Here are other Point Shooting vs. Sight Shooting articles worth checking out as well:
Colonel Rex Applegate on Point Shooting
The Connection Between Combat and Range Results
Point Shooting vs. Sight Shooting (counterpoint to the article below)
Point Shooting vs. Sight Shooting – Handgun Training Effectiveness
…….
The following guest article was written and submitted by John Veit.
We welcome a variety of points of view on the subjects of shooting and marksmanship. Test them objectively on the range and let the results fall where they may.
HOW YOU WILL SHOOT IN A “REAL” CQB SITUATION
by John Veit
The often touted theory that Sight Shooting is the way to shoot in Close Quarters Battle situations, has been around for 100+ years, and teaching it has kept many a trainer employed, yet there is no evidence in the form of pictures and videos of it being used effectively in real Close Quarters Battle. As bizarre as that may seem to be, it is the truth.
To Sight Shoot effectively requires that one meet the marksmanship requirements of taking a proper stance, getting a proper grip, correctly aligning the sights, obtaining a sight picture, proper breathing, and squeezing the trigger smoothly to the rear until each shot breaks.
And given photos and videos of real Close Quarters Battle situations, that is a prescription for suicide.
Sight Shooting behaviors conflict with the behaviors that are used to shoot effectively in the 21 foot kill zone, where most all gunfights occur, and there is the greatest chance of your being shot and killed. And if ingrained, they may/will cause confusion and conflict as to what to do in a life or death situation, and that may/will result in the Officer or Civilian defender being killed.
……….
The following pictures show real people in real shooting situations.
This series of pictures shows some of the action in a drug store robbery.
The first picture shows that the robber’s attention is on the druggist who is returning from an aisle and is holding up some pills.
The robber then notices the guard, who had acquired his gun, and is moving to confront the robber.
Note the guard’s pistol is in a two handed Isosceles type grip, which puts the gun close to his centerline and points it at the robber, and his thumbs are up, not forward along the frame. He also continues to move during the confrontation.
The robber points his gun at the guard.
The robber is shot.
I was surprised that the guard was not shot when I saw the picture showing the robber’s gun pointed at him. It clearly shows that the guard is a hairbreadth away from being shot. And that certainly would have happened, had the guard not shot the robber.
As to why the robber did not shoot, it could have been that he made the decision to shoot, and was physically in the process of doing that when he was shot.
I also wondered why the guard had not shot the robber, when the robber was bringing his gun around towards the guard. It may have been, as just mentioned about the robber, that the guard made the decision to shoot, and was in the mental/physical process of doing that. That process takes a fraction of a second, and during the lag-time, the robber pointed his gun directly at the guard.
Pictures freeze the actions being taken. So, it may look like things happened slower than they actually did. In real time, it took less than two seconds for the guard to move out from behind the counter, confront the threat, and then shoot.
Here is a link to more information and pics on the robbery.
htttp://www.pointshooting.com/1arobber.htm
These pictures are from a video of a shooting where an Officer also is taking aggressive action to stop a life threat.
Note the positioning of his feet as he moves naturally. He shoots 5 times in just over 1 second in the video, so unless he was Superman, it would have been impossible to meet the marksmanship requirements of Sight Shooting for each shot.
These pictures show a Chinese Police Officer, who after distracting a hostage taker with a knife, moved quickly towards him and used her strong hand only to end the hostage situation.
These pictures are from the video of the armed assault on a Detroit Police station and show an Officer courageously responding to a very aggressive threat armed with a shotgun.
The picture which shows the Officer’s gun hand fully extended was followed instantly by a shot from the perp which knocked the Officer back and down, and also shot off some of the fingers of his hand.
The video vividly and clearly shows that there was no time to employ the marksmanship requirements of pistol shooting that must be met to shoot a handgun effectively (a proper grip, stance, breathing, squeezing the trigger, etc.).
It is possible that due to the Officer’s training, he attempted to obtain a sight picture before shooting, which according the scientific study of CQ situation, just is not physiologically possible, and that the time lost in attempting that, was used by the gunman to shoot him and shoot off fingers of his hand.
This is no way is meant to question him or his actions. His courage, bravery, and action under fire, was heroic.
……….
As in the other cases, there was no time to meet the marksmanship requirements of getting a proper grip on the gun, taking a proper stance, aligning the sights, and squeezing the trigger smoothly back until each shot breaks that often are repeated religiously by trainers who advocate the use of Sight Shooting. The rub is that it never shows
up in shooting videos of real close quarters life threat situations.
There just will be no time to meet the marksmanship requirements of getting a proper grip on the gun, and taking a proper stance, aligning the sights, and squeezing the trigger smoothly back until a shot breaks in situations that take place within the kill zone where there is the greatest chance of one being shot and/or killed.
And if you think you will do otherwise, and train as such, good luck to you, and RIP.
There are a variety of articles on this site which explain and support the use of AIMED Point Shooting or P&S as I call it. It is fast, accurate, and instinctive, and with it you get automatic and correct sight alignment and an automatic and correct sight picture.
They also provide details on: the time and environmental constraints of Close Quarters situations and their dynamic nature, which do not allow for the use of sight shooting, and our instinctive and uncontrollable physiological responses to close quarters life threats, which makes the use of Sight Shooting moot.
Here is a link to a closely related article on this subject area that deals with: Shooting distance and survival.
Firearm User Network 
Colorado Pete
Mar 23, 2012 @ 03:37:56
I may be just an ordinary Rube (“B” class IPSC shooter and Jeff Cooper expert certificate recipient) but I take issue with almost everything in this article. Mr. Veit seems to have very little understanding of the following:
First, as Col. Cooper taught (and Mr. Veit also claims to teach), the proper alignment of sights with target is achieved by the hands at the presentation, through muscle memory guided by using the sights in thousands of practice reps. As you present it is “on”, you don’t fiddle with your aim while staring at the sights. The sights are aligned on target automatically. This is the first step of sighted fire. No time wasted there.
Second, you verify the sight picture instantaneously (flash sight picture). Cooper mentioned that the human eye can recognize an image in as little as 1/100th of a second (what the Marines taught him in WWII aircraft recognition school). Not much time wasted there, and even if the sights are blurry, you can still perceive if they are very out of whack (what I see when I shoot without my 1.25 corrected glasses). This verifies that you will hit and not miss. A fraction of a tenth of a second is worth not missing.
Third, this bit about “There just will be no time to meet the marksmanship requirements of getting a proper grip on the gun”. Huh? Do you have time to grip the gun at all? Then you have time to grip it properly the first time. A proper grip takes no more time than any other grip, including a bad one.
As far as breathing goes, that may matter with bullseye, but not so much with practical shooting at close range. I never pay it any mind at all, except to keep doing it.
Next this: “He shoots 5 times in just over 1 second in the video, so unless he was Superman, it would have been impossible to meet the marksmanship requirements of Sight Shooting for each shot.” WRONG…I have run Bill Drills with a .22 rimfire and gotten splits ranging from .14 to .18 seconds, seeing my sights for each shot in full recoil cycle without blinking, with the .14 – .16 splits being proper sight alignment recovery after recoil, and the .17 – .18 second splits being ones where the sights were slightly mis-aligned and I had to correct the alignment before squeezing. That is, AT MOST, four one-hundredths of a second to see misaligned sights, realize they were a little off, and physically correct them before squeezing a compressed surprise/subconscious shot break. Add in the initial say half of a tenth of a second or less for the initial flash sight picture, and you are looking at less than a tenth of a second of aim confirmation for your first shot even when your initial sight picture is bad!
And with the .45, the times go to .20 to .25 or so…with complete awareness of sight picture for each shot, well within the parameters of the above video. And I’m no Superman, just a 65% guy. Which itself of course takes a bit of practice to achieve. High-end competitors are simply unbelievable in their speed and smoothness, and they don’t miss…using sighted fire.
Mr. Veit is attacking a technique when in actuality the people he uses as examples who have been taught the technique, and have to use it for real, have not learned the technique well enough to perform it up to snuff. Nothing wrong with the technique, but you do actually have to be good at it. Very very few “armed employees” are. Very many competitive shooters are. The difference is motivation. As Col. Cooper said, some people are more highly motivated to earn a little brass cup than they are to learn skills that will save their life. The odd ways of male ego.
LikeLike
Colorado Pete
Mar 23, 2012 @ 03:54:55
Oh, a couple more points….I freely admit that at very close range inside 3-4 yards, point shooting without sight use can work fine if one practices it enough to get an automatic physical muscle-memory index. I can hit fine at 3-4 yards with the gun at chest level and peripherally visible against the target, or with the gun just below eyesight level. Not saying this is a bad thing. And I can switch from index to sighted fire back and forth at will.
But, another Cooper gem was his receipt of a report from the training officer of a major metropolitan police dept. reporting that out of 24 officers shooting at a suspect, 8 remembered seeing their front sights and all 8 hit, while the others did not see their front sights, and all of them missed – a 100% correlation.
There is probably more than one workable way to skin this cat. The real question is not which is the magic way, but rather how well people can perform it. No technique is worthwhile if performed poorly.
LikeLike
John M. Buol Jr.
Mar 23, 2012 @ 08:32:09
>> the people he uses as examples who have been taught the technique, and have to use it for real, have not learned the technique well enough to perform it up to snuff.
Probably better to say, “the people he uses as examples who have been SHOWN the technique.” Most cops and soldiers have been exposed to shooting ideas but haven’t trained them enough to take benefit.
It’s like watching a competitive powerlifter or Olympic weightlifter. Seeing them perform their lifts exposes you to the idea of strength and power development but you won’t see any benefit until you’ve spent enough time under the bar yourself.
Novices have been taught how to shoot and understand the fundamentals.
Masters have truly learned how to shoot and can actually apply the fundamentals.
LikeLike