At what range do you practice point-aiming with a pistol?

[MegademiC]

If my gun is pointed at the target, it's in my line of sight, and I'm using sights.
Once you practice enough, you know by feel when you are in target, so the sights may not register to my brain until after I break the shot, but as soon as I pick them up, I'm tracking sights for however many shots I need. I don't practice point shooting.

The only caveat I can think of would be contact distance.

Closer range makes incapacitating a threat quickly more critical. Can you ensure a hit in the ocular triangle (or whatever it's called) without using sights at 10yds?
How much time is not using sight saving? Are you taking too much time to acquire sight picture? I highly recommend a shot timer, as only you can answer these questions, after verification.

A little patmac vid for perspective.

https://youtu.be/U-_9OIiQOJg

[Ron3]

I wonder if peoples definition of "point shooting" or "point aiming" can vary?

For example, when shooting at one yd from a retention position, the little finger of the hand holding my pistol is basically jammed up against my lowest rib. It's still point aiming to me.

When shooting at 10 yds, both hands on the gun arms extended, I'm using the silhouette of the slide to aim, really. I can see the sights but I'm not focused on them. I am focused on the target and right where I want the bullet to go. This, too, I call point aiming.

It's when I'm really focused on the front sight, while the target and rear sight are also "seen" but blurred, when I say I'm "using the sights".

[MegademiC]

Even at 5 yds, I focus on the sight, as it tightens up the groups. Can you clean dot torture at 3yds point shooting? How about 5?

[echo5whiskey]

First off, please understand that I'm not a SME, IP, or even a mod; so my opinion is based solely on my experiences both learning and training.

In my opinion (yes it's like an a-hole), point shooting--as it's traditionally known: using body mechanics to aim without the aid of sights--is only acceptable for gaining distance to where one can bring up sights to eye-level. Depending on the circumstances, that could be a fairly wide range (e.g. is the assailant moving; in which direction; how fast; etc.). If one effectively practices the fundamentals and becomes fluent in them, "point shooting" is almost like a side effect.

I will always preach to use sights. I'm not talking about CMP-style slow fire aiming in a defensive situation. In those instances (mid-to-close range self-defense), I believe flash sight picture is key. It is compressing the fundamentals into an effective response time. The more one practices the fundamentals, the more they will become second-nature (i.e. muscle memory). As that automatic movement to bring sights to eyes develops, the response time will get shorter and shorter--if done properly.

In short, I wouldn't practice strictly point-shooting at any specific distance(s). I would (and do) practice fighting--though shooting--to bring up my sights for a flash sight picture.

Again, my $.02. YMMV.

ETA: I'm also not necessarily a proponent of automatically drawing to retain my sidearm. If my attacker is unarmed, and shows that I can retain without drawing, I'm not going to help him (or her) by clearing my holster for him or her. Now I'm not an expert in defensive tactics by any stretch, so maybe someone who is--or at least more so than me--can school me in the go to method.

[echo5whiskey]

If my gun is pointed at the target, it's in my line of sight, and I'm using sights.
Once you practice enough, you know by feel when you are in target, so the sights may not register to my brain until after I break the shot, but as soon as I pick them up, I'm tracking sights for however many shots I need. I don't practice point shooting.

The only caveat I can think of would be contact distance.

Closer range makes incapacitating a threat quickly more critical. Can you ensure a hit in the ocular triangle (or whatever it's called) without using sights at 10yds?
How much time is not using sight saving? Are you taking too much time to acquire sight picture? I highly recommend a shot timer, as only you can answer these questions, after verification.

A little patmac vid for perspective.

https://youtu.be/U-_9OIiQOJg

Yeah, what he said.

[ST911]

I point shoot 99 percent of the time. Unless I'm at distance going for very specific small target. If I take the time to look for the sights I much slower and have no improved accuracy. Over the years and practice. I could have no sights and be equally accurate. I may be by myself on this one, but it is what works for me.

On what commonly known drills/tests is that true for you?

[Eurodriver]

Practice! Head/heart shots are easy with a Beretta .25 or Glock 19 at 3 yds, rapidly, with no sights.

As for shooting a 4 inch circle at 15 yds no sights...I don't think I could shoot a group that tight. But certainly upper torso hits.

Time? Don't know, no timer. But It's clearly much faster at close range (what range exactly is debatable) to shoot get :decent: hits vs taking longer to get a "good" hit. It's the ol' precision vs speed debate.

You should get a shot timer and post up some videos. I’ll do the same. What drills do you typically run so that we can accurately compare the two techniques?

[ST911]

There are a variety of ways to "point shoot/aim", and no common definition. Depending on time, distance, and accuracy requirements you can index or superimpose the front sight, the nose of the slide, the rear outline of the slide, the cylinder, your fist, unfocused grossly misaligned sights, focused misaligned sights, focused aligned sights, on the target. In Pat Mac's video above, he uses the term "acceptable sight picture." A variety of methods accomplish that goal. Few people truly "point shoot", even those who profess to do so.

[glocktogo]

There are a variety of ways to "point shoot/aim", and no common definition. Depending on time, distance, and accuracy requirements you can index or superimpose the front sight, the nose of the slide, the rear outline of the slide, the cylinder, your fist, unfocused grossly misaligned sights, focused misaligned sights, focused aligned sights, on the target. In Pat Mac's video above, he uses the term "acceptable sight picture." A variety of methods accomplish that goal. Few people truly "point shoot", even those who profess to do so.

IMO, whether point shooting is a benefit depends on eye speed. We're all different in physical capabilities, and that includes how quickly we can "see" and process what we're seeing. As a competition shooter, I used to point shoot a lot on targets out to 7 yards. As I shot more and more, my eye speed began to catch up and flash sight pictures began to occur more frequently out to 7 yards. As this happened over time, my points dropped in matches improved with no observable loss in speed.

As an RO/SO, I've seen more than my share of shooters drop points and even miss targets at 3 yards, or even less! Those people tend to take close targets for granted, which is one way to lose a match on the range and possibly get hurt on the street. Again, IMO it's something each person needs to evaluate for themselves. A lot of people confuse not being able to acquire a flash sight picture, with not being able to make themselves press the trigger when the picture reaches "acceptable". IOW, it's the decision making slowing things up, not the eye speed. If you really can't acquire the sights quickly enough, then you need to be working on eye speed drills.

[Evel Baldgui]

I vary in my practice, within 10 yds, point vs aim, not much difference; over 10 yds almost always use my sights.