Use Of Sight Shooting In Close Quarters Gunfights

[cksh8me]

Didn't Bill Jordan shoot and kill his own deputy?

[IAmASensFan]

Good time to call Mythbusters.

I don't normally use sights. Although the gun is in line with my eyeballs, I focus on the target. And I'm not talking one shot per second stuff here.

Is that point shooting, or is my use of sights developed enough that I don't notice?

When we train, we do a bit of shooting from the hip, which is DEFINITELY not using any sights...at 3 yards or less, you can be VERY accurate.

[gr8fatman]

Originally Posted by 5shot

...





...

My non-expert 2 cents. It's very hard to tell from these pics. But, it looks to me like the gaurd has his arms parallel to the floor. This indicates to me that he is using some sort of combat stance (crouch), which in my mind would put the gun at his eye level. Is he using the sights? Who knows for sure, but him? My interpretation.

[El Gato]

Originally Posted by CCWInstructor

Nice picture of Lou! What is right in front of his dominant eye? And level with his eye? A gun! What is on top of the slide? SIGHTS!!!!!!


WOW!!!!!
What a concept!

Personally, I was astounded...I mean... what is there to say... I always wondered what that bumpy thing was on the front of the gun.... and now I know...

Speaking as an instructor... with only about 550 clients on the range so far this year... I believe it would be malpractice to teach anything but using the front sight.....

Well Mr. Catboy would you kindly explain to the jury how you instructed your client to not use the sights but simply point the gun in the direction of the threat, following which your client negligently let fly with those deadly hollow point 9mm rounds what went through the wall behind the bad guy and killed his lovin' baby mama and how teaching that method of pointing the gun in the general direction of the threat would have produced a better outcome than simply putting the bumpy little device the manufacturer so kindly placed on said smokewagon in the middle of said threat and pressing the trigger of the weapon in such a manner as to not move the gun....since that is the industry standard... has been for Oh.... 300+ years... when they figured out that if you put a sight on the musket your soldiers actually stood a better chance of hitting the enemy... and how much insurance are you carrying Mr. Catboy who USED to own a nice little profitable firearms instruction business.....

[libertarian]

Frankly, I've had at look at your qualifications, Mr. 5shot, and I've had a look at CCWI's credentials. I know who's advice I'll be taking. Thanks much for your opinion.

[El Gato]

and here I thought we might have abandoned a long tradition of spirited debate...

[swdr]

Originally Posted by 5shot

However, when you are dealing with innovation and advancement, credentials attesting to past learned behaviors may not be of that much value.

True. But, of course, they may be, instead, of the usual predictive value when you are dealing with innovation and advancement.

Originally Posted by 5shot

Additionally, "experts" who have taught, and continue to teach the "wrong" shooting methods as proven by scientific investigation and studies, can be expected to slam any upstart who questions their behavior. And their associates can be expected out of fellowship, to do the same."

I'm disappointed in your antagonistic use of scare quotes to denigrate your opponents.

Further, it also doesn't help your case to claim that all the shooting methods, other than the method you are touting, being taught by firearms experts have been proved wrong by scientific studies without providing any references whatsoever to those scientific studies.

You're credentials may look impressive, but your unsavory polemics do not. You might consider taking that chip off your shoulder and engaging in a more honest debate.

[X-ffdo]

Right or wrong, shooting a rifle at long distance is very different than shooting at someone with a pistol who is a few feet from you.
I think that some firearms are sighted with a 6 oclock position so that when you shoot you look above/over the sights at the target/threat then you hit center, for CQC.
I think it is normal for a person who is under a threat to look at the source, focus and track the source of the threat, you would instinctively tend to do that. That is where the difference between an experienced (read "bloodied") person who has been exposed to such situations before will hopefully default to his training, (Inoculation) and someone who has not seen blood flying.
In flight training, sometimes your instinct will kill you (Spin recovery and graveyard spiral recovery, two different maneuvers, for those who fly, nose down and the more you strive to pitch up the worse it gets) People sometimes will even freeze and become totally dysfunctional. Specially when components fail, or do not behave normally.
We are not talking about a normal situation, this is why we never train a pilot under stress, except when teaching emergency maneuvers, we introduce a stressor to induce some fear. Must learn to organize your thoughts and your training will take over. If you yield to panic you are dead.
That is why regular training. (reinforcement) is a must.
A tendency in this country is to cut corners, fill in the squares, practice something once or twice to cut cost. Well, The law of primacy in learning says, when put under stress and TSHTF, you default back to your initial training, you must learn it right the first time. The law of recency says if you did it yesterday you are better off than if you practiced it a year ago. That is why we train over and over. (Reinforcement and consolidation.)
I am not an expert, except in the air, that one is mine! I have been in flight training for over 40 years, still am, and could tell you many, many stories. I have seen it!.
The thing is all theory, until it is your turn at the barrel. That's is why I believe, if you trully want to know a subject, teach it.
So if you trainers say it is so, so be it, you are the experts.

[gr8fatman]

Again a non-expert's view. After reviewing your P & S website. I noticed the additional pics of the pharmacy robbery. Two pics in particular caught my attention. Here they are.

# 9

# 10

Looking at pic number nine, the BG is focused on the pharmacist and or drugs. The security guard has already turned the corner of the counter.

In pic number 10, the security guard clearly has the drop on the BG.

My point is, the time it takes to "sight shoot", as you put it, has nothing to do with win or lose in this example. It's the element of surprise, pure and simple. The BG was caught off guard. And in my opinion, for you to suggest that point shooting is the reason for the BGs demise, is completely irresponsible.

Again, I'm not an expert. But frankly, do I really need to be a proctologist to identify a load of crap. I don't think so. Although, having these additional pics, and video initially, would have made it easier. Why didn't you post the video?

I'll help you out. Would-be robber shot and killed by security guard - AOL Video

Now, if I'm the one full of crap, I'll accept that, and I will eat crow happily. But I'm not the one calling myself an expert. Nor, am I providing only partial pieces evidence to make a point.

[X-ffdo]

Yeah, looks like the BG is wearing loose blue rubber gloves and has dropped a small box, (Which you can see in first frame of previous post, but not on the second picture), as the security guard is about to shoot.

[El Gato]

Let us not be clear..

"sight shooting" is not necessarily taking a specific NRA perfect sight picture.. Ayoob often refers to it as a "flash" sight picture... that is what I ask of my students at contact range... flash sight picture....so far so good... the students have been stacking up the bodies.

Now when you ask them "did you see the front sight"... the answer is probably that they will tell you what you want to hear... they most often don't remember... the witnesses have universally indicated they had the gun up in front of the face and were making it run... they may not have hit with all shots, but they hit good enough....

We teach them to index the gun in front of them... lasers or no lasers... and all lasers sighted so that the dot appears to be sitting on top of the front sight at 7 yards....look through the sights and turn the gun on in the most expeditious manner possible...

anything less is mal-practice....er... mal-training?

[desertrat]

Not an expert by any stretch of the imagination, just my .02.

The IDF (Isralei Defense Force) so i have heard trains using their pointer finger alongside the gun, with their middle finger as the trigger finger as was told to me by a marine friend of mine who is a seargant and cant tell me what he does in the military. I was also told that when engaging with a pistol that it should just be an extension of your arm.

But as anyone with a brain would surmize, these techniques are probably only used if their is absolutly no chance of getting some sort of sight picture, I have no idea, never been in a gun fight, and hope to hell I never have to.

Just my 2 cents

[X-ffdo]

Originally Posted by El Gato

Let us not be clear..
Now when you ask them "did you see the front sight"... the answer is probably that they will tell you what you want to hear... they most often don't remember... the witnesses have universally indicated they had the gun up in front of the face and were making it run... they may not have hit with all shots, but they hit good enough....

Therein lies the issue...they do not remember because they were coping with an unusual situation, their brains were sorting out all kinds of new, unknown perceptions, a mind overload?, triggered by a situation which they might be able to reconcile in a while, that insight might come sometime later.
Then the event, like when things go into slow motion, hell, that's another one I do not understand at all!, but I have experienced that twice, not related to firearms.
Did you see the front sight?? I do not know guys, you tell me!!.
That is the same reason why you make your statement to the law later. Your coping abilities might be max out for a short while. Sometimes your mind will do the coping for you, temporary amnesia. Not unheard of after a vehicle crash where you do not remember what you were doing right before the collision.
This is an interesting subject!
I do not know why. remember those cops shooting at that van in L.A. that was moving slowly, and about 100 rounds were fired and no hits. the film was in the news. What a fiasco!!. Remember? wonder why? I do.

[RomanDad]

I begin shooting while the gun is still in the holster, and dont stop until everything standing in the vicinity is dead.

[Keith92555]

Looks like 5shot just got a helluva beatdown delivered by CCWInstructor, El Gato, libertarian, swdr, X-ffdo, and gr8fatman. Can he possibly come back from this one?? I DON'T THINK SO!!

I think if he had started out his post emphasizing the importance of training (a la X-ffdo's post) he may have gotten a little respect. I am sure that a lot of the training goes out the window when the bullets are flying, but practice, practice, practice will allow you to revert to your training in stressful situations. I will continue sight shooting practice because that is all I've ever done, I was taught it in the Marines, and it has been proven by generations of Marines.

Not that there isn't any merit to 5shot's method. But all of us have seen the videos of police shoot-outs where 20-50 shots are fired and 1 or 2 bullets hit the mark. There can't be any doubt among us that if just one of the cops or BGs in these situations had taken the extra 1/10 of a second to AIM THE GUN, the gunfight would have ended much, much sooner.

5shot, you should not start your posts by touting your method and bashing all other methods of shooting. It only demeans your standing on this forum.