Aim or point and shoot?

[buster94]

Something to consider is learning point and shoot. This does not use the sights at all. P&S is actually reported as the best option to be using for self defense. Because in many shootings a person is only pointing the gun and shooting rather than aiming anyway. If they take time to aim they could very well be to late getting a shot off and end up being dead. The eye and finger and brain work well together with training. Just imagine or wonder how shaky will your hand be during an adrenalin rush?
Paper don't move and paper doesn't fire back at you either. You can take all day aiming for target shooting but possibly not in a real life defense situation.
As we get older our eyesight sometimes starts to diminish. Even if a body is a blur or my sights are a blur I can still point center mass blur. I have decided to look into point and shoot.
I may be wrong but isn't a lot of cowboy shooting done by point and shoot.? Have any of you tried P&S and was able to do it quicker and accurately?

 

[JohnBiltz]

If you don't first learn the fundamentals it doesn't matter how you aim.

How much time your going to give to sight alignment is going to be different with distance and circumstances. Off the draw with say a five yard target I can generally hit a four inch circle relying on my presentation. It took thousands of practice draws to get to that point. When shooting a drill at fairly close range I tend to look over my sights and from what I understand so do a lot of the pro shooters. I'm still using the sights as an index. In my case, when shooting thumbs forward my left thumb points where I am shooting pretty well.

In real life shootings a lot people report not shooting with sights. In real life shootings only about one in three shots are a hit. For some reason people don't think that the first doesn't lead to the other. I don't think its a coincidence.

 

[Hanzo581]

Anything outside of hugging distance no thanks. If it takes you a long time to get that front sight up and on target keep practicing. There is a difference between bullseye shooting and simple sight/target acquisition.

 

[MedWheeler]

I suck at point-shooting, but I'm working on it. Part of what has held me back is that I am cross-dominant (eye on one side, hand/arm on the other.) It is only been recently that I have been practicing "two-eye" drawing, as well as "same-side" shooting. I shoot handguns with my left side/arm, and long guns off the right. This messes me up, but it's been this way for over thirty years. Not easy to change, so I'm training to adapt instead. What will most likely be best for me is to learn to do all shooting with both eyes open, whether sighting or not.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Massad Ayoob says if you interview people who have been in gunfights, they will be split about 50/50 between pointing and aiming.

But if you interview only WINNERS, that changes. Most winners used the sights.

 

[9mmepiphany]

I may be wrong but isn't a lot of cowboy shooting done by point and shoot.?

If you are talking about cowboy shooting as the shooting competition, you'd be wrong. The winners bring the gun up to eye level and use their sights

Have any of you tried P&S and was able to do it quicker and accurately?

It isn't more accurate, but it can sometimes be as accurate if you are willing to spend the time and ammo to practice it

If you are talking about Point Shooting from below eye level without any reference to the sights at all, it can be faster if you are willing to accept less accuracy.

I can Point Shoot fairly competently, within a couple of yards

I can place rounds on target without looking at the sights, but bring the gun up to shoulder/eye level, fairly reliably out to about 5-7 yards...I learned to do it by learning to shoot using my sights

If you don't first learn the fundamentals it doesn't matter how you aim.

This is really the key.

The cornerstone to hitting what you are shooting at will always fundamentally be trigger management

 

[LiveLife]

Have any of you tried P&S and was able to do it quicker and accurately?

Yes. My defensive shooting instructor who taught PD/SD SWAT required us to remove front sight of our pistols and pass/fail was 4"-6" groups at 5-7 yards called out to multiple targets. With deliberate point shooting practice, you can even do things like these:



Virtues of point shooting has been discussed in detail on multiple threads. Here's the latest one with step-by-step outline of point shooting exercise - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/point-shooting.814672/#post-10428857

As to shooting accurately and fast, here are Rob Leatham and Jerry Miculek's opinions - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/point-shooting.814672/page-7#post-10500193

 

[chicharrones]

I prefer using sights, but my middle aged eyes have made sights alone useless.

Barring the use of a red dot or laser, I look over the top of the gun to make sure it's pointing where I want it. I don't think that method is pure point shooting, but it is what I do.

 

[mercervillerental]

Too much risk IMO to point and shoot, I'm in the aiming camp

 

[45_auto]

Too much risk IMO to point and shoot, I'm in the aiming camp

If the attacker is 3 feet away and rapidly moving towards you, do you really consider it necessary to raise the gun up in front of you and align the sights? Seems there would be more of a risk of the attacker taking your gun away before you could align the sights and get off a shot.

 

[JohnnyFlake]

I am of the belief that point shooting, from below eye level, within 15/20 feet is much faster than trying to acquire the sights. In reality, point shooting, at close range can be very accurate, with a little practice. As an example, without a weapon in hand, just bring your hand up quickly. pointing you index finger at a human target, say 10' away. Do it quickly and then holding in place, analyze you point of aim. You should find that you are on target, maybe not a bulls-eye shot, but a solid hit. That same movement with a weapon in hand and a double tap, should be effective and takes a second, or more, less in time than trying to acquire the sights. In a deadly confrontation, especially a gun fight, a second in time, can be a life time.

 

[ClickClickD'oh]

I always get a chuckle out of "this is the best way" threads for shooting techniques.

It reminds me of martial arts instructors who insist that the technique taught by their particular school is the bestest martial art ever... when the truth is that a person who has studied multiple techniques will mop the floor with a person that only has learned one.

Being able to shoot with sights is important. Being able to shoot with snap alignment is important. Being able to shoot from retention is important. Shooting while moving is important.

If you have one tool in your tool chest, you will be a poor mechanic. If you have one technique in your skill set, you will be a poor gunfighter.

Practice many techniques, be a slave to none of them.

 

[earplug]

If you train with the sights and engage targets under the clock with a bit of stress you will find yourself adjusting your method based on target distance and size. Try USPSA.

 

[Bad Ninja]

If you have one tool in your tool chest, you will be a poor mechanic. If you have one technique in your skill set, you will be a poor gunfighter.

Practice many techniques, be a slave to none of them.

This is the truth.
Excellent post.

 

[LiveLife]

Being able to shoot with sights is important. Being able to shoot with snap alignment is important. Being able to shoot from retention is important. Shooting while moving is important.

Practice many techniques, be a slave to none of them.

I agree.

While I was ingrained to use "front sight flash" and "shot calling" for accurate double taps in USPSA matches, regional match shooters at the top told me to use the "zen" approach and focus on the target instead of sights at close distances (5-7 yards) and "make holes appear" on target.

With deliberate practice, you could make holes appear anywhere on the target fast. Even being able to point shoot with eyes closed is part of my shooting drills for close targets.

For most of my range drills, I use sighted shooting but consider point shooting another option in my skill set like being able to shoot accurately with weak hand or being able to change magazine and rack the slide with one hand.

I like having options in life.

 

[scaatylobo]

Have any of you tried P&S and was able to do it quicker and accurately?

I have practiced "point shooting" for many decades.

At short distances [ between 0 and 20 feet ] I have found it to be instinctive and FAST.

But it is done from a holster and with carry ammo.

 

[Sunray]

"... lot of cowboy shooting done by point and shoot..." CAS is a shooting game and does not apply to the real world. Ditto for all the shooting games, USPSA included. As soon as somebody makes a set of rules, it's a game.
In any case, point shooting does have advantages, but it also increases the possibility of a shot going where you did not intend it to go.
"...focus on the target instead of sights at close distances..." That's not 'Zen'. It's called instinctive shooting. Relies in your eye hand coordination. Works with a bow. Also works in military battle drills with a rifle. In 'Zen', you become the arrow/bullet.

 

[22250Rem]

It can be done........ I've personally witnessed it quite a few times; just don't ask me to show you, though. I sometimes do it with a Glock 19 at close range and at close distance I can get by because I'm talking almost point blank range. Beyond that it gets pretty "iffy" and I'm gonna keep playing around with it because I figure it could be a valuable skill to have even though, as someone already stated, "I suck at it".

 

[wally]

I've really nothing to add, I think its worthwhile to be able to shoot both ways and use whatever is most appropriate for the situation. To that end, invest in a "realistic" AirSoft replica of your carry gun and learn to point shoot safely from your carry holster before going live.

 

[LiveLife]

It can be done........with a Glock 19 at close range and at close distance

Beyond that it gets pretty "iffy" and I'm gonna keep playing around with it because I figure it could be a valuable skill to have even though, as someone already stated, "I suck at it".

How many of us never fell while learning to ride the bicycle? Like any other skill, point shooting takes practice.

To me, point shooting is an appropriate evolution to sighted shooting.

When we started learning to shoot, we all started at close range like 5 yards then to 7 yards. With practice, many of us increased our shooting range to 10, 15, 25, 50 yards and beyond.

When we started learning to shoot, most of us started out with sighted shooting with focus on the front sight. Just because you started out with sighted shooting with front sight focus does not mean that's the only way you have to shoot. We can add to our shooting skill set by practicing unsighted shooting - point shooting.

Besides, we have been pointing all of our lives and essentially mastered that skill already. We are now sending bullets to where we point.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

Point shooting goes way back to the cold west and further back too. Point shooting is fun on the range and for showing off but IMO if my life is on the line I want to be sure I hit with the first shot.

 

[LiveLife]

We fight like we train. How we train is our decision.

What if you need to shoot in a darkened room against intruders where sight visibility is not viable? I want to keep my eyes on the target(s), especially in low light situations - this is where point shooting is applicable.

I rather train and do range drills with point shooting and not need it than not practice and need to point shoot.

 

[1911 guy]

It's not one or the other. If you're not at least competent in both methods, you will find yourself holding the short end of an already short stick. You will be lacking in approximately half of the actual situations that call for the use of a handgun. Anyone who tells you to use one method in exclusion of the other is either misinformed at best or finding some sort of satisfaction in your failure at worst.

Additionally, it isn't a line that is crossed from point and shoot to traditional sighted fire. It is a sliding scale depending on the situation. You may have to intuitively point the handgun with no visual reference at all. Maybe you'll have the pistol in your peripheral vision. Perhaps you'll have the whole gun in your line of sight as a reference. In a perfect world, you'll have a clean sight picture.

What will happen with proper instruction is beginning to shoot at some point on this scale as the situation dictates. With every subsequent shot, you will strive to get one step closer to a sight picture if the situation allows.

 

[Chuck R.]

I believe they both (sighted and unsighted fire) have their place depending on the distance and target (size, presentation, time etc.), actually took a class on Thursday (Pincus Combat Focus Shooting) that worked both. We shot quite a bit of unsighted at 5 yards and under, using a modified isosceles stance indexing out bodies to the TGT. As the instructor stressed though, when in doubt or questioning which is appropriate, go to your sights. The problem with a majority of these discussions on forums is it always comes across as an absolute, either/or and never gets into when unsighted is or isn't a viable option.

Chuck

 

[GRIZ22]

It all depends on distance to target

Everyone can point and shoot at 3 feet.

I teach one needs to transition according to their ability. The more skilled you are the greater the range between the transition. The transition is:

1. Point
2. Point using nose point (Jim Cirillo technique)
3. Point using gun silhouette (another Jim Cirillo technique)
4. Flash sight picture (advocated by Jeff Cooper)
5. Sighted fire

Everything past #1 means your're using more than your eye and shooting hand to align the gun with the target. The gun keeps coming up higher with each step. Its worked for those i've taught it to and were willing to practice.