https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERs7VyRMETg , thought you guys might enjoy it
How to Win a Gunfight , made in the 60's by DOJ
- Thread starter gym
- Start date
- Status
Hometeached1
Member
Thanks. Other then not moving when drawing,the "FBI crouch" and hip shooting with the shotgun I did not see much that is not taught today. Still neat to watch.
xxjumbojimboxx
Member
Neat
Tommygunn
Member
Nice....woulda been better if it had had Efrem Zimbalist Jr.
ohbythebay
Member
Pretty cool
Interesting about the aimed ricochets
Interesting about the aimed ricochets
Lucky Derby
Member
Early 70's based on the cars. Neat film.
Ya’ I’m old enough to remember too. These days I put myself in the “pick and choose” side when it comes to what technique to employ. Over the years I never learned anything that wasn’t in some way useful. Of course some of it wasn’t especially useful. But one never knows.
I was part of that generation who started with Revolvers. It's funny how some things change but others remain the same. I remember always being uncomfortable with that stance, and not really ever using it, I just stood however felt comfortable to me. But the revolver grip is still pretty much the same.
The one-handed shooting stances & firing the shotgun from the hip went out the window decades ago & for good reason.
Yeah, cover's fine, but even the weak-hand barricade position's been long replaced by a two-handed swing out & fire technique.
In 1976 when I was a brand new reserve officer our reserve class did a man against man walk & shoot when our grizzled old sergeant & department firearms instructor blew his whistle.
I outshot everybody else, then he took me on.
He was raised in the back-East FBI one-hand crouch method shown in the video.
I was not & fired two-handed.
He was no slouch, even with his outdated shooting style.
He was fractionally faster.
I was more accurate.
I beat him.
Denis
Yeah, cover's fine, but even the weak-hand barricade position's been long replaced by a two-handed swing out & fire technique.
In 1976 when I was a brand new reserve officer our reserve class did a man against man walk & shoot when our grizzled old sergeant & department firearms instructor blew his whistle.
I outshot everybody else, then he took me on.
He was raised in the back-East FBI one-hand crouch method shown in the video.
I was not & fired two-handed.
He was no slouch, even with his outdated shooting style.
He was fractionally faster.
I was more accurate.
I beat him.
Denis
I was never into the crouch that much as I think it was suppose to make one a smaller target for incoming fire (doubtful), make the holster more horizontal, and maybe clear the covering garment better. Anyway when waist-level shooting - that pretty well died out when case-ejecting pistols became the mode.
I subscribed more to what Bill Jordan did, that did not involve a crouch. I regret that the two of you never had a chance to have an against-the-clock shooting demonstration.
The current most popular handgun stances require the use of two hands, while I understand the advantage it also means one must have both hands available for the task.
Personally I would never shoot a shotgun from waist level unless speed was the single most important imperative and the target was very close. This assumes of course that I was already holding the scattergun at waist level in the first place. Again not likely.
I subscribed more to what Bill Jordan did, that did not involve a crouch. I regret that the two of you never had a chance to have an against-the-clock shooting demonstration.
The current most popular handgun stances require the use of two hands, while I understand the advantage it also means one must have both hands available for the task.
Personally I would never shoot a shotgun from waist level unless speed was the single most important imperative and the target was very close. This assumes of course that I was already holding the scattergun at waist level in the first place. Again not likely.
I was no quickdraw superstar when I beat our instructor, it was more a matter of technique superiority than shooter superiority.
That was the point I was trying to make.
He was a veteran of many years of shooting the old way, I was fairly new to DA revolvers & only had limited Air Force Security Police revolver "training" (if it could even be called that) behind me at the time.
Jordan was an exceptionally skilled shooter, and among other things a clear example of the principle that even an inferior technique CAN achieve superior results, combined with sufficient practice, good equipment, and far-above-average physical coordination and reflexes.
Even using a lesser technique, a true athlete can out perform the average contender using a better technique.
Meanwhile, back in the world that most of us live in, one-hand shooting, un-aimed fire, and so on, are simply much less efficient & produce inferior results to two-handed and aimed shooting, once you move back beyond a certain distance.
The hip-fired close-in (VERY close) speed rock has its place.
Even the Full Feeb crouch with shooting arm extended out front can produce hits.
Aiming & two-hand support increases the probability, along with the realistic speed that also comes from better control, especially once you move above the .38 Special caliber.
I would have enjoyed seeing one of Jordan's exhibitions, but I'm under no illusions about how my shooting would have compared to his.
Denis
That was the point I was trying to make.
He was a veteran of many years of shooting the old way, I was fairly new to DA revolvers & only had limited Air Force Security Police revolver "training" (if it could even be called that) behind me at the time.
Jordan was an exceptionally skilled shooter, and among other things a clear example of the principle that even an inferior technique CAN achieve superior results, combined with sufficient practice, good equipment, and far-above-average physical coordination and reflexes.
Even using a lesser technique, a true athlete can out perform the average contender using a better technique.
Meanwhile, back in the world that most of us live in, one-hand shooting, un-aimed fire, and so on, are simply much less efficient & produce inferior results to two-handed and aimed shooting, once you move back beyond a certain distance.
The hip-fired close-in (VERY close) speed rock has its place.
Even the Full Feeb crouch with shooting arm extended out front can produce hits.
Aiming & two-hand support increases the probability, along with the realistic speed that also comes from better control, especially once you move above the .38 Special caliber.
I would have enjoyed seeing one of Jordan's exhibitions, but I'm under no illusions about how my shooting would have compared to his.
Denis
longknife12
Member
To date myself, I did attend a couple of Mr Jordans siminars... still retain most of it.I was never into the crouch that much as I think it was suppose to make one a smaller target for incoming fire (doubtful), make the holster more horizontal, and maybe clear the covering garment better. Anyway when waist-level shooting - that pretty well died out when case-ejecting pistols became the mode.
I subscribed more to what Bill Jordan did, that did not involve a crouch. I regret that the two of you never had a chance to have an against-the-clock shooting demonstration.
The current most popular handgun stances require the use of two hands, while I understand the advantage it also means one must have both hands available for the task.
Personally I would never shoot a shotgun from waist level unless speed was the single most important imperative and the target was very close. This assumes of course that I was already holding the scattergun at waist level in the first place. Again not likely.
Dan
It taught me to shoot one handed back then, which I still can do with either type of weapon pretty well. Also the use of the weak hand, we used to do much more weak hand shooting exercises. It was a good idea then and still is. Most shooters don't practice at all wit their weak hand anymore from my range trips.
Also much easier to shoot across the body to the opposite side using 1 hand.
Also much easier to shoot across the body to the opposite side using 1 hand.
I have always been interested in that some techniques are superior (and without question) when they are largely developed on shooting ranges where the targets aren't shooting back.
I hope I don't leave the impression that two-handed holds aren't good. They are very much so when they can be employed. The problem is that in the real world, for various reasons, sometimes they can't.
Under the rules of engagement, demanded by our laws concerning the use of Deadly Force, in a law enforcement or civilian environment the bad guy(s) usually get to start first. This can be a substantial advantage for the other side, but the consequences are seldom taken into consideration.
I hope I don't leave the impression that two-handed holds aren't good. They are very much so when they can be employed. The problem is that in the real world, for various reasons, sometimes they can't.
Under the rules of engagement, demanded by our laws concerning the use of Deadly Force, in a law enforcement or civilian environment the bad guy(s) usually get to start first. This can be a substantial advantage for the other side, but the consequences are seldom taken into consideration.
It's not a complete either/or deal, you use whichever's indicated.
Just the idea of ONLY training people to shoot one-handed & un-aimed is long outdated.
Most current professional thinking holds that if there's room enough to get the sights up without handing the gun away, use the sights.
If not, do a push-off, step back, use the speed rock, whatever.
Also a better hit probability using a barricade two-handed roll-out than just the weak hand.
Weak hand practice is always a good idea, but for when the primary hand isn't available.
And so on.
Denis
Just the idea of ONLY training people to shoot one-handed & un-aimed is long outdated.
Most current professional thinking holds that if there's room enough to get the sights up without handing the gun away, use the sights.
If not, do a push-off, step back, use the speed rock, whatever.
Also a better hit probability using a barricade two-handed roll-out than just the weak hand.
Weak hand practice is always a good idea, but for when the primary hand isn't available.
And so on.
Denis
Two hands are better than one. But as Fluff said, it's good to know that in a pinch , if you had to shoot either with your weak hand or could only reach the gun with that 1 hand, that you could still hit what needs hitting.
There are a lot of old police videos from the 50's and 60's and further back, those guys sure could shoot a revolver. I think they took more pride in what they did back then.
There are a lot of old police videos from the 50's and 60's and further back, those guys sure could shoot a revolver. I think they took more pride in what they did back then.
Gordon
Member
I was trained that way in the mid 70s at DEA, 5 years later Col Cooper showed me the correct way . I was brought up to date in 2000 by Scott Reitz at ITTS and as of 2010 it aint changed .
Its funny how they show the ricochet shots and then try to place the man directly behind cover with his arm and head sticking out around it. Nowadays we are taught to give a bit of space between cover and yourself and never let any appendage stick out from around it.
DT Guy
Member
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2003
- Messages
- 1,846
I still remember my first department qualification, some 25 years ago...we were told we had ten seconds to fire three rounds at 1 yard (!) Buzzer goes, and I grab a flash sight picture and put three into the HUGE silhouette's center in a couple seconds or so.
I hear everyone else stop shooting, and look down the line and every single cop is stopped dead, head turned to stare at me; being the new guy, I assume this is bad.
The rangemaster, who'd probably learned to shoot thirty years prior to that date, pounds over to me and asks, "why did you shoot so damn fast? You had ten seconds!"
I replied that, if there was someone three feet away from me that was so dangerous I had to shoot them, I most certainly DIDN'T have three seconds....
Which is a long way to point out that there was very little 'fast' shooting in police training years back; someone who'd shot IPSC was PROFOUNDLY more prepared to shoot accurately and quickly than the average cop. Thankfully, the training has progressed.
Larry
I hear everyone else stop shooting, and look down the line and every single cop is stopped dead, head turned to stare at me; being the new guy, I assume this is bad.
The rangemaster, who'd probably learned to shoot thirty years prior to that date, pounds over to me and asks, "why did you shoot so damn fast? You had ten seconds!"
I replied that, if there was someone three feet away from me that was so dangerous I had to shoot them, I most certainly DIDN'T have three seconds....
Which is a long way to point out that there was very little 'fast' shooting in police training years back; someone who'd shot IPSC was PROFOUNDLY more prepared to shoot accurately and quickly than the average cop. Thankfully, the training has progressed.
Larry
- Status
