On gun forums, how many times have you heard someone advocate pie plate accuracy for self defense?

I vehemently disagree with this thinking but certainly mean no disrespect to those who do so.

A pie plate is a LARGE target at self defense range. Some people also use a sheet of notebook paper. Again too LARGE.

I feel this thinking is flawed at best and dangerously irresponsible. To simply "settle" for pie plate accuracy is misleading and unrealistic.

Not to say that my method is perfect or the only way, I shoot at a five inch diameter target at 15 yards and in.

I use a life sized target and a 5 inch stick on target. I place the sticky target in what some call the "Golden Triangle". From the nipples up to the nose in the high chest area.

Simply aiming for the heart or lungs isn't good enough. I believe the above method is the best chance at hitting the spine.

Shoot until the threat is stopped. Repeat if neccessary.

Just my humble opinion however.

I am also of the school of aim small, miss small. Inside of 15 yds I will use a stickon that is probably 2" across. I will place 2 per target, one like yours and another in the T zone of the head.

I usually shoot on pubic land so I can set targets however I want, draw and shoot, and shoot on the move.

I have found that practicing the aim small, miss small adage has really worked for me. I don't hit the sticky all of the time but it is close aboard nearly every time that I do miss it.

bob

As one who has been using paper plates at 7 yards, shooting my J as fast as possible, I'm now rethinking this. With my J's and Colt Cobra, shooting fast to empty, if everything was on the paper plate I was satisfied. I also used man sized targets at the same distance shooting two to the body one to the head as fast as possible. Thanks for your ideas.

If someone can consistently hit a target area the size of a pie plate, at speed, with multiple rounds, at typical defensive ranges, they'll probably win the fight.

paper plates or sheets of paper usually have the size of what its knows as the lethal zone when used on live size targets and e-types. It is a very proven and effective method for rapid engagements on CQB scenarios. In a combat situation it doesn't really matter if you have 2 inch shot group or a 5 inch shot group. Especially if you take longer to aim and engage. speed is the key. When you shoot a hostile (and I have) you don't check to see how close the holes are on his chest.

THAT BEING SAID..... I agree with you in the fact that some people may just limit to this type of shooting and not develop different sets of skills. I agree that training that requires greater accuracy has to be done. I include such things in my own practice. I just want to make the point that the "paper plate" thing should not be dismissed as not good enough, because it its. It teaches fighting skills.

Kanewpadle, I understand how you feel but would like to offer somewhat of an alternative view of the issue. To begin with, I guess I would have to ask which context the term "pie plate accuracy" is being used in. I'm a 68 year old long-retired cop and firearms instructor and do a lot of defensive drills involving hip shooting at three to seven yards on large silhouette targets. If I can hold DAO hip shots and DA/SA double taps from the hip in a pie plate at seven yards on a not-very-well-defined target, I'm tickled pink. If I can do it at five yards, I'm only tickled a light shade of pink, and if it's the best I can do at three yards I leave the range and go fishing before I accidentally shoot someone.

I always shoot for center of mass in these drills, and I never, ever, fire defensive exercises at a well defined target area. Just like in real life, I use a large, open space of paper and force myself to identify and fire on center of mass. Nobody is going to be wearing a pie plate to tell you where to shoot, so you really shouldn't get too accustomed to having such a well defined target. This is especially true in areas of low light.

Of equal importance is shooting in the same manner you will have to shoot in real life, i.e. I carry a DA/SA auto pistol with the hammer down, which means my first shot will be DA and if I double tap it will be a rapid DA/SA burst of two shots. Therefore, 80% of all of my defensive practice is either individual DA shots, decocking after every shot, or DA/SA double taps, decocking after every two shots.

Like you, I also have a deep reverence for the basic rules of pistol marksmanship and will always set a target out at 15 yards and practice SA singles, carefully aimed with full sight alignment. Even though a defensive situation is not very likely at that range, I find that it keeps my motor skills sharp. Besides, training to a minimum standard yields minimal results so your point regarding your quest for accuracy is well taken.

You make some very good points and my remarks are presented with all respect. Best wishes.

JayPee

PS - I don't get too worried until they start talking about "minute of car door accuracy." Big grin here.

Who needs a pie-plate when you have 00 buckshot in a Remington 870? Lol, JK, JK......

I have never tried training to shoot quick draw, rapid succession defensive patterns. Sounds interesting and fun. Informative posts, Ill have to give it a try.

When using a j frame which is normally a second gun, I do the same. If I've had to resort to my j frame, I would use it the same as you.

Maybe. Maybe not. Don't count on it.

Absolutely no one can predict how a fight will go and what the outcome may be. It is widely accepted that your first string of shots must be effective before adrenaline kicks in. And it is also general knowledge that hits other than the head or spine can give your attacker ample time to get to you. Shots to the head and spine have proven to be more effective. But with all things, there are no guarantees. Aiming small increases your odds.

Sarge, paper plates MAY be alright for beginners. But not for anyone with intermediate skills.

The old adage "whoever shoots first usually wins" is true but only to a point. These days "whoever shoots first ACCURATELY usually wins".

With all the caliber wars that we have had throughout the gun forums it is generally agreed that shot placement is king. Following that logic, shooting small makes sense.

Training as such makes more sense.

Jaypee, good points all.

With respect, coppers in your era and before were taught to shoot from the hip. I admire anyone that can do so effectively.

But today, many instructors don't teach that method and folks don't practice it.

Some wrongly assume that they have plenty of time to use both hands, take thier time and aim. And that's all they practice.

We all could discuss a myriad of different situations, possibilites, and methods used.

All I'm saying (without writing a book ) is we should not assume that pie plate accuracy is "good enough" for every situation.

We need to practice and train so we can be prepared to recognize and adapt to anything that comes our way.

We use B-27 targets. We train getting three shots, two to the chest and one to the head. We also train to shoot from the hip. In the field there is seldom time to take good aim, acquire a proper sight picture or even totally assess the situation before having to fire.

Past that, as long as we can hit the center mass, we are content.

What should be remembered is pie plates, B-27 targets and such are not shooting back. Instinctive shooting comes in handy.

All the above is why I love a 1911 so much. They are much easier to just point. If my finger can point at a target without bringing it into my line of vision, so will the 1911. Those that have never fired a quality 1911 will not understand this.

We also must remember that not all get the chance to draw, shoot or any warning at all. A local area officer with 20+ yrs was recently gunned down without any warning. A man just pulled up, got out of his car and walked to where the officer stood, pulled his gun up and began firing. The officer did not stand a chance. Yet that is common among perps. They do not want a fair fight, they do not want witnesses and no matter how much we train or spend in equipment, there are some things we cannot plan on.

Oldman, there is one thing you don't seem to understand about the 1911. While a great firearm, they aren't for everyone. Hell I love the gun and have had many. But folks don't want to take the time to learn how to use the 1911 properly. It's much easier to pick up a striker fired polymer gun and go from there. Why do think they are so popular?

Different guns will point different for different people.

Years ago I learned to shoot stick bows instinctively,bullseyes,circles,dots etc.are the worst enemy in becoming skilled at this type of shooting.There are no game animals that are equipped with these aiming points.I feel defensive shooting is much more like this style than bullseye shooting.Unless the target has a Mr. T medallion chain on or a Skoal can showing there is no aiming point on an attacker. People might be surprised how well they can shoot at "self defense" ranges using both eyes open point shooting.

Kane, you hit the bulleye. The 1911 is a special gun and that is why the model has been aorund all these years and still popular.

As you correctly stated, people will not take the time to learn to shoot a 1911 and therefore it is not for everyone. Those that have shot them enough to learn it will love them. I had to shoot one back in the early 60s while in the Army. They made me be able to do many things with one in total darkness. I still have several but they are the original point and shoot. Not all guns can be a point and shoot.

But I will say that most gun owners never take the time to learn how their own model of gun works or even learn to be passively proficient with it.

Precise aiming points work great for new shooters who are learning marksmanship skill and for bullseye competitors, but they can be a hindrance to defensive shooters as they condition the shooter to look for stimuli that will not be present in a real lethal force encounter. This is similar to the conditioning that takes place when a shooter conditions him/herself to always take two shots on a target and then stop shooting.

When a human being engages a lethal threat with a handgun, it is a physiological response to a certain stimuli. When we train, and subsequently practice to engage a lethal threat, we are conditioning our brain to recognize certain stimuli and immediately respond to it intuitively, without the need for a lot of cognizant energy. How strong and precise that response will be is a direct result of the repeated practice of initially recognizing the stimuli (in this case, a lethal threat), and then the carrying out of the physical response (in this case, engaging it with our handgun). We can build a much stronger and much more precise response by understanding what kind of encounters are most likely, becoming more aware of what they look like as they develop, becoming more aware of what our appropriate responses to the threat need to be, and then practicing those responses in as realistic environment as we can. That requires realistic targets; preferably three dimensional, and if they are reactive, all the better.

The truth is, bad guys don't walk around with stickers or pie plates attached to their bodies, so while it's fun to stand on a range and "spot your hits" on these convenient targets, they aren't doing much to help us develop that strong, precise and intuitive response that will help us win the battle. Yes, they can certainly help you become a good marksman, but once you've achieved a high level of marksmanship, it's time to put them away and move on to more realistic targets. Nondescript paper targets are much better than those with precise aiming points, and a 3-D or even an IDPA cardboard target with an old t-shirt or jacket placed over it is still better.

I am with you personally. (And with the 1911 advocate as well.)
Re: your post about instinctive shooting - it is not so hard as one may think if one 'opens oneself' to trusting those instincts. Like all instincts, with use they then begin to develop by themselves.

IMO - It is better to spend time honing one's instincts than it is to spend the same amount of time honing one's trigger.

A little different perspective.

In competition, the cardboard targets have no aiming point, and the scoring marks are light perforations not visible beyond a few feet.
For that kind of target, what I like to see is 3 shots (drawing from the holster) in 3 sec, on the move, in the 8" center circle. Try that drill and see how you do. Try different distances and directions of movement back to 7-10 yds.

For beginners, I put a paper plate over the center circle and tell them that whole plate is the "bullseye." If I don't give them some sort of standard, they'll start trying to put them all in the same hole (which they can't do) yanking the trigger instead of concentrating on form and smoothness.

Remember with a true beginner or novice, we're trying to overcome all they "learned" from TV.

__________________
Science plus Art

Dang, I was just reading the collards and cornbread thread and popped in here for desert. I'm very disappointed!

I believe that deliberate aimed initial shots in a gunfight can get you killed. Reason? Because the amount of time you give your opponent to shoot AT you is everything. You MUST minimize the amount to time they have and maximize the amount of time you have. Shooting at a human sized target at up close and personal ranges requires hits center of mass with spread of shots up to 5 or 6 inches is acceptable and even desirable. I had an Emergency Room Physician in one of my CCW classes and he told us that humans with a couple of shots in the chest that are say from nipple to nipple apart are much more traumatized and quicker to be disabled than one with two shots right on top of each other. The obvious exception would be two in the heart or two into the spinal column. My point is that the self defense shooter should be so practiced that at his/her maximum speed the first two or three shots should be in the center of mass and be covered by a pie plate. I used the pie plate for training shooters up until they became intermediates. Then I switched to IPSC humanoid cardboards with old T-shirts covering them. At some point the self defense shooter HAS to stop looking at where those individual bullets are hitting and just shoot for effect as quickly as possible. IMH experience I found that precision placement shooters shoot slower than 'center of mass' shooters. ... Big Cholla

Yes I agree in spades. I think the tendency to go for full sight alignment and discard instinct shooting at appropriate close ranges has a lot to do with the trainer's fear of civil liability for teaching someone to shoot without using the sights. But I also believe that the training costs associated with instinct shooting are probably going to make most basic pistol training courses unaffordable to most gun owners because of the time and ammunition required to bring the student up to an acceptable level of proficiency.

Instinct shooting is like landing an airplane at night.....you have to practice in order to stay good at it. And I believe that this, coupled with the liability issues inherent in teaching people to shoot without sights, is a major reason why a lot of instructors won't teach instinct shooting any more.....non-police students usually won't practice it enough to stay good at it. And when they hit the school kid on the bus bench instead of the badguy they were being confronted by, the instructor who taught them to shoot without sights will probably be named in any subsequent lawsuit. I don't look for this to change any time soon, I'm sorry to say. Rant ended.

JayPee

Many different shooting programs still teach point shooting, or "instinctive shooting" techniques. In fact, even the civilian NRA Personal Protection courses teach point shooting and shooting from retention. Most every CQB class, civilian or LEO, will teach several different methods of retention shooting. But I can't say I know of any reputable programs that are ONLY teaching point shooting.

My random thoughts are this. In a real defensive shooting situation, if you keep all your shots, or even "most all" your shots on a "paper plate" sized area on the bad guys chest you have done good.

Whether you are at 5 inches or 50 yards....

After all, if you put 2 shots in the same hole, the second shot does no additional damage. Much better to have 2 shots 3 or 4 inches apart....

Think about it....

I am very underqualified to be posting on this thread. But here it goes.
When I go to the range I do about 3-5 mags at 10 yards taking real aim, getting a sight picture and trying to make one hole. I aim very small and dont like to see any more than one hole in the paper. After this I increase my rate of fire, shoot in bursts of two or three, etc. I find this helps me in a more "real world" drill since I can get some muscle memory happening at first and then speed things up. Kinda like a golf swing, get it perfect and then just apply some speed.

Every once in a while I will also go to the range and start right away with point shooting and some speed drills. Lets face it, wont have time to warm up in a real situation.

I am not a LEO and dont ever plan on being in a speed draw gun fight. In a situation where I have to protect myself and family retreat is the first option, shooting the second. However I would hope to have the mindset to find a good way to draw and remain clam. So I practice very small, even sometime shooting out the little silouette in the upper left corner :-)

No matter how much training, the best thing to do is be alert and know your surroundings.

TD

__________________
More stuff!!!

agreed man. As you can tell I am an eclectic and I like both approaches. Personally use FBI targets stapled to an e-type. These have the lethal zones very well delineated and show you where you stand.

In gunfights I adhere to the theory of "Who gets there the firstest with the mostest" wins.

I was trained to take a 3 pound coffee can, cut both ends out of it, put it over the center mass just to the right of the of the center of the heart (center of the body) on the silhoutte, take some white spray paint, spray it and use it for center of mass. If you can keep your rounds in that area, you're doing ok.

Me, I'd like to see some one asume the correct stance, good sight picture, breath and trigger control in a gun fight at three to five yards.

Rule 303

It can be done!

Another one here who thinks the paper plate is too large.

It use a sheet of kid's colored construction paper, torn in half, for distances of 7-15 yards, or in quarters for 3-5 yards. A full sheet is just about the size of the chest heart/lung area. You can staple overlay the smaller pieces at the center of a full size if you wish for a different practice routine. Why the construction paper? Well, it's cheap and is sort of 'shirt' colored and you don't have an aiming point other than COM. If you can keep them in that firing dao, using your personal carry method and your defensive draw and fire technique, you have things well in hand.

__________________
" I said, good DAY! "

On all my various target silhouettes are outlined a std "Kill-Zone" measuring about 12 x 18"....BTW, this measurement is pretty much used in most states during the firing portion of your CC licensure.
Multiple hits in this area would be extremely effective. Never been much into pie plates or bullseye shooting....

I like to keep it simple - I just buy the small sized paper plates. They're 5" or 6" across and I think they work well for practicing keeping fast shots in a small area.

I do practice "bullseye" shooting on a regular basis as well. I think it's important to be able hit a particular spot if you need to, not just keep your shots in a general area.

__________________
Don't kiss smiling dogs!

If your hits are all within a paper plate, large or small, within the alloted time frame, then it's right to reduce the time. Speed comes with practice; if you're proficient or better at a certain range/time, then up the ante, move back, reduce the time, reduce the target size, and start all over again to get to the higher level of skill.
I've followed the teachings of Bill Jordan for years regarding point shooting, and think his description of how the draw and point should feel are as appropriate today as when he wrote them. For example, at close contact distances, it's simply draw and shoot ("speedrock" in today's tacticool terms), firing when the muzzle is relatively on target, but still close to the body. If you extend your handgun towards the target at these distances, it won't make much difference in accuracy, but it offers the gun up for a grab.

Good discussion.

I practice using both the paper plate and aim small/miss small techniques. My problem is that I have always been a shooter. I am an inveterate plinker, and I was trained in bullseye. Neither are great as defensive techniques!

__________________
I hope I copied that right

Here is a link to an article written for the American Rifleman by Cameron Hopkins. Cameron interviews world champion Mike Plaxco on proper sight pictures necessary for accurate shooting vs distances to targets;

Acceptable Sight Picture - Best Shooting Advice I Ever Received - Shooting Photo Galleries


......... Big Cholla

In a self defense situation I doubt the BG will have a stick-on target on him/her, be it 2", 5", or ??".

__________________
Hook686

So what's your point? Anything constructive to say?

How we train and practice is how we will fight.

I feel you are partly right. When being under stress with others shooting back at you, a lot of training goes out the window. Have you watched the dozens of videos that are out there showing shootouts between officers and perps that were at less than 20 feet, with no cover, and nobody was hit.

The flip side of this, and I have heard this story from about every instructor I have had, is where the officer was trained at the range to pick up his brass. Then one day he was in a shoot out and his brass flew away from his cover as the shooting was going on. He reached out to pick it up and yes he got fatally hit. In his pocket, they found all his spent casings he had fired and in his hand, there was the last round he ever fired. All the training he had went out the window but the lone instruction of pick up your brass.

When one is being shot at, training is way down on your list. Survival becomes number one. Accuracy is out, correct target alignment is out. You take your best shots as often as you can.

Back in 1970, I went into a domestic call in a rural area. The man was intoxicated and as I walked in, he raised up with a shotgun in hand. I went off his porch and carried two others with me in record time. I never pulled my gun until I was behind my car but I heard that shotgun going off loud and clear. It was not the time or place for a gunfight. He eventually gave up and we all were able to be alive at the end of the day. Some trainers will say I should have drawn and fired on the man. Others say I should have stepped behind the doorway. I was out for survival, nothing else was important at the time.

I'm with Oldman45. I was in a shootout in a dark parking lot in 1974. My duty weapon was a Colt DS and I kept shooting until the fight was over, I reloaded once. Bottom line was he was "retired" at the scene and I went on to retire 23 years later.

The problem with "pie plate accuracy" is that a lot of people never go beyond that. I spend a lot of time on slow fire. I'm a fire believer that one needs to master their carry weapon and be able to make accurate shots. I personally am disappointed with myself if I can't shoot sub 1.5" slow fire groups at 7-10 yards.

However, when it comes to close encounter of the deadly kind, one needs to be able to make multiple good hits fast. When you start talking about firing 4-5 shots in a second, the old pie plate is a decent measure. I personally prefer something smaller and like to keep my rapid fire groups in a 6" or less circle.

I'm not a person that believes in "good enough". I'm of the opinion that anyone who carries a defensive weapon should always strive to be better, to shoot smaller groups, to make faster hits, etc.

Pie plates, stickies, B-27s, whatever. When bad things start to happen that cannot be stopped otherwise, it's best to try and put lots of holes in the bad guy. Little holes, big holes--doesn't matter. Just lots of holes.

Yes, but by trying to put lot's of holes in the guy, your odds of missing him completely go up considerably unless he's standing right in front of you.

I agree completely with your post.

My point is, nobodys knows how they will react. But that doesn't mean that we should'nt at least train and practice in the best way we can. Simpy settling for pie plate accuracy is not good enough.

Training and practice should be taken more serious by some. It should be regimented and habit forming but flexible enough to adapt to or incorporate new ideas or techniques.

There are many other instances of cops in shootouts where they did exactly what they were trained to do and it kept them alive.

And I'm glad you survived the guy with the shotgun. Otherwise you wouldn't be here for me to give you a hard time.

Also, I would have taken a dive of the porch too. If you took the time to draw, you wouldn't be here. And stepping behind the doorway probably wouldn't have stopped 00 buck.

I have used the term "minute of pie plate" several times referring to service rifle accuracy, and it's always as a negative.

__________________
Member MVGCA, OGCA, NRA Life

Kanewpadle; Your target area (nipple to nipple to nose) actually seems to be about the same size as a pie plate. I've read through this whole post and I think the point has been missed. The idea of training with an 8" circle (pie plate) is this: Can you draw and fire two rounds, on target, in two seconds? My deoartment trained "high center mass" which is basically about the same as your target but stops just below the the adam's apple area. There are a lot of vitals n that area and two shots in that area will quickly put a stop to activity. As atated before, two rounds spaced 2-3 inches apart are better than two rounds right on top of each other.

If you have read the entire post, you will also see that I place a smaller stick on target in that area. Right in the middle.

My goal is that little target. Do I always hit it? No, of course not. But I always come real close.

I've seen people who could dot an i on a stationary target but couldn't hit a moving target to save their soul. I've also seen people who could regularly hit moving targets but if you asked them to shoot a small group on a stationary target, would perform no better than average.

In a shootout, it would be very handy to be able to hit a moving pie plate.

I have too.

It seems that some miss the point here.

PRACTICING ONLY WITH PIE PLATES IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH.

Until you can reliably hit that moving plate, it's useless to shoot at anything smaller. I know you don't share this opinion, but it doesn't really matter how small of a group you shoot on that moving plate. If you're on the plate, all shots are within 4 1/2 inches of point of aim.

If you want to improve your skill, move the plate faster. That will serve you better than a smaller group on a slower (or stationary) plate.

If I understand this thread it has nothing to do with a bad guy having a sticky or plate or anything on him. It has to do with what is an acceptable training standard. I agree with the pie plate being too large for training. I disagree with people when they say they are "spreading the trauma" by placing shots all over the target. Unless they are aiming for each spot it, they don't get to count it. I understand shots three inches apart may cause more damage than two on top of each other. I believe you should try to put your shots close together in training because the group will expand in the real world.

Train on a small target and when a full sized target presents itself your shot will be easier to make.

I'd heard to use playing cards. I'd guess if you can hit a couple of playing cards tacked onto a target, you're doing fairly well at any range.

__________________
"... shall not be infringed."

Well no ****!

You full well understand the meaning of this thread but add yet another dimension!

Guess we could get off track and add some more stuff huh?!

Maybe I'll start a new thread entitled "Force on Force".