HAS YOUR HANDGUN TRAINING SET YOU UP TO BE KILLED?
According to modern science, the study of thousands of Police combat studies, and as documented by real gunfight videos, Sight Shooting is not used in most all Close Quarters armed encounters. And it is in those situations, where your chance of being shot or killed is the greatest.
So, IF YOU HAVE A HANDGUN FOR SELF DEFENSE, AND IF YOU HAVE BEEN TAUGHT ONLY SIGHT SHOOTING, or if the main part of your training was on Sight Shooting with minimal emphasis on Point Shooting, THEN YOU HAVE BEEN SET UP TO BE KILLED.
What else would you say about being trained in a shooting method to use in a kill or get killed situation, that according to Police combat studies and real time gunfight videos, is not used in most all of those situations.
That is what is.
Unless you know of, and how to use an alternate shooting method such as Point Shooting, you will have no effective shooting method available for use in a real Close Quarters kill or get killed situation.
And who set you up?
Some who immediately come to mind are: the US Gov., Gun Makers, trainers, and organizations who support gun ownership and gun safety, but who have abdicated their Constitutional and moral responsibilities to provide science based information and training on the realities of Close Quarters life threat situations, and the effective use of firearms in them.
There are some who consider Point Shooting to be an advanced technique that is to be taught only after the fundamentals of shooting (Sight Shooting), are mastered.
And others say that countless hours of training, and the sending of thousands of rounds down range, are required to become proficient in Point Shooting and to maintain proficiency in it.
I say that those are just "polite" ways of rejecting Point shooting and maintaining the status quo.
Sight Shooting true believers dismiss Point shooting out of hand as being the devil's work or close to it. Or they ridicule and heap scorn on those like me who advocate for the use of P&S in Close Quarters self defense situations. It is as though they believe that if you squelch, suppress, or ridicule Point Shooting, it will go away, and then all will be OK.
What the true believer types don't do, is bring forward scientific studies, stats, plus videos of Close Quarters gun fights which show/prove that Sight Shooting can be used effectively in Close Quarters life threat situations.
And since Sight Shooting has been taught for over 100 years, you would think that there should be hundreds if not thousands of studies, stats, and films/videos that prove the case for the use of Sight Shooting in Close Quarters gunfights.
But where are they?
If by some chance, they exist, how come they have not been made freely available to the millions of home defenders who bought a gun with the understanding that they would be able to use it in their self defense, and who most likely use or have been trainded to use Sight Shooting?
Perhaps they are being kept at some undisclosed and secure location out West in the dessert near Area 51.
I do not take lightly the traditional ways of the gun world, or the long standing dogma found in training manuals as represented in the specifications for courses of fire, and as qualification requirements for this or that gun related position or license.
In hierarchical organizations, they are powerful tools which can be used as barriers against, and to suppress innovation and change.
For example, the US Army's FM 3-23.35 - Combat Training With Pistols M9 And M11 - of 2003, is both tradition driven and dogma laden.
Point Shooting is given mention in it, but only with a few sentences, and only after pages and pages are first spent on describing in great detail with words and pictures, the proper stance, grip, sighting, breathing, and trigger squeezing that make up the must-be-met-requirements of Sight Shooting.
The Point Shooting information is found in the manual's Section on Combat Marksmanship. But, before you get to it in that Section, you first have to wade through some marksmanship dogma.
From Section II. COMBAT MARKSMANSHIP
"After a soldier becomes proficient in the fundamentals of marksmanship, he progresses to advanced techniques of combat marksmanship. The main use of the pistol is to engage the enemy at close range with quick, accurate fire. In shooting encounters, it is not the first round fired that wins the engagement, but the first accurately fired round. The soldier should use his sights when engaging the enemy unless this would place the weapon within arm's reach of the enemy."
"Quick-Fire Point Shooting. This is for engaging an enemy at less than 5 yards and is also useful for night firing. Using a two-hand grip, the firer brings the weapon up close to the body until it reaches chin level. He then thrusts it forward until both arms are straight. The arms and body form a triangle, which can be aimed as a unit. In thrusting the weapon forward, the firer can imagine that there is a box between him and the enemy, and he is thrusting the weapon into the box. The trigger is smoothly squeezed to the rear as the elbows straighten."
"Quick-Fire Sighting. This technique is for engaging an enemy at 5 to 10 yards away and only when there is no time available to get a full picture. The firing position is the same as for quick-fire point shooting. The sights are aligned left and right to save time, but not up and down. The firer must determine in practice what the sight picture will look like and where the front sight must be aimed to hit the enemy in the chest."
To me, Quick-Fire Point Shooting is more practical and much easier than trying to meet the must-be-met-requirements for successful Sight Shooting. And it is more in line with the results of modern investigative science, combat studies, and the literature.
However; a finding of the NYPD's study of thousands of Police combat cases, was that with few exceptions Officers fired with the strong hand.
Also, most all gunfights occur at Close Quarters, in poor light where the sights will be difficult to see and use, and where there will be no time to use them even if one could focus on them.
Also, modern science says that our near vision and our fine motor skills, both of which are necessary for Sight Shooting, can be expected to be lost to use with the activation of our Flight or Fight response. The activation occurs automatically in Close Quarters life threat situations, and it is virtually uncontrollable.
As such, learning and knowing how to use Point Shooting of some kind, makes life over death sense. That is reality.
The following is from Col. Rex Applegate's book Kill or get Killed. It is what he says about the combat use of Sight Shooting by a skilled target shooter in a life threat situation.
"... It is dark, he is in an alley, a poorly lighted street, or a room in a building. He can hardly see his gun at arm's length, to say nothing of the sights. His muscles are tense, his nerves keyed up to a fighting pitch.
"Suddenly the enemy starts shooting at him from an unexpected quarter.
"Even if he could see the sights, would he take the time to line them up and fire at the enemy's gun flash? Does he take up the trigger slack and squeeze off the shot as he has been taught to do in target shooting?
"Will he make sure that his feet are properly positioned and that he is breathing correctly? He certainly will not! He will grip his gun convulsively, raise it, point or shove it in the general direction of the enemy, and pull (not squeeze) the trigger.
"...In daylight he will do exactly the same thing....
"It is a matter of record that the average hand gun shooting affray takes place at a distance not exceeding 20 feet...Any distance not exceeding 40 feet can be considered as Close Quarters in the combat use of the pistol or revolver. Beyond that distance the capabilities of the average individual and of the weapon show a marked decline.
"...By proper training at combat ranges, man-killing accuracy, without the use of sights and with extreme speed, can be acquired by the average soldier or Police Officer. This can be done in less time, and with less expenditure of ammunition, than is required to become even a fair target shot."
If you find my opinion objectionable, I will be the first to apologize, when those who teach and those who sanction and approve of what is taught, present scientific evidence that reasonably establishes that what is taught, actually works in Close Quarters life threat situations were Officers and your average civilian are most likely to be shot and/or killed.
There are those who say they have been there and done that, and they say that they saw and used their sights, except when shooting at contact distance.
And I don't doubt their honesty and sincerity. There are a lot of good and honest folks who obviously believe that Sight Shooting can be used in real Close Quarters life threat shootings.
A well known trainer in the Southeast, who considers P&S to be BS, has said that his students have prevailed in a number of shootings over the years, and that they used their sights.
Unfortunately for him and the others, unless they have data that has been gathered in a scientifically sound manner, and which is presented for review, what they say is open to serious question as to its soundness and applicability to the millions of home defenders in the U.S.
As to AIMED Point Shooting or P&S, which has been used as far back as 1835, Jack Ruby used it to shoot and kill Oswald.
The guard in the drug store holdup covered in the article: A Real Time Gunfight. Who Wins, Who Dies?, used a two handed Isso. type grip and was moving when he used Point Shooting to shoot and kill the robber.
In both situations, there was no time to do anything but point-n-shoot.
Now, there can be exceptions to most any rule or finding. And if a person is a SEAL or SWAT operator, he/she may have the skills and training to be able to function extraordinarily and regardless of the situation at hand.
But if you are just a run of the mill mortal, chances are that unless you know how to Point Shoot effectively, you will do as thousands of Police have done in combat. And that is, default to Spray and Pray shooting (pointing the gun in the direction of the threat and blasting away).
Point Shooting is not Spray and Pray shooting. And it is easy to learn and it can be easily maintained. But, it won't happen by magic. You have to know about it, and learn how to do it.
AS TO WHOSE LOOKING OUT FOR THE HOME DEFENDER:
As far as I know, there is no Government agency which has taken on the task of providing the millions and millions of consumer gun owners (Police and civilians), with the facts on what works in life threat situations and what may get you killed.
I also don't know of any National level gun rights organization or Gun Manufacture that has taken on that obligation and responsibility in an open and public way, which would include mentioning its support for the use of Point Shooting for personal protection on its web site, in its publications, and in its advertisements.
(The NRA does support the use of Point Shooting in its: NRA Guide To The Basics Of Personal Protection In The Home was published in 2000.)
The ATF and the Federal Trade Commission do not deal with the issue of consumer safety and guns. The Consumer Products Safety Commission, by its charter, is exempted from dealing with firearms. And the Occupational Safety And Health Administration does not deal with consumer issues, only worker concerns. OSHA has some standards for Personal Protection Equipment like armor vests, but none dealing with handguns that I am aware of.
Why are millions and millions of gun owing citizen consumers being selectively excluded and denied consumer protection in regard to their self defense, since the exclusion and denial, may result in their death?
I think their should be a "proof house" of sorts that looks into the question of what works, and what doesn't.
Use your go back button to return to the
prior page, or click here for the index.