Exibition shooters may have an edge in a S.D. senario

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

gamestalker

member
Joined
Sep 10, 2008
Messages
9,827
Location
SW Arizona
Anyone ever seen those exibitionists who can shoot multiple pennies out of the air? I wonder if this is only limited to their DNA make up, or if it's something that can be harnessed and honed by an average person. I'm guessing that with such amazing talent, what if any use it would serve in a S.D. situation?
I've tried hitting clay targets flying through the air with a 22 pistol, and surprisingly I've connected from time to time. I think even something as seemingly unrelated to S.D. shooting as this may seem, it sure can't hurt to develope and improve our shooting skills at any level, in my opinion.
At any rate, I wouldn't want to be the bad guy who accidentally picks someone with these kind of skills under their belt.
 
Some exhibition shooters are gifted.. some practice often and well... most are both gifted and practice very often.

As for S.D. situations, well that depends on how alert they are and if they have the nerve to do what needs to be done quickly.

There have gunfighters who were excellent shots and had nerves of steel. Names like Wild Bill, Jordan, and Bryce come into mind.

Others were not that good a shot (but good shots) and still did very well. People such as Frank Hammer, Askins, Audie Murphy, and Gonzales.

But even fair shots have been know to be in multiple gunfights and win. One was Lance Thomas.

On the other hand some top competition shots have not done very well in gunfights.

It takes more than just skill to win a fight. Any fight.

Deaf
 
You are aware that Bill Jordan was never in a gunfight as a peace officer, right? ;)

The skills needed to hit a reactive "un" track-able target are directly related to gunfighting, but they are not all that's needed. As Lee has said a jillion times, it's Mindset, Skillset, Toolset in that order and for a reason.

As for hitting small flying objects with a rifled firearm, it's very resource intensive with a low probability payoff IMHO. With a few hours instruction, I can have a completely unskilled person getting that firearm in an appropriate stance/position that will enable them to ably defend themselves.

Modern techniques, properly instructed, beat anecdotal "old" techniques, all day, every day, seven days a week. Take a look at the FBI shootout in Miami for a horrible example of darn brave agents going into a battle with outmoded techniques. One brave agent fired six shots at about ten (or less) feet and missed a guy sitting in a car with all six shots. :(

Bumpy things on top of the handgun work. :D
 
I think anyone who lives and breathes with a gun in his or her hand as an avocation is going to be a force to be reckoned with, so long as they also have a solid background in tactics. Skill can't hurt, again, so long as the shooter knows how to get off the x, as it were, along with all the other stuff being taught today that has little to do with trigger control and hand-to-eye coordination.

That said–If I may paraphrase one of my teachers–the day I start seeing small, shiny, copper-colored, flying criminals as a serious threat to my well being is the day I hope the next generation comes and relieves me of my firearms.

YMMV.
 
Shooting is one thing.

Gunfighting is something else entirely.

I don't know if Annie Oakley was ever in a gunfight. I know she could shoot. Could she fight? Would she? I don't know. The evidence is she could, and would have, had she been forced to. She was a hunter as a youngster, and a very successful one, too, so she did shed blood. She believed in women learning to use a gun safely and effectively in self defense, taught thousands of women how to shoot. She even offered to field a unit of female sharpshooters for the Spanish-American War (her offer was not accepted).

The man I paraphrase in my SIG could flat out fight, from the standpoint of employing air to air tactics in a fighter jet. They called him "40 Second Boyd" because he would give another fighter pilot the pat position, behind and below him. And when the "fight's on" call went out, in mere seconds Boyd would reverse position on the other pilot. But would he shoot? He was never involved in air to air combat that I know of, so I have to say - I don't know. But again, I'd imagine he would have, if it was ever necessary.

The thing about it is, there's more to gunfighting than just shooting. A good bit more. Being a good shot is definitely a useful talent. But being a good shot doesn't necessarily translate to being willing and able to win a gunfight.

fwiw,

lpl
 
the day I start seeing small, shiny, copper-colored, flying criminals as a serious threat to my well being
Click to expand...
Well, it might be useful if you had to fend off a cloud of shiruken ;)

On a more reality based note, bear in mine that shooting pennies out of the air or even the much easier splitting a playing card edgewise are just parlor tricks that are based on fundamental shooting skills.

The most important thing in a deadly encounter is a willingness to act. It isn't a strange as it seems, I've seen much better shots and much stronger men than myself unable to act/perform in the face of danger
 
To turn Lee around
people have, will, and will continue to win gunfights with crappy shooting
but good shooting helps a lot.
 
Imagine the fool that breaks into Jerry Miculek's home. In the blink of an eye he'll look like Swiss cheese.
 
Deaf Smith nailed it.

One of my favorite related movie quotes comes from "The Shootist."

"Gillam...it's not always about being fast or even accurate that counts. It's being willing. I've found that most men...regardless of need or cause...aren't willing. They'll blink an eye or take a breath before they pull the trigger. I won't."
 
Al Thompson said:
You are aware that Bill Jordan was never in a gunfight as a peace officer, right? ;)

The skills needed to hit a reactive "un" track-able target are directly related to gunfighting, but they are not all that's needed. As Lee has said a jillion times, it's Mindset, Skillset, Toolset in that order and for a reason.

As for hitting small flying objects with a rifled firearm, it's very resource intensive with a low probability payoff IMHO. With a few hours instruction, I can have a completely unskilled person getting that firearm in an appropriate stance/position that will enable them to ably defend themselves.

Modern techniques, properly instructed, beat anecdotal "old" techniques, all day, every day, seven days a week. Take a look at the FBI shootout in Miami for a horrible example of darn brave agents going into a battle with outmoded techniques. One brave agent fired six shots at about ten (or less) feet and missed a guy sitting in a car with all six shots. :(

Bumpy things on top of the handgun work. :D
Click to expand...
Yea Al, but he was pretty good with a flamethrower right?

Deaf
 
Imagine the fool that breaks into Jerry Miculek's home. In the blink of an eye he'll look like Swiss cheese.
Click to expand...

Hahaha, imagine the fool that breaks into Tom Knapp's house...He'll get a nice Benelli sales pitch, "Dont make me shoot you with this BENELLI SHOTGUN!! hahahaha
 
I think anyone who lives and breathes with a gun in his or her hand as an avocation is going to be a force to be reckoned with, so long as they also have a solid background in tactics.
Click to expand...

That's a profound point, and I consider it highly valid.

I've got to say, as a whole there aren't many of those people (despite there being a concentration on this forum).

Frankly, you can carry your whole life and never HAVE a need to draw, so many people aren't committed.

Personally, I'm never more than arm's reach from my sidearm and knife.

I've observed countless confrontations, and mindset is key. I've been involved in several, survived them all, walked away from some terrified becuase I was caught off-guard and come away from others with my feathers fluffed because I overwhelmed the other combatant.

While I've never shot anyone, I've had solo foot chases with a couple fleeing felons that ended with the Taser... the only two times I've deployed the Taser. Both times it utterly failed to make a connection (one time I missed with a probe and the other time a probe hit a shirt-tail and didn't make contact) so I ended up drilling the suspect with the Taser in-hand. It worked then. In those cases I was mentally ready and adapted to my equipment failure without a hiccup.

I can't say for sure what I'd do in a gunfight, but one option would be to fire and move forward until I was shooting at contact range if necessary. Granted, the scenarios I face include more than self defense. For instance, an active shooter at a school, is a scenario where I'm moving forward and hosing down the suspect(s) as fast & aggressive as I can for as long as I can.

From what I've seen, few individuals are prepared to meet outright agression head on. They freeze or revert to a defensive tactic, while I'm advancing. Sometimes I'm not mentally prepared, which is when I'm walking away terrified knowing I got very lucky, and managed to "come from behind" after losing the initiative.

Exhibition shooters would have that singular advantage, assuming they're currently in the mindset.

Ironically, most people reason that special details like SWAT are the most dangerous, and granted, they are... but on SWAT you are geared up, you have a plan, and you initiate the confrontation when you and your team are physically & mentally prepared. I'll argue that a lone patrol officer has a more difficult time combating complacency, because 95% of the time he can de-escalate, which makes his function more dangerous than SWAT.
 
Maybe, maybe not. Last year after much formal training and practice over several years (when I was single I had the time and money) I finally took a force on force class with airsoft pistols. Wow. I found it much harder than I would have ever imagined to shoot. We did four or five scenarios. I definately need to do more force on force training.
 
While he wasn't addressing "trick" or exhibition shooting, Jim Cirillo (a real gunfighter of some note), in his book Guns, Bullets and Gunfights, noted that officers who competed or hunted with handguns performed better in their gunfights than those who did not.
 
Sheepdog1968 said:
Maybe, maybe not. Last year after much formal training and practice over several years (when I was single I had the time and money) I finally took a force on force class with airsoft pistols. Wow. I found it much harder than I would have ever imagined to shoot. We did four or five scenarios. I definately need to do more force on force training.
Click to expand...
What is needed is more than just FOF.

Few people shoot moving targets with any regularity. Few shoot targets while they are moving with any regularity. Few shoot under adverse conditions. Few...

Well you get the picture. All this takes much practice and something other than a square range. IDPA helps a bit but once the match is over few practice any of the above BEFORE the match.

I found a good way. Laser pistol.

attachment.php


I made the above laser pistol out of an airsoft $25 buck pistol. Everytime I press the trigger a laser beam comes out of the muzzle. And the airsoft fits my holsters for the Glock26 carry gun.

You can practice on anything moving in the house. Ceiling fans work quite well if set on slow. And so do remote controlled toy cars (see the Hummer below in the picture. It takes wooden dowels and bullseye targets!) Then on a range use a mover like the one I built here to get used to shooting moving targets. You can then add your own movement to.

Do that for a while and then take that FOF class again!

Deaf
 
Last edited:
^^^the first time I ever shot a mover like that was in a class; the thing was scurrying about, in and out from behind no-shoot targets, run by the instructor with his remote control. I am both unhappy and pleased to say that I hit the thing twice. Unhappy, because I used two mags from a sig P238 (12 rounds total). Happy, because the only guy who did any better only hit three times, using a tricked out witness .45, with all sorts of bells and whistles.

Stuff that moves any faster than granny's walker with a full size B-27 target taped to it is really hard to hit reliably with a handgun, IMHO.
 
On the other hand some top competition shots have not done very well in gunfights.
Click to expand...
Can someone give me just one example where a "top competition" shooter did not do "very well" in a gunfight? Just curious.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

B
  • Locked
Just back from the first Rifle/Shottie Quick Kill course
2
Replies
36
Views
886
Fred Fuller
F
E
  • Locked
Caliber Comparison Question.....
Replies
14
Views
997
MinnMooney
M
D
  • Locked
Professional Shooter performing in SD
Replies
1
Views
689
Kcustom45
K
F
  • Locked
AAR - Louis Awerbuck, Refresher Handgun, 29 May 2012
Replies
4
Views
258
Jeff22
J
JohnKSa
  • Locked
IDPA reloading rules?
Replies
22
Views
615
Jenrick
J
Back
Top