How accurately can you shoot a handgun without sighting?


PDA






bobhaverford
October 16, 2005, 01:51 PM
I'm relativelyl new to handguns. Have owned them for years but am just now practicing in earnest. It seems to me that in a tight spot where your life was on the line you'd likely not be able to line up the sights (no time and in many cases insufficient light). Can you learn to shoot accurately without the sights - simply by pointing? Are there any good books that you can recommend to learn this technique? Thanks.

If you enjoyed reading about "How accurately can you shoot a handgun without sighting?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
rdbrowning
October 16, 2005, 02:07 PM
When the wife and I took our CCW class, that was the only way we were allowed to shoot, by pointing. At 10 yards ands less it was amazing how well it works without even looking at your gun conciously.

Zak Smith
October 16, 2005, 02:24 PM
Read Brian Enos' "Practical Shooting - Beyond Fundamentals", after you have the fundamentals of "front sight - press" down. It describes some methods of aimed shooting that do not use a front sight focus.

It is a fact that if your sights are aligned on the target (and you don't jerk the trigger), the round will hit the target. You don't have to "see" the sight picture if the sights are aligned, but it is the most sure way to make hits.

If you practice to see the front sight, then you are more likely to do so in an actual gunfight. Under stress, you will default to the level of training you have mastered, NOT "rise to the occasion".

In the Force on Force class (review here) (http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=157436), using the front sight was emphasized, because unsighted shooting in a high stress, dynamic situation was not effective at making hits on the assailents.

James T Thomas
October 16, 2005, 02:33 PM
Here is a true life experience for you to consider.

The U S Army had taught a skill called "quick kill" to the infantry soldiers who were ordered to go to Vietnam ~1966 and later. It was a pointing method with rifles.

In 1968, in the First Air Cavalry, I had "ample opportunity" to see the effectiveness of pointing and firing, even full automatic at close ranges.

When your heart is pounding, your hands trembling, and deep breating, you would think that a fine skill using the sights would be nullified.
Not so! The men who I saw prevailing on the battlefield used their sights.
I would qualify this by stating that at an even closer range, pehaps five yards, a sightless point would be effective, however for most situations, practice using your sights.

One more piece of experience. Carefully consider what methods you use in your training, because, if you ever need to defend yourself, you will absolutely -reflexively, go to the training you received.

HaroldOhio
October 16, 2005, 04:39 PM
I carry a Seecamp which has no sights. The following was copied from the Seecamp web site on why their guns don't have sights.


An exhaustive NYPD report (NYPD SOP 9) revealed that in 70% of recorded police shootings (the majority under poor lighting conditions) officers did not use sights while 10% of the time officers didn’t remember whether sights were used. In the remaining 20% of the cases, officers recollected using some form of visual aid to line up the target ~ which could be the sights themselves or just the barrel.

The NYPD statistics showed no correlation between an officer’s range scores and his ability to hit a suspect at close range. The mean score for NYPD police officers (1990-2000) for all shootings is fifteen hits per 100 shots fired, which is almost the identical hit ratio seen among Miami officers ~ who in the years 1990-2001 fired some 1300 rounds at suspects while recording fewer than 200 hits. Almost unbelievably, some NYPD figures show 62% of shots fired at a distance of less than six feet were complete misses.

The 1988 US Army training manual for pistols and revolvers [FM 23-35], in apparent recognition of the disconnect between sighted shooting at the range and the ability to score hits in short distance combat, wisely calls for point shoot training at distances of less than fifteen feet. The ability to shoot targets at 25 yards using sights sadly seems to provide little or no advantage in close combat. Nor are there recorded instances where an officer required a reload in close combat. When reloads do occur, there is no immediate threat to the officer’s safety and the perpetrator has usually barricaded himself in a defensive posture. A study by Etten and Petee (l995) showed that neither large capacity magazines nor the ability to reload quickly was a factor in shootings.

Speed reloads at short ranges just don’t happen, and practicing paper punching at long ranges using sights appears to prepare one for short range conflict to the same degree it prepares one for using flying insect spray. (Hitting an annoying yellow jacket buzzing a picnic table without spraying the guests or the food might be better practice for combat than long range paper punching. So might a plain old-fashioned water pistol fight.)

In the FWIW department, of 250 NYPD police officers killed in the line of duty in the years 1854-1979 there was only one instance where it could be determined an officer was slain at a distance of over 25 feet ~ by a sniper 125 feet away. Of the 250 fatal encounters, 92% took place under fifteen feet and 96.4% under 25 feet. In the remaining eight instances the distance was unknown.

But how do I qualify at 75 feet without sights?

If you hold the LWS pistol at a 45-degree angle semi-gangsta style there is a groove formed that can be used as a sighting tool

The 25 yard shooting proficiency test for carry qualification required by many issuing authorities is absurd. It's a request to perform a feat that would land you in jail if you ever tried to perform it "in self-defense."

It's like passing a driver's test that requires you to slalom between traffic cones at 120 miles an hour. Seventy-five feet shooting proficiency is not too much to ask from a police officer who may be firing at a barricaded target, as the ability to drive at high speeds is not too much to ask from a Trooper pursuing a fleeing vehicle, but it’s ridiculous to ask it of civilians.

Shoot an "assailant" at 75 feet. Then try to find a lawyer good enough to keep you out of prison.

On the one hand the law demands that you use deadly force only when you are in danger of serious bodily injury or your life is threatened. On the other hand they demand that you have the ability to commit a long-range homicide with a firearm before they give you that right.

Using sights at shorter ranges invites problems

In order to use sights a shooter has to put at least one hand in front of their face. This obstructs the view behind the hand they have placed there. When the focus is on the upper torso of the threatening individual, the lower portion of that person is partially or completely hidden from view by this deliberately chosen visual obstruction. The closer the target, the greater is the degree of visual impairment that may cause the shooter to fail to recognize potentially important information below the sight picture.

Statistics show pistol sights generally go out the window once shooting starts; however, this does not mean sights are not used prior to the commencement of hostilities. We can see on reality TV police programs numerous instances where officers in a Weaver stance point guns at suspects who are in absurdly close proximity to them.

With both hands in front of one’s face, one is less able to recognize whether a possible threat is reaching for a gun or a wallet when the landscape below the target area is blocked from view. One might perceive movement but one cannot see what is being moved. There is no doubt in my mind accidental shootings of unarmed individuals have in many instances been caused by sight shoot training, in which a trained focus on a clear sight picture leaves one necessarily with an incomplete view of the important overall scenario.

The potential hazard of losing perspective of the complete picture of the environment is well illustrated by American Matthew Emmons. He lost what appeared to be a safe Gold medal in the 2004 Olympics by shooting, with great accuracy, holes in his neighbor’s target. Overmuch concentration on the bull’s eye, which can be achieved with sights that exclude distracting but possibly important stimuli, may assist in hitting what one is aiming to hit but it can do so at the great cost of making an improper choice of target.

Suggestions for achieving proficiency

Other than range practice of point shooting at realistic combat distances (under fifteen feet), here’s what you can do to achieve proficiency, making sure you are using an unloaded pistol:

1. Dry fire the pistol to get acquainted with the trigger pull. Dry firing will not hurt the LWS. Slow deliberate dry firing will help you get acquainted with the pull, but make it a snappy pull once you get the feel because you’ll never use the slow pull to defend yourself. (Please keep in mind ‘unloaded’ guns are probably responsible for most accidental shootings, so never under any circumstances point the pistol at any living thing or something you are not prepared to suffer the consequences of shooting.)
2. Repeatedly pick up the pistol and point it towards a target without looking at the gun. Holding the gun in that position, bring your eyes down to examine whether the position of the gun lines up with the target. As much as you can, keep your arm straight without allowing it to interfere with your vision. A straight arm makes for more accurate pointing. (The pocket slipper laser aimer is also a good training tool for getting you on target. If a threat arises you should not be thinking of the pistol, which should become an extension of yourself, but on the threat that faces you.)

Most of those who buy pistols for self defense shoot infrequently. At the distance at which handguns are likely to be used for self-defense this doesn’t bother me as much as it perhaps should. Who doesn’t have a shotgun or some other weapon stashed away, seldom or never used, that they wouldn’t hesitate to bring center stage if there was a forced house entry. People who buy pepper spray and Mace don’t normally feel the need to practice a thousand squirts to feel comfortable they can hit an assailant. And, as mentioned, the studies seem to show little practical benefit from long distance range practice. I’d rather go up against a target shooter than an individual who plays occasional paintball.

bobhaverford
October 16, 2005, 05:27 PM
My wife and I both read your post with great interrest. Thank you.

MikeIsaj
October 16, 2005, 05:53 PM
BobHaverford; Welcome to THR. Good thread you started.

HaroldOhio: I read that article awhile back. It's a good one to resurrect now and then.

I have to admit, going into my first point shooting experience my thought was "How hard can that be?" What a surprise I got! 12 rounds and never hit the target at 7yds! I eventually got better.

If anything improves with practice, it's point shooting. I now can hit most of what I shoot at. I think muscle memory and body memory has a lot to do with it. I like the idea of being able to "shoot from the hip", although my aim gets better the farther up I bring the weapon.

I never understood the point of 25yd fire either. I agree if you make that shot, you'll be everyones hero. If you miss, your decision to shoot at that range will be criticized by all.

My last two quals were on a simulated 25yd target at 15 yds. It's just a smaller target at 15 yds. I don't like it because it completely disregards weapon/ammo performance at 25yds. It gives guys the false impression that they could make that shot with that gun at 25yds.

gbran
October 16, 2005, 05:58 PM
The closer the target, the less you need the sights.

dfaugh
October 16, 2005, 06:16 PM
To me its similar to shooting clay/birds with a shotgun...I have NO perception of the bead/sights....After a while (and plenty of practice)it becomes almost automatic...

Slighty of-topic, but I have a problem with pidgeons in my barn...Saw a couple fly in there a few weeks back...Grabbed my scoped .22 (had had it to the range and it was still out of the case)and went out there...Now they won't usually stay put for long, and the light switch is a few feet from the door..Range about 30 ft....In short the scope is useless...So I threw the gun up like I would a shotgun, and fired one shot...And centerpunched that sucker right through the body, he dropped like a stone....Now, that was an exceptionally lucky shot, but had the target been bigger (certainly if man sized), it would certainly been plenty effective.

bogie
October 16, 2005, 06:27 PM
A 1911 with a curved backstrap points like it's an extension of me... Basically, I just hang on, and try to keep the front sight on the target. It's getting so I can dump and switch mags _fast_ and I'm keeping all the rounds in a paper plate at 7 yards. I just don't feel good about totally point shooting tho, and I won't do it unless there's a darn good backstop. In John's quarry, I was able to pretty consistently hit soda cans, etc...

DelayedReaction
October 16, 2005, 06:33 PM
I'm curious. What would be considered a 'good' shooter at 25 yards with aimed fire, and what would be considered a 'good' shooter at 25 feet with point fire? Specifically I'm interested in grouping given a certain number of shots in a certain time. All I've done is mostly plink for a year (200 rounds or so every week, but still), so I want to know just how badly I would do compared to someone who knows what they're doing.

zahc
October 16, 2005, 06:50 PM
I’d rather go up against a target shooter than an individual who plays occasional paintball.

Quoted for contemplation.

Monkeyleg
October 16, 2005, 06:53 PM
Every so often I'll go to the range near dusk, and set a B-27 target at seven yards. The, while wearing welding goggles to get as close to night conditions as possible, I'll practice drawing and firing without aiming (point shooting).

Even with double-taps, I've been able to keep thirty to forty or more shots in the COM area.

It's been awhile, though, so I should try again to see how I fare.

bogie
October 16, 2005, 07:46 PM
I'm a target shooter. Just because I prefer benchrest and perfect accuracy doesn't mean that I don't know how to put 8 very large holes into center mass at 7 yards in under five seconds...

Downside of paintball as training could be a shooter who doesn't worry about getting shot himself.

Zak Smith
October 16, 2005, 08:10 PM
Statistics show pistol sights generally go out the window once shooting starts
One could argue that this is because most people who get into gunfights are reluctant shooters (e.g. the LEO who considers his pistol "just another tool on his belt" and does not train religiously with it).

Which tactical training schools teach to not use the front sight?

(The one exception would be shooting from retention, at contact distance)

Also let me add that besides "target" shooting (pure marksmanship like Bullseye or Benchrest), there is Practical Shooting which has been around for 30+ years.

Jim Watson
October 16, 2005, 08:22 PM
I think that if you shoot enough at different ranges, the transition from pointing, to looking over the front sight (I call it "shotgunning.") to blade-in-notch aiming is smooth and habitual. Discussions like this get to be moot. And claims for superiority of one or another secret ninja technique are worthless. No one method works all the time. You can tell this by watching any seasoned IPSC/IDPA competitor or a really highly trained government employee.

Mr Seecamp is advertising a vest pocket pistol, suitable only for close range emergency self defense, which is all that he makes. If they made other guns, he might sing a different tune. I know that if somebody shoots at me from 75 feet and does not get me the first time, I will be shooting back in aimed fire, and not worrying about a lawyer's job.

Zak Smith
October 16, 2005, 08:23 PM
I think that if you shoot enough at different ranges, the transition from pointing, to looking over the front sight (I call it "shotgunning.") to blade-in-notch aiming is smooth and habitual. Discussions like this get to be moot. And claims for superiority of one or another secret ninja technique are worthless. No one method works all the time. You can tell this by watching any seasoned IPSC/IDPA competitor or a really highly trained government employee.

Yep, and Brian Enos' book discusses this really well.

Blackhawk 6
October 16, 2005, 08:24 PM
I would note that while NYPD's SOP-9 is an informative document, some of the information it contains is somewhat skewed. I had the opportunity to listen to Pat Rogers' explanation/opinion of the SOP-9 and consequently put very little faith in any conclusion drawn based on the document.

Editted to Add: While the Army's FM 23-35 does indeed advocate "Quick-Fire Point Shooting" as a technique for use in engaging an enemy at less than five yards, it also acknowledges that the quick-kill method does not always ensure a first-round hit.

lycanthrope
October 16, 2005, 09:12 PM
Brian Enos knows what he's talking about.......

I'm constantly amazed at the number of new USPSA/IDPA competitors that will miss targets within 5 yards due to point shooting without visual input from the gun.

slopemeno
October 16, 2005, 10:01 PM
Just because someone doesnt recall using the sights dosnt mean he didnt use them. They reverted to their 'training floor'. Did they recall using their car keys or keying the mike? Probabhly not.

Think youre pretty good with point shooting? Have you tried it in a competition setting? Against man-on-man bowling pins or pepper-poppers?
Enter a local contest and let us know how it goes.

Heres the reason I ask. I competed heavily in club-level USPSA/IPSC style matches for 5 years. 2 matches a month, 2 practices a month, shot club-level master class, which worked out to mid-level A-class shooters. If I ignored the front sight, I lost. Just that simple. To some crappy shooters too.
If I watched that front sight like crazy, I won.

Now, dont get me wrong. In a powder-burn range gunfight, it probably isnt going to matter, but if you want to hit, watch that front sight.

kudu
October 16, 2005, 10:01 PM
I am mostly a shotgun shooter. A shotty is pointed, not aimed at flying targets. When I switch over occasionally to shoot handguns, they are very rarely sighted onto a target, but are pointed.

I was invited to an informal tactical shoot about two months ago that was three gun , never done it before. A shotgun, a pistol, and a pistol caliber carbine. I had not shot a handgun in several months, maybe only 50 rounds through my 1911 in the last 2 years. I borrowed a friends Tommy gun for the carbine part of the shoot (semi-auto), never fired it before that morning. It was on a Cowboy action shoot field with ringing steel and knock-downs and there were 13 people shooting. I still ended up third place in a timed event, only missed 2 pistol shots, and 2 carbine shots. I have lots of trigger time on a shotgun, just point and shoot. I struggled with the sights on the carbine, and decided to just look over the gun and point it at the targets, granted they were only 15- 40 yard shots that were ringers about 10" to 14" across.

I believe if you can get quality trigger time on a shotgun you can shoot most other guns quite well, the exeption is probably long range work, but I have been there and done that in years previous.

bjbarron
October 16, 2005, 10:03 PM
30 years ago I got a New Jersey carry permit (yes, 'twas hard but back then you could sometimes get them). One of the requirements was a 'combat shooting' course (and shoot for score).

The trainer showed me how to shoot thru obstacles by extending my arm, even at waist height, until I could see the front sight. He said the brain could naturally triangulate between the eye, the front sight, and the target out to a moderate distance of 15 yards. It was absolutely critical that the front sight be actually in the field of vision somewhere. You concentrate on the target and the body naturally points the third locii (the gun) to fill in the triangle.

It works and I've been practicing it since I learned it. My Mozambique drills are great and the pistol never gets higher than my chest.

An example if the distinctive oval quick-fire grouping is here (http://mywebpages.comcast.net/bjbarron/blogfiles/string1.jpg)...This was at 10 yards with a Walther P22. The oval starts out centered and slowly climbs about 2 1/2 inches. My Kimber .45 shows the same oval, but it is about 5" from top to bottom.

I tried the same thing with my Mac 9x18, but at three targets and 9 mags as fast as I could pull the trigger and change out mags...the results are here. (http://mywebpages.comcast.net/bjbarron/blogfiles/KIF_0377.jpg). Big ragg'ed oval holes.

It works, but you've got to practice. Needless to say, I've got more confidence in my snap shooting because I practice it than I do in my slow fire aimed shooting.

Satch
October 17, 2005, 09:39 AM
On a program about self defence on the Discovery Channel after 9-11 they showed how to draw and shoot fast from a holster in a combat situation. The instructer said you,ll only have time to clear the holster, level the pistol and fire at your target in most situations. Trying to come to a "weaver" stance would take to many seconds of time and could cause you to lose the fight. It was very interesting to watch.I've tried this at the range and it's surprising how much damage you can do at close range under 10 yds. to a target.

Camp David
October 17, 2005, 09:46 AM
I hate to recommend something so technologically advanced, but it works....

LASERPOINTERS...

Try them!

Use of a laser pointer is a quick, inexpensive, easy way to train your shooting arm to extend to a point where firing a handgun is both on target and on frame!

Some groups swear that use of a laserpointer can improve handgun accurancy almost overnight!

I know that these are not historic, but I became a believer in them after use and my aim-without sighting-improved almost immediately!:)

bobhaverford
October 17, 2005, 06:24 PM
I hate to recommend something so technologically advanced, but it works....

LASERPOINTERS...

Try them!

Use of a laser pointer is a quick, inexpensive, easy way to train your shooting arm to extend to a point where firing a handgun is both on target and on frame!

Some groups swear that use of a laserpointer can improve handgun accurancy almost overnight!

I know that these are not historic, but I became a believer in them after use and my aim-without sighting-improved almost immediately!:)


Now that makes a lot of sense to me. Practice with the laser then take it to the range. I agree that most situations in which you are forced to use your gun will require nearly immediate firing. After all, you'd not take it out unless you were immediately prepared to use it. I'm going to try the laser route and then see how I do at the range.

I'm planning on doing most of my preliminary practice with my 22 Buckmark which I love to shoot.

Monkeyleg
October 17, 2005, 06:43 PM
"Which tactical training schools teach to not use the front sight?"

One portion of Ayoob's Stressfire course involves shooting at close range without using the sights. Of course, if you refer to it as "point shooting," Ayoob hits you.

Correia
October 17, 2005, 07:04 PM
Unfortunately there is a lot of internet conjecture on this subject from people who don't shoot a whole lot. No offense intended.

I will second Zak's recommendation. Read Brian Enos' book. Read the section of focus, otherwise many folks here are talking past each other.

First and most important thing to do, seek out a good instructor. Then practice. Go shoot in action pistol games (IDPA or IPSC) They are just games, not tactical training, but they will teach you how to shoot with speed and accuracy, usually far far better than your average shooter.

It doesn't take many seconds to get into a shooting stance and access your sights. It takes a FRACTION of a second longer to use your sights, but with a massive increase in hit probability. As the range increases, this becomes even more true.

The only time for unsighted fire is at bad breath distance, or maybe if you are inside an elevator with the badguy.

For in the dark, that is what tritium sights and a good flashlight along with training and technique come in.

Lasers are fun, but for most folks, with proper training they can acquire the sights faster than they can find the bouncing dot on the target.

DT Guy
October 17, 2005, 07:34 PM
Why do people come up with all kinds of hyperbole about 'what you'll do in a gunfight'?

I've shot a little IPSC, shot more IDPA and pointed guns at people 'for real.' Stress is stress, and if you train you'll do what you trained yourself to do.

I can clearly remember the sight picture I took when I first pointed my pistol at an offender as an LEO. (Fellow had just threatened to kill his wife with a Taurus 9mm.) COM, front sight sharp and rear sight blurred-just like I trained to do.

If unsighted fire were all the rage, you'd see IDPA being won by guys with no sights on their guns. And before someone starts spewing statisics about the average distance of an armed encounter, consider this:

http://www.thegunzone.com/well-enough.html


Larry

DT Guy
October 17, 2005, 08:12 PM
Why do people come up with all kinds of hyperbole about 'what you'll do in a gunfight'?

I've shot a little IPSC, shot more IDPA and pointed guns at people 'for real.' Stress is stress, and if you train you'll do what you trained yourself to do.

I can clearly remember the sight picture I took when I first pointed my pistol at an offender as an LEO. (Fellow had just threatened to kill his wife with a Taurus 9mm.) COM, front sight sharp and rear sight blurred-just like I trained to do.

If unsighted fire were all the rage, you'd see IDPA being won by guns with no sights on their guns. And before someone starts spewing statisics about the average distance of an armed encounter, consider this:

http://www.thegunzone.com/well-enough.html


Larry

Ryder
October 17, 2005, 09:30 PM
How accurately can you shoot a handgun without sighting?


At 3-4 steps I can hit a paper plate. Might be high left or low center but they hit the plate. Beyond that I use sights.

sturmruger
October 17, 2005, 09:50 PM
I shoot a lot of IPSC matches. I have found targets out to about 10 yards easy to hit with a point style of shooting. This is usually acomplished by walking fast and shooting with both eyes open.

If I had time to prepare and focus on my sights I would definetly use them. If I was jumped or suprised and had to react quickly I would most like shoot back without regard to my front sight.

Horsesense
October 17, 2005, 11:13 PM
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=61867&highlight=point+shooting+horsesense

Gunfight failure analyses and corrective measures. (Point shooting video) ;)

eddited to add http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=161135

Taurus 66
October 17, 2005, 11:29 PM
I'm not as accurate as I should be at 15 yards. I take the full blame for not getting better sights.

Sir Aardvark
October 18, 2005, 12:37 AM
Speaking for myself - I practice a lot!

I have found that my S&W J-frame comes up precisely aligned when I lock my arms out in front of me in my normal shooting stance. I can shoot this and hit the target all the time without "aiming", just by "pointing". The shots are all placed well enough to be COM out to 20+ feet.

I spend A LOT of time with the firearms I use for carrying so that I feel comfortable enough that I can shoot them well in a stressful situation.
I've yet to be placed in a "Stressful Situation", and hope I never do, but one of my firearms instructors stated things succinctly:

"When you find yourself in a situation, you will not 'rise to the occasion', you will fall back to your level of training"

Zak Smith
October 18, 2005, 12:44 AM
Speaking for myself - I practice a lot!

I have found that my S&W J-frame comes up precisely aligned when I lock my arms out in front of me in my normal shooting stance. I can shoot this and hit the target all the time without "aiming", just by "pointing". The shots are all placed well enough to be COM out to 20+ feet.

This is not directed at you specifically, but it is a good example--

Can you make hits this way while moving laterally away from someone coming at you with a knife from 21' away?

-z

Adept
October 18, 2005, 01:49 AM
On a related note: Has anyone here tried old west style shooting from the hip? If so, what were the results?

Sir Aardvark
October 18, 2005, 02:23 AM
I have practiced shooting while moving and other "Scenario" type situations. All I can say about that is that I need more practice to keep my skills up.

My first firearms instructor had us work on shooting just after the draw when you got your weak-side hand on the grip (at about the level of your belly) and to shoot as you brought your gun up to your normal firing position. You could usually get off about 3 shots very quickly while doing this before you attained your stance. This was a close quarters skill.

To be honest with everybody here, my S&W J-frame is not my most favorite gun to carry; I am very comfortable with it - that's not the problem - I just feel that I would like to have 11 rounds of .40S&W or 10 rounds of .45ACP if shooting became necessary. But... small, lightweight, easily concealed handguns will always have their place, and, as has been mentioned here in the past, having some sort of firearm is better than having none.

Nematocyst
October 18, 2005, 05:01 AM
Just before beginning to read this thread, I left another one (actually driven away by some amount of boredom) about hitting a target with your SHTF rifle at 600 yards.

Speaking ONLY for myself - kudos to those who want to try to hit things at 600 yds - I find this thread more interesting, realistic & relevant.

As for me, if something or someone is threatening me from 600 yds, my plan is to stay low & go the other direction. (Rarely are there insufficient trees, rocks or buildings to prevent that, seeing as how I don't walk much in big open playas.)

It's the crack head closing in on me from 30' that I want to deal with.

My strategy in a nutshell:
Keep your distance, go your own way.
Get too close, feel the sting.
Nematocyst is locked and loaded.

Nem

Brad Johnson
October 18, 2005, 04:00 PM
At 3 yards I can keep 90+ % of my shots on a paper plate at anything less than full-on "spray-and-pray" feed rates. If I limit shot strings to three rounds or less I can up the feed rate a bit and, given a little calm concentration, I can get some slow-fire strings into an area you could cover with the palm of your hand.

However, from 3 yards out my rapid-fire point-shooting accuracy drops off almost exponentially. At 7 yards I would be lucky to keep half my shots on a B-27 target. At 25 yards I would be lucky just to hit the ground. Only in the gravest of emergencies (and in no situation that I can actually think of) would trying to point-shoot at distances past the 12-15' limit even be a consideration.

It took a long time and a lot of money to find a gun that points naturally for me (a Springfield XD). That and a LOT of practice ammo are the only reasons for my ability to shoot reasonably well in a point-shoot scenario.

Brad

If you enjoyed reading about "How accurately can you shoot a handgun without sighting?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!