As for Massad Ayoob's discussion of the very old practice (dating back to at least WWII) of pointing the index finger along the side of the frame for "instinct" shooting, particularly at night. It does work for many people, even if it is out of fashion.

-----

As for people bashing Ayoob for not being a full time officer, I'm not sure how that is relevant, other than as a justification for instructors and full time officers to disagree with what he says.

The sad fact is most police officers are not gun people and are just not very proficient with their service pistols. Despite the PR to the contrary, they are also not all that well trained in using them.

I shot tactical pistol competition for a couple decades and I rarely saw law enforcement officers who were competitive, even at small local matches. In fact I rarely saw them. The two I remember most were FBI agents who were smart enough and humble enough to realize they didn't shoot very well, despite far better than average training at Quantico. They were firmly in the bottom of the pack but improved significantly over time with practice and more competitive experience. They stand out as the average LEO showed up for match shot poorly and then never came back. To proud to admit they could not shoot well, or to embarrassed to show it in public was a likely possibility.

Thus when I see an LEO show up in a forum and talk like they are some sort of handgun combat expert, I take that with a HUGE grain of salt.

Now... that probably raised the hackles on a lot of LEOs, and they'll counter with arguments such as "over 80% of officers involved in shootings report never using their sights", or that under extreme stress your sights are useless.

The first statement is true but the second is only conditionally true and failing the second is the reason for the first. That's where they need to hear me out - as a former LEO, who's been shot at twice. Under extreme stress people devolve to their lowest level of fully mastered training.

For an LEO who qualifies once or twice a year and never really masters any of the basic skills, pointing the service pistol in the general direction of the bad guy and mashing the trigger is all he or she has when under extreme stress. Hit rates in the 20% range are the result with lower percentages in low light conditions and or at ranges longer than about 15 yards.

In contrast, if you take an LEO who shoots often (100-200 rounds per week) and more importantly learned to shoot properly to:

- keep his eyes on the target/threat;
- draw his pistol and bring it up into his line of sight;
- place the front sight on target;
- pause to verify sight alignment or align the rear sight with the front sight; and then
- press the trigger.

You'll see much higher hit percentages and you'll see the LEO using his sights, even under extreme stress.

That happens for a couple reasons.

First, the shooter has repeated the process above so often that over time the he develops muscle memory in his hand that ensures the pistol rises into his line of sight with the pistol positioned so that the rear sights will automatically be aligned with the front sight when he places the front sight on target. During practice, once that grip is mastered and committed to muscle memory, the "pause" in the above process is extremely short - less than a tenth of a second - and mostly just verifies the front sight is on target. The sights will always be aligned as the response from the muscles is automatic and is no longer a conscious thought.

Second, under extreme stress, the response is automatic and takes zero mental bandwidth. The shooter just focuses on the front sight placed on the target/threat. Any pause that is taken is just to confirm the need to send the shot/next shot. For example if you've double tapped the threat and are transitioning to a failure to stop shot to the head, as the pistol recovers from the recoil and your transition to the head, that very brief "pause" is just confirming the head is still where it should be and the front sight is on it. If that head is on the way down to the ground, you'll recognize the need may no longer exist and extend the pause.

If the LEO has also shot competitively it's a plus as the shooter has experience shooting under time pressure and some degree of stress, while also having to divide his attention.

The key either way is having the basic grip, sight picture and trigger pull skills firmly committed to muscle memory so that they do not require any mental bandwidth at all. That leaves the reduced bandwidth you have under extreme stress 100% available to make the critical decisions and assessments, without compromising your shooting.

Not many LEOs ever come close to that level of proficiency, and most then shoot very poorly under stress.

----

Now...I'm not saying that you should agree with everything Ayoob says. First of all doing something just because someone said is authoritarian learning that is the least robust, least valid and lowest level means of learning anything. Second, like *any* "expert" or "authority" he's biased by his experiences, preferences and individual skill sets.

I don't agree with everything he says. However, I do listen to what he says, and then evaluate it critically and *objectively* based on how well it fits with my experiences, philosophy, preferences and skill sets.

I also come with an attitude that I am willing to change my point of view if what he suggests works better for me.

I do not discount what he says just because he says it from a part time officer perspective. Part time or not, most of what he says is well considered and well thought out and at least worth considering even if you don't choose to follow it based on your own experience or specialized circumstances.

A lot of full time officers could stand to significantly improve their objectivity as well as their critical thinking skills. They shouldn't be discounting what someone says based solely on some sort of authoritarian learning that says something different.