Point Shooting

[Jellybean]

Anyone that needs to use their sights to hit a man sized target within 10ft. has no business carrying a gun in the first place.

F&S wasn't based on budgets or resources it was based on actual gunfight statistics, (and if you look at modern day gunfights they haven't changed.) not the garbage that is printed in the gun rags to sell ammo, and more gun rags. And the reason people chose to follow it was that it worked and it is still the best system of point shooting. The reason that people choose not to follow it is because someone who is more than likely not totally honest about his background and experiences says it won't work.

It won't win you first place in an action pistol competition, but it will give you a better chance at winning first place in a real life gunfight than some of this stuff I see floating around now days, from all these self proclaimed experts.

Being able to use your sights is still important, but you must know and understand when to use them, and you need to understand that most bad guys are not going to stand still while you pull your gun up to eye level and line up a shot. By all means if they do take advantage of it, but it's a good idea to practice a different plan if they don't. As others have said point shooting isn't hard to learn, but it will take time to master it just like any other form of shooting.

There are many different styles of shooting out there and I'm not telling anyone which one to pick, even though in my opinion there are some that are better and others that are purely asinine. But before you start asking people for advice and opinions try to find out how much they really know about the techniques they are endorsing or bashing , if anything.

 

[photoman]

Anyone that needs to use their sights to hit a man sized target within 10ft. has no business carrying a gun in the first place.

LOL! So true.

With the advent of force-on-force training, the old Cooper front sight, stand and deliver technique has been solidly proven to get you shot!

 

[OKFC05]

It won't win you first place in an action pistol competition, but it will give you a better chance at winning first place in a real life gunfight .....

Being able to use your sights is still important, but you must know and understand when to use them, ..... As others have said point shooting isn't hard to learn, but it will take time to master it just like any other form of shooting.

It just might help you win a competition!

Most serious competitors I know are excellent at point shooting and practice with both hands, strong hand only, weak hand only, standing, walking, kneeling, squatting, sitting, lying down, whatever.

One IDPA stage I set last month had the shooter sitting at a table with 3 targets across the table, and required firing with the gun held low in close retention to simulate keeping the gun from being grabbed by the "bad guys." Only simulated stress, sure, but it made the sweat pop out on some trying to shoot quickly and accurately without raising the gun.

 

[David Sinko]

Cooper did concede that at close range nobody was able to beat Thell Reed and his Colt SAA. I expect that at such close range Reed would be shooting as soon as the gun cleared the leather and he'd most likely be fanning. That's funny; most experts will tell you that fanning doesn't work either. If the SAA isn't your thing, men like Bryce and Jordan have proven that a DA revolver is probably just as fast from the hip.

Of course aimed fire can be brutally effective and amazingly fast too. To prove that he could use the sights at high speed, McGivern would have a bystander click the rear sight of his revolver either left or right, and then he'd shoot that much off center of a lead disk that was thrown into the air.

Another important consideration is that in this day and age many of us carry our service grade handguns slightly high above the belt line in a tight fitting holster. This is done out of necessity to keep the gun properly concealed. When my 4" revolvers clear the holster they are already near chest level and in an awkward position for effective hip shooting. It is easier for me to continue to bring the gun up to eye level, unless of course the target is at very close range. A J Frame in a pocket holster would be a different matter entirely with many more options available for point shooting, so I think it just goes to show that neither method can be dismissed entirely, depending on the circumstances.

Dave Sinko

 

[photoman]

so I think it just goes to show that neither method can be dismissed entirely, depending on the circumstances.

Dave Sinko

This is the correct answer in my opinion.

 

[tpd223]

We will have to agree to disagree sir on the F&S information. I have read everything available on that subject in my studies, and I believe it is very clear that they did what they could with limited time, ammo, budget and resources, and within the most current research available to them at that time.

In my primary job, and my secondary job, I have been involved in hundreds, if not thousands, of FOF gunfights. When you are moving, and your target doesn't want to get shot, you had better have some sort of sight index on your target if you want to hit it at all. Fact of life.

Over the years many LEO agencies have had only a 15-20% hit rate in real live OISs, a training issue to be sure, but undertrained shooters firing unsighted rounds at close range are what contribute to this percentage.

Other agencies, and I will throw in LAPD as I have some knowledge of their program, strongly push sighted fire, and have hit rates if their OISs ranging from 60-100%, depending on the unit involved.

We also have an issue of what target we are speaking of. If one wants to hit anywhere on a stationary silhouette, then point away. If you need to hit the vital structure on an attacker to shut them down as quickly as possible, that takes much more accuracy.

One does not need to see the sights sharp and crisp to be firing with sighted fire, the term "flash sight picture" exists for a reason, although guys like Jim Cirillo have told me in conversation that when they shot bad guys they were so focused on their front sight that they could see the striations on it.

 

[Jellybean]

It just might help you win a competition!

Most serious competitors I know are excellent at point shooting and practice with both hands, strong hand only, weak hand only, standing, walking, kneeling, squatting, sitting, lying down, whatever.

One IDPA stage I set last month had the shooter sitting at a table with 3 targets across the table, and required firing with the gun held low in close retention to simulate keeping the gun from being grabbed by the "bad guys." Only simulated stress, sure, but it made the sweat pop out on some trying to shoot quickly and accurately without raising the gun.

I had originally included a "maybe" in my post but took it out, it would depend on who the shooters are and how well they know their game and most competitions are designed to require sighted shooting. Jeff Cooper had talked about a combat triangle, or something tacticooly trianglish like that, where he claimed power speed, and accuracy were all equally important. Well, I believed it for a long time, until I found out how much he really knew about real gunfighting, so I went back and looked at it again. He was wrong. But since he is the grandfather of the action pistol games they will forever bear his fruits.

We will have to agree to disagree sir on the F&S information.

tpd223, I will agree to this, which is the only thing you've said so far that I do. But knowing that neither of us is going to convince the other to change their minds on all the research, and of course the training and experience that we have, let me be the first to say have a nice day and good luck in your endeavors.

But first, if I may since you have obviously collected a lot of data, do you happen to have statistical information for the agencies, such as the LAPD, that push for sighted fire on the percentage of officers that are shot without ever drawing their weapon or that did draw it but never fired it compared to agencies that don't push it so hard? And also the percentage of officers that are taught to use their sights that actually do? Most of the agencies I've dealt with teach sighted fire at every distance but the officers themselves that have been in actual shootings admit that they didn't use them during the event, even though they intended to do so. The FBI doesn't collect all this information and it's hard to find.
Thank you.

 

[Harrison]

USPSA/IPSC matchs have stages requiring that you shoot one handed both strong hand and weak hand. Point shooting maybe if the target is within touching distance. Otherwise, I may not line up the sights, but I am aware of where the front sight is pointing. That is all you need, sort of like shooting a shotgun. In a match things go very fast. Depending on the stage, it may be taken at almost a run, shooting and reloading as you go.

 

[photoman]

I have been involved in hundreds, if not thousands, of FOF gunfights.

You are talking about training excercises right?

 

[M falcon]

I agree with Jellybean,if you cannot hit man at 10ft, just pointing, you should not have a gun,two times I had to use my S&W Terrier in my home and neither time did I have time to aim, and I scored both times.
M Falcon

 

[cshoff]

If you are bringing the gun up into your line of sight, you are, at the very least, using a rough sight picture to index the gun to the target.

Bottom line is to always use the sights when you can. You may be able to train yourself to make accurate hits from longer than average distances without using a sight picture of any kind, but you will NEVER be able to train yourself to make consistently as accurate hits from any distance without the aid of sight picture as you will with the aid of a sight picture of some kind. Try this drill using point shooting (no sight picture) and see how well you do:

pistol-training.com F.A.S.T. (Fundamentals, Accuracy, & Speed Test)

 

[USAF385]

A few years back I started point shooting with my .22 handguns. It started out as a recreational shooting thing first. I would hang multiple targets in different locations and see how close I could come without aiming. After a while it became easy to place the round very near to where I wanted it.. both from the hip and raised but without using the sights.

I have adopted this sort of shooting when training with the guns I carry the most... particularly my 642, LCP, and G27.

I practice all around.... right hand, left hand, one hand, two hands, under the leg (well.. maybe not that last one).

 

[Jellybean]

If you are bringing the gun up into your line of sight, you are, at the very least, using a rough sight picture to index the gun to the target.

This is where there is so much confusion in terminology. Purist sight shooters claim that if you are not aligning the sights you are point shooting. Purist point shooters claim that if you are using any kind of index or employing the sights in anyway you are sight shooting.

Bottom line is to always use the sights when you can. You may be able to train yourself to make accurate hits from longer than average distances without using a sight picture of any kind, but you will NEVER be able to train yourself to make consistently as accurate hits from any distance without the aid of sight picture as you will with the aid of a sight picture of some kind. Try this drill using point shooting (no sight picture) and see how well you do:

pistol-training.com F.A.S.T. (Fundamentals, Accuracy, & Speed Test)

I agree with you, you can make more accurate hits with more consistency using your sights. But this is for real world, life saving self defense shooting. In gun games, like your link, too much emphasis is put on accuracy over speed. Print out the target available in your link, then hold it in front of an average sized man, or a little smaller to simulate a crack head. If your shots go just below the big zero how much difference would it make to the score in the rules compared to the man behind the target? Shooting at center of mass is to make sure you have the most room for error, missing the "A" zone by a half inch will not make you lose to a guy that is more accurate but slower in real life.

But I will say that that target is a great training aid to anyone who wants to try point shooting, just like a paper plate taped to a standard silhouette target is. Back in the 70s when we were using a PPC based requalification course on B-27 targets there was a stage where you had to fire six shots strong hand only, then reload and fire six shots weak hand only from the seven yard line. Most people could keep their shots all within a small group at that range while shooting as fast as they can, even those that had trouble hitting the paper at 25 yards using their sights. Bottom line is that if you are ever in a self defense situation, it is half over before you know it started and speed is more important than shooting a nice tight group. Which I had trouble explaining to a couple of my officers that had attended a high priced shooting school, or used to shoot IPSC.

 

[cshoff]

This is where there is so much confusion in terminology. Purist sight shooters claim that if you are not aligning the sights you are point shooting. Purist point shooters claim that if you are using any kind of index or employing the sights in anyway you are sight shooting.

It really doesn't matter whether you are a "purist" or not. The act of using a reference point on the gun (the sights, the barrel, or the silhouette of the gun in a low light situation) to align the gun with the target, is, by it's very nature, sighted fire. Anything said to the contrary is simply splitting hairs.

I agree with you, you can make more accurate hits with more consistency using your sights. But this is for real world, life saving self defense shooting. In gun games, like your link, too much emphasis is put on accuracy over speed. Print out the target available in your link, then hold it in front of an average sized man, or a little smaller to simulate a crack head. If your shots go just below the big zero how much difference would it make to the score in the rules compared to the man behind the target? Shooting at center of mass is to make sure you have the most room for error, missing the "A" zone by a half inch will not make you lose to a guy that is more accurate but slower in real life.

You are completely missing the point I was making by posting a link to that drill. It's not about whether a "miss" of a inch or two makes any difference in the "real world", it's about the fact that a considerable number of shooters who use their sights are able to score "advanced" or "expert" on that drill, which provides more than anecdotal evidence that speed and accuracy are both quite achievable with sighted fire, even under stress. I've read a number of debriefings from gunfight survivors in which they remembered seeing the front sight on their gun in vivid clarity at the moment they made the shot.

Obviously, it's not plausible to think we will be able to obtain a "adequate" sight picture in every possible defensive scenario, but it's also not plausible to think that we will NEVER be able to obtain said sight picture either. It is for that reason that our training should be multi-faceted and lend itself to allowing us to adapt to the adversity of a dynamic incident.

But I will say that that target is a great training aid to anyone who wants to try point shooting, just like a paper plate taped to a standard silhouette target is. Back in the 70s when we were using a PPC based requalification course on B-27 targets there was a stage where you had to fire six shots strong hand only, then reload and fire six shots weak hand only from the seven yard line. Most people could keep their shots all within a small group at that range while shooting as fast as they can, even those that had trouble hitting the paper at 25 yards using their sights. Bottom line is that if you are ever in a self defense situation, it is half over before you know it started and speed is more important than shooting a nice tight group. Which I had trouble explaining to a couple of my officers that had attended a high priced shooting school, or used to shoot IPSC.

Forgive me for nitpicking, but that is only sound advice to a certain extent. Speed is only more important than accuracy until the point that accuracy falls outside of acceptable (adequate) defensive standards. Once you cross that line, speed becomes a detriment over accuracy. Like it or not, we are always responsible for where our bullets go, regardless of the reason why we engaged a particular target. If a person sacrifices accuracy for the sake of speed and completely misses the deadly threat in front of him/her, that person likely only achieved the goal of (potentially) being killed faster, perhaps at the expense of innocent bystanders caught in the crossfire.

 

[Kanewpadle]

If you ever end up in a gun fight, two things are highly likely. First, the range will be VERY close. Second, the event will happen VERY fast. Neither of those lead me to believe that the classic "stand and deliver" Weaver front sight shooting method will produce satisfactory results in that situation.

There is a place for both sighted shooting and instinctive shooting. If the situation warrants, the sights should be used. On the other hand, with proper training and practice, it's downright amazing what a shooter can do without using the sights and that is a very valuable skill to have in the toolbox.

So... I guess what I'm saying is, be good at both and know which one to use at the right time.

Couldn't have said it better myself. Good post. To the point and easy for anybody to understand.

Point shooting AND sighted shooting should be practiced.

In point shooting you may or may not push the gun forward towards the target. If you bring the gun up to or near eye level, this could be considered sighted shooting. Because whether you realize it or not, in point shooting at eye level you use your periferal vision to find the front sight as a reference as you extend towards the target.

Obviously any position other than eye level is considered instinctive point shooting whether from the hip or in between the hip and eye level.

Point shooting is one reason why some guns don't have sights that stand out and are difficult to find. Some guns have a trough sight. It's because the gun was meant to be used up close and personal and bad breath distance were you may not have time to align the sights.

 

[Jellybean]

cshoff, I got your points, I think you might be missing mine. I'm not saying that you can't achieve speed and accuracy by using the sights, I'm saying you can achieve greater speed with an acceptable loss of accuracy by not using them.

Look at the rules printed on that target. A shot outside of the 3X5 box takes two seconds off your time and a shot outside the 8" circle takes one second off your time. The fastest record is 3.56 seconds. So if a guy shoots it in 2 seconds but misses all six shots, a penalty of eight seconds, by 1/4" he is a novice by their standards but the winner, maybe, in a real gunfight.

Also, a guy that misses real fast would die at the same speed as if he didn't get a shot off at all because he was trying to use his sights, not faster. I've only had a few street cops ask me about point shooting, most of them could care less about their life, but of the ones that did one there was one thing I noticed. Most of them were able to hit the target with no problem, and of those they always hit the target with the first shot. The misses were usually with follow up shots and were correctable once they learned how to control the handgun properly under recoil. There were a few that had problems hitting the target at all and they were all higher "skilled" shooters. Their problems were because they had trained to shoot with two hands and when attempting to shoot with one hand the shots would go right, or left in the case of a lefty, and they either had to learn how to point differently or bring the gun further in to the centerline of their body.

 

[Jellybean]

Point shooting is one reason why some guns don't have sights that stand out and are difficult to find. Some guns have a trough sight. It's because the gun was meant to be used up close and personal and bad breath distance were you may not have time to align the sights.

And some handguns don't have sights at all. But if yours does, learn how to use it in every way you can. Just because they are there doesn't mean they have to be used, but they add to the versatility by making a gun that was intended strictly for close quarters gunfighting a potential fighting tool out to say 100 yards or more. I just had to throw that one in there.

 

[Kanewpadle]

Also with point shooting or sighted shooting come the responsibilty of getting effective hits on target. Even more so with point shooting we must have the ability to assess the situation and react.

This is were the use of movement and/or cover come into play. Simply pointing and pulling the trigger may be the wrong decision. You may think that you don't have the time to make the right decision. But you must. As a well known gun writer once said "every bullet has an attorney attached to it".

 

[cshoff]

cshoff, I got your points, I think you might be missing mine. I'm not saying that you can't achieve speed and accuracy by using the sights, I'm saying you can achieve greater speed with an acceptable loss of accuracy by not using them.

And I would have to argue that in a lot of situations, that is simply false. Many shooters are just as quick, if not quicker, using a legitimate sight picture,than many other shooters are who use point shooting. Of course, everything is situational, and the further you are from the target, the more critical precise sight alignment becomes.

Point shooting definitely has it's place and should certainly be in the repertoire of every defensive shooter, but it can't replace sighted fire in many situations.

Look at the rules printed on that target. A shot outside of the 3X5 box takes two seconds off your time and a shot outside the 8" circle takes one second off your time. The fastest record is 3.56 seconds. So if a guy shoots it in 2 seconds but misses all six shots, a penalty of eight seconds, by 1/4" he is a novice by their standards but the winner, maybe, in a real gunfight.

Again, I posted the drill to illustrate how proficient one can become with sighted fire under stringent time constraints. I'd guess you'd be hard pressed to find many point shooters that could complete that drill with no misses from 7 yards even in 10 seconds, but that is really irrelevant to the point I was making. If a shooter using sighted fire can draw and place 5 shots into center of mass of a humanoid target from 21 feet in 3 seconds, and a shooter using point shooting can achieve the same thing albeit with a slightly larger group, then the clear advantage, at least in my eyes, goes to the shooter using sighted fire.

Also, a guy that misses real fast would die at the same speed as if he didn't get a shot off at all because he was trying to use his sights, not faster.

Not necessarily, because in a number of incidents, a slow hit has been enough to incapacitate an attacker or otherwise thwart further aggression from the attacker. A fast miss likely won't have the same effect. Bottom line is a slow hit beats a fast miss almost 100% of the time, and you can't miss fast enough to lose a gunfight.

I've only had a few street cops ask me about point shooting, most of them could care less about their life, but of the ones that did one there was one thing I noticed. Most of them were able to hit the target with no problem, and of those they always hit the target with the first shot. The misses were usually with follow up shots and were correctable once they learned how to control the handgun properly under recoil. There were a few that had problems hitting the target at all and they were all higher "skilled" shooters. Their problems were because they had trained to shoot with two hands and when attempting to shoot with one hand the shots would go right, or left in the case of a lefty, and they either had to learn how to point differently or bring the gun further in to the centerline of their body.

Training, or a lack thereof, can well be the difference between life and death.

 

[Jellybean]

cs, you obviously aren't seeing the forest through the trees. I have responded to every thing you just said in previous posts, except for the part you completely misunderstood, and I'm not going around this bush again.