User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 7/8/2014 4:06:06 AM EDT
[#1]
I practice point shooting every time I go to the range which is 2-3 times a week.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/8/2014 4:07:14 AM EDT
[#2]
I practice a fast, instinctive shot at close range. I train to keep the handgun moving through that first shot, and am referencing the front sight by the second shot.
If I were shooting at something beyond 5-7 yards I would absolutely be using a proper sight picture. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/8/2014 4:08:09 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
When accosted by a mugger do you always ask him to step back so you can aim properly or do you practice firing from retention? I personally can get 2 solid hits in before the sights are at eye level. How stupid. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
No, because I have access to ammo and reloading supplies and can actually train myself to shoot well. When accosted by a mugger do you always ask him to step back so you can aim properly or do you practice firing from retention? I personally can get 2 solid hits in before the sights are at eye level. How stupid. Huge paper targets on a gun range in a controlled environment don't translate in any way to reality. Use your sights, don't shoot something you don't mean to--like the NYPD does. How stupid. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/8/2014 4:10:10 AM EDT
[#4]
Point shooting is a skill that is worth learning, IMHO. I was coached for several years by a man who taught that center mass shots under 10 yards were easily made without using sights. When I shot IDPA and USPSA a lot, I usually engaged targets under 10 yards while focusing on the target and not the sights. I see the sights in peripheral vision, but don't focus on them.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/8/2014 5:44:20 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Huge paper targets on a gun range in a controlled environment don't translate in any way to reality. Use your sights, don't shoot something you don't mean to--like the NYPD does. How stupid. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
No, because I have access to ammo and reloading supplies and can actually train myself to shoot well. When accosted by a mugger do you always ask him to step back so you can aim properly or do you practice firing from retention? I personally can get 2 solid hits in before the sights are at eye level. How stupid. Huge paper targets on a gun range in a controlled environment don't translate in any way to reality. Use your sights, don't shoot something you don't mean to--like the NYPD does. How stupid. So there is no point in bothering any practice at the range because it isn't like the real world. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/8/2014 6:02:54 AM EDT
[#6]
At some point things will get so close you are going to point shoot - the argument seems to be where that point is.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/8/2014 6:04:14 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Col. Applegate's stuff was as effective as it could get with the nearly vestigial sights found on old guns that were often used in the dark by people with minimal training. We have advantages today the good Col. didn't have way back when. The limitations of point shooting... People point-shoot at close range on fucking huge targets in perfect lighting and then pronounce their resultant accuracy to be adequate or even superb for a real-life task which won't resemble that scenario. Try that shit when the target is small (like a person might be who is using cover), moving, and in low light. It goes to hell pretty quick. Sighted fire is demonstrably more effective at getting bullets into bad people...which is why the units (military and LE) who have the most experience putting bullets into bad people all use sighted fire. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Do you Point-Shoot? Why or why not? What do you think of the work of Col. Applegate? -Lee Col. Applegate's stuff was as effective as it could get with the nearly vestigial sights found on old guns that were often used in the dark by people with minimal training. We have advantages today the good Col. didn't have way back when. The limitations of point shooting... People point-shoot at close range on fucking huge targets in perfect lighting and then pronounce their resultant accuracy to be adequate or even superb for a real-life task which won't resemble that scenario. Try that shit when the target is small (like a person might be who is using cover), moving, and in low light. It goes to hell pretty quick. Sighted fire is demonstrably more effective at getting bullets into bad people...which is why the units (military and LE) who have the most experience putting bullets into bad people all use sighted fire. police. I, personally, don't think there is any shooting that can really be done without training. People talk about how we point all our life. We do that, but we do it without firearms. There has to be some integration training. Also, except for shooting someone in body contact from retention, or a master shooter like Taran Butler shooting from the hip in a demonstration, I don't think there is any "unsighted" fire even in point shooting. Even under Col. Applegates program, at full extension, I think it was applying the principles of shooting a bead sighted shotgun to a hand gun, with the entire rear of the pistol being the front sight, the shooting eye being the rear sight, and body memory from training doing the rest.....which even Col. Cooper espoused. I also think precision has a large role to play. The closer the target, the less precise the sighting method can be while still being effective. At 100 yards, an iron sighted AR can be deadly for just about anyone with some basic training. At 600 yards, there are some that can still use iron sights, but most everyone else really needs optics. At 4 yards, my front sight is the rear of the slide of my Glock superimposed on the target. At 14 yards, front site, press.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/8/2014 6:05:54 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Never fired a shot in anger in my life. Prefer to keep it that way. . . . uh . . . . ok then.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/8/2014 6:21:47 AM EDT
[#9]
If you have good mechanics, you can easily get A/0 hits in the cardboard games at 7 to 10 yards, and do so faster than someone using their front sight. With practice it is extremely easy to see-saw back and forth at targets near and far, switching from target focus to front sight focus. Or even targets in an array that are obscured/half size targets or have no shoots/non threats next to them.
Just as you can slow your splits down when the targets get harder, you can decrease your target transition time by trusting yourself and looking right at the target. Be honest. Get a coach/buddy and a shot timer, and go out to the range. Set yourself up at 5 yards, and draw and fire at two targets, two or three rounds each. Now put some tape on your rear sights so that the notch is covered up. Do it again with a target focus. You will not see a discernible difference in shot placement, but your times will improve if you give it an honest shot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/8/2014 6:28:05 AM EDT
[#10]
Tagged.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/8/2014 6:33:36 AM EDT
[#11]
We were taught to use both aimed fire and point shooting at the academy. I think the Izzys still use point shooting too.
Both have their application. In police work though, you must account for each bullet fired. You don't want to hit a bystander. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/8/2014 6:54:18 AM EDT
[#12]
Sometimes you need to "point shoot".
Sometimes you need a target focus with blurry sights. Sometimes you need a hard, crisp front sight focus. Circumstance and situation dictate technique.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/8/2014 6:56:19 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Sometimes you need to "point shoot". Sometimes you need a target focus with blurry sights. Sometimes you need a hard, crisp front sight focus. Circumstance and situation dictate technique. IMHO the biggest "takeaway" from action shooting (USPSA, etc>), is learning when to apply the above doctrine. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/8/2014 6:58:25 AM EDT
[#14]
Yep, I'll point shoot out to 10 yards almost exclusively.
I'm minute of paper plate and get my shots off under 1.2 seconds. I'm more or less looking over the gun, not firing from the hip. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/8/2014 7:02:29 AM EDT
[#15]
In.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/8/2014 7:03:30 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Huge paper targets on a gun range in a controlled environment don't translate in any way to reality. Use your sights, don't shoot something you don't mean to--like the NYPD does. How stupid. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
No, because I have access to ammo and reloading supplies and can actually train myself to shoot well. When accosted by a mugger do you always ask him to step back so you can aim properly or do you practice firing from retention? I personally can get 2 solid hits in before the sights are at eye level. How stupid. Huge paper targets on a gun range in a controlled environment don't translate in any way to reality. Use your sights, don't shoot something you don't mean to--like the NYPD does. How stupid. You're either A) old B) a fudd C) never been in a combat style lifestyle ( Combat Mil. MOS, Police, Security, live in a white bread safe neighborhood) Please keep your comments to yourself. Men come here to learn how to kill other men in a fight. (or at least get pointed to the correct mindset and training opportunities.) This is GD, yada, yada, yada. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/8/2014 7:06:38 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I ususaly point shoot at anything under 7 yards in competition. I started doing it after a lot of stages where part had to be fired from retention, or from the hip. It is a hell of a lot faster. Past 7 yards and I start watching my font sight. Came here to say exactly this. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/8/2014 7:22:07 AM EDT
[#18]
The first competitive shooting I jumped into was cowboy action. I was just the run of the mill range guy before shooting cowboy, just shooting to shoot without much thought of form or function. With no formal background I learned to point shoot pretty well doing the cowboy stuff (super close targets) without really knowing I was point shooting.
Fast forward a couple years and I started shooting 3 gun… practicing with a purpose and taking some pistol classes. I found that point shooting was a blessing and a curse. Close in stuff I shoot exceedingly fast and accurate but I had to fight the urge to point shoot on longer more precision type targets. I think you need to know how to do both proficiently, my problem is that when I get rolling in a stage that has close stuff and then bumps out to targets at 35 to 40 yards, I will often fall back on my roots, take my eyes of the front sight and try to point shoot my way through it. In short… know both, practice both and be able to adjust between the two under stress. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/8/2014 7:27:36 AM EDT
[#19]
Tier 1 point shooting instructor.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/8/2014 7:31:58 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
He who shoots first wins Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
He who hits first wins. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/8/2014 7:49:36 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The first competitive shooting I jumped into was cowboy action. I was just the run of the mill range guy before shooting cowboy, just shooting to shoot without much thought of form or function. With no formal background I learned to point shoot pretty well doing the cowboy stuff (super close targets) without really knowing I was point shooting. Fast forward a couple years and I started shooting 3 gun… practicing with a purpose and taking some pistol classes. I found that point shooting was a blessing and a curse. Close in stuff I shoot exceedingly fast and accurate but I had to fight the urge to point shoot on longer more precision type targets. I think you need to know how to do both proficiently, my problem is that when I get rolling in a stage that has close stuff and then bumps out to targets at 35 to 40 yards, I will often fall back on my roots, take my eyes of the front sight and try to point shoot my way through it. In short… know both, practice both and be able to adjust between the two under stress. Practice, practice, and practice. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/8/2014 6:05:17 PM EDT
[#22]
One of my observations is that sighted fire takes a lot of practice while pointing is very easily picked-up once a student learns to grip a handgun so it aligns with their forearm.
I can only recall having a nice sight picture one time while having my gun drawn on a BG. He was pretty far away and going after someone else, not me. The statement made about the different dynamics encountered by MIL & LE is absolutely true. Things also get interesting when the shooter and target are both moving. It's very hard to use sights under those conditions. It takes a ton of discipline and practice to pull one's focus away from the threat when reacting to an attack, as opposed to initiating the fight or shooting to protect another person. IIRC, the hit rate in actual shootings for LEOs using sighted fire is in the 18% range but much higher for LEOs who are trained in target-focused shooting techniques. Of course, we should be proficient with both methods as neither one is best for all situations. -Lee |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 2:25:13 PM EDT
[#23]
May I offer a driving analogy?
Those of us who drive manual transmissions don't need to watch the instruments closely to know when it's time to shift gears. We can come very close just based upon our senses. Sights are like instruments. If you have a good feel for things, they just confirm what you already know. We don't have to constantly watch the speedo and tach to drive. We can focus on driving. -Lee |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 2:58:19 PM EDT
[#24]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 7:02:25 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryI have a lot of respect for Mr. Lamb and he raises some excellent points but ignores the data: For LEOs: about 18% hit rate for sighted fire vs. about 90% hit rate for point-shooting in actual shootings, with handguns. Unfortunately, our best measure of performance is static targets under controlled conditions and they lead us astray. To be the best we can be: Practice and get good at any method that works for your situation. -Lee |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 7:23:55 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
For LEOs: about 18% hit rate for sighted fire vs. about 90% hit rate for point-shooting in actual shootings, with handguns. Unfortunately, our best measure of performance is static targets under controlled conditions and they lead us astray Quote HistoryQuoted:
For LEOs: about 18% hit rate for sighted fire vs. about 90% hit rate for point-shooting in actual shootings, with handguns. Unfortunately, our best measure of performance is static targets under controlled conditions and they lead us astray Where are you getting that 90% hit figure from? Here's a thought. If point shooting were that much better than aimed fire why do all the best "practical" shooters (who are scored on speed and accuracy) use their sights for everything past literal spitting distance? Since the competition targets are static (except when they aren't) how does point shooting suddenly overtake sighted fire in real life situations five fold? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 7:32:05 PM EDT
[#27]
If you can accurately engage distant targets in any reasonable timeframe, you can sure has shit hit a large target up close by a "flash" sight picture or sheer proprioception.
Everyone I know who can ding down a plate at 25 yards can blast a few rounds into a nearby IPSC target in a split second without formally aiming, The converse is NOT true, however 
While there's nothing wrong with being able to shoot by muscle memory per-se, a whole lot of people are using it as an excuse for shitty shooting. It reminds me of guys who play guitar superfast but sound like crap the entire time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 7:36:05 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have a lot of respect for Mr. Lamb and he raises some excellent points but ignores the data: For LEOs: about 18% hit rate for sighted fire vs. about 90% hit rate for point-shooting in actual shootings, with handguns. Unfortunately, our best measure of performance is static targets under controlled conditions and they lead us astray. To be the best we can be: Practice and get good at any method that works for your situation. -Lee Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have a lot of respect for Mr. Lamb and he raises some excellent points but ignores the data: For LEOs: about 18% hit rate for sighted fire vs. about 90% hit rate for point-shooting in actual shootings, with handguns. Unfortunately, our best measure of performance is static targets under controlled conditions and they lead us astray. To be the best we can be: Practice and get good at any method that works for your situation. -Lee To be fair Lamb's "data' comes from a whole bunch of actual gunfights in which he was an actual participant. From the "Blackhawk Down" incident to the bad old days in of 2005- 2008 in Baghdad he saw way more real and up close gunfights than I ever will so I tend to give that level of experience a whole bunch of "credit". Your mileage (guessin) might vary. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/22/2014 5:57:00 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Where are you getting that 90% hit figure from? Here's a thought. If point shooting were that much better than aimed fire why do all the best "practical" shooters (who are scored on speed and accuracy) use their sights for everything past literal spitting distance? Since the competition targets are static (except when they aren't) how does point shooting suddenly overtake sighted fire in real life situations five fold? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
For LEOs: about 18% hit rate for sighted fire vs. about 90% hit rate for point-shooting in actual shootings, with handguns. Unfortunately, our best measure of performance is static targets under controlled conditions and they lead us astray Where are you getting that 90% hit figure from? Here's a thought. If point shooting were that much better than aimed fire why do all the best "practical" shooters (who are scored on speed and accuracy) use their sights for everything past literal spitting distance? Since the competition targets are static (except when they aren't) how does point shooting suddenly overtake sighted fire in real life situations five fold? One of my mentors did a lot of research into self-defense shootings with handguns. Most often, military engagements take place with rifles beyond appropriate point-shooting range. Inside a room, point-shooting seems to come naturally to many combat veterans I've spoken to. The best practical shooters can shoot VERY well even if you take away their sights. Again, we should be very good at the entire continuum of shooting skills. It seems to work better to learn to shoot by feel, then to learn the use of sights. At close range, when you are under attack, moving and dealing with a moving threat point-shooting just works better. As the range increases, the target gets smaller or one is called upon to defend another, sighted fire is the answer. Point-shooting also comes more naturally and works better with our natural responses to danger. The big point I'm trying to make is to be our best we should be very proficient at both. Too often, people seem to make it a only one way or the other choice. The correct answer, as usual, is GET BOTH. -Lee P.S. I really appreciate the efforts of everyone taking the time to share their thoughts and experiences. There are a lot of very smart and experienced folks here which is why I enjoy these discussions. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/22/2014 8:36:28 PM EDT
[#30]
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
