Use Of Sight Shooting In Close Quarters Gunfights

[5shot]

Here's a link to a Chronology on the use of P&S as I call it. It dates way back to 1804. Dueling pistols sometimes came without sights or it was against the rules to use them.

There's even a link to the pics of Ruby shooting Oswald using P&S.

AIMED Point Shooting or P&S Chronology

..........

I'm still standing by to be inundated with pics and videos of SS actually being used in CQB.

I have a knife and fork in hand, and ready to chow down. I have a bib on that reads: Guess whose eating crow?

If you come up with some, I would be happy to add them or links to them on my site if that's OK. My aim is to put out info on self defense that has to do with helping Police, CCW folks, and home defenders survive CQ life threats.

[swdr]

Originally Posted by 5shot

I'm still standing by to be inundated with pics and videos of SS actually being used in CQB.

I have a knife and fork in hand, and ready to chow down. I have a bib on that reads: Guess whose eating crow?

Still playing the child, I see. Meanwhile, those "scientific studies" that you touted proving the "experts" "wrong" are still conveniently MIA. What a blowhard. You act like you don't even know what "eating crow" means.

[gr8fatman]

Originally Posted by 5shot

Here's a link to a Chronology on the use of P&S as I call it. It dates way back to 1804. Dueling pistols sometimes came without sights or it was against the rules to use them.

There's even a link to the pics of Ruby shooting Oswald using P&S.

AIMED Point Shooting or P&S Chronology

..........

I'm still standing by to be inundated with pics and videos of SS actually being used in CQB.

I have a knife and fork in hand, and ready to chow down. I have a bib on that reads: Guess whose eating crow?

If you come up with some, I would be happy to add them or links to them on my site if that's OK. My aim is to put out info on self defense that has to do with helping Police, CCW folks, and home defenders survive CQ life threats.

OK 5 Shot,

Very interesting chronology, and I plan to continue reading it in it's entirety. I'll admit, point shooting isn't for me, as I have no faith in my ability to use it. However, I do not have any distain for those who choose to utilize this technique. What will raise my dander (as I specifically said in my last post) is trying to prove a point with misleading info, or the omition of evidence that may contradict the point being made.

In the chronology, I find it interesting that Jack Ruby was used as an example of a successful point shooting tecnique.

Here's a pic of the event.



While technically it would be considered point shooting. With a gun pushed into a persons belly, the shooter will achieve the intended point of impact every time. No matter what technique is used, if any. A close your eyes, gun behind the back, count to three, alley ooop shot will succeed if the muzzle is in the targets belly.

Also, in this case the target was held by LE and mechanical restraints. This is not an example of point shooting used in self defense. This is a example of an assasination. Another example of using misleading info to make make a point.

Please continue to share your views, and use appropriate examples to demonstrate those views. But remember, CalCCW members come to this website to gleen reliable and accurate information. Please don't let them down.

Thank you

[tango-52]

Don't feed the trolls.

[El Gato]

Originally Posted by tango-52

Don't feed the trolls.

nasty bit of business that...

[Keith92555]

Good points gr8fatman. I don't think there is any way to talk sense into 5shots brain. I frankly am tired of reading his nonsense. Someone please close this thread!! Stop the pain. STOP THE PAIN!!!

[huna koa]

Originally Posted by Keith92555

Good points gr8fatman. I don't think there is any way to talk sense into 5shots brain. I frankly am tired of reading his nonsense. Someone please close this thread!! Stop the pain. STOP THE PAIN!!!

..who are reasonable and responsible will do so at the appropriate time. As in war,you pick your fields of battle on your own terms.

[akulahawk]

Originally Posted by 5shot

Thanks Poogsdad.

...........

You can copy the video and then import it to windows movie maker which came with my pc, and then run through it frame by frame a few time and you will not, I think, that the good guy's gun is about chest high and not up a eye level. Here is alink to more info on it on my site that shows several of the pics: Florida Shootout

Here's a pic of the grip used and it gives you an automatic and correct FSP. just point-n-pull, point-n-pull. If you want to check out the sights to see if they are aligned properly just look down your arm.

Like I said: I watched the video. Your pics show only ONE camera view of the incident. The OTHER view shows that the Security Guard's weapon was brought to eye level... The Security Guard planned the response... It's not a purely defensive/instinctive action...

[El Gato]

A short thought...

In my professional career I have pointed loaded guns at miscreants of varying malfeasance.... and thinking back on it... and being prone to having miscellaneous random thoughts at the most opportune times... I remember thinking on a number of occasions that the sights on my Glock were rather large when superimposed over the chest of said evil doer... fortunately, they have all seen the error of their ways when having their own special "come to jesus" moment and I have not had to turn the gun on... with a little grace and luck I will NEVER have to turn it on when confronted by other homosapien's or perhaps they will be a little less sapien... anyway I digress... the point being that even when scared I had trained to the point that the gun only felt natural when I was looking through the sights....

and Yes I can hit targets thrown in the air using my sights... and yes I have shot trap with a .22 rifle and a S&W 22s pistol with a dot scope (done by moving the trap to the 500 meter rifle range) and solid lead single bullet loads with some minor success and yes the very first guy I pointed a gun at was in Garden Grove 29 years ago... I was leaving the gun shop I worked at at about 0200 after working some overtime fixin' guns and was confronted by a guy with a ponytail wearing an eyepatch who insisted I buy some dope.. and when he reached into a bag I drew a 1911 on him... the hoag sights looked big I am sure but I must admit that at 2 ft. I was simply indexing the gun on his sternum .... he decided to ply his trade in Stanton or Anaheim or someplace elsewhere...gives me the willies thinkin' about it and writin' about it... anyway... I guess I wasn't ACTUALLY lookin at the sights at the time... but give me a break... I was 21 and had no formal training other than what most other American redneck Oakies from Kern get...which was quite a lot come to think about it... but things have progressed some since then

[THE Gimper]

Originally Posted by El Gato

the hoag sights looked big I am sure but I must admit that at 2 ft. I was simply indexing the gun on his sternum .... I guess I wasn't ACTUALLY lookin at the sights at the time... but give me a break.

Indeed. And as gr8fatman pointed out in the Jack Ruby example above, at that distance it almost doesn't matter what method you're using. It's almost impossible to miss.

[Keith92555]

This guy is getting spanked on multiple forums. Can't find even one favorable reply by any knowledgeable source. This guy is NUTS. OF COURSE point shooting is effective at 0-3 yards. Unless you are using this gun....

YOU CAN'T MISS!! If you actually want to hit something beyond that distance, you will need to reference your sights. I, personally, want to be able to shoot the perp BEFORE he gets into my personal space. No one can convince this guy to find his sights (unless he ever needs to use his gun in self-defense). Good luck in that event 5shot.

[El Gato]

Originally Posted by Keith92555

This guy is getting spanked on multiple forums. Can't find even one favorable reply by any knowledgeable source. This guy is NUTS. OF COURSE point shooting is effective at 0-3 yards. Unless you are using this gun....

YOU CAN'T MISS!! If you actually want to hit something beyond that distance, you will need to reference your sights. I, personally, want to be able to shoot the perp BEFORE he gets into my personal space. No one can convince this guy to find his sights (unless he ever needs to use his gun in self-defense). Good luck in that event 5shot.

what intoxicating grips... I simply must have a pair... used them much?....

Opinions are like body parts...everybody has them...and for some reason we feel the need to share...some more than others...and people with outrageous body parts...like piercings... feel the need to strut their body parts more than those with more subtle body parts....there is an analogy here if I could just grasp it...hmmmmmm

[ordu]

Since I have absolutely nothing but time on my hands these days I've been experimenting with this idea.

For the record: All of my training has been sight based. Why would I blow a thousand bucks and get all my sights the same on all my pistols otherwise... I digress. However, in CQB training I'm usually firing as soon as the pistol is unholstered. Say 10' or less. Obviously it's situational based so there's no at x use y until x > 10 then use z crap.

While I do not have one these widgets that attach to the side of the gun I do own XD's which reading on lots of boards are apparently the in thing for point shooting. So, enter XD 4" service model... and its airsoft friend. (thank you robert for letting me borrow it)

So, my condo does not allow for much range in firing but it gives me a couple choice setups for testing this at over 10 feet.

Unholstered, firing at a spot 20' 7" away my results for 10 shots:

Sighted: 90% success rate at headshot
Pointed: 50% success rate at headshot

Sighted: 100% success rate at hitting the target
Pointed: 90% success rate at hitting the target

I tried two different methods of point shooting, using my middle finger to fire (which took some practice but I got used to it pretty quick) and just pointing the gun and firing. The first method I was most successful with so I'm going with those numbers.

More interesting was when I switched to my left hand.

Sighted: 90% success rate at headshot
Pointed: 20% success rate at headshot

Sighted: 100% success rate at hitting the target
Pointed: 60% success rate at hitting the target (and the failures were epic in most cases, like not even hitting the paper)

I am fairly ambidextrous - I just prefer to shoot right handed since most guns eject the brass to the right.

The target was moved at least 2' in one or more directions between each test to hopefully prevent memory having something to do with it.

Granted, none of this is scientific and unfortunately my nikon d80 is in the shop so I don't have any cool pictures of my setup, which wasn't cool at all and I think my wife would eviscerate me if I sent out pictures of the inside of our house.

Anyway, just more fodder for the trolls but it was a fun experiment to do. I'd like to repeat it at the range with my P7M8 and p2000sk and see what the results are (couldn't find an airsoft of those).

This would seem like a very easy thing to test scientifically, which in my mind has already been done by the overwhelming data that the sights do, indeed, make a difference.

[OIS]

Second the motion.

Originally Posted by Keith92555

Good points gr8fatman. I don't think there is any way to talk sense into 5shots brain. I frankly am tired of reading his nonsense. Someone please close this thread!! Stop the pain. STOP THE PAIN!!!

[5shot]

Following pics show hits that are not in tight pretty little groups, but they would stop or kill most mortals.

At 15 feet or so, it's repeatable most every time. Just point-n-pull, point-n-pull as fast as you can point-n-pull.

No thinking, no cognitive directed sight alignment, MT stance or grip, etc., and shooting one handed. The sights will be in proper alignment and you will get a correct FSP everytime you point.

Want to check that out, put your index finger along side the frame, and then point - stop - look at the sights and the target.

You certainly can take the time to use the sights and confrm their correct placement on the target, unless it's sort of dark and/or you can't see or focus on them, which will be the case per the science and the data.

The bottom line is use what works for U.