Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 24 of 24

Thread: Point Shooting Book

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    11
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quoting Grossman and Siddle, both of whom have been debunked at length, doesn't add much credence to your position. As was mentioned above, Fairbairn's own data showed that untrained Chinese criminals were more successful than his trained SMP officers in gunfights. Applegate being a disciple of Fairbairn's kinda negates his opinion.

    The day a point shooter hits GM, or gets an Advanced rating at Rogers, and the day point shooting becomes the method taught at OTC, I'll give it any credence.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    4,058
    Feedback Score
    0
    I was doing some of this with the wife the other day. (Shooting without sights from "compression" at very close silhouette targets) One and two handed.

    Mind you she shoots very well 15 yds and in, with sights of course.

    I think she felt bold enough to go for head shots and to her surprise she missed a few even at just 5 ft.

    She even said out loud, "Huh? How'd I miss?" I told her "point aiming/shooting" may be "instinctive" but it is not "precise". This takes practice to do well.

    And we'll do more of this. But it was cool for her to see that near-contact shooting requires practice to do well, consistently. Also the lesson helped her appreciate what sights can do for bullet placement when you have enough distance to extend your arms and use them.

    As for me I used to think I was point aiming much farther out. But when I really considered it I was certainly using the sights. Even getting a quick, slightly blurry front sight with the rear even less clear is still "using sights".

    The closer the target the less perfect the sights are allowed to be. To learn when the sight picture is "good enough" takes experience and ammo.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    South Florida
    Posts
    61
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by tanksoldier View Post
    True, but when you are training for it you have to think about what you're doing so you do it right and ingrain the correct muscle memory.

    Your body doesn't recognize speed in developing muscle memory, which is why slow katas are effective in martial arts.

    It's more important to move correctly than to move quickly.
    Yes! Correct. Do it right not fast.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    South Florida
    Posts
    61
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by devildog70 View Post
    Quoting Grossman and Siddle, both of whom have been debunked at length, doesn't add much credence to your position. As was mentioned above, Fairbairn's own data showed that untrained Chinese criminals were more successful than his trained SMP officers in gunfights. Applegate being a disciple of Fairbairn's kinda negates his opinion.

    The day a point shooter hits GM, or gets an Advanced rating at Rogers, and the day point shooting becomes the method taught at OTC, I'll give it any credence.
    "The Force Science Institute" is a great place to research these points. I recommend checking them out. Their papers are based on looking at the facts, history, science of thousands of past gun fights. Also our own observations based on our own force on force and scenario training (about 15,000 students to date) supports the theory that most shooters in reactive scenarios tend NOT to use the sights to aim the pistol. This is what drives us to look at other options other that the tradition front sight focus.
    Last edited by Standby; 08-31-22 at 15:27.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •