John Veit, a regular guest author here and point shooting advocate, tells why he believes point shooting is viable for many gun owners, as well as police and soldiers.

 

 Instructors and others who shoot thousands of rounds a year, are not representative of the average shooter IMHO, and as such what they say one should do, may not be what the average shooter should do.

This is possibly the best synopsis I’ve read about this issue and is very telling. Working with soldiers, cops, hunters and others who aren’t really shooters they probably won’t go to the range unless forced (annual qual, pre-season sight-in). I know a rookie cop could develop a solid base of skill if they made the effort to perform a simple dry practice series every day they went on duty. It takes minimal time and a year of it would show real results. I put it out in each academy class I help teach, but I suspect many don’t bother.

When I talk about the “best technique” I refer to the best known possible approach. Competition is great for assessing this. However, this may not be the best approach for someone unwilling to do the work necessary to imbed that level of skill.

I liken it to using a keyboard or typewriter. Clearly, the fastest approach is touch typing but hunt-and-peck is more natural and quicker to learn for new person. For the person willing to put in the work, touch typing (and aimed shooting) is clearly the superior approach. Any doubts can be proven by measurement in a formal test. For those not willing or able to practice, hunt-and-peck (and point shooting) has value.

Advertisements