Rastoff
US Veteran
Well, that certainly answers the question.
Correct sight picture.
- Thread starter drewjames91
- Start date
In context... The vast majority of civilian defense shootings(high 90's percentile) take place inside 3-5 yards. Sights are irrelevant inside 5 yards for likely scenarios IMO.Therefore, sights are pretty much irrelevant for civilian defensive shooting. Prioritize your training accordingly.
"For close range gunfighting inside of 5 yards, any sights are irrelevant. You explode off the line of fire, press the pistol to the threat and press a burst into their chest. You wait for nothing and use physical indexing methods."
-Gabe Suarez
So, will you and should you focus on your front sight or focus on the threat inside 5-7 yards in probable and realistic civilian self-defense scenarios?
First 2 minutes of the video. Is Pincus wrong?
[ame]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=k_AbAfZtTpk[/ame]
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2005
- Messages
- 8,020
- Reaction score
- 7,101
Jim Cirillo said he focused so hard on his front sight during his many "social target matches" that he could "count the serrations" on his front sight. Wow. I guess he was doing it wrong when he won all those gunfights.
Sights are not irrelevant. You might just find yourself in a fight at more than contact distance.
For the love of Pete, everyone realizes that you do not bring the pistol up for a proper sight picture at contact distance. You use the sights when you can, and when you cannot, you use some other indexing method. Even Rex Applegate brought the pistol up so that it was within his cone of vision to achieve a rough alignment of the pistol itself on the target.
That said, it is entirely possible to bring the pistol up for a "flash sight picture" instantaneously, and anyone who wishes to hit the threat will do so when possible. Jeff Cooper was about as good at trick shooting or hip shooting as anyone I have ever seen, save possibly Bill Jordan, and I am not sure I would want to bet on the difference, and when Cooper demonstrated the difference in time between a full speed locked on hip shot versus a full speed flash sight picture, the difference was so minute it was irrelevant. Better to use your sights when you can.
Sights are not irrelevant. You might just find yourself in a fight at more than contact distance.
For the love of Pete, everyone realizes that you do not bring the pistol up for a proper sight picture at contact distance. You use the sights when you can, and when you cannot, you use some other indexing method. Even Rex Applegate brought the pistol up so that it was within his cone of vision to achieve a rough alignment of the pistol itself on the target.
That said, it is entirely possible to bring the pistol up for a "flash sight picture" instantaneously, and anyone who wishes to hit the threat will do so when possible. Jeff Cooper was about as good at trick shooting or hip shooting as anyone I have ever seen, save possibly Bill Jordan, and I am not sure I would want to bet on the difference, and when Cooper demonstrated the difference in time between a full speed locked on hip shot versus a full speed flash sight picture, the difference was so minute it was irrelevant. Better to use your sights when you can.
Last edited:
Jim Cirillo is quoted as saying many things including..."In Law Enforcement, your problem isn't at your front sight, it's in the background. As a Police Officer, you're obligated to make sure that the one you're shooting is the one you should be shooting. If you're looking at your front sight, you can't see that some poor guy is pulling a black wallet out of his back pocket - you think he's pulling a gun."
Sure sounds like he's advocating threat focused shooting there. I'm familiar with Cirillo's idea of an "alternative sight picture" which most would call a form of unsighted fire since focus in on threat not the sights, but still bringing the gun up into line of sight and visually indexing the gun on the target. His "silhouette point" and subconscious shooting" is the essentially the same method Suarez, Pincus and I are advocating. I've not read the book, but according to several sources, it appears Cirillo advocated "alternative sight picture" in close quarters, which to him meant inside 10-15 yards...
http://smith-wessonforum.com/concea...m-cirillos-weapon-silhoutte-point-method.html
Here Are 3
https://books.google.com/books?id=7...nepage&q=Jim Cirillo Silhouette Point&f=false
And individual opinions can change over time. I don't know if that's the case with Cirillo or the times of his various quotes. Back when I worked retail security next to the housing projects, I was involved in countless altercations with shoplifters. I came out on top in every incident, but my understanding and current views regarding DT, Combatives, H2H, RBMA's differ rather drastically from what they were back then.
I'm not a cop, it's not my job to engage or pursue, so if there is a fairly size-able distance between me and the threat, I likely have other options rather than immediately engaging.
From Michael Janich WILSON DEFENSE JOURNAL: Understanding Point-Shooting- Michael Janich
From Marty Hayes... https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/sighting-fundamentals/
Another perspective from experience...
Bob Stasch of the Chicago PD survived 14 gunfights during his law enforcement career.
At 13:53 of the video interview he discusses aimed/sighted fire vs "unsighted" vs his instinctive or "point shooting". Same method of focusing on the threat and bringing the gun up into the line of sight.
At 22:41 he gives his opinions on two handed vs one handed shooting and combat distances.
[ame]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Yd3v_fssabI[/ame]
Sure sounds like he's advocating threat focused shooting there. I'm familiar with Cirillo's idea of an "alternative sight picture" which most would call a form of unsighted fire since focus in on threat not the sights, but still bringing the gun up into line of sight and visually indexing the gun on the target. His "silhouette point" and subconscious shooting" is the essentially the same method Suarez, Pincus and I are advocating. I've not read the book, but according to several sources, it appears Cirillo advocated "alternative sight picture" in close quarters, which to him meant inside 10-15 yards...
http://smith-wessonforum.com/concea...m-cirillos-weapon-silhoutte-point-method.html
Here Are 3
https://books.google.com/books?id=7...nepage&q=Jim Cirillo Silhouette Point&f=false
And individual opinions can change over time. I don't know if that's the case with Cirillo or the times of his various quotes. Back when I worked retail security next to the housing projects, I was involved in countless altercations with shoplifters. I came out on top in every incident, but my understanding and current views regarding DT, Combatives, H2H, RBMA's differ rather drastically from what they were back then.
I'm not a cop, it's not my job to engage or pursue, so if there is a fairly size-able distance between me and the threat, I likely have other options rather than immediately engaging.
From Michael Janich WILSON DEFENSE JOURNAL: Understanding Point-Shooting- Michael Janich
From Marty Hayes... https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/sighting-fundamentals/
Another perspective from experience...
Bob Stasch of the Chicago PD survived 14 gunfights during his law enforcement career.
At 13:53 of the video interview he discusses aimed/sighted fire vs "unsighted" vs his instinctive or "point shooting". Same method of focusing on the threat and bringing the gun up into the line of sight.
At 22:41 he gives his opinions on two handed vs one handed shooting and combat distances.
[ame]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Yd3v_fssabI[/ame]
Last edited:
