You should be able to see hundreds to thousands of pics and videos of Sight Shooting, since Sight Shooting has been taught for 100+ years; and film and videos have been around for at least 50 of those years.
And as there are million and millions of handgun owners in the U.S. of A., there is a giant pool of possibilities to draw from, plus there are thousands of handgun trainers.
Even the NRA can participate as they offer handgun training via NRA certified handgun instructors, and as I understand the situation, Sight Shooting is the main shooting method taught.
Now realistically, I don't except much if any response as I have been involved in the area of close quarters self defense for 10+ years, I have yet to run across even one pic or video of Sight Shooting used effectively in a real close quarters gunfight. I have a patent for a handgun aiming aid that was patented back in 2000, so you can count me as more than just an interested bystander in regards to handgun self defense use.
My only aim is to determine/use the method/s that provides the best chance of aiming and shooting accurately at close quarters in a real life threat close quarters situation, becasue it is in CQ situations where the likely hood of your being shot and/or killed is the greatest.
Per NYPD statistics, 75% of gunfights occur at less than 20 feet, and if you are going to be shot and killed, there is an 81% chance that it will be at less than 6 feet, and a 90% chance that it will be at less than 15 feet.
The only savings grace is that the mis rate in armed encounters is more than 80%. That means that for every five bullets fired at a target, four+ go somewhere else. So, unless you are having a very unlucky day, chances are you will not be in a gunfight, and if you are, you will survive.
So, I would appreciate it if you or anyone could provide me with URL's to place on mynew page of Sight Shooting and/or other shooting methods, being used effectively in real close quarters gunfights.
I will check them out, and if they appear to be factual and fair as to their presentation, I will add them to the top portion of the page.
Rejects will be added at the bottom of the page if appropriate for viewing by the general public.
Please send them to ps (at) pointshooting.com
I also would appreciate being sent URL's to Pics - Videos - Films that show alternate shooting methods, such as FAS, QK, CAR, P&S, ..., that also show them to be effective in close quarters gunfight situations.
I will add them as links below those showing Sight Shooting being used effectively.
The method being used does not have to finely defined. For example, there are two pics on the new page of alternate methods being used.
In one, Jack Ruby is using P&S to shoot and kill Oswald. A close examination of the photos discloses the he truly is using P&S. In the second photo, it is obvious that a drugstore guard is using a modified two handed isso grip to dispatch a robber.
Would be nice to know that the shooting method you plan to use to defend your life and your loved ones, has actually been used in close quarters combat. Trust but verify makes sense.
Just saying something is so, doesn't make it so, now-a-days in the age of the electron.
i have figured after many ours studying and hours at the range. point shooting can and will save yourlife,
you can side step draw and fire before your assailint will be able to track you horizontally and fire an effective shot. it takes alot of practice but if you get it right to where it is instinct if will save your life civilian or not
If you are an "average joe" who is not a 20plus yards marksman or probably a bit closer, you have to make a decision real quick on using a firearm. It may not be a second but every bit of a second counts and point shooting IMO is the only method that, if done with some practice, will save you that bit of a second and save your life, particularly with these smaller mouseguns, where sights are small and almost insignificant. Firearms with lasers etc, as good as they can be, still require that little extra bit of a second to not only have on but to focus in on your target--this is time that you cannot afford if a minisecond counts. In addition to this forum, defensive carry.com contains many articles under its tactics subcategory, and concealed carry.com and threat focussed.com also contain point shoot info if you look for it. Many good tips on how to achieve a level of success with point shooting probably at that under 10 yds or so scenario (my limit) and I commend the start of this thread on this forum--looking forward to some of our "experts" participating. Everytime I target shoot I bring along the "mouser" or even the 38 for some point shooting.
Good stuff 5shot. Thanks. I was taught at close proximity to raise the gun to belt level, so, your upper arm would be aiming down to your elbow and forearm perpendicular pointing toward the target, and let er rip. Farther away, move aim and shoot. I'd rather take a second and land one good shot than send a flurry of lead who knows where.
It's interesting that even with their training, none of the police remembered if they aimed or pointed. Stress effects us all I guess. I suspect our troops who fight every day are aware of exactly what methods they're employing since they do it almost every day.
I am investing in the Center Axis Relock System Instructor program coming up in July.
I've been researching self defense and firearm training that "work" in CQC combat situations regardless of civilian/leo/military use.
Your accurate info on the "hit percentages" was pleasant to see and you should know those stats of being 18-20% hit accuracy are the NATION WIDE LEO stats!
Pretty much quoted info straight from the CAR Manual and the primary reason why Paul Castle created the system.
I spent a very short time as an LEO and look forward as an NRA Instructor, RSO, Self Defense Instructor and future CAR Instructor to teaching others how to WIN in CQC confrontations.
The weaver stance(s) and isosceles stances are great for sport shooting where you have time and non-combatant targets to shoot at but in CQC confrontations when stress is high and you are only several feet away from an attacker its apparent that they are ineffective at helping TRAINED professionals to WIN.
I'm sure there are many other forms of CQC firearm training but what I like is how it works well with a specific self defense (not martial arts or mma) program I will be basing my instructing on as well.
We all need to remember to "train how we need to fight in order to fight how we trained"!
I appreciate the competitive aspect of Sport Shooting for fun or professionally but I don't care about hitting a target 20+ yards away much less with a specifically designed "target pistol" and having one eye closed.
In combat your bodies natural instinct will FORCE both eyes open, cause extreme increase in heart rate and ELIMINATING complex motor skills and we end up relying on basic primal INSTINCTIVE methods of self preservation.
If you train for it than when you brain goes "oh s%$!" your instinct will kick in and do what you have been training in order to save your behind.
To many LEO are missing 80-83% of the time in high stress REAL LIFE THREATENING confrontations...what makes Joe Citizen think he is going to do much better if his training is less and only based on shooting targets 20+ yards away.
I fully expect to be the least experience guy at the course but a little "humility/humbleness" is worth learning not only how to save my own life but to be able to teach it to others as well!
The course is $500 plus all expenses and your own gear or $1000 for all inclusive including room, board, ammo, gear, firearms etc.
I'm putting my "poker bankroll" aside to do the $1000 option as I am confident that even adding another 3-4 NRA Instructor Certs are not going to give me the benefits that the CAR training will.
I am happy to be NRA Certified but unfortunately the NRA does not teach this form of CQC training specifically (to my knowledge) and in fact many of the "old guard" in my neck of the woods frown upon the system.
We all have to make life decisions and for me spending money on a course that makes sense to not only learn but to be able to teach others that has practical application in an actual self defense situation makes sense.
Are there other course...yep. Are they better than what I believe C.A.R. will offer me...I honestly have to say nope.
I will keep you guys posted and may even blog if I am not worn out...its a 5 day trainers course.
I teach point shooting and front sight shooting in advanced coursework. When people take the time to learn the techniques and make the technique work through repetition they can quickly see that within the 21 foot reactionary gap that those techniques are fast, relatively accurate, and they'll likely never get to see the sights anyway. The Teuller drill is the perfect example of why. When I kick out the statistics illustrating that the bulk of shootings are likely to be in low-light or no-light situations it just reinforces the need for point shooting inside the 21 foot reactionary gap.
I'm also a NRA instructor and we instructors know that the NRA wants us to teach their material by the book when we teach their coursework. They simply don't want the liability of such advanced techniques. Besides, everyone has to have a foundation of the fundamentals before they can get into the advanced coursework.
Not understanding that too much/too little trigger finger is pulling/pushing the pistol or that one might be inadvertently squeezing with the pinky and ring fingers on the strong hand pulling the muzzle down is a huge downfall. Sight picture being a fundamental also covers the line of sight issue for point shooting and front sight shooting. Most of us as instructors have had to tell shooters not to sag their head, but rather to bring the firearm to their eyes, ie the line of sight aspect.
Sadly, the statistics are going to be there to illustrate that in CQB environments where a handgun is employed that most will never get to their sights. The article claimed 20% said they had, but I'd bet the farm that's a skewed statistic as many of those LEOs would have wanted to claim they did use the sights to avoid any reprimands. The major thing that's often not mentioned is that LEOs are documented as missing 7 out of 10 shots at just 21 feet per the FBI's stats, but one has to consider all that's going on once a shooting starts. The FBI's latest manual on Violent Encounters is an eye opener for folks who are unfamiliar with LEO statistics of that nature.
If LEOs are trained religiously to use their sights and miss 7 out of 10 shots at just 21 feet then why are we still training them for failure?
The statistics show that sight picture and sight alignment are difficult to apply inside 15 yards on a genuine threat and a near impossibility for most people inside 7 yards. 21 feet (7 yards) can be covered typically in 3 seconds and it's called the reactionary gap for a reason. Most people have enough trouble just identifying a threat in 3 seconds, which is typically done visually, let alone formulating a response and putting it into action. Kick in the increased heart rate, increased breathing, adrenaline dump, potential for tunnel vision, auditory exclusion, perceptual narrowing, the loss of fine motor skills, the likelihood of low light or no light environments, and a threat intent on causing you harm through violence and you have a near impossible technique to incorporate with sight picture/sight alignment using a handgun in a survival situation.
Here's an important question. Do you (generic use) train on a visual cue, audio cue, or just your own personal timing? There's a huge difference between the three with the visual cue being the most likely of the three. Personal timing simply cannot be gauged in scenarios as it's based on still-shooting going when you're ready and it varies so much from person to person. Audio cues, like shot timers, mean you're already on the alert and that cannot be avoided. A visual cue can be adapted to lower your readiness, though you'd still be cued up. Throw in a threat that's shooting at you then the personal timing and audio cues go out the window completely.
Heck, even the FBI's own statistics illustrated that bad guys in their studies had practiced point shooting and front sight shooting because they knew they would never be able to get to their sights fast enough because of the close-in environment they would likely be engaged in. If the bad guys are training on it, why aren't we doing the same?
That's in part why I've developed a competition around those concepts to illustrate that the statistics are dead-on. Everything forces you to react as if it were real world: perceive that a potential threat is present, identify it as a threat, formulate a response, initiate that response plan. Force on force training exists to illustrate that in the real world bad guys don't stand still, they often shoot back, and your fine motor skills disappear quite rapidly.
Fact is it's just another tool for survival. If you can't get to the sights or simply cannot see them then you have another option, but it certainly requires training. Knowing both aspects are equally important as one is more applicable at a distance, however self-defense justifications change dramatically as distance increases. (also dependent on what State you live in)
It's another one of the ironies of history that the most trusted pistols in history, the 1911A1 45 ACP was the reason that point shooting was no longer taught. The error was the position of the slide stop pin on the slide, which made having the finger along the slide a questionable practice.
This is why the US Military stopped teaching the practice of point shooting.
The great mystery is why they never retooled to modify the error.
Incidently, the US Military has now returned to point shooting AKA reflexive shooting for their rifles as that technique is far more effective in the new world of combat conditions.
Practic is what counts drawing and pulling the trigger. I look at the target not the gun. I go to the range and shoot twice a week, I go with my friends, we shoot pretty good i don't miss much we start at 7 yards and draw and shoot not aimed fire. then go to 3feet and push and draw and shoot. not aimed and then we shoot aimed shot at 10 and 20 yards. I also use a shotgun and shoot it a box or two. (870) my friend has a m-1a (M-14) he is good with it 600 yards shooting and that the end of the range at that distance.
I have a new holster I am trying out do not know it's name just a black holster slide on I use it at the range we can not carry yet here in wisconsin yet still waiting till nov 1 to put a ccw app in.
I am getting a kimber 45 tac. I like them very much also i am going to get the kel-tec shotgun. I love it and am hoping to get it soon after they start selling them. I want to put sight and fore grip on it then a choke on it to add a few more inchs on the barrol. I want to customize it too. I have a brother who can
plate parts so maybe crome some stuff on it. Yea it going be my toy I love shot guns. it's so small. less than 22 inchs long, it still has a 18 1/2 inch barrol so its legal. two tubes to load 14 shots and one in the pipe 15 blasts 12 gage. HMMMM a crome choke on it might be poss. look real cool lazer sight on a fore grip and a mini light on the other side. one tube oo and the other slugs. just needs a tube in the back for jellybeans to chew while ya shoot zombies. Oh I think I am in love. KSG !!!