moved to the center of the chest (Retention Position) where we acquire a two hand grip. We are still firing at the target.

I'm having a hard time picturing this. I was trained to move the non-shooting hand to the grip of the gun. Essentially, the non-shooting hand is sliding across from the abdomen position to the gun which is in retention tucked at my side.

I don't see the benefit of moving the firearm towards the center of my chest. At close range, the gun becomes less protected from the assailant and the alignment of the gun to the bone structure of your arm is compromised. Also, the point impact will more than likely change if you're firing and moving the gun at the same time making it more difficult to stay at center mass in a combat scenario.

Could you break this step down a bit for better understanding where you're coming from?

I have also said at the moment of truth when your life is in danger you will not rise to the occasion you will default to the level of training you have mastered.

I was at the understanding that Barrett Tillman was the originator of this statement. Not that there's copyright's in who gets credit for statements, but shouldn't he be credited for this?

[Scattergun Bob]

"I was at the understanding that Barrett Tillman was the originator of this statement. Not that there's copyright's in who gets credit for statements, but shouldn't he be credited for this?"

I totally agree with you, I have addressed this point with the poster concerning other "ownership" comments he has made and his excuse is that HE CAN'T REMEMBER who said what! I have found that some folks who spend their lives teaching novice students, forget that there are other audiences with greater understandings and knowledge out there. The KING OF THE RANGE complex is a real one, just look at Coopers writing, and the use of the empirical WE!

Most of us who teach, stand on the shoulders of Titans from the past. I try very hard to not own those things that others worked hard to bring forth. I work very hard at REMBERING whom said what and "tip my hat"!

In regard to the movement toward the chest, this was a "somewhat secret" idea used in officer survival to combat takeaways, thanks to SOME instructors, it is no longer unknown and is very effective in saving the gun from your enemy at close range. His drill simply puts the gun in the right index to grasp it to your chest with both hands.


Good Luck & Be Safe

[Sweatnbullets]

If I was to give credit on everything anyone ever said or taught, half of my posts or my courses would be name, after name, after name.

Really is kind of ridiculous!

Write one biography giving credit to those that taught you. If that is not good enough for people.....tough! Who said what/when would become a full time job with zero time left towards the advancement of the art.

The priority is putting out useful information, not being dragged down with credit minutia.

[David Armstrong]

I don't see the benefit of moving the firearm towards the center of my chest.

It's been taught to me at various places over the years. It actually works prettty good, particularly when using a squared-up stance.

What I teach my students is not “Point Shooting” but more of indexed fire. At close distances 3-10 feet I teach my students the elbow up, elbow down, handgun canted method.

FWIW, Tom, that is very classic old-school Point Shooting.

[DCJS Instructor]

Folks,

For what it's worth Barrett Tillman wrote: You will not rise to the occasion, rather you will default to your level of training. ...

What I posted was: “At the moment of truth when your life is in danger you will not rise to the occasion you will default to the level of training you have mastered". And if credit is needed???? James Yeager is who coined that saying.

Scattergun Bob do we know each other? It seems you have an axe to grind not sure what your problem is, however it is easy to throw stones at someone when you have anonymity!

P.S. My memory is fine!

Tom Perroni
Training Director / Lead Firearms Instructor
Commonwealth Criminal Justice Academy
Virginia DCJS # 88-1499
(540) 322-3000 Office
8am-5pm M-F
And if I am out of the office or on the range tell my secretary who you are someone will find me!!!

[DCJS Instructor]

FWIW, Tom, that is very classic old-school Point Shooting.


Dave,

Thanks the point I was trying to make is that both types of shooting have value in a tactical situation.

I am by no means trying to reinvent the wheel. Or re-name something.

I was co teaching a class for Maryland State Police Handgun Instructors and the subject came up. I thought it would be some good info to pass along.

I try to have my instructor cadre think outside the box. I always tell them to be a good instructor you must be a good student first. And to take as much training as they can from as many instructors as they can but to always have an open mind when in a training class.

I try to teach at least two classes per week to stay sharp. But I am by no means an expert.

Thanks for the heads up!

Tom

[stephen426]

What about shooting "from the hip"? In very close quarters, I have read that the weak hand is used to push the threat away and keep the threat away (arm extended) to prevent a gun grab. The shooting hand is kept right next to the hip and the arm is actually pressed against the body, increasing stability and serving as an index. Your body should be pointed directly at the target and the gun is kept in line with the body as you turn. While I'm sure it is not nearly as accurate, bringing the shooting hand out is an invitation to grap the gun or sweep it away when you are within contact distances.

I would also have to whole heartedly agree that you will react how you train in a "poop hits the fan" situation. If you have to actually think things through, you are put way back on the reactionary curve. That is why practice leads to muscle memory, which in turn leads to reflexive actions. I took several years of martial arts back when I was in high school (quite a few years ago). I still have a tendancy to block things that are going to hit me (falling objects or friends messing around) without even thinking about it.

I had a "potential" close encounter one time and I think my practice made a big difference. I just left a drive thru window late and night and was still in parking lot. Three guys were walking towards the front door and I stopped to let them cross. This was a college town so there were still quite a few people out and about. All of a sudden, one of the guys ran up to my window. I'm not sure how long it really took, but he only had to move about 10 feet at most. By the time he reached my window, I had already drawn my gun from my center console and had it in the low ready position. For some reason or other, I even had the clarity of mind to not move my shooting hand towards the window where it could have been grabbed or pushed away. The guy say the gun and started blabbing something like he was not trying to cause any trouble and was just playing around. That was up in Gainesville, FL when I was at the U of F. If that happened in Miami, where I live now, the guy would have been staring down the business end for sure. When it was all over, i was shocked how quickly I was able to draw my gun from the center console. I actually practiced this every so often and my reaction reverted back to what I practiced. I'm sure that If I had not practiced drawing fromthe center console, I would have never gotten the gun out before he reached my window.

[Shane Tuttle]

In regard to the movement toward the chest, this was a "somewhat secret" idea used in officer survival to combat takeaways, thanks to SOME instructors, it is no longer unknown and is very effective in saving the gun from your enemy at close range. His drill simply puts the gun in the right index to grasp it to your chest with both hands.

I'm still not understanding how this is advantageous. What I'm picturing is "bringing the gun towards the chest is described as the gun is literally in front of your sternum in retention. I understand you don't keep it there, but while firing a semi-auto can't be good. The action of the slide hitting you and therefore malfunctioning your gun is what I'm picturing.

It's been taught to me at various places over the years. It actually works prettty good, particularly when using a squared-up stance.

And this is another problem that I see. I don't use a squared-up stance. I use a bladed angle when possible.

If I was to give credit on everything anyone ever said or taught, half of my posts or my courses would be name, after name, after name.
Really is kind of ridiculous!
Write one biography giving credit to those that taught you. If that is not good enough for people.....tough! Who said what/when would become a full time job with zero time left towards the advancement of the art.
The priority is putting out useful information, not being dragged down with credit minutia.

Point taken. However, when it's a pretty popular quote, I do question the claimer. Not to call him out, rather make sure neither party is mistaken.

I am by no means trying to reinvent the wheel. Or re-name something.

I understand that. I'm picking apart your statements to gain further understanding, not to try and pigeon hole you. I'm trying to see the full picture in order to be in the same page for discussion sake.

[timothy75]

What I've found over the years concerning extreme close range shooting is, if I try to read something on the wall and bring the gun up to what I'm reading the gun doesnt register at all because I'm concentrating 100% on the letters. You could wave a 100$ bill in my face and I still wouldnt see it because I'm focused so hard. The question is would I be that focused on a threat. Maybe, so my theory is to bring the gun toward the threat, if you can see it index it, if not start running the gun anyway from your strongest position. It sounds terrible but whats the alternative? Since gunfights are impossible to simulate you better have a plan for whatever your eyes do or do not let you focus on. Good luck

[DCJS Instructor]

Tuttle8,

Let me try and help you understand the best I can.

First let me say that it is my belief that if you get into a gunfight (God forbid) you will not be at a bladed angle you will most likely be in a squared-up stance slightly squatting.

We all agree that most gunfights happen quick and at close range. So when we draw we want to keep the gun as close to the body as possible in order to help defeat a gun grab. It is much harder to wrestle a handgun away from someone when it is close to the center of the body as apposed to arms stretched out. Fighting against hand strength versus body strength so to speak.

I can assure you that when you move the handgun from the side index position (elbow down) handgun slightly canted 5-10 degrees to the center of the chest to acquire a solid grip that you can shoot from this position (I have done it) Your wrist's actually hold the handgun far enough away from the chest to cycle the slide. From the center of the chest begin to push forward and upward from partial compression (elbows slightly bent) to locking the elbows out and then bring the handgun to your eye.

This method ensures you have accurate hits center mass of the target "IF YOU ARE "squared-up” this is both smooth and fast. And works well under duress because you are using the body to index the handgun on target.

While at FLETC we called this the Zipper method and believe it or not this will get you more accurate hits on target as you "ride the recoil” and let the front sight dictate the cadence of fire. This is the best method I know to get a head shot under stress.

We could talk all day about the draw but this is all the room I have for this article. If you want to talk more about the draw come to class and we can work on it

[Shane Tuttle]

Thanks, DCJS.

My version of the gun at retention is tucked to my chest along my side, canted like you said. However, it's tucked high and tight on the side next my pectoral muscle.

I can't disagree with you about being squared up compared to being bladed most of the time. I haven't done the research nor put that into practice to back up my claim. All I know is if there's immenent danger, my reaction is to place my body in a position that's advantageous for me.

I do know there's always exception to rules and I'm sure many scenarios have been studied that being squared up might be the most common occurance. But, I've been taught to gain advantage body wise against your opponent and gain space if at all possible. Drawing my weapon prematurely could make things even worse.

Do you have any links providing your input? I'd like to know more.

[Keltyke]

In the heat of a gunfight, you may find yourself firing from almost any position. I believe in firing as soon as I can bring the gun into play and acquire the target, whether it be point or sighted. Although it's desirable to shoot from an established, practiced stance, it's not always possible.

[matthew temkin]

[QUOTE]Tuttle8,

"Let me try and help you understand the best I can.

First let me say that it is my belief that if you get into a gunfight (God forbid) you will not be at a bladed angle you will most likely be in a squared-up stance slightly squatting.

We all agree that most gunfights happen quick and at close range. So when we draw we want to keep the gun as close to the body as possible in order to help defeat a gun grab. It is much harder to wrestle a handgun away from someone when it is close to the center of the body as apposed to arms stretched out. Fighting against hand strength versus body strength so to speak.

I can assure you that when you move the handgun from the side index position (elbow down) handgun slightly canted 5-10 degrees to the center of the chest to acquire a solid grip that you can shoot from this position (I have done it) Your wrist's actually hold the handgun far enough away from the chest to cycle the slide. From the center of the chest begin to push forward and upward from partial compression (elbows slightly bent) to locking the elbows out and then bring the handgun to your eye.

This method ensures you have accurate hits center mass of the target "IF YOU ARE "squared-up” this is both smooth and fast. And works well under duress because you are using the body to index the handgun on target.

While at FLETC we called this the Zipper method and believe it or not this will get you more accurate hits on target as you "ride the recoil” and let the front sight dictate the cadence of fire. This is the best method I know to get a head shot under stress.

We could talk all day about the draw but this is all the room I have for this article. If you want to"





All I can add to this excellent post is..RIGHT ON!!!

[RainbowBob]

Then we compress to Position SUL...

Can you explain what "SUL" is?

[DCJS Instructor]

RainbowBob,

If you go to this web link:

http://www.swatmag.com/archive_2004/dec04.htm


The second article on the right hand side of the page is Position Sul: Here's The Scoop Employed by many operators and misused by even more, ... by Max Joseph.


Hope this helps!

Tom Perroni

[Brit]

The sights on a pistol allows you to place shots more accurately on small targets close up, or man sized targets far away.

I hit a 2 ft square piece of steel at 100 yds, from a prone position, three consecutive times. Using a Glock 17, 147g WW Ranger, ammunition.
The Range was in Palm Bay, late 90s.

This was viewed by a Federal agent (who said no chance, when I said I could hit that with my pistol) and my Son who said he would spot the shots, behind this hanging steel plate was a sand back stop. Seemed like 2 seconds from bang to hit.

The other use of the sights, close up, as a Police Officer you go to the pucker factor 100 call, a violent (or could be violent, domestic) the players are in the kitchen, the 6 year old lets you in, crying her/his eyes out, "my new daddy is hurting my Mummy" you are senior, your partner is keeping the child out of harms way, you peer into the kitchen, pistol down out of sight in your hand "Hi, whats up?" Man with knife behind woman, holding her tight up against his chest, distance 5 yards, your target, because it is now a target, 6" vertical 4" across of a head shot.

If you can not fire an aimed shot into a 1" circle at five yards with your service pistol, cold shot! You are in the wrong place at the wrong time.

This believe it or not is the normal deployment of a Police Officers pistol, not from a quick draw, but rather gun in hand.

I have only addressed the sighted shot here.

[ECHOONE]

Your basically describing the C.A.R. system center axis relock,and yes I agree and see what your saying.due to a disability I train with C,A,R. exclusively and it works wonders for me,was taught to me by Paul Castle,great guy

[Tamara]

"Most debated issue"?

In internet chatrooms and the letters column of Guns'n'Gear mags, maybe.

Generally, though, most everybody with serious credentials says one thing, and a handful of guys (most who coincidentally have techniques named after themselves and epaulettes on their shirts) say a few other, different things.

Incidentally, I'm planning to name a technique after myself, start teaching an "intense, high round count course", and let folks dump a case of ammunition into the berm unsighted from the hip for two days. That way I make money, and they get to take home a certificate and tell their friends that they're "trained". And since the odds of them being in a shootout in suburbia are slim to frickin' none, we're all happy.

[David Armstrong]

Generally, though, most everybody with serious credentials says one thing, and a handful of guys (most who coincidentally have techniques named after themselves and epaulettes on their shirts) say a few other, different things.

Seems a trifle unfair to imply that folks like Sykes, Fairbairn, Klein, Jordan, Bryce, and so on didn't have serious credentials. Tom's got some pretty good credentials himself, come to think of it, and mine aren't too bad. Matt's creds are good enough that he gets invited to conduct seminars at IALEFI, and that seems pretty serious. If I misunderstood the post I'll apologize in advance, but if I got it right and the contention is those who support threat focused shooting don't have serious credentials, well, let's decide what constitutes "serious credentials" and go from there.

[Deaf Smith]

The thing about Tom Givens is, he has had well over 50 student in gunfights now. And very well documentated.

We can all talk about Cooper or Applegate or Fairbrain's students having told them about how sucessful they were (those that were not sucessful ususally didn't write back.) I have not read of any account by Fairbrain, Applegate, or Cooper detailing many, or all, or even a good portion, of the actual shootings their students were in.

But Tom has even disected many of his students confrontations at the Polite Society and NTI. That speaks very well for what he does.

And the focus for most of his students confrontations are civilian in nature and almost all are carjackings or robberies.

They have all been sucessful to.

[NRAhab]

I reckon it's because Cooper, Applegate, and Fairbairn didn't think it was cool to go around talking about killing folk, or feel the need to talk about all their people their students had killed.

[buzz_knox]

I reckon it's because Cooper, Applegate, and Fairbairn didn't think it was cool to go around talking about killing folk, or feel the need to talk about all their people their students had killed.

I don't think the latter two cared all that much. Cooper was apparently open about how many he had killed, and frequently mentioned fights his students had been in. He didn't discuss it for entertainment value, but to discuss where techniques came from (i.e. the Mozambique drill that developed from a situation a friend of his was involved in) or what could be learned from the situation.

[Deaf Smith]

I reckon it's because Cooper, Applegate, and Fairbairn didn't think it was cool to go around talking about killing folk, or feel the need to talk about all their people their students had killed.

Givens discusses it as part of what works. Theory is one thing, but having students survive, and come back and be debriefed is nother thing.

Unless one researches what actually happens in a gunfight, then all is just guess work. Givens is not using guess work.